Alias wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>

>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>XP.

>>>

>>>

>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>

>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>It is about Vista.

>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>

>

> Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

> drivel and prove it.

>

> Alias

>

That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

sheep-fukker?

Figures.

You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

ignorant and stupidity.

But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their folly.

 

Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers!

Nice to know you're good at something right?

Alias wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>

>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>XP.

>>>

>>>

>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>

>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>It is about Vista.

>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>

>

> Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

> drivel and prove it.

>

> Alias

>

That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

sheep-fukker?

Figures.

You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

ignorance and stupidity.

But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their folly.

 

Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers!

Nice to know you're good at something right?

Leythos wrote:

> In article <#uqggR64IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, charlie@tames.net

> says...

>> Leythos wrote:

>>> In article <g57taq$abq$2@aioe.org>, fbis@wankerin.grade.sch says...

>>>> This is your opinion. I have mine. Others have theirs. Unlike you, I

>>>> think people should make up their minds themselves as to what they like

>>>> or dislike. I also like Macs and XP. My first computer was a Mac back in

>>>> 1984.

>>> Your statement was not posted as an "Opinion" it was posted as though

>>> you believe it to be fact and want others to believe it as fact, which

>>> is incorrect.

>>>

>>> You can say "I believe Ubuntu is a far superior operating system.", but

>>> you can not say "Ubuntu is a far superior operating system." and be

>>> expected to be believed or honest.

>>>

>>> Your postings are misleading.

>>>

>>> You were claiming Ubuntu was better before you had even experienced

>>> Vista, and well before you had installed it.

>>>

>>> In ever case I've tested with clients, they will take Vista + MS Office

>>> over Ubuntu + Open Office.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> That's hardly impartial is it? Why would clients need to employ you if

>> not to seek your advice. In any case people with unlimited (Company)

>> funds to spend will always take the easiest option, and those who have

>> not yet tried Vista will assume it to be easier than Ubuntu.

>

> Let's see, all of our customers are Businesses, not home users, but,

> they all interact with Exchange, SQL 2000/2005, medical and accounting

> programs and Ubuntu doesn't support that, even with Open Source

> applications that provide SOME level of function for Exchange.

>

> Vista, while you have to get better hardware, some newer apps, it works

> painlessly, without error, and they only have to learn where to find new

> menu items, not how to import/export documents, learn new apps since

> none of theirs are supported.....

>

> The cost of a FREE OS is not free when you consider a business that was

> not previously running on Open Source.

>

 

 

And that was my point. You said "In every case I've tested with clients,

they will take Vista + MS Office over Ubuntu + Open Office."

 

That makes it sound rather voluntary, when in fact they are trapped by

their previous software choices and have no alternative but to keep

paying top dollar.

 

So maybe they "Will take" Vista over Ubuntu, but is that because the

option to remain with XP is no longer there?

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:31:39 -0700, fb wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>>XP.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>

>>>>Alias

>>>

>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>It is about Vista.

>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>

>>

>> Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>> drivel and prove it.

>>

>> Alias

>>

> That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

> sheep-fukker?

> Figures.

> You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

> ignorant and stupidity.

> But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

> folly.

>

> Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

> something right?

 

So what does Frank do? It proves it *again*.

 

Alias

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:38:01 -0700, fb wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>>XP.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>

>>>>Alias

>>>

>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>It is about Vista.

>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>

>>

>> Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>> drivel and prove it.

>>

>> Alias

>>

> That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

> sheep-fukker?

 

No and no.

> Figures.

 

"Figures" and Frank the Wank is an oxymoron.

> You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

> ignorance and stupidity.

> But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

> folly.

>

> Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

> something right?

 

Have you looked up the word "general" yet?

 

Alias

fb wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:54:27 -0400, Leythos wrote:

>>

>>

>>> In article <#uqggR64IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, charlie@tames.net

>>> says...

>>>

>>>> Leythos wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> In article <g57taq$abq$2@aioe.org>, fbis@wankerin.grade.sch says...

>>>>>

>>>>>> This is your opinion. I have mine. Others have theirs. Unlike you, I

>>>>>> think people should make up their minds themselves as to what they

>>>>>> like or dislike. I also like Macs and XP. My first computer was a

>>>>>> Mac back in 1984.

>>>>>

>>>>> Your statement was not posted as an "Opinion" it was posted as though

>>>>> you believe it to be fact and want others to believe it as fact,

>>>>> which is incorrect.

>>>>>

>>>>> You can say "I believe Ubuntu is a far superior operating system.",

>>>>> but you can not say "Ubuntu is a far superior operating system." and

>>>>> be expected to be believed or honest.

