[rescue] several second lag...

[Mike Free]

jeez, you know, I can remember the first "real" computer I ever had, the
first one I ever accomplished useful work with.

I was 16, mind you, and broke.

386DX40, 8 megs ram, 120Meg hard drive.
monitor: hyundai 14", broken, red display only.
operating system: Windows 95.

The motherboard had a bad cache controller so there was no off-chip cache.
at all.

What's worse, I was running AOL. AOL 3.0.

And you know what? If you could get past the 1min20 boot time, and the
blazing hot monitor, and 14.4K modem when 33.6 was emerging, The machine was
actually responsive and useable.

And a grand sum total of: $65. $30 of that in a case. everything else but
the motherboard and the floppy drive was giveaway/scrap.

Mike Free
yes, I've opened hard drives to clean out oxide fragments to get another 6
months of use.....


----- Original Message -----
From: "joshua d boyd" <jdboyd at cs.millersville.edu>
To: <rescue at sunhelp.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:06 AM
Subject: Re: [rescue] several second lag...


> On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 04:47:05PM -0500, Bill Bradford wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 05:26:27PM -0400, joshua d boyd wrote:
> > > I didn't build her a windows machine with 64megs.  I built her one
with
> > > 192.  A 128dimm went bad, and I haven't gotten it replaced yet.
> >
> > Well then dont complain that its slow, especially if she's got lots of
> > tray crap loaded (AIM, RealPlayer, WinAmp agent, etc).
>
> At this point, I'm remebering when I recently scolded for commenting about
> 40megs not being much, and now I'm being scolded for thinking that 64 megs
> is enough.  Which is it?  Is the 40-64 meg range enough for normal work or
> not?  I think it should be enough personally I mean, web pages and email
> don't take that much memory.
>
> --
> Joshua D. Boyd
> _______________________________________________
> rescue maillist  -  rescue at sunhelp.org
> http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue