Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics - Linux ; amicus_curious wrote: > > "Terry Porter" wrote in message > news:d-SdnbiU2PWXmJTUnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@netspace.net.au... >> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:22:23 -0400, amicus_curious wrote: >> >>> "Richard Rasker" wrote in message >>> news:490854e2$0$720$7ade8c0d@textreader.nntp.inter nl.net... >>>> >>>> http://www.australianit.news.com.au/ >> story/0,24897,24561082-5013040,00.html >>>> >>>> "Aged care ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

  1. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    amicus_curious wrote:

    >
    > "Terry Porter" wrote in message
    > news:d-SdnbiU2PWXmJTUnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@netspace.net.au...
    >> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:22:23 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Richard Rasker" wrote in message
    >>> news:490854e2$0$720$7ade8c0d@textreader.nntp.inter nl.net...
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.australianit.news.com.au/

    >> story/0,24897,24561082-5013040,00.html
    >>>>
    >>>> "Aged care providers are shocked by Microsoft's decision to revoke
    >>>> their
    >>>> not-for-profit status, which gave them access to its products at a
    >>>> heavily
    >>>> discounted rate.
    >>>> ...
    >>> You seem to have missed the key part of this, i.e.:
    >>>
    >>> "The spokesman said Microsoft remained committed to supporting
    >>> not-for-profit organisations and had donated more than $22 million worth
    >>> of software to local charities last year."

    >>
    >> Hahahaahahaahah!
    >> The same software provided by Linux, would have cost $0. (ZERO) dollars.
    >>

    > "Would have", "Could have", it is all the same, i.e. "Didn't happen."
    > The OSS folk talk a lot, but they never seem to act much.


    Quite the contrary. Microsoft is the notorious vapourware peddler,
    ballmering loudly about all the Great Features their Great New Software
    will have. In reality, they can't even get a half decent OS out the door
    after five years of work and billions of dollars in expenses. It's
    pathetic, really.

    OSS folk churn out evolutionary new versions of their software like
    clockwork, often two versions each year. And I explicitly say
    "evolutionary" because OSS folk don't promise heaven, but in the end deliver
    hell, like Microsoft does; instead, they simply attempt to keep the good
    bits, improve the somewhat shaky bits, and abandon the really bad bits.

    All this closely resembles the way Microsoft shouts it from the rooftops
    that they spent millions on charity, while in reality the just gave away
    stuff that hardly cost them anything, and keeps people locked into their
    product -- while the OSS folk silently give away almost everything they
    create.

    Microsoft is all talk and no trousers -- no worse: a bunch of greedy
    hypocrites, who use their drug dealer tactics for purposes of keeping any
    competition at bay, and making good PR at the same time. Although the
    deviousness and effectiveness of this strategy deserves admiration, its
    goals and effects are loathsome.
    OSS is a silent benefactor of mankind: hardly seen or heard from, but in the
    meantime making sure that networks are kept secure, mail is delivered and
    web sites are available. All thanks to free software. Yet you Wintrolls
    somehow seenm to think that there's something wrong with advocating the use
    of OSS for desktop use as well.

    And remember: without Windows, the Internet would be a vastly more secure
    and relaxed place. Without OSS, the Internet would simply vanish.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  2. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Richard Rasker wrote:



    There is something seriously wrong with you. Have you ever considered a
    stay at an asylum? They got lots of pills there that you can take.

  3. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics


    "Richard Rasker" wrote in message
    news:4909c3c6$0$726$7ade8c0d@textreader.nntp.inter nl.net...
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Terry Porter" wrote in message
    >> news:d-SdnbiU2PWXmJTUnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@netspace.net.au...
    >>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:22:23 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Richard Rasker" wrote in message
    >>>> news:490854e2$0$720$7ade8c0d@textreader.nntp.inter nl.net...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://www.australianit.news.com.au/
    >>> story/0,24897,24561082-5013040,00.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Aged care providers are shocked by Microsoft's decision to revoke
    >>>>> their
    >>>>> not-for-profit status, which gave them access to its products at a
    >>>>> heavily
    >>>>> discounted rate.
    >>>>> ...
    >>>> You seem to have missed the key part of this, i.e.:
    >>>>
    >>>> "The spokesman said Microsoft remained committed to supporting
    >>>> not-for-profit organisations and had donated more than $22 million
    >>>> worth
    >>>> of software to local charities last year."
    >>>
    >>> Hahahaahahaahah!
    >>> The same software provided by Linux, would have cost $0. (ZERO) dollars.
    >>>

    >> "Would have", "Could have", it is all the same, i.e. "Didn't happen."
    >> The OSS folk talk a lot, but they never seem to act much.

    >
    > Quite the contrary. Microsoft is the notorious vapourware peddler,
    > ballmering loudly about all the Great Features their Great New Software
    > will have. In reality, they can't even get a half decent OS out the door
    > after five years of work and billions of dollars in expenses. It's
    > pathetic, really.
    >

    What seems so odd to me is how you can go on and on and on about MS being so
    bad at software and how the OSS folk are so noble and incisive and achieving
    near perfection and not comprehend why no one seems to want to bother with
    OSS and are so slavishly committed to Microsoft products that it gives them
    an effective monopoly. Certainly there is no physical barrier to obtaining
    OSS product. I've downloaded an Ubuntu DVD image a couple of times in a
    half-hour or so of casual trying. It installed OK and ran just fine, too.
    It just didn't do anything that Windows doesn't already do that I could find
    that was worth doing.

    > OSS folk churn out evolutionary new versions of their software like
    > clockwork, often two versions each year. And I explicitly say
    > "evolutionary" because OSS folk don't promise heaven, but in the end
    > deliver
    > hell, like Microsoft does; instead, they simply attempt to keep the good
    > bits, improve the somewhat shaky bits, and abandon the really bad bits.
    >

    And yet no one seems to care one whit. Why is that? My premise above is
    that the OSS supporters/evangelists talk amongst themselves, but they are a
    sneering bunch when it come to carrying their message to the masses. You so
    disrespect the end users and it shows. It makes them want to deal with
    Microsoft instead. It is your own fault. I doubt that you really could
    beat Microsoft in the market, but you never even try.

    > All this closely resembles the way Microsoft shouts it from the rooftops
    > that they spent millions on charity, while in reality the just gave away
    > stuff that hardly cost them anything, and keeps people locked into their
    > product -- while the OSS folk silently give away almost everything they
    > create.
    >

    "Find a need and fill it!" Microsoft is doing that, what are you doing
    other than whining?

    > Microsoft is all talk and no trousers -- no worse: a bunch of greedy
    > hypocrites, who use their drug dealer tactics for purposes of keeping any
    > competition at bay, and making good PR at the same time. Although the
    > deviousness and effectiveness of this strategy deserves admiration, its
    > goals and effects are loathsome.


    Deus ex machina explains it all, eh? Do you really believe that they can be
    so evil and yet so effective? Maybe you just don't understand people.

    > OSS is a silent benefactor of mankind: hardly seen or heard from, but in
    > the
    > meantime making sure that networks are kept secure, mail is delivered and
    > web sites are available. All thanks to free software. Yet you Wintrolls
    > somehow seenm to think that there's something wrong with advocating the
    > use
    > of OSS for desktop use as well.
    >

    I don't think there is anything wrong with it at all. I don't develop or
    sell platform software and I am a big consumer of it. But you don't really
    offer anything useful or at least as easily useful as Microsoft does.
    Anyone who says that gets sneered at and called various names. I guess that
    is easier to do than to actually produce any help or discover any better
    way.

    > And remember: without Windows, the Internet would be a vastly more secure
    > and relaxed place. Without OSS, the Internet would simply vanish.
    >

    You are overly fascinated by the bits and bytes. There is a lot more to it,
    but you wouldn't know.


