Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?
From: Joe Zitzelberger (joe_zitzelberger_at_nospam.com)
Date: 10/28/03
- Next message: Joe Zitzelberger: "Re: GOBACK after EXEC CICS RETURN"
- Previous message: Joe Zitzelberger: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- In reply to: Judson McClendon: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- Next in thread: Howard Brazee: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 23:24:49 -0500
In article <20031027144223.529$AU@news.newsreader.com>,
"Judson McClendon" <judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote:
> "Joe Zitzelberger" <joe_zitzelberger@nospam.com> wrote:
> > "Judson McClendon" <judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote:
> > > The fact that
> > > 95% of all PCs made today can boot a Windows 98 boot disk is
> > > attributable to the original IBM PC architecture (with extensions) still
> > > incorporated in almost every PC on the planet, except for those made
> > > by Apple.
> >
> > The how do you explain all those Apples that can boot Windows 98?
>
> I was not aware that you could insert a Windows 98 boot disk into any
> Apple computer, turn on the power and boot directly from that disk. If
> this is the case, then the point I was defending above is even stronger. :-)
Actually, you cam bring up multiple virtual copies of any Intel OS in
any Mac going back to about 1988. There were also a bunch of hardware
addins that provided an actual co-processor.
But in all cases (6 or 7 different brands of software and a few dozen
hardware solutions) the Macintosh System managed the virtualization. So
you would not boot the machine with Windows98, but you would boot one or
more copies of Windows98 in a window.
- Next message: Joe Zitzelberger: "Re: GOBACK after EXEC CICS RETURN"
- Previous message: Joe Zitzelberger: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- In reply to: Judson McClendon: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- Next in thread: Howard Brazee: "Re: FORTRAN or COBOL first ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|