f



7 N 7. Windows 7 here in 7 days. Goodbye Linux.

Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
past, if that is even mathematically possible.
You can tell that excitement is in the air over the Windows release
because the Linux morons are squealing like stuck pigs. Hopefully this
will put desktop Linux out of it's misery and flush the basements of
the world of these Linux worshiping vermin.
Who knows, maybe sales of soap, the kind used to clean things, will go
up?
Of course sales of pizza and jolt will go down.
Goodbye Linux. We hardly knew ya.
-1
10/15/2009 11:07:31 AM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

68 Replies
1547 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 27

Doug Miller wrote:

> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
> past, if that is even mathematically possible.

Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person (DFS)
that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would like to give
us some figures?

In effect, Windows 7 will have been on sale on most new computers (retail)
since July (in that most have been sold with a Windows 7 Upgrade option),
and no doubt (as you say) people will go out in droves to open their
wallets and buy it anyway.

Therefore, on 1st December, we should see a very substantial leap in Windows
7 use on (say) NetApplications and statcounter, showing 5-months of take-up
of the option, *plus* all those good people who have rushed to open their
wallet, should we not?
Thereafter, we should see very significant increases month-on-month,
shouldn't we?

Instead of rhetoric, and vague forcasts, perhaps *you* would be brave enough
to give us *your* figures, say of:-
 % users by 1st December, and 
 % rate of monthly increase thereafter?

> You can tell that excitement is in the air over the Windows release
> because the Linux morons are squealing like stuck pigs. Hopefully this
> will put desktop Linux out of it's misery and flush the basements of
> the world of these Linux worshiping vermin.

So similarly, you could perhaps give us your predictions of the rate of
decline, as reported by those two sites?

I trust that such a prediction will be rather better than that of
amicus_curious in 2004, when he said that all of FOSS would have
disappeared by now!

Looking forward to hearing from you :-)

0
bbgruff (6628)
10/15/2009 12:28:57 PM
bbgruff wrote:
> Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
>> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
>> past, if that is even mathematically possible.
>
> Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person
> (DFS) that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would
> like to give us some figures?


Still trying to set up your little strawman so you knock him down on Dec 1, 
eh Mr Gruff?

I think I understand... when you "advocate" a going-nowhere-but-down system 
like Linux, you have to concoct elaborate fantasies because reality is too 
depressing.

In case I forget to tell you next week: Happy Oct. 22nd!



0
nospam11 (18349)
10/15/2009 1:07:40 PM
DFS wrote:

> bbgruff wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>>> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
>>> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
>>> past, if that is even mathematically possible.
>>
>> Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person
>> (DFS) that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would
>> like to give us some figures?
> 
> 
> Still trying to set up your little strawman so you knock him down on Dec
> 1, eh Mr Gruff?
> 
> I think I understand... when you "advocate" a going-nowhere-but-down
> system like Linux, you have to concoct elaborate fantasies because reality
> is too depressing.
> 
> In case I forget to tell you next week: Happy Oct. 22nd!

Hi DFS - and how nice to hear from you again.

I'm a little bewildered though by your reference to a "strawman".
All that I'm asking for is some numerical estimates.

In your case, you refer to "a going-nowhere-but-down" system.
So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
I merely ask "how quickly"?
Down by how much over what period?

Similarly, I'm told that Windows 7 will be a fantastic success.
How much of a success numerically?
What numbers should I look for on 1st. December, and how will that change
over the months and years?

Not a strawman - just a polite request for you guys to put some numbers
where your mouth is.  So far, I've had no takers - would you like to be
first? :-)



0
bbgruff (6628)
10/15/2009 4:00:53 PM
bbgruff <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> writes:

> DFS wrote:
>
>> bbgruff wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>>>> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
>>>> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
>>>> past, if that is even mathematically possible.
>>>
>>> Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person
>>> (DFS) that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would
>>> like to give us some figures?
>> 
>> 
>> Still trying to set up your little strawman so you knock him down on Dec
>> 1, eh Mr Gruff?
>> 
>> I think I understand... when you "advocate" a going-nowhere-but-down
>> system like Linux, you have to concoct elaborate fantasies because reality
>> is too depressing.
>> 
>> In case I forget to tell you next week: Happy Oct. 22nd!
>
> Hi DFS - and how nice to hear from you again.
>
> I'm a little bewildered though by your reference to a "strawman".
> All that I'm asking for is some numerical estimates.
>
> In your case, you refer to "a going-nowhere-but-down" system.
> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
> I merely ask "how quickly"?
> Down by how much over what period?

According to OS stats picked up on the worlds leading websites, it's
market share for Desktop osen has indeed fallen recently. It#s certainly
not "exponential growth" as that lying idiot Telnet Terry claims. I
mean. Really.

>
> Similarly, I'm told that Windows 7 will be a fantastic success.
> How much of a success numerically?
> What numbers should I look for on 1st. December, and how will that change
> over the months and years?

Do you doubt it will be? I don't. I have no intention of using it
though. But most others will.

>
> Not a strawman - just a polite request for you guys to put some numbers
> where your mouth is.  So far, I've had no takers - would you like to be
> first? :-)
>

Its you and your ilk claiming Linux is taking over. Yet the only numbers
we see actively refute that.

Why do you tell so many lies?
0
hadronquark (21814)
10/15/2009 4:04:18 PM
"bbgruff" <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:7jois8F368sldU1@mid.individual.net...
> Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
>> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
>> past, if that is even mathematically possible.
>
> Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person (DFS)
> that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would like to give
> us some figures?
>
> In effect, Windows 7 will have been on sale on most new computers (retail)
> since July (in that most have been sold with a Windows 7 Upgrade option),
> and no doubt (as you say) people will go out in droves to open their
> wallets and buy it anyway.
>
> Therefore, on 1st December, we should see a very substantial leap in 
> Windows
> 7 use on (say) NetApplications and statcounter, showing 5-months of 
> take-up
> of the option, *plus* all those good people who have rushed to open their
> wallet, should we not?

No - I wouldn't expect that. Your expectation assumes that *everyone* who 
received the upgrade option will have upgraded their OS in the first month. 
Also - not all PC's that have been sold since July even have the upgrade 
option.


> Thereafter, we should see very significant increases month-on-month,
> shouldn't we?

We'll certainly see a significant increase but it's unrealistic to think 
that everyone who bought a PC since July is going to upgrade in the first 
month.


> Instead of rhetoric, and vague forcasts, perhaps *you* would be brave 
> enough
> to give us *your* figures, say of:-
> % users by 1st December, and
> % rate of monthly increase thereafter?

The upgrade rate will be roughly what it was for Windows XP.


> I trust that such a prediction will be rather better than that of
> amicus_curious in 2004, when he said that all of FOSS would have
> disappeared by now!

Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced. 
"Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS 
because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation. How 
did those predictions work out?



0
not-zeke (902)
10/15/2009 4:26:01 PM
Ezekiel wrote:

> 
> "bbgruff" <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7jois8F368sldU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>>> around like rotting garbage. The masses will welcome Windows 7 with
>>> open wallets and will ignore free Linux desktop even more than in the
>>> past, if that is even mathematically possible.
>>
>> Well now, you seem to be much more intelligent than the last person (DFS)
>> that I was talking to on this subject, so perhaps *you* would like to
>> give us some figures?
>>
>> In effect, Windows 7 will have been on sale on most new computers
>> (retail) since July (in that most have been sold with a Windows 7 Upgrade
>> option), and no doubt (as you say) people will go out in droves to open
>> their wallets and buy it anyway.
>>
>> Therefore, on 1st December, we should see a very substantial leap in
>> Windows
>> 7 use on (say) NetApplications and statcounter, showing 5-months of
>> take-up
>> of the option, *plus* all those good people who have rushed to open their
>> wallet, should we not?
> 
> No - I wouldn't expect that. Your expectation assumes that *everyone* who
> received the upgrade option will have upgraded their OS in the first
> month. Also - not all PC's that have been sold since July even have the
> upgrade option.

True - and thank you.
There are several groups, in fact:-

1. Some machines would not carry the option.  Net-books/tops in particular
will remain with XP (and some with Linux)

2. Some people (many?) will have accepted the "downgrade to XP" option (from
Vista) and are unlikely to change.

3. Some will just stick with Vista.

I don't know how to estimate the effect.
Say half of the total will upgrade to W7, and perhaps over a period of 2 or
3 months? 
 
>> Thereafter, we should see very significant increases month-on-month,
>> shouldn't we?
> 
> We'll certainly see a significant increase but it's unrealistic to think
> that everyone who bought a PC since July is going to upgrade in the first
> month.

As above?
 
>> Instead of rhetoric, and vague forcasts, perhaps *you* would be brave
>> enough
>> to give us *your* figures, say of:-
>> % users by 1st December, and
>> % rate of monthly increase thereafter?
> 
> The upgrade rate will be roughly what it was for Windows XP.

I wish I *had* those figures - from something like hitslink rather than MS
sales figures.  I don't suppose you can help there?
Also, I don't know how XP uptake (% rate) compared with Windows 95 - do you?
 
>> I trust that such a prediction will be rather better than that of
>> amicus_curious in 2004, when he said that all of FOSS would have
>> disappeared by now!
> 
> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
> How did those predictions work out?

Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
serious failure.
I'm anticipating *much* better than Vista (just from reading reactions to
W7), but I'm trying to point out that Microsoft is mostly competing here
with XP, that the bar is very high, and that (imo) MS needs to clear that
bar.



0
bbgruff (6628)
10/15/2009 4:55:35 PM
bbgruff wrote:

>So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>I merely ask "how quickly"?
>Down by how much over what period?

Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...

-- 
"Now Vista is cleaning up its act and its pretty much game over for
Linux."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, January 2008.
0
chrisv (22840)
10/15/2009 4:57:42 PM
chrisv wrote:
> bbgruff wrote:
> 
>> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>> I merely ask "how quickly"?
>> Down by how much over what period?
> 
> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
> 

It has already happened. It never left the launching-pad on a crash and 
burn baby a crash and burn.

0
Toro1 (58)
10/15/2009 5:09:17 PM
bbgruff wrote:

> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>
>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>> How did those predictions work out?
>
>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>serious failure.

There were no such predictions for XP, either.  The fsckwit is lying,
as usual.  The fsckwit may be able to find an obviously
not-to-be-taken-literally post saying something like "this is end of
Microsoft", but, obviously, no one ever doubted Micro$oft's monopoly
power with the OEM's, and with it their ability to push-out their
latest version of crapware.

"Complete failure" indeed.  I wonder why trolls think they need to lie
and dishonestly twist things all the time.  Even something from so
long ago.

0
chrisv (22840)
10/15/2009 5:13:58 PM
Ezekiel wrote:

> 
> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced. 
> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS 
> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation. How 
> did those predictions work out?
> 
> 
> 



Name the "advocate" quoted below for extra points.


"MS produce unreliable crap. Instead of fixing the crap they bring out
a new release which 'solves' all the problems of earlier
versions. Even if it were true the new release has so many new bugs
that the pain just starts all over again. So I hate MS because they
produced crap and never gave a toss about solving the problems. I hate
them even more now for the way they have used their monopoly to
destroy rival companies and their continued attempt to take over the
Internet. The good news is that MS are on self destruct. W2K a
disaster. XP a damp squid. Once the xbox fails to take over the games
console market MS will find themselves in a major crisis."
0
ecarter (34)
10/15/2009 5:28:10 PM
"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:vcled51l5qvf6e8gk61k5rnb1bnjgk2fsl@4ax.com...
> bbgruff wrote:
>
>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>
>>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>>> How did those predictions work out?
>>
>>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>>serious failure.
>
> There were no such predictions for XP, either.
> The fsckwit is lying, as usual.

Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
to hide it a little better.



http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
*less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmode=source&hl=en
XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
aren't all taken in with the MS hype.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmode=source&hl=en
XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
over the advocacy newsgroups.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmode=source&hl=en
BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmode=source&hl=en
This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmode=source&hl=en
I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmode=source&hl=en
It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmode=source&hl=en
Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
foster *some* interest in XP ?


The "XP could sink Microsoft" thread his an absolute gem. You'd think
these advocates were related to Nostradamus!

- "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
some  major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
touchdown."

- "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
want something new and more exciting."

- "Actually XP *is* getting press, but most of it is along the lines of
"we're going to wait and see", in other words not very good."




> "Complete failure" indeed.  I wonder why trolls think they need to lie
> and dishonestly twist things all the time.  Even something from so
> long ago.

chrisv - Just another typical low-life idiot.





0
not-zeke (902)
10/15/2009 5:45:19 PM
chrisv pulled this Usenet boner:

> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
>
> -- 
> "Now Vista is cleaning up its act and its pretty much game over for
> Linux."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, January 2008.

Such transparency.  "Hadron" is no Linux advocate.  And he makes even the
most obnoxious Linux zealot seem like a Milquetoast in comparison.

-- 
Well, if you take someone semi-technical like Chris Arsetongue, his eyes
are not much good in searching the code as they are pressed up against
Roy's butt cheeks 'cos his tongue is so far up Roy's arse.
   -- Hadron <gi3s3e$kqd$6@reader.motzarella.org>
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/15/2009 6:59:36 PM
"Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> schreef in bericht 
news:hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:vcled51l5qvf6e8gk61k5rnb1bnjgk2fsl@4ax.com...
>> bbgruff wrote:
>>
>>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>>>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>>>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>>>> How did those predictions work out?
>>>
>>>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort 
>>>of
>>>serious failure.
>>
>> There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>> The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>
> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least 
> attempt to hide it a little better.
>
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
> If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
> *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmode=source&hl=en
> XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
> aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmode=source&hl=en
> XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
> over the advocacy newsgroups.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmode=source&hl=en
> BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmode=source&hl=en
> This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
> are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmode=source&hl=en
> I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
> there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
> sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmode=source&hl=en
> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmode=source&hl=en
> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
> foster *some* interest in XP ?
>
>
> The "XP could sink Microsoft" thread his an absolute gem. You'd think
> these advocates were related to Nostradamus!
>
> - "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
> some  major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
> alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
> touchdown."
>
> - "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
> want something new and more exciting."
>
> - "Actually XP *is* getting press, but most of it is along the lines of
> "we're going to wait and see", in other words not very good."
>
>
>
>
>> "Complete failure" indeed.  I wonder why trolls think they need to lie
>> and dishonestly twist things all the time.  Even something from so
>> long ago.
>
> chrisv - Just another typical low-life idiot.
>
He will claim he has you kill filed, so he doesn't see your posts, but he 
always sees my posts, so I'm not plonked, but off course he will slink away 
as always.
When chrisv noticed that XP was a big success back in 2002, he started 
trolling / tried to disrupt alt.os.windows-xp, together with Ahlstrom 
(Linonut) and (OE-crash code) Kohlmann.
Very soon alt.os.windows-7 will start. History will repeat itself, I bet. 














































































0
BWAHAHAHAAA (2032)
10/15/2009 9:05:22 PM
Clogwog wrote:
>> chrisv - Just another typical low-life idiot.
>>
> He will claim he has you kill filed, so he doesn't see your posts, but 
> he always sees my posts, so I'm not plonked, but off course he will 
> slink away as always.
> When chrisv noticed that XP was a big success back in 2002, he started 
> trolling / tried to disrupt alt.os.windows-xp, together with Ahlstrom 
> (Linonut) and (OE-crash code) Kohlmann.
> Very soon alt.os.windows-7 will start. History will repeat itself, I bet.
> 

So these so called high and mighty clowns will go low mighty I see.

