alias takes it up his stupid, arrogant ass...again!...LOL!

 

On 7/17/2010 7:23 AM, Frank wrote:

 

> Yes you did. You said the CEO...Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft.

 

> Oops!

 

 

 

I said Chief Operating Officer. Again, sigh:

 

 

 

From the article:

 

 

 

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with

 

that," Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer, said at the

 

company's Worldwide Partner Conference.

 

 

 

Being as you've conveniently snipped the URL for the article, here it is

 

again:

 

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

 

 

Note that MSNBC is a joint effort between Microsoft and NBC so it ain't

 

a blog you can dismiss.

 

 

 

Game, set, match.

 

 

 

Checkmate.

 

 

 

You lost again!

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

Gordon wrote:

 

 

> On 14/07/2010 13:05, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:

 

>

 

>>

 

>> Me, too. Due to a computer meltdown and subsequent replacement, I

 

>> went directly from Windows 2000 to Windows 7 (an obvious step

 

>> backward). You can imagine my joy when I discovered Classic

 

>> Shell.

 

>

 

> Do you drive a Ford T and watch a 425 lines black and white TV?

 

> Jeeeze!

 

 

 

New isn't always improved. As "Crash" pointed out, Windows 2000 is, in

 

many ways, superior to later OSs. *IF* MSFT released a 64 bit version

 

and improved USB support it would probably be the OS of choice for

 

many, it's smaller, lighter and MUCH faster than any later version of

 

Windows.

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

 

The Usenet Improvement Project:

 

http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

XS11E wrote:

 

> Gordon wrote:

 

>

 

>> On 14/07/2010 13:05, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> Me, too. Due to a computer meltdown and subsequent replacement, I

 

>>> went directly from Windows 2000 to Windows 7 (an obvious step

 

>>> backward). You can imagine my joy when I discovered Classic

 

>>> Shell.

 

 

>> Do you drive a Ford T and watch a 425 lines black and white TV?

 

>> Jeeeze!

 

>

 

> New isn't always improved. As "Crash" pointed out, Windows 2000 is,

 

> in many ways, superior to later OSs. *IF* MSFT released a 64 bit

 

> version and improved USB support it would probably be the OS of

 

> choice for many, it's smaller, lighter and MUCH faster than any later

 

> version of Windows.

 

 

 

Not only that, but I think those old, dead composers, like Bach and

 

Beethoven, are better than the latest top-40 music.

 

--

 

Crash

 

 

 

"The fewer the facts, the stronger the opinion."

 

~ Arnold H. Glasow ~

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 3:07 AM, Alias wrote:

 

> On 7/17/2010 7:23 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>> Yes you did. You said the CEO...Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft.

 

>> Oops!

 

>

 

> I said Chief Operating Officer. Again, sigh:

 

>

 

> From the article:

 

>

 

> "It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with

 

> that," Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer, said at the

 

> company's Worldwide Partner Conference.

 

>

 

> Being as you've conveniently snipped the URL for the article, here it is

 

> again:

 

>

 

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>

 

> Note that MSNBC is a joint effort between Microsoft and NBC so it ain't

 

> a blog you can dismiss.

 

>

 

> Game, set, match.

 

>

 

> Checkmate.

 

>

 

> You lost again!

 

>

 

So where is the "diss"?

 

Oops, it isn't there. You are only "parsing" the words of others to try

 

and be right.

 

You aren't, and it is obvious to everyone in here.

 

 

 

Game, set, match.

 

 

 

Checkmate.

 

 

 

You lost again!

alias loses again!

 

On 07/17/2010 07:10 PM, Frank wrote:

 

> On 7/17/2010 3:07 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 7/17/2010 7:23 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>>> Yes you did. You said the CEO...Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft.

 

>>> Oops!

 

>>

 

>> I said Chief Operating Officer. Again, sigh:

 

>>

 

>> From the article:

 

>>

 

>> "It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with

 

>> that," Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer, said at the

 

>> company's Worldwide Partner Conference.

