Markus <> wrote:
> "The day micro$oft puts out something that doesn't suck will be the
> day they introduce a line of vacuum cleaners." -stolen from someone...
>
> Well, you could try Linux, but I see you seem to be upset over 35
> minutes. Installing a peripheral on Linux (such as a dvd player), or
> a new
> program without the aid of rpm, etc etc will tie up a hellva lot more
> time than 35 minutes (and that's providing you found a compatible
> driver). Lets face it, Linux isn't for the faint of heart.
>
> Windows products: In addition to the programming I do on Linux, I use
> win2k for graphic stuff and admittedly, ease of use, and the
> stability. I think it is rather telling that XP pro is supposed to
> replace win2000 pro but yet is offered at a cheaper price than
> win2000. Go figure. However, someday I will either have to, or just
> want to; upgrade. I'm looking real hard at Mac's OS X. Mac has
> always been years ahead of IBM/Intell/M$.

Wow - you are a walking-talking billboard for "Here's something for you
people to argue over, fill in the details". heh

I've used just about every OS out there so far. There was one point when I
actually recommended OS/2 over anything else. Damn it was FAST in the day -
made my games scream anyway. heh

Windows:
I used Windows 95, installed it, tweaked it, etc. While it was an
improvement in at least looks and some functionality over Windows 3.11, I
still say the larger jumps were NT 4.0 and 98. NT 4.0 gave professionals
something while 98 gave the home user something. (Yeah - I skipped NT 3.X
and haven't mentioned 98SE.. Assume that 98SE bleeds into my 98
conversation..) In the end, NT 4.0 was a pain in the rear and 98 was an
insecure playtoy. ME - I mention so the rest of the world can laugh with
me. That was "Just to put something out" I think. After all, look how no
one - even Microsoft - hardly ever mention it. Windows 2000.. That was a
SWEET OS. Strong, Stable and the start of the "World Mixing" between home
and professional, in my opinion. The problem? Home users were still
confused. Too much learning curve. So Microsoft came out with XP. The
complete and final merge between the two - now the road doesn't have forks,
just separate lanes (HOME, TABLET, PROFESSIONAL) and we are all on the same
page. And as long as the professionals get rid of all the pretty things and
tweak up the speed by doing so, it's as good (better) than Windows 2000 to
them. The home users are pleased because "look, I click here and it does
this!". The next version (Longhorn) - Oh good Lord. I have seen the
pre-releases. I am scared. The amount of bells and whistles is
mind-boggling even in comparison to XP. It's a overly tweaked, I downloaded
one of every application and added bloated piece of software right now.
IMHO.

MacOS:
I have to say I have played with MacOS back to only 7.6. Ouch. Anything
until 8.x hurt my head. Then 8.x and 9.x came along. The 9.x's weren't
bad - they could run stuff and were MADE for people who wanted to not have
to do anything to their computer but use it. No power tweaking, no real
customization options, etc. It looks like this, you install this and it
USUALLY works.. Done. The MacOSX. Best of many worlds, but still not 100%
ready for any power-tweaking people. Yeah - you got the BSD background, so
you have something to play with, but there are some things in the GUI that
seem locked. I like OSX. It's a sweet OS too. It does exactly what an OS
should. Works 90% of the time, allows one to play with most of its features
and look and accepts a multitude of applications with little modification.
If OSX cannot turn Macintosh around, then all the pretty outside boxes
(grape, apple, etc and the new cheese-grater look) in the world won't.

*nix:
Wonderful! Fantastic! For Professionals and Power users and those who have
time to play around. Some of the GUIs can be adapted for normal users, but
God help them if something goes awry and you have to get them to repair it.
No longer are they dealing with their familiar GUI. I love *nix products,
but you are not getting me to give it to 99% of the people I deal with on a
daily basis, yet.

Other:
BeOS, Lindows, EROS, DOS, OS/2, etc..

Make your own decision. Noble attempts, waste of time, still has a chance,
cool to keep somewhere as a timeline demonstration?

--
Shenan Stanley
"Just trying to help"

Shenan T. Stanley wrote:

> There was one point
> when I actually recommended OS/2 over anything else.

And there you have it. You're an idiot.

--
There is no end to human stupidity.
http://kadaitcha.kicks-ass.org:83

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:50:09 GMT, Markus

> Mac has always been years ahead of IBM/Intell/M$.

Pity about the hardware monopoly. Like Bill Clinton vs. Pol Pot.



>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Hmmm... what was the *other* idea?
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Any credibility you had went away when your name calling arrived.
Your name calling is nothing more than a feeble attempt to shore up
your poor position.

An example is your last paragraph about "Is THIS newsgroup "valid
source" enough for you?"
Actually no it is not, not if you want to demonstrate that Windows XP
is bad.
No more than going to a hospital and assuming all people were sick.
No more than going to an automobile repair shop and determining all
automobiles are broken.
These newsgroups are largely to help others to solve problems so it is
normal; for people to come here with problems.

Perhaps it you who is not awake.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
Please respond to newsgroup only for everyone's benefit.


wrote in message
news:cf40ivciutfd3n15dp720h01r1ft43b0n1@4ax.com...
SNIPPED
> Is THIS newsgroup "valid source" enough for you? How many questions
> have you read here? How many answers require calling MS, visiting
> their update site, modifying the registry to make it work.
> You seem to think Windows is the perfect software, and everybody is
> 100% satisfied with it and the way MS handles busines.
> If that were true.......... this newsgroup would not be here, there
> would be no Mac's, no Linux.......... after all if it were that
> perfect, why would anybody want anything else?
> I hpoe I provided enough non- Nat.Enquirer links for you feeble mind
> to mull over.......... but then again, it will probably take you 6
> months to click all the links..........

metamorphosis wrote:
> Do you have enough toilet paper with which to wipe your and Jupiter
> Mones arse?

Plenty. I print out all your responses!

--
Shenan Stanley
"Just trying to help"

And if anyone other than the trolls wish to respond, then that is when I
will respond again.
Trolls are okay, don't get me wrong - but you can only encourage them so
much.
They have to come out from under the bridge on their own.

--
Shenan Stanley

After see this post, all I can say is that I couldn't agree more with Shenan
and Jupiter. Although I do have some problems with XP, most (if not almost
all) of "buttnuget"'s facts are incorrect.
"Shenan T. Stanley" wrote in message
news:OSuUuFjUDHA.412@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> And if anyone other than the trolls wish to respond, then that is when I
> will respond again.
> Trolls are okay, don't get me wrong - but you can only encourage them so
> much.
> They have to come out from under the bridge on their own.
>
> --
> Shenan Stanley
>
>

Shenan T. Stanley wrote:
: metamorphosis <> wrote:
:: Do you have enough toilet paper with which to wipe your and Jupiter
:: Mones arse?
:
:: Shenan T. Stanley wrote:
:: Plenty. I print out all your responses!
:
: metamorphosis <> wrote:
:: Great, you need it.
:
: It's arguments like yours that win arguments like mine.
: Thanks!

Wrong; I made no argument, it was a question followed by a statement; you really must learn to distinguish
between the three.
You win nothing with your self opinionated babbling, but I can understand how someone needs to follow up
with the wiping of Jupiters arse.

: I didn't really request any outside effort, but every little bit
: helps. =)

"I didn't really request any outside effort" are you saying that unless and until you do, others cannot
express anything? LOL
Do yaself a favour and FOAD.
--
::
-
-

Shenan T. Stanley 'Oo-oo and one more thing I forgot' wrote:
: And if anyone other than the trolls wish to respond, then that is
: when I will respond again.

Was it really necessary to post your opinion in 1204 words?
Think about it disckhead, what have you written that is exclusiveley different to anything else available,
other than your worthless opinon?


: Trolls are okay, don't get me wrong - but you can only encourage them
: so much.
: They have to come out from under the bridge on their own.

Again, your worthless opinion.

Anything else?

--
::
-
-

metamorphosis <> wrote:
> Again, your worthless opinion.
>
> Anything else?

For those not interested, no. I could pose the same question to you, and
am..

Anything else?

You and the clown from Cleopatra 2525 (least that is what it looks like) can
shoot out one-liners all day.
Probably the same person or brothers anyway.

--
Shenan Stanley

Back to my original bitch, which was not directed at the product, but the
process imposed on me after I have purchased it as in "Paid in Full".
Considering myself somewhat of a reasonable person, I understand they are
protecting their product from illegal yada yada yada ...but to force me to
activate my "paid in full" copy or lose the use of it is bull****. I would
hate to be forced to call Ford every time I empty the ****ing ashtray,
change radio station, new floor mats combination or some other change to my
"paid in full" car that would cause it to not start until I complied to the
bull**** rules of Henry.


"Don Burnette" wrote in message
news:%23zkEgDzUDHA.2272@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> They always resort to name calling Jupiter, that is the one common
> denominator in those posters.
>
> I just don't get it. I have no troubles with wpa. Since first purchasing
XP
> Home in Dec of 01, and upgrading to XP pro almost a year ago, it has
> performed flawlessly.
> Understand, I love to change things in my computer. I rarely go more than
6
> months, at most, without changing out some components.
> Since my first XP install, I have changed 3 motherboards, 2 processors,
> added new ram, added new hard drive, added external usb 2.0 hard drive,
> changed 2 video cards, added a new cd rw.
> I have had to re-activate 3 times total I think, 2 of which went very
> quickly over the internet, and one of which required me to call a toll
free
> number, which took about 5 minutes.
> Oh, and I have reformatted a couple of times as well.
>
> Don Burnette
>
>
>
>
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> > Any credibility you had went away when your name calling arrived.
> > Your name calling is nothing more than a feeble attempt to shore up
> > your poor position.
> >
> > An example is your last paragraph about "Is THIS newsgroup "valid
> > source" enough for you?"
> > Actually no it is not, not if you want to demonstrate that Windows XP
> > is bad.
> > No more than going to a hospital and assuming all people were sick.
> > No more than going to an automobile repair shop and determining all
> > automobiles are broken.
> > These newsgroups are largely to help others to solve problems so it is
> > normal; for people to come here with problems.
> >
> > Perhaps it you who is not awake.
> >
> >
> > wrote in message
> > news:cf40ivciutfd3n15dp720h01r1ft43b0n1@4ax.com...
> > SNIPPED
> >> Is THIS newsgroup "valid source" enough for you? How many questions
> >> have you read here? How many answers require calling MS, visiting
> >> their update site, modifying the registry to make it work.
> >> You seem to think Windows is the perfect software, and everybody is
> >> 100% satisfied with it and the way MS handles busines.
> >> If that were true.......... this newsgroup would not be here, there
> >> would be no Mac's, no Linux.......... after all if it were that
> >> perfect, why would anybody want anything else?
> >> I hpoe I provided enough non- Nat.Enquirer links for you feeble mind
> >> to mull over.......... but then again, it will probably take you 6
> >> months to click all the links..........
>
>
>
>
>
>

While restarting Outlook, Will Denny grumbled:

> It's a shame that MS don't have a description like yours, Bruce. It would make understanding the EULA a lot easier.
>
> Will

Long EULAs make it easier to hide other more disquieting clauses.

relic wrote:

> "If you can't trust Microsoft, who can you trust?"

Do you really believe that? It is really sad if you do.

Do you really think Microsoft cares about customers?

I thought you were smarter than that. Just how many years have you been
involved with PCs? Sounded like more than 40 years from some of your
previous posts. Have you not learned anything all these years?

Using it and trusting it are 2 different things relic. I do not have a
problem You or anybody else prefering to use windows. But trusting
microsoft? It is sad coming from you. I expected more from you. You are one
of more sane people in this newsgroup. I do respect you in a lot of ways.

You have disappointed me relic with the above statement.

Really sad.....

semantics ....ok....I have purchased a copy of an OS, not the OS.
NO ****en **** .....
The terms are not on the box, but instead, revealed during installation.
Also, if I do not agree, can I get my money back, since I had to open it to
read the agreement.


"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message
news:vi7nmgsqst0h6f@corp.supernews.com...
> Greetings --
>
> The whole point is that you have *not* purchased the operating
> system. You, like everyone else in the world, can only "purchase" the
> copyright owner's permission to use the product for as long as you
> abide by the terms of the specific license. If you don't like those
> license terms, purchase a different license or a different product --
> it's that simple.
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> --
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
> having both at once. -- RAH
>
>
> "asr" wrote in message
> news:HWHUa.19592$BB6.601931@twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> > Back to my original bitch, which was not directed at the product,
> but the
> > process imposed on me after I have purchased it as in "Paid in
> Full".
> > Considering myself somewhat of a reasonable person, I understand
> they are
> > protecting their product from illegal yada yada yada ...but to force
> me to
> > activate my "paid in full" copy or lose the use of it is bull****.
>
> Irrelevancies snipped....
>
>
>

Lord Gazwad of Grantham - MVP (Special Faeces) wrote:
: Jupiter Jones [MVP] asked wistfully...
:
::: Any credibility you had went away when your name calling arrived.
:
: Please explain why you take this position, it's very interesting when
: people who have no argument try to turn the tables and insist that
: their opponent has lost all credibility because they were a stupid
: twat.

I agree with this poast.

Welcome back Lord Gazwad
--
Keyser Soze

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
One can always be kind to people
about whom one cares nothing. OW

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
WARNING:
*linux makes you stupid as confirmed by linux**** Peter Köhlmann*
Evidently endorsed by another linux****witted cunt *ALW*.
JC & Linønut are just two little linux****lets.
21/07/2003 13:09 Re: Question for linux geeks...
Peter Köhlmanns claim *"Linux may very well make you stupid"*
Peter Köhlmanns supporting argument "but just watch what windows does to
you!"
Peter Köhlmanns sig 'Idiot'.

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 02:47:09 GMT, wrote:

>semantics ....ok....I have purchased a copy of an OS, not the OS.
>NO ****en **** .....
>The terms are not on the box, but instead, revealed during installation.
>Also, if I do not agree, can I get my money back, since I had to open it to
>read the agreement.
>
EXACTLY. Stores don't allow software to be returned with unopened
packaging.
Question: Why does not Microsoft print the EULA on the box?
Have a plastic coated copy displayed for inspection at place of sale?
They have had thousands of complaints dating back to Win95. Why hide
it on the disc? And purposefully might I add.
Microsoft along with Symantic are being sued for this right now.
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-983988.html

The responses made from the MSVP's here sound like standard
Bill-in-training smoke.
"There is no problems with Windows". "It's the best product you have
ever used...if you don't believe me, ask me". "There is NO
inconvenience for you to do what Microsoft wants".

I happen to LIKE Windows. And do not WANT to use Linux, or a Mac.
I would also like a little more consideration when I lay down $300 for
a copy of WinXP Pro.
I DO NOT want to be treated like a criminal who at any moment will
give copies of the disc to all my friends.
I DO NOT want to have to call and ask permission (yes, that's what it
boils down to) to do ANY upgrades to my own system. I have not
"licensed" my machine from Microsoft. I OWN it.

Please do not treat people here with valid complaints, as idiots who
do not know what is best for them.
There is a REASON why Microsoft has been sued so many times.
And if they don't change their ways...it will be their downfall.
I am not a "whiner" or anti-social person. I (and others) have a
valid complaint.
I have read in the past where this was "Microsofts" newsgroup.
It seem like a decidedly "On-Topic" place to voice an opinion on this.