Henry:

 

I hope you hang around for a while. This forum needs a little sanity and it

seems you can provide it.

 

 

"Henry" <not@all.com> wrote in message

news:f7r48b$sj6$1@registered.motzarella.org...

>I have been in computing since the 1950s (vacuum tubes, magnetic donut

>memory). For most of my years, everything in a system was made by one

>company - the computer, accessories, peripherals, software, etc., and that

>company trained operators, who were generally "programmers".

>

> For a computer to run today, it must be compatible with an astonishing

> spectrum of processors, mother boards, peripherals, and software made by

> diverse people and companies ranging from geniuses to incompetent, working

> in many different communication and programming languages. And to further

> complicate things, there are smart but emotionally troubled people who

> deliberately seek to screw up such systems with various sorts of malware!

>

> Today's users range from two years old up to my age, and I'm not certain

> which age group has more skills. There probably are two computers

> somewhere that are more than a year old and are identical, with precisely

> the same configuration, software, hardware, etc., operated by

> similarly-skilled people. Somewhere.

>

> That Windows (or OSX, or Linux, etc.) does so well under these conditions

> is wonderful, a tribute to our collective ingenuity. Part of the reason is

> the feedback system - we call it beta. Linux, of course, is in perpetual

> beta, which is part of its attraction to those who seek the comfort of

> knowing things others don't. And one of the reasons it's such a poor

> solution is that so few make money at it.

>

> As mentioned, Vista works well for me. I think it works fine for most, and

> that those with problems look for solutions in such discussion groups as

> this, which has become a pit of discontent. And worse, advocates of other

> operating systems, or haters of Microsoft (but why? It's one of America's

> great successes!), gravitate to where their passions will be fed.

>

> Henry

> ...a view from seven decades of painful experience

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Gary wrote:

>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>> Frank wrote:

>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>>>>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>> False.

>>>

>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>

>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>

>>> XP and SP2

>>>

>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well maybe

>> they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>

> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>

> Alias

 

Oh I forgot about your double standard.

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Gary wrote:

>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>> Frank wrote:

>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>>>>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>> False.

>>>

>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>

>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>

>>> XP and SP2

>>>

>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well maybe

>> they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>

> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>

> Alias

 

Oh I forgot about your double standard.

ray wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>

>

>>ray wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>Really!

>>>>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.

>>>>

>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories,

>>>>and high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't

>>>>waste time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>

>>>

>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>minority.

>>>

>>

>>Only if you can't count!

>>Frank

>

>

> Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may be

> in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to see it.

>

 

Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

:-)

Frank

ray wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>

>

>>ray wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>Really!

>>>>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.

>>>>

>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories,

>>>>and high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't

>>>>waste time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>

>>>

>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>minority.

>>>

>>

>>Only if you can't count!

>>Frank

>

>

> Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may be

> in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to see it.

>

 

Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

:-)

Frank

Possum wrote:

> Henry:

>

> I hope you hang around for a while. This forum needs a little sanity and

> it seems you can provide it.

>

>> Henry

>> ...a view from seven decades of painful experience

>

 

 

Thanks, my pomposity is often confused with enlightenment.

 

Henry

....don' need no steenkin' long warrantees

Possum wrote:

> Henry:

>

> I hope you hang around for a while. This forum needs a little sanity and

> it seems you can provide it.

>

>> Henry

>> ...a view from seven decades of painful experience

>

 

 

Thanks, my pomposity is often confused with enlightenment.

 

Henry

....don' need no steenkin' long warrantees

I like my Vista too!

 

Sandy

 

 

--

The Sand

 

God is my "back up." :)

I like my Vista too!

 

Sandy

 

 

--

The Sand

 

God is my "back up." :)

GO wrote:

>

> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

> bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's of the

> software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

> reactivate Windows.

 

No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

friend or acquaintance.

This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

activation and easiest to deter.

 

 

Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

> it's pointless.

 

It's pointless? Nope, not at all.

 

The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to prevent

> piracy.

 

Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

 

Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

People that truly do not want to

> pay for it won't.

 

Of course they won't, but that's nothing new.

Frank

GO wrote:

>

> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

> bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's of the

> software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

> reactivate Windows.

 

No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

friend or acquaintance.

This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

activation and easiest to deter.

 

 

Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

> it's pointless.

 

It's pointless? Nope, not at all.

 

The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to prevent

> piracy.

 

Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

 

Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

People that truly do not want to

> pay for it won't.

 

Of course they won't, but that's nothing new.

Frank

Mike wrote:

>> And now you know what MS said? They will enable the same activation

>> technology for other 3rd party products! So if they hurl all the

>> industry into this stupid anti-piracy strategy...

>> they wont have that many fingers pointing at them alone!

>

> Sounds like a good idea. Pirates are whining about it, it must be

> working.

 

Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's of the

software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

reactivate Windows. Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

it's pointless. The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to prevent

piracy. If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

cheaper and better ways to go about it. People that truly do not want to

pay for it won't.

Mike wrote:

>> And now you know what MS said? They will enable the same activation

>> technology for other 3rd party products! So if they hurl all the

>> industry into this stupid anti-piracy strategy...

>> they wont have that many fingers pointing at them alone!

>

> Sounds like a good idea. Pirates are whining about it, it must be

> working.

 

Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's of the

software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

reactivate Windows. Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

it's pointless. The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to prevent

piracy. If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

cheaper and better ways to go about it. People that truly do not want to

pay for it won't.

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>>

>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>

> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

> Here's the problem junior...drivers...software/hardware manufacturers

> have literally had years to develop drivers for Vista for their

> products. Yet at Vista's RTM many major software/hardware

> manufacturers were just beginning to develop and release drivers for

> Vista.

> As a prime example, Nvidia video drivers have been notoriously bad for

> months after Vista went RTM and are still somewhat buggy.

> So the only beta testing Vista owners are doing is mainly for the

> crappy drivers from software/hardware manufacturers.

> Same thing goes on with every newly released os, Windows, Mac, linux

> all of them.

> Problem is, Windows owns the desktop market so bad drivers affect more

> users.

> Frank

>

 

I've actually been curious about this. I realize that some of Vista's

problems are related to third-party developers, but why is this so? Why is

it that they've taken so long to get properly functioning drivers out for

Vista? Vista was in final beta and RC mode for quite a long time, more

than enough time for hardware developers. It would seem to be in their best

interest to create functional drivers for Vista for it's release. Are

drivers that much more difficult to create for Vista? Is MS not providing

enough information to developers to create proper drivers?

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>>

>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>

> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

> Here's the problem junior...drivers...software/hardware manufacturers

> have literally had years to develop drivers for Vista for their

> products. Yet at Vista's RTM many major software/hardware

> manufacturers were just beginning to develop and release drivers for

> Vista.

> As a prime example, Nvidia video drivers have been notoriously bad for

> months after Vista went RTM and are still somewhat buggy.

> So the only beta testing Vista owners are doing is mainly for the

> crappy drivers from software/hardware manufacturers.

> Same thing goes on with every newly released os, Windows, Mac, linux

> all of them.

> Problem is, Windows owns the desktop market so bad drivers affect more

> users.

> Frank

>

 

I've actually been curious about this. I realize that some of Vista's

problems are related to third-party developers, but why is this so? Why is

it that they've taken so long to get properly functioning drivers out for

Vista? Vista was in final beta and RC mode for quite a long time, more

than enough time for hardware developers. It would seem to be in their best

interest to create functional drivers for Vista for it's release. Are

drivers that much more difficult to create for Vista? Is MS not providing

enough information to developers to create proper drivers?

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>>

>> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions

>> that bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate

>> owner's of the software in the first place that have to continually

>> call into MS to reactivate Windows.

>

> No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

> pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

> friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

 

It is true. I've already stated there are other methods to prevent casual

piracy. Education or a simple one time activation upon installation are two

easy examples all of this continuing calling home and authenticating is

pointless. If neither of those work then they are unlikely to pay in the

first place, and will fall to the other methods to obtain the OS. Want to

minimize piracy? Create a great product at a fair price and people will pay

for it. The RIAA is facing this lesson right now....the hard way.

> The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

>> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to

>> prevent piracy.

>

> Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

Common sense. The time to take to develop and implement it. The time to

maintain it. The time to pay call centers to deal with activation issues.

> If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

>> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

>

> Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

I did. They weren't interested. They like the ability to control you and

your computer.

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>>

>> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions

>> that bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate

>> owner's of the software in the first place that have to continually

>> call into MS to reactivate Windows.

>

> No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

> pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

> friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

 

It is true. I've already stated there are other methods to prevent casual

piracy. Education or a simple one time activation upon installation are two

easy examples all of this continuing calling home and authenticating is

pointless. If neither of those work then they are unlikely to pay in the

first place, and will fall to the other methods to obtain the OS. Want to

minimize piracy? Create a great product at a fair price and people will pay

for it. The RIAA is facing this lesson right now....the hard way.

> The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

>> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to

>> prevent piracy.

>

> Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

Common sense. The time to take to develop and implement it. The time to

maintain it. The time to pay call centers to deal with activation issues.

> If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

>> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

>

> Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

I did. They weren't interested. They like the ability to control you and

your computer.

Gary wrote:

> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

> news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>> Gary wrote:

>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>>>>>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>>> False.

>>>>

>>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>>

>>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>>

>>>> XP and SP2

>>>>

>>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>>

>>>> Alias

>>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well maybe

>>> they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Oh I forgot about your double standard.

>

>

 

Ubuntu comes out with a new stable build every six months for free. MS

comes out with buggy betas and foists them on the public for a high

price. If you read the Ubuntu forums, the questions are about how to use

or configure Ubuntu not "OE lost all my messages" or "My computer keeps

rebooting" like with XP and Vista. See the difference or are you blind?

 

I've been using Ubuntu now for over nine months and I've been using XP

Pro SP2 with all the updates except WGA/N since '02 and I have to say

that Ubuntu is much more solid and much more of a pleasure to use.

 

Alias

Gary wrote:

> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

> news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>> Gary wrote:

>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I call

>>>>>> Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>>> False.

>>>>

>>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>>

>>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>>

>>>> XP and SP2

>>>>

>>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>>

>>>> Alias

>>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well maybe

>>> they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Oh I forgot about your double standard.

>

>

 

Ubuntu comes out with a new stable build every six months for free. MS

comes out with buggy betas and foists them on the public for a high

price. If you read the Ubuntu forums, the questions are about how to use

or configure Ubuntu not "OE lost all my messages" or "My computer keeps

rebooting" like with XP and Vista. See the difference or are you blind?

 

I've been using Ubuntu now for over nine months and I've been using XP

Pro SP2 with all the updates except WGA/N since '02 and I have to say

that Ubuntu is much more solid and much more of a pleasure to use.

 

Alias

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>>

>> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

>> bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's

>> of the

>> software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

>> reactivate Windows.

>

> No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

> pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

> friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

 

If true, MS wouldn't have made BILLIONS off of pre XP Windows but they

did make BILLIONS so this theory doesn't hold water as most people are

honest.

>

>

> Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

>> it's pointless.

>

> It's pointless? Nope, not at all.

 

It is the main cause for people checking out Linux or Mac.

>

> The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

>> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to

>> prevent

>> piracy.

>

> Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

Ever hear of common sense?

>

> If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

>> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

>

> Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

No, they aren't. They are interested in controlling your computer and

you think that's normal! LOL!

>

> People that truly do not want to

>> pay for it won't.

>

> Of course they won't, but that's nothing new.

> Frank

 

No, but controlling your computer through WPA and WGA is.

 

Alias

Frank wrote:

> GO wrote:

>

>>

>> Pirates are not whining about, they already have cracked versions that

>> bypass all MS's crap. The only people affected are legimate owner's

>> of the

>> software in the first place that have to continually call into MS to

>> reactivate Windows.

>

> No, that's not true at all. Legitimate users will become "casual

> pirates" when they "loan" their copy of Windows OS to a family member,

> friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

 

If true, MS wouldn't have made BILLIONS off of pre XP Windows but they

did make BILLIONS so this theory doesn't hold water as most people are

honest.

>

>

> Sure they want to stop casual pirates but ultimately

>> it's pointless.

>

> It's pointless? Nope, not at all.

 

It is the main cause for people checking out Linux or Mac.

>

> The money they lose to casual pirates is a drop in the

>> bucket compared to what they've invested in all this technology to

>> prevent

>> piracy.

>

> Oh yeah, where did you get that idea from?

 

Ever hear of common sense?

>

> If they're goal is to stop/slow casual piracy there are simpler,

>> cheaper and better ways to go about it.

>

> Call MS, I'm sure they'll be interested!

 

No, they aren't. They are interested in controlling your computer and

you think that's normal! LOL!

>

> People that truly do not want to

>> pay for it won't.

>

> Of course they won't, but that's nothing new.

> Frank

 

No, but controlling your computer through WPA and WGA is.

 

Alias

The Sand wrote:

> I like my Vista too!

>

> Sandy

>

>

 

Correction: it is not *your* Vista. You are paying to use it until MS

decides you can't use it anymore.

 

Alias

The Sand wrote:

> I like my Vista too!

>

> Sandy

>

>

 

Correction: it is not *your* Vista. You are paying to use it until MS

decides you can't use it anymore.

 

Alias

Alias wrote:

> Gary wrote:

>

>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>> news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>

>>> Gary wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>>>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>>

>>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I

>>>>>>> call Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>>>>

>>>>> False.

>>>>>

>>>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>>>

>>>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>>>

>>>>> XP and SP2

>>>>>

>>>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>>>

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well

>>>> maybe they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>>>

>>> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>>

>> Oh I forgot about your double standard.

>>

>

> Ubuntu comes out with a new stable build every six months for free. MS

> comes out with buggy betas and foists them on the public for a high

> price. If you read the Ubuntu forums, the questions are about how to use

> or configure Ubuntu not "OE lost all my messages" or "My computer keeps

> rebooting" like with XP and Vista. See the difference or are you blind?

>

> I've been using Ubuntu now for over nine months and I've been using XP

> Pro SP2 with all the updates except WGA/N since '02 and I have to say

> that Ubuntu is much more solid and much more of a pleasure to use.

>

> Alias

 

You're an admitted liar! Go spread your stupid, insidious lies somewhere

else.

BTW, got that phone number yet?

Lying linux lose.

Frank

Alias wrote:

> Gary wrote:

>

>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>> news:%23v$a1ayyHHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>

>>> Gary wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

>>>> news:Oi3JbtuyHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>>

>>>>> Frank wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> All versions of Windows, without exception, ended up in what I

>>>>>>> call Public Beta before they were ready for prime time.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Nope, totally wrong analogy. Completely off base.

>>>>>

>>>>> False.

>>>>>

>>>>> Windows 95 had how many version updates? 3?

>>>>>

>>>>> Windows 98 and then Windows 98SE

>>>>>

>>>>> XP and SP2

>>>>>

>>>>> Ill informed drivel snipped.

>>>>>

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>> WOW only 3 how many versions has UBUNTU had like 100 or so. Well

>>>> maybe they will get it in about 20 or so years.

>>>

>>> LOL! Not the same thing, sorry.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>>

>> Oh I forgot about your double standard.

>>

>

> Ubuntu comes out with a new stable build every six months for free. MS

> comes out with buggy betas and foists them on the public for a high

> price. If you read the Ubuntu forums, the questions are about how to use

> or configure Ubuntu not "OE lost all my messages" or "My computer keeps

> rebooting" like with XP and Vista. See the difference or are you blind?

>

> I've been using Ubuntu now for over nine months and I've been using XP

> Pro SP2 with all the updates except WGA/N since '02 and I have to say

> that Ubuntu is much more solid and much more of a pleasure to use.

>

> Alias

 

You're an admitted liar! Go spread your stupid, insidious lies somewhere

else.

BTW, got that phone number yet?

Lying linux lose.

Frank