My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu ; Erik Funkenbusch wrote: > On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:30:49 -0500, Ignoramus27079 wrote: (..) >> Due to much improved scripting, our production support people are also >> able to do a lot less. I have extensive experience with Windows >> ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 250

Thread: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

  1. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    > On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:30:49 -0500, Ignoramus27079 wrote:

    (..)
    >> Due to much improved scripting, our production support people are also
    >> able to do a lot less. I have extensive experience with Windows
    >> scripting and it cannot compare due to various Windows nonsense.

    >
    > Also utter BS. The single most advanced scripting environment available
    > for general purpose computers is PowerShell. It blows the doors of any
    > other scripting environment out there.

    (...)

    That is a joke, right?! Only someone with little (or no experience) with
    scripting languages and system administration can anyone consider
    PowerShell "The single most advanced scripting environment available for
    general purpose computers"

    >> Altogether, the efforts to maintain those linux boxes and their
    >> software (including our software) are many times less than that
    >> required for Windows, plus no performance issues. Changes can be
    >> rolled out in minutes. Scripts make a lot less mistakes than humans,
    >> etc.

    >
    > And somehow you managed to retrain all your developers without any loss of
    > productivity or migration issues. Yeah, right. If what you say is true,
    > you have the single most amazing development staff on the planet.


    It can be true if the team of developers is experienced in portable and
    cross-platform development.

    >> So, as a final tally I think that everyone is very happy about this
    >> move. The windows centered computer administrators were apprehensive
    >> in the beginning, but now they see it as less work. Plus people with
    >> Linux on resumes are paid 15-20% more, according to Microsoft, so they
    >> like this aspect.

    >
    > Wow, not only are the amazing, they're also entirely even headed without
    > any prejudices or predisposions. They don't care that their entire
    > skillsets are suddenly being dumped and they have to relearn everything.


    The fact is that a developer's skill set does not get "dumped" and a
    developer does *not* "have to relearn everything" just because (s)he
    changed is tools of work.

    > I've never met a group of developers like that. You have quite a
    > (ficticious) team there.


    I have met several, with the exception of "paid 15-20% more" part.

    A good developer (team) should adapt quickly to a new environment. In the
    end, a programming environment is mostly a text editor, a compiler, a
    staging area, and a debugger.

    I have worked in a varied set of development environments and a few hours of
    messing around and a few days getting used to where everything is and the
    productivity again dependents only on the programmer's ability to write
    code.

    Regards.

  2. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:09:42 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    > snipe wrote:


    [...]

    > Linux as a desktop has been a long time coming..its a lot of OS just to
    > run apps..


    Um, which OS isn't?

    > and having to support multiple versions of it on multiple
    > window managers is a tough call.


    Can't quite parse that. What has to support multiple versions of what on
    multiple window managers?

    > Thats the whole Ubuntu idea, stabilize a particular desktop. And hope
    > people port apps to it.


    Strange. None of the apps I run seem to care too much which desktop/window
    manager they are running under. If they did they would by definition be
    badly written (or possibly just old) - there is a standard for how apps
    are to interact with window managers.

    [...]

    --
    Lionel B

  3. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    > There is a very good reason to run windows. Because the program, you
    > need to USE (remember USING a computer rather than pratting about with
    > it) doesn't run on anything ELSE.


    Not any more. If I /really/ needed to use a Windoze-only application, I'd
    virtualize it. However, that sad state of affairs doesn't happen any more!

    C.


  4. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    > However while Linux is good and fast underneath I am not so sure that
    > X-windows is actually the best way to do graphics. I am not the worlds
    > expert but it did seem to me last time I peeked into it and hastily
    > looked away, that there's an awful lot more code to change a pixel in
    > that than in windows. And no short cuts.


    You've seen the Windows source code, have you? I have, and can tell you that
    DX10 is /much/ less efficient than the X server. The "optimisations" for
    DX10 don't work for most hardware...

    C.

  5. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    MD5dennis licked his wounds and prattled:

    >> You *can* be certain that all MS "operating systems" include "facilities"
    >> for the NSA (or whatever they're called this week).


    > So show one then!


    Take a look at the browser flaw that was "resolved" by the recent "urgent"
    Windows patch. The one that wasn't issued on a "patch Tuesday". The
    underlying flaw has been covered up, but there are /still/ several points of
    possible access *using* *that* *flaw* - the patch was only issued to:

    (a) Show that they're doing "something" (after yet another bank compromise)

    (b) Close the backdoor that was recently exploited by the Russians. (Change
    one address call, and the exploit /still/ works!)

