[Old] How Microsoft Vandalised (Espionage) to Kill Competitor
Roy Schestowitz
Hash: SHA1
Borland fights big brain suck
,----[ Quote ]
| Fierce competitors Microsoft Corp. and Borland International, Inc. have moved
| their battle from the networked desktop to the courtroom.
|
| Borland last week filed suit against Microsoft, alleging that the Redmond,
| Wash., giant has been systematically recruiting Borland developers in an
| attempt to eliminate the company as a competitor. Microsoft and Borland are
| rivals in the budding Java and Internet tools markets.
|
| [...]
|
| The suit alleges that Microsoft's Bill Gates himself sweetened the pot. Gross
| eventually accepted the offer, which included an additional half-million
| dollar bonus, last September.
|
| A noticeably angry Borland CEO Del Yocam complained about the nerve of
| Microsoft. "How flagrant, driving limos up to the front of the company. That
| is what riles you," Yocam complained. Yocam said his No. 1 goal is to get
| Microsoft to stop recruiting.
`----
http://www.networkworld.com/news/1997/0512borland.html
Microsoft now tries this against companies like Adobe. Maybe Novell too.
Microsoft: "Gathering intelligence on enemy activities is critical to the
success of the Slog."
http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf
-- Microsoft, internal document
Recent:
Adobe staff under Microsoft lens
,----[ Quote ]
| Head hunters may like to call this intelligence gathering. Microsoft is in
| the process of engaging several executive search firms to conduct extensive
| talent mapping exercises focused on Adobe's development centers in Bangalore
| and Noida. These two centers collectively employ close to 700 people
| primarily constituting product development specialists at various levels of
| seniority.
`----
CodeGear goes Ruby on Rails route
,----[ Quote ]
| Ruby on Rails is an open-source framework--an addition to the
| Ruby language--that has become a popular choice for building
| Web applications, particularly public-facing Web sites.
`----
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6183175.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkicKWIACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6iJgCgpLtamKAX1uN6Ez1nWHalVOEs
C1cAnRvRR09JA2K7aP/yxvm1xIclfJI3
=N2M/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Moshe Goldfarb.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Borland fights big brain suck
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Fierce competitors Microsoft Corp. and Borland International, Inc. have moved
>| their battle from the networked desktop to the courtroom.
>|
>| Borland last week filed suit against Microsoft, alleging that the Redmond,
>| Wash., giant has been systematically recruiting Borland developers in an
>| attempt to eliminate the company as a competitor. Microsoft and Borland are
>| rivals in the budding Java and Internet tools markets.
>|
>| [...]
>|
>| The suit alleges that Microsoft's Bill Gates himself sweetened the pot. Gross
>| eventually accepted the offer, which included an additional half-million
>| dollar bonus, last September.
>|
>| A noticeably angry Borland CEO Del Yocam complained about the nerve of
>| Microsoft. "How flagrant, driving limos up to the front of the company. That
>| is what riles you," Yocam complained. Yocam said his No. 1 goal is to get
>| Microsoft to stop recruiting.
Someday you will learn that it is all about money Roy Schestowitz.
And I suspect that you and Mark Kent would be standing in line to get into
one of those limos and partake of the 1/2 million dollar bonus as well.
Most people would and those that claim they wouldn't are either lying,
already set up financially, don't have the skills needed (like you for
example) or are just plain crazy.
Borland is just pissed because their products are no longer top tier.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Stephan Rose
Wait a moment. "are no longer top tier"? When was anything Borland *ever*
top tier?
--
Stephan
1986 Pontiac Fiero GT
君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
君の事忘れたときがないから
Hadron
Borland C++ 2.0 (c 1990) and its GUI and DOS IDE kicked the crap out of pretty much
anything else at the time for PC development.
Their Turbo series won awards left right and centre before Linux was
just a stirring in Linus's pants.
Greenhorn
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
--- "Network World, 5/12/97 "
The last millenium called. They want their ancient news stories back.
Slow day for Linux news eh? I guess since you get paid by the post
spamer like you want to keep those counts up.
Moshe Goldfarb.
They were among the first to release programming environments and
languages, like C, C++, Pascal and others when Microsoft was charging and
arm and a leg for the ones they sold.
Quattro was pretty good as well at the time.
Unfortunately due to poor management and lackluster development of new
products they went down the drain.
Moshe Goldfarb.
