Re: Not very encouraging :(
From: XP Slave (P@spamnotyahoo.com)
Date: 11/21/02
- Next message: XP Slave: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Previous message: Bob Cerelli: "Re: Administrators password"
- In reply to: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Next in thread: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Reply: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "XP Slave" <Tyler P@spamnotyahoo.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 08:56:06 -0500
"Max Burke" <mlvburke@%$%#@.nz> wrote in message
news:0yYC9.1947$Li.383441@news02.tsnz.net...
> > XP Slave scribbled:
>
> >> "Max Burke" <mlvburke@%$%#@.nz> wrote in message
>
> > ...and trying to figure out why an existing app no longer works
> > after installing new software, and wondering why the system no
> > longer boots after applying a service pack, and wondering why
> > Outlook or IE no longer functions correctly after applying a
> > security hotfix, and wondering why those pop-ups keep happening,
> > and wondering why checkdsk keeps wanting to run even though no
> > errors are reported, and wondering why the registry gets corrupted,
> > and wondering why fragmentation is all of a sudden such an issue
> > after applying SP1, and wondering why their windows keep resizing,
> > and wondering why their recycling bin gets corrupted, and wondering
> > why their machine no longer shuts down, and wondering why their
> > machine restarts in the middle of the day, and wondering why viri
> > are so prolific (poor design and coding practices is the REAL
> > reason)...this is just the short list.
>
> >> Well gee, none of the above have any effect on me and my use of MS
> >> products and services for the 14+ years I have been using same...
> >> Why? Because I make sure my computer is set up correctly to run the
> >> OS and any applications I install on it.
>
> > You've lost all credibility with this statement.
>
> With who have I 'lost all credibility?' You? I dont remember asking
> you to provide credibility to my experience in using MS products and
> services.
>
> > I don't believe
> > you've never had a problem with any Windows OS or application.
>
> Did I say I had NEVER had any problems with any windows OS or
> application? No *I* didn't.
> Try reading *again* what I did say.
It was implied.
>
> But I'll clarify it for you, any and all of the *minor* problems I have
> ever had with using windows OS'es and MS applications have nearly always
> been of my own making through incorrect use of said OS and/or
> application; A *very few* have been through incompatibilities with
> hardware or third party applications, and again they only happened
> because I was trying to do something that could not be done....
When you actually try doing something more with your system than an initial
install and then letting it sit in a corner we'll talk....
>
> > That's virtually an impossibility.
>
> Naaaa, that's just *your* opinion that it's an impossibility.....
>
> > Even Mr. Gates himself
> > experiences problems due to bugs in his OS's. LOL
>
> Because *you* say so????
No, because it occurs when he's attempting to demo his products such as when
his systems crashed at the Chicago Trade show when he was introducing WIN98.
And, the fact that with each new revision of Windows he makes the statement
of how prone to crashing the previous revision was.
>
> Sure users *can* have problems with MS OS'es and applications, but show
> *any* OS and/or computer program that cant; Then show me how PEBCAK
> problems are the fault of MS, it's OS'es, and/or applications..... The
> biggest bug that causes computer problems are ones sitting in front of
> the computer......
> Or to put it another way (as stated so eloquently by another participant
> in this thread):
>
> It's awfully hard to refute fiction.....
Based on your writings I'll have to admit that you're the expert on fiction.
>
> >>>> Ask any open source/*nix user what the OS on their computer means
> >>>> to them and they tell you that it's their stand for freedom and
> >>>> choice (as in free beer and free speech), and doing their bit in
> >>>> the holy war against the evil and corrupt empire called
> >>>> Microsoft.....
>
> >>> Probably true for some, I don't agree that any UNIX user would say
> >>> this. Some Windows users are just as fanatical. The reason most use
> >>> the various flavors of UNIX is because it's a very stable platform.
> >>
> >> Read any *nix support newsgroups lately?
>
> > Yep, no different than the fanaticism expoused in the Windows support
> > groups.
>
> Try reading COLA (Comp.os.Linux.advocacy) for one week, then get back to
> me and tell me how Microsoft.public.windowsxp.general is no
> different....
>
> I'll expect your report on Thursday 28th November; Make it no more than
> 500 words, with verifiable examples from both groups showing how both
> are *no different*.....
>
Again, there are Windows newsgroups of the same ilk. Proves nothing one way
or another.
> >>> In any event if Microsoft continues down it's current path corporate
> >>> IT staffs will begin to seriously look at alternatives.
>
> >> Because it's their *CHOICE* to do so. That I DONT have any problems
> >> with at all, mostly because it will make MS do the best it can for
> >> those of us that choose to use their products and services.....
> >>
> >> No matter how you look at it MS alone provides for anyone who wants
> >> to use a computer the means and ability to do so far better that any
> >> other 'corporate entity' does. That's why the vast majority of
> >> personal computers throughout the world run MS OS'es and
> >> applications....
>
> > Again, not true at all.
>
> Of course it is.
>
> > Mac's and newer flavors of linux give users
> > access to anything they need.
>
> Yeah RIIIGHHHTT....
>
> I guess that's why you have to troll the WWW to find all manner of
> patches, drivers, updates, etc, etc, etc just to *install a distro of
> Linux, let alone get it running....
>
Yep, never have to do this with Windows products! Thank goodness they make
half of your hardware obsolete with each new revision so we can all by new
hardware with nice bug-free drivers. Yeah, Yeah, I know, it's up to the
manufacturers to write the drivers. It couldn't be that Microsoft is
constantly changing core OS functions each time rather than concentrating on
just delivering a stable and secure platform for a change.
> No version of Linux gives me access to the CDRom on my 486, and
> apparently never will.
>
If you open your PC case you'll see a little white plug with red, black and
possibly yellow wires. That needs to be plugged into the back of your cdrom
drive.
> > In some cases it's easier access than
> > Windows and in some cases it's more difficult. They all have their
> > strengths and weaknesses.
>
> Isn't that what I said?
>
No.
> > You also greatly underestimate the power
> > of Microsoft's marketing team.
>
> WTF is that supposed to mean?????
You're too far gone to even begin to understand.
>
> >> You can claim it's because of the business practices of MS, and got
> >> to court to get legally enforced judgements against MS just so you
> >> can compete with MS if you want, but in the end all you do is make
> >> lawyers rich, and miss the crucial fact that to compete against MS
> >> you need to be providing what your potential customers want, and are
> >> willing to pay for, NOT $1000 per hour fees to a lawyer so they can
> >> tell some judge you dont think it's fair you cant do what MS is
> >> doing......
>
> > Where in the h*ll did this court shi* come from? I happen to
> > believe the market place will end up dictating to MS how they will
> > have to change their business model, not the other way around.
>
> Well gee you are complaining about the way MS conducts it's business in
> the market place aren't you?
>
No, I'm lamenting the fact that they constantly change their products and
implementation philosophy every three years forcing companies to upgrade and
retrain. And you can't fathom the fact that these organizations AREN'T free
to just go out and convert everything overnight to another OS platform.
> # I'd be all in favour of legislation that mandates Open Standards where
> applicable, and requires government bodies to seriously consider Open
> Source alternatives. But what we're getting is attempts to *require* use
> of Open Source software - effectively criminalizing an official's
> decision to buy commercial software to meet their needs. First in Peru,
> and now here. And at LinuxWorld it is apparently being preached and
> accepted as part of the "party doctrine."
> http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/view/wlg/1840
>
They won't have to force it. It's already happening because companies are
fed up with the ever changing licensing schemes, bloatware, buffer overruns,
short life cycles, etc....It's great to watch capitalism at its best.
> --
> mlvburke@#%&*.net.nz
> Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
> See Found Images at:
> http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
>
- Next message: XP Slave: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Previous message: Bob Cerelli: "Re: Administrators password"
- In reply to: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Next in thread: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Reply: Max Burke: "Re: Not very encouraging :("
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
