Re: Ubuntu is a worhtless POS...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter Köhlmann
  • Start date Start date
Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>
>> NoStop wrote:
>>
>>> Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> NoStop wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything
>>>>> coming in
>>>>> via http for example can certainly get through your NAT router. Geez.
>>>>> What do you think a firewall does?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh you mean like having an open "port-hole" in urbuttoo...LOL!
>>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No, I don't mean that Frankie Boy. Of course you don't understand such
>>> stuff. Go and play on the freeway.
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>> Got any more "fairy" tales "nostop"...LOL!
>> Frank
>
>
> Frank laughs at his own stupid homophobic "jokes" because no one else
> will. How pathetic can you get?
>
> Alias

No one is near as pathetic as you are mr liar, mr troll, mr spammer, mr
bigot.
And no one is laughing at your sick sh*t!
Loser!
Frank
 
NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:fouu180nlf@news3.newsguy.com:

>>> You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything coming
>>> in via http for example can certainly get through your NAT router.
>>> Geez. What do you think a firewall does?
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>
>> Only things coming thru would be things you specifically asked for, like
>> WU's.
>>
>
> Don't be silly. Spyware rides in all the time through a NAT router via an
> open http port. Trojans and viruses also can easily come through a NAT
> router as file attachments with email messages or even embedded in web
> pages. The list goes on, depending on how your box is accessing the Net.

Of course what you wrote is true, but that is not the subject of this
branch of the thread.

To refresh your memory, the statement you made was:

'If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2 update, it
will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2 downloaded.
Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.'

Maybe we need to ad a 'B' to the end of your name.......NoStopB
 
DanS wrote:

> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:fouu180nlf@news3.newsguy.com:
>
>>>> You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything coming
>>>> in via http for example can certainly get through your NAT router.
>>>> Geez. What do you think a firewall does?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>> Only things coming thru would be things you specifically asked for, like
>>> WU's.
>>>
>>
>> Don't be silly. Spyware rides in all the time through a NAT router via an
>> open http port. Trojans and viruses also can easily come through a NAT
>> router as file attachments with email messages or even embedded in web
>> pages. The list goes on, depending on how your box is accessing the Net.
>
> Of course what you wrote is true, but that is not the subject of this
> branch of the thread.
>
> To refresh your memory, the statement you made was:
>
> 'If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2 update,
> it will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2 downloaded.
> Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.'
>
> Maybe we need to ad a 'B' to the end of your name.......NoStopB

Seems like you suffer from an inability to comprehend what you read. Yes, I
did say that and that is what I'm continuing to say. I don't need my memory
refreshed, you need to be able to read and understand what someone is
saying.

Cheers.

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

How a Windows Firewall protects your computer:
http://tinyurl.com/2z9qdn

AlexB (another Vista expert): "I ruined at least 5 or 6 installations of
Vista
before I realized what was going on."
 
NoStop wrote:

> DanS wrote:
>
>
>>NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:fouu180nlf@news3.newsguy.com:
>>
>>
>>>>>You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything coming
>>>>>in via http for example can certainly get through your NAT router.
>>>>>Geez. What do you think a firewall does?
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers.
>>>>
>>>>Only things coming thru would be things you specifically asked for, like
>>>>WU's.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Don't be silly. Spyware rides in all the time through a NAT router via an
>>>open http port. Trojans and viruses also can easily come through a NAT
>>>router as file attachments with email messages or even embedded in web
>>>pages. The list goes on, depending on how your box is accessing the Net.
>>
>>Of course what you wrote is true, but that is not the subject of this
>>branch of the thread.
>>
>>To refresh your memory, the statement you made was:
>>
>>'If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2 update,
>>it will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2 downloaded.
>>Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.'
>>
>>Maybe we need to ad a 'B' to the end of your name.......NoStopB
>
>
> Seems like you suffer from an inability to comprehend what you read. Yes, I
> did say that and that is what I'm continuing to say.

Liar!

I don't need my memory
> refreshed,

No...you need to actually use Windows to know you have no idea what
you're talking about.

you need to be able to read and understand what someone is
> saying.

You need to grow up and stop lying!
Frank
>
no more Cheers.
>
 
NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:fovkdk02b3r@news1.newsguy.com:

> DanS wrote:
>
>> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
>> news:fouu180nlf@news3.newsguy.com:
>>
>>>>> You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything
>>>>> coming in via http for example can certainly get through your NAT
>>>>> router. Geez. What do you think a firewall does?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>> Only things coming thru would be things you specifically asked for,
>>>> like WU's.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't be silly. Spyware rides in all the time through a NAT router
>>> via an open http port. Trojans and viruses also can easily come
>>> through a NAT router as file attachments with email messages or even
>>> embedded in web pages. The list goes on, depending on how your box
>>> is accessing the Net.
>>
>> Of course what you wrote is true, but that is not the subject of this
>> branch of the thread.
>>
>> To refresh your memory, the statement you made was:
>>
>> 'If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2
>> update, it will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2
>> downloaded. Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.'
>>
>> Maybe we need to ad a 'B' to the end of your name.......NoStopB
>
> Seems like you suffer from an inability to comprehend what you read.
> Yes, I did say that and that is what I'm continuing to say. I don't
> need my memory refreshed, you need to be able to read and understand
> what someone is saying.

Whatever dude.

I'm not wasting my time any more on dipsh*ts like you.
 