>>>>>

>>>>> Your postings are misleading.

>>>>>

>>>>> You were claiming Ubuntu was better before you had even experienced

>>>>> Vista, and well before you had installed it.

>>>>>

>>>>> In ever case I've tested with clients, they will take Vista + MS

>>>>> Office over Ubuntu + Open Office.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> That's hardly impartial is it? Why would clients need to employ you if

>>>> not to seek your advice. In any case people with unlimited (Company)

>>>> funds to spend will always take the easiest option, and those who have

>>>> not yet tried Vista will assume it to be easier than Ubuntu.

>>>

>>> Let's see, all of our customers are Businesses, not home users, but,

>>> they all interact with Exchange, SQL 2000/2005, medical and accounting

>>> programs and Ubuntu doesn't support that, even with Open Source

>>> applications that provide SOME level of function for Exchange.

>>>

>>> Vista, while you have to get better hardware, some newer apps, it works

>>> painlessly, without error, and they only have to learn where to find new

>>> menu items, not how to import/export documents, learn new apps since

>>> none of theirs are supported.....

>>>

>>> The cost of a FREE OS is not free when you consider a business that was

>>> not previously running on Open Source.

>>

>>

>>

>> Using your "logic", they should have never abandoned IBM Selectric

>> typewriters.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Using your brain (what little you have) man would never have left the

> caves.

 

Really? How so? Please explain. Oh, you're just hurling another

unfounded insult and can explain nothing.

 

Alias

Frank wrote:

> Ringmaster wrote:

> ----------------------

>

> Tell us adam albright, in which mental institution did you spent the

> last 20 yrs. Cause only someone who was/has been committed for a

> lengthly stay would know that much about mental illnesses.

> How many of those did you suffer from?

> We know the ones you currently have!...LOL!

 

Once again, Frank uses his trusty "I know you are but what am I" grade

school retort.

 

Alias

the wrote:

> Leythos wrote:

>> In article <#uqggR64IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, charlie@tames.net

>> says...

>>> Leythos wrote:

>>>> In article <g57taq$abq$2@aioe.org>, fbis@wankerin.grade.sch says...

>>>>> This is your opinion. I have mine. Others have theirs. Unlike you,

>>>>> I think people should make up their minds themselves as to what

>>>>> they like or dislike. I also like Macs and XP. My first computer

>>>>> was a Mac back in 1984.

>>>> Your statement was not posted as an "Opinion" it was posted as

>>>> though you believe it to be fact and want others to believe it as

>>>> fact, which is incorrect.

>>>>

>>>> You can say "I believe Ubuntu is a far superior operating system.",

>>>> but you can not say "Ubuntu is a far superior operating system." and

>>>> be expected to be believed or honest.

>>>>

>>>> Your postings are misleading.

>>>>

>>>> You were claiming Ubuntu was better before you had even experienced

>>>> Vista, and well before you had installed it.

>>>>

>>>> In ever case I've tested with clients, they will take Vista + MS

>>>> Office over Ubuntu + Open Office.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> That's hardly impartial is it? Why would clients need to employ you

>>> if not to seek your advice. In any case people with unlimited

>>> (Company) funds to spend will always take the easiest option, and

>>> those who have not yet tried Vista will assume it to be easier than

>>> Ubuntu.

>>

>> Let's see, all of our customers are Businesses, not home users, but,

>> they all interact with Exchange, SQL 2000/2005, medical and accounting

>> programs and Ubuntu doesn't support that, even with Open Source

>> applications that provide SOME level of function for Exchange.

>>

>> Vista, while you have to get better hardware, some newer apps, it

>> works painlessly, without error, and they only have to learn where to

>> find new menu items, not how to import/export documents, learn new

>> apps since none of theirs are supported.....

>>

>> The cost of a FREE OS is not free when you consider a business that

>> was not previously running on Open Source.

>

> What's that called? Is it called Cost Justification, Return on

> Investment and Cost to Operate? Businesses have heavy investment in the

> technology that's in place, and they are just not going to jump ship to

> something else on a whim when there is no justification to do so.

 

 

Nobody is asking them to, but there are many companies that could

replace almost every XP machine with either a thin clients or a Linux

machine.

 

So why would they jump ship and buy all new hardware for Vista?

> And with emerging technology for the MS platform such as .Net's WCF,

> MPF, Workflow, MVP etc, etc, now many 3rd party software language

> vendors and 3rd party solution venders tapping into .Net technology,

> businesses are not running to another platform for workstation or servers.

