Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!inquo!in-news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!samba.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!dhesi.a2i!dhesi From: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@rahul.net> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD ... Date: 10 May 1996 01:43:46 GMT Organization: a2i network Lines: 14 Message-ID: <4mu70i$mq@samba.rahul.net> References: <3188C1E2.45AE@onramp.net> <dZDkxoHpv+EH089yn@skypoint.com> <4mpmt8$na9@agate.berkeley.edu> <3191679E.35B7F086@lambert.org> <4mtimm$1ji@flash.noc.best.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: waltz.rahul.net NNTP-Posting-User: dhesi In <4mtimm$1ji@flash.noc.best.net> dillon@best.com (Matthew Dillon) writes: > You'd think that motherboard and card manufacturers would test, > test, test. 'Gee, it works under Windows 95 running a couple of > 16 bit apps, it *must* be perfect!'. Pah! If I Microsoft Windows understand correctly, it escapes into real processor mode for all I/O. Hence its painfully slow speed, multitasking-with-10-second-pauses, and of course failure to exercise the hardware. The BIOS does most of the I/O, and vendor-supplied drivers do the rest. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@rahul.net> "please ignore Dhesi" -- Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>