 

>>

 

>> Being as you've conveniently snipped the URL for the article, here it is

 

>> again:

 

>>

 

>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>>

 

>> Note that MSNBC is a joint effort between Microsoft and NBC so it ain't

 

>> a blog you can dismiss.

 

>>

 

>> Game, set, match.

 

>>

 

>> Checkmate.

 

>>

 

>> You lost again!

 

>>

 

> So where is the "diss"?

 

> Oops, it isn't there. You are only "parsing" the words of others to try

 

> and be right.

 

> You aren't, and it is obvious to everyone in here.

 

>

 

> Game, set, match.

 

>

 

> Checkmate.

 

>

 

> You lost again!

 

 

 

You really are dumb. The COO of Microsoft compared the flawed iPhone4 to

 

Vista. Here are some more of your wonderful Microsoft products that have

 

their rightful place in the Computer Hall of Shame:

 

 

 

http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/smb/hardware_software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225800274

 

 

 

First one on the list is, you guessed it, Vista.

 

 

 

Hasta la Vista, baby!

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

"Worn Out Retread" wrote in message

 

news:i1plsf$9tu$1@news.datemas.de...

 

>

 

 

 

I don't know what you have been using in the past but Win 7 is very good at

 

finding files. I don't know how you could make it easier. >

 

 

 

OK, so I will summarise where we have got to in response to my comment that

 

attaching a file to an email is not simple because Windows 7 is a bit coy

 

about where it keeps things.

 

 

 

Here is the dead simple, trivial, easy to use and I am thick method:

 

 

 

1. Write the email and click on attach file:

 

 

 

2. Click the start button

 

3. In the search box type the name of the file you wish to attach

 

4. When it provides a list of results, right click on the correct file (if

 

there is more than one, right click on each and write down the full

 

pathnames

 

5. Open Computer and navigate to the file of choice, double click on it if

 

you wish to check it is the correct one

 

6. Once sure is is OK, go back to the email software and click on the

 

browse facility

 

7. Navigate to the file and double click it.

 

 

 

I just think it would be easier if the user knew where things were saved, if

 

full pathnames were shown by the software, if the search facility found them

 

like it unerringly did in XP, if the search list did not vanish on selecting

 

one file, if the search list showed the pathname, if the files were not

 

stored in very odd places, if users were given documentation to tell them

 

where things were saved, if the help system explained where things were

 

saved

 

 

 

If these things were so, the instructions would be:

 

 

 

1. Ensure you know where the file is

 

2. Write the email and click on attach file:

 

3. Click Browse and browse to the file

 

4. Double click it.

 

 

 

Something like that anyway. The point is that the first step is not a

 

trivial matter, as people have been claiming, because of the file locations,

 

omitting pathnames from normal display, and some of the behaviour of the

 

search system. I assume that people are being so defensive because of the

 

original over the top comment made by a person of doubtful judgement.

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 11:11 AM, Alias wrote:

 

> On 07/17/2010 07:10 PM, Frank wrote:

 

>> On 7/17/2010 3:07 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>>> On 7/17/2010 7:23 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>>>> Yes you did. You said the CEO...Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft.

 

>>>> Oops!

 

>>>

 

>>> I said Chief Operating Officer. Again, sigh:

 

>>>

 

>>> From the article:

 

>>>

 

>>> "It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with

 

>>> that," Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer, said at the

 

>>> company's Worldwide Partner Conference.

 

>>>

 

>>> Being as you've conveniently snipped the URL for the article, here it is

 

>>> again:

 

>>>

 

>>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>>>

 

>>> Note that MSNBC is a joint effort between Microsoft and NBC so it ain't

 

>>> a blog you can dismiss.

 

>>>

 

>>> Game, set, match.

 

>>>

 

>>> Checkmate.

 

>>>

 

>>> You lost again!

 

>>>

 

>> So where is the "diss"?

 

>> Oops, it isn't there. You are only "parsing" the words of others to try

 

>> and be right.

 

>> You aren't, and it is obvious to everyone in here.

 

>>

 

>> Game, set, match.

 

>>

 

>> Checkmate.

 

>>

 

>> You lost again!