>

> The posters making the most noise here on the opposite side of the coin,

> really don't see what's happening or how things work. People in

> businesses that are in a position to make such decisions don't shoot

> from the hip. They just don't shoot from the hip, and they will keep the

> status quo.

 

 

Status Quo is XP as far as many companies are concerned. Changing to

Vista is the same "Shooting from the hip" scenario as changing to

another OS.

 

> And Linux and Apache continue to loose Web server market share.

>

> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2008/06/22/june_2008_web_server_survey.html

>

>

> Look, I got nothing against Linux, which helps bring down cost for the

> home user and business sectors. But MS is certainly not on some kind of

> doom and gloom path nor are Linux systems the wave of the future that

> the evangelist in the NG make it out to be.

 

The various Linux are becoming an increasingly viable alternative.

> However, Linux is free and it still can't make a dent, not really.

 

The risk is not that Linux will make the dent, the risk is that

Microsoft will do it themselves.

Charlie Tame wrote:

>> What's that called? Is it called Cost Justification, Return on

>> Investment and Cost to Operate? Businesses have heavy investment in

>> the technology that's in place, and they are just not going to jump

>> ship to something else on a whim when there is no justification to do so.

>

>

> Nobody is asking them to, but there are many companies that could

> replace almost every XP machine with either a thin clients or a Linux

> machine.

 

There business solutions sitting out on a Citrix Windows based or

Windows server based terminal server farm such as office solutions and

other business solutions that are not run on a workstation reside with

client based workstations accessing the farm currently, thin clients.

 

You have no clue about what's happening with .Net technology and what's

taking place in the business sector with the technology. No, they are

not going to do any of the sort what you are talking about with Linux.

 

Yes they will have thin client business based solutions as they

currently do with Com, Com+ and .Net technology business developed

solutions that run on the MS platform.

 

They are also coming back to the fat client in order to use the power of

the desktop workstation and new equipment technology a wasted commodity

in this area with .Net Windows Communication Foundation and other such

technology that allow processing of business transactions to be done at

the workstation. And the workstation in communications with a SOA portal

Web server over HTTP or application server by means of Named Pipe, MSMQ

or TCP with client side WCF solution and WCF server side application at

the desktop in an N-tier architect solution, which I have worked on in

the development of such business solutions.

>

> So why would they jump ship and buy all new hardware for Vista?

 

Return of Investment, capital expenditures, tax write off such as

dumping old equipment and keeping with state of the art technology. They

will buy new equipment and swap out old equipment because of the

advancement of technology, and they are going to do if Vista is involved

or not. It's the cost to operate.

>

>> And with emerging technology for the MS platform such as .Net's WCF,

>> MPF, Workflow, MVP etc, etc, now many 3rd party software language

>> vendors and 3rd party solution venders tapping into .Net technology,

>> businesses are not running to another platform for workstation or

>> servers.

>>

>> The posters making the most noise here on the opposite side of the

>> coin, really don't see what's happening or how things work. People in

>> businesses that are in a position to make such decisions don't shoot

>> from the hip. They just don't shoot from the hip, and they will keep

>> the status quo.

>

>

> Status Quo is XP as far as many companies are concerned. Changing to

> Vista is the same "Shooting from the hip" scenario as changing to

> another OS.

 

The status Quo is MS and Windows period. Some will progress to Vista,

some will remain on XP and some will move on to Windows 7, just like

they came from Win 9'x to Win 2k workstation and server, to Win XP and

Win 2k3 server, now to Vista workstation and Win 2k8 server.

 

They will not be jumping to Linux. Businesses have too much invested in

MS technology, such as new in-house and 3rd party programming business

based solutions based on .Net technology and old legacy applications

using Com and Com+ technology on the MS platform that run the company's

day to day business.

 

The company has staff that has been trained on the MS technology,

whether that be an IT or office staff that has been trained on MS

technology. The company's IT culture is MS technology based.

 

Companies with business leaders such as president, vice presidents, CIO,

IT director and other senior level management must be shown

justification for change, return on investment, cost to operate, etc,

etc. And what they will do is move forward on the same platform, but

they will not move over to another platform, because it's too costly to

do so, and they don't shoot from the hip.

 

They keep the status quo. What you're talking about is a wild move and

those people who have gotten to that station in their careers don't make

wild moves. How do you think he or she has gotten to their positions? By

making unjustifiable wild moves?

>

>

>> And Linux and Apache continue to loose Web server market share.

>>

>> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2008/06/22/june_2008_web_server_survey.html

>>

>>

>> Look, I got nothing against Linux, which helps bring down cost for the

>> home user and business sectors. But MS is certainly not on some kind

>> of doom and gloom path nor are Linux systems the wave of the future

>> that the evangelist in the NG make it out to be.

