xp reactivation after mobo change
jj
extended warranty, so I bought a new mobo (asus) now that everything is back
together it won't let me activate. When I use the 800 number they say that
the product can't be activated. Please help.
--
Jack
Will Denny
Please see if the following article helps:
"Windows Product Activation (WPA) on Windows XP"
http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.htm
--
Will Denny
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
Please reply to the News Groups
"jj" <j...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5DD95DF2-C09F-4C00...@microsoft.com...
humans
going to provide you support to reactivate it. You need to contact the
manufacturer for support, but in this case even they are not going to
support, because you have changed the motherboard.
I feel the only way is to purchase a new Windows retail license which you
can always use and ask for activation support, even if you changed your
hardware, just need to ensure you are running it only on one computer.
Humans
jj
to put my product code in or will I have to reinstall the OS and lose my
data. Thanks
--
Jack
Will Denny
A changed mobo requires a 'Repair' install of XP. If the XP CD is OEM
version then the 'Repair' option may not be available.
--
Will Denny
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
Please reply to the News Groups
"humans" <hum...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0478F17F-B184-4186...@microsoft.com...
jj
--
Jack
Will Denny
Have a look through the documentation that came with the XP CD. Dells's OEM
CDs are sometimes different to other ones. Failing that, contact Dell to
see if they can give you some more info.
--
Will Denny
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
Please reply to the News Groups
"jj" <j...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C0CE2A61-2682-4FBC...@microsoft.com...
jj
kurttrail
It may be too late, but do the phone activation number, and when asked
why are you activating, say you needed to reinstall, so you slipstreamed
SP2 into your installation CD, and then you were prompted to activate
upon reinstallation. Stick to our guns, and if you have a problem with
the phone rep, ask to speak to their supervisor.
You may want to learn how to slipstream a Service Pack and create your
installation CD from that, so you can tell a convincing story.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Greg Ro
If you system was purchased before March 2005
Try the key fix first that I found on the web.
http://www.angelfire.com/in4/computertips/key.html
I would use the key listed on your machine. If kurttrail replies
here saying don't take this advice-don't listen to him.
Greg Ro
kurttrail
LOL! Please be my guest!
Donald McDaniel
> In article <5DD95DF2-C09F-4C00...@microsoft.com>,
> j...@discussions.microsoft.com says...
> Here's the deal - since your motherboard died, MS permits a replacement
> motherboard of a different type to be installed and still be considered
> the same system under the OEM agreement. In your case, you need to call
> MS, tell them that you have a replacement motherboard as part of an OEM
> repair from Dell, and that Dell said you need a new activation key.
Actually, this is not completely true: Microsoft's OEM policies
require you to fulfil the conditions of the OEM (in your case, Dell)
in replacing the burnt motherboard. The Dell OEM agreement requires
you to replace a defective motherboard with an identical one purchased
from Dell.
> If you explain it, nicely, as the fact that you are replacing a
> defective OEM board with an OEM board, it fully qualifies you to
> reactivate.
If your OEM CD is a so-called "Full OEM (generic)", Microsoft allows
you to replace it with any other motherboard. But if your OEM is
Dell, it must be replaced with an identical one purchased from Dell,
IF you want to keep your Dell OEM license.
Unless you fulfil the Dell warranty conditions, your Dell OEM license
will lapse.
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread
so that conversations may be kept in order
=======================================================
Ron Martell
Your Dell Windows XP is a "BIOS Locked" version that is self
activating when it is installed on a Dell motherboard. Prior to 1
March 2005 if these versions were installed on a different motherboard
then they required activation over the Internet or by telephone.
However since 1 March 2005 Microsoft has blocked the online activation
of these Windows versions and they are also declining requests for
telephone activation.
Your only options would appear to be:
1. Replace the motherboard with one from Dell and try to find another
buyer (eBay?) for your Asus board if it cannot be returned.
2. Purchase a new license for Windows XP.
Good luck
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm
kurttrail
> In article <91tjg1h62s7avvhr0...@4ax.com>,
> dlmcdaniel2005 @yahoo.com says...
> an identical or a different motherboard if no identical board is
> available - please check the Systems Builder site if you don't want to
> believe this.
LOL! So MS can dictate whether Dell continues to support a computer
with a non-Dell Mobo?
I would think MS's Anti-Trust regulators would like to here about that
one!
Donald McDaniel
> In article <91tjg1h62s7avvhr0...@4ax.com>, dlmcdaniel2005
> @yahoo.com says...
> >
> Not true - any defective motherboard from any OEM may be replaced with
> an identical or a different motherboard if no identical board is
> available - please check the Systems Builder site if you don't want to
> believe this.
Actually, you should have written "not completely true". What I wrote
was true in general for OEM licenses distributed by large system
builders such as Dell. End-users are required to fulfil the OEM's
license terms if they want their OEM license to remain in effect after
a motherboard change.
However, you do make a good point. What happens if Dell has no
identical replacement motherboard?. I am pretty sure they would allow
you to install a non-Dell-supplied motherboard in that instance. I
didn't think about that, nor did I know that Dell (never bought a Dell
computer) has that policy. But it really makes sense to me. Hopefully,
it also makes sense to Microsoft.
Greg Ro
<ron.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"jj" <j...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>Help. I have a Dell pc and the mobo just fried and of course I didnt take the
>>extended warranty, so I bought a new mobo (asus) now that everything is back
>>together it won't let me activate. When I use the 800 number they say that
>>the product can't be activated. Please help.
>
>Your Dell Windows XP is a "BIOS Locked" version that is self
>activating when it is installed on a Dell motherboard. Prior to 1
>March 2005 if these versions were installed on a different motherboard
>then they required activation over the Internet or by telephone.
>
>However since 1 March 2005 Microsoft has blocked the online activation
>of these Windows versions and they are also declining requests for
>telephone activation.
Are their any small claim court lawsuits yet for not being able to use
their legally bought system the way they want too against either the
oem or Microsoft? I think you should have the right to reinstall or
do clean install of the operating system withoout havinmg to purchase
another copy.
I think that may depend on which key you use.
On systems that don't require activation.
They key provided on the machine has to activate or you couldn't use
for a reinstall or clean install or only for 30 days. Microsoft said
they would always allow you to do a clean or repair install.
I can see people with vista being ticked off and not being able to do
a clean install without purchasing another oem copy.
>Your only options would appear to be:
>1. Replace the motherboard with one from Dell and try to find another
>buyer (eBay?) for your Asus board if it cannot be returned.
>2. Purchase a new license for Windows XP.
>
>Good luck
>
>Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
There is a third option. hint hint
I would only do this third option if Microsoft would not help me.
Greg Ro
Ron Martell
>Are their any small claim court lawsuits yet for not being able to use
>their legally bought system the way they want too against either the
>oem or Microsoft? I think you should have the right to reinstall or
>do clean install of the operating system withoout havinmg to purchase
>another copy.
>
None that I am aware of, but there may well be. The suit would
probably have to be against the OEM. The wording of the EULA for
these OEM versions is pretty specific about tieing the license to the
specific hardware that the license was first installed on, and about
identifying the OEM and not Microsoft as having primary responsibility
for all problems and other issues.
This change in activation was brought about because it was becoming
fairly widely known that a "BIOS Locked" OEM license could in fact be
used on 2 computers, one self-activating through the BIOS Lock and the
other with different hardware activated normally over the Internet.
>
>I think that may depend on which key you use.
>On systems that don't require activation.
Product keys are actually quite specifically coded and it is
(apparently) quite easy to identify the SLP (=Bios Locked) versions
from the product key. I am not sure if a SLP version would even
accept an OEM Product key for a non-SLP version that was otherwise
identical.
>
>They key provided on the machine has to activate or you couldn't use
>for a reinstall or clean install or only for 30 days. Microsoft said
>they would always allow you to do a clean or repair install.
>
>I can see people with vista being ticked off and not being able to do
>a clean install without purchasing another oem copy.
I think it is far too early to tell exactly what procedures will apply
to the activation of OEM versions of Vista
With XP it is the "different motherboard = different computer"
presumption that is the underlying cause of this issue.
Good luck
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
Greg Ro
<ron.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>This change in activation was brought about because it was becoming
>fairly widely known that a "BIOS Locked" OEM license could in fact be
>used on 2 computers, one self-activating through the BIOS Lock and the
>other with different hardware activated normally over the Internet.
Is that the hidden image key or the oem key that on the sticker? I
have done a clean install of my machine using the image key. Before
I figured out how to do a clean install without no oem cd. I use the
key on the back of the machine. This key does require you to
activate. The image key usually does not unless it installed on
another system or on the same system with another bios or motherboard.
So if Wga becomes a problem. I can change it to my oem key.
My system Emachine w2040 model. Xp sp2 work on it if dep is disabled.
Greg Ro
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
>The Dell OEM agreement requires you to replace a defective
>motherboard with an identical one purchased from Dell.
If you are prepared to expose yourself to that degree of vendor
lock-in abuse, you may as well go Mac.
Note that "agreement" in this case is between two vendors playing
vulture, with you as the carcass. Were these terms visible when you
bought your PC, and did you consider them when weighing that purchase
against less "big" brands? If not, how can "the market" apply
Darwinian selection pressure? It's time the DoJ had another look,
methinks - sware/hware vendor cabals may benefit both sware and hware
vendors, but guess who's the toothpaste getting squeezed in between.
>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The rights you save may be your own
>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
kurttrail
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:59:09 -0700, Donald McDaniel
>
>> The Dell OEM agreement requires you to replace a defective
>> motherboard with an identical one purchased from Dell.
>
> If you are prepared to expose yourself to that degree of vendor
> lock-in abuse, you may as well go Mac.
>
> Note that "agreement" in this case is between two vendors playing
> vulture, with you as the carcass. Were these terms visible when you
> bought your PC, and did you consider them when weighing that purchase
> against less "big" brands? If not, how can "the market" apply
> Darwinian selection pressure? It's time the DoJ had another look,
> methinks - sware/hware vendor cabals may benefit both sware and hware
> vendors, but guess who's the toothpaste getting squeezed in between.
Hear, hear! In all the US Anti-Trust preceding the one group that
wasn't really considered were consumers.
NoStop
this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
> "jj" <j...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>Help. I have a Dell pc and the mobo just fried and of course I didnt take
>>the extended warranty, so I bought a new mobo (asus) now that everything
>>is back together it won't let me activate. When I use the 800 number they
>>say that the product can't be activated. Please help.
>
> Your Dell Windows XP is a "BIOS Locked" version that is self
> activating when it is installed on a Dell motherboard. Prior to 1
> March 2005 if these versions were installed on a different motherboard
> then they required activation over the Internet or by telephone.
>
> However since 1 March 2005 Microsoft has blocked the online activation
> of these Windows versions and they are also declining requests for
> telephone activation.
>
> Your only options would appear to be:
> 1. Replace the motherboard with one from Dell and try to find another
> buyer (eBay?) for your Asus board if it cannot be returned.
> 2. Purchase a new license for Windows XP.
>
> Good luck
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
3. Say to hell with this MickeyMouse madness and install Linux. You'll end
up with a far more powerful system, more customizable, more secure and with
access to literally thousands of free software apps. Most importantly,
you'll be FREE. Free from the marketing and bullying of MicroShaft.
--
Have you been MicroShafted today?
To mess up a Linux box, you need to work *at* it.
To mess up a Windows box, you need to work *on* it.
Donald McDaniel
> begin trojan.vbs ... On Monday 22 August 2005 09:54 am, Ron Martell had
> this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
> > "jj" <j...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Help. I have a Dell pc and the mobo just fried and of course I didnt take
> >>the extended warranty, so I bought a new mobo (asus) now that everything
> >>is back together it won't let me activate. When I use the 800 number they
> >>say that the product can't be activated. Please help.
> >
> > Your Dell Windows XP is a "BIOS Locked" version that is self
> > activating when it is installed on a Dell motherboard. Prior to 1
> > March 2005 if these versions were installed on a different motherboard
> > then they required activation over the Internet or by telephone.
> >
> > However since 1 March 2005 Microsoft has blocked the online activation
> > of these Windows versions and they are also declining requests for
> > telephone activation.
> >
> > Your only options would appear to be:
> > 1. Replace the motherboard with one from Dell and try to find another
> > buyer (eBay?) for your Asus board if it cannot be returned.
> > 2. Purchase a new license for Windows XP.
> >
> > Good luck
> >
> > Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
>
> 3. Say to hell with this MickeyMouse madness and install Linux. You'll end
> up with a far more powerful system, more customizable, more secure and with
> access to literally thousands of free software apps.
"Thousands of free software apps..." Yeh, right. You SHOULD have
written "thousands of free and extremely buggy software apps."
I've never installed a distibution of Linux (and I have installed
several) which did NOT contain MANY buggy apps (especially media
apps.) At least Microsoft's apps work as they should.
> Most importantly,
> you'll be FREE. Free from the marketing and bullying of MicroShaft.
A bully or a salesman can only influence you if you let them. You
must be extremely morally weak to be affected by Microsoft's marketing
efforts, and to feel that Microsoft has bullied you.
I've been using Microsoft Products since the early 80's, and have
never felt bullied by Microsoft.
kurttrail
<snip>
> I've been using Microsoft Products since the early 80's, and have
> never felt bullied by Microsoft.
And snake oil salesmen never seem to bully their customers either.
Obviously you have little understanding on the power of subliminal
marketing. It is like the preachers that convert people by subtly
preying on their fear of the unknown, with the false promise to know
what is unknowable.
Charlatans come in many sizes and shapes, but the all prey on the sucker
that is within all of us, and make it seem like they are the best thing
since we came out of the trees.
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> Donald McDaniel wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > I've been using Microsoft Products since the early 80's, and have
> > never felt bullied by Microsoft.
>
> And snake oil salesmen never seem to bully their customers either.
>
> Obviously you have little understanding on the power of subliminal
> marketing. It is like the preachers that convert people by subtly
> preying on their fear of the unknown, with the false promise to know
> what is unknowable.
>
> Charlatans come in many sizes and shapes, but the all prey on the sucker
> that is within all of us, and make it seem like they are the best thing
> since we came out of the trees.
My choices in Software are never determined by advertising or
peer-pressure.
EVERY item of software I keep and use was chosen by EXPERIMENTATION,
not advertising promises. I take ALL advertising promises from ANYONE
with a grain of salt. If I want to try a product out, I download a
legal trial, and put it to the test. If I feel that it does what I
want it to, I purchase it. My decision to purchase is ALWAYS
preceeded by a thorough trial of the software.
I also listen very carefully to WHAT any preacher or teacher (or
anyone in authority) says, and always apply my powers of discernment
and intellect to judging the worth of what they say. I am NEVER
fooled by a preacher of ANY religion.
I learned MANY YEARS ago that the claims of advertisers, charlatans,
and preachers seldom stand up to experimentation very long. I
certainly have no illusions that Microsoft is any different. I also
realize that Microsoft is in the business to make money, not make
people happy. But the fact is, they have made MILLIONS of buyers
happy in the process of making their money.
On the other hand, I did try several varieties of Linux for the sole
reason of investigating the claims of Linux enthusiasts. Linux fell
very short when compared to Windows XP. Maybe it is a good server OS,
but it certainly is a poor desktop experience.
Since I have no need for a server, there is no need for Linux in my
life. All it brought me was frustration and disappointment.
And I certainly reject your weak arguments, since they are nothing but
hate-filled words.
I really feel sorry for you, kurt, that you have nothing but coldness
in your heart. You need to learn to trust others.
kurttrail
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:05:01 -0400, "kurttrail"
> <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>> Donald McDaniel wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> I've been using Microsoft Products since the early 80's, and have
>>> never felt bullied by Microsoft.
>>
>> And snake oil salesmen never seem to bully their customers either.
>>
>> Obviously you have little understanding on the power of subliminal
>> marketing. It is like the preachers that convert people by subtly
>> preying on their fear of the unknown, with the false promise to know
>> what is unknowable.
>>
>> Charlatans come in many sizes and shapes, but the all prey on the
>> sucker that is within all of us, and make it seem like they are the
>> best thing since we came out of the trees.
>
> My choices in Software are never determined by advertising or
> peer-pressure.
So you say. But if you wouldn't be the best judge of determining the
effect of advertising some of which is quite subliminal had on you.
>
> EVERY item of software I keep and use was chosen by EXPERIMENTATION,
> not advertising promises. I take ALL advertising promises from ANYONE
> with a grain of salt. If I want to try a product out, I download a
> legal trial, and put it to the test. If I feel that it does what I
> want it to, I purchase it. My decision to purchase is ALWAYS
> preceeded by a thorough trial of the software.
But even taking advertising with a grain of salt, you still have paid
attention to it, and its effect can influence how you perceive your
testing. Without a true controlled testing through scientific method,
your results more that likely is skewed in some manner.
> I also listen very carefully to WHAT any preacher or teacher (or
> anyone in authority) says, and always apply my powers of discernment
> and intellect to judging the worth of what they say. I am NEVER
> fooled by a preacher of ANY religion.
LOL! So you say. If you believe in any established religion, then you
are influenced by teachers and preachers but past and present.
Only a very few people in history can claim to come to their
spirituality un-influenced. Unfortunately their names are lost to
history as they pre-date history by many millenia.
The closest modern written-historical man has come to not being
influenced about their spiritual beliefs are true agnostics, that keep
an open mind and truely believe that they don't know what to believe
when it comes to the spiritual.
> I learned MANY YEARS ago that the claims of advertisers, charlatans,
> and preachers seldom stand up to experimentation very long. I
> certainly have no illusions that Microsoft is any different. I also
> realize that Microsoft is in the business to make money, not make
> people happy. But the fact is, they have made MILLIONS of buyers
> happy in the process of making their money.
LOL! And what evidence do you base this customer-satisfaction on?
Surely not because Windows is preinstalled on 9x.x% of the computers
sold?
> On the other hand, I did try several varieties of Linux for the sole
> reason of investigating the claims of Linux enthusiasts. Linux fell
> very short when compared to Windows XP. Maybe it is a good server OS,
> but it certainly is a poor desktop experience.
It is getting better. But again, that isn't a measure of
customer-satisfaction.
> Since I have no need for a server, there is no need for Linux in my
> life. All it brought me was frustration and disappointment.
But that may also be influenced by the fact that you are set in you
Windows ways.
>
> And I certainly reject your weak arguments, since they are nothing but
> hate-filled words.
What hate-filled words? Please quote what you felt was hate-filled
words in my last post.
>
> I really feel sorry for you, kurt, that you have nothing but coldness
> in your heart. You need to learn to trust others.
LOL! I trust those that earn my trust. And you would know nothing
about my heart. Worry about you own.
Greg Ro
You would trust Microsoft? Even with doj lawsuit?
The problem with linux you had. The machine possible was not built
for linux system. If you get a machine specifally for linux it
should run fine. There would be users of red hat, mandrake, suse,
linspire. e.tc. if that was the case.
Greg Ro
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> Donald McDaniel wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:05:01 -0400, "kurttrail"
> > <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Donald McDaniel wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> I've been using Microsoft Products since the early 80's, and have
> >>> never felt bullied by Microsoft.
> >>
> >> And snake oil salesmen never seem to bully their customers either.
> >>
> >> Obviously you have little understanding on the power of subliminal
> >> marketing. It is like the preachers that convert people by subtly
> >> preying on their fear of the unknown, with the false promise to know
> >> what is unknowable.
> >>
> >> Charlatans come in many sizes and shapes, but the all prey on the
> >> sucker that is within all of us, and make it seem like they are the
> >> best thing since we came out of the trees.
> >
> > My choices in Software are never determined by advertising or
> > peer-pressure.
>
> So you say. But if you wouldn't be the best judge of determining the
> effect of advertising some of which is quite subliminal had on you.
The claims of "subliminal advertising" by crackpots such as yourself
have been LONG dismissed as UNTRUE by researchers. So-called
"subliminal advertising" MAY have been practiced in the past (the
50s), but the Federal government outlawed the practice years ago.
ALL the negative words about the worth of Microsoft products is
nothing but anti-Microsoft PROPOGANDA, such as yours in these
newsgroups.
>
> > On the other hand, I did try several varieties of Linux for the sole
> > reason of investigating the claims of Linux enthusiasts. Linux fell
> > very short when compared to Windows XP. Maybe it is a good server OS,
> > but it certainly is a poor desktop experience.
>
> It is getting better. But again, that isn't a measure of
> customer-satisfaction.
You actually mean that whether a product works as it claims it should
is not a factor in determining its worth, or whether a customer will
be satisfied with it or not?
You're an idiot, kurt. For a while there, I thought you were fairly
intelligent. But after your making a statement like that, I no longer
have any respect for you.
>
> > Since I have no need for a server, there is no need for Linux in my
> > life. All it brought me was frustration and disappointment.
>
> But that may also be influenced by the fact that you are set in you
> Windows ways.
Nope, I learn software very quickly. Using a new and unknown product
seldom frustrates me very long. The only time I am disappointed is
when the software does not live up to the claims of its enthusiasts or
manufacturers.
Microsoft Windows XP does what its users (and manufacturers) claim,
without fail, if the user has a machine which was built to properly
run it. Putting XP on a machine which was built for Windows 9x will
ALWAYS disappoint a user, especially a novice like the majority of
home computer users.
My brother and I carefully researched hardware (by experimentation)
which would properly run XP, and settled on what WE considered the
best test-bed for Windows applications.
On the other hand, I am continually disappointed by the "free"
software I download and try.
>
> >
> > And I certainly reject your weak arguments, since they are nothing but
> > hate-filled words.
>
> What hate-filled words? Please quote what you felt was hate-filled
> words in my last post.
kurt, it is obvious that you hate Microsoft. Your anti-Microsoft
rhetoric in 99% of your posts marks you completely, and shows how
hate-filled your heart is.
You may be a little more intelligent than most who post in these
groups, and have a better command of English than most, but you just
use more "acceptable" language to express your hatred, rather than
language which would show you up for what you really are.
>
> >
> > I really feel sorry for you, kurt, that you have nothing but coldness
> > in your heart. You need to learn to trust others.
>
> LOL! I trust those that earn my trust. And you would know nothing
> about my heart. Worry about you own.
Donald McDaniel
wrote:
Greg, the number and types of people who regularly experiment with
Linux can in NO WAY compare to the number and types of people who use
Windows.
Most Linux types I have found to be computer nerds and freaks, who
love endless fiddling with obscure text files, rather than normal,
every day people who just want to turn the machine on, get what they
need done, then turn it off, till the next time it is needed.
The only "problem" I had with Linux was Linux itself. Anything built
by OpenSource is bound to be weak and subject to buggy behavior.
kurttrail
LOL!
What I should have said is subconscious effects. You would be the worst
judge of the subconscious effect that advertising had on you.
>
>>>
>>> EVERY item of software I keep and use was chosen by EXPERIMENTATION,
>>> not advertising promises. I take ALL advertising promises from
>>> ANYONE with a grain of salt. If I want to try a product out, I
>>> download a legal trial, and put it to the test. If I feel that it
>>> does what I want it to, I purchase it. My decision to purchase is
>>> ALWAYS preceeded by a thorough trial of the software.
>>
>> But even taking advertising with a grain of salt, you still have paid
>> attention to it, and its effect can influence how you perceive your
>> testing. Without a true controlled testing through scientific
>> method, your results more that likely is skewed in some manner.
>>
>>> I also listen very carefully to WHAT any preacher or teacher (or
>>> anyone in authority) says, and always apply my powers of discernment
>>> and intellect to judging the worth of what they say. I am NEVER
>>> fooled by a preacher of ANY religion.
>>
>> LOL! So you say. If you believe in any established religion, then
>> you are influenced by teachers and preachers but past and present.
>>
>> Only a very few people in history can claim to come to their
>> spirituality un-influenced. Unfortunately their names are lost to
>> history as they pre-date history by many millenia.
>>
>> The closest modern written-historical man has come to not being
>> influenced about their spiritual beliefs are true agnostics, that
>> keep an open mind and truely believe that they don't know what to
>> believe when it comes to the spiritual.
LOL! Your silence is golden!
>
>
>>
>>> I learned MANY YEARS ago that the claims of advertisers, charlatans,
>>> and preachers seldom stand up to experimentation very long. I
>>> certainly have no illusions that Microsoft is any different. I also
>>> realize that Microsoft is in the business to make money, not make
>>> people happy. But the fact is, they have made MILLIONS of buyers
>>> happy in the process of making their money.
>>
>> LOL! And what evidence do you base this customer-satisfaction on?
>> Surely not because Windows is preinstalled on 9x.x% of the computers
>> sold?
>
> ALL the negative words about the worth of Microsoft products is
> nothing but anti-Microsoft PROPOGANDA, such as yours in these
> newsgroups.
>
LOL! And would that mean that ALL the positive words wouldn't be pro-MS
Propaganda?
It's quite funny that you dismiss ALL negatives comments about MS
out-of-hand. So much for your open mind!
You do realize that MS has been proven to be both a predatory monopoly
and a proven intellectual property infringer. Or do you just believe
that in nothing but propaganda?
>>
>>> On the other hand, I did try several varieties of Linux for the sole
>>> reason of investigating the claims of Linux enthusiasts. Linux fell
>>> very short when compared to Windows XP. Maybe it is a good server
>>> OS, but it certainly is a poor desktop experience.
>>
>> It is getting better. But again, that isn't a measure of
>> customer-satisfaction.
>
> You actually mean that whether a product works as it claims it should
> is not a factor in determining its worth, or whether a customer will
> be satisfied with it or not?
No, I was talking about your feelings about the state of Linux desktop
development, is no measure of Windows customer-satisfaction.
>
> You're an idiot, kurt. For a while there, I thought you were fairly
> intelligent. But after your making a statement like that, I no longer
> have any respect for you.
LOL! I'm not seeking your respect.
>
>>
>>> Since I have no need for a server, there is no need for Linux in my
>>> life. All it brought me was frustration and disappointment.
>>
>> But that may also be influenced by the fact that you are set in you
>> Windows ways.
>
> Nope, I learn software very quickly. Using a new and unknown product
> seldom frustrates me very long. The only time I am disappointed is
> when the software does not live up to the claims of its enthusiasts or
> manufacturers.
Linux is not just a different piece of software. It is a different way
of computing.
> Microsoft Windows XP does what its users (and manufacturers) claim,
> without fail, if the user has a machine which was built to properly
> run it.
LOL! Without Fail! Now any reasonable person can see you are full of
it!
> Putting XP on a machine which was built for Windows 9x will
> ALWAYS disappoint a user, especially a novice like the majority of
> home computer users.
>
> My brother and I carefully researched hardware (by experimentation)
> which would properly run XP, and settled on what WE considered the
> best test-bed for Windows applications.
>
> On the other hand, I am continually disappointed by the "free"
> software I download and try.
Your opinion is no measure of overall Windows customer-satisfaction.
Which gets us back to you saying, "But the fact is, they [MS] have made
MILLIONS of buyers happy in the process of making their money."
And me asking, "And what evidence do you base this customer-satisfaction
on?"
So far, you seem to base this solely on your own opinion.
>
>>
>>>
>>> And I certainly reject your weak arguments, since they are nothing
>>> but hate-filled words.
>>
>> What hate-filled words? Please quote what you felt was hate-filled
>> words in my last post.
>
> kurt, it is obvious that you hate Microsoft. Your anti-Microsoft
> rhetoric in 99% of your posts marks you completely, and shows how
> hate-filled your heart is.
You seemed to be talking about the original post of my you were replying
to.
Again, you have no idea what is in my heart, and you have yet to show
ANY hate-filled words.
Put up!
>
> You may be a little more intelligent than most who post in these
> groups, and have a better command of English than most, but you just
> use more "acceptable" language to express your hatred, rather than
> language which would show you up for what you really are.
LOL! I use more curse words than nearly anybody in these groups, but I
do self-censor them.
And how dare you tell me what I hate? Judge not, lest ye be judged. Or
are you like Pat Robertson? He advocates murder to satisfy his hate.
Do you judge me as being hateful to satisfy your own hatred?
>>
>>>
>>> I really feel sorry for you, kurt, that you have nothing but
>>> coldness in your heart. You need to learn to trust others.
>>
>> LOL! I trust those that earn my trust. And you would know nothing
>> about my heart. Worry about you own.
I feel sorry for you. You are a hypocrite, and you will not allow
yourself to see it.
kurttrail
LOL! You are so closed-minded! Why would you think any rational human
being respect and take seriously what you blather on about?
Alias
"kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
> Or are you like Pat Robertson? He advocates murder to satisfy his hate.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
Getting rid of Chávez would do the world and Venezuela a big favor. He's a
megalomanical idiot with a lot of money. But successful assasinations are,
by their very nature, covert, and Pat Robinson opening his big mouth might
have just prevented such a covert operation from happening. What a dork.
Alias
kurttrail
> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
>
>> Or are you like Pat Robertson? He advocates murder to satisfy his
>> hate.
>
> He's a megalomanical idiot with a lot of money. But successful
> assasinations are, by their very nature, covert, and Pat Robinson
> opening his big mouth might have just prevented such a covert
> operation from happening. What a dork.
Unlike many Christians, I do believe that killing is wrong.
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
I always close my mind to falsehood and idiocy such as you continually
spew in these newsgroups.
kurttrail
LOL! I listen to everything. I don't purposely close my mind.
But there you go again, judging. O, ye of little faith, and great
hypocrisy!
Greg Ro
<dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:44:04 -0500, Greg Ro <webw...@yes.lycs.com>
>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:46:31 -0700, Donald McDaniel
>> <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:05:01 -0400, "kurttrail"
>> ><donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Donald McDaniel wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> <snip>
>The only "problem" I had with Linux was Linux itself. Anything built
>by OpenSource is bound to be weak and subject to buggy behavior.
And windows does not have buggy behavoir?
When I select mulitple files using xp sp1 or xp sp2
I get a code 0xc0000005 error
It is not spyware or adaware or a virus.
Greg Ro
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> Alias wrote:
> > "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
> >
> >> Or are you like Pat Robertson? He advocates murder to satisfy his
> >> hate.
> >
> > Getting rid of Chávez would do the world and Venezuela a big favor.
> > He's a megalomanical idiot with a lot of money. But successful
> > assasinations are, by their very nature, covert, and Pat Robinson
> > opening his big mouth might have just prevented such a covert
> > operation from happening. What a dork.
>
> Unlike many Christians, I do believe that killing is wrong.
How do you know what "many Christians" believe? Do YOU know what is
in their hearts?
One of the BASIC tennents of Historical Christianity is "Thou shalt
not commit murder".
Just because "SOME" "Christians do not live up to or believe that
tennent does NOT mean that "many" Christians do not.
I have never met an Historical Christian who did not attempt to fulfil
the 10 Commandments from his heart. If you TRULY love Christ, you
will WANT to obey His Father.
Do not judge the worth of Christianity or random Christians by the
actions of those who fail to follow its teachings.
You never see the millions of Christians who live quiet, obedient
lives. They follow Christ in their everyday lives, and do not listen
to such men as Pat Robertson. He has a "voice" which we do not
recognise. Christ tells us SPECIFICALLY, "My sheep know My voice, and
a stranger they WILL NOT follow."
I would truly question the reality of a man's profession of Christ if
he commits murder, or participates in it.
By the way, if you REALLY want to understand the Bible, you must see
that there is a DIFFERENCE between the words "kill" and "commit
murder".
I am sure you would never find fault with a man if he killed another
man in the process of protecting his family from grievous harm. If
you do, you are truly morally confused.
Donald McDaniel
wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 09:30:52 -0700, Donald McDaniel
> <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:44:04 -0500, Greg Ro <webw...@yes.lycs.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:46:31 -0700, Donald McDaniel
> >> <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:05:01 -0400, "kurttrail"
> >> ><donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Donald McDaniel wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip>
>
>
>
> >The only "problem" I had with Linux was Linux itself. Anything built
> >by OpenSource is bound to be weak and subject to buggy behavior.
>
> And windows does not have buggy behavoir?
>
> When I select mulitple files using xp sp1 or xp sp2
> I get a code 0xc0000005 error
>
> It is not spyware or adaware or a virus.
>
>
> Greg Ro
Greg, I really don't know why you receive that error. I never receive
an error after selecting multiple files, and I have XP Pro w/SP2
installed. In fact, I seldom receive an error not caused by my
ineptness.
Maybe you should start a new thread about it, describing in detail
your error, every thing you do leading up to receiving the error, and
every thing you do until you receive the error, along with a detailed
description of your OS, Service Pack level, and computer hardware.
kurttrail
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 14:56:22 -0400, "kurttrail"
> <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>> Alias wrote:
>>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
>>>
>>>> Or are you like Pat Robertson? He advocates murder to satisfy his
>>>> hate.
>>>
>>> Getting rid of Chávez would do the world and Venezuela a big favor.
>>> He's a megalomanical idiot with a lot of money. But successful
>>> assasinations are, by their very nature, covert, and Pat Robinson
>>> opening his big mouth might have just prevented such a covert
>>> operation from happening. What a dork.
>>
>> Unlike many Christians, I do believe that killing is wrong.
>
> How do you know what "many Christians" believe? Do YOU know what is
> in their hearts?
>
> One of the BASIC tennents of Historical Christianity is "Thou shalt
> not commit murder".
LOL! That is, thou shalt not KILL.
>
> Just because "SOME" "Christians do not live up to or believe that
> tennent does NOT mean that "many" Christians do not.
LOL! Look at history. The last 2000 years is full of Christians
killing in the name of their god.
> I have never met an Historical Christian who did not attempt to fulfil
> the 10 Commandments from his heart. If you TRULY love Christ, you
> will WANT to obey His Father.
Too bad many of them didn't fulfill them in practice! Trying to fulfill
in your heart is nothing more than lipservice!
> Do not judge the worth of Christianity or random Christians by the
> actions of those who fail to follow its teachings.
Like you Judging me as being hatefilled, although Yehoshua taught that
you should be more concerned about the plank in your own eye, than the
speck in mine?
I'm not a Christian, thank the gods, fairies, little green men,
whatever! ;-)
> You never see the millions of Christians who live quiet, obedient
> lives. They follow Christ in their everyday lives, and do not listen
> to such men as Pat Robertson. He has a "voice" which we do not
> recognise. Christ tells us SPECIFICALLY, "My sheep know My voice, and
> a stranger they WILL NOT follow."
I grew up in Christianity, and have seen firsthand the hypocrisy of most
Christians.
The most vehement Iraqi War supporters are Christians, yet Iraq didn't
attack us, wasn't planning to attack us, didn't have the capability to
attack us!
The Iraq War was NOT a war of self-defense!
> I would truly question the reality of a man's profession of Christ if
> he commits murder, or participates in it.
Too bad the commandment doesn't say "murder" but "kill."
> By the way, if you REALLY want to understand the Bible, you must see
> that there is a DIFFERENCE between the words "kill" and "commit
> murder".
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?word=Thou+shalt+not+kill
> I am sure you would never find fault with a man if he killed another
> man in the process of protecting his family from grievous harm. If
> you do, you are truly morally confused.
LOL! The morally confused are those that advocate & allow killings in
their name, though they were not in harm's way, or under threat of any
imminent danger.
But let's bring this back to something on topic for this group, since
you seem to be willing to misquote one of the Ten Commandments to not
answer my question to you.
You stated, "But the fact is, they [MS] have made MILLIONS of buyers
happy in the process of making their money."
Then I asked, "And what evidence do you base this customer-satisfaction
on?"
And you seemed to base it on YOUR OPINION ONLY, not that of MILLIONS.
So come clean. You don't have any reliable measure of how HAPPY
MILLIONS of people are with Windows, and that your opinion is totally
baseless. IOW, you are just bullsh*tting.
So come on, be a man of true morals, either show rational and reliable
evidence that you based "they [MS] have made MILLIONS of buyers happy in
the process of making their money," or be man enough to say you don't
really know if MILLIONS of buyers have been made HAPPY by MS with
Windows.
kurttrail
Do you count Greg as one of the MILLIONS made HAPPY by Windows? ROFL!
