Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by prmoustache on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @07:01AM (#40050546)

The rant about qemu/kvm at the bottom is weird. Has the author never heard of virt-manager or gnome-boxes?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by tetris11 on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @07:53AM (#40050869)

    # create disk image 
    qemu-img create -f qcow2 win95.img 10G
    # install win95 from iso
    qemu-system-x86_64 -m 256 -hda win95.img -cdrom windows95.iso -boot d
    # boot the disk
    qemu-system-x86_64 -m 256 -hda win95.img

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by InfamousRece on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @07:56AM (#40050886)

Now configure the network card on that thing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by a1xndr on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @09:32AM (#40051645)

On most builds of QEMU, that command will start a VM with an e1000 card networked through SLIRP. It's the equivalent of something like:

  -netdev user,id=net0 -device e1000,netdev=net0

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by tomrod on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @07:55AM (#40050879)

virt-manager/gnome-boxes haven't achieved the same mindshare as, say, virtualbox, so it is entirely possible.

I know when I took a break from VMs for awhile and came back, I found virt-manager about 3 days after I started trying to crack the nut of qemu/kvm from only the command line.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by sumtechguy on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @08:56AM (#40051316)

I as a CLI guy, usually have 2 or 3 open somewhere, I still find some CLI programs to be quite inscrutable. Pop it in a GUI though and suddenly the thing is dead easy to use. Have not quite figured out what triggers this response in me though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reproducing the printer hack of Windows 95 by black3r on Tuesday April 16, 2024 @11:43AM (#40053494)

I used to be a heavy CLI user when I was in college, after 10 years of professional experience I now prefer GUIs for most actions. For me the response you mention is automatic for every program with more than 10 CLI options. The longer the manual the easier is to just understand what to do in a GUI.

I only really prefer CLIs for two things: commands I use really often so I remember their usage and I can type the command faster than clicking the right things in GUI (e.g. "git rebase", "gh pr checkout", ...) and writing shell scripts, especially if I need to often do the same chain of actions, writing a .sh script saves a lot of time and mental energy.

For these reasons I especially love software which both has a good GUI and a good CLI, like VirtualBox for example.

[ Parent | on HN ]