Verbrugge uit den Anuscoureur wrote:
> William Poaster, ye self-centred hell's black intelligencer, let's meet
> as little as we can, ye vented:
>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 17:28:20 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> d wrote:
>>>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>>>>> Frank Arthur advocated: [ <-- attribution reinstated ]
>>>>> 1. No need for anti-virus applications 2. No need for anti-spyware
>>>>> applications 3. No need for anti-trojans or worry about rootkits 4. No
>>>>> need to 'defrag' every month
>>>>> 5. No need for registry cleanup
>>>>> 6. No need to 'reformat' every month
>>>>> 7. Many thousands of free applications available at the click
>>>>> of a mouse or one command line entry
>>>>> 8. Hundreds of choices based on individual needs 9. The price is right
>>>>> ...many more reasons
>>>> 10. because you have even less idea whats going on underneath than
>>>> windows
>>> Maybe in your case.

>> Because it's open source, a linux user has actually got *more* chance of
>> fixing things than a in closed source Windoze, where you'd have to wait
>> till M$ decide *if* they're gonna fix it.

> What a complete load of ****ing ****. There are innumerable dead open source
> projects on sourceforge,

Read beliefs about, that tell the TRUTH, and lurk it OR....

> and there hundreds of millions more users who do
> not know what code is, let alone are capable of debugging, fixing and
> recompiling it

and then there's those WHO can... burst to EVERY Win**** rascal who has
no workshop what's going on.

> you less than useless one-eyed linuxfuxtard cunt.

That makes sense, PMSL.

> The only people who have "*more* chance of fixing things", you brain dead
> flapfart, are those who know how to fix them.

What? Micro**** (see wildcard:#yourself don't)