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
Obviously, he is not happy at this time. What do you take me for?
However, happiness is very transient. A man can be happy one minute,
and unhappy the next, depending on the time of day, the weather, what
he sees out the window, how his wife is treating him, how his boss is
treating him, etc. And the other side is also true. He can be
unhappy one minute, and happy the next, depending on many factors.
I never have had the problems with XP which Greg has reported.
I do not doubt him for one minute. However, I told him the truth,
that I personally have had no problems with XP which were not caused
by my own ineptness or lack of knowledge or understanding. I am also
sure, by the Laws of Chance (after all, XP has been distributed to
MANY MILLIONS of people), that the MAJORITY of Windows XP users are
more HAPPY with the product than UNHAPPY.
Alias
"Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8morg15r2c70nh86r...@4ax.com...
I, for one, am happy with the product. I am not happy with Activation and
WGA as I believe it only affects paying customers and assuming guilt until
proven otherwise is an insult.
Alias
kurttrail
<snip>
> I never have had the problems with XP which Greg has reported.
> I do not doubt him for one minute. However, I told him the truth,
> that I personally have had no problems with XP which were not caused
> by my own ineptness or lack of knowledge or understanding. I am also
> sure, by the Laws of Chance (after all, XP has been distributed to
> MANY MILLIONS of people), that the MAJORITY of Windows XP users are
> more HAPPY with the product than UNHAPPY.
Which brings us back to it. Before it was MILLIONS, now it is MAJORITY!
On what evidence do you base customer HAPPINESS on?
Are you just making this HAPPINESS sh*t up, or is it based on reasonable
& reliable evidence?
Donald McDaniel
Insult-schminsult. I could care less whether I am insulted by
Microsoft Product Activation or not. I grew out of my teen-age pride
MANY, MANY years ago.
Just as long as it works, I am happy as a bedbug cuddled up to a fat
man on a long Winter night.
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread
so that conversations may be kept in order
=======================================================
GregRo
<aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
I never said I was happy or not happy for the record .
I can't see kurttrail post. He told me something I didn't like to
hear.
It possible one peace of software causing that problem or some tweak I
did or an the repair changed my CPU without my permission.
It is a problem with explorer.exe shell32.dll and shlwapi.dll
This does it even with xp sp1 and no updates installed.
Maybe ie 7 will fix this problem.
What I don't like about xp.
Is the activation and Wga things.
It won't run some of my older programs.
(I am not the type of person who goes out any buys the newest software
with each operating system)
I don't like the high picth noise my computer makes-yes this is after
I cleaned out the fan and the heat sinks.
I like 98se a lot better myself.
I do like somethings about xp and somethings I don't.
Greg R
Alias
When either activation or WGA doesn't work for you, get back to me. It has
nothing to do with maturity, you moron! Being considered guilty until proven
innocent is an insult. Period.
Alias
kurttrail
> Insult-schminsult. I could care less whether I am insulted by
> Microsoft Product Activation or not. I grew out of my teen-age pride
> MANY, MANY years ago.
Of course your not insulted. You are a conformist.
>
> Just as long as it works, I am happy as a bedbug cuddled up to a fat
> man on a long Winter night.
LOL! I find it hysterical that you recieve happiness from an Operating
System.
Ron Martell
>> One of the BASIC tennents of Historical Christianity is "Thou shalt
>> not commit murder".
>
>LOL! That is, thou shalt not KILL.
Actually "you must not commit murder" would probably be a more
accurate translation of the original Hebrew text into current English.
Languages constantly evolve, and did so even in biblical times. The
meanings of words, and how they were used by the people living at that
time, can and does change. Just look at your phrase "thou shalt not"
which is totally archaic. The usage of the word shalt in the 16th
century corresponds more closely to the modern usage of must rather
than shall.
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm
R. McCarty
the commandment did not apply to either taking life in criminal type
punishment or warfare.
"Ron Martell" <ron.m...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:si2sg11mqfpkj7om9...@4ax.com...
kurttrail
> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>>> One of the BASIC tennents of Historical Christianity is "Thou shalt
>>> not commit murder".
>>
>> LOL! That is, thou shalt not KILL.
>
> Actually "you must not commit murder" would probably be a more
> accurate translation of the original Hebrew text into current English.
LOL! Unless you have a time machine, there is no measure of what is the
more accurate translation.
> Languages constantly evolve, and did so even in biblical times. The
> meanings of words, and how they were used by the people living at that
> time, can and does change. Just look at your phrase "thou shalt not"
> which is totally archaic. The usage of the word shalt in the 16th
> century corresponds more closely to the modern usage of must rather
> than shall.
But that is the difference in the same language, over a relatively short
period of time. Hardly analoguos to translating old Hebrew to modern
day English.
But it really does not matter, since Pat was advocating assassination.
And the Iraq war was not a war of self-defense. Modern-day hypocritical
Christians that support assassination and unprovoked wars have broken
the intent of the Don't Murder/Kill commandment, no matter the
interpretation.
Ron Martell
>
>But that is the difference in the same language, over a relatively short
>period of time. Hardly analoguos to translating old Hebrew to modern
>day English.
The problems occur when older documents are translated based on usage
at the time of translation.
One example, again from the bible, can be found in the book of Isiah
where a word whose usage at the time of the writing meant "young girl"
was translated as "virgin" because that is how that specific Hebrew
word was used at the time of the translation.
kurttrail
> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> But that is the difference in the same language, over a relatively
>> short period of time. Hardly analoguos to translating old Hebrew to
>> modern day English.
>
> The problems occur when older documents are translated based on usage
> at the time of translation.
>
> One example, again from the bible, can be found in the book of Isiah
> where a word whose usage at the time of the writing meant "young girl"
> was translated as "virgin" because that is how that specific Hebrew
> word was used at the time of the translation.
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
LOL! And quite frankly, recent translations of the Bible may be just as
suspect especially considering the how out of touch with reality much of
the Christian communities and "scholars" are.
Idiots that think that evolution is suspect because it is considered a
"scientific theory," yet accept creationism or "intelligent design" on
nothing more than wishful thinking, are not credible sources of
scholarship.
GregRo
This may also be the caused way it crashing xp after I burn a cd.
The dll for eazyzip is the same name as xp zip dll.
I really liked that program :(
I may try the compatibility option.
Greg Ro
Donald McDaniel
NOTE that the Rev. Robertson has RECENTLY (in the last few days)
APOLOGISED PUBLICALLY for his thoughtless remarks, giving his reasons
for them.
By the way, Dr. Robertson was referring to President Chavez of
Venezuela in his outburst, not Iraq.
I am sure he got frustrated, like many people in the US, by Pres.
Chavez's constant anti-American rhetoric, as he claimed in his
apology. He spoke in anger, as I am sure all of us (including you)
have. HE, on the other hand, admitted his error, and apologized
publically to the world, unlike you (I have never seen you apologise
or admit your errors. Apparently you think you are sin-or-error-free,
like all proud and haughty men.
Donald McDaniel
<aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
Sir: ONLY a court of law can convict a person of guilt or innocense.
If you are made to feel GUILTY by Microsoft Activation, maybe you are.
Perhaps you need to learn to not go by your "feelings". Feelings come
and go, but guilt or innocense remain, until changed by a court of Law
or God.
If you can't overcome feelings of guilt when you KNOW you are
innocent, maybe you need to grow up a little.
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread
so that conversations may be kept in order
=======================================================
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
> Donald McDaniel wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > I never have had the problems with XP which Greg has reported.
> > I do not doubt him for one minute. However, I told him the truth,
> > that I personally have had no problems with XP which were not caused
> > by my own ineptness or lack of knowledge or understanding. I am also
> > sure, by the Laws of Chance (after all, XP has been distributed to
> > MANY MILLIONS of people), that the MAJORITY of Windows XP users are
> > more HAPPY with the product than UNHAPPY.
> Which brings us back to it. Before it was MILLIONS, now it is MAJORITY!
> On what evidence do you base customer HAPPINESS on?
You ACTUALLY can't distinguish between "MILLIONS of XP users" and "the
MAJORITY" of them, when "the MAJORITY" of MILLIONS" is MORE Than a
"TWO millions"?. XP is installed on at LEAST 100 million computers.
If I remember my English, that would mean EXACTLY what I wrote. The
"MAJORITY" of 100 MILLION is at LEAST 51% of 100 MILLION, which is at
LEAST 51 MILLION.
Happiness is a very subjective thing, kurt. What makes me happy might
not be what makes you happy. Computers help to make me happy.
> Are you just making this HAPPINESS sh*t up, or is it based on reasonable
> & reliable evidence?
Having come from VERY HARD circumstances, it doesn't take much to make
me happy.
I'm sorry you aren't happy, kurt. Maybe if you got a little religion
into your life, you would become more happy. I hope so. I could
never bear to live without Christ in my heart again. This world is a
tough and evil place for a man without Christ. When He enters, your
complete outlook on Life changes, forever. In addition, you will
inherit eternal life after you leave this earth.
Donald McDaniel
wrote:
> I never said I was happy or not happy for the record .
> I can't see kurttrail post. He told me something I didn't like to
> hear.
>
> It possible one peace of software causing that problem or some tweak I
> did or an the repair changed my CPU without my permission.
>
> It is a problem with explorer.exe shell32.dll and shlwapi.dll
>
> This does it even with xp sp1 and no updates installed.
>
> Maybe ie 7 will fix this problem.
>
>
> What I don't like about xp.
> Is the activation and Wga things.
> It won't run some of my older programs.
> (I am not the type of person who goes out any buys the newest software
> with each operating system)
>
> I don't like the high picth noise my computer makes-yes this is after
> I cleaned out the fan and the heat sinks.
>
>
> I like 98se a lot better myself.
>
> I do like somethings about xp and somethings I don't.
>
>
>
> Greg R
>
>
>
I do admit that Windows 98 WILL run better than XP on a marginal or
some older computer systems. And yes, some software products get
broken by SP1 or SP2 (or any Windows service pack). I experienced
this when I first installed SP1. My PrintShop20 Deluxe would not
start after I installed SP1. However, with SP2, it started working
again. I was lucky enough to have several versions of PrintShop, so
was able to install one which worked with the service pack.
So service packs sometimes break some programs and drivers, and
sometimes fix others. It's kind of a crap-shoot. And sometimes
service packs will not work with the drivers supplied by the
manufacturer. The solution in that case is to obtain and install a
driver which will from the manufacturer. If they have none, there is
nothing Microsoft can do, since it is not in the business to produce
the millions of drivers needed for the millions of cards and devices
in use by millions of users. Such a CD, if it even existed, would
need many BILLIONS of bytes JUST for all the drivers to be included.
However, I have not found a single software program of mine which will
not run with XP, with some configuration of either the program or
Windows XP, or the installation of a newer service pack. Some of them
I have had since Windows 95, and used through Windows 98, Windows ME,
and Windows 2000. However, I HAVE had to replace device drivers for
EACH new version of Windows.
Microsoft can't test each and every software product released against
the Service Packs, so there are always a few which the packs are sure
to break or fix.
Many older products cannot be used simply because they have code which
directly addresses hardware devices, instead of using Windows calls to
address them . In that case, your only recourse is to replace them
with software which operates safely with Windows.
Microsoft always gives software developers months or years to update
their software and drivers so they will run with any newer version of
Windows or its service packs. They just refuse to update their
software, for whatever reason. In that case, Microsoft can do
nothing, since support for non-Microsoft software and hardware is
strictly the manufacturer's responsibility.
Sometimes, it takes months or years for device drivers to be updated
and made available by their manufacturers.
I am going on and on. Sorry. Needless to say, there are many reasons
why some programs fail to work with some software or hardware, and why
some are just plain out-of-luck with the release of a newer OS or
service pack.
I hope you get it fixed, Greg. I hate to see fellow-users
disappointed by the product.
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread
so that conversations may be kept in order
=======================================================
kurttrail
LOL! The day he apologized, he first lied and said he never said
assassination. But Robertson is one of those that aren't going to
heaven according to Yehoshua. Something about a camel fitting through
the eye of a needle! LOL!
