Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples - Linux

This is a discussion on Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples - Linux ; On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 07:29:51 -0800, Tom Shelton wrote: > On Nov 6, 1:49*am, Terry Porter wrote: >> On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 08:43:39 -0800, Tom Shelton wrote: >> > On Nov 5, 5:57*am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >> ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 217

Thread: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

  1. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 07:29:51 -0800, Tom Shelton wrote:

    > On Nov 6, 1:49*am, Terry Porter wrote:
    >> On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 08:43:39 -0800, Tom Shelton wrote:
    >> > On Nov 5, 5:57*am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >> >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Kelsey Bjarnason belched out
    >> >> > tar cvzf - /wwwdata | ssh ssh user@host "dd
    >> >> > of=/path/wwwdata.tar.gz"

    >>
    >> >> I'm wondering if you can build self-installing compressed archives
    >> >> using only Powershell and command-line commands.

    >>
    >> > Out of the box, probably not.

    >>
    >> There ya go folks, the debate is over. Kelsey has shown that the old
    >> Linux shell is still far superior to Eriks "PowerShill"
    >>
    >>

    > So tell me, Terry - how do you do it in bash? Wait, you don't - bash
    > relies on external tools to do those things.




    I'm taking issue with Erik the Wintroll who claimed that Powershell is
    superior to Linux Bash, and to me *one* example is enough to prove him
    wrong.

    Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    You can argue the fine points all day long, but surely the advocacy of
    the Windows Powershell belongs in another Usenet group where *Windows
    Advocacy* is welcome ?

    I'm here to *ESCAPE* Windows, not to learn any more about it, what I know
    about Windows drove me to Linux in 1997.





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

  2. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:31:30 +0100, Steve Townsend wrote:

    > Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Steve Townsend belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Why do you snip corrections?


    We just ignore Wintrolls. Soon only Wintrolls will read your posts as I
    imagine you'll be taking your rightful place in all the Linux advocates
    killfiles.

    Surprised ?




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

  3. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:

    > I'm taking issue with Erik the Wintroll who claimed that Powershell is
    > superior to Linux Bash, and to me *one* example is enough to prove him
    > wrong.


    That's because you can't possibly understand set theory.

    If there's 2000 examples that prove me right, but one that proves me wrong,
    in your eyes, i'm wrong. The only person that thinks that way is an
    idealogue.

    > Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    > and this is a Linux advocacy group ?


    Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that Linux had
    something like it?

    Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer ignorance.

    > You can argue the fine points all day long, but surely the advocacy of
    > the Windows Powershell belongs in another Usenet group where *Windows
    > Advocacy* is welcome ?


    Who's advocating anything? I responded to the false comments about how
    Windows lacks a decent shell or scripting, I proved him wrong. If you call
    that "advocacy", you're sorely mistaken.

    > I'm here to *ESCAPE* Windows, not to learn any more about it, what I know
    > about Windows drove me to Linux in 1997.


    Yet somehow you can't seem to stop participating in threads in which
    Windows and Linux are compared, with your 11 year old knowledge as your
    only guide.

  4. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:24:47 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:31:30 +0100, Steve Townsend wrote:
    >
    >> Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Steve Townsend belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Why do you snip corrections?

    >
    > We just ignore Wintrolls.


    Because you prefer to bask in your ignorance.

    > Soon only Wintrolls will read your posts as I
    > imagine you'll be taking your rightful place in all the Linux advocates
    > killfiles.
    >
    > Surprised ?


    Not at all, selective input is a clear sign of a "Linux advocate". They
    can only stay sane by ignoring reality.

  5. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On 2008-11-07, Erik Funkenbusch claimed:
    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:


    >> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    >> and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    >
    > Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that Linux had
    > something like it?
    >
    > Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer ignorance.


    You mean I should rush out to learn Fortran because I don't use it? Do
    tell.

    Excuse me now. I have to get busy learning Cobol, .NYET, Pascal, AIX
    and hundreds of other languages I don't need because I don't use them,

    --
    Linux: It just _works_.
    Windows: It _just_ works.
    Vista: It _doesn't_ work.

  6. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    In article <5d4du5-pt8.ln1@ue.harry.net>,
    Sinister Midget wrote:
    > On 2008-11-07, Erik Funkenbusch claimed:
    > > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:

    >
    > >> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    > >> and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    > >
    > > Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that Linux had
    > > something like it?
    > >
    > > Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer ignorance.

