It's been said before, but...
Phil
Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
Matthew Gordon wrote:
> Can I take this opportunity to say that I can't understand how any of
> you can support microsoft. A company who's software is continually
> crashing, whose OS I have had to install 20 times cos' of registry
> problems, startup problems, crashes, crashes, and more crashes. Why
> would any of you want to support them?
>
> All I wish for is death to microsoft and bill gates!
ethhoack
Dans le message <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>
Phil <m@s.n> écrit:
>
>Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
>yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
>was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
so. your hd never crashed with wi95. your 25.gb hd was full. then it
crashed. so you blame the latest program you used. it must have been
written by an incompetent programmer, ie someone who isn't use to the
microsoft bloat. and who would that be ?
>written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
of course.
such winprick fanatics like you keep feeding bill gates' wallet by
being too coward to admit microsoft is crooking them.
the sad thing is that concerning about you isn't enough; with that you
as well as other lamers take the defense of microsoft ! it's easier
than face the responsiblity.
it's like the iraqi people: they don't dare overthrow saddam, so they
go for the illusion of a great leader.
pub 2048/7579B421 7D 29 B3 3A CB 2D 42 B1 DE F3 19 D6 18 F6 C5 55
"abwärts wend'ich mich zu der heiligen, unaussprechlichen, geheimnisvollen
nacht. fernab liegt die welt - in eine tiefe gruft versenkt" novalis
Phil
Why is it when Microsoft despoilers run out of arguments, they always bring up
the point about Mr Gates' money. Well, that's what happens when you market a
successful product. UNIX is owned by AT&T. They make a lot of money from it.
Its been going on for 30 years, but you anti-microsoft types say nothing. But
if Gates makes money...boy is that wrong!. Come on!
If by some miracle some very smart entrepreneur started to actively market
LINUX as a business solution, and , shock, horror, it became popular, then all
you guys will jump on to the next bandwagon that comes along, in other words
rubbishing LINUX etc. After years of reading these newsgroups, my conclusion
is that young guys want to be different. Same reason why people still choose
to drive those ridiculous VWs I suppose. Try smoking dope. its different from
tobacco.
Lartib...@my-dejanews.com
In article <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>,
Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
>
> Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
>
Excuse my incredulous stare, but you, sir, are either a complete idiot, or
lying out your hairy arse. Are you trying to tell us that you have NEVER,
EVER gotten one SINGLE GPF, IPF, invalid or illegal operation, or Blue Screen
o' Death??? (well, except for that one time you mentioned). As they say in
the crude vernacular of the times, bullshit. Or are you ONLY considering a
blue screen to be a 'crash'? Most of the rest of the world considers a crash
to be any event that results in the loss of data, time, and (possibly) money.
A crash doesn't necessarily have to tear down the whole system, it is any
harmful software or hardware failure, temporary or permanent, 2nd party
software notwithstanding.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Jeff Read
Phil wrote:
>
> Why is it when Microsoft despoilers run out of arguments, they always bring up
> the point about Mr Gates' money. Well, that's what happens when you market a
> successful product. UNIX is owned by AT&T. They make a lot of money from it.
> Its been going on for 30 years, but you anti-microsoft types say nothing. But
> if Gates makes money...boy is that wrong!. Come on!
AT&T hasn't made a penny off of Linux. Or Solaris, or FreeBSD.
> If by some miracle some very smart entrepreneur started to actively market
> LINUX as a business solution, and , shock, horror, it became popular, then all
> you guys will jump on to the next bandwagon that comes along, in other words
> rubbishing LINUX etc. After years of reading these newsgroups, my conclusion
> is that young guys want to be different. Same reason why people still choose
> to drive those ridiculous VWs I suppose. Try smoking dope. its different from
> tobacco.
There're a lot of experienced folks in this business who love Linux.
Why? Because it's little, yellow, different, and better. Better, that
is, than WinDoze. You can continue using it if you like. Just don't
knock Unix guys just because we've moved on to the state-of-the-art
technology, and left you behind.
> > Dans le message <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>
> > Phil <m@s.n> écrit:
> > >
> >
> > >Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> >
> > >yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
This is every Windows apologist's argument for their sorry excuse for an
OS. I shouldn't be surprised you said this. I'm sure that millions of
people who bought Win95-configured machines right off the shelf are
having Windows 95 problems because "it's their computer" or "they set it
up wrong". You WinDoze advocates never define what the Right Thing to do
is, just tell us how it's all our fault and unconditionally indemnify
Microsoft. Bzzzzt, wrong. Anybody who knows about OS internals knows
that Windows 95 is pretty sloppily put together.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Read <bit...@geocities.com>/ http://genpc.home.ml.org
Unix / Linux / Windows Hacker, / Boycott Microsoft!
Anime & Sonic Fan, / Use Linux/GNU!
All Around Nice Guy / Let's keep the Net and the Land FREE!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ethhoack
Dans le message <35A09736.C32A22CB@s.n>
Phil <m@s.n> écrit:
>
>Why is it when Microsoft despoilers run out of arguments, they always bring up
>the point about Mr Gates' money. Well, that's what happens when you market a
>successful product. UNIX is owned by AT&T. They make a lot of money from it.
>Its been going on for 30 years, but you anti-microsoft types say nothing. But
>if Gates makes money...boy is that wrong!. Come on!
the money isn't the problem ... that's why we don't attack at&t.
the problem is that gates has so much money he buys any compagny he
wants and then screws the innovation into his clumsy way.
>If by some miracle some very smart entrepreneur started to actively market
>LINUX as a business solution, and , shock, horror, it became popular, then all
a friend of mine has his own company installing linux boxes in
entreprises who realised how sluggish m$ produkts are.
>you guys will jump on to the next bandwagon that comes along, in other words
>rubbishing LINUX etc. After years of reading these newsgroups, my conclusion
>is that young guys want to be different. Same reason why people still choose
no you're misleading the debate with something that has nothing to do.
you know the microsoft domination is insane. so keep on lying to
yourself but don't lie to others.
T. Max Devlin
Phil <m@s.n>, on Mon, 06 Jul 1998 14:07:49 +1000,
>yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
>written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
Reverse engineering things that don't work is orders of magnitude harder
than reverse engineering things that do. IOW, yes, I blame Microsoft
when their OS crashes regardless of the reason, be it bad software or
bad hardware.
That an application can be "so badly written, it crashed my PC,
resulting in a reformat" is absolutely, without a doubt, Microsoft's
fault. That an OS should crash because of a failing app is bad enough;
that a reformat of the HD would be required to unwedge the stupid thing
is unforgivable, and directly attributable to bad OS design.
--
T. Max Devlin
Hi-TECH Connections/Eltrax Systems
*****************************************************
- Opinions expressed are my own.
Anyone else may use them only in
accordance with licensing agreements. -
Loren Petrich
In article <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>, Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
>yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
>was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
>written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
How would it be the product of a Unix programmer?
If it was, then if it follows the common Unix user-interface
stereotype, it would be a command-line program with cryptic options and
murky documentation.
Also, an OS that crashes so hard as to require a disk reformat is
a rather defective one -- an app ought to crash *harmlessly*, as I have
experienced many times in my years past when I worked on IBM mainframes
and VAXes.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
Loren Petrich
In article <35A09736.C32A22CB@s.n>, Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
>Why is it when Microsoft despoilers run out of arguments, they always bring up
>the point about Mr Gates' money. Well, that's what happens when you market a
>successful product. UNIX is owned by AT&T. They make a lot of money from it.
How much? I'm sure you have some figures on that.
Most of the varieties of Unix out there have *not* been
moneymakers for AT&T.
Jason S.
Loren Petrich posted the following to alt.destroy.microsoft:
>>Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
>>yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>>Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
>>was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
>>written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
> How would it be the product of a Unix programmer?
Haven't you figured it out, Loren? The Microsoft shills have changed
the target of their FUD from Apple to UNIX. Anything bad is now the
fault of UNIX.
Billy Boy conquered Apple; now he's going after UNIX.
> If it was, then if it follows the common Unix user-interface
>stereotype, it would be a command-line program with cryptic options and
>murky documentation.
Loren, Loren. Should I point you to some UNIX screenshots?
--
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time
to reform.
-- Mark Twain
Johan Kullstam
In article <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>, Phil wrote:
> Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
> written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
if an application takes down an operating system, it is *always* the
operating systems fault.
--
Johan Kullstam [joh...@idt.net]
J Hern
ethhoack wrote in message ...
>the problem is that gates has so much money he buys any compagny he
>wants and then screws the innovation into his clumsy way.
When is this illegal? Are you realizing that these companies are
CHOSING to sell themselves to microsoft? The rhetoric I keep hearing is how
MS is "forcing", "Bullying", "monopolozing", and "fear mongering", yet in
EACH of these situations you can point to someone CHOSING to give/sell/buy
somethign from Microsoft. As long as no ones CHOICE is taken away, I will
support MS's right to do what they have been doing.
I personally HATE Win98. I haven;t had more problems with my OS since I
installed it. BUT.. I feel superior to those who want to tear MS down just
because they envy Gates. Why else would people shout and scream that MS is
unfair when it really all traces back to some consumers CHOICE?
jup...@highfiber.com
In article <6nrv19$luj$1...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
"J Hern" <jh...@columbus.x.com x=rr> wrote:
>
>
> ethhoack wrote in message ...
>
> >the problem is that gates has so much money he buys any compagny he
> >wants and then screws the innovation into his clumsy way.
>
> When is this illegal? Are you realizing that these companies are
> CHOSING to sell themselves to microsoft? The rhetoric I keep hearing is how
> MS is "forcing", "Bullying", "monopolozing", and "fear mongering", yet in
> EACH of these situations you can point to someone CHOSING to give/sell/buy
> somethign from Microsoft. As long as no ones CHOICE is taken away, I will
> support MS's right to do what they have been doing.
>
It's called hostile takeover. And they do it very frequently.
Matthew Gordon
I went into a shop today and asked them to show me a bit about Windows 98 to
see if it was worth buying. They said "Oh it's great for stability, and it's
really fast. Let me show you."
So the attendant moved the mouse and the screen came back, then froze. He
said "Oh, it seems to have crashed. I'll just reboot it."
Now WHAT a surprise.
Now you can't say It's my computer.
> Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
> written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
>
Absolute bollocks.
My computer was brought from IBM, a very successful, and honest company.
Loren Petrich
J Hern <jh...@columbus.x.com x=rr> wrote:
> I personally HATE Win98. I haven;t had more problems with my OS since I
>installed it. BUT.. I feel superior to those who want to tear MS down just
>because they envy Gates. ...
How are you so sure that M$'s critics envy Bill Gates?
Loren Petrich
Jason S. <ja...@jhste1.dyn.ml.org> wrote:
>Loren Petrich posted the following to alt.destroy.microsoft:
>>>Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
>>>yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>>>Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
>>>was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
>>>written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
>> How would it be the product of a Unix programmer?
>Haven't you figured it out, Loren? The Microsoft shills have changed
>the target of their FUD from Apple to UNIX. Anything bad is now the
>fault of UNIX.
>Billy Boy conquered Apple; now he's going after UNIX.
Complete with the insinuation that Unix equals complicated
command lines, it would seem.
I wonder what FUD he'd use against Unix GUI's, however.
>> If it was, then if it follows the common Unix user-interface
>>stereotype, it would be a command-line program with cryptic options and
>>murky documentation.
>Loren, Loren. Should I point you to some UNIX screenshots?
I'm just being whimsical -- this is a common stereotype of Unix.
Michael Davis
> yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
> written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
What? Are you implying that Unix programmers are stupid or malicious?
I've written software for Solaris, Windows, VAX, and others,
and I've made my share of mistakes on all those platforms.
For example, you might try to write through an uninitialize
pointer that can point somewhere outside your program's
address space. If you do that on Unix or Vax, then
the OS shuts down your app, and isn't hurt one bit.
If you do that on Windows, if you're very lucky
you'll get a GPF message, but as often as not
you'll bring down the system, because the OS isn't
too smart about protecting itself against badly behaving
apps.
On Unix, you tend to find and fix those bugs quickly,
because the OS detects them right away. On Windows,
such bugs can lurk around for months, if by fluke they don't
usually do any real harm.
Yes, blame Microsoft. They sell an inferior product.
Of course I'm biased, right now I'm getting paid to
write Unix software, and I'm ever so happy I don't have
to write for Windows.
Michael Davis
T. Max Devlin
>
>ethhoack wrote in message ...
>
>>the problem is that gates has so much money he buys any compagny he
>>wants and then screws the innovation into his clumsy way.
>
>
> When is this illegal? Are you realizing that these companies are
>CHOSING to sell themselves to microsoft? The rhetoric I keep hearing is how
>MS is "forcing", "Bullying", "monopolozing", and "fear mongering", yet in
>EACH of these situations you can point to someone CHOSING to give/sell/buy
>somethign from Microsoft. As long as no ones CHOICE is taken away, I will
>support MS's right to do what they have been doing.
When I'm in a dark alley at night at some 6' guy says, quietly, with his
hand in his pocket "give me your wallet", am I CHOOSING to hand it to
him?
Economic power is a frightful thing, most particularly _BECAUSE_ of this
line of argument. Economic power being wielded by a monopoly always has
that "can't touch us" taint of "but they *wanted* to give us their lunch
money".
> I personally HATE Win98. I haven;t had more problems with my OS since I
>installed it. BUT.. I feel superior to those who want to tear MS down just
>because they envy Gates. Why else would people shout and scream that MS is
>unfair when it really all traces back to some consumers CHOICE?
I would feel superior to those who want to tear down MS just because
they envy Gates, too. If I knew of anyone like that.
Phil
the middle of the evaluation period I loaded IE4. Cleansweep apparently didnt like
IE4. I lost total control of the machine. I could not even get safe mode. Hence the
reformat. It was my own fault anyway, as why do I need that utility when W95 has the
Add/Remove application.
Which leads me to another issue. In my technical experience, I have made a lot of
money being called out at all hours to fix someone's problems. I have been doing
this for many years, however, over the past three years I have kept spreadsheets of
all the callouts. Guess what?. Over that time 91%, 89% and 94%(this financial year
97%), of all problems were due to fuckfits not using the Add/Remove utility to
uninstall programs. Time and again it is operator error. They use Windows Explorer,
find the program file for a game or whatever they loaded on ages ago, then delete
it. Video drivers, sound drivers, shared files disappear. Then they blame
Windows95. Morons. The number of times these alleged knowledgeable users fuck up is
astounding, but what gets me is that they blame Microsoft.
Anyway, W95 is meant to mimic a desktop right. Well you would clean
out/rearrange/throw out unwanted stuff, papers etc from your physical desk. why
don't you do this with W95. Over a period of time, unwanted files etc gather on your
computer. SPRING CLEAN the PC. Back up your data regularly, even better ensure that
saved files automatically go on to a backup zip drive for instance. So if there is a
crash, you lost nothing, and you have refreshed your computer. You dont buy a new
car, then drive it around without a service or tune up or new oil. Why expect this
from a computer. And if you did drive the car around in that condition, it will
eventually come to a stand still.