>
> By the way, Dr. Robertson was referring to President Chavez of
> Venezuela in his outburst, not Iraq.
Yes, I know. I was talking about Robertson's assassination remarks, AND
Christians being the biggests supporters of the Iraqi War.
Robertson is a hypocrite, and so are all of the Christian supporters of
an unprovoked Iraqi War!
>
> I am sure he got frustrated, like many people in the US, by Pres.
> Chavez's constant anti-American rhetoric, as he claimed in his
> apology.
LOL! So you think his heart isn't hateful?!
> He spoke in anger, as I am sure all of us (including you)
> have. HE, on the other hand, admitted his error, and apologized
> publically to the world, unlike you (I have never seen you apologise
> or admit your errors.
LOL! It two days for him to apologize, and I've already mentioned how
he lied about his original comments earlier on the day he apologized.
It took just about universal condemnation to get him to give his belated
apology. One noticable except to the condemnation, GWB!
> Apparently you think you are sin-or-error-free,
> like all proud and haughty men.
Actually, find a mistake I've made, and you'll see that I've admitted to
it. I have no problem admitting my mistakes.
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/msg/4e22bcbb8784fecc
The above link is just one example.
kurttrail
Typical Christian moron. You know he didn't mean he felt guilty, but
that PA operates on the assumption that MS's customers are guilty of not
following MS's convulted, arcane, and arbitrary rules, until they prove
otherwise, yet you purposely misrepresented what Alias wrote.
How Christ-like of you, O ye of little faith, and of much hypocrisy!
kurttrail
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:29:17 -0400, "kurttrail"
> <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>> Donald McDaniel wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> I never have had the problems with XP which Greg has reported.
>>> I do not doubt him for one minute. However, I told him the truth,
>>> that I personally have had no problems with XP which were not caused
>>> by my own ineptness or lack of knowledge or understanding. I am
>>> also sure, by the Laws of Chance (after all, XP has been
>>> distributed to MANY MILLIONS of people), that the MAJORITY of
>>> Windows XP users are more HAPPY with the product than UNHAPPY.
>
>> Which brings us back to it. Before it was MILLIONS, now it is
>> MAJORITY! On what evidence do you base customer HAPPINESS on?
>
> You ACTUALLY can't distinguish between "MILLIONS of XP users" and "the
> MAJORITY" of them, when "the MAJORITY" of MILLIONS" is MORE Than a
> "TWO millions"?. XP is installed on at LEAST 100 million computers.
> If I remember my English, that would mean EXACTLY what I wrote. The
> "MAJORITY" of 100 MILLION is at LEAST 51% of 100 MILLION, which is at
> LEAST 51 MILLION.
>
> Happiness is a very subjective thing, kurt. What makes me happy might
> not be what makes you happy. Computers help to make me happy.
You are sick, and should seek professional psychiatric help!
But at least we are now clear that you have NO F*#KING IDEA how many
millions of sickos feel happiness from using an operation system,
because, as you said, it is subjective, and I would be willing to bet
that you don't even know one million Windows users, let alone know their
feelings regarding Windows.
>
>> Are you just making this HAPPINESS sh*t up, or is it based on
>> reasonable & reliable evidence?
>
> Having come from VERY HARD circumstances, it doesn't take much to make
> me happy.
Ah, but you only know your feelings, you have no idea the feeling of the
MAJORITY of Windows Users, so you just made that sh*t up about the
MAJORITY of them being made happy by Windows.
In YOUR God's book, that is bearing false witness!
>
> I'm sorry you aren't happy, kurt.
LOL! No you are just sorry, as you have no idea how I feel.
> Maybe if you got a little religion
> into your life, you would become more happy.
Much happier since I got religion out of my life.
> I hope so. I could
> never bear to live without Christ in my heart again.
And what makes you think that Christ has anything to do with a false
witness and a judgemental hypocrite like you? Just because you ask for
forgiveness? LOL! Since you keep making the same mistakes over and
over again, your actions make a lie of that!
> This world is a
> tough and evil place for a man without Christ.
Tell that to the victims of the Inquistion!
> When He enters, your
> complete outlook on Life changes, forever.
LOL! So you can go around sanctioning the killing of innocents in his
name!
> In addition, you will
> inherit eternal life after you leave this earth.
. . . . And the cow jumped over the moon!
Alias
"Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> When either activation or WGA doesn't work for you, get back to me. It
>> has
>> nothing to do with maturity, you moron! Being considered guilty until
>> proven
>> innocent is an insult. Period.
>>
>> Alias
>>
> Sir: ONLY a court of law can convict a person of guilt or innocense.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I said that MS ASSUMES YOU ARE
GUILTY, not me, you moron! They ASSUME ONE IS GUILTY OF PIRACY UNTIL ONE
PROVES OTHERWISE by activation and WGA.
> If you are made to feel GUILTY by Microsoft Activation, maybe you are.
I have a legit copy of XP on all my computers. I do not feel guilty. I feel
insulted because I have to prove twice that I paid for a licence. Many
people have had to call India and other countries to prove that their copy
of XP is genuine. Meanwhile, the crackers and pirates just laugh. Only the
paying customer is inconvenienced. It's the worst PR move MS has ever made.
> Perhaps you need to learn to not go by your "feelings". Feelings come
> and go, but guilt or innocense remain, until changed by a court of Law
> or God.
God doesn't exist. A court of law is irrevelant unless you are talking about
a country taking MS to court for their abusive, monopolistic and predatory
ways.
> If you can't overcome feelings of guilt when you KNOW you are
> innocent, maybe you need to grow up a little.
>
> Donald L McDaniel
Maybe you need to get off your Christian high moral horse.
Alias
Alias
"Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> I'm sorry you aren't happy, kurt. Maybe if you got a little religion
> into your life, you would become more happy. I hope so. I could
> never bear to live without Christ in my heart again. This world is a
> tough and evil place for a man without Christ. When He enters, your
> complete outlook on Life changes, forever. In addition, you will
> inherit eternal life after you leave this earth.
>
> Donald L McDaniel
The amazing thing is that the man believes this. And thinks he's saved. LOL!
Just curious, when you get to the spiritual kingdom, being as it's spiritual
and not material, you won't have body to see, taste, touch, hear. You won't
have a mouth to talk with. Are you sure you want that for eternity? Seems
kinda bleak and, well, impossible to me. You wouldn't even know you're there
without a body to *see* it.
BTW, Einstein proved that one cannot create or destroy anything, only the
form can change. Kinda mucks up the chosen few saved trip, doesn't it?
Alias
Tom
> If I remember my English, that would mean EXACTLY what I wrote. The
> "MAJORITY" of 100 MILLION is at LEAST 51% of 100 MILLION, which is at
> LEAST 51 MILLION.
I don't see how English translates into mathematical functions, but your 51%
assumption is wrong using the word "majority" when considering number
reflecting a certain guage or measurement. 51% is simply more than 50%, but
51% isn't the threshhold of a majority, any portion of a total that is over
50% is the majority (e.g. 50.000000001% is still more than 50%).
Tom
He didn't apologize, he first lied about using the term "assassination"
concerning a means to get rid of chavez. Pat then took another route after
it was shown he did say that, by copping a sorry assed plea! I love how the
biggest media Christ revelers are the first to act un-Christ like, or like a
Christian.
George
Think about this: Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire:
there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
For ETERNITY Fellows!!!! That is a LONGGGGGGGGGG time.
God loves you guys and He made Heaven just for you, and He wants you in
it!!!
George
"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:usbbW7mq...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Donald McDaniel
<donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote:
NOTE my words above, kurt: I PLAINLY stated "If you are made to feel
GUILTY by Microsoft Activation". NOTE my use of the word "IF"
preceeding my statement. That word makes EVERYTHING that follows
dependent on whether or not he truly is feeling guilty. If he did NOT
feel guilty in some way, WHY did he even use the word "guilt"? Perhaps
he is not, but has heard others use the word "guilt" when referring to
Product Activation. I really think everyone thinks that because of
people like you, who constantly accuse Microsoft of making people feel
guilty by product activation.
A man CERTAINLY can't EXPERIENCE guilt, unless he first FEELS it
inside. Many people are socio-paths, who NEVER feel guilt, so they
would just feel insulted or something, since they usually have huge
amounts of pride, being basically narcissistic. I try my best to
avoid such people.
In my experience, people who are made to feel uncomfortable, insulted,
or guilty by something as reasonable as Product Activation usually
are, or are WITHOUT accurate knowledge of the process and reason for
Microsoft to require it. OR are simply immature. If they keep
following your advice, they certainly will be.
>, but
> that PA operates on the assumption that MS's customers are guilty of not
> following MS's convulted, arcane, and arbitrary rules, until they prove
> otherwise, yet you purposely misrepresented what Alias wrote.
> How Christ-like of you, O ye of little faith, and of much hypocrisy!
Product Activation doesn't operate "on the assumption that MS's
customers are guilty...". It asks EVERYONE, no matter WHO they are,
to go through Product Activation. I doubt VERY SERIOUSLY that those
at Microsoft think that EVERYONE is guilty of having pirated software.
Since there appears to be NO OTHER WAY at this time to distinguish
between legitimate licenses and pirated licenses, they have EVERY
RIGHT to require it. If you show me or them a better way, I might
change my mind, and so might Microsoft.
Your statement is JUST like saying that because policemen carry
handguns, and execute the law fairly evenhandedly, the Law
automatically considers everyone guilty. If you actually think that,
you need a LOT of instruction in law and the duties and
responsibilities of cops (plus their internal thought-processes and
motivations), or you need to have your own guilty conscience cleared
up (if it is weighted down with guilt.)
Since you do NOT know the hearts (or ANYONE, for that matter) of those
at Microsoft, you can NEVER honestly make such statements. Wait till
you HEAR IT FROM THEIR MOUTHS, first. THEN accuse them publically..
Part of becoming a mature person is learning to distinguish between
the things you can change, and the things you cannot. Until the
Millennium Digital Copyright Act is repealed or changed, Microsoft has
EVERY RIGHT to continue requiring Product Activation.
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread
so that conversations may be kept in order
=======================================================
Donald McDaniel
<aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>
> "Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> When either activation or WGA doesn't work for you, get back to me. It
> >> has
> >> nothing to do with maturity, you moron! Being considered guilty until
> >> proven
> >> innocent is an insult. Period.
> >>
> >> Alias
> >>
> > Sir: ONLY a court of law can convict a person of guilt or innocense.
>
> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I said that MS ASSUMES YOU ARE
> GUILTY, not me, you moron! They ASSUME ONE IS GUILTY OF PIRACY UNTIL ONE
> PROVES OTHERWISE by activation and WGA.
OK, prove it publically! I will certainly change my mind about
Microsoft if you can PROVE (with internal documentation from MICROSOFT
or a finding by a court of law) what you just said.
Product Activation ACTUALLY assumes that ALL product keys of XP are
LEGITIMATE, not ILLEGITIMATE. You just got it backward. Not
completely your fault. You just lack a little knowledge and
understanding about Microsoft Product Activation.
(By the way, Product Activation has been found to be COMPLETELY legal.
I assure you, Microsofts' legal department would have reseached case
law VERY, VERY carefully before instituting the process. Not only
that, but MANY software developers are starting to require Product
Activation or other means of authentication of some sort.)
Tell me, WHY do you feel "insulted", as you call it? An insult can
only touch you if there is ANY thing in you which responds to it.
For instance, I do not feel insulted that you have called me a "Moron"
publically several times in this newsgroup, because I know I am not a
moron. Now, when I was younger, I would have felt insulted, because I
was puffed up with pride, like most younger adults and some older
ones, too. I do admit that I still struggle with pride from time to
time. After all, I am still a little immature myself. I certainly
don't claim to being God or a wise man.
There is no room or need for pride in the heart of a mature person.
Donald McDaniel
You are certainly "right", Tom. I should have been more specific,
because there are many people who reject your statements because you
fail to "dot your eyes, and cross your tees". However, I used "51%"
(a little poetic license) to show kurt how ridiculous his statement
was.