+10
Linonut
* Hadron peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Stephan Rose <ker...@nospammer.com> writes:
>
>>> Borland is just pissed because their products are no longer top tier.
>>
>> Wait a moment. "are no longer top tier"? When was anything Borland *ever*
>> top tier?
>
> Borland C++ 2.0 (c 1990) and its GUI and DOS IDE kicked the crap out
> of pretty much anything else at the time for PC development.
>
> Their Turbo series won awards left right and centre before Linux was
> just a stirring in Linus's pants.
Nice.
I used Borland starting with 2.0, and then picked up 3.0, and it was
damn good. Except that Borland made a major mistake with OWL (Object
Windows Library) -- they implemented a major feature of it using their
own extension to C++, involving an array operator.
They rectified it with version 4 (IIRC), and had some promising stuff in
version 5.
Then they screwed the pooch completely by tying C++ Builder to Delphi
code. Oh. My. God.
--
Under the wide and starry sky,
Dig my grave and let me lie,
Glad did I live and gladly die,
And laid me down with a will,
And this be the verse that you grave for me,
Here he lies where he longed to be,
Home is the sailor home from the sea,
And the hunter home from the hill.
-- Robert Loius Stevenson, "Requiem"
Stephan Rose
Ahh, that explains things. I was a little too young at that time to be
concerned with programming IDE's. =)
Stephan Rose
Come to think of it, I honestly don't even know if I had a PC in 1990...
Synapse Syndrome
news:6fOdnSPNh7d8AQHV...@giganews.com...
>
> Come to think of it, I honestly don't even know if I had a PC in 1990...
>
You ought to be ashamed of having a PC those days, if you did. Amiga was
where it was at then. I got one of the first A500s in 1988. It was far
ahead of the PC and Macintosh, with multitasking and massively superior
sound and graphics. The only thing that came close was the Archimedes.
ss.
chrisv
You were late to the party, man! 8) I bought my A1000 in late
1985. Used the hell out of the thing for 7 years with only a few
upgrades (2MB RAM, Quickstart ROM, and 50MB SCSI harddrive).
Boy, was that HD a nice upgrade. 8)
Rex Ballard
> On Aug 8, 4:09 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> wrote:
> --- "Network World, 5/12/97 "
> The last millenium called. They want their ancient news stories back.
Good catch.
> Slow day for Linux news eh? I guess since you get paid by the post
> spamer like you want to keep those counts up.
Since you brought it up Roy, can you find out what the ruling was on
the case?
From 2004
[quote]
| Of note is the fact that many ex-Borlanders have, in fact, ended up
at Microsoft, including the creator of C#,
| Anders Hjelsberg, the inventor of Delphi. Borland seems to be
shrugging off the defections, but in the past
| they've been less generous, filing suit against Microsoft in 1997
for "trying to get [Borland's] company plans"
| by hiring away more than 30 employees.
|
| Whether you like Microsoft or not, whether you consider such actions
to be fair business practices or not,
| you have to ask yourself, at what point will such "cherry-picking"
come under DOJ scrutiny?
http://www.theserverside.net/news/thread.tss?thread_id=23708
The answer was "Never" because Microsoft's bribes to George Bush and
the Republican fund raisers like Carl Rove and Jack Abramhov
"charities" made sure that George W. Bush was bought, and STAYED
bought. The Gates foundation has also made "donations" to similar
charities. My guess is that Microsoft is greasing both sides of the
isle, just to make sure that nobody tries too hard to enforce the DOJ
settlement.
Eventually, Borland left the application development business
completely. Today they offer a few products, including a CORBA based
(Visibroker) middle-ware application server, some project management
software, and some collaboration software. Essentially, Borland is a
shell of it's former self, barely hanking on to it's NASDAQ listing at
$1.51 per share, down from about $8 per share a few years ago, thanks
in part to Microsoft's poaching and the DOJ inaction. But for
Microsoft, this is just "Business as Usual".
The NASDAQ and OTC are littered with the bodies of former Microsoft
"Partners" who had their software poached by Microsoft and then
accepted a Microsoft-written settlement, only to discover too late,
that it was essentially worthless, and worse than that, granted
Microsoft immunity for both past and future activity of the same type.
DFS
> The NASDAQ and OTC are littered with the bodies of former Microsoft
> "Partners" who had their software poached by Microsoft and then
> accepted a Microsoft-written settlement, only to discover too late,
> that it was essentially worthless, and worse than that, granted
> Microsoft immunity for both past and future activity of the same type.
Like who? Name one, with plenty of proof for every lie you just posted.
<requests for proof are translated into Rex's brain as reasons to slink away
and come back later with more lies>
Moshe Goldfarb.
The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of behavior.
It's the way they operate.
Rick
> On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:26:19 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>
>>> The NASDAQ and OTC are littered with the bodies of former Microsoft
>>> "Partners" who had their software poached by Microsoft and then
>>> accepted a Microsoft-written settlement, only to discover too late,
>>> that it was essentially worthless, and worse than that, granted
>>> Microsoft immunity for both past and future activity of the same type.
>>
>> Like who? Name one, with plenty of proof for every lie you just
>> posted.
>>
>> <requests for proof are translated into Rex's brain as reasons to slink
>> away and come back later with more lies>
>
> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
> behavior. It's the way they operate.
Grow up.
--
Rick
Snit
0qKdnc8tqPi7AQDV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 6:31 AM:
>> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
>> behavior. It's the way they operate.
>
> Grow up.
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views... and here
you are telling others to grow up.
Interesting.
--
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments
that take our breath away.
Rick
> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
> 0qKdnc8tqPi7AQDV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 6:31 AM:
>
>>> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
>>> behavior. It's the way they operate.
>>
>> Grow up.
>
> You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views...
Liar.
> and here you are telling others to grow up.
Follow the thread, you might catch a clue, insteadt of posting just to
dispute whatever I say.
>
> Interesting.
yeah ... grow up.
--
Rick
Moshe Goldfarb.
I am.
You're the one who constantly calls people "bitch".
Seems to me you should take your own advice, Rick.
Rick
> On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 08:31:18 -0500, Rick wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 09:28:30 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:26:19 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The NASDAQ and OTC are littered with the bodies of former Microsoft
>>>>> "Partners" who had their software poached by Microsoft and then
>>>>> accepted a Microsoft-written settlement, only to discover too late,
>>>>> that it was essentially worthless, and worse than that, granted
>>>>> Microsoft immunity for both past and future activity of the same
>>>>> type.
>>>>
>>>> Like who? Name one, with plenty of proof for every lie you just
>>>> posted.
>>>>
>>>> <requests for proof are translated into Rex's brain as reasons to
>>>> slink away and come back later with more lies>
>>>
>>> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
>>> behavior. It's the way they operate.
>>
>> Grow up.
>
> I am.
> You're the one who constantly calls people "bitch". Seems to me you
> should take your own advice, Rick.
Well, stop being such a bitch, and grow up.
--
Rick
Snit
> On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 08:21:47 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
>> 0qKdnc8tqPi7AQDV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 6:31 AM:
>>
>>>> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
>>>> behavior. It's the way they operate.
>>>
>>> Grow up.
>>
>> You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views...
>
> Liar.
From just this month (and I am likely missing some):
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
A complete fabrication on your part created when I pointed out how PCLOS
clearly has the qualities you referred to as not best for the user. You
tried to pretend that the way the problems were created somehow excused
them...
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
This implies I have claimed the problem with an inconsistent GUI is
primarily confusion... which I did not ever say and have repeatedly stated
otherwise (and quoted your own comments that show you understand otherwise).
Your implication was a fabrication you made up.
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
Another complete fabrication on your part... and being that you had been
repeatedly been shown screen shots from Gnome (without KDE) that still had
the inconsistencies I have been talking about your comments were contrary to
information you had been shown.
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
Another complete fabrication on your part. When you were called on it you
went off topic and "guessed" that I would not talk about the problems of
fracturing on desktop Linux, as if one must panic over every problem with
Linux!
The fact you repeatedly fabricate stories about my views is indisputable,
Rick. I have quoted you doing so!
...
--
What do you call people who are afraid of Santa Claus? Claustrophobic.
Rick
> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
> 0qKdncUtqPhlWwDV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 9:34 AM:
>
>> On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 08:21:47 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>
>>> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
>>> 0qKdnc8tqPi7AQDV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 6:31 AM:
>>>
>>>>> The company Rex works for has brainwashed him into that kind of
>>>>> behavior. It's the way they operate.
>>>>
>>>> Grow up.
>>>
>>> You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views...
>>
>> Liar.
>
> From just this month (and I am likely missing some):
>
> Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems that
> have no central command authority, and those that don't.
>
> A complete fabrication on your part created when I pointed out how PCLOS
> clearly has the qualities you referred to as not best for the user.