 

>

 

> You really are dumb. The COO of Microsoft compared the flawed iPhone4 to

 

> Vista. Here are some more of your wonderful Microsoft products that have

 

> their rightful place in the Computer Hall of Shame:

 

>

 

> http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/smb/hardware_software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225800274

 

>

 

>

 

> First one on the list is, you guessed it, Vista.

 

 

 

The is one writers opinion, and he is in the minority.

 

>

 

> Hasta la Vista, baby!

 

>

 

Vista was a flop? Really? Then why are there millions, that's

 

*MILLIONS*, of happy, contended Vista users through the world, huh?

 

Why does Microsoft continue to wholly support it huh?

 

Can't answer those questions can you.

 

Figures.

 

Also, I am one of those contended users. You never...never ever, used Vista.

 

Face it sheep-fucker, you just hate Microsoft and love pushing the FUD

 

about them.

 

Sorry you lying cock sucking POS, but there is absolutely nothing wrong

 

with Vista...nothing. And no Executive from Microsoft has claimed it to

 

be a flop or a failure.

 

Keep parsing words you idiot, as I do so enjoy refuting them and kicking

 

your lamer ass.

 

Oops!

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 9:49 PM, Frank wrote:

 

> On 7/17/2010 11:11 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 07/17/2010 07:10 PM, Frank wrote:

 

>>> On 7/17/2010 3:07 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>> On 7/17/2010 7:23 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>>>>> Yes you did. You said the CEO...Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft.

 

>>>>> Oops!

 

>>>>

 

>>>> I said Chief Operating Officer. Again, sigh:

 

>>>>

 

>>>> From the article:

 

>>>>

 

>>>> "It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with

 

>>>> that," Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer, said at the

 

>>>> company's Worldwide Partner Conference.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Being as you've conveniently snipped the URL for the article, here

 

>>>> it is

 

>>>> again:

 

>>>>

 

>>>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Note that MSNBC is a joint effort between Microsoft and NBC so it ain't

 

>>>> a blog you can dismiss.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Game, set, match.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Checkmate.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> You lost again!

 

>>>>

 

>>> So where is the "diss"?

 

>>> Oops, it isn't there. You are only "parsing" the words of others to try

 

>>> and be right.

 

>>> You aren't, and it is obvious to everyone in here.

 

>>>

 

>>> Game, set, match.

 

>>>

 

>>> Checkmate.

 

>>>

 

>>> You lost again!

 

>>

 

>> You really are dumb. The COO of Microsoft compared the flawed iPhone4 to

 

>> Vista. Here are some more of your wonderful Microsoft products that have

 

>> their rightful place in the Computer Hall of Shame:

 

>>

 

>> http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/smb/hardware_software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225800274

 

>>

 

>>

 

>>

 

>> First one on the list is, you guessed it, Vista.

 

>

 

> The is one writers opinion, and he is in the minority.

 

>>

 

>> Hasta la Vista, baby!

 

>>

 

> Vista was a flop? Really? Then why are there millions, that's

 

> *MILLIONS*, of happy, contended Vista users through the world, huh?

 

 

 

A sucker is born every day and MS are just the folks to take advantage.

 

 

> Why does Microsoft continue to wholly support it huh?

 

 

 

They have to by law, otherwise they wouldn't.

 

 

> Can't answer those questions can you.

 

 

 

Just did.

 

 

> Figures.

 

 

 

You and figures don't computer.

 

 

> Also, I am one of those contended users.

 

 

 

We know, one of the suckers mentioned above.

 

 

> You never...never ever, used

 

> Vista.

 

 

 

Yes I did and I didn't like it and sold it to a sucker like you.

 

 

> Face it sheep-fucker, you just hate Microsoft and love pushing the FUD

 

> about them.

 

 

 

I love Microsoft. The shoddy software has made me lots of bucks over the

 

years.

 

 

> Sorry you lying cock sucking POS, but there is absolutely nothing wrong

 

> with Vista...nothing. And no Executive from Microsoft has claimed it to

 

> be a flop or a failure.

 

 

 

Chief Operating Executive. Read the link.

 

 

> Keep parsing words you idiot, as I do so enjoy refuting them and kicking

 

> your lamer ass.

 

> Oops!

 

 

 

Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 10:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

 

>

 

>> Sorry you lying cock sucking POS, but there is absolutely nothing wrong

 

>> with Vista...nothing. And no Executive from Microsoft has claimed it to

 

>> be a flop or a failure.

 

>

 

> Chief Operating Executive. Read the link.

 

 

 

Oops, it's Chief Operating Officer.

 

 

 

You've snipped the link so here it is again:

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

 

 

Enjoy, I know I did!

 

 

>

 

>> Keep parsing words you idiot, as I do so enjoy refuting them and kicking

 

>> your lamer ass.

 

>> Oops!

 

>

 

> Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

>

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

alias loses again!

 

Alias wrote:

 

 

> On 7/17/2010 10:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>

 

>>

 

>>> Sorry you lying cock sucking POS, but there is absolutely nothing wrong

 

>>> with Vista...nothing. And no Executive from Microsoft has claimed it to

 

>>> be a flop or a failure.

 

>>

 

>> Chief Operating Executive. Read the link.

 

>

 

> Oops, it's Chief Operating Officer.

 

>

 

> You've snipped the link so here it is again:

 

>

 

>

 

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>

 

> Enjoy, I know I did!

 

>

 

 

 

You enjoy the opinions of bloggers?

 

So what.

 

He got the XP/Vista/Win7 development history wrong.

 

He doesn't know his ass from a whole in the ground.

 

He's just like you.

 

 

 

--

 

Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,

 

Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

On 17/07/2010 19:36, johnbee wrote:

 

>

 

> "Worn Out Retread" wrote in message

 

> news:i1plsf$9tu$1@news.datemas.de...

 

>>

 

>

 

> I don't know what you have been using in the past but Win 7 is very good at

 

> finding files. I don't know how you could make it easier. >

 

>

 

> OK, so I will summarise where we have got to in response to my comment

 

> that attaching a file to an email is not simple because Windows 7 is a

 

> bit coy about where it keeps things.

 

>

 

> Here is the dead simple, trivial, easy to use and I am thick method:

 

>

 

> 1. Write the email and click on attach file:

 

>

 

> 2. Click the start button

 

> 3. In the search box type the name of the file you wish to attach

 

> 4. When it provides a list of results, right click on the correct file

 

> (if there is more than one, right click on each and write down the full

 

> pathnames

 

> 5. Open Computer and navigate to the file of choice, double click on it

 

> if you wish to check it is the correct one

 

> 6. Once sure is is OK, go back to the email software and click on the

 

> browse facility

 

> 7. Navigate to the file and double click it.

 

>

 

 

 

No need to do all that - drag the file from the search window to the new

 

email message....

On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:36:42 +0100, johnbee wrote:

 

 

> OK, so I will summarise where we have got to in response to my comment that

 

> attaching a file to an email is not simple because Windows 7 is a bit coy

 

> about where it keeps things.

 

>

 

> Here is the dead simple, trivial, easy to use and I am thick method:

 

>

 

> 1. Write the email and click on attach file:

 

>

 

> 2. Click the start button

 

> 3. In the search box type the name of the file you wish to attach

 

> 4. When it provides a list of results, right click on the correct file (if

 

> there is more than one, right click on each and write down the full

 

> pathnames

 

> 5. Open Computer and navigate to the file of choice, double click on it if

 

> you wish to check it is the correct one

 

> 6. Once sure is is OK, go back to the email software and click on the

 

> browse facility

 

> 7. Navigate to the file and double click it.

 

>

 

> I just think it would be easier if the user knew where things were saved, if

 

> full pathnames were shown by the software, if the search facility found them

 

> like it unerringly did in XP, if the search list did not vanish on selecting

 

> one file, if the search list showed the pathname, if the files were not

 

> stored in very odd places, if users were given documentation to tell them

 

> where things were saved, if the help system explained where things were

 

> saved

 

>

 

> If these things were so, the instructions would be:

 

>

 

> 1. Ensure you know where the file is

 

> 2. Write the email and click on attach file:

 

> 3. Click Browse and browse to the file

 

> 4. Double click it.