However, "51%" IS a majority, as "50.000001%" is. In fact, ANYTHING
over exactly "50%" is a MAJORITY, technically. It's CERTAINLY not a
"MINORITY", nor is it the "EXACT" amount. I don't know EXACTLY when a
decimal approaching anything over .99 to a bilion places becomes a
UNIT, do you? Maybe if the decimal part somehow becomes exactly ".6"?
I am learning. I've never seen a decimal part of anything(including
human beings who make up a legislature such as the US legislature,
without dividing asunder the thing itself. Show me .6% of a Senator,
and I might more fully agree with you.
The word "Majority" is used OFTEN when referring to the greater part
of one of our legislative bodies, such as the US Senate, or ANY number
of human beings, for that matter. In that context, it means "exactly
ONE-HALF of the TOTAL number of persons making up the body, PLUS ONE
(a unit). That is the context I used the MAJORITY in.
Anyway, thanks for your correction.
kurttrail
Is a presumption that he had feelings of guilt to overcome.
> That word makes EVERYTHING that follows
> dependent on whether or not he truly is feeling guilty. If he did NOT
> feel guilty in some way, WHY did he even use the word "guilt"?
He used the word "guilty," not "guilt," in a legal sense, not an
emotional one.
Bearing false witness again! I love you Christians! Hypocritical to
end!
> Perhaps
> he is not, but has heard others use the word "guilt" when referring to
> Product Activation. I really think everyone thinks that because of
> people like you, who constantly accuse Microsoft of making people feel
> guilty by product activation.
It has to do with MS's presumption that its customers are guilty until
proven innocent by their PA technology, not customers feeling guilty.
> A man CERTAINLY can't EXPERIENCE guilt, unless he first FEELS it
> inside. Many people are socio-paths, who NEVER feel guilt, so they
> would just feel insulted or something, since they usually have huge
> amounts of pride, being basically narcissistic. I try my best to
> avoid such people.
>
> In my experience, people who are made to feel uncomfortable, insulted,
> or guilty by something as reasonable as Product Activation usually
> are, or are WITHOUT accurate knowledge of the process and reason for
> Microsoft to require it. OR are simply immature. If they keep
> following your advice, they certainly will be.
You are a serial bearer of false witnessing!
>
>> , but
>> that PA operates on the assumption that MS's customers are guilty of
>> not following MS's convulted, arcane, and arbitrary rules, until
>> they prove otherwise, yet you purposely misrepresented what Alias
>> wrote.
>> How Christ-like of you, O ye of little faith, and of much hypocrisy!
>
> Product Activation doesn't operate "on the assumption that MS's
> customers are guilty...".
If not, there would be no need for it. Why would MS spend money and
time developing it, if it presumed their customers were innocent?
> It asks EVERYONE, no matter WHO they are,
> to go through Product Activation.
Yet another lie. MS's corporate VL customers do not go through PA.
Corporations good, people bad. That is MS's PA policy!
> I doubt VERY SERIOUSLY that those
> at Microsoft think that EVERYONE is guilty of having pirated software.
Until people's installations pass the PA check, that is exactly the
presumption, if it wasn't, then no PA check would be necessary.
> Since there appears to be NO OTHER WAY at this time to distinguish
> between legitimate licenses and pirated licenses, they have EVERY
> RIGHT to require it. If you show me or them a better way, I might
> change my mind, and so might Microsoft.
It was working fine before PA. The piracy rate had been dropping since
1994 until MS introduced PA, since then, the PA rate remained static.
MS made billions prior to PA. As a matter of fact, statistically, you
cannot prove that MS has ever been hurt by "piracy," either real, or its
imagine unsubstantiate piracy.
> Your statement is JUST like saying that because policemen carry
> handguns, and execute the law fairly evenhandedly, the Law
> automatically considers everyone guilty.
If their were a policeman in every home, like PA is with Windows XP,
then I would say that, but that isn't the case. PA is in every home
with Windows XP, though BIOS-locking hides it from view from many, but
on every boot up, XP does a license check. To me, that is having the MS
PA police in my home.
> If you actually think that,
> you need a LOT of instruction in law and the duties and
> responsibilities of cops (plus their internal thought-processes and
> motivations), or you need to have your own guilty conscience cleared
> up (if it is weighted down with guilt.)
LOL! I have no guilty conscience. I have no need to beg forgiviness,
to alleviate my guilt!
> Since you do NOT know the hearts (or ANYONE, for that matter) of those
> at Microsoft, you can NEVER honestly make such statements. Wait till
> you HEAR IT FROM THEIR MOUTHS, first. THEN accuse them publically..
Actions speak louder than words, and the way PA works, with constant
licensing checking, that action says it all to me.
But then again I don't put my faith into false gods, like MS, and
organized religion, so I'm able to use reason to base my judgements, and
don't use faith to fool myself into believing all sorts of nonsense!
> Part of becoming a mature person is learning to distinguish between
> the things you can change, and the things you cannot.
No. It is the part of becoming a comformist to submit to those that you
think have authority over you. Like MS and the false gods of organized
crime . . . . er, I mean organized religion!
> Until the
> Millennium Digital Copyright Act is repealed or changed, Microsoft has
> EVERY RIGHT to continue requiring Product Activation.
First of all, it is the DMCA, Digital Millennium Copyright Act .
Second of all, it says that:
TITLE 17, CHAPTER 12, § 1201 (c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected.-(1)
Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or
defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this
title.
So I have every right to break it for my "fair use."
And since PA DOES NOT stop real piracy at all, and it is mostly used to
limit paying customers "fair use," MS is really just wasting its
stockholders dividends on developing PA and the rest of its
copy-protection schemes, and on maintaining the PA/copy-protection
infrastructure.
So PA pisses off paying customers, and you can only do that for so long
before customers tell you to go screw, and it just ends up taking
dividends out of the pockets of stockholders, so while MS may have the
right to use copy-protection, all it is really doing in the long run is
cutting off their nose to spite their face!
kurttrail
> kurtrail and alias,
>
> Think about this: Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of
> fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
>
> For ETERNITY Fellows!!!! That is a LONGGGGGGGGGG time.
>
> God loves you guys and He made Heaven just for you, and He wants you
> in it!!!
Of course supposedly Yehoshua said that in the middle of a parable, that
wasn't meant to be taken literally!
Another false witness! I really love you Christians, and how you have
to misrepresent your God in order to justify your beliefs!
kurttrail
LOL! You totally misrepresent what I meant. First you said MILLIONS
were made HAPPY by Windows, and then you said a MAJORITY. Now I only
pointed that out to show you up the ante on all the people you have no
way of proving that have been moved to happiness from an operating
system. The main point I was making was not the MILLIONS v. MAJORITY,
but that you are making both up! All you know is that Windows gets YOU
off on happiness. You have no friggin' idea how MILLIONS or a MAJORITY
of people are made to feel from Windows.
But there you go again bearing false witness. ;-)
Alias
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:44:05 +0200, "Alias"
> <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> >> When either activation or WGA doesn't work for you, get back to me. It
>> >> has
>> >> nothing to do with maturity, you moron! Being considered guilty until
>> >> proven
>> >> innocent is an insult. Period.
>> >>
>> >> Alias
>> >>
>> > Sir: ONLY a court of law can convict a person of guilt or innocense.
>>
>> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I said that MS ASSUMES YOU
>> ARE
>> GUILTY, not me, you moron! They ASSUME ONE IS GUILTY OF PIRACY UNTIL ONE
>> PROVES OTHERWISE by activation and WGA.
>
> OK, prove it publically! I will certainly change my mind about
> Microsoft if you can PROVE (with internal documentation from MICROSOFT
> or a finding by a court of law) what you just said.
Reading comprehension isn't your only problem. You also have a problem with
logic. Why should I have to prove I bought something twice when I have the
receipt for payment over in the drawer?
>
> Product Activation ACTUALLY assumes that ALL product keys of XP are
> LEGITIMATE, not ILLEGITIMATE. You just got it backward. Not
> completely your fault. You just lack a little knowledge and
> understanding about Microsoft Product Activation.
BS. If they assumed all were legitimate, no PA would be necessary.
Meanwhile, the pirates just laugh and burn another copy.
>
> (By the way, Product Activation has been found to be COMPLETELY legal.
> I assure you, Microsofts' legal department would have reseached case
> law VERY, VERY carefully before instituting the process. Not only
> that, but MANY software developers are starting to require Product
> Activation or other means of authentication of some sort.)
BS. PA has never been challenged in court. You're back pedaling big time
now.
>
> Tell me, WHY do you feel "insulted", as you call it? An insult can
> only touch you if there is ANY thing in you which responds to it.
Having to prove, twice, that I bought something is insulting.
>
> For instance, I do not feel insulted that you have called me a "Moron"
> publically several times in this newsgroup, because I know I am not a
> moron.
I should have rephrased that. You were and are acting like a moron. I don't
know you well enough to know if you always act like that.
> Now, when I was younger, I would have felt insulted, because I
> was puffed up with pride, like most younger adults and some older
> ones, too. I do admit that I still struggle with pride from time to
> time. After all, I am still a little immature myself. I certainly
> don't claim to being God or a wise man.
Good thing.
>
> There is no room or need for pride in the heart of a mature person.
>
> Donald L McDaniel
Really? Gosh, I always thought one should be proud of a number of things
like a job well done, caring for your customers and not driving them crazy
with having to prove they're not thieves twice after paying for a product
but what the hell do I know, I don't believe in a god and I think that Jesus
of Nazarath had a slew of kids with Magdalena and retired to the Kashmir.
Cody
Donald McDaniel
<aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>
> "Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1dvug1dfgr11bcnfm...@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:44:05 +0200, "Alias"
> > <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> >> When either activation or WGA doesn't work for you, get back to me. It
> >> >> has
> >> >> nothing to do with maturity, you moron! Being considered guilty until
> >> >> proven
> >> >> innocent is an insult. Period.
> >> >>
> >> >> Alias
> >> >>
> >> > Sir: ONLY a court of law can convict a person of guilt or innocense.
> >>
> >> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I said that MS ASSUMES YOU
> >> ARE
> >> GUILTY, not me, you moron! They ASSUME ONE IS GUILTY OF PIRACY UNTIL ONE
> >> PROVES OTHERWISE by activation and WGA.
> >
> > OK, prove it publically! I will certainly change my mind about
> > Microsoft if you can PROVE (with internal documentation from MICROSOFT
> > or a finding by a court of law) what you just said.
>
> Reading comprehension isn't your only problem. You also have a problem with
> logic. Why should I have to prove I bought something twice when I have the
> receipt for payment over in the drawer?
No, "alias" you are the one with reading comprehension problems: I
was referring your bold-faced lie that Microsoft automatically assumes
all are guilty of piracy, above: Prove that Microsoft automatically
considers all guilty of piracy until one proves it otherwise.
Microsoft is not trying to weed out the LEGITIMATE license-holders
with Product activation. They are trying to weed out the illegitimate
licenses. To do this, they MUST check ALL keys without exception,
since they have no record connecting an individual key with a
legitimate license holder's name.
They DO have a list of pirated keys, or keys known to be pirated at
one time or other, or keys which are used to attempt activation when
the Activation record for that particular key is flagged as being
already used to install on a machine with a different hardware profile
than the hardware profile of the machine currently attempting to
activate.
So a part of Product Activation is a check of ALL keys against that
list, plus other algorithms. Those which do not pass the test are
rejected, while those which do pass it are activated, or go on to
further algorithms.
> > Product Activation ACTUALLY assumes that ALL product keys of XP are
> > LEGITIMATE, not ILLEGITIMATE. You just got it backward. Not
> > completely your fault. You just lack a little knowledge and
> > understanding about Microsoft Product Activation.
>
> BS. If they assumed all were legitimate, no PA would be necessary.
> Meanwhile, the pirates just laugh and burn another copy.
No, if YOU assumed that all were legitimate, no PA would be necessary.
However, not all users of Windows are as honest as you.
For whatever reason, Microsoft has decided that it is necessary
> > (By the way, Product Activation has been found to be COMPLETELY legal.
> > I assure you, Microsofts' legal department would have reseached case
> > law VERY, VERY carefully before instituting the process. Not only
> > that, but MANY software developers are starting to require Product
> > Activation or other means of authentication of some sort.)