And yet it stays in the top 5 at distrowatch...
> You tried to pretend that the way the problems were created somehow
> excused them...
>
> Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use apps from one
> windowing environment. Problem solved.
>
> This implies I have claimed the problem with an inconsistent GUI is
> primarily confusion... which I did not ever say and have repeatedly
> stated otherwise (and quoted your own comments that show you understand
> otherwise). Your implication was a fabrication you made up.
If there is no confusion on the pert of the user, tell us why you think
how there is any problem with an inconsistent UI
>
> So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking a standard
> Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free? And why not?
>
> Another complete fabrication on your part... and being that you had been
> repeatedly been shown screen shots from Gnome (without KDE) that still
> had the inconsistencies I have been talking about your comments were
> contrary to information you had been shown.
You include Mozill 2.x, which isn't a gtk app.
>
> Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
> desktop?
>
> Another complete fabrication on your part. When you were called on it
> you went off topic and "guessed" that I would not talk about the
> problems of fracturing on desktop Linux, as if one must panic over every
> problem with Linux!
Why do you?
>
> The fact you repeatedly fabricate stories about my views is
> indisputable, Rick. I have quoted you doing so!
>
> ...
Your way of using quotes to prove something is, at best, humorous, and
always inaccurate.
--
Rick
Snit
...
>>>> You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views...
>>>
>>> Liar.
>>
>> From just this month (and I am likely missing some):
>>
>> Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems that
>> have no central command authority, and those that don't.
>>
>> A complete fabrication on your part created when I pointed out how PCLOS
>> clearly has the qualities you referred to as not best for the user.
>
> And yet it stays in the top 5 at distrowatch...
While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the topic from your
fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The quote of yours
above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view. If you
thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more quotes
from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the conclusion you
did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely fabricating a story
about my view - something you denied doing.
>> You tried to pretend that the way the problems were created somehow
>> excused them...
>>
>> Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use apps from one
>> windowing environment. Problem solved.
>>
>> This implies I have claimed the problem with an inconsistent GUI is
>> primarily confusion... which I did not ever say and have repeatedly
>> stated otherwise (and quoted your own comments that show you understand
>> otherwise). Your implication was a fabrication you made up.
>
> If there is no confusion on the pert of the user, tell us why you think
> how there is any problem with an inconsistent UI
While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the topic from your
fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The quote of yours
above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view. If you
thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more quotes
from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the conclusion you
did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely fabricating a story
about my view - something you denied doing.
>> So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking a standard
>> Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free? And why not?
>>
>> Another complete fabrication on your part... and being that you had been
>> repeatedly been shown screen shots from Gnome (without KDE) that still
>> had the inconsistencies I have been talking about your comments were
>> contrary to information you had been shown.
>
> You include Mozill 2.x, which isn't a gtk app.
It is not KDE. While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the
topic from your fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The
quote of yours above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view.
If you thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more
quotes from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the
conclusion you did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely
fabricating a story about my view - something you denied doing.
>> Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
>> desktop?
>>
>> Another complete fabrication on your part. When you were called on it
>> you went off topic and "guessed" that I would not talk about the
>> problems of fracturing on desktop Linux, as if one must panic over every
>> problem with Linux!
>
> Why do you?
While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the topic from your
fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The quote of yours
above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view. If you
thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more quotes
from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the conclusion you
did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely fabricating a story
about my view - something you denied doing.
>> The fact you repeatedly fabricate stories about my views is
>> indisputable, Rick. I have quoted you doing so!
>>
>> ...
>
> Your way of using quotes to prove something is, at best, humorous, and
> always inaccurate.
Incorrect. Look at the examples, above, where I use quotes to show you are
fabricating stories about my views. In not a single case did you even *try*
to defend your claims about me... at least not try in a way an adult would
take seriously.
--
You really have to give credit to Apple for driving innovation.
- Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)
Rex Ballard
In no particular order.
McAffee, Norton, Symantic, Quarterdeck, Novell, WordPerfect, Lotus,
Corel, Borland, Cyrix, AMD, IBM's OS/2 division, Sun/Java, Gateway,
ButtonWare, Mark Williams, Apple (eventually recovered by adopting
Unix and adding product diversity), DEC, Alpha, Texas Instraments,
Tandy, Commodore, Atari, Sony, Electronic Arts.
As for the settlement and legal costs information, that's in the 10-K
annual report. It's been a pretty big Line Item for about 12 years.