>

> The various Linux are becoming an increasingly viable alternative.

 

But only a very few are going to the platform, because of the reasons

stated above, if they are already on the MS platform.

 

That's the problem with Linux, it has too many versions, and it has spun

out of control.

 

I don't see it happening as Linux stays at the 1% market level. I have

talked with IT staff as a consultant that are moving to Vista. I have

also talked with others that wait like they usually do for the first SP

to settle down for an Windows O/S release before they make the move,

just like they have done in the past.

>

>> However, Linux is free and it still can't make a dent, not really.

>

> The risk is not that Linux will make the dent, the risk is that

> Microsoft will do it themselves.

 

Well, it's not going to happen, and you'll be dust in your grave when

and if it ever does.

 

MS has three things going for it. It has an O/S no matter what you think

about it, it has .Net technology that is an ISO and ECMA standard no

matter what you think about it, and it's top dog no matter what you

think about it.

Charlie Tame wrote:

 

<snipped correction>

 

There business solutions sitting out on a Citrix Windows based or

Windows server based terminal server farm such as office solutions and

other business solutions that are not run on a workstation *reside on

the server* with client based workstations accessing the farm currently,

thin clients.

Charlie Tame wrote:

>

> So maybe they "Will take" Vista over Ubuntu, but is that because the

> option to remain with XP is no longer there?

 

This reminds me of the time I was driving on the San Diego freeway in

Los Angeles in a brand new signal red Mercedes Benz sunroof back sipping

a wine cooler back in the 80's, with a partner in the car with me and

his son. When all of a sudden, two beautiful women pulled up in their

car honking their horn sipping wine coolers too smiling.

 

We acknowledged each other and they drove on. I said to my partner, "I

wonder was it me or the car?" My partner replied back, "Why do you even

care?"

the wrote:

> Charlie Tame wrote:

>

>>> What's that called? Is it called Cost Justification, Return on

>>> Investment and Cost to Operate? Businesses have heavy investment in

>>> the technology that's in place, and they are just not going to jump

>>> ship to something else on a whim when there is no justification to do

>>> so.

>>

>>

>> Nobody is asking them to, but there are many companies that could

>> replace almost every XP machine with either a thin clients or a Linux

>> machine.

>

> There business solutions sitting out on a Citrix Windows based or

> Windows server based terminal server farm such as office solutions and

> other business solutions that are not run on a workstation reside with

> client based workstations accessing the farm currently, thin clients.

>

> You have no clue about what's happening with .Net technology and what's

> taking place in the business sector with the technology. No, they are

> not going to do any of the sort what you are talking about with Linux.

>

> Yes they will have thin client business based solutions as they

> currently do with Com, Com+ and .Net technology business developed

> solutions that run on the MS platform.

>

> They are also coming back to the fat client in order to use the power of

> the desktop workstation and new equipment technology a wasted commodity

> in this area with .Net Windows Communication Foundation and other such

> technology that allow processing of business transactions to be done at

> the workstation. And the workstation in communications with a SOA portal

> Web server over HTTP or application server by means of Named Pipe, MSMQ

> or TCP with client side WCF solution and WCF server side application at

> the desktop in an N-tier architect solution, which I have worked on in

> the development of such business solutions.

>

>>

>> So why would they jump ship and buy all new hardware for Vista?

>

> Return of Investment, capital expenditures, tax write off such as

> dumping old equipment and keeping with state of the art technology. They

> will buy new equipment and swap out old equipment because of the

> advancement of technology, and they are going to do if Vista is involved

> or not. It's the cost to operate.

>

>>

>>> And with emerging technology for the MS platform such as .Net's WCF,

>>> MPF, Workflow, MVP etc, etc, now many 3rd party software language

>>> vendors and 3rd party solution venders tapping into .Net technology,

>>> businesses are not running to another platform for workstation or

>>> servers.

>>>

>>> The posters making the most noise here on the opposite side of the

>>> coin, really don't see what's happening or how things work. People in

>>> businesses that are in a position to make such decisions don't shoot

>>> from the hip. They just don't shoot from the hip, and they will keep

>>> the status quo.

>>

>>

>> Status Quo is XP as far as many companies are concerned. Changing to

>> Vista is the same "Shooting from the hip" scenario as changing to

>> another OS.

>

> The status Quo is MS and Windows period. Some will progress to Vista,

> some will remain on XP and some will move on to Windows 7, just like

> they came from Win 9'x to Win 2k workstation and server, to Win XP and

> Win 2k3 server, now to Vista workstation and Win 2k8 server.