"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns9A44C1E5236B7thisnthatadelphianet@207.46.248.16...
> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:fovkdk02b3r@news1.newsguy.com:
>
>> DanS wrote:
>>
>>> NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
>>> news:fouu180nlf@news3.newsguy.com:
>>>
>>>>>> You silly boy. Of course things can get past a router. Anything
>>>>>> coming in via http for example can certainly get through your NAT
>>>>>> router. Geez. What do you think a firewall does?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only things coming thru would be things you specifically asked for,
>>>>> like WU's.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't be silly. Spyware rides in all the time through a NAT router
>>>> via an open http port. Trojans and viruses also can easily come
>>>> through a NAT router as file attachments with email messages or even
>>>> embedded in web pages. The list goes on, depending on how your box
>>>> is accessing the Net.
>>>
>>> Of course what you wrote is true, but that is not the subject of this
>>> branch of the thread.
>>>
>>> To refresh your memory, the statement you made was:
>>>
>>> 'If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2
>>> update, it will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2
>>> downloaded. Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.'
>>>
>>> Maybe we need to ad a 'B' to the end of your name.......NoStopB
>>
>> Seems like you suffer from an inability to comprehend what you read.
>> Yes, I did say that and that is what I'm continuing to say. I don't
>> need my memory refreshed, you need to be able to read and understand
>> what someone is saying.
>
> Whatever dude.
>
> I'm not wasting my time any more on dipsh*ts like you.


NoStop isn't a dude.
Its some kind of eunuch ... with a linux thumb drive surgically attached
 
"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:KNCdneBCnswxfy3anZ2dnUVZ_sjinZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:31:33 -0500, alexB wrote:
>
>> I installed probably about 8 Vistas and at least a dozen XPs.
>>
>> Vista installation is fast, requires only one reboot as far as I
>> remember. It takes care of ALL, and I mean it, ALL drivers. You don't
>> have to do anything, just sit and wait.
>
> Oh REALLY?
>
> It takes care of ALL drivers? REALLY? ALL DRIVERS?
>
> Hmm...
>
> What about my 8800 GTX that vista does *not* recognize automatically?
> What about my ETHERNET drivers that vista does *not* recognize
> automatically?
>
> What about my sound drivers that vista does *not* recognize automatically?
>
> What about the other 2-3 other devices it had listed as "unknown, got no
> frigging clue" in the device manager that it quite obviously did not
> recognize??
>
> How is any of *that* taking care of ALL drivers?
>
> --
> Stephan
> 1986 Pontiac Fiero GT
>
> å›ã®äº‹æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
> å›ã®äº‹å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
Jury is in about Ubuntu. It does not meet my needs. No media. It does not
properly recognize video card. Latest downloads do not include TV time or
Xaw TV.
Compiler works, but can't compile the latest trunk of GCC (4.3.0. Claims
<features.h> is missing.) Face it. Best Linux right now for my needs is
Mandrake, though i am thinking about buy 64 bit Vista Ultimate.
 
"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:foqij311ipr@news5.newsguy.com...
> stfu wrote:
>
>>
>> "Peter K�hlmann" . wrote in message
>> news:fonm2v$90o$02$1@news.t-online.com...
>>
>>>
>>> He was generous with the 20 minutes
>>> After all, a standard install of XP will not even get the first update
>>> before it is hit with the first malware if you are unlucky enough
>>>
>> Christ, another nitwit.
>
> If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2 update, it
> will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2 downloaded.
> Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.
>
And Ubuntu does what? Before you can even use it, it has to go on line and
get everything.
700,000 KB cd image. Windows Vista has all you need to get started on a 4
gigabyte DVD.
More by going online.
Windows automatically updates during the day. Ubuntu has to be manually
feed. No joke about that. Experience taught me that $150.00 investmesnt for
the DVD and 600 for the computer gives me a far more stable environment than
Ubuntu can supply. Plus, I can run all my software from my Windows 95 to
present with a compatibilty mode. Ubuntu (debian wannabe) is out of the
picture. Ubuntu can't play MIDIS and you can't watch television. I record TV
and am looking for a desktop running 64 bit Windows Vista, TV recorder, and
a 1 TB hard drive.
Ubuntu? I tried it. Did not like it. Will try the next version when it comes
out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bobby McNulty wrote:
>
> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:foqij311ipr@news5.newsguy.com...
>> stfu wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Peter K�hlmann" . wrote in message
>>> news:fonm2v$90o$02$1@news.t-online.com...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> He was generous with the 20 minutes
>>>> After all, a standard install of XP will not even get the first update
>>>> before it is hit with the first malware if you are unlucky enough
>>>>
>>> Christ, another nitwit.
>>
>> If you connect a XP box prior to SP2 to the Net to get the SP2
>> update, it
>> will definitely be compromised before you have the SP2 downloaded.
>> Everybody who knows Windoze, knows that.
>>
> And Ubuntu does what? Before you can even use it, it has to go on line
> and get everything.
> 700,000 KB cd image. Windows Vista has all you need to get started on a
> 4 gigabyte DVD.
> More by going online.
> Windows automatically updates during the day. Ubuntu has to be manually
> feed. No joke about that. Experience taught me that $150.00 investmesnt
> for the DVD and 600 for the computer gives me a far more stable
> environment than Ubuntu can supply. Plus, I can run all my software from
> my Windows 95 to present with a compatibilty mode. Ubuntu (debian
> wannabe) is out of the picture. Ubuntu can't play MIDIS and you can't
> watch television. I record TV and am looking for a desktop running 64
> bit Windows Vista, TV recorder, and a 1 TB hard drive.
> Ubuntu? I tried it. Did not like it. Will try the next version when it
> comes out.
>

At least you can get it online but you don't have to.
Yes you can play MIDIs.
Yes you can watch and record TV if thats what you want.
64 bit no problem.
And yes there are some Windows programs that won't run in Linux. Many
will(with a compatibility layer-WINE,for instance).
If you don't like Linux that's fine. But if its because you don't want
to learn it then say so.
caver1
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top