The settlements with the DOJ are a matter of public record. The
settlements with other states are not so public. Most of the
settlements are under court seal.
If you want to unseal the settlements, you can prove me wrong, or
prove me right. It would take a criminal prosecution under RICO to
unseal the settlements.
I don't think the Bush administration will lift a finger, other
prosecutors were fired for doing things the Bush administration didn't
like, and current investigations in various states and nations are
typically not announced until indictments are handed down.
The only reliable form is print or photocopied print media, such as
Microfilm or Microfiche of trade magazines for the period from 1977 to
2008. Some electronic web archives are purged within a week if a
major advertiser such as Microsoft, requests that it be "Cleaned up".
The other possibility would be for Microsoft to attempt to sue
someone, and the defendant could then petition to have all the
settlements unsealed. And of course, all relevant records from those
cases could be reprocessed and made part of the public record again.
Rick
> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
> 0qKdnfwtqPjHhQPV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 3:21 PM:
>
> ...
>>>>> You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about my views...
>>>>
>>>> Liar.
>>>
>>> From just this month (and I am likely missing some):
>>>
>>> Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
>>> that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
>>>
>>> A complete fabrication on your part created when I pointed out how
>>> PCLOS clearly has the qualities you referred to as not best for the
>>> user.
>>
>> And yet it stays in the top 5 at distrowatch...
>
> While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the topic from your
> fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The quote of yours
> above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view. If you
> thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more
> quotes from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the
> conclusion you did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely
> fabricating a story about my view - something you denied doing.
PCLinuxOS stays at te top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
something right.
>
>>> You tried to pretend that the way the problems were created somehow
>>> excused them...
>>>
>>> Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use apps from
>>> one windowing environment. Problem solved.
>>>
>>> This implies I have claimed the problem with an inconsistent GUI is
>>> primarily confusion... which I did not ever say and have repeatedly
>>> stated otherwise (and quoted your own comments that show you
>>> understand otherwise). Your implication was a fabrication you made up.
>>
>> If there is no confusion on the pert of the user, tell us why you think
>> how there is any problem with an inconsistent UI
>
> While I can appreciate your desire to want to change the topic from your
> fabrications about my views, I shan't be distracted. The quote of yours
> above is an example of you fabricating a story about my view. If you
> thought you could show otherwise you would have provided one or more
> quotes from me to show where you could have *reasonably* come to the
> conclusion you did. You cannot do so, however, because you were merely
> fabricating a story about my view - something you denied doing.
If there is no confusion on the part of the user, tell us why you think
there is any problem with an inconsistent UI
>
Your are getting boring pasting your bullshit.
>
>>> The fact you repeatedly fabricate stories about my views is
>>> indisputable, Rick. I have quoted you doing so!
>>>
>>> ...
>>
>> Your way of using quotes to prove something is, at best, humorous, and
>> always inaccurate.
>
> Incorrect. Look at the examples, above, where I use quotes to show you
> are fabricating stories about my views. In not a single case did you
> even *try* to defend your claims about me... at least not try in a way
> an adult would take seriously.
Your way of using quotes to prove something is, at best, humorous, and
always inaccurate.
--
Rick
Snit
...
> PCLinuxOS stays at te top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
You fabricated that. Outright just made it up - not based on any comments
of mine you can point to.
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use apps from
one windowing environment. Problem solved.
This implies I have claimed the problem with an inconsistent GUI is
primarily confusion... which I did not ever say and have repeatedly
stated otherwise (and quoted your own comments that show you
understand otherwise). Your implication was a fabrication you made up.
>
> If there is no confusion on the part of the user, tell us why you think
> there is any problem with an inconsistent UI
I will accept your statements on that one:
Rick:
I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.
Rick:
And yes, I do know that it is better for the user if the button are
all in the same places in comparable dialog boxes, and that common
menu items are the same.
Rick:
Actually my view is not so different from usability experts. It does
enhance usability to have menus and controls in the same places
across applications. The more uniform or consistent that is, the
better for the user. I have said this many times before. I am not
coming around to your point of view.
Rick:
I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across an
interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.
Note: you said *nothing* about confusion... no less the idea of "easily
confused". Nor did I. As noted, you fabricated that claim about me. Just
made it up.
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking a
standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free? And why
not?
Another complete fabrication on your part... and being that you had
been repeatedly been shown screen shots from Gnome (without KDE) that
still had the inconsistencies I have been talking about your comments
were contrary to information you had been shown.
