Price drop on Asus EEE
In case anyone is interested: http://www.misco.co.uk/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=29411... 4GB/512MB white PC701, down to £165 inc VAT -- Mark Rogers // More Solutions Ltd (Peterborough Office) // 0845 45 89 555 Registered in England (0456 0902) at 13 Clarke Rd, Milton Keynes, MK1 1LG
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 12:39:36PM +0100, Mark Rogers wrote:
In case anyone is interested:
http://www.misco.co.uk/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=29411...
4GB/512MB white PC701, down to £165 inc VAT
I'm currently considering a 901. Does anyone here have one and have any comments (good or bad) about it? J. -- Programmer, | Run like hell! | Tel/SMS: sysadmin & | | +423-663-212343 BHMF. | | Made by HuggieTag
On 14/8/08 14:11, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
I'm currently considering a 901. Does anyone here have one and have any comments (good or bad) about it?
Yes, mine arrived yesterday. First impressions are favourable: screen is fine for viewing my digital photos, speed running Stellarium is good, Python 2.5 and 2.5 are loaded, I've been able to install Emacs, LaTeX and tcsh. Haven't been able to get it working on my home wifi yet, nor configure the control key onto caps lock. Keyboard is dinky, OK for those of us who've used a Libretto but tricky for those who haven't downsized in the past. I intend to use it for presenting lectures, making notes in meetings and hacking code while out and about; for these, I think it'll be even better than my Mac. But don't expect to type in that book you've always wanted to write. ..Adrian -- Dr Adrian F Clark WEB: http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~alien/ EMAIL: alien/at/essex.ac.uk TEL: +44 1206 872432 FAX: +44 1206 872900 PAPER: VASE Lab, Dept CES, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ,UK "The great tragedy of science: the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact" -- Huxley
On 14 Aug 14:49, Adrian F. Clark wrote:
On 14/8/08 14:11, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
I'm currently considering a 901. Does anyone here have one and have any comments (good or bad) about it?
Yes, mine arrived yesterday. First impressions are favourable: screen is fine for viewing my digital photos, speed running Stellarium is good, Python 2.5 and 2.5 are loaded, I've been able to install Emacs, LaTeX and tcsh.
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Haven't been able to get it working on my home wifi yet, nor configure the control key onto caps lock. Keyboard is dinky, OK for those of us who've used a Libretto but tricky for those who haven't downsized in the past.
I intend to use it for presenting lectures, making notes in meetings and hacking code while out and about; for these, I think it'll be even better than my Mac.
Most things are better than a Mac ;)
But don't expect to type in that book you've always wanted to write.
I'm sure that'd be perfectly possible once one is used to the keyboard. -- Brett Parker
On 14/8/08 15:57, Brett Parker wrote:
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Apologies: 2.4 and 2.5. In what way is csh bad, pray? I've been typing commands into it for about 25 years with no problems.
Most things are better than a Mac ;)
Ah, the uninitiated... ;-)
I'm sure that'd be perfectly possible once one is used to the keyboard.
Perhaps; but my typing speed on a Libretto keyboard, which admittedly is somewhat smaller, never approached that on a full-size keyboard despite using one daily for about 9 months. It may just be that I'm clumsy, of course. ..Adrian -- Dr Adrian F Clark WEB: http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~alien/ EMAIL: alien/at/essex.ac.uk TEL: +44 1206 872432 FAX: +44 1206 872900 PAPER: VASE Lab, Dept CES, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ,UK "The great tragedy of science: the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact" -- Huxley
On 14 Aug 16:20, Adrian F. Clark wrote:
On 14/8/08 15:57, Brett Parker wrote:
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Apologies: 2.4 and 2.5. In what way is csh bad, pray? I've been typing commands into it for about 25 years with no problems.
Broken task management and redirections for a start... For a lot of links to articles telling you why csh and tcsh are bad see: http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/csh/
Most things are better than a Mac ;)
Ah, the uninitiated... ;-)
Nah - the poor git that gets to "fix" macs when they break round here, and gets incredibly frustrated by the crappy UI, the broken keyboard layout and the very broken userland.
I'm sure that'd be perfectly possible once one is used to the keyboard.