 

 

 

(I deleted lots of unmarked or incorrectly marked quoted material in an

 

attempt to make it possible to track the above.)

 

 

 

I have no idea why you're clicking on the start button or a browse button.

 

When I try to attach a document in Windows Live Mail, the program instantly

 

opens a pretty good imitation of an Explorer screen, and in a few seconds I

 

can navigate to a document or two. It was trivially easy, and I don't even

 

*use* Windows Live Mail.

 

 

 

You seem to be working hard to misdirect your efforts. I suggest you find

 

some tutorial online or buy a decent book and work from there.

 

 

 

--

 

Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 10:21 PM, Death wrote:

 

> Alias wrote:

 

>

 

>> On 7/17/2010 10:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>

 

>>>

 

>>>> Sorry you lying cock sucking POS, but there is absolutely nothing wrong

 

>>>> with Vista...nothing. And no Executive from Microsoft has claimed it to

 

>>>> be a flop or a failure.

 

>>>

 

>>> Chief Operating Executive. Read the link.

 

>>

 

>> Oops, it's Chief Operating Officer.

 

>>

 

>> You've snipped the link so here it is again:

 

>>

 

>>

 

>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267909/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

 

>>

 

>> Enjoy, I know I did!

 

>>

 

>

 

> You enjoy the opinions of bloggers?

 

 

 

Um, I don't think that MS' Chief Operating Officer's opinion about Vista

 

is "an opinion of bloggers".

 

 

> So what.

 

> He got the XP/Vista/Win7 development history wrong.

 

> He doesn't know his ass from a whole in the ground.

 

> He's just like you.

 

>

 

 

 

Wacko.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

"Dave \"Crash\" Dummy" wrote:

 

 

> XS11E wrote:

 

>> New isn't always improved. As "Crash" pointed out, Windows 2000

 

>> is, in many ways, superior to later OSs. *IF* MSFT released a 64

 

>> bit version and improved USB support it would probably be the OS

 

>> of choice for many, it's smaller, lighter and MUCH faster than

 

>> any later version of Windows.

 

>

 

> Not only that, but I think those old, dead composers, like Bach

 

> and Beethoven, are better than the latest top-40 music.

 

 

 

I prefer the classics myself, here's one of the truly great:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UejelYnVI3U&feature=related

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

 

The Usenet Improvement Project:

 

http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 1:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

 

 

 

>

 

> Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

 

 

You don't live in Madrid and anyone who buys two new laptops with 512 &

 

1 gig of RAM in this day and age, obviously can't afford to travel to

 

Madrid. I've got a much better, fool proof plan...I'll leave a prepaid

 

ticked for you at the spanish airport of your choice, (can you find the

 

airport from where you actually live), and you can fly to Paris.

 

That way, we can end this diatribe and you can prove your manhood!

 

Ok?

 

No? Why? Oh...you're a fucking POS lying coward...as we all know.

 

Oops!

 

>

alias loses again!

 

On 7/17/2010 1:14 PM, Alias wrote:

 

 

 

Definition of a "diss".

 

 

 

Read'em and weep, cock sucker!

 

 

 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/diss

 

 

 

Enjoy, I know I did!

 

 

 

Want more? Stick around, the fun is just now beginning and you are the

 

one paying the tab!

 

Hahahah!!!

alias loses again!

 

On 07/18/2010 08:11 AM, Frank wrote:

 

> On 7/17/2010 1:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

>>

 

>> Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

>

 

> You don't live in Madrid and anyone who buys two new laptops with 512 &

 

> 1 gig of RAM in this day and age, obviously can't afford to travel to

 

> Madrid.

 

 

 

False logic.

 

 

> I've got a much better, fool proof plan...I'll leave a prepaid

 

> ticked for you at the spanish airport of your choice, (can you find the

 

> airport from where you actually live), and you can fly to Paris.

 

> That way, we can end this diatribe and you can prove your manhood!

