Windows 3.11 loads in less than a blink of an eye on my Pentium MMX, while Windows 98 takes at least a minute to boot. This is with a 8 GB CF card as the HDD too, so the I/O is going as fast as possible.
It's because of drivers and PnP and especially USB. When you load Win3.1, WinNT4 and lower, drivers load without scanning for hardware presence. It's just a disk to memory copy. In Win95, the first PnP OS, it scans for PnP hardware at every boot. That's slow.
To prove my point, you could try loading some of the USB drivers for DOS or one of the ISA PnP configuration utilities (such as ICU - Intel Configuration Utility), see how fast it boots then!
Also, if you left the network config untouched, it defaults to TCPIP+DHCP, and when DHCP doesn't respond (cable unplugged), it's another 30s delay. Win311 didn't have TCPIP unless you install it manually. It also asks you to configure it during installation - less likely to select DHCP if you don't have it. And then, in Win311, network is started by DOS (NET START in autoexec.bat), not by Windows.
Besides the boot (which windows 3 didn't even do so I don't see why we are comparing it), from clicking on the start menu the 1st time after boot, to the start menu actually appearing on screen it would take 1-2 minutes to populate on windows 95, while on windows 3 on the same machine there would be no such issue.
Were you running a 386-16 MHz with 4 MB of memory? And you had hundreds of apps listed on the start menu? Because on anything faster it would absolutely not take that long.
It wasn't always instant on boot on my 486-SLC 33 MHz with 8 MB of memory but at most several to ten seconds for it to appear on first boot after clicking.
And on the Pentium MMX that I'm running now it's always instant on Windows 98 SE.
Linux based phones are starting to become viable as daily drivers. [0] They are even coming with VM Android in case an application is needed that does not have a Linux equivalent.
I am interested in how Google's gatekeeper tactics are going to affect Android like platforms such as /e/os and GrapheneOS. [1]
> No luck needed. Linux based phones are starting to become viable as daily drivers.
Then please tell me, which non-Android Linux-based phone can I buy here in Brazil (one of the first places where Android would have these new restrictions)? I'd love to know (not sarcasm, I'm being sincere). Keep in mind that only phones with ANATEL certification can be imported, non-certified phones will be stopped by customs and sent back.
My condolences, that sucks that you’re stuck in such an authoritarian country. If you look at the PostmarketOS site, you may be able to find a legal phone (weird to type that phrase) that can be reflashed. Or you could buy one while on vacation, my guess is they don’t check models at the border if it looks like a personal device.
Illegal in Brazil per the Digital Child and Adolescent Statute. Operating systems are legally required to provide age verification functionality in a manner approved by the government.
Edit: apparently if it isn’t a “marketable product” then the law may not apply. So far they haven’t enforced it against Linux distros, likely because of this exception. However, IANAL (and definitely not a Brazilian lawyer).
Only way is to get the laws to change by electing other officials or civil disobedience.
I do not know all International laws. Nor do I respect countries and politicians that force such restrictive laws that prevent reuse of good devices that are now unsupported by the original manufacture.
Secondly if that law was enacted in the US ... I would buy a product that has a known bug to allow for loading a custom OS. In court I would push for jury-nullification too.
Authoritative governments suck at all fronts ... not just phone restrictions.
Would you mind pointing me to the ANATEL certification process? I am wondering if the voice of the law is worded to prevent competition ... sounds like something Google would of helped push through.
Are you allowed old school non-smart phones? That is how I would do it. Laptop and dumb phone.
Indeed, and since Brazil now has mandatory age checking in the OS, it's illegal to own or operate such phones in the country, thus they will never be certified by ANATEL.
>settings menu, it was impossible to navigate using tab and arrow keys.
Huh? All you need is tab and the arrow keys to navigate the GNOME Settings app. I'm literally doing that right now. Maybe it was a later addition but it works perfectly fine in GNOME 49.
Because Mac OS X Finder has always been kinda terrible. There was a lot of talk about this in the early 2000s and it's just faded away since the people using macOS now probably never experienced the good old Mac OS 9 Finder.
And its Windows competition Windows Explorer has likewise gotten worse and worse each revision of Windows.
lol, directory opus? I was using that on the Amiga way back in the day. I tried it like a decade ago, but it didn't stick for me. It doesn't seem to run on Linux, and it costs $$$, so no chance I'll try it again.
I can't think of a better rationale for the ubiquitous worsening of local search than increasing ignorance of comp sci fundamentals.
There's no reason a senior at undergrad level shouldn't be able to write an efficient, fast, deterministic, precomputed search function.
... and yet, professional developers at major companies seem completely incapable.
Minimum acceptance criteria for any proposed shipping search feature should be "There is no file / object in the local system that fails to show up if you type its visible name" ffs.
reply