LOL!
0
Toro1 (58)
10/15/2009 9:17:37 PM
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:07:31 -0700, Doug Miller wrote:

> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
> around like rotting garbage. 

Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
Oh, you were serious?

Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...

-- 
Rick
0
none11 (12193)
10/15/2009 9:23:11 PM
Rick pulled this Usenet boner:

> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:07:31 -0700, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>> around like rotting garbage. 
>
> Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
> Oh, you were serious?
>
> Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...

Yeah, the tossers said that about Win 2000.

Win XP.

Win Vista.

Linux is still growing (and for good reason -- it gets better continually).

Win 7?

No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.

-- 
Every why hath a wherefore.
		-- William Shakespeare, "A Comedy of Errors"
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/15/2009 9:32:03 PM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Rick pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:07:31 -0700, Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>>> around like rotting garbage. 
>> Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
>> Oh, you were serious?
>>
>> Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
> 
> Yeah, the tossers said that about Win 2000.
> 
> Win XP.
> 
> Win Vista.
> 
> Linux is still growing (and for good reason -- it gets better continually).
> 
> Win 7?
> 
> No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.
> 

There is nothing he can do about it. He has no control over anything.
0
ISO
10/15/2009 9:56:08 PM
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:59:36 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> chrisv pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
>> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
>>
>> --
>> "Now Vista is cleaning up its act and its pretty much game over for
>> Linux."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, January 2008.
> 
> Such transparency.  "Hadron" is no Linux advocate.  And he makes even
> the most obnoxious Linux zealot seem like a Milquetoast in comparison.

He sure does!


-- 
C.O.L.A Charter:-
"For discussion of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to other
operating systems."
0
linux-2 (2716)
10/15/2009 10:27:03 PM
chrisv wrote:

> bbgruff wrote:
> 
>> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>> I merely ask "how quickly"?
>> Down by how much over what period?
> 
> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...

LOL :-)

Vista 7 is going to crush Linux right?

I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere. It's
simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.

Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.

How amusing <grin>

-- 
|_|0|_| Marti van Lin
|_|_|0| http://ml2mst.googlepages.com
|0|0|0| http://osgeex.blogspot.com

I ain't no Vole and I don't live in a freaking hole!
0
ml2mst1 (1210)
10/15/2009 10:31:27 PM
Marti van Lin wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
> 
>> bbgruff wrote:
>>
>>> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>>> I merely ask "how quickly"?
>>> Down by how much over what period?
>> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
>> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
> 
> LOL :-)
> 
> Vista 7 is going to crush Linux right?
> 
> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere. It's
> simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.
> 
> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.
> 
> How amusing <grin>
> 

Yeah boy, how amusing as you amount to nothing expert's expert.
0
ISO
10/15/2009 11:52:26 PM
"Marti van Lin" <ml2mst@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hb87s0$fmg$1@news.albasani.net...
> chrisv wrote:
>
>
> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere. It's
> simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.
>
> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.
>
> How amusing <grin>



Make sure that somebody saves this "quote" from lover-boy. It can be used in 
the next round of idiotic COLA "advocate" predictions. Here's what these 
same idiots predicted about WinXP even after it was released.



http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
*less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmode=source&hl=en
XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
aren't all taken in with the MS hype.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmode=source&hl=en
XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
over the advocacy newsgroups.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmode=source&hl=en
BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmode=source&hl=en
This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmode=source&hl=en
I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.


http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmode=source&hl=en
It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmode=source&hl=en
Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
foster *some* interest in XP ?


The "XP could sink Microsoft" thread his an absolute gem. You'd think
these advocates were related to Nostradamus!

- "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
some  major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
touchdown."

- "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
want something new and more exciting."

- "Actually XP *is* getting press, but most of it is along the lines of
"we're going to wait and see", in other words not very good."






0
10/15/2009 11:54:40 PM
Ezekiel wrote:
> "Marti van Lin" <ml2mst@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:hb87s0$fmg$1@news.albasani.net...
>> chrisv wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere. It's
>> simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.
>>
>> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.
>>
>> How amusing <grin>
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure that somebody saves this "quote" from lover-boy. It can be used in 
> the next round of idiotic COLA "advocate" predictions. Here's what these 
> same idiots predicted about WinXP even after it was released.
> 
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
> If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
> *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmode=source&hl=en
> XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
> aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmode=source&hl=en
> XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
> over the advocacy newsgroups.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmode=source&hl=en
> BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmode=source&hl=en
> This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
> are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmode=source&hl=en
> I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
> there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
> sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmode=source&hl=en
> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmode=source&hl=en
> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
> foster *some* interest in XP ?
> 
> 
> The "XP could sink Microsoft" thread his an absolute gem. You'd think
> these advocates were related to Nostradamus!
> 
> - "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
> some  major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
> alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
> touchdown."
> 
> - "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
> want something new and more exciting."
> 
> - "Actually XP *is* getting press, but most of it is along the lines of
> "we're going to wait and see", in other words not very good."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Marti van Idiot is just another idiot an expert's expert at it.
0
ISO
10/15/2009 11:58:35 PM
In article <hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote:

> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:vcled51l5qvf6e8gk61k5rnb1bnjgk2fsl@4ax.com...
> > bbgruff wrote:
> >
> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
> >>> How did those predictions work out?
> >>
> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
> >>serious failure.
> >
> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
> 
> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
> to hide it a little better.
> 
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
> If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
> *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
> aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
> over the advocacy newsgroups.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
> are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
> there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
> sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
> 
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
> de=source&hl=en
> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
> foster *some* interest in XP ?

Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a 
whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
and Terry Porter, respectively.


-- 
--Tim Smith
0
reply_in_group (13194)
10/16/2009 12:01:56 AM
"Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
news:reply_in_group-AA79B9.17015615102009@news.supernews.com...
> In article <hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote:

  (SNIP)

>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
>> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
>> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
>> foster *some* interest in XP ?
>
> Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a
> whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
> and Terry Porter, respectively.

The scary thing is that just by reading the last two examples I can tell who 
wrote what. And in a way I feel sorry for the likes of Terry Porter.





0
10/16/2009 12:08:30 AM
Tim Smith pulled this Usenet boner:

>> <other similar quotes snipped for brevity>
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
>> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
>> foster *some* interest in XP ?
>
> Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a 
> whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
> and Terry Porter, respectively.

How do you know they weren't just trolling?   ;->

-- 
It's a very *__UN*lucky week in which to be took dead.
		-- Churchy La Femme
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/16/2009 12:15:03 AM
Marti van Lin wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
>
>> bbgruff wrote:
>>
>>> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>>> I merely ask "how quickly"?
>>> Down by how much over what period?
>>
>> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will
>> "peak" and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
>
> LOL :-)
>
> Vista 7 is going to crush Linux right?

No doubt about it... if by crush you mean wipe that open source crapware off
the pages and minds of the world's tech press for a good long while.

This is a new release of Microsoft Windows we're talking about - it's a
worldwide media event.  This isn't another yawn-fest, 3x per day
announcement of a shitty new Linux distro that nobody cares about.





> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere.
> It's simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.
>
> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.

Interesting.  I remember a big, fat, hairy fairy telling us "Vista isn't 
half-bad".




> How amusing <grin>

You must be looking at your fstab file...




0
nospam11 (18349)
10/16/2009 3:22:49 AM
Marti van Lin <ml2mst@gmail.com> writes:

> chrisv wrote:
>
>> bbgruff wrote:
>> 
>>> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?
>>> I merely ask "how quickly"?
>>> Down by how much over what period?
>> 
>> Maybe the Dumfsck can at least tell us the date when Linux will "peak"
>> and then start to decline.  Because it's still growing, now...
>
> LOL :-)
>
> Vista 7 is going to crush Linux right?
>
> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going
> nowhere. It's

Fortunately for Linux development your "HO" means jack.

> simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.

Now I know you are trolling.

>
> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.
>
> How amusing <grin>

It's kind of embarrassing how you throw your knickers on the stage
without knowing what they're playing.

Do grow up Marti. Then, maybe, your ra-ra posts might hold some water.

Claiming that things "suck" when its clear you're a clueless arse
convinces no one.


0
hadronquark (21814)
10/16/2009 4:52:28 AM
Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> In article <hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote:
>
>> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
>> news:vcled51l5qvf6e8gk61k5rnb1bnjgk2fsl@4ax.com...
>> > bbgruff wrote:
>> >
>> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>> >>> How did those predictions work out?
>> >>
>> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>> >>serious failure.
>> >
>> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>> 
>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
>> to hide it a little better.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
>> If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
>> *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
>> aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
>> over the advocacy newsgroups.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
>> are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
>> there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
>> sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
>> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
>> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
>> foster *some* interest in XP ?
>
> Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a 
> whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
> and Terry Porter, respectively.


My favourite is the quote where someone says "I've been saying for
years....". As he will continue to do so no doubt...

0
hadronquark (21814)
10/16/2009 4:54:34 AM
Timmy wrote:

> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>
>> "chrisv" wrote:
>> >
>> > bbgruff wrote:
>> >
>> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>> >>> How did those predictions work out?
>> >>
>> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>> >>serious failure.
>> >
>> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>> 
>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
>> to hide it a little better.

You are lying, as usual, fsckwit.  Only a complete idiot would
"realize" anything so obviously false.

>> (snip utter lack of support for the fsckwit's claim)

Poor "Ezekiel".  Is that the best you can do?  Not a single quote of
someone saying that XP would be a "complete failure".  Nothing even
*close* to a declaration that the market would reject XP-based
machines from OEM's.

Words like "flop" and "not selling well" refer to people buying (or
not) upgrades for their older machines.  Obviously, M$ would like to
make a lot of upgrade sales, in addition to their **inevitable** OEM
sales.

I'll say it again.  NO ONE doubted the inevitable "success" (if
"success" is defined in terms of market share) of XP, given
Micro$oft's control of the market and sufficient time for the
replacement of older machines.

Read that last paragraph a few times, until it sinks-in, fsckwit.
It's as obviously true as it is that you are a liar.  "Complete
failure" indeed.

>Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a 
>whuppin' anyway. 

In your dreams, Timmy.  I know you'd like to see that, given that I've
spanked you and your fsckwitted pals so many times.

>Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
>and Terry Porter, respectively.

Note that Timmy has again made a jackass of himself.  

You trolls, and your dishonest, worst-case interpretations of what the
advocates write, are not going to fool anyone who has a brain.

0
chrisv (22840)
10/16/2009 1:20:53 PM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>>> Windows 7
>
>Yeah, the tossers said that about Win 2000.
>
>Win XP.
>
>Win Vista.
>
>Linux is still growing (and for good reason -- it gets better continually).
>
>Win 7?
>
>No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.

No matter how good any product is, it will not be the best choice for
everyone on the planet.  No product is, in *any* product category.
People want choice.  People *need* choice.

The desktop OS market is simply in an unhealthy state, with people
believing that they have to use what "everyone else" uses, regardless
of alternatives which may offer better performance or value.

