4 ms·
2400 in the year 2000? You were WAY behind the times. Should have been 56k by then.
by D13Fd 3y ago
2400 in the year 2000? You were WAY behind the times. Should have been 56k by then.
- hollywood_court 3y agoNa I replaced the 2400 well before 2000. I simply stated that I had the 486x until 2000.
- D13Fd 3y agoOooh that makes sense. 486DX ran pretty well all told.
- IntelMiner 3y agoDid you move it to Linux at any point? Back then it seemed to be an easy way to turn aging machines into veritable hotrods
- hollywood_court 3y agoNo I didn't fool around with Linux until almost 2004.