    >
    > You mean I should rush out to learn Fortran because I don't use it? Do
    > tell.
    >
    > Excuse me now. I have to get busy learning Cobol, .NYET, Pascal, AIX
    > and hundreds of other languages I don't need because I don't use them,


    Unless I missed them, you have not posted about Fortran. You've not
    made numerous claims about its suitability vs. other languages for
    various tasks (that you have no experience with). You don't include in
    nearly every post of yours some comment about how Fortran sucks. So of
    course it is reasonable for you to not bother to learn Fortran.

    Terry, on the other hand, shows a tremendous interest in Windows
    technology. He has a hard time talking about anything in this group
    without bringing up Windows. Hence, if he wants to at least present the
    appearance of not being a stupid troll, he should want to actually learn
    something about the subject before commenting so extensively on it.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  7. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Tim Smith writes:

    > In article <86abccbkiz.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>,
    > Mart van de Wege wrote:
    >> >> Can you, say, write a Powershell script as an event handler to run on
    >> >> hardware changes? Like, e.g., changing the processor powersaving mode
    >> >> on disconnecting the AC on a laptop?
    >> >
    >> > Yes, via WMI objects.
    >> >
    >> > However, there is little reason to have to do that particular task, since
    >> > Windows itself can be configured to do that.

    >>
    >> In other words, Windows can't do it, so it is useless.
    >>
    >> Sour grapes.

    >
    > What part of "Yes, via WMI objects" did you take to mean "Windows can't
    > do it"?


    What part of 'However, ...' did *you* not understand?

    Moron. Can't even read your own language.

    Mart

    --
    "We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
    --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.

  8. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > Sinister Midget wrote:
    >> Erik Funkenbusch claimed:
    >>> Terry Porter wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I
    >>>> only use Linux, and this is a Linux advocacy group ?
    >>>
    >>> Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that
    >>> Linux had something like it?
    >>>
    >>> Of course you won't do any of those things because you
    >>> prefer ignorance.

    >>
    >> You mean I should rush out to learn Fortran because I don't
    >> use it? Do tell.
    >>
    >> Excuse me now. I have to get busy learning Cobol, .NYET,
    >> Pascal, AIX and hundreds of other languages I don't need
    >> because I don't use them,

    >
    > Unless I missed them, you have not posted about Fortran.
    > You've not made numerous claims about its suitability vs.
    > other languages for various tasks (that you have no experience
    > with). You don't include in nearly every post of yours some
    > comment about how Fortran sucks. So of course it is
    > reasonable for you to not bother to learn Fortran.
    >
    > Terry, on the other hand, shows a tremendous interest in
    > Windows technology. He has a hard time talking about anything
    > in this group without bringing up Windows. Hence, if he wants
    > to at least present the appearance of not being a stupid
    > troll, he should want to actually learn something about the
    > subject before commenting so extensively on it.


    These two paragraphs, one against Sinister Midget and one against
    Terry Porter are examples of ad hominem attacks.

    http://tantek.pbwiki.com/TrollTaxonomy

    Ad hominem troll

    Ad hominem troll at its simplest, will attack people personally,
    rather than the merits of their statements or methodologies.

    The ad hominem troll often has already lost a rational argument
    about a topic, and thus its goal is to change the argument from
    being about a topic, to being about the people opposed to the
    troll (which could mean any/all rational person(s) in the
    discussion), in the hopes of both discrediting people's ideas
    indirectly by discrediting the people, and engendering an
    emotional reaction from the people by attacking their egos /
    self-image. The "getting a reaction out of" goal is common to
    most troll types.

    The simple ad hominem troll is easily detected and dealt with by
    calling them on their ad hominem attacks.

    However, often ad hominem troll will start its discourse with
    seemingly reasonable commentary, perhaps an analogy etc. Using
    rational tone, they may lull you into thinking that they are
    rational in general and thus their entire message should be
    considered rational. Once they have established such an
    impression, then they will then descend into personal attacks
    which may even sound reasonably worded, until you recognize them
    for what they are, nothing more than personal attacks.

    Example: thacker. thacker starts by ignoring the previous comment
    (which itself was a rational challenge to thacker's earlier
    statements), repeating himself (see the section below on
    Repeating themselves), then moves onto an analogy. Afterwards he
    continues with personal attacks, starting subtly worded, then
    increasingly harsh:

    * "some here, yourself included, will not see nor understand
    the parallels"
    * "Your noses are simply buried too deeply into the
    proverbial bark."
    * "Or you lack the courage, will, ability to step away and
    ask the truly difficult questions. That is a shame."
    --
    HPT

  9. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:39:01 -0600, Sinister Midget wrote:

    > On 2008-11-07, Erik Funkenbusch claimed:
    >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:

    >
    >>> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    >>> and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    >>
    >> Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that Linux had
    >> something like it?
    >>
    >> Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer
    >> ignorance.