    //Abuse snipped//

    C.




  6. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:24:03 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    wrote:

    >The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >
    >> There is a very good reason to run windows. Because the program, you
    >> need to USE (remember USING a computer rather than pratting about with
    >> it) doesn't run on anything ELSE.

    >
    >Not any more. If I /really/ needed to use a Windoze-only application, I'd
    >virtualize it. However, that sad state of affairs doesn't happen any more!
    >
    >C.


    I suggest that you are wrong.

    One of the more important uses I have for a computer is to run
    navigation programs used on a cruising sail boat. These programs,
    which include a world wide set of charts, utilize GPS information to
    display one's position on the correct chart, keep track of where
    you've been, heading, speed and course, and any leeway or course
    deviation due to currents. On some voyages, say non-stop from Thailand
    to India, a two week open ocean trip the program is an essential aid
    to navigation.

    The programs will not run on Linux, nor have I, in the past year, been
    able to locate any Linux substitute for the two programs I use.

    Since you insist that there is no reason to use Windows please advise
    your solution to my problem. Give up sailing?

    Before you reply please be advised that the failure of the system to
    provide correct and timely navigation data may well result in lose of
    the vessel and/or loss of life.

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  7. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:

    > You must realise that all the good open source is exactly that open
    > source, and it runs on windows and other OSes not just the linux kernel.



    Not all open source is cross platform. Far from it. There are TONS of
    obscure Linux/Unix/BSD-only programs that you probably haven't heard of.

    Cross-platform FOSS benefits from the efforts of people who want the
    stuff to run on Windows. There are twenty or fifty or a hundred times
    as many Windows users as Linux users, and most programmers---FOSS or
    not---like to see their stuff put to use by as many as possible.

    A few Linux folks on a big project can direct their attention to making
    sure the stuff works on Linux, so Linux users get the benefit of the
    work of a lot of programmers who could give a hoot about Linux.

  8. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 22:06:05 -0600, Ignoramus22113 wrote:

    > The problem with bash on Windows relates mainly to Windows
    > idiosyncrasies, such as that you cannot delete a file with the image of
    > a currently running executable. Which is an incredible pain in the ass.
    > Under Linux, you can delete a dile with running executable just fine. It
    > will continue to run etc. This is a nightmare when it comes to updates
    > (and that's why Windows tells you to close apps when you are upgrading).


    Oh that **** has caused me so much grief under windows it's beyond
    ridiculous. I have the problem with Solidworks files all the time (the
    only reason I need windows installed on this machine) as explorer
    (sometimes and relatively unreliably) shows thumbnails for those files.
    However, sometimes the file won't create a thumbnail for some odd reason
    and the explorer then will not allow me to delete it was the file is
    "open". Even after a reboot of windows, can't delete the file as explorer
    is the process that is accessing it.

    I've had times where I needed to reboot into Ubuntu to delete the damn
    file because Explorer wouldn't let me.

    Oh and yea, let's not get into the nightmares of distributing software
    updates. An application can't just simply replace it's own EXE and
    restart itself. What a ****ing hack is it to have to create a second
    executable that is run to see if the main executable needs to be updated,
    update it, and then call the main exe? Now what the **** do you do if you
    need to change the exe that does the updating?

    Windows: The biggest piece of **** on this planet.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  9. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

    > Since you insist that there is no reason to use Windows please advise
    > your solution to my problem. Give up sailing?


    You have several options - there *is* some Linux GPS software about, and it's
    good, or you could run it under an emulator, or you could write your own (not
    too difficult), or you could ask someone else to develop the software for
    you...

    > Before you reply please be advised that the failure of the system to
    > provide correct and timely navigation data may well result in lose of
    > the vessel and/or loss of life.


    If it's *that* critical, Windows is the /last/ "operating system" you should
    choose! Also, if you're irresponsible enough to trust the safety of other
    people, yourself, and your vessel to Windows, perhaps you /should/ give up
    sailing.

    C.


  10. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:6n8cimFk90rfU3@mid.individual.net...
    > The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >
    >> However while Linux is good and fast underneath I am not so sure that
    >> X-windows is actually the best way to do graphics. I am not the worlds
    >> expert but it did seem to me last time I peeked into it and hastily
    >> looked away, that there's an awful lot more code to change a pixel in
    >> that than in windows. And no short cuts.

    >
    > You've seen the Windows source code, have you? I have, and can tell you
    > that
    > DX10 is /much/ less efficient than the X server. The "optimisations" for
    > DX10 don't work for most hardware...


    They are optimised for shader model 4.1.
    They are not intended to run on any old junk that you happen to have around.
    The X server doesn't support any such model so it won't have optimisations
    for it.
    Are you sure you have even seen the code for X let alone windows?
    I doubt it.



  11. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Christopher Hunter wrote:
    > The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >
    >> However while Linux is good and fast underneath I am not so sure that
    >> X-windows is actually the best way to do graphics. I am not the worlds
    >> expert but it did seem to me last time I peeked into it and hastily
    >> looked away, that there's an awful lot more code to change a pixel in
    >> that than in windows. And no short cuts.

    >
    > You've seen the Windows source code, have you? I have, and can tell you that
    > DX10 is /much/ less efficient than the X server. The "optimisations" for
    > DX10 don't work for most hardware...
    >


    MMm. I have to say this goes back some way, when windows 98 would run on
    hardware that X certainly barely crawled on.


    I cant answer for todays bloatware.

    > C.


  12. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:27:30 +0000, Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >
    >> However while Linux is good and fast underneath I am not so sure that
    >> X-windows is actually the best way to do graphics. I am not the worlds
    >> expert but it did seem to me last time I peeked into it and hastily
    >> looked away, that there's an awful lot more code to change a pixel in
    >> that than in windows. And no short cuts.

    >
    > You've seen the Windows source code, have you? I have, and can tell you
    > that DX10 is /much/ less efficient than the X server. The
    > "optimisations" for DX10 don't work for most hardware...
    >


    Actually I honestly gotta say DirectX is about the one and only thing I
    consider that Microsoft actually got RIGHT! I ditched OpenGL after the
    whole 3.0 disaster.

    HLSL and the debugging tools for DirectX made me not even remotely
    consider looking back to OpenGL. It's sad as I really wanted one of my
    projects to be cross-platform but wine support is simply going to have to
    do.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  13. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:6n8d0mFk90rfU4@mid.individual.net...
    > MD5dennis licked his wounds and prattled:
    >
    >>> You *can* be certain that all MS "operating systems" include
    >>> "facilities"
    >>> for the NSA (or whatever they're called this week).

    >
    >> So show one then!

    >
    > Take a look at the browser flaw that was "resolved" by the recent "urgent"
    > Windows patch. The one that wasn't issued on a "patch Tuesday". The
    > underlying flaw has been covered up, but there are /still/ several points
    > of
    > possible access *using* *that* *flaw* - the patch was only issued to:
    >
    > (a) Show that they're doing "something" (after yet another bank
    > compromise)
    >
    > (b) Close the backdoor that was recently exploited by the Russians.
    > (Change
    > one address call, and the exploit /still/ works!)


    So now you are claiming any code error that allows the possibility of remote
    access is a plot.
    You are paranoid.
    BTW does that mean linux is also full of stuff to allow the NSA in as it
    also has and has had lots of similar exploits possible.

    >
    > //Abuse snipped//


    You call this abuse

    "So show one then!
    You just keep chuntering away and making stuff up, no sensible person
    believes a word you say."

    You are an idiot.





  14. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    > On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:24:03 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    > wrote:
    >
    >> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >>
    >>> There is a very good reason to run windows. Because the program, you
    >>> need to USE (remember USING a computer rather than pratting about with
    >>> it) doesn't run on anything ELSE.

    >> Not any more. If I /really/ needed to use a Windoze-only application, I'd
    >> virtualize it. However, that sad state of affairs doesn't happen any more!
    >>
    >> C.

    >
    > I suggest that you are wrong.
    >
    > One of the more important uses I have for a computer is to run
    > navigation programs used on a cruising sail boat. These programs,
    > which include a world wide set of charts, utilize GPS information to
    > display one's position on the correct chart, keep track of where
    > you've been, heading, speed and course, and any leeway or course
    > deviation due to currents. On some voyages, say non-stop from Thailand
    > to India, a two week open ocean trip the program is an essential aid
    > to navigation.


    Yeah - sure. And EVERY user has a cruising sail boat. There
    are so many cruising sail boats that there is no more room
    on any lake left. So EVERY user has to use Windows. Thats
    the reason you cannot use Linux. Right! I got it!

    > The programs will not run on Linux, nor have I, in the past year, been
    > able to locate any Linux substitute for the two programs I use.
    > Since you insist that there is no reason to use Windows please advise
    > your solution to my problem. Give up sailing?


    You have to use windows - sure. Just as any other user
    owning a cruising sail boat. How stupid he does not
    recognized that.

