[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: QUIK on the 7200



"EB" == Ethan Benson <erbenson@alaska.net> writes:

   EB> frankly i would suggest selling the damn thing and getting
   EB> a newworld box (a used imac or something) nobody is testing
   EB> kernels on 7200's and nobody other then Dan seems to give a
   EB> damn whether quik works or not.  oldworld macs are a total
   EB> nightmare for running GNU/Linux.

That seems like a pretty short-sighted and wasteful attitude.

Not everyone can afford to buy a ``new world'' Macintosh to run
Linux, and not everyone *needs* the power of a newer machine.  If
*I* could afford a new Mac, I'd wait 'til I could run Mac OS X.
If I were going to buy a new machine just to run Linux, I'd
probably buy a PC just to get past the annoying incompatibilities.
And if I really wanted processing power, I'd buy an Alpha.

As things stand now, however, Linux is one of the few operating
systems you can run on older Mac hardware that gives you decent
performance.  I have a PowerCenter 132 (allegedly a 7200 clone).
I still use MacOS apps so I'm using BootX to boot Linux, and the
machine runs great -- I've been using it as my main system for
over a year now.  For my needs, it's just fine.

I'm sorry you don't think old world machines are worth your time.
Please do both yourself and those of us who have such machines the
favor of not wasting your time sharing your negative opinions with
us in the future.

Thanks,

   CMC


P.S. For user experience, the best machine we have in our house,
by far, is a 25 MHz 68040 NeXTstation running NEXTSTEP.  Linux
doesn't even begin to come close.

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
 Behind the counter a boy with a shaven head stared vacantly into space, 
 a dozen spikes of microsoft protruding from the socket behind his ear.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
   C.M. Connelly               c@eskimo.com                   SHC, DS
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 



Reply to: