New to the list

[Segin]

Don Y wrote:
> Segin wrote:
> 
>> I wouldn't say "emotionally attached" myself, since I exibit no 
>> emotional response to... well, anything! I like old hardware, mainly 
>> cause it's more dependable than today's workstations and desktops. 
>> Why? Because companies actually put thought into creating parts that 
>> were durable back then. Compare it to cars (my favorite analogy 
>> against computers), A 1969 Ford Mustang is usually more durable, 
>> dependable, and will survive a crash with substantally less damage 
>> than, say, a 2005 Kia Optima or Saab xB.
> 
> 
> Sure.  But the PASSENGERS will have substantially MORE damage than
> those in that 2005 vehicle...
They're only humans. We got 6 and a half billion on this planet, losing 
one or two doesn't really make a difference.

> Don't confuse consumer "peecees" with other modern machines.
> (what's the MTBF on that 15 year old disk drive from your 386sx??)
Dunno. Good guess would be about 9 years, or 85,000 hours.

But that's if it's in constant use. This box was found at a old job 
site. I remember booting it once, only to find it still has NetWare/DOS 
and Windows 3.11 installed, so I am assuming that it sat around in a 
corner, doing absolutely nothing for about 11 years.

And yes, I know what a MTBF is. It's Mean Time Before Failure. And no, I 
didn't need to use Google to find that out.

Please stop trying to belittle me, I get enough of it from the local 
LUG. If I wanted to be trolled, I'd go post on USENET.

-- 
The real problem with C++ for kernel modules is: the language just sucks.
	-- Linus Torvalds