    > Before you reply please be advised that the failure of the system to
    > provide correct and timely navigation data may well result in lose of
    > the vessel and/or loss of life.
    >


    That would be a mass extinction, because every windows owner
    also has a cruising sail boat. OMG...

    > Bruce-in-Bangkok
    > (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)


    You know.. I think it is strange people stating MS-Windows
    is unmissable always come up with applications only a very,
    very exclusive small minority are using. Example? "you
    cannot use Linux because it does not run AutoCAD." So what?
    How many standard households (and middle-of-the-road
    company's) are using AutoCAD? The same for the latest and
    the newest Photoshop. How many standard households (and
    middle-of-the-road company's) can't survive without the
    newest and latest (CS3) Photoshop. How many many standard
    households (and middle-of-the-road company's) can even
    afford those applications (without pirating - another thing
    in majority only existing in windows-land).


    Sigh - of all stupid things...

  15. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    John Kloosterman wrote:

    > You know.. I think it is strange people stating MS-Windows is
    > unmissable always come up with applications only a very, very
    > exclusive small minority are using. Example? "you cannot use Linux
    > because it does not run AutoCAD." So what? How many standard
    > households (and middle-of-the-road company's) are using AutoCAD? The
    > same for the latest and the newest Photoshop. How many standard
    > households (and middle-of-the-road company's) can't survive without
    > the newest and latest (CS3) Photoshop. How many many standard
    > households (and middle-of-the-road company's) can even afford those
    > applications (without pirating - another thing in majority only
    > existing in windows-land).
    >
    >
    > Sigh - of all stupid things...


    What might be considered stupid is to believe that every household is
    the same. Or that any are "standard," whatever that might mean in your
    dream -- today.

    I run AutoCAD, but I don't in any way believe that I can't use Linux. I
    use Linux for nearly everything, but if I should need to use AutoCAD,
    then I move over to a Windows box.

    Maybe your vision of a "standard household" only contains one computer?
    I don't know, but I evidentially don't even appear in your narrow view
    of computerdom, eh.

    What "they" do is not my concern, and shouldn't be a target of your
    observations either.

    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, 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.

  16. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    MD5dennis drooled:

    > So now you are claiming any code error that allows the possibility of remote
    > access is a plot.


    No. That particular "flaw" was /deliberately/ introduced.

    > You are paranoid.


    No. Just realistic.

    > BTW does that mean linux is also full of stuff to allow the NSA in as it
    > also has and has had lots of similar exploits possible.


    No - proper code oversight ensures that these things don't happen. There is
    *no* effective inspection of Windoze code - no department is ever allowed to
    examine the work of another. This is just another way that MS get their code
    in a spectacular mess, with continual duplication of effort, no real version
    control system and /deliberately/ ineffectual "management".

    Game Over, MD5dennis

    C.


  17. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:47:56 -0600, John F. Morse wrote:

    > John Kloosterman wrote:
    >
    >> You know.. I think it is strange people stating MS-Windows is
    >> unmissable always come up with applications only a very, very exclusive
    >> small minority are using. Example? "you cannot use Linux because it
    >> does not run AutoCAD." So what? How many standard households (and
    >> middle-of-the-road company's) are using AutoCAD? The same for the
    >> latest and the newest Photoshop. How many standard households (and
    >> middle-of-the-road company's) can't survive without the newest and
    >> latest (CS3) Photoshop. How many many standard households (and
    >> middle-of-the-road company's) can even afford those applications
    >> (without pirating - another thing in majority only existing in
    >> windows-land).
    >>
    >>
    >> Sigh - of all stupid things...

    >
    > What might be considered stupid is to believe that every household is
    > the same. Or that any are "standard," whatever that might mean in your
    > dream -- today.
    >
    > I run AutoCAD, but I don't in any way believe that I can't use Linux. I
    > use Linux for nearly everything, but if I should need to use AutoCAD,
    > then I move over to a Windows box.
    >
    > Maybe your vision of a "standard household" only contains one computer?
    > I don't know, but I evidentially don't even appear in your narrow view
    > of computerdom, eh.
    >
    > What "they" do is not my concern, and shouldn't be a target of your
    > observations either.


    He's got a very valid point though. Seriously, how many households need
    or use AutoCAD? With software like that it is more than fair enough to
    say that the greater majority of people probably don't.

    Photoshop I also agree. If I think about all the people I personally know
    that even own it in the first place, very few. That gets reduced to
    absolutely none if I only consider those who actually know how to use it
    to a fraction of it's potential and/or actually purchased it.

