CONTEST: Who has the best insult for this idiot... (was Re: Gates Of Hell
Stoney Edwards
While rolling around in a tub filled with raw liver, some idiotic flunkie
that has very poorly masked his true identity with <kicki...@home.com>
muttered in the pathetic hopes that someone would respond to help to fill
his empty life:
[much idiocy snipped]
: Thank God Bill came and saved the world of computers from the fools.
Normally, I would do one of two things here:
1.) Trace this luser's post to it's point of origination, and then post
his/her E-mail address in *.advocacy, and let the mailbombing begin.
2.) Not respond at all.
However, in this case, I thought an insult contest would be fun. I have
better things to do, than to chase down morons, and have mail wars with
them. However, I am willing to take time out for a good gag. :)
I would like to propose that we all (Linux, Windows, and Mac users alike)
come together to host the 1st annual
"Kicki...@home.com Insult Fair"
sponsored by absolutely anyone who has lots of cash to give away.
So, the object of the game, is to try to come up with the absolute best
insult for this completely stupid stupid fscking lamer luser who masks
himself as kicki...@home.com. Yes, a string of vulgarities, that roll
off of the tongue when spoken, and shatter the spirit when heard, are the
goal of this contest. So, I shall go first. BTW, do keep in mind that
this is just a prank, so to those about to e-mail me with complaints about
content... just chill. Think of it as a chance to hone your flaming
abilities. Here I goes!!!... :)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dearest Retard, whose benign trolls pollute our precious newsgroup...
You are a luser... you are a maggot ball... you are the yellow puss that
oozes from the gangreneous wound of a dead rat's testicles... you are the
lone bacteria cell, who lapeth up off of the feces of the intestinal
linings of diseased babboons... you are the dried urine beneath the
urinal in the dive bar in Mexico... you are the scum that lineth the anal
opening of the mighty elephant... you are the weed which feedeth off of
the festering, dripping mucus of the dead rhino, covered by tse tse flies,
moss, and fungus... you are the particle of dessicated poo poo in the
alley dog's gum line... you are the squishy ball of unflushed semen in the
womb of a 75 year old hooker... you are the gooey oil, in the zit of an
unbathed computer science student <g>... you are the muck, at the bottom
of a port-a-john.
Why don't you take your worthless, brainless, dickless, helpless,
hopeless, spineless, absolutely ridiculous autistic sevant rantings, and
stick to what you do best, which is having sex with large bowls of Jello
brand gelatin. <THWACK!>
--
QUOTE: Okay... who's next?...
Stephen S. Edwards II -- p h l a x i o r @ p r i m e n e t . c o m
------------------------------------------------------------------
[JA207030-TRON-RAM-FLYNN] <- leave this line in your e-mail reply
macdude
Please, I really dont want to
read such gross things.
So at the very least please
post that this will be extremely gross
I think I am going to throw up
.
.
.
..
.......
Sean
Stoney Edwards wrote in message <642qeg$4...@nntp02.primenet.com>...
:While rolling around in a tub filled with raw liver, some idiotic flunkie
:that has very poorly masked his true identity with <kicki...@home.com>
:muttered in the pathetic hopes that someone would respond to help to fill
:his empty life:
:
...
:
:However, in this case, I thought an insult contest would be fun. I have
:better things to do, than to chase down morons, and have mail wars with
:them. However, I am willing to take time out for a good gag. :)
:
:I would like to propose that we all (Linux, Windows, and Mac users alike)
:come together to host the 1st annual
:
: "Kicki...@home.com Insult Fair"
:
:sponsored by absolutely anyone who has lots of cash to give away.
:
< insults snipped >
My contribution:
kickingback@home is the only person I know who lost a flame war to Barbara
Pfrommer.
Ok, Ok... I don't think anyone in the groups to which this has been posted
will get it. Trust me... this is a wound he carries that still has not
healed.
Sean
John Black
While I respect your reasons for disliking Microsoft, you are making
the anti Microsoft camp look bad. When I see this, the image I get of
anti-Microsofters is that they are a juvenile bunch who can't attack
the opposing argument, so they attack the person instead with
schoolyard insults questioning the sexual preference, and personal
worth of anyone who dares defend Microsoft. You are lowering yourself
way below his level.
John Black
I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
Donovan Rebbechi
John Black spouted the following drivel:
>
> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit?
there are ethical and unethical ways to make a profit. The point is that
> So
> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives,
fortunately, these guys have not as yet acquired a level of power that
is a pre-requisite to the kind of arrogance Micro$haft display.
> while evil
> Microsoft only cares about money?
well, you at least you've got half of it right.
> Hello, GET A CLUE,
I can't. Bill Gate$ bundled all the clues with Window$ 95 (but I guess
you didn't get that edition?) , and now Microsoft don't have any left.
Unfortunately, due to an M$IE bug, the clues were deemed unregistered
and promptly erased, which explains the existing state of most Win95
users...
> you losers!
yep. arrogance. Does that come bundled with Windoze as well ?
> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
ahhh-huh. I've always strived for arrogance, egocentricity,
obnoxiousness,and smugness. But those personal qualities just don't seem
to come to me as naturally as they do to some... so I guess I'm
condemned to lead a jealous existence. Then again, maybe they come
bundled with Win98...
-- Donovan
James Charles Rau
nospam@nospam (John Black) wrote:
>I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
>Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
>Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
>are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
I have no problem with Microsoft (see, I didn't even use an "$")
trying to make a profit.
What I object to is Microsoft's flagrant violation of the anti-trust
laws and shoving sub-standard, proprietary products on the Internet
community.
James Rau
Craig Koller
In article <34660fee...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
Black) wrote:
> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
> Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
Not *every* company out there trying to make a profit is a ruthless,
monopolistic, cut-throat band of thugs whose lust for power and wealth
knows no bounds ... Roosevelt and Hitler were both leaders of nations. Do
you put them in the same category?
Of course, this isn't meant to reflect upon MicroSoft or anything like
that. I'm just saying there *is* a difference. Some companies do *earn* the
"$."
Eric Bennett
In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
Black) wrote:
> You don't
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> community, and get back to work.
And I suppose "Crapintosh" and "Macintoy" are really mature, right?
BTW, what do you think of "Slick Willy?" :-)
--
Eric Bennett ( er...@pobox.com ; http://www.pobox.com/~ericb )
Cornell University
Paul Rickard
If Microsoft gave me $10 million or so every year for ads, I'd probably
be quite willing to declare Windows the product of the century and BillG
king of all civilization. Giving Orifice '97 it's Editors Choice award
is the least they can do for keeping their whole company alive for a
decade.
And as for you using and liking the products, well, that just goes into
my "stupid is as stupid does" file.
--
-Paul Rickard, President of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign.
"Without data, you're just another opinion."
www.abctec.com/~msbc
Joe Ragosta
> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
Only a very tiny percentage of Mac users do this and real Mac advocates
apologize for them.
But these names are quite common among Windows users, as well. Given the
market share differences, there may be more Windows users who use these
terms than Mac users.
> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
No. It's usually "Hackintosh" or "Macintrash" or just the simple "Macs suck".
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
Or who are too smart to want to waste their time on config.sys files.
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
See the Complete Macintosh Advocacy Page
http://www.dol.net/~Ragosta/complmac.htm
Steven Schulze
Koen Deforche wrote in message <346657...@cs.kuleuven.ac.be>...
>John Black wrote:
>>
>> All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
>> Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
>> Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
>> from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
>> recgonition from every major PC publication. Why, just look at the
>> awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
>> Editor's Choice. I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>> their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
>> dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
>
>You are right, as usual. It really beats me too that all these guys
>are saying that linux is better than the rest. It is incredible that
>people are making huge efforts, for free, to have their linux
>running (i am talking here about the guys that make and maintain
>linux, write apps for it). It's even nuts that internet runs on
>unix machines, while you are impressed with the power of Ms Word.
>Also it is very odd that from time to time a writer for the magazine
>Byte is very confused and writes that linux is good.
>And man, you cant enter a decent bookstore without passing to a
>whole shell of books on Linux, GNU utilities and the lot. Like
>some sensible man would buy that.
>
>But, you are right.
>
>However, I am certain that when I would take my 12" black/white
>TV to a tribe in south africa, which, by accident, has never seen
>a tv before,
You really need to brush up on reality before you make statements like that.
In some respects, South Africa is technically ahead, like in some areas of
the medical field. (The first ever successfull heart transplant in the world
was performed in a hospital in South Africa by Dr Chris Barnard).
You need to go a little bit more north...
they would put it on a totem and worship it, and
>if you would come along the same tribe, laughing at them with
>their black/white tv and say that where you are from they have
>bioscopes with 3D projection, superrealistic, they would argue
>that is not possible because they haven't put your bioscope with 3D
>projection on a totem, and do not worship it.
>
>cu, koen.
Steven Schulze
Joe Ragosta wrote in message ...
>In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
>Black) wrote:
>
>> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>
>Only a very tiny percentage of Mac users do this and real Mac advocates
>apologize for them.
>
>But these names are quite common among Windows users, as well. Given the
>market share differences, there may be more Windows users who use these
>terms than Mac users.
>
>> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
>
>No. It's usually "Hackintosh" or "Macintrash" or just the simple "Macs
suck".
I prefer "Mac'nCrash", "crApple", and Mac-lusers.
>> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>
>Or who are too smart to want to waste their time on config.sys files.
So they get to endlessly turn on- and off their inits, finding why this one
doesn't work with that one, or why after you installed something new does
this one crash the trash, etc.
Actually, my config.sys and autoexec.bat files are both empty. These are
not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to edit
it anymore, after all this time with W95...
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Kevin and Brian Stone
John Black (nospam@nospam) wrote:
: All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
: Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
: Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
: from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
: recgonition from every major PC publication.
Hype?
: Why, just look at the
: awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
: Editor's Choice. I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
: their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
: dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
Actualy in your rant, you've managed to completely blind your self to the
underlying reason why MOST people despise Microsoft... namely unfiar or
otherwise unethical business practices. Now every large company from time
to time has to deal with their public image due to something they've done,
but Microsoft seems consistent in its anti-competetive practices and
almost always finds a loop hole to avoid prosecution frustrating users
even more.
The following is just a sampling of what Microsft has done to get an
unfair edge in the marketplace:
- Taking dubious advantage of an agreement between them selves and Apple
Computer, Inc. to use certain portions of the MacOS interface in their
creation of MS Windows spurring a lawsuit which they won allowing them
to (more or less) freely add MacOS-like features not covered under the
original agreement... the argument continues to rage more than a decade
later.
- The attempted anti-competetive hostile take over of Intuit (Microsoft's
only competition against their Microsoft Money software).
- Pushing Synet (a small 20 person software company) out of business by
purposfuly extending an expensive lawsuit for use of the name "Internet
Explorer"... and it's not the first time this has happend.
- Forcing PC manufacturers to install the Internet Explorer browser if
they want a license to preinstall Windows95 on their machines,
supposably in violation of a previous court order... people normaly go
to jail for acts like these.
Most of these examples are not old... in fact you may be able to look in
your local paper to learn more about them. And I hope I've made it clear
that people do have their reasons for hating Microsoft and its software,
and their reasons are not unfounded.
BTW, nice cross post for such a poor troll. I snipped it to the vaugely
valid newsgroups.
-Kevin Stone
Stone Entertainment
www.StoneEntertainment.com
Steven Schulze
Craig Koller wrote in message <645phq$r...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>In article <34660fee...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
>Black) wrote:
>
>> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
>> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
>> Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
>> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
>
>Not *every* company out there trying to make a profit is a ruthless,
>monopolistic, cut-throat band of thugs whose lust for power and wealth
>knows no bounds ... Roosevelt and Hitler were both leaders of nations. Do
>you put them in the same category?
Yes, but we all know that if Apple was actually successful (like MS), they
definately would give their money away to charity, slow down their R&D to
give other companies a chance to catch up again, not invest into technology
to speed up the internet for everyone, not do anything to spread their
software to everyone (to give the competition a chance, not advertise
anything so that the competition can have a chance, and, boy, they
definately won't want to make their investers any more money, now would
they?
Dream on, Macboy...
>Of course, this isn't meant to reflect upon MicroSoft or anything like
>that. I'm just saying there *is* a difference. Some companies do *earn* the
>"$."
Yes, MS must have stolen it.
Please wake up. MS is SUCCESSFUL, and Apple is NOT. THAT is why MS has
money, and Apple doesn't. People buy MS products because they want to (some
Mac-user inserts pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS products are
forced to do it), and people DO NOT buy Apple products because they don't
offer as much as a Wintel machine. Stop being in denial.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Morbius
In article <6469l8$gs2$2...@news.ycc.yale.edu>, Miguel Cruz
<migue...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
> >I guess because Apple targeted the Mac towards morons who don't know how to
> >edit config.sys and autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>
> This from the same person who just covered the inside of my screen with
> spittle yelling about how difficult linux is to use? What is your point
> exactly?
>
> miguel
Whatever the point (if any) what is this crap doing in c.s.m.a and with
this Subject line?
<c.s.m.a trimmed from the headers>
--
Morbius (morbius at sure dot net)
"Wintel, the greatest monument to the world's natural affinity for mediocrity." -- Me
James Cornthwaite
Microsloth products good eh? I recall that every machine that i have
ever
run a MS OS on has been problematic (ie, crashed) on a consistent basis.
You'll think everything is fixed, and everything runs smoothly for a
while,
and all of a sudden, things start to crash again. It isn't just me, it
is
everyone i know - it is a reality that MS products are unreliable.
Everyone
at work was laughing the other day when our secretary got the following
message in win95:
"Error loading explorer.exe. You must reinstall windows."
This is no joke. A reboot left no trace of the problem (except that the
hard
disk still had windows on it). It has been observed by many that MS
apps
either hog memory, or don't release memory when they exit.
Funny how i never have problems with my linux box. Very funny indeed :)
I don't just 'say' MS products suck. I know from experience that they
do.
Regards,
James
Craig Koller
In article <eDNrGhY78GA.326@upnetnews03>, "Steven Schulze"
<Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
...Yeah, fine. Whatever ... and Captain Kirk could kick Captain Picard's
butt ... yeah, yeah, yeah.
Let Bill be your champion because he's *successful.* And don't make a straw
man of my saying *all* people buying MS products are ... because I never
said that. Hell, *I* buy MS products. Got a Wintel computer sitting right
next to me. I work with both computers all day. How 'bout *you,* sporto?
Know from whence you speak?
I don't buy products from the most *successful* company. I buy the best
products. And, no, you're quite wrong, Apple established a standard of
philanthropy from the get-go, to almost shocking proportions, initially.
But, by and large, Apple is a good neighbor and doesn't try to annihilate
or screw either its developers or competitors.
And, for the record, MS STOLE CP/M by purchasing a plagarized knock-off
called QDOS and licensing it back to IBM. That's their ignominious entrance
into the world of operating systems. If the legal system wasn't so clueless
as to what an OS was 15 years ago, MS would have gotten busted big time.
Something to be real proud of, huh.
Hey, but fuck it ... they're SUCCESSFUL.
Steven Schulze
Donovan Rebbechi wrote in message
<34662000...@nospam.pegasus.rutgers.edu>...
>John Black spouted the following drivel:
>>
>> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit?
>
>there are ethical and unethical ways to make a profit. The point is that
>
>> So
>> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives,
>
>fortunately, these guys have not as yet acquired a level of power that
>is a pre-requisite to the kind of arrogance Micro$haft display.
>
>> while evil
>> Microsoft only cares about money?
>
>well, you at least you've got half of it right.
>
>> Hello, GET A CLUE,
>
>I can't. Bill Gate$ bundled all the clues with Window$ 95 (but I guess
>you didn't get that edition?) , and now Microsoft don't have any left.
>Unfortunately, due to an M$IE bug, the clues were deemed unregistered
>and promptly erased, which explains the existing state of most Win95
>users...
>
>> you losers!
>
>yep. arrogance. Does that come bundled with Windoze as well ?
>
>> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
>
>ahhh-huh. I've always strived for arrogance, egocentricity,
>obnoxiousness,and smugness. But those personal qualities just don't seem
>to come to me as naturally as they do to some... so I guess I'm
>condemned to lead a jealous existence. Then again, maybe they come
>bundled with Win98...
>
>-- Donovan
Yep, there's some serious sour grapes in this ng. What else if your beloved
little loser OS is being tramped over by the OS Of Choice. That and some
insecurity complexes...
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
John Black
I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
George
On Sun, 09 Nov 1997 19:34:07 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
nope ... we are just pointing to a monopoly ...
George
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Lebl <ji...@5z.com> http://www.5z.com/jirka/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING:
Reading this message can affect the dimensionality of your
mind, change the curvature of your spine, cause the growth of hair on
your palms, and make a difference in the outcome of your favorite war.
George
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:00:00 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
>Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
>Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
>from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
>awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
>Editor's Choice. I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
>dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
well simple ... M$ kind of owns Ziff ... Ziff ownes PC Mag ... plus M$ is
the biggest advertizer in PC Mag ...
it's the same reason why Linux Jurnal will never give an award to M$ (well
besides the reason that M$ products can't stand up to linux or unix products
in general)
nobody shits in their own nest ... (well except birds, but that's beside the
point)
get a clues ... monopolies never did and never will produce quality products
Jerry Sams
Demonspawn Armageddon wrote in message <3468102B...@pipeline.com>...
>
>
>John Black, in a state of mental inferiority, wrote:
>
>> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh".
Yeah! You mushed up "Macintush" people.
We Windows users are above name-calling.
Jerry
100% Windows Pure
George
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 03:25:04 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>See, the common response by an Anti-Microsofter. Can't attack the
>argument, can't give any reason why Microsoft products and the company
>are as bad as they say they are, so they attack the person instead.
>What a bunch of losers. I'm not saying Microsoft products are
>perfect, but they aren't as bad as you idiots say they are.
nope, they are worse ...
well ... I'm not an anti microsofter ... I'm anti monopoly ... once M$ gets
split up and isn't a monopoly any more .. I'd be mroe then happy to go
out and buy some of their stuff if I thought I'd like it ..
problem is ... I have to administer some NTs ... and that's enough to
make you hate them ... of course if you have never administered linux
boxes ... you might think NTs are simple ... yeah right ... plus you
actually have to go around and restart the boxes .. reinstall ... reboot
... why ... I install a linux box ... it runs ...
so I'm not someone who doesn't know M$ ... I'm someone who has had to
work with them (fortunately not much any more)
so once they get their shit together ... I might buy stuff from them ...
in the meantime I'm not stupid enough to buy something just because it got
pretty adverisements ....
George
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:03:37 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
hmm ... well I guess by the same argument ... M$ targeted windoze toward
morons who can't edit their rc files ... hmm ... your argumentation powers
are seriously impaired .... get your head checked ... maybe they'll find a
brain in there somewhere ...
George
>>> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>>> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>>> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>>> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>>
>
>So they get to endlessly turn on- and off their inits, finding why this one
>doesn't work with that one, or why after you installed something new does
>this one crash the trash, etc.
>
>Actually, my config.sys and autoexec.bat files are both empty. These are
>not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to edit
>it anymore, after all this time with W95...
so by the original argumentation .. which you seem to agree with ....
you are a moron ...
hmmm ...
Loren Petrich
In article <#AiWDRY78GA.274@upnetnews03>,
Steven Schulze <Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
>Yep, there's some serious sour grapes in this ng. What else if your beloved
>little loser OS is being tramped over by the OS Of Choice. That and some
>insecurity complexes...
I've used OSes that put M$ ones to shame, like the MacOS, the
BeOS, Unix, ...
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
Jeffrey C. Dege
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:00:00 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
>Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
>Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
>from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
>recgonition from every major PC publication. Why, just look at the
>awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
>Editor's Choice. I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
>dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
I saw an ad for Microsoft Project a couple of weeks ago, where some
actor was talking about how great it was, then ended with something like:
"if I didn't have it, I'd have to use..., I don't know, I've never used
anything else."
This is the core of the problem. Most users of Microsoft Project never
_have_ used anything else, or had any formal training in project management,
or have any idea as to just what Microsoft Project _should_ be doing
for them that it doesn't or does wrong.
I'll admit I'm a cantankerous sort. I've been using LaTeX now for more
than ten years now, on dozens of different platforms, and I'm quite
familiar with it. It just might be that if Microsoft developed a new
document preparation system that did everything that LaTeX only better
I _still_ wouldn't use it, just because of general obstinacy. But I'd
like to think that I would be open enough to the new system to give it
a chance. But it isn't likely to be an issue, because looking at
the progress of Word, it's going to take Microsoft at least another
twenty years before it will be able to match LaTeX in the abilities
that are important to me.
