Wes Newell wrote:

about dead now. And I sure wouldn't recommend it either.:-) OTOH, there's
no reason to shy away from X86_64 as it's backwards compatible to even 16
bit code without emulatiion.

Thats something else that I have a bee in my bonnet about - Microsoft
and its Backward compatability

You will never get away from the bad code if you dont dump it some time
and start a fresh

Why not learn by our mistakes from the last 20 years and apply what we
have learnt to a totally new system and get away from the cludges that
try to get around it.. I mean who cares if your new computer can read
1982 PC or XT or 286 software ... your old XT or 286 certainly cant do
anything with todays software because it doesnt have the memory or hard
disk space, so its not true compatibility... who are they trying to kid

if they did this they might come up with a system that doesnt need
rebooting 20 times a day (as solid as Unix) or spend so much time "not
responding"
Why nit strenghten it so that it never "not responds".. instead of
prolonging the time it is not responding by making it hang on and on
and not let you instantly recover from the situation and start to
respond again


Heavens.. if we learnt by our mistakes there wouldnt be any WAR

But wait WARS make money, so does microsoft with its backward compatibility

I surrender