Perhaps; but my typing speed on a Libretto keyboard, which admittedly is somewhat smaller, never approached that on a full-size keyboard despite using one daily for about 9 months. It may just be that I'm clumsy, of course.
I tend to use my Tosh Portege R200 when not in the office, it's small, and I can type on that at the same speed as I do on the desktop at work... ;) -- Brett Parker
Hi 2008/8/14 Adrian F. Clark <alien@essex.ac.uk>:
On 14/8/08 15:57, Brett Parker wrote:
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Apologies: 2.4 and 2.5. In what way is csh bad, pray? I've been typing commands into it for about 25 years with no problems.
I seem to remember that tcsh has no function support. There was a document/essay written by somebody that gave reasons why we should just avoid tcsh like the plague. Srdjan
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:36:11PM +0100, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
2008/8/14 Adrian F. Clark <alien@essex.ac.uk>:
On 14/8/08 15:57, Brett Parker wrote:
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Apologies: 2.4 and 2.5. In what way is csh bad, pray? I've been typing commands into it for about 25 years with no problems.
I seem to remember that tcsh has no function support. There was a document/essay written by somebody that gave reasons why we should just avoid tcsh like the plague.
Presumably that's avoiding it for writing shell scripts, not as an interactive shell? (Personally I hate ending up with csh as my shell, but I believe it's still the default on Solaris/other BSD based OSes?) J. -- "It will be mine, oh yes. It will be mine." -- Wayne, Wayne's World.
On 15 Aug 10:27, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:36:11PM +0100, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
2008/8/14 Adrian F. Clark <alien@essex.ac.uk>:
On 14/8/08 15:57, Brett Parker wrote:
Python 2.5 and 2.5?! Wow! And, err, what on earth did you install tcsh for? csh is a very very bad shell.
Apologies: 2.4 and 2.5. In what way is csh bad, pray? I've been typing commands into it for about 25 years with no problems.
I seem to remember that tcsh has no function support. There was a document/essay written by somebody that gave reasons why we should just avoid tcsh like the plague.
Presumably that's avoiding it for writing shell scripts, not as an interactive shell?
(Personally I hate ending up with csh as my shell, but I believe it's still the default on Solaris/other BSD based OSes?)
Most have switched to using ksh these days. A quick google suggests that even solaris has switched to using a default of a statically linked Bourne shell, and Solaris 10 appears to use a dynamically linked bourne shell... Mac OS X when first introduced did, indeed, default to tcsh, but they've since moved to bash. It does appear, though, that FreeBSD hasn't yet moved out of the dark ages and is still using tcsh as it's default shell. OpenBSD definately uses ksh these days :) Maybe it's OK for an interactive shell if you only use the shell to start other programs, perhaps? I tend to end up with some serious command lines of doom in bash that I'm not even sure would be possible in {t,}csh... but then, I am special! Cheers, -- Brett Parker
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 15:11 +0100, Brett Parker wrote:
Most have switched to using ksh these days. A quick google suggests that even solaris has switched to using a default of a statically linked Bourne shell, and Solaris 10 appears to use a dynamically linked bourne shell..
I'll add to that list, Opensolaris tends to default to ksh but tru64 varies between plan old sh, ksh or csh, I can't remember what is default on a plain installation.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:49:19PM +0100, Adrian F. Clark wrote:
On 14/8/08 14:11, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
I'm currently considering a 901. Does anyone here have one and have any comments (good or bad) about it?
Yes, mine arrived yesterday. First impressions are favourable: screen is fine for viewing my digital photos, speed running Stellarium is good, Python 2.5 and 2.5 are loaded, I've been able to install Emacs, LaTeX and tcsh. Haven't been able to get it working on my home wifi yet, nor configure the control key onto caps lock. Keyboard is dinky, OK for those of us who've used a Libretto but tricky for those who haven't downsized in the past.
It'll be interesting to hear what you think of it after a few weeks. I have a full size laptop that I'm happy with, but something a bit smaller for carrying around more/using on trains is appealing. J. -- Revd. Jonathan McDowell, ULC | "p.s You're all retards." -- merl
participants (6)
-
Adrian F. Clark -
Brett Parker -
Jonathan McDowell -
Mark Rogers -
Srdjan Todorovic -
Wayne Stallwood