--
IF 2 + 2 .EQ. 5 THEN 5 = 4
Loren Petrich
In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>,
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life.
Don't you guys have a sense of humor?
You don't
>see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh".
Yes, they've been known to.0
We just roll
>our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
Or who prefer not to -- I find it much less of a headache to work
with dialog boxes. Actually, MacOS apps generate big loads of files
comparable to config.sys and autoexec.bat -- they are called preferences
files, and are only manipulated indirectly, by way of those
aforementioned dialog boxes.
Herman
> I wish I could convince the employers of many M$ groupies to
>switch to (say) Linux or Java or the MacOS; let's see how they feel about
>feeling forced to use something other than M$.
How about Sun's Solaris for the Intel processor? I heard it's a good
OS, and on Intel, it offers a very good alternative to NT, especially
for a server.
Signed, a UNIX and Windows user.
De§oto
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 04:34:46 GMT, pet...@netcom.com (Loren Petrich)
wrote:
>
> I've used OSes that put M$ to shame.
>
> Consider the MacOS's user interface -- and how widely it has
been
>imitated. Even by M$.
-snip-
Let me try to get this through your heads once & for all....
...... .............. ........ ..zee.. ..... .....
^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
*$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
.$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
..z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
Both apple and M$ GUI's are derivatives of...
...... .............. ........ ..zee.. ..... .....
^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
*$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
.$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
..z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
When you look at your Mac GUI you are looking at a copy
of the interface made by
...... .............. ........ ..zee.. ..... .....
^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
*$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
.$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
..z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
When you use your mouse, you are using a device invented by
...... .............. ........ ..zee.. ..... .....
^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
*$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
.$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
..z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
What does it take for you to comprehend this?
Loren Petrich
I've used OSes that put M$ to shame.
Consider the MacOS's user interface -- and how widely it has been
imitated. Even by M$. And consider an interesting comment in an early Be
newsletter. There have been relatively few replacements for the MacOS
Finder that have been written over the years, despite their being a
superabundance of other MacOS software; while replacements for the Windoze
3.x Program Manager / File Manager have been much more common (I wonder
what the story is for Win95). Also, the Windoze MDI (Multiple Document
Interface -- a content-free root window that contains the other windows)
makes me ill thinking about it.
And consider one of the nice features of the BeOS -- BMessages.
These are something like AppleEvents in the MacOS (Windoze has something
called OLE Automation, but I don't know much about that, or whether it is
even comparable), but remarkably simple to program and use. This has made
it possible to write a drag-and-drop color picker -- roDesign's roColour
-- that will work with anything that can receive a certain sort of
BMessage (transmitted when one drags and drops a color swatch from it).
I'm sure that many of you will be able to point out other
deficiencies of M$ OSes.
Miguel Cruz
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>I guess because Apple targeted the Mac towards morons who don't know how to
>edit config.sys and autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
This from the same person who just covered the inside of my screen with
Donovan Rebbechi
> John Black wrote:
> >
> > Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
> > from Windows,
is this a joke, or a troll ?
> > to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
> > recgonition from every major PC publication.
I wonder where the publications get their advertising revenue...
> > Why, just look at the
> > awards and accolades given to IE4.
My honest opinion is that this Netscape vs IE thing is a bit of a
pointless debate. Both browsers have all the features one needs to view
today's web pages. It was foolish of them to release activeX on a
product that runs on an insecure single user OS (ActiveX would probably
be much safer on NT or Unix). But still, you can keep the trust level
fixed at 0 and surf in 'Netscape mode'.
> > Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
> > Editor's Choice.
from what I've seen of that magazine, some of the staff have no idea how
to use an office suite let alone review one. MS Word is very good for
short to medium sized documents. Also very customizable and flexible.
Unfortunately, it encourages bad habits (excessive use of physical
markup) but it has good support for styles and customization.
> > I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
> > their power, ease of use, and versatility.
you were doing so well... Office is pretty good, so is IE... but Win95
is a piece of crap. From a technical standpoint, it's a mile behind
anything else... Most of the people I know who use NT as a desktop OS
review it favourably , but MS don't have a scalable server OS yet...
> > So all you anti-Microsoft
> > dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
>
I can see where you're coming from, but if you knew more about Unix,
you'd realise that it's not just the Unix users who occasionaly take a
holiday from reality in the midst of a heated debate on an advocacy
newsgroup. BTW, I haven't heard that many people trashing MS Office.
Certainly, people debate the relative merits of MSIE and COmmunicator.
As I said, apart from MSIE security flaws, I doubt there's that much
difference, we just like arguing. That's what advocacy newsgroups are
for (:
-- Donovan
Loren Petrich
In article <3466abd...@news.mindspring.com>,
I agree in principle, but Solaris is rather expensive (Linux
easily undersells it) -- making it mainly good for big databases and
other such stuff that Linux does not handle very well.
Loren Petrich
In article <34669f01...@news.supernews.com>, De吶to <De吶to> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 04:34:46 GMT, pet...@netcom.com (Loren Petrich)
>wrote:
>> Consider the MacOS's user interface -- and how widely it has
>been
>>imitated. Even by M$.
In what follows, a big ASCII-art rendition of "XEROX" has been cut
to size.
>Let me try to get this through your heads once & for all....
[XEROX]
>Both apple and M$ GUI's are derivatives of...
[XEROX]
Although I will concede that Xerox PARC had made important contributions,
Apple made others, and most other GUI efforts have varying degrees of
Apple heritage:
Xerox:
Windows
Popup menus
Pull-down menus?
Apple:
Overlapping windows
Pull-down menus
The Finder:
Directories and files represented by icons.
Activate something by double-clicking on it.
When a file gets activated, the app with its creator code opens it.
When a directory gets activated, its contents appear in a new window.
Locations of icons in a directory window get remembered.
One can rename by editing in place.
One can move and copy by drag-and-drop.
Delete is soft; one drags to a directory called the Trash,
and then empties it if one is sure one wants
to get rid of something.
One question that is worth answering is how many different ways
there are to make a GUI; but it would seem that Apple had gotten a lot right.
>When you look at your Mac GUI you are looking at a copy
>of the interface made by
[XEROX]
>When you use your mouse, you are using a device invented by
[XEROX]
>What does it take for you to comprehend this?
I comprehend it very well. However, most of the other GUI's
around have tended to look to Apple than to Xerox's much-less-well-known
designs.
Dave Pearson
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:00:00 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
> All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that Microsoft
> shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone. Well, if
> they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products, from Windows, to
> Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and recgonition from every
> major PC publication.
Advertising revenue?
--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: | w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ | ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ | eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
Free software, including........| dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.
Zinzan
>I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>their power, ease of use, and versatility.
My objections to MS products (and I do use them, just don't have the $
to run Macs yet) are that they are SO hard to use. There's so much
redundancy and feature creep it becomes unwieldy. You can browse the
Internet in the same interface as your local files... why? There's a
perfectly good Internet Explorer window for that purpose. There are 67
different ways to open a Word file... why? Just one, a really
effective one, would be fine. There are seventeen different ways to
update the styles in normal.dot... why? When there are so many options
to do something, I get so swamped that none of them comes out truly
effective. They may be versatile and powerful, but MS needs to ditch
their engineer-based interface designers and hire some actualy
designers.
~scott
Steven Schulze
George wrote in message ...
>>>> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>>>> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>>>> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>>>> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>>>
>>>Or who are too smart to want to waste their time on config.sys files.
>>
>>So they get to endlessly turn on- and off their inits, finding why this
one
>>doesn't work with that one, or why after you installed something new does
>>this one crash the trash, etc.
>>
>>Actually, my config.sys and autoexec.bat files are both empty. These are
>>not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to
edit
>>it anymore, after all this time with W95...
>
>so by the original argumentation .. which you seem to agree with ....
>
>you are a moron ...
No, not really. I never agreed to that. I said YOU ARE A MORAN BECAUSE YOU
ARE CLUELESS AS TO WHAT GOES ON IN W95. You still think we are all using
W3.1.
"Forgetting" how to edit a config.sys file and a autoexec.bat file is a sign
that we don't do these things anymore. Unlike on the Mac where you still
need to battle with init conflicts.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Steven Schulze
Craig Koller wrote in message <6466l2$8...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>In article <eDNrGhY78GA.326@upnetnews03>, "Steven Schulze"
><Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
>
>> Craig Koller wrote in message <645phq$r...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>> >In article <34660fee...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
>> >Black) wrote:
>> >
>> >> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>> >> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
>> >> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>> >> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
>> >> Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
>> >> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
>> >
But 90% of Wintel purchases are forced, right? Or, let's see... If the Mac
has 3% marketshare, and it's a better deal than a Wintel, that means that,
what, AT LEAST 97% of all PC purchases are done with a gun the head. Only
makes sense, right? Yea, that's it - 97%...
>I don't buy products from the most *successful* company. I buy the best
>products. And, no, you're quite wrong, Apple established a standard of
>philanthropy from the get-go, to almost shocking proportions, initially.
>But, by and large, Apple is a good neighbor and doesn't try to annihilate
>or screw either its developers or competitors.
Of course, what does escape you is that MS GOT TO BE SUCCESSFUL by selling
the best products, or didn't they?
And Apple does not annihilate or screw it's developers or competitors?
Let's see here... Apple licences the MacOS. Apple start losing money to
it's competitors. Apple kills all clones. No, your'e right - Apple doesn't
screw it's competitors.
And MS treats it's developers way better than Apple does. Apple has viewed
Mac developers as cash sources in the past.
Of course, the difference is that all this is on a teeny-weeny scale
compared to MS, so therefore MS must be bad and Apple must be good.
>And, for the record, MS STOLE CP/M by purchasing a plagarized knock-off
>called QDOS and licensing it back to IBM. That's their ignominious entrance
>into the world of operating systems. If the legal system wasn't so clueless
>as to what an OS was 15 years ago, MS would have gotten busted big time.
>Something to be real proud of, huh.
>
>Hey, but fuck it ... they're SUCCESSFUL.
Yes. Sue them - their'e successful. Can't have that...
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Steven Schulze
Christopher Mahmood wrote in message <646m4j$t84$2...@pravda.ucr.edu>...
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Steven Schulze <Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com>
wrote:
>
>> Actually, my config.sys and autoexec.bat files are both empty. These are
>> not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to
edit
>> it anymore, after all this time with W95...
>
>they never where *required* in dos, you moron! But think about it...where
do you
>think your path and prompt and all of the vars are being set? Or are you
one of those
>windoze types that think there's no dos in windoze anymore.
>-ckm
Nope. Empty. Just checked it. Nothing but three REMed out lines. I'm
aware of the W95/DOS relationship, thanks. That's why W95 is so compatable
with ancient software. Best of both worlds.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Ben Hekster
In article <eDNrGhY78GA.326@upnetnews03>, "Steven Schulze"
<Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
> Craig Koller wrote in message <645phq$r...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
> >monopolistic, cut-throat band of thugs whose lust for power and wealth
> >knows no bounds ... Roosevelt and Hitler were both leaders of nations. Do
> >you put them in the same category?
>
> Yes, but we all know that if Apple was actually successful (like MS), they
> definately would give their money away to charity, slow down their R&D to
> give other companies a chance to catch up again, not invest into technology
> to speed up the internet for everyone, not do anything to spread their
> software to everyone (to give the competition a chance, not advertise
> anything so that the competition can have a chance, and, boy, they
> definately won't want to make their investers any more money, now would
> they?
In fact, giving the competition an even break is exactly what Apple did.
They spun off their application development department into an independent
company that competed on equal terms with everybody else-- the company
known as 'Claris'. Whereas M$ concentrated their 'research' into
developing secret APIs that made it nearly impossible for anybody else to
compete.
Oh, and Apple was distributing their system software for free over the
Internet almost a decade before any researcher at Micro$oft even knew what
a DNS entry was. What was that URL again where I can download Windoze
95..? Right, absolutely staggering research those guys are doing over
there.
> >Of course, this isn't meant to reflect upon MicroSoft or anything like
> >that. I'm just saying there *is* a difference. Some companies do *earn* the
> >"$."
>
> Yes, MS must have stolen it.
M$ has not done one iota of useful research, unless, of course, you
consider the research efforts of their Corporate Scavenging department to
find new promising companies to snuff out and assimilate.
> People buy MS products because they want to (some
> Mac-user inserts pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS products are
> forced to do it), [...]
People buy M$ products because they don't know any better, and the people
who should know better have their heads stuck so far up M$'s arse that all
they see is whatever latest 'innovation' the behemoth chooses to excrete.
That is, until it decides it needs an extra billion, craps you out and
swallows you whole.
Have fun up there while it lasts.
Ben
Steven Schulze
Loren Petrich wrote in message ...
>In article <eDNrGhY78GA.326@upnetnews03>,
>Steven Schulze <Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
> ^^^^^^^
>
> Hmmmm....
>
>>Yes, but we all know that if Apple was actually successful (like MS), they
>>definately would give their money away to charity, slow down their R&D to
>>give other companies a chance to catch up again, not invest into
technology
>>to speed up the internet for everyone, not do anything to spread their
>>software to everyone (to give the competition a chance, not advertise
>>anything so that the competition can have a chance, and, boy, they
>>definately won't want to make their investers any more money, now would
>>they?
>
>>Dream on, Macboy...
>
> Mr. Schulze practically concedes just about every criticism made
>of M$.
Please explain to me which of the above is questionable... I fail to see how
normal business practices suddenly become unacceptable when a successful
company does it. What should MS do - GIVE money to it's competition? Oh
yea, MS already does that ($150 survival tip to Apple). You are just sour
because YOUR beloved Apple is failing pathetically.
> And just because Apple might possibly do at least some of what M$
>would do if it could does not make any of that misbehavior justified.
Please explain the misbehaviour. Is it illegal for AOL to spread their
floppies everywhere? No. They can send you five copies in the mail each
day if they want to (seems like they do). It surely has benefitted them, no
matter how tired I am of seeing those disks. What erlse is MS doing wrong?
Making products most people seem to want to use (another
Mac-user inserts the same pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS
products are forced to do it)? Last time I checked, that wasn't illegal.
>>Please wake up. MS is SUCCESSFUL, and Apple is NOT. THAT is why MS has
>>money, and Apple doesn't. People buy MS products because they want to
(some
>>Mac-user inserts pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS products
are
>>forced to do it),
>
> I wish I could convince the employers of many M$ groupies to
>switch to (say) Linux or Java or the MacOS; let's see how they feel about
>feeling forced to use something other than M$.
Note my previous prediction of this lame excuse. Java? Switching to Java
will put you back two years on the performance curve. There's serious
performance issues when it comes to Java. Gone are apps that can take
advantage of certain platform-specific performance features, gone are
tightly performance-tuned apps, and how about that little problem with using
hardware-specific resources. Do you know that if you print from a Java app
that you only get screen-resolution output? Forget about 1200, 600 or even
300 dpi output (This might be fixed at some point, but it just shows how
serious some of the issues are). Even Sun admitted to faking their Java
performance tests. This definately says something about how severe this
issue is.
No, seriously - I'd like to witness the Jave equivelant to MS Word - what a
joke! Or Photoshop! You'll wait 10 minutes just to download it from the
server, before you can even start running it. And I use the term "run" very
loosely.
MacOS? Outdated. Too unstable. Not enough software variety. Plus you
need some balls to invest a lot of money into a circus-act like Apple
Management.
Linux? Maybe. But there's other issues.
If something that OVERALL is a better choice, I'm sure people will switch,
but to date, there isn't.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Gregory Loren Hansen
>In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>,
>John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>>result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>>making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life.
Well, I don't. But they're referring to Windows, not Windows users.
> You don't
>>see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh".
Muckintosh, Crapintosh, Macintrash, Crapple, Crapsody... there's no
shortage.
> We just roll
>>our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>>community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
If you really want to talk about "we" in the collective sense, "you" tend
to come over to comp.sys.mac.advocacy, not even cross-posting from another
newsgroup but specifically in csma, and cause trouble. I really don't
know if Mac users do the same, I hope not.
--
2*3*3*37 : The Prime Factorization of The Beast
John Millington
John Black (nospam@nospam) wrote:
: All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
: Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
: Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
: from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
: recgonition from every major PC publication.
An excellent question. Suppose you were in charge of running a publication
that you had put years of effort into. It's your baby. It's part of your
ego. And on top of that, it 's making you good money. It's profitable.
You *care* about whether it lives or dies.
And Microsoft is a major advertiser. You depend on their revenue.
What if Microsoft's flagship product were disappointing? Would you be willing
to say so, knowing that Microsoft could completely devastate your business
by withholding advertising revenue? It would depend on your integrity and
your willingness to do the right thing, even though it could hurt you.
When individual people make such decisions, it becomes a function of their
personality and integrity. Not so for a large business with many stockholders
and a board of directors. It _must_ act purely in self-interest without
regard for right and wrong. It cannot afford integrity. So it lies.
Take a look at what PC Magazine did in 1995. They gave Windows 95 their
award for "technical merit". Note: they didn't just recommend Windows 95 for
practical reasons, or say that you can't go wrong buying Microsoft. They
didn't give it some kind of "Marketing Achievement" award or "Success in
Getting 3rd Party Support" award. They awarded it TECHNICAL MERIT. And that
is utterly and completely ridiculous. It is objectively false. Windows 95
is a technical disgrace. Compare it to the other OSes available at the
time (on technical grounds only!), and Windows 95 wouldn't even make the
first cut.
PC Magazine deliberately tried to mislead its readers. Now take a look at
any issue of PC Magazine and see _who_ has how many pages of advertising
therein. Are you still willing to pay attention to the awards given by
the professional media?
Yog-Sothoth Neblod Zin,
John Millington
Phil Ptkwt Kristin
In article <34664dd9...@news.mindspring.com>,
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
>Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
>Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
>from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
>awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
>Editor's Choice.
Who do you think buys a big chunk of advertising in the publications you
refer to? You know what they say about money talking.
Micro$oft may make technically inferior products, but there is one area
where they can't be called inferior - Marketing. M$ is able to convince
companies to leave perfectly good (and superior) UNIX systems and replace
them with inferior WinNT while at the same time making them think that
they now have something that is 'better' than what they had.
> I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>their power, ease of use, and versatility.
But the question is have you ever used anything but M$ apps/OS's? If all
you've ever eaten are peanut-butter&jelly sandwiches and someone comes
along and tells you that you should try steak and lobster perhaps you
would reply that "I've always eaten peanut butter & jelly sandwiches and I
am impressed with their taste, why should I try steak & lobster?".
> So all you anti-Microsoft
>dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
No, I think that actually we lack the lemming complex (herd mentality) and
that we are free and independent thinkers that are not afraid to ask if
there is anything else out there that is better.
pt
Oregon: The state where it is legal to kill yourself, but illegal
to pump your own gas.
George
>>>So they get to endlessly turn on- and off their inits, finding why this
>one
>>>doesn't work with that one, or why after you installed something new does
>>>this one crash the trash, etc.
>>>
>>>not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to
>edit
>>>it anymore, after all this time with W95...
>>
>>
>>you are a moron ...
>
>
>No, not really. I never agreed to that. I said YOU ARE A MORAN BECAUSE YOU
>ARE CLUELESS AS TO WHAT GOES ON IN W95. You still think we are all using
>W3.1.
well ... that means you are a moron acording to the original argument...
I never said anything about win95 ... and fortunately I don't have to give
a crap what's going on with it ... the only OS from M$ that can be called an
OS is NT ... which is another bloated goat ...
>"Forgetting" how to edit a config.sys file and a autoexec.bat file is a sign
>that we don't do these things anymore. Unlike on the Mac where you still
>need to battle with init conflicts.
well I don't use a mac ... and unless it will run PPCLinux ... I never will
I guess .. (although since rapsody should be BSD based it will be kind of kewl
as well ...but I don't like the part about the mach microkernel)
George
>>> Actually, my config.sys and autoexec.bat files are both empty. These are
>>> not required in W95 anymore. Must say I probably won't remeber how to
>edit
>>> it anymore, after all this time with W95...
>>
>do you
>>think your path and prompt and all of the vars are being set? Or are you
>one of those
>>windoze types that think there's no dos in windoze anymore.
>>-ckm
>
>Nope. Empty. Just checked it. Nothing but three REMed out lines. I'm
>aware of the W95/DOS relationship, thanks. That's why W95 is so compatable
>with ancient software. Best of both worlds.
hmm .. well .. nope ... cuz I know quite a lot of things I can do in dosemu
which just won't work in win95 .. since win95 is dos .. you just can't fake
stuff for it ... like fake i/o ports ... rerouting files ...
and win95 dosbox won't run elks ...