    >
    > You mean I should rush out to learn Fortran because I don't use it? Do
    > tell.
    >
    > Excuse me now. I have to get busy learning Cobol, .NYET, Pascal, AIX and
    > hundreds of other languages I don't need because I don't use them,


    Bwahahaahah!!

    An I have to run out and find a book on 'the lost language of the gnash'
    because they had an interesting theory regarding the random patterns of
    dropped chicken bones ...





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

  10. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:37:42 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:
    >
    >> I'm taking issue with Erik the Wintroll who claimed that Powershell is
    >> superior to Linux Bash, and to me *one* example is enough to prove him
    >> wrong.

    >
    > That's because you can't possibly understand set theory.


    I'll take understanding IP tables over that any day, and so should you
    Einstein.


    >> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    >> and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    >
    > Know thy enemy?


    Like Iptables ?

    > Get ideas to copy?


    I'll leave that to your mates at Microfost.

    > Lament


    LAMENT ??? Lamenting and Gnashing of teeth is pretty much a Windows user
    experience Erik Wintroll.

    > your wish that Linux had
    > something like it?


    Frankly, I'll quietly and with heavy heart, try and come to terms with my
    bitter disappointment that Linux has no PowerShill .... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHH!


    >
    > Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer ignorance.


    Hows IPtables for Windummies going Erik, finished the book yet ?

    >
    >> You can argue the fine points all day long, but surely the advocacy of
    >> the Windows Powershell belongs in another Usenet group where *Windows
    >> Advocacy* is welcome ?

    >
    > Who's advocating anything?


    I'm advocating Linux, Your Wintrolling Windows in a LINUX ADVOCACY
    GROUP, ... sigh, must I lead you by the had thru *everything* Erick ?

    > I responded to the false comments


    As yes, Erick The Wintroll, guardian of false Windows statements in a
    LINUX ADVOCACY GROUP.


    .... makes sense .. really

    > about how
    > Windows lacks a decent shell or scripting,


    That's not what I recall. Your words were more to the effect "Powershell
    blows everything else away"

    I say, Powershell, blow me ...

    > I proved him wrong.


    You're such a dreamer Erick.

    > If you
    > call that "advocacy", you're sorely mistaken.


    I'm not mistaken about you. You are the most consistent Wintroll on Cola,
    and you have learnt *nothing* about Linux since I was last here in 2001.

    Erick the Wintroll time machine.

    >
    >> I'm here to *ESCAPE* Windows, not to learn any more about it, what I
    >> know about Windows drove me to Linux in 1997.

    >
    > Yet somehow you can't seem to stop participating in threads in which
    > Windows and Linux are compared,


    Yes, I'm drawn to them, especially when Wintrolls like you are the main
    protagonists.

    > with your 11 year old knowledge as your
    > only guide.


    Windows XP, the most common Windows OS in the world was released in 2001,
    and it's now 2008, so I'm only four years behind which isn't a problem.

    Same old Microsoft, same old crap, nothings changed much, not even you.

    Same old Erick Wintroll.







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

  11. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:39:08 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:24:47 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:31:30 +0100, Steve Townsend wrote:
    >>
    >>> Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >>>
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Steve Townsend belched out
    >>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Why do you snip corrections?

    >>
    >> We just ignore Wintrolls.

    >
    > Because you prefer to bask in your ignorance.


    Oh I dunno Erick, I just picked up your latest book, "How I failed at
    IPTABLES, lost a fortune, ruined the lives of others and just looked
    stupid, by Erik Wintroll"

    >> Soon only Wintrolls will read your posts as I imagine you'll be taking
    >> your rightful place in all the Linux advocates killfiles.
    >>
    >> Surprised ?

    >
    > Not at all,


    I didn't think he or you would be, and I knew you'd soon make an
    appearance sooner rather than later.

    > selective input is a clear sign of a "Linux advocate".


    Actually posting Linux advocacy in COLA is a better sign of a Linux
    advocate, but I don't expect you'll ever understand that simple fact.











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

  12. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Terry Porter belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:11:39 +0100, "Steve Townsend" wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > If you're not a Wintroll, you can prove it quite easily doing the
    > following.
    >
    > 1) Apologise to Chris, then see 2) below.


    Don't bother.

    --
    Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these.
    -- Ovid (43 B.C. - A.D. 18)

  13. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    >If there's 2000 examples that prove me right, but one that proves me wrong,


    Illogical. You cannot be proven both right and wrong.

    --
    "Yes, theres choice alright - that buggy heap of ****, or that one, or
    that one.... etc etc etc." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

  14. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > Terry Porter wrote:
    >>
    >> We just ignore Wintrolls.