 

> Ok?

 

> No? Why? Oh...you're a fucking POS lying coward...as we all know.

 

> Oops!

 

>>

 

>

 

 

 

Puerto del Sol, coward. Wear a bullseye on your back so I know who it is.

 

 

 

--

 

Alias

alias takes it up his lying ass...again...as usual...Oops!

 

On 7/18/2010 3:35 AM, Alias wrote:

 

> On 07/18/2010 08:11 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>> On 7/17/2010 1:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>

 

>>

 

>>>

 

>>> Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

>>

 

>> You don't live in Madrid and anyone who buys two new laptops with 512 &

 

>> 1 gig of RAM in this day and age, obviously can't afford to travel to

 

>> Madrid.

 

>

 

> False logic.

 

 

 

On your part, yes!

 

>

 

>> I've got a much better, fool proof plan...I'll leave a prepaid

 

>> ticked for you at the spanish airport of your choice, (can you find the

 

>> airport from where you actually live), and you can fly to Paris.

 

>> That way, we can end this diatribe and you can prove your manhood!

 

>> Ok?

 

>> No? Why? Oh...you're a fucking POS lying coward...as we all know.

 

>> Oops!

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>

 

> Puerto del Sol, coward. Wear a bullseye on your back so I know who it is.

 

 

 

*COWARD*! Your day will come.

 

>

< "Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message

 

news:1rfjdn2nxz9sl.2ang4yvcedza$.dlg@40tude.net...

 

 

 

You seem to be working hard to misdirect your efforts. I suggest you find

 

some tutorial online or buy a decent book and work from there. >

 

 

 

The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files, because

 

I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good look at what

 

the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do that is ample

 

evidence of what I am saying.

 

 

 

If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book publishers

 

would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short paragraphs

 

about where files are stored.

On 18/07/2010 20:43, johnbee wrote:

 

>

 

 

>

 

> The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files,

 

> because I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good

 

> look at what the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do

 

> that is ample evidence of what I am saying.

 

>

 

> If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book

 

> publishers would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short

 

> paragraphs about where files are stored.

 

 

 

User files are stored where the USER puts them - ie C:/Users/{Account

 

name}/Documents. Where else would they be?

alias takes it up his lying ass...again...as usual...Oops!

 

On 7/18/2010 12:07 PM, Frank wrote:

 

> On 7/18/2010 3:35 AM, Alias wrote:

 

>> On 07/18/2010 08:11 AM, Frank wrote:

 

>>> On 7/17/2010 1:08 PM, Alias wrote:

 

>>>

 

>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> Puerto del Sol. Be there.

 

>>>

 

>>> You don't live in Madrid and anyone who buys two new laptops with 512 &

 

>>> 1 gig of RAM in this day and age, obviously can't afford to travel to

 

>>> Madrid.

 

>>

 

>> False logic.

 

>

 

> On your part, yes!

 

 

 

You are the idiot who wasted his money.

 

>>

 

>>> I've got a much better, fool proof plan...I'll leave a prepaid

 

>>> ticked for you at the spanish airport of your choice, (can you find the

 

>>> airport from where you actually live), and you can fly to Paris.

 

>>> That way, we can end this diatribe and you can prove your manhood!

 

>>> Ok?

 

>>> No? Why? Oh...you're a fucking POS lying coward...as we all know.

 

>>> Oops!

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> Puerto del Sol, coward. Wear a bullseye on your back so I know who it is.

 

>

 

> *COWARD*! Your day will come.

 

>>

 

>

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:59:14 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

 

> On 18/07/2010 20:43, johnbee wrote:

 

>>

 

>

 

>>

 

>> The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files,

 

>> because I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good

 

>> look at what the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do

 

>> that is ample evidence of what I am saying.

 

>>

 

>> If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book

 

>> publishers would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short

 

>> paragraphs about where files are stored.

 

>

 

> User files are stored where the USER puts them - ie C:/Users/{Account

 

> name}/Documents. Where else would they be?

 

 

 

I was amused that johnbee also chose to clip a relevant part of my text

 

when he replied.

 

 

 

I think he also fails to realize that OSes are, by necessity, not quite as

 

easy to use as a faucet.

 

 

 

--

 

Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 19/07/2010 23:26, Gene E. Bloch wrote:

 

> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:59:14 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

>

 

>> On 18/07/2010 20:43, johnbee wrote:

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>>>

 

>>> The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files,

 

>>> because I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good

 

>>> look at what the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do

 

>>> that is ample evidence of what I am saying.

 

>>>

 

>>> If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book

 

>>> publishers would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short

 

>>> paragraphs about where files are stored.

 

>>

 

>> User files are stored where the USER puts them - ie C:/Users/{Account

 

>> name}/Documents. Where else would they be?

 

>

 

> I was amused that johnbee also chose to clip a relevant part of my text

 

> when he replied.

 

>

 

> I think he also fails to realize that OSes are, by necessity, not quite as

 

> easy to use as a faucet.

 

>

 

 

 

But that's the whole point - they ARE! Certainly modern ones. Remember

 

WFWG 3.11?

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:44:19 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

 

> On 19/07/2010 23:26, Gene E. Bloch wrote:

 

>> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:59:14 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

>>

 

>>> On 18/07/2010 20:43, johnbee wrote:

 

>>>>

 

>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>> The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files,

 

>>>> because I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good

 

>>>> look at what the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do

 

>>>> that is ample evidence of what I am saying.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book

 

>>>> publishers would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short

 

>>>> paragraphs about where files are stored.

 

>>>

 

>>> User files are stored where the USER puts them - ie C:/Users/{Account

 

>>> name}/Documents. Where else would they be?

 

>>

 

>> I was amused that johnbee also chose to clip a relevant part of my text

 

>> when he replied.

 

>>

 

>> I think he also fails to realize that OSes are, by necessity, not quite as

 

>> easy to use as a faucet.

 

>>

 

>

 

> But that's the whole point - they ARE! Certainly modern ones. Remember

 

> WFWG 3.11?

 

 

 

That was the one that convinced me it was time to run Windows.

 

 

 

I'm hoping that, when you say that they are as easy to use as a faucet,

 

you're just pulling my chain. Or Microsoft's?

 

 

 

If not, then I can't come close to agreeing with you. If yes, then I'm

 

laughing. Ha ha (see?).

 

 

 

--

 

Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 21/07/10 01:43, Gene E. Bloch wrote:

 

> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:44:19 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

>

 

>> On 19/07/2010 23:26, Gene E. Bloch wrote:

 

>>> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:59:14 +0100, Gordon wrote:

 

>>>

 

>>>> On 18/07/2010 20:43, johnbee wrote:

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>> The thing is you see, I actually know where Windows 7 stores files,

 

>>>>> because I have bought various books and read them, and have had a good

 

>>>>> look at what the system does. Obviously, the fact that one needs to do

 

>>>>> that is ample evidence of what I am saying.

 

>>>>>

 

>>>>> If you don't agree, I am certain that Microsoft, and many book

 

>>>>> publishers would be happy to pay you well for writing a couple of short

 

>>>>> paragraphs about where files are stored.

 

>>>>

 

>>>> User files are stored where the USER puts them - ie C:/Users/{Account

 

>>>> name}/Documents. Where else would they be?

 

>>>

 

>>> I was amused that johnbee also chose to clip a relevant part of my text

 

>>> when he replied.

 

>>>

 

>>> I think he also fails to realize that OSes are, by necessity, not quite as

 

>>> easy to use as a faucet.

 

>>>

 

>>

 

>> But that's the whole point - they ARE! Certainly modern ones. Remember

 

>> WFWG 3.11?

 

>

 

> That was the one that convinced me it was time to run Windows.

 

>

 

> I'm hoping that, when you say that they are as easy to use as a faucet,

 

> you're just pulling my chain. Or Microsoft's?

 

>

 

> If not, then I can't come close to agreeing with you. If yes, then I'm

 

> laughing. Ha ha (see?).

 

>

 

 

 

Well they must be easy. If my 87 year old mother-in-law can use XP.......