Paul Rickard
I dont blindly say all Microsoft products are bad. Some, like older
versions of FrontPage, are nearly usable. The company itself is my main
problem. Doesn't it bother you in the least that once Microsoft buys
that 7% share of MediaOne (which owns 25% of Timewarner) the company
will directy or indirectly have control of this country's 3 largest
cable companies? That's at least 75% of the US cable television network.
And don't give me that "they aren't controlling shares" BS, because most
business insiders will tell you that doesn't make a lot of difference.
When somebody owns 1/4 of your company, you listen to them even if
they're not controlling shares.
--
-Paul Rickard, President of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign.
"Without data, you're just another opinion."
www.abctec.com/~msbc
George Graves
John Black wrote:
> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh".
You don't? What planet do you live on? I've seen Macs called that
and a lot of other things as well.
> We just roll
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> community, and get back to work.
You better. Studies show that you won't get as muchwork done on your PC
today as your Mac counterpart
will.
> I guess because Apple targeted the
> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
Who in their right mind would WANT to spend all day
editing config.sys and autoexec.bat files? No wonder
my above posted productivity statements are so true!
George Graves
Chuck Bermingham
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote in article
<34660fee...@news.mindspring.com>...
> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft [snip]
I myself can understand why people do it.
In the old days, I used to like to program on Intel hardware for a hobby.
This used to be easy to do, because the *free* Basic interpreter that came
with Bill's OS's was reasonably on a par with the OS. Even when MS-DOS
version 5 came out, with its "qbasic" program, there was still at least
*some* potential there.
I can still do this at very low cost with Linux and any number of
languages.
Can't no more with Microsoft stuff (unless, of course, I want to pay for
the OS, then the development tools, then all the Windows documentation that
never seems to come free with anything...
So you see, my friend, the answer is $simple. $some of u$ prefer to do
things for fun, not money.
At least, that's how I view it.
Paul Rickard
De吶to wrote:
>
> Let me try to get this through your heads once & for all....
>
> ^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
> *$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
> ^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
> ^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
> .$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
> zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
> ..z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
> ^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
>
>
> ^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
Sure Xerox invented the GUI (using consumer feedback or something), but
the GUI Xerox showed (and later sold) to Apple was simple, basic, and
looked something like the GUI menus some DOS programs use, like the old
menus in scandisk. Apple took that crude, ugly GUI and within a few
years created the MacOS. It took Microsoft 10 years to take the Mac GUI
and "improve" it into the mess that is Windows 95. Apple did in less
than 4 years what Microsoft hasn't been able to do in nearly 15.
You can
....... .............. ........ ..zee.. ..... .....
^"*$E" "C$"""3$F""""$ ^"$$""$$. z$"" ^"$b. "3$E" ^)$""
*$c .$" 4$F ." $$ 4$F J$" ^$b *$c .$"
^*$c$" 4$F $ $$ .d$" $$ $$. *$c$"
^$$L 4$P***$ $$*$$" $$ J$F *$E
.$*$c 4$F $ $$ 3$L $$ $$" .$*$L
zP" *$c 4$F $ $$ *$c 3$L .$P .$" 3$L
...z$L. J$$c..J$L....d$..$$. ^$$c. "$c. ..$" ..z$L. .$$L..
^""""" """""""""""""""^""""" ^""" ^"""""" ^""""" """"""
my butt..
Chuck Adams
> I comprehend it very well. However, most of the other GUI's
>around have tended to look to Apple than to Xerox's much-less-well-known
>designs.
Big deal. Apple made the modern GUI. They haven't moved on since. How about
a protected memory? Pre-emptive multitasking? An interactive CLI? How about
even putting in some damn TEXT for those error numbers?
Rhapsody might have all that, and when it's actually on the shelves, I'll sing
the praises of Apple. Until they manage to commit hari kari again by going
after clone makers again.
Chuck Adams
>>How about Sun's Solaris for the Intel processor? I heard it's a good
>>OS, and on Intel, it offers a very good alternative to NT, especially
>>for a server.
>
> I agree in principle, but Solaris is rather expensive (Linux
>easily undersells it) -- making it mainly good for big databases and
>other such stuff that Linux does not handle very well.
In an enterprise, that initial investment is chump change compared to the cost
of maintaining it. One regional ISP here (Rocky Mountain Internet) runs on
Solaris for Intel, and they're pretty stable. Their ratio gets pretty bad at
times, but that's testament to stability that people can stay on like that.
There's far more open software for Solaris (open == interoperability), most of
which is not per-user licensed (contrast with NT which nickel-and-dimes you
for every product per user -- they even tried to do that with IIS then backed
off). And just about all GNU software is available for Solaris. I used to
beat on Solaris as part of my job, and I had a very hard time killing it.
Linux, OTOH, could do with decent multithreading before it can be seriously
considered as a large-scale database server.
Stoney Edwards
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
[moronic ranting snipped]
: their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
: dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
Nice troll... fsck off.
--
QUOTE: <PHlaxiOR has no words of wisdom for today>
Stephen S. Edwards II -- p h l a x i o r @ p r i m e n e t . c o m
------------------------------------------------------------------
[JA207030-TRON-RAM-FLYNN] <- leave this line in your e-mail reply
Donovan Rebbechi
> On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:03:37 GMT, nospam@nospam (John Black) wrote:
>
> > Just get a life. You don't
> >our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> >Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> >autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>
I'm not even a Mac user, actually, I don't even like Macs. But I don't
see why Mac users deserve this kind of abuse.
Yes, some-one needs to grow up.
Hint: I'm not talking about the Mac users.
-- Donovan
Daniel Ingling
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------5C842C5E6204
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Zinzan wrote:
>
> >I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
> >their power, ease of use, and versatility.
>
> My objections to MS products (and I do use them, just don't have the $
> to run Macs yet) are that they are SO hard to use. There's so much
> redundancy and feature creep it becomes unwieldy. You can browse the
> Internet in the same interface as your local files... why? There's a
> perfectly good Internet Explorer window for that purpose. There are 67
> different ways to open a Word file... why? Just one, a really
> effective one, would be fine. There are seventeen different ways to
> update the styles in normal.dot... why? When there are so many options
> to do something, I get so swamped that none of them comes out truly
> effective. They may be versatile and powerful, but MS needs to ditch
> their engineer-based interface designers and hire some actualy
> designers.
>
> ~scott
--
Daniel Ingling - Owner
Cutting Edge Graphics
208 New Freedom Road
Southampton, NJ 08088-2802
--------------5C842C5E6204
Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="Microsoft.jpg"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Microsoft.jpg"
<encoded_portion_removed>
sVdirsVdirsVf//Z
--------------5C842C5E6204--
JEDI
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:39:02 GMT, Herman <spa...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> I wish I could convince the employers of many M$ groupies to
>>switch to (say) Linux or Java or the MacOS; let's see how they feel about
>>feeling forced to use something other than M$.
>
>OS, and on Intel, it offers a very good alternative to NT, especially
>for a server.
Solaris Intel has rather meagre software support when compared
to it's big brother (Solaris SPARC) and poor performance when
compared to Linux (or FreeBSD I imagine).
Although, any of the *nixen are preferable to NT.
>
>Signed, a UNIX and Windows user.
Matthew Gaunt
Brian S. wrote:
> > Nigel
> That must be why I reboot my Win NT Workstation at least twice daily
Our NT servers haven't been booted for months. I can't remember the
last time I powered off my workstation. And it gets HAMMERED...
Matthew Gaunt
UDMS wrote:
>
> > If all you had NT 4.0 doing was file/print serving it would be stable as a
> > rock, too.
>
> bullshit. i have to work on nt workstation at work and it crashes when i
> am not even doing anything.
Well, that "nothing" that you are doing, you must be doing it extremely
badly.
Our company hammers NT - our machines don't get chance to do "nothing".
And, not only is it rock solid, it's also possible for anyone to
configure it - unlike the abominable and unnecessary humility of trying
to prize obscure secrets out of a smug, resident Unix guru.
Keith M. Lucas
In article <joe.ragosta-09...@elk75.dol.net>,
Joe Ragosta <joe.r...@dol.net> wrote:
>In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
>Black) wrote:
>
>> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>
>apologize for them.
Whereas those who develop on Macs swear at them ALL the time and are
happy referring to the naff little boxes with their poxy apology of an
operating system as "beige toasters".
Of course, I have in my time described NT in terms I'm not going to
repeat, taken a half hour to hate 95 so hard I could spit and punched
Linux PCs and let's see, CPM is a bag of wank, GEM never did work
properly, the Amiga user interface is shite. The battery in my NC100
keeps resetting the thing, my CPC screen flickers too much, Solaris is
far, far, far too slow. The last mobile phone I had had bugs in the OS
and would crash from time to time...
Actually, the reason I hate Windows so hard is the sheer number of
users that whine at me about it. People I meet at classes, people I'm
related to, people on the bus who happen to overhear me talking and
work out I'm a software engineer. And then next thing they'll ask is
always along the lines of "Do you know why my PC won't run Word
anymore ?", "Why does it crash all the time ?", "Why does it keep
losing all my writing ?"
Never, never does anyone have anything but complaints. Whine, whine,
whine they go. Hate that. Really do.
So rather than be proud of being a software engineer, I have to go out
of my way not to tell people what I do for a living. All because
Windows is crap and people want to complain at someone about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sillywizATexcessionDOTdemonDOTcoDOTuk"It's not a personality..it's a bulldozer"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Great boiling hell, Jones, what happened ?" "Er.. I think my pants exploded."
---------------------------------------------------------- Captain Star -------
Jerry Sams
George wrote in message ...
>On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:00:00 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>All you anti-Microsoft whiners and losers keep complaining that
>>Microsoft shoves "sub-standard" products down the throats of everyone.
>>Well, if they're so substandard, how come many Microsoft products,
>>from Windows, to Office, to Internet Explorer 4 collects awards and
>>recgonition from every major PC publication. Why, just look at the
>>awards and accolades given to IE4. Microsoft Office was PC Magazine's
>>Editor's Choice. I use Microsoft products, and I am impressed with
>>their power, ease of use, and versatility. So all you anti-Microsoft
>>dorks must have some kind of inferiority complex.
>
>well simple ... M$ kind of owns Ziff ... Ziff ownes PC Mag ... plus M$ is
>the biggest advertizer in PC Mag ...
>
>it's the same reason why Linux Jurnal will never give an award to M$ (well
>besides the reason that M$ products can't stand up to linux or unix
products
>in general)
>
>nobody shits in their own nest ... (well except birds, but that's beside
the
>point)
Actually, that right on point.
>>jumps up and down like a jay and sings (to the tune of Cotton Eye Joe):
Where did it come, where did it go
everybody is goin' for the Java bird dough!
It's late and . . .
Jerry
John Black
See, the common response by an Anti-Microsofter. Can't attack the
argument, can't give any reason why Microsoft products and the company
are as bad as they say they are, so they attack the person instead.
What a bunch of losers. I'm not saying Microsoft products are
perfect, but they aren't as bad as you idiots say they are.
> And as for you using and liking the products, well, that just goes into
>my "stupid is as stupid does" file.
John Black
Koen Deforche
You are right, as usual. It really beats me too that all these guys
are saying that linux is better than the rest. It is incredible that
people are making huge efforts, for free, to have their linux
running (i am talking here about the guys that make and maintain
linux, write apps for it). It's even nuts that internet runs on
unix machines, while you are impressed with the power of Ms Word.
Also it is very odd that from time to time a writer for the magazine
Byte is very confused and writes that linux is good.
And man, you cant enter a decent bookstore without passing to a
whole shell of books on Linux, GNU utilities and the lot. Like
some sensible man would buy that.
But, you are right.
However, I am certain that when I would take my 12" black/white
TV to a tribe in south africa, which, by accident, has never seen
a tv before, they would put it on a totem and worship it, and
if you would come along the same tribe, laughing at them with
their black/white tv and say that where you are from they have
bioscopes with 3D projection, superrealistic, they would argue
that is not possible because they haven't put your bioscope with 3D
projection on a totem, and do not worship it.
cu, koen.
Loren Petrich
In article <eDNrGhY78GA.326@upnetnews03>,
Steven Schulze <Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
^^^^^^^
Hmmmm....
>Yes, but we all know that if Apple was actually successful (like MS), they
>definately would give their money away to charity, slow down their R&D to
>give other companies a chance to catch up again, not invest into technology
>to speed up the internet for everyone, not do anything to spread their
>software to everyone (to give the competition a chance, not advertise
>anything so that the competition can have a chance, and, boy, they
>definately won't want to make their investers any more money, now would
>they?
>Dream on, Macboy...
Mr. Schulze practically concedes just about every criticism made
of M$.
And just because Apple might possibly do at least some of what M$
would do if it could does not make any of that misbehavior justified.
>Please wake up. MS is SUCCESSFUL, and Apple is NOT. THAT is why MS has
>money, and Apple doesn't. People buy MS products because they want to (some
>Mac-user inserts pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS products are
>forced to do it),
I wish I could convince the employers of many M$ groupies to
switch to (say) Linux or Java or the MacOS; let's see how they feel about
feeling forced to use something other than M$.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
Christopher Mahmood
Loren Petrich
In article <6469l8$gs2$2...@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
Miguel Cruz <migue...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>I guess because Apple targeted the Mac towards morons who don't know how to
>>edit config.sys and autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>This from the same person who just covered the inside of my screen with
>spittle yelling about how difficult linux is to use? What is your point
>exactly?
Mr. Black might claim that Windoze goes between the extremes of
too much GUI (the MacOS) and too little GUI (Linux).
However, M$ has been moving its user interfaces more and more in a
Mac-like direction, so all the Mac-hating M$ groupies might want to pause
to think about why their heroes are trying to imitate the MacOS.
Donald Brown
In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam says...
> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>
recently posted in comp.sys.mac.advocacy, also check out the posts by "HO
YOU KONG".
(Sorry for the reposting, but it's useful to have a real example for
those "Mac users call names" posters.)
---------------------
Subject: Gates Of Hell
From: kicki...@home.com (With My Feet Up)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-
windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-
windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,
alt.netscape.sucks
It won't be long now until MS will have this fucked up computer
industry in good shape. Every other OS is failing badly because they
just don't have the talent and leadership that Bill Gates brings to
MS. Why is it that so many people put down MS? Could it be they are
jealous of the success of a good design?
Lets face the facts boys, MS brings down the price of using a computer
in business and home. The bottom line is what counts in business and
the business that use MS products are kicking ass on the others.
Writing code with the MS products is much easer and faster and you can
bring your products to the customers faster then with any other OS.
Anyone who is in the business world knows this to be true, only the
old farts using outdated OS and to lazy to learn the new and better
way of MS are complaining and belly aching like the bunch of losers
they are.
Cry all you want but the bottom line is, use and learn MS products or
be left behind with all the other losers in the Gates Of Hell.
Thank God Bill came and saved the world of computers from the fools.
-------------------
Nigel Tzeng
In article <slrn66dgho...@julia.5z.com>,
George <ji...@julia.5z.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:00:00 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
[snip]
>get a clues ... monopolies never did and never will produce quality products
Really. And telephone service was of such low quality until AT&T was
broken up. And power companies have high failure rates...
I will grant you cable companies are an example of poor monopolies :).
As a matter of fact MS has better quality than most other software
manufacturers in the industry (95% vs 85% defect removal rates).
Their software development techniques are some of the best in the
industry and they have one of the highest tester to developer ratios
in the business.
Yes, they have bugs in their code but the programs are huge...NT is
the same size as MVS or Unix. And if you think unix is bug free you
haven't installed and used any of the common unices.
There were problems with HPUX 10.0 (and for that matter 10.20) and
Solaris 2.0-2.2 (Solaris 2.3 was really the first stable release of
Solaris).
Linux isn't bug free either but hey...it's free. Then again so is
Windows.
>George
Nigel
Nigel Tzeng
In article <petrichE...@netcom.com>,
Loren Petrich <pet...@netcom.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Mr. Black might claim that Windoze goes between the extremes of
>too much GUI (the MacOS) and too little GUI (Linux).
>
> However, M$ has been moving its user interfaces more and more in a
>Mac-like direction, so all the Mac-hating M$ groupies might want to pause
>to think about why their heroes are trying to imitate the MacOS.
Because they are bright? The Mac GUI is pretty damn good...of course
it seems like a lot of the names that made the Mac GUI great are
somewhere else now. As an example Tog is at Sun now...has been for a
while.
To be accurate MS isn't trying to imitate the MacOS but the Mac GUI.
I doubt anyone is trying to imitate the core MacOS...
>Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
Nigel
Steven Schulze
Loren Petrich wrote in message ...
>In article <#AiWDRY78GA.274@upnetnews03>,
>Steven Schulze <Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
>
>>Yep, there's some serious sour grapes in this ng. What else if your
beloved
>>little loser OS is being tramped over by the OS Of Choice. That and some
>>insecurity complexes...
>
> I've used OSes that put M$ ones to shame, like the MacOS, the
>BeOS, Unix, ...
Yea? Well than go play with them. Buy them. Run them. I don't care.
Doesn't look like many others care either.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Jeffery Chow
: When you use your mouse, you are using a device invented by
: XEROX (thanks for the bandwidth-wasting art)
Actually, didn't Engelbart invent the mouse while he was
working at NASA?
Jeff
--
|======================================================|
| Jeffery Chow 4th year Computer Science, UBC |
|------------------------------------------------------|
| http://www.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca/spider/j8g1/fdoor.html |
| "Here lives a competent, trustworthy salesman of |
| propane and propane accessories." -- H. Hill |
| This message brought to you by Bill Gates, inventor |
| of DOS, the World Wide Web, and the modern GUI. |
|======================================================|
Joe Ragosta
In article <OHK$gIf78GA.284@upnetnews03>, "Steven Schulze"
<Captain_SOS@*NOSPAM*msn.com> wrote:
> Please explain to me which of the above is questionable... I fail to see how
> normal business practices suddenly become unacceptable when a successful
> company does it. What should MS do - GIVE money to it's competition? Oh
The practices sometimes _do_ become illegal when a large company does it.
It's called antitrust law.
More importantly, MS isn't being charged with being successful. They're
being charged with violating the consent decree they signed. I realize
that in MS-land, trivial things like signed contracts don't count, but for
the rest of the world they do.
> yea, MS already does that ($150 survival tip to Apple). You are just sour
> because YOUR beloved Apple is failing pathetically.
Hmmm. MS is giving money away because they want the rights to Apple's
patents or because they felt that Apple stock was a good buy. Which one is
it?
>
> Please explain the misbehaviour. Is it illegal for AOL to spread their
> floppies everywhere? No. They can send you five copies in the mail each
Nope. But if they signed a consent decree saying they wouldn't spread
their floppies around if the DOJ didn't prosecute, and then did it anyway,
it _would_ be illegal.
> day if they want to (seems like they do). It surely has benefitted them, no
> matter how tired I am of seeing those disks. What erlse is MS doing wrong?
Why not read the DOJ complaint. It would save everyone a lot of time.
> Making products most people seem to want to use (another
> Mac-user inserts the same pathetic excuse here that all people buying MS
> products are forced to do it)? Last time I checked, that wasn't illegal.
Nope. And (not coincidentally), MS isn't being charged with that. They're
only being charged with the things that are illegal.
> If something that OVERALL is a better choice, I'm sure people will switch,
> but to date, there isn't.
Back to the old "Windows must be better because more people use it" argument.
It's amazing how common this argument is even though the Wintel fans
insist they don't use it.
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
See the Complete Macintosh Advocacy Page
http://www.dol.net/~Ragosta/complmac.htm
Jack Walker
On Sun, 09 Nov 1997 19:34:07 GMT, nospam@nospam (John Black) wrote:
I think the real reason is to commorate NT's VMS heretage. ;^)
>I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
>Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
>Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
>are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
Reply to jawalker(AT)beckman(dot)com
Rauli Ruohonen
[Hmm. This is off-topic here (comp.os.linux.development.apps). Oh well..]
First reply to your subject line:
Re: Why do people use the dollar sign in Microsoft's name?
Dunno. Why do people write like this...................... Lotsa
dots...................................................... cool............
Maybe they haven't used the keyboard enough to find s instead of $, and
also push "." too long and can't find the backspace key.
On Sun, 09 Nov 1997 19:34:07 GMT, John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
And why do people use forged e-mail addresses? Can't you build a decent
procmail spam filter?
>I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
>wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit?
Wackos? Whee.
>So Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
>making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
>Microsoft only cares about money?
