Alias wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>> Alias wrote:

>>

>>> Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> GO wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Assuming all your paying customers are thieves until they activate

>>>>>>>> and genuinize themselves otherwise is very stupid PR and your

>>>>>>>> support for it is even more stupid.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Ok, lets put your "thief theory" to it final rest and be done

>>>>>>> with it,

>>>>>>> once and for all.

>>>>>>> When you purchase a car, a house, a motorcycle, etc., you're given a

>>>>>>> physical key. When you open a bank account you're given a numerical

>>>>>>> key that identifies your account. When you purchase software for

>>>>>>> use,

>>>>>>> you're given a CD key. None of these "keys" come with any warning

>>>>>>> stating that you are considered a "thief" until such time as you

>>>>>>> prove otherwise. And you must use all of these keys, EXCEPT THE

>>>>>>> SOFTWARE KEYS, each and every time you use your car, motorcycle,

>>>>>>> enter your house, or access your bank account, correct? None of

>>>>>>> them...in any way, shape or form, label or calls you a thief each

>>>>>>> time you use them, correct?

>>>>>>> So your bullsh*t theory (and it is yours alone. You own it!) is

>>>>>>> nothing more than a bullsh*t self imagined ignorant theory and it is

>>>>>>> totally meaningless!

>>>>>>> Unless of course, you are a thief!

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to

>>>>>> rest. A

>>>>>> car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually call back

>>>>>> to the

>>>>>> seller and make you verify that you bought said item.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> You noticed that too, eh?

>>>>>

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Maybe you missed the part where you need a real key anytime you want

>>>> to use any of them...hahaha...lol!

>>>> Frank

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Frank, there are many things you can use without a key. A book, which

>>> is copyright, for example. To use your lame apple/orange examples,

>>> once you install Windows, the key to get in is your password, not

>>> permission from Redmond. Does your Toyota call Japan when you change

>>> spark plugs or oil?

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>>

>> Now who would've thought that my post would go right over your little

>> pointy head and you wouldn't even have to duck?

>> Can you image that?

>> Frank

>

>

> Translation: Frank's been soundly refuted once again so he resorts to

> insults as usual.

>

> Alias

 

Translation: alias loses once again (as usual).

But we all know he's just a linux loser...hahaha...no big deal...lol!

Frank

"GO" muttered...

> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to rest. A

> car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually call back to the

> seller and make you verify that you bought said item.

>

 

Ok, more software, less hardware. Subscribe to cable or satellite? Your

account includes the serial number and model codes for the converter

equipment you bought/rented. If your box goes bad, they replace it, but you

lose signal until their computer is updated with new codes. Once your new

equipment is electronically confirmed, your subscribed channels are

available. So, if you have to upgrade/update/replace hardware, you have to

re-activate with a new registration key to continue using it. Fortunately,

M$ licensed software is a one time fee, not a monthly subscription. -)

here@home.again wrote:

> "GO" muttered...

>> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to rest. A

>> car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually call back to the

>> seller and make you verify that you bought said item.

>>

>

> Ok, more software, less hardware. Subscribe to cable or satellite? Your

> account includes the serial number and model codes for the converter

> equipment you bought/rented. If your box goes bad, they replace it, but you

> lose signal until their computer is updated with new codes. Once your new

> equipment is electronically confirmed, your subscribed channels are

> available. So, if you have to upgrade/update/replace hardware, you have to

> re-activate with a new registration key to continue using it. Fortunately,

> M$ licensed software is a one time fee, not a monthly subscription. -)

>

>

 

Fortunately Linux has no "one time" fee and no subscription.

 

Alias

"Alias" added...

> here@home.again wrote:

>> "GO" muttered...

>>> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to rest.

>>> A

>>> car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually call back to the

>>> seller and make you verify that you bought said item.

>>>

>>

>> Ok, more software, less hardware. Subscribe to cable or satellite? Your

>> account includes the serial number and model codes for the converter

>> equipment you bought/rented. If your box goes bad, they replace it, but

>> you lose signal until their computer is updated with new codes. Once your

>> new equipment is electronically confirmed, your subscribed channels are

>> available. So, if you have to upgrade/update/replace hardware, you have

>> to re-activate with a new registration key to continue using it.

>> Fortunately, M$ licensed software is a one time fee, not a monthly

>> subscription. -)

>

> Fortunately Linux has no "one time" fee and no subscription.

>

> Alias

 

 

And no users. A loose group of fanboys, sure, but if it ever makes to a

double digit maket share then I'll take it seriously. :p

Alias wrote:

> GO wrote:

>> Frank wrote:

>>> GO wrote:

>>>

>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>> Assuming all your paying customers are thieves until they

>>>>>> activate and genuinize themselves otherwise is very stupid PR

>>>>>> and your support for it is even more stupid.

>>>>> Ok, lets put your "thief theory" to it final rest and be done with

>>>>> it, once and for all.

>>>>> When you purchase a car, a house, a motorcycle, etc., you're

>>>>> given a physical key. When you open a bank account you're given a

>>>>> numerical key that identifies your account. When you purchase

>>>>> software for use, you're given a CD key. None of these "keys"

>>>>> come with any warning stating that you are considered a "thief"

>>>>> until such time as you prove otherwise. And you must use all of

>>>>> these keys, EXCEPT THE SOFTWARE KEYS, each and every time you use

>>>>> your car, motorcycle, enter your house, or access your bank

>>>>> account, correct? None of them...in any way, shape or form, label

>>>>> or calls you a thief each time you use them, correct?

>>>>> So your bullsh*t theory (and it is yours alone. You own it!) is

>>>>> nothing more than a bullsh*t self imagined ignorant theory and it

>>>>> is totally meaningless!

>>>>> Unless of course, you are a thief!

>>>>

>>>> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to

>>>> rest. A car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually

>>>> call back to the seller and make you verify that you bought said

>>>> item.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>> hahaha...try running any one of them without a key...lol!

>>> Frank

>>

>> Where did I ever say anything about running them without a key?

>>

>>

>>

>

> Frank's usual tactic when refuted is to change the subject and ignore

> the refutation.

>

> Alias

 

Yeah, I realized that. I think my new tactic is just going to be to ignore

him. I enjoy these little debates and don't even have a problem admitting

when I'm wrong, but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I think

I've ever heard.

GO wrote:

....but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I think

> I've ever heard.

>

 

Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

Frank

>

>

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:12:24 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>GO wrote:

>...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I think

>> I've ever heard.

>>

>

>Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>Frank

 

You're understood perfectly Frank. You're just a idiot with a BIG

mouth.

GO wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>>GO wrote:

>>...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>

>>>I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>>think I've ever heard.

>>>

>>

>>Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>>Frank

>

>

> Sorry Frank. You're the one with problems understanding things. Your

> analogy was quite clear, but wrong. Better luck next time.

>

>

heheheh...so you still think MS thinks you're a thief because you have

to activate Vista?

Is that correct?

Frank

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>> Frank wrote:

>>

>>> GO wrote:

>>> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>>

>>>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>>> think I've ever heard.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>>> Frank

>>

>>

>> Sorry Frank. You're the one with problems understanding things. Your

>> analogy was quite clear, but wrong. Better luck next time.

>>

>>

> heheheh...so you still think MS thinks you're a thief because you have

> to activate Vista?

> Is that correct?

> Frank

 

The only thing you should have to do to "activate" Vista is turn the

computer on.

 

Alias

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>> think I've ever heard.

>>

>

> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

> Frank

 

Sorry Frank. You're the one with problems understanding things. Your

analogy was quite clear, but wrong. Better luck next time.

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:12:24 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>

>> GO wrote:

>> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>> think I've ever heard.

>>>

>>

>> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>> Frank

>

> You're understood perfectly Frank. You're just a idiot with a BIG

> mouth.

 

Thank you. Save me from resorting to that )

here@home.again wrote:

> "GO" muttered...

>> One little thing you forgot when you were putting this theory to

>> rest. A car, a house, or a motorcycle don't need to continually

>> call back to the seller and make you verify that you bought said

>> item.

>>

>

> Ok, more software, less hardware. Subscribe to cable or satellite?

> Your account includes the serial number and model codes for the

> converter equipment you bought/rented. If your box goes bad, they

> replace it, but you lose signal until their computer is updated with

> new codes. Once your new equipment is electronically confirmed, your

> subscribed channels are available. So, if you have to

> upgrade/update/replace hardware, you have to re-activate with a new

> registration key to continue using it. Fortunately, M$ licensed

> software is a one time fee, not a monthly subscription. -)

 

I don't think this quite matches up with what MS is doing. First, it's a

one time activation they activate the "box" and you watch TV. No

continuing need to call home to re-authenticate. And second, the "boxes"

are fairly static unlike a computer. I'm sure there are exceptions but I

would think most people would have them for years without even considering

getting a new one. Computers on the other hand are upgraded on a regular

basic by many.

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>> Frank wrote:

>>

>>> GO wrote:

>>> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>>

>>>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>>> think I've ever heard.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>>> Frank

>>

>>

>> Sorry Frank. You're the one with problems understanding things. Your

>> analogy was quite clear, but wrong. Better luck next time.

>>

>>

> heheheh...so you still think MS thinks you're a thief because you have

> to activate Vista?

> Is that correct?

> Frank

 

Yes, Frank. That's exactly it! :(

 

--

Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:

http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

 

"Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with

legality."

- Linus Torvalds

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:46:35 -0500, "GO"

<aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:

>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:12:24 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>>

>>> GO wrote:

>>> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>>> think I've ever heard.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>>> Frank

>>

>> You're understood perfectly Frank. You're just a idiot with a BIG

>> mouth.

>

>Thank you. Save me from resorting to that )

 

My pleasure. What can I say, I've had fun with dolts like Frankie for

decades in all kinds of newsgroups. It is sort of a hobby. Weird, but

fun.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry <not@all.com> wrote, quoted

or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works

>perfectly including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is

>about the same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive,

>protects my work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has

>seriously useful gadgets that make life easier. Files and

>folders are now easier to find, in any of several ways.

 

If you are telling the truth, why do you post anonymously.

Clearly you could charge large admissions to see the curiosity.

 

--

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products

The Java Glossary

http://mindprod.com

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:46:35 -0500, "GO"

> <aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>

>> Adam Albright wrote:

>>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:12:24 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>>>

>>>> GO wrote:

>>>> ...but trying to debate with someone like Frank is pointless.

>>>>> I mean, just look at his last analogy....it's the silliest thing I

>>>>> think I've ever heard.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Translation: you didn't understand one bit of it!

>>>> Frank

>>>

>>> You're understood perfectly Frank. You're just a idiot with a BIG

>>> mouth.

>>

>> Thank you. Save me from resorting to that )

>

> My pleasure. What can I say, I've had fun with dolts like Frankie for

> decades in all kinds of newsgroups. It is sort of a hobby. Weird, but

> fun.

 

Weird indeed. :) The main thing is that you're enjoying yourself. I do

agree though as there is a certain amount of pleasure in it. I just don't

have the time or patience to carry on as long as you. Perhaps when I

retire....

Linux will remain where it is, very good if you like to use command line

control. It is trying to catch those who don't by imitating lots of the

interface. It will never catch up or over take. It does not have to. For

some like me it stands alone and is great but so is Windows for those who

like it.

 

--

Ian

 

"Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.li> wrote in message

news:erIEOpkzHHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Mike wrote:

>> "Frank" <fb@nospamer.cmn> wrote in message

>> news:eojeMfizHHA.5052@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>> Vista use grows as Mac OS X stays flat

>>>

>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=windows&articleId=9027558&taxonomyId=125

>>>

>>>

>>> Linux wasn't ready for the masses until recently.

>>

>> It still isn't. Linux is still below 0%.

>>

>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

>>

>> The same numbers quoted in the above Computerworld article. I've been

>> quoting these numbers for years, but of course the Linux Loonies *always*

>> deny them. Funny how no one else denies them.

>>

>> Mike

>>

>

> There was a time when selectric typewriters out numbered computers.

> Windows is the past Linux is the future. You're staying with the past.

>

> Alias

>

Ian Betts wrote:

> Linux will remain where it is, very good if you like to use command line

> control. It is trying to catch those who don't by imitating lots of the

> interface. It will never catch up or over take. It does not have to. For

> some like me it stands alone and is great but so is Windows for those

> who like it.

>

 

Gosh, if I want to know how much memory my rig is using, I open a

terminal and type "free" and hit Enter. Man, I guess that's too

complicated for you. There are IRC channels where you can ask a question

and the bot will answer it and Ubuntu will automatically make a log for

your later perusal. Try and get some sensible information from Event Viewer!

 

Alias

GO wrote:

> It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with each

> and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much quicker than

> MS's.

 

Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

Sorry! :-(

 

Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious computer

activity.

Frank

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>> It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with each

>> and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much quicker than

>> MS's.

>

> Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

> Sorry! :-(

>

> Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious computer

> activity.

> Frank

 

This from someone who isn't capable of installing Ubuntu.

 

Alias

It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with each

and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much quicker than

MS's. MS has such a strangle hold on the market that it just may always

remain dominant. Linux is likely going to see a fairly large boom as there

is a growing interest in the "regular user" crowd for alternatives.

Personally, I hope it grows signifigantly because competition is good! It

likely won't take much before MS takes notice (if they haven't

already)....just look at Firefox. IE6 had been stagnating for years and IE7

was still a long ways away. The release and adoption of FF by many (still

a very small number compared to IE users) enough for to wake up MS.

 

 

Ian Betts wrote:

> Linux will remain where it is, very good if you like to use command

> line control. It is trying to catch those who don't by imitating lots

> of the interface. It will never catch up or over take. It does not

> have to. For some like me it stands alone and is great but so is

> Windows for those who like it.

>

>

> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.li> wrote in message

> news:erIEOpkzHHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>> Mike wrote:

>>> "Frank" <fb@nospamer.cmn> wrote in message

>>> news:eojeMfizHHA.5052@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>> Vista use grows as Mac OS X stays flat

>>>>

>>>>

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxo

nomyName=windows&articleId=9027558&taxonomyId=125

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Linux wasn't ready for the masses until recently.

>>>

>>> It still isn't. Linux is still below 0%.

>>>

>>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

>>>

>>> The same numbers quoted in the above Computerworld article. I've

>>> been quoting these numbers for years, but of course the Linux

>>> Loonies *always* deny them. Funny how no one else denies them.

>>>

>>> Mike

>>>

>>

>> There was a time when selectric typewriters out numbered computers.

>> Windows is the past Linux is the future. You're staying with the

>> past.

>>

>> Alias

Alias wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>> GO wrote:

>>

>>> It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with

>>> each

>>> and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much quicker

>>> than

>>> MS's.

>>

>>

>> Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

>> Sorry! :-(

>>

>> Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious

>> computer activity.

>> Frank

>

>

> This from someone who isn't capable of installing Ubuntu.

>

> Alias

 

Do you want to bet your human character (or lack thereof) on that lie?

Frank

GO wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>>GO wrote:

>>

>>

>>>It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with

>>>each and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much

>>>quicker than MS's.

>>

>>Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

>>Sorry! :-(

>>

>>Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious

>>computer activity.

>>Frank

>

>

> I wouldn't know if there's any statistical data, but it's easily observed by

> anyone that's used multiple releases. The new and actually useful features

> improved from v6 of Ubuntu to v7 are far better than any improvements I've

> seen in Vista over XP. And how many years was Vista in development compared

> to the last version of Ubuntu?

>

>

 

 

You tell me seeing as how you're head over heels about it.

Frank

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>> It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better" with

>> each and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be much

>> quicker than MS's.

>

> Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

> Sorry! :-(

>

> Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious

> computer activity.

> Frank

 

I wouldn't know if there's any statistical data, but it's easily observed by

anyone that's used multiple releases. The new and actually useful features

improved from v6 of Ubuntu to v7 are far better than any improvements I've

seen in Vista over XP. And how many years was Vista in development compared

to the last version of Ubuntu?

GO wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>>GO wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>GO wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>It's never a good idea to say never. Linux is getting "better"

>>>>>with each and every release, and the rate of releases seems to be

>>>>>much quicker than MS's.

>>>>

>>>>Not according to any statistical data it isn't.

>>>>Sorry! :-(

>>>>

>>>>Linux for the desktop is a mess and a nightmare for any serious

>>>>computer activity.

>>>>Frank

>>>

>>>

>>>I wouldn't know if there's any statistical data, but it's easily

>>>observed by anyone that's used multiple releases. The new and

>>>actually useful features improved from v6 of Ubuntu to v7 are far

>>>better than any improvements I've seen in Vista over XP. And how

>>>many years was Vista in development compared to the last version of

>>>Ubuntu?

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>>You tell me seeing as how you're head over heels about it.

>>Frank

>

>

> Ubuntu v6 to 7: less than a year (June 2006 - April 2007)

> XP to Vista: 6 years (October 2001 - Janurary 2007)

>

> And I'm not head over heels anything. I'm just objective enough to see the

> benefits of both systems (well 2k and XP on the MS side. I've still yet to

> see anything worthy of moving myself to Vista yet)

>

>

 

Oh, so you've never installed Vista?

Frank