I think that the point for this topic is that Windows doesn’t do that.

(from following above BSoD link to https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/26586)

I've always wanted to [ask how to] copy&paste my kernel panics into LQ CODE tags...
Now, if LP's M$systemd-AI gives me the solution on my phone, I won't need LQ!

I'm surprised nobody mentioned coding of Dos games. Apparently things like pacman set 320x200, and built their own character set to move things about, because the way you wrote on screen was by choosing a character, location, etc and calling an interrupt.

It makes you realise how awful the hardware actually was. You'd be inclined to cut any system a bit of slack after that.

Speak for yourself.

"Koff, koff ..." It was simply because: this what we had. And, plenty of programmers managed to perform magic with it. (Necessarily the definition of "magic" of the day.)

However: "Moore's Law has not yet been repealed!" :) Your(!) children and grandchildren – should you have any – will likely be saying the same "derisive things" about the technology of today.

And the only thing that you can say is: "We tried our best to make magic(!) with what we had. And, lo and behold, we did it!"

I do not prefer to emulate line writers.

Agreed, magic was worked. One of my kids had this Dos game with falling letters going down the screen and if any reached the bottom, you lost. You had to type them first. Difficulty incremented up, he was ultra-competitive, and he was a touch typist before long.

I feel Moore's law is reaching physical & material limits. But we won't have that one out.

Back in the 80s/early 90s we could still grasp how things worked. To the next generation, it will be magic. It augurs poorly for hardware inventiveness when you become accustomed to such a high level of complexity & sophistication.

My point was, that my understanding is that what you had said previously was:

"Linuxers, however, still prefer to emulate line writers...".


If I understood you correctly, I am a "Linuxer" and I do not prefer to emulate line writers.

That's not just true for computers. My late father was a master auto mechanic all his adult life. He got his start after WWII, and retired in 1988. Even by 1988 there were few mechanics who knew how to diagnose/repair cars because they had already become so dependent on computers. He was ecstatic at the prospect of retirement. He taught me enough to keep my $100 wrecks running in the 70's and 80's, but now? It's virtually impossible for the driveway mechanic to do more that change an air filter or (in some vehicles) the oil. I'm past retirement age now, and will barely touch a wrench anymore. Our 2017 vehicle is incomprehensible. (I still can occasionally be found inside a laptop's guts, though!)

Yes, modern cars are incomprehensible and sometimes wilfully so. My son['s 2008 car had to be brought to a recognised service agent to have the E²proms read over some pollution controller error. That sort of thing really acts against the small guy. What's wrong with a simple readout? Oh no, every agent has to upskill, & buy their kit and keep the software updated. No wonder there's all this fuss about "right to repair."

I'll tell you the problem with that. It means BMW (as an example) cannot sell you a car with deactivated functions where have you pay a subscription fee to activate the function (like say, the radio, or seatwarming). Furthermore, any old mechanic could just repair your car, which is unacceptable where ONLY licenced repairmen should be able to repair carbrand X while serving carbrand X corporation and unable or unwilling to repair carbrand Y. This means the rapairman would be an indirect employee/agent of carbrand X.

At least, so seems the "logic" behind it.

Well, from the Electronics POV, there is a lot of complicated control strategy in software that has to be interrogated or manipulated in various fault scenarios. There is also a CAN bus - a sort of scsi bus for transport vehicles, and no consideration of the maintenance guy. No feet on the ground at all, just in the Lab.

Let me give you an example: In my electronics days, I was called to fix a Japanese imported Toyota Land Cruiser. The automatic gear box had just been repaired, the repair shop was €2k out of pocket, and it wouldn't lock the drive out in top gear. So, on the first long trip, the torque convertor would overheat the gearbox oil, the rubber seals would all go (as they just had done), and the new gearbox would be wrecked. I spent the day on it, and retired in defeat. I didn't charge him.

I rang the guy two days later. There had to be a second engine heat sensor, I told him. It was either gone, or adjusted for the hotter climate in Japan. So it wouldn't lock the drive out.

Three weeks later, he rang me and told me to send in the bill. He had bought the wiring diagram, and there was a second sensor. He had replaced it, and everything worked! That was the last car repair I did before I went out of business (2006), because with a cpu running unknown software in that mix, to attempt repairs would be foolish.

For users, who use computers for things computers are meant for, Windows was OK up to and including Windwows 7. Offered a platform to develop SW, work with spreadsheets and browse the internet and explore the file system. The rest, like video editing, streaming, gaming, chatting, aSocial Media, and do not get me started on 'AI', is fluff. With Windows 8 MSFT went the fluff way, making Windows look like dumb-phones. 10 and 11 followed that trend and now you need to push away all that fluff, without the help of a centralized Control Panel, before you have a reasonable computer again. I want to build up my own environment from the bottom up, not trim all that fat before I get there. Then these over-reaching update policies, you do not feel like the master of your device anymore. Then the security issues. DOS command-line is atrocious.

Apple is over-reaching, too, with their closed HW 'ecosystem'. MAC OS is fine, IOS/IPADOS is as unacceptable as is Android (don't try to make a computer out of a phone). Apple pricing is way beyond its added value for solid products. Who cares, everything is outdated in no time anyway.

Both of them are good in that you can legally yell at someone, because you paid. Rightly so or not, that provides some 'professional' impression.
Linux lacks that, of course, for good or worse, mostly good, but to travel around in this and that forum etc. to get some help and info is not for everyone. I personally do not mind.

Having said all that, I will play with Linux more and more, had some age-old and now faded professional SW development experience with it, so it is sort of fun (retired now), and will see if it ever will be my primary platform, it is possible. I play with Apple, too, to that end, but I am not willing to pay for their overpriced stuff. For the foreseeable future I might hold my nose and stay with Windows, always having a Linux option, at least in the form of a live USB.

If you are retired and have plenty of time to "play around", then Linux is the ideal system. It's got a lot of other bonuses of course, but the main drawback – that you have to learn how to use it and maintain it – doesn't really apply to people like us. We have time on our hands and are more likely to get bored than overworked.

How is Linux better to "play around" than other Unix-like systems (or even Haiku)? I mean, most "new" developments around Linux involve "immutability", so if anything, it slowly turns unbearable to "play around" with a system that won't even let "root" be root.