I don't recall that anyone has said this. There are reasons to dislike
Microsoft, and people like to have a little fun with names. Some people like
to writ3 l1k3 th15, r3al 371+3 d00dz! If it's readable, it doesn't matter.
>Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers!
Now you're being unnecessarily rude, really funny as you don't seem to grasp
the real reason behind writing Microsoft as Micro$oft.
>Or are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
I wonder why so many people always try to explain it this way :/
Maybe some people are incapable to understand the feeling of pure disgust?
--
To seek out knowledge of C, to explore strange Unix commands,
and to boldly code where no one has man page 4.
Frank C. Earl
On Sat, 08 Nov 1997 23:48:42 GMT, nospam@nospam (John Black) wrote:
>While I respect your reasons for disliking Microsoft, you are making
>the anti Microsoft camp look bad. When I see this, the image I get of
>anti-Microsofters is that they are a juvenile bunch who can't attack
>the opposing argument, so they attack the person instead with
>schoolyard insults questioning the sexual preference, and personal
>worth of anyone who dares defend Microsoft. You are lowering yourself
>way below his level.
And what you missed in all of this was that the original poster (not
the person you responded to) posted a (f)lametroll. A (f)lametroll is
not an opposing view per se. It's inflamatory content has little in
the way of FACTUAL content or decent opinions- it's crafted for one
thing and one thing only- to pull flame posts out of the reading
audience in question. To this end, that is what is happening here-
me, I prefer to killfile twits that post (f)lametrolls... But some
like responding to them with flamage.
--
Frank C. Earl
Earl Consulting Services
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to USC 47, there is a $500 per incident charge for each and
every piece of Unsolicited Commercial Email (UCE) sent to this or any
of my other addresses. Sending UCE's to any of my addresses implys
general acceptance of these terms. (My Return addresses are _deliberately_
broken to interfere with mailing list generators- remove "-no-spam-" every
place in the address to reply.)
Bob Taylor
In article <34664e86...@news.mindspring.com>,
nospam@nospam (John Black) writes:
> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 03:25:04 GMT you wrote:
> See, the common response by an Anti-Microsofter. Can't attack the
> argument, can't give any reason why Microsoft products and the company
> are as bad as they say they are, so they attack the person instead.
> What a bunch of losers. I'm not saying Microsoft products are
> perfect, but they aren't as bad as you idiots say they are.
Hmm. Look who's calling the kettle black!
Bob
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Taylor Email: brta...@qtpi.lakewood.ca.us |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
| A witty statement goes here! (when I get to it!) |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
George
>Of course, what does escape you is that MS GOT TO BE SUCCESSFUL by selling
>the best products, or didn't they?
hmmm ... what??? ... I'm kind of missing a proof ...
for an os to be considered good .. it has to be stable .... now show me
a wintelbox that stayed up 700 routing packets ... hmmm ...
hmmm ... second ... one bad thing aboout your argument is the universal
statement ... you should take a logic class ...
btw ... M$ killed off a competitor with a dos gui-shell 1 year before
windoze 1.0 ...
dos was on machines just because IBM sighned a deal ... then M$ could sell
dos for one reason only ... it already was on all kinds of machines ... not
because it's better ...
same with win95 ... the resellers get cheap deals when they pre-install
so wwhy shouldn't they .. then since most machines run windblows then ...
it's not because it's the better operationg system ... but because Bill
is good at marketing ...
and he really is ... I think Bill is the ideal bussinessman ... but that
has nothing to do with the fact that win95 is pure and simple crap ...
I have yet to see a monopoly which will produce a quality product and
continue improving on it ...
George
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Lebl <ji...@5z.com> http://www.5z.com/jirka/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING:
Reading this message can affect the dimensionality of your
mind, change the curvature of your spine, cause the growth of hair on
your palms, and make a difference in the outcome of your favorite war.
Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:00:19 GMT, De§oto <De§oto@Šetroit_§teel.com> wrote:
:On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 04:34:46 GMT, pet...@netcom.com (Loren Petrich)
:wrote:
:
:>
:> I've used OSes that put M$ to shame.
:>
:> Consider the MacOS's user interface -- and how widely it has
:been
:>imitated. Even by M$.
:-snip-
:
:Let me try to get this through your heads once & for all....
:
:Both apple and M$ GUI's are derivatives of...
:<very big XeroX>
Except that the Macintosh GUI was a significant superior refinement of
the Xerox GUI. There were a number of important advances made by the
Apple engineers, especially in the handling of arbitrary regions. One
of the Apple engineers thought that he remembered Xerox doing something
cool (overlapping regions) and 're'invented an elegant solution, when it
turned out that the Xerox people had not done it at all.
The Lisa and Mac GUIs were significantly better than the Xerox ones. Xerox
people have said so.
The Windows GUI were not.
:
:When you look at your Mac GUI you are looking at a copy
:of the interface made by
: <Xerox>
No. The Mac GUI is definitely NOT a clone of the Xerox smalltalk machines.
The Windows GUI was much more like the Mac GUI than the Mac was like Xerox,
and so are the internal structures and procedures in Windows like those
of MacOS. MS developed Windows after long and intimate experience with
the look and feel and internals of the MacOS, and it didn't really turn out
better.
The Mac was developed after a few people *saw* a *demo*. I'm not sure if
Apple ever actually *owned* a real Xerox Alto. They missed object-oriented
programming. Steve Jobs recognized his mistake on that one quickly and
founded NeXT.
:When you use your mouse, you are using a device invented by
: <xerox>
No, that was Engelbart.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* According to California Assembly Bill 3320, it is now a criminal offense
* to solicit any goods or services by email to a CA resident without
* providing the business's legal name and complete street address.
*
Quantum Leaper
George Graves wrote in message <34671203...@slip.net>...
>John Black wrote:
>
>> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>>
>> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh".
>
>You don't? What planet do you live on? I've seen Macs called that
>and a lot of other things as well.
>
Most of the time, I see Mac users doing the name calling and Windows
(95/NT) users not calling Mac users names. There are exceptions to the
rule.
I guess it come down to which group of users are Adults and which act like
school children, I will let you make up your mind. If you want I will give
examples.... (Alittle hint, the school children, use a computer from a
company, which take it name from what good school children give to their
teacher or what keeps the doctor away)
>> We just roll
>> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>> community, and get back to work.
>
>You better. Studies show that you won't get as muchwork done on your PC
>today as your Mac counterpart
>will.
>
>
>> I guess because Apple targeted the
>> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
>
>Who in their right mind would WANT to spend all day
>editing config.sys and autoexec.bat files? No wonder
>my above posted productivity statements are so true!
>
Amazing, last time I edited my Autoexec.bat was to remove a PATHed
directory, which took 10 seconds at most. I know of users who have NEVER
needed to edit either file and they computers works just great. In fact
those files are NOT even need if you run ONLY win32 programs.
Demonspawn Armageddon
John Black, in a state of mental inferiority, wrote:
> I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
> result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
> making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
> see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
> our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
> community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
> Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
> autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
If you think all that is out there is Winblows or Mac O/S (Which I do
find superior in it's core, but not in supported software. I just hate
the hardware on which it runs.) then you are sadly mistaken. There's
somthing out there called UNIX. You might want to look into it or my
perfered version of it called Linux. But I guess Microsoft tarteted the
idiots out there that don't know how to edit a .profile or a cron.daily
file ;)
-- DSA
Klaus Schilling
nospam@nospam (John Black) writes:
>
> I mean, so you're implying that Micro$oft, as you anti-Microsoft
> wackos call it, is the only company that wants to make a profit? So
> Sun, Silicon Graphics, Apple, Corel, Netscape, etc. don't care about
> making a profit, they just want to better everyone's lives, while evil
> Microsoft only cares about money? Hello, GET A CLUE, you losers! Or
> are you just jealous of Bill Gates?
I also write Net$crap, $un, $GI etc. in addition to Micro$loth.
It's capitali$m that sux altogether.
Klaus Schilling
Jeremy Nelson
Nigel Tzeng <ni...@access5.digex.net> wrote:
>Linux isn't bug free either but hey...it's free. Then again so is
>Windows.
What is it youre smoking, and where can i get some?
(Unless youre talking about not being bug free, as opposed to being free.)
-jfn
M D Malthouse
} I guess because Apple targeted the
} Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
} autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
Or maybe Apple targeted the Macintosh at people who had better things to do
with thier lives than edit config.sys and autoexec.bat files.
Or post Mac vs Windows flame bait to comp.os.linux.advocacy and
comp.os.linux.development.apps for that matter.
Matthew
--
Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto.
mailto:matthew....@guardian.co.uk [work]
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/6630/
The opinions expressed are not those of the Guardian Media Group
Pedro B. Morales
>you were doing so well... Office is pretty good, so is IE... but Win95
>is a piece of crap. From a technical standpoint, it's a mile behind
>anything else... Most of the people I know who use NT as a desktop OS
>review it favourably , but MS don't have a scalable server OS yet...
Don't insult Windows 95! That's Microsoft's masterpiece. It's a good OS, at
least for those of us who like pretty icons and the Start Menu.
I am aware that people recognize NT Workstation as a better desktop OS, but
for home use, 95 is the champion.
Pedro B. Morales
Campea...@worldnet.att.net
Pedro B. Morales
>Everyone
>at work was laughing the other day when our secretary got the following
>message in win95:
>
> "Error loading explorer.exe. You must reinstall windows."
I got this error when I got tired of IE4 windows desktop update and decided
to remove it. I removed it, but then I decided to remove the entire IE4 web
suite. So I removed everything, and rebooted. Nice error, shut down my
system, leave me dead on the floor. Only way out was: format C:\ reinstall
everything. NOT a pretty sight!
Sincerely,
Pedro
Campea...@worldnet.att.net
Pedro B. Morales
Jeremy Nelson wrote in message <6488d5$6k9$1...@news.inc.net>...
>Nigel Tzeng <ni...@access5.digex.net> wrote:
>>Linux isn't bug free either but hey...it's free. Then again so is
>>Windows.
>
>What is it youre smoking, and where can i get some?
HAHAHAHA!!!
Jason V. Robertson~
In article <3467A4...@ix.netcom.com>,
Brian S. <sutt...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Nigel Tzeng wrote:
>....
>> As a matter of fact MS has better quality than most other software
>> manufacturers in the industry (95% vs 85% defect removal rates).
>> Their software development techniques are some of the best in the
>> industry and they have one of the highest tester to developer ratios
>> in the business.
>>
>> Yes, they have bugs in their code but the programs are huge...NT is
>> the same size as MVS or Unix. And if you think unix is bug free you
>> haven't installed and used any of the common unices.
>>
>> There were problems with HPUX 10.0 (and for that matter 10.20) and
>> Solaris 2.0-2.2 (Solaris 2.3 was really the first stable release of
>> Solaris).
>>
>> Windows.
>>
>>
>> Nigel
>That must be why I reboot my Win NT Workstation at least twice daily and
>why MS Access bombs when I accidently close the supporting word document
>when accessing a link, and yada, yada, yada... and why I have 14 Alpha
>servers on Dec OS which are used for software development that were last
>rebooted 6-8 weeks ago, and Solaris boxes that only dump once every few
>months, and a linux box which has been running faithfully for almost a
>year straight with no interruption as a file/print server.
>
>Where did you get this 95% defect removal rate, maybe MS doesn't
>consider a defect in the same light that I do... Makes you wonder.
>B.
A rational man expects differences in the stability of a server OS and a
desktop OS.
If all you had NT 4.0 doing was file/print serving it would be stable as a
rock, too.
--
|Jason V. Robertson <jvro...@sedona.intel.com> |
|Not speaking for Intel. |
Miguel Cruz
Zinzan <sb...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>There are 67 different ways to open a Word file... why? Just one, a really
>effective one, would be fine.
Reminds me... we spent 15 minutes the other day trying to figure out how to
open a .html file as text in Word and see the html source. It kept insisting
on trying to render it.
Is this possible? Was about to go back to telnet when we discovered
WordPad will do the trick. But I'd like to hear how to do it in Word.
miguel
Joshua T. McKee
On Mon, 10 Nov 1997 00:03:37 GMT, nospam@nospam (John Black) wrote:
>I mean, you call Windows users, "Win Blows" and "Win doze". You
>result to schoolyard insults to defend your failing platform, thus
>making Mac users look bad in the process. Just get a life. You don't
>see us "Winblows" users referring to the "Muckintosh". We just roll
>our eyes at all this juvenile name-calling on the part of the Mac
>community, and get back to work. I guess because Apple targeted the
>Mac towards morons who don't know how to edit config.sys and
>autoexec.bat files that the Mac community is like this.
And one can say you are guilty as well...just look at the title.
Josh
Sung Ho Kim
Ben Hekster <heks...@odyssey.co.il> wrote in article:
>
> People buy M$ products because they don't know any better,
Oh, yeah, the typical excuse...every person that I know (many of them who
are in computer science) prefer Windows to that of MacOS. Why is that?
You are telling me that you somehow know something better because you
didn't buy an Microsoft product? C'mon wake up from you childish
insecurity.
and the people
> who should know better have their heads stuck so far up M$'s arse that
all
People who are free to choose what they want have chosen Windows in larger
proportion to MacOS--that's just a fact, and LIVE WITH IT, FOR PETE'S SAKE.
I have used computers for quite a while, and I have always been aware of
MacOS (many of my friends have MacOS) and I decided to go Windows because
it offers advantages MacOS simply can't offer. I'm not buying Microsoft
products because I like Microsoft--hell I don't like any company in
general, but I think that more people buy Apple products because they "have
their heads stuck up Apple's arse" than other computer users. Don't lash
out your insecurities on other people--it's typical of some macusers, some
macintosh-dedicated magazines, and the mac-populace that is bitter because
they can't accept the fact that their OS of choice has deficiencies other
people aren't willing to look over.
> they see is whatever latest 'innovation' the behemoth chooses to excrete.
> That is, until it decides it needs an extra billion, craps you out and
Hmm... sure sounds a lot like inferiority complex to me...
>
> Ben
>
Bob Faulkner
Here Here!!!
I've used MicroVirus products for years and have become accustomed to
having to reboot at least 1 time per session, usually more, due to crashes
and the system flaking out.. To date I have NEVER locked up linux... When
I want to give my reset button a break I boot into linux...
This machine will boot directly to MS-DOS 6.2 / Windows 3.11 / MS-DOS 7.0 /
Windows 95 / Windows NT 4.0 WS / and Linux.... 5 of those lock up/flake
out REGULARLY... Guess which one doesn't...
C ya...
Bob
----
Visit my web site!!!!
http://www.randomc.com/~rdf
Jason V. Robertson~
In article <6492sj$nkf$6...@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
Miguel Cruz <migue...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Jason V. Robertson~ <jvro...@chnews.intel.com> wrote:
>>A rational man expects differences in the stability of a server OS and a
>>desktop OS.
>
>posited that one? Oh, wait, it was Hume.
Sorry, sarcasm is over my head.
>You are manufacturing a fictional concept of rationality in order to satisfy
>the requirements of your argument.
Sorry, big words are over my head.
>Why should a rational person expect a desktop OS to be buggy? Help me out
>with the theory here. What characteristic of a desktop OS inherently causes
>unreliability? Is it the GUI? Nope, there are plenty of rock-solid GUI
>environments. Is it the placement on the desk? Nope, I don't think so, my
>computer has been both on and beneath my desk with no effect on reliability.
>The only possible connection I see is that OSes from companies that
>emphasize marketing over good product design, whether they're on the desktop
>or in the server closet, tend to be less stable. But that wasn't your point,
>was it?
A rational person would expect a machine that handles more chores to be more
likely to crash than another machine that does less _given the same OS_.
With different OS's you'd have to put them under similar stress to have any
basis for comparison. You claim to have done so below...
As for emphasizing marketing over technology I have one simple word. Duh.
Microsoft is a business, not a university. Depending on the target market for
a given product the technology can be less important than the ease of use and
marketing image. With NT, they're targeting the middle end so they need to come
up with good software. They have, and they are continuing to improve it. If
some people choose to put their heads in the sand then so be it.
>>If all you had NT 4.0 doing was file/print serving it would be stable as a
>>rock, too.
>
>(A) I doubt it. (B) I do word processing and spreadsheet and web surfing and
>graphic design on my AMD K5-75 Linux box while everyone else in my house
>uses it as an internet gateway and HTTP proxy for their computers and guess
>what? It hasn't crashed since I turned it on in September.
Hey, man, just because you're incable of running a stable NT machine doesn't
mean everyone else is. You just have to pick the right software and administer
it properly.
If you put a Linux machine in front of a cluess twit I'm sure he could have it
crashing twice a week, too.
All that said, I'd still take Linux anyway. So go ahead and convince me to
keep my opinion as it is.
Joe Ragosta
In article
<01bcee6c$130e1560$4166...@bigred.cit.cornell.edu.cornell.edu>, "Sung Ho
Kim" <sk...@cornell.edu> wrote:
> Ben Hekster <heks...@odyssey.co.il> wrote in article:
> >
> > People buy M$ products because they don't know any better,
>
> Oh, yeah, the typical excuse...every person that I know (many of them who
> are in computer science) prefer Windows to that of MacOS. Why is that?
> You are telling me that you somehow know something better because you
> didn't buy an Microsoft product? C'mon wake up from you childish
> insecurity.
Actually, the statement was probably made because so many of these people
who "prefer Windows" have never even tried a Mac. Our MIS group claims
that they've done a "thorough evaluation" and have decided that our
company needs to switch to all Windows. If you ask them, though, every
single person in the group admits that they've never used a Mac.
So much for informed choice.
>
> People who are free to choose what they want have chosen Windows in larger
> proportion to MacOS--that's just a fact, and LIVE WITH IT, FOR PETE'S SAKE.
First, a lot of people I know are using Windows, but _not_ because they
prefer it. I would guess that 90% of our users who have used both prefer
the Mac. The Evans study found the same thing.
Second, so what if more people want Windows? Why should that be used as an
argument to eliminate the choice that Mac users make?
Raymond N Shwake
pet...@netcom.com (Loren Petrich) writes:
>In article <3466abd...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Herman <spa...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> I wish I could convince the employers of many M$ groupies to
>>>switch to (say) Linux or Java or the MacOS; let's see how they feel about
>>>feeling forced to use something other than M$.
>>How about Sun's Solaris for the Intel processor? I heard it's a good
>>OS, and on Intel, it offers a very good alternative to NT, especially
>>for a server.
> I agree in principle, but Solaris is rather expensive (Linux
>easily undersells it) -- making it mainly good for big databases and
>other such stuff that Linux does not handle very well.
Those supporting Solaris servers but who can't afford Sparc
stations might like to run a comparable environment on their own desktop.
In our case, we're just bringing up our first Sparc server (a 3000); I
and one of our support backups will be running x86 on IBM 365 desktops.
It's tough enough to keep one's bearings jumping back and forth supporting
Windows (3.x, '95 and NT) and UNIX. I appreciate the level of consistency in
operation, administration and command syntax that comes from having Solaris
on the server, and Solaris on my x86 desktop.
Christopher Smith
>
>CHOICE!? OS OF.... CHOICE??? Since when do PC users have a choice of OS
>to load on their intel box? When every intel box sold includes a copy of
>Viru... uh.. Win 95, how can you call it the OS of CHOICE!? YOU HAVE NO
>CHOICE!!! If there was no OS prepackaged with the box, most informed
>people would choose ANYTHING BUT win95. OS/2.. Rhapsody for Intel... the
>31 flavors of Unix... you name it. Anything but that horrible virus of
>an operating system.
So. . . . . . . . .
Maybe you can enlighten us as to how a product that *must* be hated by
*everyone* who uses it is *still* growing in popularity and user base ? Not
even close to every copy of Win95 is sold pre-loaded, and no-one can *force*
you to choose a machine with Windows pre-loaded.
David F. Skoll
In article <6497gd$h77$1...@nargun.cc.uq.edu.au>, Christopher Smith
(drsm...@usa.net) wrote:
> Heaps of stable GUIs ? Care to name a few GUIs you consider stable ? (For
> me to consider it stable it'd have to crash/reset/whatever about once ever
> 3-6 months, thats what I'd call (relatively) stable).
My Linux machine at work runs X and has been up for months (since I upgraded
the kernel).
--
David F. Skoll
UDMS
> If all you had NT 4.0 doing was file/print serving it would be stable as a
> rock, too.
bullshit. i have to work on nt workstation at work and it crashes when i
am not even doing anything.
Joe Ragosta
In article <01bceec5$2be18820$8140aace@systems-markm>, "Mark Micklich"
<SRF...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Since when do Mac Users have a choice of what OS to load on their Mac?
Since Linux and Be OS became available.