    >
    >Because you prefer to bask in your ignorance.


    Oh, is that why, Fuddie?

    --
    "Linux is no more secure and probably less secure than Windows in the
    areas where security is actually important." - Rat

  15. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Mart van de Wege writes:

    > Tim Smith writes:
    >
    >> In article <86abccbkiz.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>,
    >> Mart van de Wege wrote:
    >>> >> Can you, say, write a Powershell script as an event handler to run on
    >>> >> hardware changes? Like, e.g., changing the processor powersaving mode
    >>> >> on disconnecting the AC on a laptop?
    >>> >
    >>> > Yes, via WMI objects.
    >>> >
    >>> > However, there is little reason to have to do that particular task, since
    >>> > Windows itself can be configured to do that.
    >>>
    >>> In other words, Windows can't do it, so it is useless.
    >>>
    >>> Sour grapes.

    >>
    >> What part of "Yes, via WMI objects" did you take to mean "Windows can't
    >> do it"?

    >
    > What part of 'However, ...' did *you* not understand?
    >
    > Moron. Can't even read your own language.
    >
    > Mart


    Are you related to Christopher Hunter? You are totally and utterly wrong.

  16. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Mart van de Wege writes:

    > Steve Townsend writes:
    >
    >> Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Tom Shelton belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> On Nov 5, 12:35*pm, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Can you djinn up a quick one that might work? *(Doesn't have to work, just
    >>>>> illustrate how to use Powershell to extract the binary part and untar it.)
    >>>>
    >>>> The biggest problem I see is the embeded binary data. I'm not sure
    >>>> how I would accomplish that, except to maybe put it in a here string
    >>>> in the script and format it in hex. Believe me, I'm far from a
    >>>> powershell power user - so anything I come up with might not be
    >>>> optimal. But, I'll give a quick try on it latter.
    >>>
    >>> No need, unless you want to do it.
    >>>
    >>> It works in bash because bash, and the other tools (awk and tail) can handle
    >>> very large "lines" of binary data. In my experience with Windows (as
    >>> opposed to GNU) tools, size limits are pretty important.

    >>
    >> Wrong again. It is limited and why people must use xargs.
    >>
    >> http://www.ss64.com/bash/xargs.html
    >>

    >
    > Oh dear. Someone has heard something. Too bad it is not applicable.
    >
    > Dear idiot: xargs is meant to address the problem that the buffer size
    > for the command line itself is fixed. This has nothing to do with how
    > shell commands interact with STDIN.
    >
    > Come back when you actually *understand* what you parrot.
    >
    > Mart


    Are you naturally stupid or just in the mood to argue?

    No one cares.

    The point is that one MUST use xargs in a lot of bash commands/scripts
    since the tools bash allows you to use can not have unlimited input
    commands.


    Kapiche?

  17. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Terry Porter writes:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:11:39 +0100, "Steve Townsend" wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hadron? You have at least twice today spouted nonsense and hope not
    >>>>> to be called on it. I was trying to help you clearly fancy yourself
    >>>>> as some kind of luminary in this group. Try this rubbish in real
    >>>>> linux groups and you will find far ruder people than me.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You're obviously new here on COLA, perhaps even new to Linux, judging
    >>>> from your total lack of respect to an established Linux advocate like
    >>>> Chris.

    >>
    >> Established or not, if he talks nonsense about things he knows nothing
    >> about then expect some response.

    >
    > "Some response" and "your response " are two different things.
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>>> How long have you been reading COLA ?

    >>
    >> In and out for a while.

    >
    > Ok, don't answer the question. It's my opinion you are a newly hatched
    > Wintroll.
    >
    > And you haven't read COLA for the obligatory 3 months yet, judging by
    > your ignorance.


    I did not have to do a "obligatory anything" you big headed arsehole.

    Tell me, did you see the replies your monumentally embarassing comments
    about fwbuilder? Seriously, get some idea before you come here and post
    your nonsense. I can add you to the two Chris guys for incompetence and
    stupidity.

    >
    >
    >
    > If you're not a Wintroll, you can prove it quite easily doing the
    > following.
    >
    > 1) Apologise to Chris, then see 2) below.


    Apologise for what? For correcting him? he's a clueless idiot from what
    i can see. And then goes into little girly hissy fits and killfiles and
    snips to try and hide his OWN mistakes.

    >
    > 2) COLA is READ ONLY for you for 3 months, if you just *can't* wait three
    > months to post again, then you must wait *six months*.


    You really are a pretentious little twit. Get a life.

    >
    > 3) When you next post here (after 3 months), advocate Linux and do not
    > attack long term Linux Advocates. Feel free to debate with them
    > however.


