Vista users. Why bother to answer them? - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Vista users. Why bother to answer them? - Ubuntu ; SINNER wrote: > * dennis@home wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu: > > Funny, my thoughts exactly and your trolling ability has gotten rusty, you > seem out or practice. > >> Oh dear the morons back. >> Lets explain it in English ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 81 to 100 of 100

Thread: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

  1. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    SINNER wrote:
    > * dennis@home wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
    >
    > Funny, my thoughts exactly and your trolling ability has gotten rusty, you
    > seem out or practice.
    >
    >> Oh dear the morons back.
    >> Lets explain it in English that is so simple even you can understand
    >> what you quoted..
    >>
    >> He is using the windows with some software which I don't know where it
    >> came from so windows is OK.
    >> Got it so far?

    >
    > We ALL got that except you let me re quote the relevant part for this
    > discussion
    >
    >> I don't know where it
    >> came from

    >
    > So you dont have any idea what the software he uses is or where he got it,
    > got that so far?
    >
    >> If he is going to use linux I am going to have to put it on.

    >
    > Right, which we have already determined that you are incapable of, please
    > reference your thread regarding WUBI.
    >
    >> Still with me?
    >>
    >> I can't find any linux software to do what he wants,

    >
    > You dont know that, since you dont know what that software is yet you still
    > said:
    >
    > [Q]
    > Linux wouldn't be much use as I can't find much in the way of software
    > that actually helps an 87 yo with cataracts to be able to use a computer.
    > [/Q]
    >
    >
    >> there may be
    >> software that does it but I don't know what.
    >>
    >> So is that simple enough?

    >
    > Not for you to see where the error in your previous statements are. Dont
    > you find it the least bit curious that EVERYONE that responded to your post
    > had the exact same sentiement? NB: you already told me that we need 10
    > Moog's to 'correct the damage I do' but even Moog agrees! Now what?
    >
    >> Now sod off!
    >> You really aren't worth the stress on the electrons needed to post.

    >
    > It takes dozens of us REAL Linux users to correct your trolls and blatently
    > incorrect statments.
    >




    No it only takes one. But it takes dozens because he's deaf.
    caver1

  2. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?



    "SINNER" wrote in message
    news:Xns9ABC90DB5EF0louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.1 30...

    idiot.



  3. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:24:30 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

    > idiot.


    You haven't evolved that far.

  4. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:24:30 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "SINNER" wrote in message
    > news:Xns9ABC90DB5EF0louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.1 30...
    >
    > idiot.


    No, he didn't write that. Quit misquoting and lying.

    Bugger off and leave, Win-droid. You've been outed for the troll that you
    are. Everyone knows you're a dip**** and know nothing. Go troll the
    Windoze newsgroups where the residents are as stupid as you are, perhaps
    they won't catch on.


    --
    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
    Now filtering out all posts originating from Google Groups.
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org


  5. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    SINNER wrote:
    > Ah but come on dad, dont spoil our fun, we have so few trolls in this
    > group!


    From what I see, we have NO trolls.

    But we sure have a lot of people arguing
    with folks who don't exist, and even quoting them.


    --
    Wes Groleau

  6. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?



    "Dan C" wrote in message
    newsan.2008.06.13.23.39.23.126128@moria2.lan...
    > On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:24:30 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "SINNER" wrote in message
    >> news:Xns9ABC90DB5EF0louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.1 30...
    >>
    >> idiot.

    >
    > No, he didn't write that.


    Neither did I.

    >Quit misquoting and lying.


    Quit misquoting and lying.

    >
    > Bugger off and leave,


    Same to you.


  7. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Dan C" wrote in message
    > newsan.2008.06.13.23.39.23.126128@moria2.lan...
    >> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:24:30 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "SINNER" wrote in message
    >>> news:Xns9ABC90DB5EF0louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.1 30...
    >>>
    >>> idiot.

    >>
    >> No, he didn't write that.

    >
    > Neither did I.
    >
    >> Quit misquoting and lying.

    >
    > Quit misquoting and lying.
    >
    >>
    >> Bugger off and leave,

    >
    > Same to you.


    I'm not even in this one and you are flaming each other, proving my
    point that each group has a few malcontents.
    Bill Baka

  8. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    SINNER illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

    >
    > Not for you to see where the error in your previous statements are. Dont
    > you find it the least bit curious that EVERYONE that responded to your post
    > had the exact same sentiement? NB: you already told me that we need 10
    > Moog's to 'correct the damage I do' but even Moog agrees! Now what?



    ;-)

    --
    Moog

    “Are you going to come quietly, or do I have to use earplugs?”

  9. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    In article , Joe wrote:
    (snip)

    >Even if your PC did come with an actual XP disc (or Vista), as all of
    >mine have, it is an OEM license. You are not (legally) allowed to
    >install it on another machine, besides the one it was purchased with.
    >


    BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    solved.


  10. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    In article <486084da$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:
    >> BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    >> twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    >> of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    >> solved.

    >
    >Only if you replace A with A, rather than replacing A with a different A
    >or a better A. When you do that's it's no longer the same tool as the
    >old one.
    >Don't argue that it's still just a tool.
    >The maintenance and insurance contracts are not working like that.


    ... Still the same to me. Still the same thing used for (well) similar
    things, OK. What colour it is (which is really what we talk about when we
    talk OS ) is irrelevant I reckon. They may well have different views ...
    thankfully, I no longer have to care what those views are. I'm running a
    purple axe.




  11. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    In article <48608721$0$90275$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:
    >Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote:
    >>> BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    >>> twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    >>> of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    >>> solved.

    >>
    >> Only if you replace A with A, rather than replacing A with a different A
    >> or a better A. When you do that's it's no longer the same tool as the
    >> old one.
    >>
    >> Don't argue that it's still just a tool.
    >> The maintenance and insurance contracts are not working like that.
    >>

    >Of course, I could not call you a Taliban because a
    >Taliban is just another human being.


    I thought a telly ban was not letting the kids watch TV ?

    ... and I have a licence for all my s/w





  12. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    > BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    > twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    > of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    > solved.


    Only if you replace A with A, rather than replacing A with a different A
    or a better A. When you do that's it's no longer the same tool as the
    old one.

    Don't argue that it's still just a tool.
    The maintenance and insurance contracts are not working like that.

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.8
    ^ ^ 13:20:01 up 3:06 1 user load average: 1.00 1.02 1.00
    (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

  13. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote:
    >> BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    >> twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    >> of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    >> solved.

    >
    > Only if you replace A with A, rather than replacing A with a different A
    > or a better A. When you do that's it's no longer the same tool as the
    > old one.
    >
    > Don't argue that it's still just a tool.
    > The maintenance and insurance contracts are not working like that.
    >


    Of course, I could not call you a Taliban because a
    Taliban is just another human being.

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.8
    ^ ^ 13:32:01 up 3:18 1 user load average: 1.04 1.02 1.00
    (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

  14. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    > things, OK. What colour it is (which is really what we talk about when we
    > talk OS ) is irrelevant I reckon. They may well have different views ...
    > thankfully, I no longer have to care what those views are. I'm running a
    > purple axe.


    Go away.. Taliban...

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.8
    ^ ^ 13:40:01 up 3:26 1 user load average: 1.00 1.01 1.00
    (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

  15. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    > I thought a telly ban was not letting the kids watch TV ?

    Do they care about others' kids? Are they all gay?

    > .. and I have a licence for all my s/w


    I could also say so, I guess. :P

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.8
    ^ ^ 14:18:01 up 4:04 1 user load average: 1.00 1.01 1.00
    (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

  16. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    > In article , Joe wrote:
    > (snip)
    >
    >> Even if your PC did come with an actual XP disc (or Vista), as all of
    >> mine have, it is an OEM license. You are not (legally) allowed to
    >> install it on another machine, besides the one it was purchased with.
    >>

    >
    > BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    > twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    > of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    > solved.
    >


    Not according to Microsoft. If you change more than 2 parts of hardware
    sent to Microsoft in the cryptographic hash used to activate your OS,
    you'll have to explain to Microsoft that you've changed a lot of stuff
    in your machine and need your OS re-activating. It's as simple as that.