  4. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics




    amicus_curious wrote:

    >And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >Microsoft based servers are also in first place


    Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    laughing so hard!!!

    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html



  5. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:56:04 -0400, Terry Porter wrote:

    > Richard Rasker wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > There is something seriously wrong with you. Have you ever considered a
    > stay at an asylum? They got lots of pills there that you can take.



    Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    spelling and grammar, and infantile content.

    This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    Message-ID:



    My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    i.e.


    My email is also a netspace.net.au address.

    So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    "From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"

    to get rid of this stupid little child.


    Cheers
    Terry
    --
    Linux full time, on the desktop, since August 1997


    --
    Linux full time, on the desktop, since August 1997

  6. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics


    wrote in message
    news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >
    >
    >
    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    >>And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>Microsoft based servers are also in first place

    >
    > Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    > laughing so hard!!!
    >
    > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >


    He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./

    There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server and
    MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market is only
    part of the total server market.



  7. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Ezekiel wrote:

    >
    > wrote in message
    > news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>>And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>>Microsoft based servers are also in first place

    >>
    >> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >> laughing so hard!!!
    >>
    >>

    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >>

    >
    > He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >
    > There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server and
    > MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market is
    > only part of the total server market.


    Well, and if it is claimed that there are 10th of millions of mid to small
    businesses that run linux servers, you have nothing to disprove it as well
    --
    The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
    the day they start making vacuum cleaners.


  8. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > wrote in message
    > news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >>
    >>
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>> And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>> Microsoft based servers are also in first place

    >> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >> laughing so hard!!!
    >>
    >> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >>

    >
    > He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >
    > There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server and
    > MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market is only
    > part of the total server market.
    >
    >


    Web servers are a small percentage at that. They forget about all the
    back-end processing that must be done by other servers and mainframes
    that allow them the luxury to do anything online with any meaning,
    because it's not happening at the Web server that's for sure.

    The world of IT is not centered around Web servers.



  9. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    COLA Gone Wild wrote:

    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> wrote in message
    >> news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>>> Microsoft based servers are also in first place
    >>> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >>> laughing so hard!!!
    >>>
    >>>

    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >>>

    >>
    >> He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >>
    >> There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server
    >> and MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market
    >> is only part of the total server market.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Web servers are a small percentage at that. They forget about all the
    > back-end processing that must be done by other servers and mainframes
    > that allow them the luxury to do anything online with any meaning,
    > because it's not happening at the Web server that's for sure.


    And none of those mainframes run windows. Many run linux, though

    > The world of IT is not centered around Web servers.


    And even less around windows desktops
    --
    Linux is like a wigwam: no windows, no gates and an apache inside!


  10. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    > COLA Gone Wild wrote:
    >
    >> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>> wrote in message
    >>> news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >>>>
    >>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>>>> Microsoft based servers are also in first place
    >>>> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >>>> laughing so hard!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>

    > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >>> He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >>>
    >>> There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server
    >>> and MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market
    >>> is only part of the total server market.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Web servers are a small percentage at that. They forget about all the
    >> back-end processing that must be done by other servers and mainframes
    >> that allow them the luxury to do anything online with any meaning,
    >> because it's not happening at the Web server that's for sure.

    >
    > And none of those mainframes run windows. Many run linux, though


    I see IBM mainframes running IBM mainframe O/S(s) and software, such as
    CICS, IMS DL1, VSAM, Total, Mantis, Supra, TSO etc. etc. I see IBM AS400
    mainframe technology and solutions on the back-end. I don't see any
    solutions running Linux and supporting the above technology.

    You show me somewhere that Linux is running the above technology,
    instead of giving me your lip service.
    >
    >> The world of IT is not centered around Web servers.

    >
    > And even less around windows desktops


    We're talking servers and mainframes you moron and NOT desktop.

    BTW, I start work this coming Monday with this consulting company of 30
    people that contracts with the USAF to design, develop, and implement
    both Windows desktop and Web based .NET solutions.

    Therefore Petey, I won't have too much time anymore to jack-around with
    you *clowns*.

    You *clowns* in this NG have too much time on your hands way too much
    time on your hands.

    I'll still be around, count on it, because this NG and the people in it
    are funny and stupid, like you.

    Your hearts and your compassions you all ware it well on your shirt
    sleeves.






  11. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    On 2008-10-31, COLA Gone Wild wrote:
    > Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >> COLA Gone Wild wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>> wrote in message
    >>>> news:UKWdnYcw8IVCTZfURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>>>>> Microsoft based servers are also in first place
    >>>>> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >>>>> laughing so hard!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>

    >> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html
    >>>> He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >>>>
    >>>> There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server
    >>>> and MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market
    >>>> is only part of the total server market.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Web servers are a small percentage at that. They forget about all the
    >>> back-end processing that must be done by other servers and mainframes
    >>> that allow them the luxury to do anything online with any meaning,
    >>> because it's not happening at the Web server that's for sure.

    >>
    >> And none of those mainframes run windows. Many run linux, though

    >
    > I see IBM mainframes running IBM mainframe O/S(s) and software, such as
    > CICS, IMS DL1, VSAM, Total, Mantis, Supra, TSO etc. etc. I see IBM AS400
    > mainframe technology and solutions on the back-end. I don't see any
    > solutions running Linux and supporting the above technology.
    >
    > You show me somewhere that Linux is running the above technology,
    > instead of giving me your lip service.


    ...of course if you're going to be running Linux on that
    hardware you will be running more Linux centric apps. If you
    are stuck in the 60's then perhaps you wouldn't be interested
    in running Unix on whatever hardware you have.

    [deletia]

    --
    If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
    hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  12. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >> You show me somewhere that Linux is running the above technology,
    >> instead of giving me your lip service.

    >
    > ...of course if you're going to be running Linux on that
    > hardware you will be running more Linux centric apps.


    Well, who has to be running Linux?
    >


    > If you
    > are stuck in the 60's then perhaps you wouldn't be interested
    > in running Unix on whatever hardware you have.
    >



    You know more know what you're talking about than the man in the MOON,
    talking out the side of your head.

    If it's not broke, then why fix it?

  13. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics




    Terry Porter wrote:

    >Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    >be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    >spelling and grammar, and infantile content.
    >
    >This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    >Message-ID:
    >


    >
    >My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    >MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    >i.e.
    >
    >
    >My email is also a netspace.net.au address.
    >
    >So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    >"From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"


    Or you could simply start PGP-signing your posts....


  14. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics




    Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    > wrote...
    >
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >>>And you seem to ignore the server market where sales of
    >>>Microsoft based servers are also in first place

    >>
    >> Stop! Stop!! you're killing me! My sides hurt from
    >> laughing so hard!!!
    >> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...er_survey.html

    >
    >He said /servers/ - and not /web servers./
    >
    >There are millions of mid to small businesses that run Exchange Server and
    >MS small business servers. The percentage of the /web server/ market is only
    >part of the total server market.


    You are accusing him of not counting small business servers, but you aren't
    counting the millions of servers used by Google, eBay, etc.


  15. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    me@privacy.net wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    > Terry Porter wrote:
    >
    >>Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    >>be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    >>spelling and grammar, and infantile content.
    >>
    >>This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    >>Message-ID:
    >>

    >
    >>
    >>My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    >>MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    >>i.e.
    >>
    >>
    >>My email is also a netspace.net.au address.
    >>
    >>So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    >>"From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"

    >
    > Or you could simply start PGP-signing your posts....


    Why should he need to act that way just because a criminal asshole (a
    windows user, naturally, and incredibly stupid) is doing his filthy deeds?