    I do advocate linux. In the real world. Corecting ridiculous comments
    from you and Ahlstrom about X versus DirectX and FWBuilder is not "pro
    windows" you silly little man.

    >
    > If you continue to post, you're a Wintroll or a moron, and deserve any
    > response you get.


    Oh go get a life you pompous fool.

    >
    > Here you have to EARN credibility and PROVE who you are FIRST, and no
    > amount of whining and insulting will achieve anything.


    prove who I am? What the hell are you raving about? Are you insane?


  18. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Terry Porter belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:11:39 +0100, "Steve Townsend" wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> If you're not a Wintroll, you can prove it quite easily doing the
    >> following.
    >>
    >> 1) Apologise to Chris, then see 2) below.

    >
    > Don't bother.


    I won't. You're less of a man than you first appeared if you can not be
    corrected in good faith. I'm still waiting for your views on better
    development IDEs for Linux over Visual Studio by the way. But you wont
    have any because you are clearly way in over your head and have no clue
    about real development tools and processes.



  19. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    In article <49140dc3$0$17070$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org>,
    High Plains Thumper wrote:
    > > Unless I missed them, you have not posted about Fortran.
    > > You've not made numerous claims about its suitability vs.
    > > other languages for various tasks (that you have no experience
    > > with). You don't include in nearly every post of yours some
    > > comment about how Fortran sucks. So of course it is
    > > reasonable for you to not bother to learn Fortran.
    > >
    > > Terry, on the other hand, shows a tremendous interest in
    > > Windows technology. He has a hard time talking about anything
    > > in this group without bringing up Windows. Hence, if he wants
    > > to at least present the appearance of not being a stupid
    > > troll, he should want to actually learn something about the
    > > subject before commenting so extensively on it.

    >
    > These two paragraphs, one against Sinister Midget and one against
    > Terry Porter are examples of ad hominem attacks.


    Incorrect. You really should learn what an "ad hominem attack" is.

    Let's take the paragraph about Sinister Midget first. In that
    paragraph, I say that I'm not aware of him having posted about Fortran.
    That's not an attack. I say he has *NOT* made unfounded claims about
    it. Again, not an attack. I say he does *NOT* constantly talk about
    Fortran. Also not an attack.

    So where is the attack?

    Now let's take the second paragraph. I do call Terry a stupid troll,
    but not to discredit an argument of Terry's, but rather to distinguish
    him from Sinister Midget. Hence, not ad hominem.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  20. Re: Windows PowerShell vs. bash examples

    Erik Funkenbusch writes:

    > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:19:54 -0600, Terry Porter wrote:
    >
    >> I'm taking issue with Erik the Wintroll who claimed that Powershell is
    >> superior to Linux Bash, and to me *one* example is enough to prove him
    >> wrong.

    >
    > That's because you can't possibly understand set theory.


    It appears to me that there are a small core of people in this newsgroup
    who now next to nothing about anything. The two Chris guys and this
    pompous fool are up there with the most incompetent "techs" I have ever
    heard.
    >
    > If there's 2000 examples that prove me right, but one that proves me wrong,
    > in your eyes, i'm wrong. The only person that thinks that way is an
    > idealogue.


    Or a fool. Terry appears to be just that.

    >
    >> Why would I bother understanding Windows Powershell, I only use Linux,
    >> and this is a Linux advocacy group ?

    >
    > Know thy enemy? Get ideas to copy? Lament your wish that Linux had
    > something like it?


    learn something before you pronounce on it?
    >
    > Of course you won't do any of those things because you prefer
    > ignorance.


    I think it's all he can cope with.

    >
    >> You can argue the fine points all day long, but surely the advocacy of
    >> the Windows Powershell belongs in another Usenet group where *Windows
    >> Advocacy* is welcome ?

    >
    > Who's advocating anything? I responded to the false comments about how
    > Windows lacks a decent shell or scripting, I proved him wrong. If you call
    > that "advocacy", you're sorely mistaken.


    I am astonished that when I pointed out why DirectX has grown relative
    to openGL I was called a "wintroll" and accused of advocating Windows. I
    was doing no such thing, just trying to explain to Chris Ahlstrom why he
    was talking nonsense about something he appeared to know nothing about.
    >
    >> I'm here to *ESCAPE* Windows, not to learn any more about it, what I know
    >> about Windows drove me to Linux in 1997.

    >
    > Yet somehow you can't seem to stop participating in threads in which
    > Windows and Linux are compared, with your 11 year old knowledge as your
    > only guide.


    Very well said. His Linux knowledge appears to be patchy at best too.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast