Rörd Hinrichsen wrote:
Yes, indeed it could. And to add to my challenge, I asked for something
that everyone on this list would agree sucked. I personally am not
willing to agree to that. 
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
Yes, indeed it could. And to add to my challenge, I asked for something
that everyone on this list would agree sucked. I personally am not
willing to agree to that.
SCO
RIAA
Timothy H. wrote:
SCO is certainly a strong contender, but I’ll have to veto RIAA.
Hmmm … how about acronyms? “Acronyms Suck?”
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 10:18:03AM +0900, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
SCO is certainly a strong contender, but I’ll have to veto RIAA.
Really? You think the RIAA doesn’t suck?
Are you fond of people who ensure that there’s no longer any guitar
tablature on the Internet, who contribute to the absurdly increasing
costs of CDs, who are attempting to eliminate any meaningful legal
definition of “fair use”, and who are trying to get BitTorrent servers
shut down, often via methods that violate the laws of the countries in
which those methods are pursued?
I guess SOMEone has to support that crap, else the RIAA wouldn’t still
exist.
Bill K. wrote:
Apologies in advance for contributing to the [OT]ness…
Meh. The thread started with a rant, it was destined to sidetrack
horribly. Into about three flamewars at once too - an impressive feat,
that.
Background: I’ve used MSDOS since PC-DOS V1.0, and also
got heavily into Amiga starting at V1.0…I don’t think it was lack of direct access everything that
killed the Amiga.
I didn’t actually say that. Both systems were very successful gaming
platforms, and IIRC, Amiga hardware tended to be technologically
superior for most of the time they coexisted. Except it was also more
expensive - I don’t think Amigas properly penetrated the European market
because of that, just like the Macintosh never did.
Especially in the later years, between 1992 - 1995, a lot of games were
made for both platforms, and Windows 3.1 was quite popular for secretary
work, which made the cheaper alternative easier to sell.
Surprising is however the speed with which Windows 95 took over the game
platform scene - a scan through Home of the Underdogs shows that it won
over by 1998, which seems a lot faster than the adoption of 2000 and XP
over 98 was.
Speaking of them Kleenex, hand me a few. I just remembered the amazing
cool credits you got for being the only kid in class / school that could
edit AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS to make Cool Game Of The Month work
before DOS4GW came along. (Cor. I could hand-tune DOS memory usage in
grad school. How many nerd points do you get for that again?)
David V.
On 8/27/06, Matt T. [email protected] wrote:
Please be kind.
Agree, silent is an alternative though 
M.T.
David V. wrote:
Murdoc wrote:
Speaking of which, is there any way to block anything he sends and quotes in replies? I swear I feel my ability to write proper English leak out my ears from that.Nothing really to say, just thought I’d make the subject a bit more appropriate.
David V.
What’s with the troll tags?
Please be kind.
Agree, silent is an alternative though
;D
M.T.
Bill K. wrote:
From: “David V.” [email protected]
I was still writing Amiga games when DooM came out for
the PC. One could buy an 8-bit graphics card for the
PC and play DooM. There was just no practical equivalent
on the Amiga… The thought of trying to implement a
game like DooM in 8 or even 6 bitplanes… A nightmare.
Some folks made some demos, as I recall, and they ran
predictably slow.There were certainly other factors in the Amiga’s
demise… but I think the entrenchment of its aging
hardware architecture, and the difficulty for any third
party to develop a plug-in gfx or sound card that was
compatible with the OS, was a huge nail in the poor
platform’s coffin…
Bill, Very cool history! I really learned a lot from your post and was
always curious as to the demise (and structure) of the Amiga. I really
appreciate the info… thanks again
On a side note, my HiMem skills were mediocre at best but I was pretty
good at cleaning up all the damage that QuarterdeckMM would do… 
ilan
“M. Edward (Ed) Borasky” [email protected] writes:
Rörd Hinrichsen wrote:
Could “spaghetti code” be called a paradigm?
Yes, indeed it could. And to add to my challenge, I asked for something
that everyone on this list would agree sucked. I personally am not
willing to agree to that.
Could I ask you to elaborate on this? In what manner does spaghetti
code not suck? Is it only in the manner that a broken window does not
suck for the window-glass repairman?
Because broken windows suck. Period.
User Name wrote:
In what manner does spaghetti code not suck?
See the Big Ball of Mud pattern:
Later,