Some fun with computer terms

H

Huy Vu

Veteran
Found these on another site...

MICROSOFT: Most Intelligent Customers Realize Our Software Only Fools Teenagers

IBM: I Blame Microsoft

MACINTOSH: Most Applications Crash; If Not, The Operating System Hangs

APPLE: Arrogance Produces Profit-Losing Entity

WINDOWS: Will Install Needless Data On Whole System

DOS: Defective Operating System

PENTIUM: Produces Erroneous Numbers Thru Incorrect Understanding of Mathematics

PCMCIA: People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms

ISDN: It Still Does Nothing

SCSI: System Can't See It

_____________________________________________
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:53:11 -0800
From: <compguy@yahoo.com>
To: <technicalsupport@wedding.com>
Subject: Wife 1.0

I recently upgraded my Girlfriend 7.0 program to Wife 1.0 Pro through your company and I have a few complaints.

First, you failed to inform me of the possible unwanted side effects of upgrading to this program, especially with regard to compatitibility issues. Programs such as Tuesday Night Poker 10.0.3, Clubbing 2.5 and Monday Night Football 5.0 will no longer run on my system as Wife 1.0 Pro will cause an immediate system crash everytime I tried to run them. I have tried many times to shut down the program or have it run in the background without much success.

Second, Wife 1.0 Pro takes up far too much hard drive space by installing miscellaneous programs such as Shopping 1.2 and Fashion 5.0 without my knowledge. These secondary programs are taking up too much of my RAM.


I've been considering returning to the Girlfriend 7.0 version but I discovered that I cannot delete Wife 1.0 Pro under any circumstances. The program has seized control of my entire operating system.

PLEASE HELP!!!
 
Sad Max said:
Don't forget the ohnosecond - the unit of time measuring the moment between deleting a vital system file, and the realization of how badly you've just f*cked yourself...
Click to expand...

I do that so often when im building websites, it kills me.

I know how Hunter Feels.
 
I have always thought about designing a computer system that held its OS flashed onto its EEPROM, that way stopping alot of problems that can happen as a result of running an OS from the HDD, also being an an EEPROM means that updates/new OS's can be flashed when new "patches/OS"are needed.

(ok, ok PICs and other Micro-controllers already do that to a limited extent)

anyho....
 
i agree with the part in Hunter kessels piece, about renaming a file... i accidentally broke a NYU computer once by mucking in the sytem folder.... i was looking for internet cookies to find a webpage i was on the daybefore... Big mistake.
 
Anhar Miah said:
I have always thought about designing a computer system that held its OS flashed onto its EEPROM, that way stopping alot of problems that can happen as a result of running an OS from the HDD, also being an an EEPROM means that updates/new OS's can be flashed when new "patches/OS"are needed.

(ok, ok PICs and other Micro-controllers already do that to a limited extent)

anyho....
Click to expand...


And the funny thing is that Atari did this back in 1986 with the Atari ST series of computers. In fact, the ST, TT and Falcon series computers all had the OS on a chip.

Also, I seem to remember that parts of the Amiga OS and Mac OS back in the late 80's early 90's also booted from chip.
 
Anhar Miah said:
I have always thought about designing a computer system that held its OS flashed onto its EEPROM, that way stopping alot of problems that can happen as a result of running an OS from the HDD, also being an an EEPROM means that updates/new OS's can be flashed when new "patches/OS"are needed.

(ok, ok PICs and other Micro-controllers already do that to a limited extent)

anyho....
Click to expand...

Being a bit banger I have always been amazed at how poorly memory is allocated and handled in bigger processors. Its the old Harvard versus Van Neuman architecture argument. I love the PICs for they are so predictable and well behaved. I am not as much a fan of Microchips language though I much prefer the Parallax (Tech Tools) 8051 like RISC language, it is extremely elegant and effective.
 
Tell me about it, its just assembly language *pimped* out :)

Have you heard about PSoC (or System on a Chip) they are really cool, I was asked to learn the language and discovered it that way.

They have this "Express" version and what you can do with it in 10 minutes would take you at least a week in using a PIC route. You literally pick inputs and outputs (visually), define behavior, simulate and built voila!

http://www.psocdeveloper.com/

www.cypress.com/psoc
 
Thanks for the links, I will check them out. While I consider myself an analog and RF guy, I have been writing for PIC, Xilinx and DSP for about 10 years now (mostly user interfaces, glue logic replacement and system control interfaces), so I am always looking for a new "solution". This sounds very promising.

Thanks for the tip!

Kevin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top