    I mean seriously, unless someone is a graphics artist, who needs
    Photoshop? There are far more efficient and better suited tools to look
    at, resize and rotate poor pictures taken by poor cameras by a person who
    didn't have a clue how to use a camera in the first place.

    Fer crying out loud, people think that the **** cellphones produce is
    great! Does those people really need Photoshop to resize their crap
    quality pictures?

    If the developers working on the standard image viewer in Gnome and just
    expand it's abilities to include standard operations such as Resize and
    Crop you could easily cover over 90% of the needs of most people. That's
    more than sufficient.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  18. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    John F. Morse wrote:
    > John Kloosterman wrote:
    >
    >> You know.. I think it is strange people stating MS-Windows is
    >> unmissable always come up with applications only a very, very
    >> exclusive small minority are using. Example? "you cannot use Linux
    >> because it does not run AutoCAD." So what? How many standard
    >> households (and middle-of-the-road company's) are using AutoCAD? The
    >> same for the latest and the newest Photoshop. How many standard
    >> households (and middle-of-the-road company's) can't survive without
    >> the newest and latest (CS3) Photoshop. How many many standard
    >> households (and middle-of-the-road company's) can even afford those
    >> applications (without pirating - another thing in majority only
    >> existing in windows-land).
    >>
    >>
    >> Sigh - of all stupid things...

    >
    > What might be considered stupid is to believe that every household is
    > the same. Or that any are "standard," whatever that might mean in your
    > dream -- today.
    >
    > I run AutoCAD, but I don't in any way believe that I can't use Linux. I
    > use Linux for nearly everything, but if I should need to use AutoCAD,
    > then I move over to a Windows box.
    >
    > Maybe your vision of a "standard household" only contains one computer?
    > I don't know, but I evidentially don't even appear in your narrow view
    > of computerdom, eh.
    >
    > What "they" do is not my concern, and shouldn't be a target of your
    > observations either.
    >


    Forgive me for using some ironic language in the reaction on
    Bruce above, but in most cases when Windows is called
    absolutely unmissable the "average" poster does refer to the
    "average Joe" as the one and only "normal" user. I know -
    being a Linux user in a Linux group I should never ever use
    the "average" or "normal" specifications describing the
    people in my neighborhood. I deeply regret my language... ;-).

    John.

  19. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    [Snip...]

    > you could easily cover over 90% of the needs of most people


    FWIW, my view is the picky headcases should just get a Mac and be happy.

    JMO; YMMV...

    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
    I toss GoogleGroup posts from gitgo (http://improve-usenet.org).

  20. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    > news:6n8d0mFk90rfU4@mid.individual.net...
    >> MD5dennis licked his wounds and prattled:
    >>
    >>>> You *can* be certain that all MS "operating systems" include
    >>>> "facilities"
    >>>> for the NSA (or whatever they're called this week).

    >>
    >>> So show one then!

    >>
    >> Take a look at the browser flaw that was "resolved" by the recent
    >> "urgent"
    >> Windows patch. The one that wasn't issued on a "patch Tuesday". The
    >> underlying flaw has been covered up, but there are /still/ several
    >> points of
    >> possible access *using* *that* *flaw* - the patch was only issued to:
    >>
    >> (a) Show that they're doing "something" (after yet another bank
    >> compromise)
    >>
    >> (b) Close the backdoor that was recently exploited by the Russians.
    >> (Change
    >> one address call, and the exploit /still/ works!)

    >
    > So now you are claiming any code error that allows the possibility of
    > remote access is a plot.
    > You are paranoid.


    Or you are terribly naive. Is it really impossible?

    Sure.. Big corporations and a government never ever do
    things like testing hallucinogen or war gas on people. They
    also absolutely can resist the opportunity to hide some
    stuff in parts of code nobody is allowed to see and is used
    worldwide. What a relief!

    And pigs can fly of coarse...

    > BTW does that mean linux is also full of stuff to allow the NSA in as it
    > also has and has had lots of similar exploits possible.
    >


    The difference is that anybody can see the code and there
    ARE things that are corrected. It is impossible to hide
    NSA-things. The key here is "not hidden". Easy eh?

    >>
    >> //Abuse snipped//

    >
    > You call this abuse
    >
    > "So show one then!
    > You just keep chuntering away and making stuff up, no sensible person
    > believes a word you say."
    >
    > You are an idiot.
    >
    >


    It is sometimes better to be called an idiot, than to be
    blamed for something terrible that happened because you was
    blindly trusting the wrong persons/corporations - just to
    avoid being called a idiot.

    Now think about that... ;-).

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast