No subject

providers, to create websites that are only accessible using P3's, and
the websites were to use software to scan visiting CPU's, for the serial
numbers.
      
> 
> > and no espionage features built in, like the P3's.
> 
> I don't know about "built in" but Windows strikes me as being a useful
> espionage feature, since it leaks "secure" information like a colander.

"Built-in" - see reference to serial number, above.

I understood that the Windows espionage feature, applied to users of
Win98, who connected to MSN, whereby, Windows said to MSN, "Look what I
have found on this computer, and who the users are, and, what they are
doing, etc"

It probably doesn't matter so much, now, that the feral government has
licensed ASIo to hack into everyone's computers, and alter the data on
the victim's computers, as Asio sees fit. I am reminded of an incident,
a few years ago, where the australian feral security force demolishers
were sent in, to destroy the wrong hotel room (in probably the wrong
hotel, in the wrong city), in Melbourne, as part of one of their
exercises.

> 
> > They definitely don't make 'em like this anymore. Good old Socket 7.
> 
> Thank goodness. My wife's machine runs a Cryix 240, branded "WinChip" (a
> bad sign to start with) and it's a dog of a processor.

I understood that the Winchip was made by IDT, a totally different
company to Cyrix. I understand that, when Cyrix went under, it was taken
over, or, relicensed the manufacture of its chips, to Via Technologies.
I had thought of upgrading from my Cyrix P150+ (chip speeed 120 MHz), to
an IDT Winchip 240, but didn't like the "Win" in the Winchip - thought
it might cause peoblems with non-Windows OS's. From what you have
said,it may have been a good decision.

> 
> > The strange thing is, that, given that my CPU is only supposed to have
> > the 486 instruction set, it runs applications and OS's, that are
> > supposed to require the 586's, and therefore, apparently, the 586
> > instruction set.
> 
> The gateway behind me is running a Mandrake 7 (for-586-compiled)
> distribution on a 486SLC40 CPU (chopped-back 486, including no FPU). The
> only change I made was to recompile the kernel to include FPU support (I
> told it to optimise for a 486 while I was there).
> 

Ah, yes. I have not recompiled anything for our Cyrix based systems. My
computer is running RH 5.2, WinNT, and Win98, with various applications.