>
> You include Mozill 2.x, which isn't a gtk app.
Irrelevant to the fact you fabricated a claim about me.
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
Another complete fabrication on your part. When you were called on it
you went off topic and "guessed" that I would not talk about the
problems of fracturing on desktop Linux, as if one must panic over
every problem with Linux!
>
> Your are getting boring pasting your bullshit.
Your excitation is irrelevant to the fact you fabricated claims about me.
And then denied it.
--
But if you are somebody who is not too concerned about price, who is not too
concerned about freedom, I don't think we can say the Linux desktop offers
the very best experience.
Rick
something right.
--
Rick
Snit
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
and:
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
and:
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
and:
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
In the end I showed not only that your accusation of dishonesty was wrong
but that you had been clearly dishonest in your denial!
--
I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.
Rick
something right.
Rick
Hadron
Rick <no...@nomail.com> writes:
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Q: how do they measure it? I suspect corruption and the developers of it
should be boycotted. Their monopoly is bad for other companies such as
Apple and Microsoft.
Rick
> Rick <no...@nomail.com> writes:
>
>> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
>> doing something right.
>
> Q: how do they measure it?
At the moment, I don't care.
> I suspect corruption and the developers of it
> should be boycotted. Their monopoly is bad for other companies such as
> Apple and Microsoft.
What monopoly would that be, dumbass?
--
Rick
Snit
Pssst.... Rick... he was mocking you.
--
I can't say we will succeed at this, but we will make a significant attempt
to elevate the Linux desktop to the point where it is as good or better than
Apple.
Snit
g7lqtp$qpp$4...@registered.motzarella.org on 8/9/08 9:30 PM:
More to the point... why did Rick change the topic from his clearly
dishonest denial of him fabricating stories?
Oh.
Because he realizes he was caught red handed being dishonest.
--
Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
imagination. - attributed to Albert Einstein, likely apocryphal
Snit
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
and:
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
and:
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
and:
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
In the end I showed not only that your accusation of dishonesty was wrong
Rick
> "Rick" <no...@nomail.com> stated in post
> 0qKdnfEtqPjw9wPV...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 9:11 PM:
>
>> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
>> doing something right.
PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
doing something right.
(snip)
--
Rick
Psyc Geek (TAB)
> > 0qKdnfEtqPjw9wPVnZ2dnUVZ_j2dn...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 9:11 PM:
>
> >> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
> >> doing something right.
>
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
> doing something right.
> (snip)
>
> --
> Rick
PCLinuxOS is number 5 today.
You do know that the reason it went to the top is the curiosity
factor?
So says Distro Watch.
Well, Mint is the new kid on the block, and climbing.
You gonna switch?
Rick
> On Aug 10, 12:27 pm, Rick <n...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 08:30:49 -0700, Snit wrote:
>> > "Rick" <n...@nomail.com> stated in post
>> > 0qKdnfEtqPjw9wPVnZ2dnUVZ_j2dn...@supernews.com on 8/9/08 9:11 PM:
>>
>> >> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
>> >> doing something right.
>>
>> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be
>> doing something right.
>> (snip)
>>
>> --
>> Rick
>
> PCLinuxOS is number 5 today.
>
> You do know that the reason it went to the top is the curiosity factor?
> So says Distro Watch.
Yes? So?
>
> Well, Mint is the new kid on the block, and climbing.
Mint and gOS have moved up in the last 7 days. gOS... that's interesting.
> You gonna switch?
Highly doubtful.
--
Rick
Snit
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
and:
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
and:
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
and:
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
In the end I showed not only that your accusation of dishonesty was wrong
Snit
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
and:
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
and:
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
and:
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
In the end I showed not only that your accusation of dishonesty was wrong
Snit
> PCLinuxOS stays at the top pf the list at Distrowatch. They must be doing
> something right.
Lovely... but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about:
Snit:
You are the one who repeatedly fabricates stories about
my views...
Rick:
Liar.
And then I listed some examples from just this month, including:
Clearly you are clueless as to the differences between systems
that have no central command authority, and those that don't.
and:
Here's a clue: if you are so easily confuse, only use
apps from one windowing environment. Problem solved.
and:
So, your position is that you can't be bothered by taking
a standard Ubuntu install, and making sure it is KDE-free?
And why not?
and:
Why do you panic when KDE and Gnome apps are used on the same
desktop?
In the end I showed not only that your accusation of dishonesty was wrong