Jeff Read wrote:
> Phil wrote:
> >
> > Why is it when Microsoft despoilers run out of arguments, they always bring up
> > the point about Mr Gates' money. Well, that's what happens when you market a
> > successful product. UNIX is owned by AT&T. They make a lot of money from it.
> > Its been going on for 30 years, but you anti-microsoft types say nothing. But
> > if Gates makes money...boy is that wrong!. Come on!
>
> AT&T hasn't made a penny off of Linux. Or Solaris, or FreeBSD.
>
> > If by some miracle some very smart entrepreneur started to actively market
> > LINUX as a business solution, and , shock, horror, it became popular, then all
> > you guys will jump on to the next bandwagon that comes along, in other words
> > rubbishing LINUX etc. After years of reading these newsgroups, my conclusion
> > is that young guys want to be different. Same reason why people still choose
> > to drive those ridiculous VWs I suppose. Try smoking dope. its different from
> > tobacco.
>
> There're a lot of experienced folks in this business who love Linux.
> Why? Because it's little, yellow, different, and better. Better, that
> is, than WinDoze. You can continue using it if you like. Just don't
> knock Unix guys just because we've moved on to the state-of-the-art
> technology, and left you behind.
>
> > > Dans le message <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>
> > > Phil <m@s.n> écrit:
> > > >
> > >
> > > >Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> > >
> > > >yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
>
Phil
ass. When I brought this machine, it came with a Kelvin Orchid video card. It
turned out that the Kelvins are incompatible with DirectX. I ripped that out and
replaced it with a Viper. Perfect. I also evaluate and comment on new software,
so I am forever installing applications and removing them. Usually at a rate of
about 10 a month. Even with that, no crashes. Nothing. Read the documentation on
Windows and use the computer as it should be and not as YOU think the computer
should behave. I clean (my term for reformatting) out the computer every about
12-14 months. Quess what?. Mr Gates' baby is purring along perfectly. I love her.
Lartib...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <35A04D94.E7DC24C0@s.n>,
> Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
> >
> > Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> > yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> > Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> > was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
> > written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
> >
>
> Excuse my incredulous stare, but you, sir, are either a complete idiot, or
> lying out your hairy arse. Are you trying to tell us that you have NEVER,
> EVER gotten one SINGLE GPF, IPF, invalid or illegal operation, or Blue Screen
> o' Death??? (well, except for that one time you mentioned). As they say in
> the crude vernacular of the times, bullshit. Or are you ONLY considering a
> blue screen to be a 'crash'? Most of the rest of the world considers a crash
> to be any event that results in the loss of data, time, and (possibly) money.
> A crash doesn't necessarily have to tear down the whole system, it is any
> harmful software or hardware failure, temporary or permanent, 2nd party
> software notwithstanding.
>
Lartib...@my-dejanews.com
Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
> Guess what Slartibartfast, that exactly right. And I'm not lying from my hairy
> ass. When I brought this machine, it came with a Kelvin Orchid video card. It
> turned out that the Kelvins are incompatible with DirectX. I ripped that out
and
> replaced it with a Viper. Perfect. I also evaluate and comment on new
software,
> so I am forever installing applications and removing them. Usually at a rate
of
> about 10 a month. Even with that, no crashes. Nothing. Read the documentation
on
> Windows and use the computer as it should be and not as YOU think the computer
> should behave. I clean (my term for reformatting) out the computer every about
> 12-14 months. Quess what?. Mr Gates' baby is purring along perfectly. I love
her.
>
That's LARTibartfast. Standard Bob term, standing for what we do to idiot
lusers. Funny, you are the only person I have ever heard make your claim. In
the world. Ever. What does this tell you? It should tell you that you are
extremely lucky. When everyone else in the world has their machines crash
regularly, they are not the wierd ones, you are. As for cleaning out your
system, I do it ever 4 months to my windoze machine. I have never once had to
flatline and reinstall the system on any UNIX box I run, simply to clean out
old crap. I question the real level of technical expertise required to
'evaluate new software', as a trained monkey can do the same job. I also
REFUSE to blithely accept what Bill (or anyone else) tells me I should be
doing with my computer. What I use my computer for is MY business. If what I
wish to do is within the physical limitations of the machine I am operating
on, then I will do what I want. Your blind, ovine acceptance of what others
tell you you will do with your computer has locked you permamently in the
status of Luser, with the right to be ordered around by Bill Gates and his
army of lawyers. Enjoy yourself. While you're at it, you could do us a favor
and get lost. Hie thee hence from this newsgroup and get back to where you
belong, festering under the fridge with the other Micro$hlock lusers.
Jeff Read
> I thought someone else owned Unix now anyway.
The Open Group does... but most implementations of Unix nowadays are
proprietary or "open source" code written to a standard spec such as
POSIX and the other satellite specs (e.g., X, SysV IPC, etc.) For all
intents and purposes it's Unix.
Jeff Read
> When is this illegal? Are you realizing that these companies are
> CHOSING to sell themselves to microsoft? The rhetoric I keep hearing is how
> MS is "forcing", "Bullying", "monopolozing", and "fear mongering", yet in
> EACH of these situations you can point to someone CHOSING to give/sell/buy
> somethign from Microsoft. As long as no ones CHOICE is taken away, I will
> support MS's right to do what they have been doing.
It's well known that Microsoft approaches companies and gives them a
choice: an offer to purchase them, or a threat to release a competing
product, sell it at a loss, and drive the offending company out of
business. This is what happened with WebTV.
> I personally HATE Win98. I haven;t had more problems with my OS since I
> installed it. BUT.. I feel superior to those who want to tear MS down just
> because they envy Gates. Why else would people shout and scream that MS is
> unfair when it really all traces back to some consumers CHOICE?
For many this "choice" is to use Microsoft or not to use computers at
all. You have a choice all right... but Microsoft tries to weasel its
way into being the default, if not the only, choice, and make it
needlessly difficult for you to choose something else.
Phil
Lartib...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <35A2FADA.CEC76A33@s.n>,
> Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
> > Guess what Slartibartfast, that exactly right. And I'm not lying from my hairy
> > ass. When I brought this machine, it came with a Kelvin Orchid video card. It
> > turned out that the Kelvins are incompatible with DirectX. I ripped that out
> and
> > replaced it with a Viper. Perfect. I also evaluate and comment on new
> software,
> > so I am forever installing applications and removing them. Usually at a rate
> of
> > about 10 a month. Even with that, no crashes. Nothing. Read the documentation
> on
> > Windows and use the computer as it should be and not as YOU think the computer
> > should behave. I clean (my term for reformatting) out the computer every about
> > 12-14 months. Quess what?. Mr Gates' baby is purring along perfectly. I love
> her.
> >
>
> That's LARTibartfast. Standard Bob term, standing for what we do to idiot
> lusers.
You're not even original, dude. You knock off others' names.You don't see other
people calling themselves "_atman", "_uggs Bunny" or whatever. Get it right. I
suppose if you only saw the series and didn't READ the book, it would sound like
_lartibartfast.
> Funny, you are the only person I have ever heard make your claim. In
> the world. Ever. What does this tell you?
That you and all you friends can fit into a telephone box?
> It should tell you that you are
> extremely lucky.
My mother always says that.
> When everyone else in the world has their machines crash
> regularly, they are not the wierd ones, you are.
I know lots of people whose machines don't crash regularly.
Anyway..."everyone"?...pretty big statement to make there buddy boy
> As for cleaning out your
> system, I do it ever 4 months to my windoze machine.
Well, good for you. Then it shouldn't crash then, should it?
> I have never once had to
> flatline and reinstall the system on any UNIX box I run, simply to clean out
> old crap.
See, that the reason why every few months or so I come to these particular groups.
So I can learn something new. Like that UNIX servers come with an AI enabled
application that recognises redundant files and removes them automatically.
Shit...keep it quiet or we'll all be without a job.
> I question the real level of technical expertise required to
> 'evaluate new software', as a trained monkey can do the same job.
Have you seen some of the crap that's out there. Hard, almost impossible, to use;
shit GUIs; buttons that don't work (on working versions). To the programmer, it
might be his/hers little baby...absolutely nothing wrong with it...he/she can use
it...no problem. The the user, its a waste of money. Now, Slarti, would you prefer
to read about how not to blow your money, or do you want to just hand it over?
> I also
> REFUSE to blithely accept what Bill (or anyone else) tells me I should be
> doing with my computer.
He never has.
> What I use my computer for is MY business.
Sure. If you want to store JPEGs, do so.
> If what I
> wish to do is within the physical limitations of the machine I am operating
> on, then I will do what I want. Your blind, ovine acceptance of what others
> tell you you will do with your computer has locked you permamently in the
> status of Luser, with the right to be ordered around by Bill Gates and his
> army of lawyers. Enjoy yourself.
I do.
> While you're at it, you could do us
"us"...whose "us"?...your friends in the phone box?...:)
> a favor
> and get lost. Hie thee hence from this newsgroup and get back to where you
> belong, festering under the fridge with the other Micro$hlock lusers.
To quote Lord SLARTIBARTFAST (dieties are incaps):"They've been experimenting on you
I'm afraid.". pp.118 (my copy anyway)
Matt Chiglinsky
Win3.1 (and maybe DOS). I run NT and Office all the time. NT never crashes,
and Office only does rarely. Fortunately, it only takes 2 seconds to get back
to where I was. It's not like I have to reboot my whole system.
Phil
sentimental.
Jeff Read
>
> Hooray. finally someone with common sense. I love NT more than W95. I'm just
> sentimental.
NT's a step in the right direction... one that should have been made a
long time ago. But Microsoft made it too bloated and unwieldy to be a
workstation OS, and too unstable to be a decent server OS.
Jeff Read
> I went into a shop today and asked them to show me a bit about Windows 98 to
> see if it was worth buying. They said "Oh it's great for stability, and it's
> really fast. Let me show you."
>
> So the attendant moved the mouse and the screen came back, then froze. He
> said "Oh, it seems to have crashed. I'll just reboot it."
Seems to be happening a lot recently.
> Absolute bollocks.
> My computer was brought from IBM, a very successful, and honest company.
