[Coco] Keeping current... ????

[Joel Ewy]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 25 February 2007, farna at att.net wrote:
>   
>> John W. Linville wrote:
>>     
>>> Forgive me for presuming that someone running RH8 might not exactly
>>> be "keeping current" with current events in Linux.  :-)  If you are
>>> already using Ubuntu, then you should know what you are getting.
>>>       
>> Is it just me, or does it seem odd that someone on a CoCo list is
>> "complaining" about someone not "keeping current" on an OS??? ;>
>>
>>     
>
> Chuckle, I could see that one coming. :-)  But I think it probably 
> appropriate to consider that the coco hasn't been made in 18 years now, 
> but that the hardware *most* linux runs on is in current production.  I 
> think it goes without saying that one is expected to keep his hardware 
> for his main machines at a level that isn't too far out of date.
>
> Like if AMC was still making cars, wouldn't you have one in the drive that 
> hasn't started to rust out yet?
>
>   
Well, the problem with that analogy is that my K6/2-450 ain't got a spot
of rust on it.  :)  When I bought the motherboard and processor in 2001
(new, but not state of the art even at that time) they were still more
than capable of running "European Air War" with a 16 MB STB Velocity
4400.  And they did a fine job with Mozilla 1.0 and OpenOffice.org 1.0. 
Now I've got an Athlon 3000XP+ that I'm dedicating to flight sim games,
an Athlon 1800XP+ that I'm using for other Windows 2K stuff, and I've
moved the K6/2-450 to the main Linux workstation, to replace the older
200MHz motherboard that had been running RH8 fairly capably.  I want
that computer to do word processing, web browsing, email, occasional
light GIMP work, and some fiddling in Perl and C.  It should easily be
up to that task, at least to my standards.  There's no reason why a
computer like that, which hasn't yet begun to rust or break down, should
be incapable of doing those things -- even with a GUI.  I'd like to move
up to Firefox, Thunderbird, and OOo 2, and my experiences running these
programs on a wide variety of systems, both faster and also quite a bit
slower than the K6/2-450 tell me that it should do the job well enough. 
And it runs Toolshed just fine.  I just need to get it a more recent
kernel so I can use the new FUSE-enabled version.

I've got a video capture card in the Athlon 1800, because doing video
work takes a lot of horsepower.  And "Il-2 Sturmovik" demands the
A-3000XP+ with 1G of RAM.  Those tasks inherently require a lot of CPU
and memory.  Web browsing, word processing, and email don't.  If I want
a race car, I'm not going to pretend my 1986 Volvo 740 Turbo is
qualified.  But if I bought a race car, I wouldn't be able to afford to
give up my reliable old daily driver.  I just don't see the need to
throw away something that is perfectly good for what it does --
especially if that's something I still want to do.  And I'm definitely
*not* going to do it just because Uncle Bill or Uncle Sam tells me it's
time.  Screw that.  I will not be manipulated by the Upgrade Fairy.

Sometimes I can even find a new use for an old tool.  I use a '486 with
16M of RAM and a couple 10Mbps ISA ethernet cards running LEAF (Linux
Embedded Appliance Firewall) to share my DSL connection with my home
LAN.  It's old, but perfectly functional, and quite adequate for the
task I'm asking of it.  If the day ever comes that I have a faster
Internet connection than 10M, I'll pull a Pentium off the pile and slap
a couple 10/100 PCI cards in it.

I can do things with the CoCo I can't do with modern PCs, because of the
simplicity of its hardware and operating systems.  I'll never get rid of
my CoCos.  I like them.  And I like my K6/2-450.  Not nearly as much as
the CoCo stuff, but it ain't broke and should still be capable of
rendering good service to me for some time to come.  I've got well over
300,000 miles on the Volvo, and it's wearing out faster than any computer.

JCE
> Whose headlight were still nice and bright instead of looking like a 10 
> year old ford or mopar where the headlights are so old & yellowed you 
> have to get out with a flashlight or light a match to see if they're lit?
>
> Yes, the 97 Dodge Caravan I traded for this 99 GMC had already had both 
> headlight housings replaced because they were getting so dim they were 
> useless.  Go ahead, price them but I'll save you the trouble, they are 
> $340 a copy.  My '88 Nissan Pathfinder 4WD pickup has glass headlights 
> with replaceable lamps in them, and it still has the best headlights of 
> anything in the driveway today, including the fresh headlamp assemblies 
> in that 99 GMC.
>
> I still don't understand why the car driving public hasn't long since 
> brought a class action suit against the automakers, sueing for free, all 
> glass headlights replacements that don't scratch up, get foggy and yellow 
> with age.  These old yellowed plastic things are a hazard on the road at 
> night for the driver, and for everyone around him.  One wonders how many 
> people a year they kill just because the driver can't see that deer 
> walking in front of him soon enough to take evasive action.
>
> I guess I got well off topic, but if a rant of mine saves a life of 
> someone on this list, well...
>
>