Re: Linux hits 6.1% on March!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
>>
>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post
>>> c-mdnVx-bt3cPGvanZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@supernews.com on 4/4/08 2:44 PM:
>>>
>>>>> OOXML is open, that goes over your head.
>>>> No, it isn't.
>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML>
>>> -----
>>> Office Open XML (often referred to as OOXML or OpenXML) is a
>>> free and open XML-based international standard for representing
>>> electronic documents such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations
>>> and word processing documents.
>>> -----
>>>
>>> <http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/OpenXML White
>>> Paper.pdf>
>>> -----
>>> Office Open XML (OpenXML) is a proposed open standard for
>>> word-processing documents, presentations, and spreadsheets
>>> -----
>>>
>>> You were saying?
>>
>> Considering Rick can't grasp the importance of a consistent User
>> Interface for users I am astonished that he now thinks anyone will
>> listen to his "views" on Open Standards.
>>
>> COLA is getting wackier by the day.
>
>
>
> Being that MS keeps moving target where is their consistency?
> caver1
>

I have no idea what you are talking about.

--
"Do a screen-shot of a text. Now disable anti-aliasing. Do again screen-shot of same text. Compare both. They are exactly the same."
Peter Koehlmann, COLA, explaining Anti Aliasing ....
http://tinyurl.com/33672q
 
"Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> stated in post
ft8g9j$4i1$2@registered.motzarella.org on 4/5/08 11:26 AM:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
>
>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post
>> c-mdnVx-bt3cPGvanZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@supernews.com on 4/4/08 2:44 PM:
>>
>>>> OOXML is open, that goes over your head.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML>
>> -----
>> Office Open XML (often referred to as OOXML or OpenXML) is a
>> free and open XML-based international standard for representing
>> electronic documents such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations
>> and word processing documents.
>> -----
>>
>> <http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/OpenXML White
>> Paper.pdf>
>> -----
>> Office Open XML (OpenXML) is a proposed open standard for
>> word-processing documents, presentations, and spreadsheets
>> -----
>>
>> You were saying?
>
> Considering Rick can't grasp the importance of a consistent User
> Interface for users I am astonished that he now thinks anyone will
> listen to his "views" on Open Standards.
>
> COLA is getting wackier by the day.

Rick 1:
Millions have formatted a disk and installed Linux without problems.

Rick 2:
The fact is, very few people know about it [Linux].

Does Rick even know what Rick believes?

--
Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.
--Albert Einstein
 
Hadron wrote:
> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post
>>>> c-mdnVx-bt3cPGvanZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@supernews.com on 4/4/08 2:44 PM:
>>>>
>>>>>> OOXML is open, that goes over your head.
>>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML>
>>>> -----
>>>> Office Open XML (often referred to as OOXML or OpenXML) is a
>>>> free and open XML-based international standard for representing
>>>> electronic documents such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations
>>>> and word processing documents.
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/OpenXML White
>>>> Paper.pdf>
>>>> -----
>>>> Office Open XML (OpenXML) is a proposed open standard for
>>>> word-processing documents, presentations, and spreadsheets
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> You were saying?
>>> Considering Rick can't grasp the importance of a consistent User
>>> Interface for users I am astonished that he now thinks anyone will
>>> listen to his "views" on Open Standards.
>>>
>>> COLA is getting wackier by the day.
>>
>>
>> Being that MS keeps moving target where is their consistency?
>> caver1
>>
>
> I have no idea what you are talking about.
>



You sure do weasel out when you're wrong.
caver1
 
"caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> stated in post
47f7f599$0$6475$4c368faf@roadrunner.com on 4/5/08 2:56 PM:

> Hadron wrote:
>> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>>
>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> stated in post
>>>>> c-mdnVx-bt3cPGvanZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@supernews.com on 4/4/08 2:44 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOXML is open, that goes over your head.
>>>>>> No, it isn't.
>>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Office Open XML (often referred to as OOXML or OpenXML) is a
>>>>> free and open XML-based international standard for representing
>>>>> electronic documents such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations
>>>>> and word processing documents.
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/OpenXML White%
>>>>> 20
>>>>> Paper.pdf>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Office Open XML (OpenXML) is a proposed open standard for
>>>>> word-processing documents, presentations, and spreadsheets
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> You were saying?
>>>> Considering Rick can't grasp the importance of a consistent User
>>>> Interface for users I am astonished that he now thinks anyone will
>>>> listen to his "views" on Open Standards.
>>>>
>>>> COLA is getting wackier by the day.
>>>
>>>
>>> Being that MS keeps moving target where is their consistency?
>>> caver1
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea what you are talking about.
>>
>
>
>
> You sure do weasel out when you're wrong.
> caver1

So what the heck is he talking about?


--
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
dennis@home had de volgende lumineuze gedachte op 03-04-08 23:17:
>
>
> Just imagine
> how much extra tax you would have to pay if you had to support the
> people that make cash from M$.
> You might think OSS is free, but not if it kills a large part of the IT
> industry.
>
Just imagine the whole internet mafia had not arisen because of MS
Windows' inherent insecurity.
Just imagine the whole security industry had not arisen because of the
arising of the internet mafia.
All these people do indeed make a lot af cash what a pity if this part
of the IT industry were killed off.

And who is to pay all this cash? We, the end-users of course.

Erik Jan
 
* dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:

>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>> protocols. Why is that?
>
> Why don't you?
> What do you have against competition?

That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
monopoly.

> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
> costs the same.

Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
product.

--
About 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but people don't pay
for the software. Someday they will, though. As long as they are going to
steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then
we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade.
-- Bill Gates, Speech at the University of Washington, as reported in
"Gates, Buffett a bit bearish" CNET News (2 July 1998) [1]
 
"Erik Jan" <anonymous@discussions.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:47f8c26a$0$15375$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
> dennis@home had de volgende lumineuze gedachte op 03-04-08 23:17:
>>
>>
>> Just imagine how much extra tax you would have to pay if you had to
>> support the people that make cash from M$.
>> You might think OSS is free, but not if it kills a large part of the IT
>> industry.
>>
> Just imagine the whole internet mafia had not arisen because of MS
> Windows' inherent insecurity.
> Just imagine the whole security industry had not arisen because of the
> arising of the internet mafia.
> All these people do indeed make a lot af cash what a pity if this part of
> the IT industry were killed off.
>
> And who is to pay all this cash? We, the end-users of course.

Just imagine.. the first worms were all unix based.. I expect whichever OS
were on the Internet would be hacked.
>
> Erik Jan
 
"Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>
>> Why don't you?
>> What do you have against competition?
>
> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
> monopoly.
>
>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>> costs the same.
>
> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
> product.

Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
You really are being stupid.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>
>>> Why don't you?
>>> What do you have against competition?
>>
>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>> monopoly.
>>
>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>> costs the same.
>>
>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>> product.
>
> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
> You really are being stupid.
>
>
>


Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
As does MS.
caver1
 
Hadron wrote:
> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>
>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>> monopoly.
>>>>
>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>> costs the same.
>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>> product.
>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>> As does MS.
>> caver1
>
> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>


Prove me wrong.
caver1
 
Hadron wrote:
> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>
>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>> monopoly.
>>>>
>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>> costs the same.
>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>> product.
>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>> As does MS.
>> caver1
>
> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>



MS really didn't concede to let others in until the EU forced them to.
Many court cases have proven that MS tries to keep every one out.
A monolithic society is no good. Just imagine if everyone was like you.
who would you ever argue with let alone claim you.
And no I am not a liar. Which is one term you like to throw around when
a point has you beaten.
caver1
 
caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>>
>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>>> monopoly.
>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>>> costs the same.
>>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>>> product.
>>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>>> As does MS.
>>> caver1
>>
>> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
>> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
>> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
>> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>>
>
>
> Prove me wrong.
> caver1

Err, yet again, I just did. What is it with you?
 
caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>>
>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>>> monopoly.
>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>>> costs the same.
>>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>>> product.
>>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>>> As does MS.
>>> caver1
>>
>> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
>> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
>> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
>> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>>
>
>
>
> MS really didn't concede to let others in until the EU forced them to.
> Many court cases have proven that MS tries to keep every one out.
> A monolithic society is no good. Just imagine if everyone was like you.
> who would you ever argue with let alone claim you.
> And no I am not a liar. Which is one term you like to throw around
> when a point has you beaten.
> caver1

beaten? Huh? You're quite crazy. I use MS Office formats daily in
OO. Also in Wine. I also run Windows under VMWare.
 
Hadron wrote:
> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>>>> monopoly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>>>> costs the same.
>>>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>>>> product.
>>>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>>>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>>>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>>>> As does MS.
>>>> caver1
>>> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
>>> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
>>> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
>>> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>>>
>>
>> Prove me wrong.
>> caver1
>
> Err, yet again, I just did. What is it with you?



No you just keep arguing or say I just did. No proof.
caver1
 
Hadron wrote:
> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>>> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
>>>>> news:AS4Kj.26981$Er2.17932@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You seem to want vendors to be able to choose to use closed formats and
>>>>>>>> protocols. Why is that?
>>>>>>> Why don't you?
>>>>>>> What do you have against competition?
>>>>>> That's not "competition". That is an attempt to create a small
>>>>>> monopoly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't have competition in a world where everything does the same and
>>>>>>> costs the same.
>>>>>> Who is asking for such a world? We simply want to be able to access our
>>>>>> documents without having to purchase one (and only one) vendor's
>>>>>> product.
>>>>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>>>>> You really are being stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Its not that we won't use certain documents. Its that MS doesn't want
>>>> anyone to unless they are using a MS product.
>>>> When a Corporation tries to control standards then they will be closed.
>>>> As does MS.
>>>> caver1
>>> What are you talking about? Seriously. You keep talking about things
>>> which are out and out lies. Loads of SW has Office layers. YOu even have
>>> Wine for crying outside. OOXML is an open standard. Where is this "not
>>> allowed" garbage you keep spouting?
>>>
>>
>>
>> MS really didn't concede to let others in until the EU forced them to.
>> Many court cases have proven that MS tries to keep every one out.
>> A monolithic society is no good. Just imagine if everyone was like you.
>> who would you ever argue with let alone claim you.
>> And no I am not a liar. Which is one term you like to throw around
>> when a point has you beaten.
>> caver1
>
> beaten? Huh? You're quite crazy. I use MS Office formats daily in
> OO. Also in Wine. I also run Windows under VMWare.


Really. Did you buy another copy of Windows so you can virtualize it?
And yes After OO Figured out how to coexist with Office. Then with xml
the EU forced them to cooperate. Remember the EU ruling?
Both Corel Office and OO can convert to many more formats than Office
ever could.
So who shows more cooperation?
caver1
 
* dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:

> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
> You really are being stupid.

Plonked for being obstinately and repetitively stupid.

--
Sometimes we do get taken by surprise. For example, when the Internet came
along, we had it as a fifth or sixth priority. It wasn't like somebody told
me about it and I said, "I don't know how to spell that." I said, "Yeah,
I've got that on my list, so I'm okay." But there came a point when we
realized it was happening faster and was a much deeper phenomenon than
had been recognized in our strategy.
-- Bill Gates, Speech at the University of Washington, as reported in
"Gates, Buffett a bit bearish" CNET News (2 July 1998) [1]
 
"Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message
news:bNdKj.18302$9O.15332@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> * dennis@home peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> Don't produce /your/ documents in one of their formats then!
>> You really are being stupid.
>
> Plonked for being obstinately and repetitively stupid.

The Linonut idiot doesn't know that he can't put himself in other peoples
killfile for being a repetitive idiot!
 
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 03:29:18 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:10:53 +0200, Josef Moellers wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>
>>> Linux seems to be losing no matter where you look.
>>> The ODF vs OOXML debates.
>>> Market Share.
>>
>> Not likely. Refer to http://www.groklaw.net/ and read all the articles
>> (also those they quote in the right column) about the way OOXML gets
>> approved.
>
> That's a Roy Schestowitz administered site so I will not go there for fear
> of getting a virus or trojan or something.
>
> As for OOXML vs ODF, all I see is a lot of conjecture, accusations and so
> forth.
> I see very little in the way of factual evidence.
>
> Possibly it may turn out to be totally rigged I don't know and personally I
> really don't care either way.
>
>> Even if Linux is in the less-than-1%-area: each and every Linux-user
>> uses it because of its merits, not because it came bundeled with the
>> computer they bought or someone forces them to use it. Some people
>> (including me) even use it *against* pressure from higher places to use
>> another OS.
>>
>> *That's* the difference.
>
> Noble, however most people just want to get work done not go on some
> religious pilgrimage.
>
> My advice to anyone is to use the OS that supports the applications you
> need to run.
> IOW choose your applications first and then your OS.


MG:

Many casual-but-consistent *nix usrs run multiple OSs ... for example I
keep an archaic WinME_box to run a friendly circuit analysis proggie. For
all else including coding I use a speedy x64AMD Ubuntu box.

The real danger with *nix having such low desktop penetration is that a
SINGLE "stat-fluct" ( anything from a developer airplane crash, to a
sudden paradigm_shift in mobo hardware ) might render *nix entirely a
deadend doorstop.
Imagine the desktop *nix lusr community being thrown back to the clutches
of slabbering Debiolians, snarling Slackmolinites and
prongtoothed, frothmouth LFSarillions!

nss
*****
 
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:08:53 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote:

> Rick wrote:
>
>> If a persons' work environment is mandated Microsoft, how do you expect
>> that person to use Linux?
>
> A company I used to work for was that stupid. I found /much/ better
> employment, and they went out of business quite soon after they tried to
> migrate their business software to Windoze XP.
>
> C.

Is that you Kelsey?

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:08:53 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote:
>
>> Rick wrote:
>>
>>> If a persons' work environment is mandated Microsoft, how do you expect
>>> that person to use Linux?
>>
>> A company I used to work for was that stupid. I found /much/ better
>> employment, and they went out of business quite soon after they tried to
>> migrate their business software to Windoze XP.
>>
>> C.
>
> Is that you Kelsey?

LOL!!!!!!!!!! Missed that. Just replied in a similar fashion.
 
Back
Top