Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Unix on x86, Hmmm ... Downloaded Xenix - But It's *41* Floppies Worth
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 10:40:39 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <10995v7$nct$1@reader1.panix.com>
References: <e4ucnb1I-5IIqur1nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> <108vigs$2q3n5$1@dont-email.me> <zeJtQ.970641$3yJ3.610791@fx16.iad> <20250902144505.00006bd9@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 10:40:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80"; logging-data="23965"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:73196 alt.folklore.computers:231739

In article <20250902144505.00006bd9@gmail.com>,
John Ames  <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Sep 2025 21:22:39 GMT
>Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> It was typical to low-ball memory requirements to get a sale, then
>> sell the customer more memory afterwards when the system turned out
>> to be painfully slow and it was too late to back out.
>
>...whereas nowadays, we have to recommend our customers spec out twice
>the memory they'd actually need as between Win10/11, the nine million
>browser tabs everyone keeps open at all times, vendor bloatware, and
>special gold-medal memory hogs like QuickBooks, an entry-level system
>is full to bursting and swapping madly before they even load *our*
>application...
>
>...and half the damn time they buy the entry-level system anyway, and
>then complain about *our* software being slow :/

"What would YOU do with 128 GiB of RAM, Dan?"
"Run two electron apps at the same time...."

        - Dan C.