    A much better response would be that ISPs get forced to throw those filthy
    creeps out of the net for good.
    --
    Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware


  16. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    On 2008-11-01, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > me@privacy.net wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Terry Porter wrote:
    >>
    >>>Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    >>>be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    >>>spelling and grammar, and infantile content.
    >>>
    >>>This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    >>>Message-ID:
    >>>

    >>
    >>>
    >>>My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    >>>MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    >>>i.e.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>My email is also a netspace.net.au address.
    >>>
    >>>So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    >>>"From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"

    >>
    >> Or you could simply start PGP-signing your posts....

    >
    > Why should he need to act that way just because a criminal asshole (a
    > windows user, naturally, and incredibly stupid) is doing his filthy deeds?
    >
    > A much better response would be that ISPs get forced to throw those filthy
    > creeps out of the net for good.



    Or just kill the ****ers, rape their women and eat their children.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  17. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Gregory Shearman wrote:

    > On 2008-11-01, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> me@privacy.net wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Terry Porter wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    >>>>be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    >>>>spelling and grammar, and infantile content.
    >>>>
    >>>>This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    >>>>Message-ID:
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    >>>>MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    >>>>i.e.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>My email is also a netspace.net.au address.
    >>>>
    >>>>So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    >>>>"From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"
    >>>
    >>> Or you could simply start PGP-signing your posts....

    >>
    >> Why should he need to act that way just because a criminal asshole (a
    >> windows user, naturally, and incredibly stupid) is doing his filthy
    >> deeds?
    >>
    >> A much better response would be that ISPs get forced to throw those
    >> filthy creeps out of the net for good.

    >
    >
    > Or just kill the ****ers, rape their women and eat their children.
    >


    and **** their dogs and smash their computers into little bits. Anything
    more is just extremism and uncalled for
    --
    Confucius: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.


  18. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    Verily I say unto thee, that Peter Köhlmann spake thusly:
    > Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-11-01, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>> me@privacy.net wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Terry Porter wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Readers are advised to check the Message-ID: header of posts claiming to
    >>>>> be Terry Porter. These posts by the "Level3.com troll" consist of poor
    >>>>> spelling and grammar, and infantile content.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This forger is posting from earthlink.com i.e:-
    >>>>> Message-ID:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> My posts (the real terry Porter) have the following
    >>>>> MessageID:@netspace.net.au
    >>>>> i.e.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> My email is also a netspace.net.au address.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So please check the headers and if your newsreader supports it, killfile
    >>>>> "From: Terry Porter AND Message-ID:@earthlink.com"
    >>>> Or you could simply start PGP-signing your posts....
    >>> Why should he need to act that way just because a criminal asshole (a
    >>> windows user, naturally, and incredibly stupid) is doing his filthy
    >>> deeds?
    >>>
    >>> A much better response would be that ISPs get forced to throw those
    >>> filthy creeps out of the net for good.

    >>
    >> Or just kill the ****ers, rape their women and eat their children.
    >>

    >
    > and **** their dogs and smash their computers into little bits. Anything
    > more is just extremism and uncalled for


    I draw the line at smashing computers, that's just uncalled for.



    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
    | the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
    | weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
    04:19:50 up 22 days, 14:15, 4 users, load average: 0.30, 0.17, 0.09

  19. Re: Microsoft's drug dealer tactics

    On 2008-10-31, COLA Gone Wild wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >>> You show me somewhere that Linux is running the above technology,
    >>> instead of giving me your lip service.

    >>
    >> ...of course if you're going to be running Linux on that
    >> hardware you will be running more Linux centric apps.

    >
    > Well, who has to be running Linux?
    >>

    >
    >> If you
    >> are stuck in the 60's then perhaps you wouldn't be interested
    >> in running Unix on whatever hardware you have.
    >>

    >
    >
    > You know more know what you're talking about than the man in the MOON,
    > talking out the side of your head.
    >
    > If it's not broke, then why fix it?


    ...perhaps you would like to crawl out of the 60's and use
    programming interfaces and user interfaces that don't drive
    your customers and your own employees away.

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of mysql's |||
    popularity as does an attempt to do some simple date / | \
    manipulations in postgres.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

+ Reply to Thread