>
> BS. PA has never been challenged in court. You're back pedaling big time
> now.
> >
> > Tell me, WHY do you feel "insulted", as you call it? An insult can
> > only touch you if there is ANY thing in you which responds to it.
>
> Having to prove, twice, that I bought something is insulting.
Product activation does not check to see if YOU bought the license,
they only check to see if the KEY is valid, since they have no
personal information about you, unless you actually REGISTER the
software after installing it. They don't care whether YOU bought the
license or not. They only care that the key is valid. I don't even
think that they have a record of which key was generated by the
manufacturer for each copy of XP. They MAY have a record, though. I
just don't know. If they did, it would make it really easy to check a
license's validity. Just check each key against that list of valid
keys.
However, you know, and I know that MANY copies of XP have been
casually copied, and distributed, either by real pirates, or your
neighbor (this is an example: I am not specifically referring to YOUR
neighbor here, since only God knows whether your actual neighbor
casually copied Windows 9x or XP), because Windows 9x users did it a
LOT. As long as it contains characters with correct numerical order
and type, it is considered legitimate. Microsoft RIGHTLY assumed when
XP was released, that people were going to try to casually copy it
like they did with 9x. THOSE people made Product Activation
necessary, not Microsoft.
> >
> > For instance, I do not feel insulted that you have called me a "Moron"
> > publically several times in this newsgroup, because I know I am not a
> > moron.
>
> I should have rephrased that. You were and are acting like a moron. I don't
> know you well enough to know if you always act like that.
How does a moron act? What are the symptoms of moronic behavior
patterns? Are you a mental health professional? Are you a
sociologist? Are you a Psychiatric Social Worker? Are you a
specialist in abnormal psychology? What are your degrees? Where did
you go to school? What schools did you attend? What is your true
name, address, and phone number, so I can check them out.
Until you can prove to me that you are qualified to make such
judgments, I will continue to reject such attempted insults.
>
> > Now, when I was younger, I would have felt insulted, because I
> > was puffed up with pride, like most younger adults and some older
> > ones, too. I do admit that I still struggle with pride from time to
> > time. After all, I am still a little immature myself. I certainly
> > don't claim to being God or a wise man.
>
> Good thing.
> >
> > There is no room or need for pride in the heart of a mature person.
> >
> > Donald L McDaniel
>
> Really? Gosh, I always thought one should be proud of a number of things
> like a job well done, caring for your customers and not driving them crazy
> with having to prove they're not thieves twice after paying for a product
> but what the hell do I know, I don't believe in a god and I think that Jesus
> of Nazarath had a slew of kids with Magdalena and retired to the Kashmir.
>
> Cody
>
Cody, there is a BIG difference between being "puffed up with pride"
and being proud of your accomplishments, as long as you report that
God helped you perform them, and are truly humble about your
accomplishments. The other kind of pride (false pride) originates
with Satan, who thought that he could rise up to take God's Place on
His Throne, or beside Him, thinking he was equal with God.
If you think within yourself tthat you are GREATER or BETTER than
anyone else, you are puffed up with false pride. This is what I mean
by "puffed up with pride".
By the way, did you know that the Bible (God's Book) tells us that
only a fool believes there is no God.
Are you a fool, Cody?
Alias
Activation and WGA, by definition, assume you have a pirated copy until you
prove otherwise by activating or passing the WGA test.
>
> Microsoft is not trying to weed out the LEGITIMATE license-holders
> with Product activation. They are trying to weed out the illegitimate
> licenses. To do this, they MUST check ALL keys without exception,
> since they have no record connecting an individual key with a
> legitimate license holder's name.
Like I said, only paying customers are affected. The pirates have cracked PA
and WGA.
>
> They DO have a list of pirated keys, or keys known to be pirated at
> one time or other, or keys which are used to attempt activation when
> the Activation record for that particular key is flagged as being
> already used to install on a machine with a different hardware profile
> than the hardware profile of the machine currently attempting to
> activate.
You don't have to convince me that the process is lame.
>
> So a part of Product Activation is a check of ALL keys against that
> list, plus other algorithms. Those which do not pass the test are
> rejected, while those which do pass it are activated, or go on to
> further algorithms.
Again, pirated copies have the PA cracked so the only people inconvenienced
and who can come up with a false positive are paying customers.
>
>
>> > Product Activation ACTUALLY assumes that ALL product keys of XP are
>> > LEGITIMATE, not ILLEGITIMATE. You just got it backward. Not
>> > completely your fault. You just lack a little knowledge and
>> > understanding about Microsoft Product Activation.
>>
>> BS. If they assumed all were legitimate, no PA would be necessary.
>> Meanwhile, the pirates just laugh and burn another copy.
>
> No, if YOU assumed that all were legitimate, no PA would be necessary.
> However, not all users of Windows are as honest as you.
The dishonest ones have cracked copies of pirated XPs and are not affected.
There aren't any statistics to show which was pirated more, 9x or XP. There
ARE statistics that MS became filthy rich with 9x.
>
>> >
>> > For instance, I do not feel insulted that you have called me a "Moron"
>> > publically several times in this newsgroup, because I know I am not a
>> > moron.
>>
>> I should have rephrased that. You were and are acting like a moron. I
>> don't
>> know you well enough to know if you always act like that.
>
> How does a moron act? What are the symptoms of moronic behavior
> patterns? Are you a mental health professional? Are you a
> sociologist? Are you a Psychiatric Social Worker? Are you a
> specialist in abnormal psychology? What are your degrees? Where did
> you go to school? What schools did you attend? What is your true
> name, address, and phone number, so I can check them out.
You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows. If you want
the definition of "moron", look it up in the dictionary. My personal
information is none of your business.
>
> Until you can prove to me that you are qualified to make such
> judgments, I will continue to reject such attempted insults.
Wow, as if I care.
>
>>
>> > Now, when I was younger, I would have felt insulted, because I
>> > was puffed up with pride, like most younger adults and some older
>> > ones, too. I do admit that I still struggle with pride from time to
>> > time. After all, I am still a little immature myself. I certainly
>> > don't claim to being God or a wise man.
>>
>> Good thing.
>> >
>> > There is no room or need for pride in the heart of a mature person.
>> >
>> > Donald L McDaniel
>>
>> Really? Gosh, I always thought one should be proud of a number of things
>> like a job well done, caring for your customers and not driving them
>> crazy
>> with having to prove they're not thieves twice after paying for a product
>> but what the hell do I know, I don't believe in a god and I think that
>> Jesus
>> of Nazarath had a slew of kids with Magdalena and retired to the Kashmir.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Cody, there is a BIG difference between being "puffed up with pride"
> and being proud of your accomplishments, as long as you report that
> God helped you perform them, and are truly humble about your
> accomplishments.
God doesn't exist.
> The other kind of pride (false pride) originates
> with Satan, who thought that he could rise up to take God's Place on
> His Throne, or beside Him, thinking he was equal with God.
Satan doesn't exist.
>
> If you think within yourself tthat you are GREATER or BETTER than
> anyone else, you are puffed up with false pride. This is what I mean
> by "puffed up with pride".
Well, whoopy de doo. Are you puffed up with pride about it?
>
> By the way, did you know that the Bible (God's Book) tells us that
> only a fool believes there is no God.
Only fools believe in something that doesn't exist.
>
> Are you a fool, Cody?
No, you are. I suppose you also believe in the fairy that exchanges money
for body parts.
Alias
>
> Donald L McDaniel
kurttrail
> No, "alias" you are the one with reading comprehension problems: I
> was referring your bold-faced lie that Microsoft automatically assumes
> all are guilty of piracy, above: Prove that Microsoft automatically
> considers all guilty of piracy until one proves it otherwise.
>
> Microsoft is not trying to weed out the LEGITIMATE license-holders
> with Product activation. They are trying to weed out the illegitimate
> licenses. To do this, they MUST check ALL keys without exception,
> since they have no record connecting an individual key with a
> legitimate license holder's name.
>
> They DO have a list of pirated keys, or keys known to be pirated at
> one time or other, or keys which are used to attempt activation when
> the Activation record for that particular key is flagged as being
> already used to install on a machine with a different hardware profile
> than the hardware profile of the machine currently attempting to
> activate.
>
> So a part of Product Activation is a check of ALL keys against that
> list, plus other algorithms. Those which do not pass the test are
> rejected, while those which do pass it are activated, or go on to
> further algorithms. <snip>
So you have to pass the PA test in order to use the software. What kind
of test? A test that you aren't pirating the software. Guilty until
passing the test.
Even your own explanation proves that with PA, MS's assumption is Guilty
until proven by the PA test to be innocent.
> By the way, did you know that the Bible (God's Book) tells us that
> only a fool believes there is no God.
>
> Are you a fool, Cody?
ROFL! What else does the good book teach? That the Earth and all life
on it was created in 6 days. That the Earth is around 10,000 years old.
That the oldest human lived over 900 hundred years. That cutting off
your foreskin is a covenant between God and Man . . . .
And the list of foolish things that the Bible tells us goes on and on.
While I don't know whether God exists or not, in the realm of being a
fool because one believes in no god, it would be at the very least
equally foolish to believe there is one very specific "God," since
neither proposition can be proven or disproven through reason.
A fool is one that presents his unprovable and unreasonable beliefs as
undeniable absolute knowledge.
A wise man is one that says he does not know that which he does not know
through reason.
I have yet to see a proof based on reason, that proves the existence of
a Supreme Being/Creator/Prime Mover in general, so therefore it would
seem very foolish to believe in a very specific "God," if one cannot
reasonably prove that a god/creator, in general, exists. Belief in the
non-existence of a god/creator is also foolish, since it cannot be
reasonably proven either, but on the scale of foolishness, it is a less
foolish belief than the existence of a very specific "God."
Alias
"Donald McDaniel" <dlmcdan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> By the way, did you know that the Bible (God's Book) tells us that
> only a fool believes there is no God.
To which version of the bible are you referring? You do know that it was
rewritten many times for political reasons, don't you?
>
> Are you a fool?
No, only people who believe in a non existent god are fools.
> Donald L McDaniel
You never answered my questions about the spiritual kingdoms good little
xtians go to. Why not? At a loss for words?
Alias
Alias
"kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:OQXjlQ4q...@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
Not being able to prove something doesn't exist could apply to anything. The
xtians say god exists but can't prove it. Even they say you have to take a
"leap in faith" to believe it.
Alias
kurttrail
> Not being able to prove something doesn't exist could apply to
> anything. The xtians say god exists but can't prove it. Even they say
> you have to take a "leap in faith" to believe it.
And it also takes a leap in faith to know that no god/creator exists. A
truly wise man would say "I don't know" whether a god/creator exists or
not, and would keep an open mind, as the possibility remains that the
existence or non-existence of a god/creator may one day be known.
But as I said, on the scale of foolishness knowing a specific "God" is
the most foolish of all, as no one has yet to prove that a god/creator,
in general, even exists. To know a very specific "God" is like knowing
that Peter Pan exists.
Alias
"kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Not being able to prove something doesn't exist could apply to
>> anything. The xtians say god exists but can't prove it. Even they say
>> you have to take a "leap in faith" to believe it.
>
> And it also takes a leap in faith to know that no god/creator exists. A
> truly wise man would say "I don't know" whether a god/creator exists or
> not, and would keep an open mind, as the possibility remains that the
> existence or non-existence of a god/creator may one day be known.
>
> But as I said, on the scale of foolishness knowing a specific "God" is the
> most foolish of all, as no one has yet to prove that a god/creator, in
> general, even exists. To know a very specific "God" is like knowing that
> Peter Pan exists.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
So a truly wise man would say "I don't know" to Bush being a god? Or a
pineapple? How about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds? Would a truly wise man
say "I don't know" if she is a god?
Besides, if humankind was created in god's image, that doesn't say much for
god.
Also, if god created man with all his earthly desires and then says one
cannot give in to those desires, what kind of god is that?
"God said to Abraham, kill me a son ..."
Fact is, all gods were created by men to control other men and women.
Alias
Rick "Nutcase" Rogers
> Fact is, all gods were created by men to control other men and women.
Actually, I would say that they were initially created to explain what man
(generic, encompassing both sexes) could not understand. This dates back
beyond the written word when early homo sapiens believed that powerful
beings controlled the winds, the seas, the stars, the moon, volcanic
actions, etc. As man came to understand the natural forces behind them, the
need for that "god" was diminished and eventually forgotten or the god's
role was downplayed, or the responsibilities of that deity replaced by
something different. A similar set of beliefs was espoused by the Egyptians,
Greeks, Aztecs, Mayans, and other early "civilized" nation-states who saw
these represented by celestial beings (hence many of the names we now have
for heavenly objects).
As these civilizations grew, some among them realized just how powerful
these beliefs could be, and used or abused them in the form of controlling
the populations. Some good, some bad. Eventually, the systems of multiple
gods became impractical as the roots of Christianity and other single-god
systems took hold. They made more sense, as it would be impossible to
disprove the existence of an all-powerful being, thus making it easier for
those in control to stay there. This would be in contrast to showing that
the winds were actually just a product of a combination of events (earth's
rotation, the sun, and the seas), which could easily explain away any one
particular god as man's knowledge of the natural world around him grew.
Plus, just to supplement it, many of these newer belief systems encompassed
a tenet that no other god or gods should be believed in.
We have now only a few major religions left, all of whom encompass the
single-god beliefs. There are many that use (or abuse) this to control the
faithful, but there is no way to prove or disprove existence based on
science or logical argument. It takes the 'leap of faith' to entrust oneself
into the arms of belief, or to become comfortable with the knowledge within
oneself that no god exists. The fact that some abuse the faith of others
does not prove that the religion is false, but rather just the person
abusing it.
--
Best of Luck,
Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:Op8bsv8q...@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Alias
>
Alias
"Rick "Nutcase" Rogers" <ri...@mvps.org> wrote
>
> We have now only a few major religions left, all of whom encompass the
> single-god beliefs.
> --
> Best of Luck,
>
> Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
Except Actual Mahayana Buddhism which states that all people can become a
Buddha.
Alias
kurttrail
> So a truly wise man would say "I don't know" to Bush being a god? Or a
> pineapple? How about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds? Would a truly
> wise man say "I don't know" if she is a god?
Now you are talking about a specific god. And any talk about a specific
god is the height of foolishness, in light that a general god cannot
even be proven.
> Besides, if humankind was created in god's image, that doesn't say
> much for god.
Of course a man wrote that man was created in "God's" image.
> Also, if god created man with all his earthly desires and then says
> one cannot give in to those desires, what kind of god is that?
One with a really sadistic sense of humor.
> "God said to Abraham, kill me a son ..."
ROFL! Yet another story written by a man.
> Fact is, all gods were created by men to control other men and women.
Gods were created to fill in the natural human need to explain what we
don't know.
Carey Frisch [MVP]
same model Dell motherboard, your Dell OEM license also died. You'll need to
purchase a new "Full Version" of Windows XP and perform a "Repair Install".
How to Perform a Windows XP Repair Install
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/XPrepairinstall.htm
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
"jj" wrote:
> Help. I have a Dell pc and the mobo just fried and of course I didnt take the
> extended warranty, so I bought a new mobo (asus) now that everything is back
> together it won't let me activate. When I use the 800 number they say that
> the product can't be activated. Please help.
> --
> Jack
kurttrail
> Sorry, but when your motheboard died, and you did not replace it with
> the same model Dell motherboard, your Dell OEM license also died.
> You'll need to purchase a new "Full Version" of Windows XP and
> perform a "Repair Install".
>
> How to Perform a Windows XP Repair Install
> http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/XPrepairinstall.htm
>
Carey is full of sh*t, and a well known liar. Ignore the fool, who is
generally considered the worst MVP.
Donald L McDaniel
It is not possible to apprehend God using human reasoning, since He is
outside and far above the realm of Aristotlean Logic. A man must KNOW
God if he is to have a relationship with Him. The ONLY way for a man
to know God is for HIM to reveal Himself to him. God does this at His
leisure, not ours.
The weakness of human reasoning (which is based in Aristotlean Logic),
it that it is possible to prove anything with it, as long as the
Premises are accepted as fact. In my estimation, a very weak method
of ascertaining the truth of a thing.
>Alias
>
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread.
If you must reply via email, remove the obvious
from my email address before sending.
=======================================================
Alias
"Donald L McDaniel" <orthocro...@skycasters.net> wrote
>>Not being able to prove something doesn't exist could apply to anything.
>>The
>>xtians say god exists but can't prove it. Even they say you have to take a
>>"leap in faith" to believe it.
>
> It is not possible to apprehend God using human reasoning, since He is
> outside and far above the realm of Aristotlean Logic. A man must KNOW
> God if he is to have a relationship with Him. The ONLY way for a man
> to know God is for HIM to reveal Himself to him. God does this at His
> leisure, not ours.
>
> The weakness of human reasoning (which is based in Aristotlean Logic),
> it that it is possible to prove anything with it, as long as the
> Premises are accepted as fact. In my estimation, a very weak method
> of ascertaining the truth of a thing.
>
>>Alias
>>
> Donald L McDaniel
Yawn. Only a fool believes in a god or the tooth fairy or Santa. They don't
exist, your fantasies notwithstanding.
I will not respond to any more god theories as it is completely off topic.
Alias
David R. Norton
"Donald L McDaniel" <orthocro...@skycasters.net> wrote in message
news:m3c6h1la99rqqam1a...@4ax.com...
> It is not possible to apprehend God using human reasoning, since He is
> outside and far above the realm of Aristotlean Logic. A man must KNOW
> God if he is to have a relationship with Him. The ONLY way for a man
> to know God is for HIM to reveal Himself to him. God does this at His
> leisure, not ours.
That may or may not be true but I believe all religions will agree it's off
topic for this newsgroup.
kurttrail
> It is not possible to apprehend God using human reasoning,
ROFL! It is a crime that he made you in his stupid image, and should be
apprehended, charged, convicted, and found guilty for that crime!
My hominid ancestors laugh at how stupid you modern Christians are!
> since He is
> outside and far above the realm of Aristotlean Logic.
Therefore your God is illogical.
> A man must KNOW
> God if he is to have a relationship with Him.
Like Noah's son's knew him? You would think that a God that has to have
that kind of a relationship with a man wouldn't have such a homophobic
religion!
> The ONLY way for a man
> to know God is for HIM to reveal Himself to him.
I thought it was "God the Father," not "God the Flasher!"
> God does this at His
> leisure, not ours.
LOL! I don't think a god as old as Yahweh could get paid to pose
showing off his naughty bits. Yehoshua is too scared up unless you are
talking about posing for a Gay S&M mag. And I don't think the Holy
Ghost would show up in most graphic media.
So the only way your schizoid "God" could reveal his naughty bits is
during his leisure time. So now we know what he does on the Sabbath.
"God the Flasher. It's not a job. It's an adventure!"
> The weakness of human reasoning (which is based in Aristotlean Logic),
> it that it is possible to prove anything with it, as long as the
> Premises are accepted as fact.
That would be unreasonable. Like your premise that God must exist as a
flasher!
> In my estimation, a very weak method
> of ascertaining the truth of a thing.
Faith in a flasher is cool in your estimation, so therefore your
estimation isn't worth diddly-do!
George
"kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:eDkh4s9q...@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
kurttrail
> Luke 16 fellows. Believe now or forever spend eternity soemwhere
> else.
Luke was a plagarist. That is what I believe. And as for eternity, you
know nothing about it. You are just fooling yourself if you think you
do. Such is faith.
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
> George wrote:
>> Luke 16 fellows. Believe now or forever spend eternity soemwhere
>> else.
>
> Luke was a plagarist. That is what I believe. And as for eternity, you
> know nothing about it. You are just fooling yourself if you think you do.
> Such is faith.
If what you say is true then some of us have wasted a lifetime believing.
If what we say is true then you have wasted an etrnity by not believing.
Such is faithlessness.
kurttrail
> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
> message news:%23Q2cK4m...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> George wrote:
>>> Luke 16 fellows. Believe now or forever spend eternity soemwhere
>>> else.
>>
>> Luke was a plagarist. That is what I believe. And as for eternity,
>> you know nothing about it. You are just fooling yourself if you
>> think you do. Such is faith.
>
> If what you say is true then some of us have wasted a lifetime
> believing.
What YOU KNOW is different than what YOU BELIEVE.
> If what we say is true then you have wasted an etrnity by
> not believing.
You know nothing about what I believe, except the bit that Luke was a
plagarist. But that there is ample circumstantial evidence that the
Book of Luke is the result of plagarism.
> Such is faithlessness.
You are right. I don't use "FAITH" to fool myself that my beliefs are
actual knowledge.
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> message news:%23Q2cK4m...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>> George wrote:
>>>> Luke 16 fellows. Believe now or forever spend eternity soemwhere
>>>> else.
>>>
>>> Luke was a plagarist. That is what I believe. And as for eternity,
>>> you know nothing about it. You are just fooling yourself if you
>>> think you do. Such is faith.
>>
>> If what you say is true then some of us have wasted a lifetime
>> believing.
>
> What YOU KNOW is different than what YOU BELIEVE.
>
>> If what we say is true then you have wasted an etrnity by
>> not believing.
>
> You know nothing about what I believe, except the bit that Luke was a
> plagarist. But that there is ample circumstantial evidence that the Book
> of Luke is the result of plagarism.
"For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks", or in your case,
the keyboard. The words you use and your posts provide evidence to what you
believe.
kurttrail
Really? Then what are my spiritual beliefs? You have no idea.
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> message news:OyHgmN8...@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>>>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>>>> message news:%23Q2cK4m...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>>>> George wrote:
>>>>>> Luke 16 fellows. Believe now or forever spend eternity soemwhere
>>>>>> else.
>>>>>
>>>>> Luke was a plagarist. That is what I believe. And as for
>>>>> eternity, you know nothing about it. You are just fooling
>>>>> yourself if you think you do. Such is faith.
>>>>
>>>> If what you say is true then some of us have wasted a lifetime
>>>> believing.
>>>
>>> What YOU KNOW is different than what YOU BELIEVE.
>>>
>>>> If what we say is true then you have wasted an etrnity by
>>>> not believing.
>>>
>>> You know nothing about what I believe, except the bit that Luke was a
>>> plagarist. But that there is ample circumstantial evidence that the
>>> Book of Luke is the result of plagarism.
>>
>> "For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks", or in your
>> case, the keyboard. The words you use and your posts provide
>> evidence to what you believe.
>
> Really? Then what are my spiritual beliefs? You have no idea.
Spiritual beliefs or lack thereof?
kurttrail
Exactly! If you knew what I believed from my posts, then you would not
have to ask! Thanks for proving my point!
kurttrail
> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> message news:O4y7f%239rFH...@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>>>> "For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks", or in
>>>> your case, the keyboard. The words you use and your posts provide
>>>> evidence to what you believe.
>>>
>>> Really? Then what are my spiritual beliefs? You have no idea.
>>
>> Spiritual beliefs or lack thereof?
>
> Exactly! If you knew what I believed from my posts, then you would
> not have to ask! Thanks for proving my point!
The enlightened forces of reason have triumphed over that of religious
dogma yet again.
Faith is no substitute for reason. Faith is the last refuge of
weak-minded fools.
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
> kurttrail wrote:
>> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>>> "kurttrail" <donte...@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>>> message news:O4y7f%239rFH...@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>>>>> "For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks", or in
>>>>> your case, the keyboard. The words you use and your posts provide
>>>>> evidence to what you believe.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Then what are my spiritual beliefs? You have no idea.
>>>
>>> Spiritual beliefs or lack thereof?
>>
>> Exactly! If you knew what I believed from my posts, then you would
>> not have to ask! Thanks for proving my point!
>
> The enlightened forces of reason have triumphed over that of religious
> dogma yet again.
>
> Faith is no substitute for reason. Faith is the last refuge of
> weak-minded fools.
"The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
"The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the
Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand
them, because they are spiritually discerned."
You can't tell what a steak tastes like until you actually taste one for
yourself.