    However, it can also be legally argued that if you stop using a copy of
    Windows on a certain computer, Microsoft would have to re-activate it so
    you could use it on a different machine. The license means you can only
    use it on one computer, but that doesn't mean you can't switch the
    computer you're using it on.

  17. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    Ben wrote:
    >

    .... snip ...
    >
    > Not according to Microsoft. If you change more than 2 parts of
    > hardware sent to Microsoft in the cryptographic hash used to
    > activate your OS, you'll have to explain to Microsoft that
    > you've changed a lot of stuff in your machine and need your OS
    > re-activating. It's as simple as that.
    >
    > However, it can also be legally argued that if you stop using a
    > copy of Windows on a certain computer, Microsoft would have to
    > re-activate it so you could use it on a different machine. The
    > license means you can only use it on one computer, but that
    > doesn't mean you can't switch the computer you're using it on.


    However this newsgroup appears to deal with Ubuntu, which isn't
    burdened with such things as an impossible licence by Microsoft.

    --
    [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    [page]:
    Try the download section.



  18. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    Ben wrote:
    > Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >> In article , Joe
    >> wrote:
    >> (snip)
    >>
    >>> Even if your PC did come with an actual XP disc (or Vista), as all of
    >>> mine have, it is an OEM license. You are not (legally) allowed to
    >>> install it on another machine, besides the one it was purchased with.
    >>>

    >>
    >> BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and
    >> the head twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace
    >> all the parts of your computer, it must surely still be the same
    >> computer ? Problem solved.
    >>

    >
    > Not according to Microsoft. If you change more than 2 parts of
    > hardware sent to Microsoft in the cryptographic hash used to activate
    > your OS, you'll have to explain to Microsoft that you've changed a lot
    > of stuff in your machine and need your OS re-activating. It's as
    > simple as that.
    >
    > However, it can also be legally argued that if you stop using a copy
    > of Windows on a certain computer, Microsoft would have to re-activate
    > it so you could use it on a different machine. The license means you
    > can only use it on one computer, but that doesn't mean you can't
    > switch the computer you're using it on.



    I thought you were a Linux n00b.

    Now I see you are also a Windows n00b (or a Micr0$lut fanboy or paid troll).

    Perhaps you are one of those MacWhackers?

    Sit back, read, and maybe learn something.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  19. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    In article , Ben wrote:
    >Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >> In article , Joe

    > wrote:
    >> (snip)
    >>
    >>> Even if your PC did come with an actual XP disc (or Vista), as all of
    >>> mine have, it is an OEM license. You are not (legally) allowed to
    >>> install it on another machine, besides the one it was purchased with.


    >> BUT ... if I have an axe and I replace the handle three times and the head
    >> twice, it's still the same axe. Similarly, if you replace all the parts
    >> of your computer, it must surely still be the same computer ? Problem
    >> solved.
    >>

    >Not according to Microsoft. If you change more than 2 parts of hardware
    >sent to Microsoft in the cryptographic hash used to activate your OS,
    >you'll have to explain to Microsoft that you've changed a lot of stuff
    >in your machine and need your OS re-activating. It's as simple as that.


    While MS might be many things, they are not a dictionary. They can't make up
    new definitions for words that will be accepted by the masses. See some
    "standards" for examples of this.
    I've never understood why anyone would use 'licence activation' anyway. That
    was one reason I switched to linux.

    >However, it can also be legally argued that if you stop using a copy of
    >Windows on a certain computer, Microsoft would have to re-activate it so
    >you could use it on a different machine. The license means you can only
    >use it on one computer, but that doesn't mean you can't switch the
    >computer you're using it on.


    Yep. All they are really doing by making their s/w hard to use and/or
    annoying is making alternatives look attractive. More power to them say I !



  20. Re: Vista users. Why bother to answer them?

    Bruce Sinclair wrote:

    > I've never understood why anyone would use 'licence activation' anyway. That
    > was one reason I switched to linux.


    Me either. It didn't work for very long, anyway. People quickly found
    ways to get around the license activation, and there are dozens of
    hacked Windows OSs to download from torrent sites like Demonoid. It only
    delays the inevitable that people *will* find a way to hack past these
    measures and get the OS for free, anyway.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5