>

> They will not be jumping to Linux. Businesses have too much invested in

> MS technology, such as new in-house and 3rd party programming business

> based solutions based on .Net technology and old legacy applications

> using Com and Com+ technology on the MS platform that run the company's

> day to day business.

>

> The company has staff that has been trained on the MS technology,

> whether that be an IT or office staff that has been trained on MS

> technology. The company's IT culture is MS technology based.

>

> Companies with business leaders such as president, vice presidents, CIO,

> IT director and other senior level management must be shown

> justification for change, return on investment, cost to operate, etc,

> etc. And what they will do is move forward on the same platform, but

> they will not move over to another platform, because it's too costly to

> do so, and they don't shoot from the hip.

>

> They keep the status quo. What you're talking about is a wild move and

> those people who have gotten to that station in their careers don't make

> wild moves. How do you think he or she has gotten to their positions? By

> making unjustifiable wild moves?

>

>>

>>

>>> And Linux and Apache continue to loose Web server market share.

>>>

>>> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2008/06/22/june_2008_web_server_survey.html

>>>

>>>

>>> Look, I got nothing against Linux, which helps bring down cost for

>>> the home user and business sectors. But MS is certainly not on some

>>> kind of doom and gloom path nor are Linux systems the wave of the

>>> future that the evangelist in the NG make it out to be.

>>

>> The various Linux are becoming an increasingly viable alternative.

>

> But only a very few are going to the platform, because of the reasons

> stated above, if they are already on the MS platform.

>

> That's the problem with Linux, it has too many versions, and it has spun

> out of control.

>

> I don't see it happening as Linux stays at the 1% market level. I have

> talked with IT staff as a consultant that are moving to Vista. I have

> also talked with others that wait like they usually do for the first SP

> to settle down for an Windows O/S release before they make the move,

> just like they have done in the past.

>

>>

>>> However, Linux is free and it still can't make a dent, not really.

>>

>

>> The risk is not that Linux will make the dent, the risk is that

>> Microsoft will do it themselves.

>

> Well, it's not going to happen, and you'll be dust in your grave when

> and if it ever does.

>

> MS has three things going for it. It has an O/S no matter what you think

> about it, it has .Net technology that is an ISO and ECMA standard no

> matter what you think about it, and it's top dog no matter what you

> think about it.

 

 

The Titanic was also unsinkable...

 

I have Vista on 2 very capable machines, on one not quite so capable

(circa 2000 but upgraded as far it is practical to go) and Linux on a

third which is also very capable.

 

I was surprised to get the older machine running as well as it does, but

for most people / companies such an upgrade path would not make sense -

the labor would cost as much as buying new.

 

So when W7 comes out will I have to buy all new again? That means it

would make sense for me to hold off and continue with XP doesn't it?

 

Every one of the "Technologies" that you described seems to have brought

with it a whole range of new vulnerabilities. If people are going to

wait for "SP1" for everything, as you stated above, that does not do

much for Microsoft's bottom line now.

 

The waiting game people play is largely due to experiences of the past,

maybe all the bells and whistles are less practical than a simpler system?

 

If your staff are going to have to learn a whole new GUI then in cost

terms staying with XP is sensible. Vista, in terms of users doing their

own settings etc is as far away from XP as most Linux are. Would have

thought the Vista "Classic" mode could have looked more like XP with

things in roughly the same places.

 

I am not trying to bash MS by the way, simply saying that they seem to

have thrown a number of obstacles in their own path. I definitely do not

"Hate" MS, rather I'd prefer to see them get their act together and get

things like Explorer faultless, produce a "Business" edition that can be

delivered "Locked down" instead of UAC and produce either a secure

update system that does not use IE or produce an indestructible version

of IE for such a purpose.

 

UAC is only useful if not combined with a user who says "Yes" to

everything anyway.

 

Dealing with Malware is a corporate headache, one that is far less time

consuming with Linux.

Alias wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:31:39 -0700, fb wrote:

>

>

>>Alias wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>>>XP.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>>

>>>>>Alias

>>>>

>>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>>It is about Vista.

>>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>>

>>>

>>>Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>>>drivel and prove it.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>>

>>

>>That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

>>sheep-fukker?

>>Figures.

>>You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

>>ignorant and stupidity.

>>But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

>>folly.

>>

>>Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

>>something right?

>

>

> So what does Frank do? It proves it *again*.

>

> Alias

 

You prove I own you! Hahaha...LOL!

Alias wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:34:37 -0700, fb wrote:

>

> The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too retarded

> to understand what the word "general" means.

>

> Alias

 

It means what it says...general questions regarding Vista.

Not irrelevant, off-topic crap that you post!

Alias wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:38:01 -0700, fb wrote:

>

>

>>Alias wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu or

>>>>>>XP.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>>

>>>>>Alias

>>>>

>>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>>It is about Vista.

>>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>>

>>>

>>>Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>>>drivel and prove it.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>>

>>

>>That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

>>sheep-fukker?

>

>

> No and no.

>

>

>>Figures.

>

>

> "Figures" and Frank the Wank is an oxymoron.

>

>

>>You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

>>ignorance and stupidity.

>>But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

>>folly.

>>

>>Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

>>something right?

>

>

> Have you looked up the word "general" yet?

>

> Alias

>

 

I suggest you look it up mr retard. I'm positive you won't find the

definition you're trying to subscribe to it.

Let's review..."Vista general", is about Vista, not linux or macs.

I bet that fact really fries your stupid ass doesn't it loser.

/Alias** wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>> Ringmaster wrote:

>> ----------------------

>>

>> Tell us adam albright, in which mental institution did you spent the

>> last 20 yrs. Cause only someone who was/has been committed for a

>> lengthly stay would know that much about mental illnesses.

>> How many of those did you suffer from?

>> We know the ones you currently have!...LOL!

>

>

> Once again, Frank uses his trusty "I know you are but what am I" grade

> school retort.

>

> Alias

 

I own your pathetic weak ass don't I loser?...LOL!

FB wrote:

> I suggest you look it up mr retard. I'm positive you won't find the

> definition you're trying to subscribe to it.

> Let's review..."Vista general", is about Vista, not linux or macs.

> I bet that fact really fries your stupid ass doesn't it loser.

 

Alias' minuscule mental capacity prevents logical and deductive

reasoning. Using Ubuntu has caused Alias to degenerate into a

hopeless, pathetic fool.

Charlie Tame wrote:

>> MS has three things going for it. It has an O/S no matter what you

>> think about it, it has .Net technology that is an ISO and ECMA

>> standard no matter what you think about it, and it's top dog no matter

>> what you think about it.

>

>

> The Titanic was also unsinkable...

>

 

That's a weak excuse, and it's not going hold, because technology has

not changed. So, the players are going to remain in their positions.

> I have Vista on 2 very capable machines, on one not quite so capable

> (circa 2000 but upgraded as far it is practical to go) and Linux on a

> third which is also very capable.

 

So?

>

> I was surprised to get the older machine running as well as it does, but

> for most people / companies such an upgrade path would not make sense -

> the labor would cost as much as buying new.

 

I am sorry, you don't know how things work. Some of those machines well

be left as is while other machine are brought in brand new, based on

business needs.

>

> So when W7 comes out will I have to buy all new again? That means it

> would make sense for me to hold off and continue with XP doesn't it?

 

You either do it if that is the case or you don't use the product. But

you're not a business, and you don't know what the business needs may

for a company that a need to move to new technology.

>

> Every one of the "Technologies" that you described seems to have brought

> with it a whole range of new vulnerabilities. If people are going to

> wait for "SP1" for everything, as you stated above, that does not do

> much for Microsoft's bottom line now.

 

They have done it in the past.I did it coming from Win 2k to XP was too

wait on the SP to settle done. It didn't seem to do anything to hinder MS.

 

And there are many vulnerabilities with Java base technology as well, it

is just another excuse, and it is no justification for the non use of

new technology, which is being used whether you like it or not, because

you don't have your finger on the pulse of IT and business needs, by no

means do you have it.

>

> The waiting game people play is largely due to experiences of the past,

> maybe all the bells and whistles are less practical than a simpler system?

 

It's another excuse and there is no reason not to use new technology.

>

> If your staff are going to have to learn a whole new GUI then in cost

> terms staying with XP is sensible. Vista, in terms of users doing their

> own settings etc is as far away from XP as most Linux are. Would have

> thought the Vista "Classic" mode could have looked more like XP with

> things in roughly the same places.

 

What? Are they going to be learning the Vista UI for the rest of their

lives? People learn new GUI's all the time. It's the nature of the beast

with UI(s) and new technology development.

 

You don't give people much credit do you?

>

> I am not trying to bash MS by the way, simply saying that they seem to

> have thrown a number of obstacles in their own path. I definitely do not

> "Hate" MS, rather I'd prefer to see them get their act together and get

> things like Explorer faultless, produce a "Business" edition that can be

> delivered "Locked down" instead of UAC and produce either a secure

> update system that does not use IE or produce an indestructible version

> of IE for such a purpose.

 

Look, I can say a whole lot of things about Linux. Linux is no bed of

roses. I am not into the bashing game period. That's because Linux was

written by fallible human beings, and nothing we do is perfect. Linus is

swiss cheese just like the other O/S(s), but they are not really coming

after Linux due to it non popularity.

 

And based again on the 3 things stated before, own O/S, on software

development language solutions with 3rd party vendors being able to tap

into new technology such as those offered by .Net, and MS being top dog,

there is nothing that is going to over take MS in your lifetime. MS saw

the mistake IBM made and they won't follow suite.

 

There is nothing new happening with IT, and the basics have been the

same for the last 30 some years, and the players are the same. MS is not

going to fall, not in your lifetime.

>

> UAC is only useful if not combined with a user who says "Yes" to

> everything anyway.

 

What does this have to do with a company using Vista or not. And if they

don't want to use UAC, they can turn it off.

 

Most users in the work environment are locked down and are not Admins on

the machines anyway.

>

> Dealing with Malware is a corporate headache, one that is far less time

> consuming with Linux.

>

 

And most business have resorted to locking down the users, so they can't

really do too much anymore. It's not the wild west on the

business/corporate LAN as you think.

 

But business is still not going to change to Linux, due to my reasons

stated. They are just not doing it. Linux can be the Rock of Gibraltar.

It doesn't mean anything with the day to day business IT needs of a

company that's already on the MS platform.

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:15:16 -0700, FB wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:38:01 -0700, fb wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Alias wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu

>>>>>>>or XP.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Alias

>>>>>

>>>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>>>It is about Vista.

>>>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>>>>drivel and prove it.

>>>>

>>>>Alias

>>>>

>>>>

>>>That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

>>>sheep-fukker?

>>

>>

>> No and no.

>>

>>

>>>Figures.

>>

>>

>> "Figures" and Frank the Wank is an oxymoron.

>>

>>

>>>You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

>>>ignorance and stupidity.

>>>But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

>>>folly.

>>>

>>>Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

>>>something right?

>>

>>

>> Have you looked up the word "general" yet?

>>

>> Alias

>>

>>

> I suggest you look it up mr retard. I'm positive you won't find the

> definition you're trying to subscribe to it. Let's review..."Vista

> general", is about Vista, not linux or macs. I bet that fact really

> fries your stupid ass doesn't it loser.

 

 

Not only has the Wank not looked it up, it still doesn't understand its

meaning.

 

Alias

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:12:14 -0700, FB wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:31:39 -0700, fb wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Alias wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu

>>>>>>>or XP.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Alias

>>>>>

>>>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>>>It is about Vista.

>>>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>>>>drivel and prove it.

>>>>

>>>>Alias

>>>>

>>>>

>>>That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

>>>sheep-fukker?

>>>Figures.

>>>You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

>>>ignorant and stupidity.

>>>But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

>>>folly.

>>>

>>>Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

>>>something right?

>>

>>

>> So what does Frank do? It proves it *again*.

>>

>> Alias

>

> You prove I own you! Hahaha...LOL!

 

Impossible. You don't even own your mind, much less anyone else.

 

Now post one of your three standard posts that always include profanity,

weird sexual fantasies, LIES, insults and bluster here:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:17:52 -0700, FB wrote:

> /Alias** wrote:

>

>> Frank wrote:

>>

>>> Ringmaster wrote:

>>> ----------------------

>>>

>>> Tell us adam albright, in which mental institution did you spent the

>>> last 20 yrs. Cause only someone who was/has been committed for a

>>> lengthly stay would know that much about mental illnesses. How many of

>>> those did you suffer from? We know the ones you currently have!...LOL!

>>

>>

>> Once again, Frank uses his trusty "I know you are but what am I" grade

>> school retort.

>>

>> Alias

>

> I own your pathetic weak ass don't I loser?...LOL!

 

Once again, Franks uses his trusty chest beating drivel. You don't own

your mind, much less anyone else.

 

Alias

Alias wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:12:14 -0700, FB wrote:

>

>

>>Alias wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:31:39 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>Alias wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:14:32 -0700, fb wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>>>So why are you here? The sign on the door says "Vista", not ubuntu

>>>>>>>>or XP.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>The sign on the door says "vista.general" but I guess you're too

>>>>>>>retarded to understand what the word "general" means.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Alias

>>>>>>

>>>>>>It seems you're the retarded one.

>>>>>>"Vista general" does not mean neither implicitly or explicitly, that

>>>>>>this ng is about linux or macs.

>>>>>>It is about Vista.

>>>>>>You're not really all that bright are you sheep-fukker!

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Not only are you too retarded to understand it, you gotta post this

>>>>>drivel and prove it.

>>>>>

>>>>>Alias

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>That went right over your pointed, bald, retarded head didn't it

>>>>sheep-fukker?

>>>>Figures.

>>>>You're not all that bright, as evidenced by your constant display of

>>>>ignorant and stupidity.

>>>>But keep it up, we all love to watch fools like you dancing in their

>>>>folly.

>>>>

>>>>Oh, and you're one of the expert dancers! Nice to know you're good at

>>>>something right?

>>>

>>>

>>>So what does Frank do? It proves it *again*.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>

>>You prove I own you! Hahaha...LOL!

>

>

> Impossible. You don't even own your mind, much less anyone else.

>

> Now post one of your three standard posts that always include profanity,

> weird sexual fantasies, LIES, insults and bluster here:

>

heheh...thanks for proving my point sheep-fukker!

Alias wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:17:52 -0700, FB wrote:

>

>

>>/Alias** wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>Ringmaster wrote:

>>>>----------------------

>>>>

>>>>Tell us adam albright, in which mental institution did you spent the

>>>>last 20 yrs. Cause only someone who was/has been committed for a

>>>>lengthly stay would know that much about mental illnesses. How many of

>>>>those did you suffer from? We know the ones you currently have!...LOL!

>>>

>>>

>>>Once again, Frank uses his trusty "I know you are but what am I" grade

>>>school retort.

>>>

>>>Alias

>>

>>I own your pathetic weak ass don't I loser?...LOL!

>

>

> Once again, Franks uses his trusty chest beating drivel. You don't own

> your mind, much less anyone else.

>

> Alias

 

Thanks for proving my point you weak little sheep-fukkin POS!

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:22:57 -0400, the <the@the.com> wrote:

>How many decades was IBM the top dog? Did the government step in then?

>What happened to IBM was micro computer systems, client servers, and

>personal computers. There was a technology change that took IBM down.

Not sure where you're getting 'take IBM down'. They're far from down.

The only reason you don't hear about IBM OS, and windows OS in the same breath,

an IBM OS runs about $8000.00 compared to an entire machine with windows

installed and other software for under $500.00

A company that's 'down' wouldn't be trying to sell anything for $8000.00 a pop

to remain in competition. They're so far past competing, the IBM name has much

more credibility than windows. Windows is the blue collar OS for every one with

a paycheck. ie: the Hula Hoop of the 50's is windows now.

>It's not happening and all the players are doing the same thing with the

>technology at hand. So MS is going to remain the top dog, until

>technology changes to something else.

 

Or the gov't brings in standards the same way they have with usage of other

PUBLIC utilities.

ie: 110 60 cycle electric. You can plug your travel clock in to an outlet in

Dollywood, Tennessee, as easily as you can in Sturgis, South Dakota.

Standards.. There is no gov't. intervention with setting standards [yet] on

computers. When they do, there'll probably be a huge software explosion to

match the windows anomaly we've been stuck with since win 98.

ie: every machine produced, must come with a built in hard coded VIRUS

preventive OS like the CBM 64-128, or amiga's had. And capable of interacting

with ALL other machines built.

As it was before 98, and still is. If a company wanted to make some money,

there was enough wrong.. scratch that.. different with their machines to FORCE

you to buy ONLY from them. Even radio shack couldn't keep up with all the

differences in the different machines being produced.

So they made their own machines and OS. But I don't think you can get a TRS-80

today. You definitely can't get software for them anymore.

--

more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html

In article <OVyyvx$4IHA.408@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, charlie@tames.net

says...

> And that was my point. You said "In every case I've tested with clients,

> they will take Vista + MS Office over Ubuntu + Open Office."

>

> That makes it sound rather voluntary, when in fact they are trapped by

> their previous software choices and have no alternative but to keep

> paying top dollar.

 

They are not trapped, they base their decision on COST, and there is a

COST associated with having to deal with incompatible software and

document formats when your customers and business partners are using MS

Office document formats, Database Formats, Code, etc....

 

Even if a Business were to start from scratch, the cost of going Open

Source, if they interact in the "Business Community" is not free, it's

larger than the cost of going Windows.

> So maybe they "Will take" Vista over Ubuntu, but is that because the

> option to remain with XP is no longer there?

 

There is no reason to switch from XP when support ends - the reason to

switch will be when software no longer supports XP.

 

 

--

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)