Successful? Yes. Honest? ... Well, IBM *invented* FUD, obscuration of
easy-to-grasp concepts, and many other industry ploys Microsoft is using
repeatedly today. They certainly have gotten better today... but IBM has
a history of not exactly being "honest".
Still, if you buy a computer from them today, chances are you're getting
a quality machine. (Unlike ten years ago....)
Phil
Jeff Read wrote:
> Phil wrote:
> >
> > Hooray. finally someone with common sense. I love NT more than W95. I'm just
> > sentimental.
>
> NT's a step in the right direction... one that should have been made a
> long time ago. But Microsoft made it too bloated and unwieldy to be a
> workstation OS, and too unstable to be a decent server OS.
Lartib...@my-dejanews.com
> > >
> >
> > That's LARTibartfast. Standard Bob term, standing for what we do to idiot
> > lusers.
>
> You're not even original, dude. You knock off others' names.You don't see
other
> people calling themselves "_atman", "_uggs Bunny" or whatever. Get it right. I
> suppose if you only saw the series and didn't READ the book, it would sound
like
> _lartibartfast.
no no no no you fscking moron. Yes, I have read all of Mr. Adams' books. LART
stands for Luser Attitude Readjustment Tool (normally a heavy object). It is
what we techs would like to apply to lusers like yourself, for your lack of
intelligence. since I would not name myself Slartibartfast (being that I am
not nearly as cool as he), I have to use the pale imitation which you see
before you. The overworked, underpaid, over-qualified, over-educated tech we
all know and love.
>
> > Funny, you are the only person I have ever heard make your claim. In
> > the world. Ever. What does this tell you?
>
> That you and all you friends can fit into a telephone box?
If it was just me and my friends who have a problem with M$, why does this
newsgroup exist?
Geez you're dense.
>
> > It should tell you that you are
> > extremely lucky.
>
> My mother always says that.
Right about the time she molested you?
>
> > When everyone else in the world has their machines crash
> > regularly, they are not the wierd ones, you are.
>
> I know lots of people whose machines don't crash regularly.
> Anyway..."everyone"?...pretty big statement to make there buddy boy
>
Given that all you hear about when talking to people about their machines is
how often they have to reboot, I'd say such a sweeping statement is
justified.
> > As for cleaning out your
> > system, I do it ever 4 months to my windoze machine.
>
> Well, good for you. Then it shouldn't crash then, should it?
*buzzzzzz* wrong answer. Thank you for playing, would you like to try a copy
of our home game?
>
> > I have never once had to
> > flatline and reinstall the system on any UNIX box I run, simply to clean out
> > old crap.
>
> See, that the reason why every few months or so I come to these particular
groups.
> So I can learn something new. Like that UNIX servers come with an AI enabled
> application that recognises redundant files and removes them automatically.
> Shit...keep it quiet or we'll all be without a job.
*smirk* you once again show your lack of technical knowledge. When you alter
the kernel in UNIX, you recompile it. This gets rid of redundant files. For
that matter, when you alter ANY program you recompile it. And guess what! It
gets rid of the redundant files.
>
> > I question the real level of technical expertise required to
> > 'evaluate new software', as a trained monkey can do the same job.
>
> Have you seen some of the crap that's out there. Hard, almost impossible, to
use;
> shit GUIs; buttons that don't work (on working versions). To the programmer,
it
> might be his/hers little baby...absolutely nothing wrong with it...he/she can
use
> it...no problem. The the user, its a waste of money. Now, Slarti, would you
prefer
> to read about how not to blow your money, or do you want to just hand it over?
So, what you are saying is, you are a highly skilled, trained, point and click
tester. Wow... I'm suitably impressed! And we let you drive a car, too!
>
> > I also
> > REFUSE to blithely accept what Bill (or anyone else) tells me I should be
> > doing with my computer.
>
> He never has.
Bullshit.
>
> > What I use my computer for is MY business.
>
> Sure. If you want to store JPEGs, do so.
And if I want to turn it into a Linux box? Gates'd hate that.
>
> > If what I
> > wish to do is within the physical limitations of the machine I am operating
> > on, then I will do what I want. Your blind, ovine acceptance of what others
> > tell you you will do with your computer has locked you permamently in the
> > status of Luser, with the right to be ordered around by Bill Gates and his
> > army of lawyers. Enjoy yourself.
>
> I do.
Yes, I'm sure you do. Immensely. And possibly illegally in most southern
states.
>
> > While you're at it, you could do us
>
> "us"...whose "us"?...your friends in the phone box?...:)
Us being the denizens of this newsgroup. Where you most assuredly don't
belong.
>
> > a favor
> > and get lost. Hie thee hence from this newsgroup and get back to where you
> > belong, festering under the fridge with the other Micro$hlock lusers.
>
> To quote Lord SLARTIBARTFAST (dieties are incaps):"They've been experimenting
on you
> I'm afraid.". pp.118 (my copy anyway)
wow, your first correct statement to date.
vex...@crystal.palace.net
: Wait for version 5.
Version 5 will be even more bloated, and less stable then
version 4. Sure, there will be many things fixed, and a
bunch of new whiz-bang features, but since they rewrote
almost the entire OS, it will be terribly unstable.
Besides, why should I wait another year (announced release
date, good luck) when there are perfectly good and stable
OS's available right now at little or no cost? Oh, yeah,
I forgot, I should wait because Bill says that we cannot live
without NT 5. Shit, how could I have forgotten?
Phil
> > > That's LARTibartfast. Standard Bob term, standing for what we do to idiot
> > > lusers.
> >
> > You're not even original, dude. You knock off others' names.You don't see
> other
> > people calling themselves "_atman", "_uggs Bunny" or whatever. Get it right. I
> > suppose if you only saw the series and didn't READ the book, it would sound
> like
> > _lartibartfast.
>
> no no no no you fscking moron. Yes, I have read all of Mr. Adams' books. LART
> stands for Luser Attitude Readjustment Tool (normally a heavy object).
SHIT...and there I thought it stood for the Little Attitude Readjustment Tool...I
knew I was wrong...what damage would a two inch tool do anyway?
> It iswhat we techs would like to apply to lusers like yourself, for your lack of
> intelligence. since I would not name myself Slartibartfast (being that I am
> not nearly as cool as he),
You said it dude.
> I have to use the pale imitation which you see before you. The overworked,
> underpaid, over-qualified, over-educated tech we all know and love
>
>
> >
> > > Funny, you are the only person I have ever heard make your claim. In
> > > the world. Ever. What does this tell you?
> >
> > That you and all you friends can fit into a telephone box?
>
> If it was just me and my friends who have a problem with M$, why does this
> newsgroup exist?
> Geez you're dense.
Well you guys seem to be the only techs left in the world who are unable to operate
Windows. I feel like Batman...oh....sorry..._atman. You know. Righting wrongs.
> > > It should tell you that you are extremely lucky.
> >
> > My mother always says that.
>
> Right about the time she molested you?
Oh...I think you've forgotten which newsgroup you're in, _larti. Alt.Sex.Incest is
further up I think. Try the Pre-teenie one while your up there.
> > > When everyone else in the world has their machines crash regularly, they are
> not the wierd ones, you are.
> >
> > I know lots of people whose machines don't crash regularly.
> Anyway..."everyone"?...pretty big statement to make there buddy boy
> >
>
> Given that all you hear about when talking to people about their machines is
> how often they have to reboot, I'd say such a sweeping statement is
> justified.
Your opinion again buddy boy. Anyway, what's wrong with rebooting. When the OS
handles a game lets say, and the games places demands on the drivers and Windows
shuts down, is Windows to blame?
> > > As for cleaning out your system, I do it ever 4 months to my windoze machine.
> >
> > Well, good for you. Then it shouldn't crash then, should it?
>
> *buzzzzzz* wrong answer. Thank you for playing, would you like to try a copy
> of our home game?
Have you thought that just maybe that CD-ROM version of the "Debbie Does Dallas" is
putting a strain on your vidoe drivers? notice that the blue screen happens when you
are playing some game. Not a Microsoft game, but by other software houses. I have
never heard of the blue screen comming up when you were just sitting there,not
touching the mouse even.
> > > I have never once had to flatline and reinstall the system on any UNIX box I
> run, simply to clean out
> > > old crap.
> >
> > See, that the reason why every few months or so I come to these particular
> groups.
> > So I can learn something new. Like that UNIX servers come with an AI enabled
> > application that recognises redundant files and removes them automatically.
> > Shit...keep it quiet or we'll all be without a job.
>
> *smirk* you once again show your lack of technical knowledge. When you alter
> the kernel in UNIX, you recompile it. This gets rid of redundant files. For
> that matter, when you alter ANY program you recompile it. And guess what! It
> gets rid of the redundant files.
ALL files right?
> > > I question the real level of technical expertise required to
> > > 'evaluate new software', as a trained monkey can do the same job.
> >
> > Have you seen some of the crap that's out there. Hard, almost impossible, to
> use; shit GUIs; buttons that don't work (on working versions). To the programmer,
>
> it might be his/hers little baby...absolutely nothing wrong with it...he/she can
> use it...no problem. The the user, its a waste of money. Now, Slarti, would you
> prefer to read about how not to blow your money, or do you want to just hand it
> over?
>
> So, what you are saying is, you are a highly skilled, trained, point and click
> tester. Wow... I'm suitably impressed! And we let you drive a car, too!
Gee...thanks
> > > I also REFUSE to blithely accept what Bill (or anyone else) tells me I should
> be
> > > doing with my computer.
> >
> > He never has.
>
> Bullshit.
No bullshit. He never has. You're having a flashback.
> > > What I use my computer for is MY business.
> >
> > Sure. If you want to store JPEGs, do so.
>
> And if I want to turn it into a Linux box? Gates'd hate that.
But then how will you view your JPEGs. never heard of a LINUX viewer.
> > > If what I wish to do is within the physical limitations of the machine I am
> operating
> > > on, then I will do what I want. Your blind, ovine acceptance of what others
> > > tell you you will do with your computer has locked you permamently in the
> > > status of Luser, with the right to be ordered around by Bill Gates and his
> > > army of lawyers. Enjoy yourself.
> >
> > I do.
>
> Yes, I'm sure you do. Immensely. And possibly illegally in most southern
> states.
Ahem. everything is illegal there. I don't think I'd enjoy myself there.
> > > While you're at it, you could do us
> >
> > "us"...whose "us"?...your friends in the phone box?...:)
>
> Us being the denizens of this newsgroup. Where you most assuredly don't
> belong.
>
> >
> > > a favor
> > > and get lost. Hie thee hence from this newsgroup and get back to where you
> > > belong, festering under the fridge with the other Micro$hlock lusers.
> >
> > To quote Lord SLARTIBARTFAST (dieties are incaps):"They've been experimenting
> on you
> > I'm afraid.". pp.118 (my copy anyway)
>
> wow, your first correct statement to date.
>
jup...@highfiber.com
Phil <m@s.n> wrote:
> > > > What I use my computer for is MY business.
> > >
> > > Sure. If you want to store JPEGs, do so.
> >
> > And if I want to turn it into a Linux box? Gates'd hate that.
>
> But then how will you view your JPEGs. never heard of a LINUX viewer.
Xview. And others.
T. Max Devlin
>
>> I went into a shop today and asked them to show me a bit about Windows 98 to
>> see if it was worth buying. They said "Oh it's great for stability, and it's
>> really fast. Let me show you."
>>
>> So the attendant moved the mouse and the screen came back, then froze. He
>> said "Oh, it seems to have crashed. I'll just reboot it."
>
>Seems to be happening a lot recently.
Happened the first time I saw Win98, on one of those snazzy Sony
systems, in a "Sun" appliance store (no relation to the computer
manufacturer). I walked up, just to see what all the fuss was about,
thinking the desktop display looked really cool for a demo, but would be
horribly inefficient for production use. Clicking on the "Welcome" demo
icon, I was greeted with the familiar cascading failures we've come to
know and hate.
Bobby D. Bryant
> Its your computer then, not the OS. Did you put the PC together
> yourself?. I have a 2.4 Gb HDD which is full. I only have ever crashed
> Win95 once, and that was due to this bullshit independent software that
> was so badly written, it crashed my PC, resulting in a reformat. Probably
> written by some UNIX programmer. Don't blame Microsoft.
Yeah, poor Unix programmer never dreamed that a bug in his software would
crash a system... 'cause it doesn't under real operating systems.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
Bobby D. Bryant
> Guess what Slartibartfast, that exactly right. And I'm not lying from my hairy
> ass. When I brought this machine, it came with a Kelvin Orchid video card. It
> turned out that the Kelvins are incompatible with DirectX. I ripped that out and
> replaced it with a Viper. Perfect. I also evaluate and comment on new software,
> so I am forever installing applications and removing them. Usually at a rate of
> about 10 a month. ...
I don't suppose you get paid for these evaluations... if not, you should clarify on
it at once: otherwise it might tempt one to speculate on why you hold your
unsupportable views so dear.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
Jeff Read
> Happened the first time I saw Win98, on one of those snazzy Sony
> systems, in a "Sun" appliance store (no relation to the computer
> manufacturer). I walked up, just to see what all the fuss was about,
> thinking the desktop display looked really cool for a demo, but would be
> horribly inefficient for production use. Clicking on the "Welcome" demo
> icon, I was greeted with the familiar cascading failures we've come to
> know and hate.
"70% bugs, 30% clean code! Repeat! 70% bugs, 30% clean code!"
Sorry, I just have to say it. :)
Mark Lindner
> Happened the first time I saw Win98, on one of those snazzy Sony
> systems, in a "Sun" appliance store (no relation to the computer
> manufacturer). I walked up, just to see what all the fuss was about,
> thinking the desktop display looked really cool for a demo, but would be
> horribly inefficient for production use. Clicking on the "Welcome" demo
> icon, I was greeted with the familiar cascading failures we've come to
> know and hate.
I'm a proud owner of one of those snazzy Sony systems. :-) The first
generation of Sony PCs were great: very multimedia-oriented, very expandable,
used standard hardware. Had no problem installing Solaris x86 on it, and using
most of my hardware.
Recently I bought one of Sony's "microtowers", and boy what a disappointment.
The thing is crunched down to the size of a shoebox, which means no drive bays
and extremely limited expansion capabilities (there's only like 2 free slots in
the thing). Plus, the thing is comprised largely of cheapo no-name
windoze-specific hardware. The thing comes preinstalled with Windoze 98, which
provides a crummy user interface and unacceptable performance. But try to
install a different OS (even Windows 95!) and you're out of luck...most of the
hardware simply won't work. You can't find win95 drivers for the audio chipset.
The goofy proprietary CD/DVD drive works only under Windows with the included
Sony driver.
It's a bad trend I'm seeing here...in the future we'll have essentially Windows
PCs...with hardware tailored to work only with the latest version of
Microsoft's bug-ridden bloatware.
I'm taking this worthless thing back to the store.
Cheers,
Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lindner http://www.netcom.com/~frenzy/ fre...@ix.netcom.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Go then--there are other worlds than these."
T. Max Devlin
It's not a trend, it's a business strategy. The entire "PC98/99" spec
that Intel and Microsoft are colluding^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H cooperating
is almost exactly what you described.