-- 
"In this case they don't want a choice. They already chose. They want
a Windows PC."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
0
chrisv (22840)
10/16/2009 1:31:24 PM
"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:m9rgd5569vnf83nki92brkbjqep7jelb30@4ax.com...

<snip>

The ass-whooping on the chrisv idiot has been confirmed and documented. 
Anything this moron says now is irrelevant. The facts prove that he once 
again has no idea what he's talking about.






0
not-zeke (902)
10/16/2009 1:37:26 PM
bbgruff wrote:


> Hi DFS - and how nice to hear from you again.

Likewise, Mr Gruff.


> I'm a little bewildered though by your reference to a "strawman".
> All that I'm asking for is some numerical estimates.

All you're looking for is some numbers you can laugh at if Win7 doesn't 
exceed, but run away from if it does.  Remember, you're a Linux "advocate" 
and you have only base motives.



> In your case, you refer to "a going-nowhere-but-down" system.
> So you think that Linux user-share will fall?

Yes


> I merely ask "how quickly"?

Don't know.


> Down by how much over what period?

Don't know.


> Similarly, I'm told that Windows 7 will be a fantastic success.

No doubt about it.  The world has been waiting on a new worthy successor to 
XP.  I think Vista SP1 was it, but the perception isn't there.


> How much of a success numerically?

Lots.


> What numbers should I look for on 1st. December, and how will that
> change over the months and years?

On Dec 1 you should look for some big numbers, and over the ensuing months 
and years you should look for some more big numbers.


> Not a strawman - just a polite request for you guys to put some
> numbers where your mouth is.  So far, I've had no takers - would you
> like to be first? :-)

Sure thing: big numbers.



0
nospam11 (18349)
10/16/2009 1:39:24 PM
Ezekiel wrote:
> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:m9rgd5569vnf83nki92brkbjqep7jelb30@4ax.com...
>
> <snip>
>
> The ass-whooping on the chrisv idiot has been confirmed and
> documented. Anything this moron says now is irrelevant. The facts
> prove that he once again has no idea what he's talking about.


chrisv is one of the few "must-killfile" cola morons. 


0
nospam11 (18349)
10/16/2009 1:46:47 PM
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

> Timmy wrote:
>
>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>
>>> "chrisv" wrote:
>>> >
>>> > bbgruff wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>>> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>>> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>>> >>> How did those predictions work out?
>>> >>
>>> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>>> >>serious failure.
>>> >
>>> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>>> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>>> 
>>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
>>> to hide it a little better.
>
> You are lying, as usual, fsckwit.  Only a complete idiot would
> "realize" anything so obviously false.
>
>>> (snip utter lack of support for the fsckwit's claim)
>
> Poor "Ezekiel".  Is that the best you can do?  Not a single quote of
> someone saying that XP would be a "complete failure".  Nothing even
> *close* to a declaration that the market would reject XP-based
> machines from OEM's.

Huh? You snipped them all. Let me put them back so your lies can be
further documented. Now, we all realise you're an idiot, but
really. Must you quite so open about it. Have you no shame?

,----
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
| > If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
| > *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
| > aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
| > over the advocacy newsgroups.
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
| > are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
| > there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
| > sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
| > 
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
| > and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
| > 
| > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
| > de=source&hl=en
| > Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
| > marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
| > foster *some* interest in XP ?
`----
0
hadronquark (21814)
10/16/2009 1:48:34 PM
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hb9tjj$eq5$4@news.eternal-september.org...
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
>> Timmy wrote:
>>
>>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>
>>>> "chrisv" wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > bbgruff wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was 
>>>> >>> introduced.
>>>> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for 
>>>> >>> MS
>>>> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product 
>>>> >>> activation.
>>>> >>> How did those predictions work out?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any 
>>>> >>sort of
>>>> >>serious failure.
>>>> >
>>>> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>>>> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least 
>>>> attempt
>>>> to hide it a little better.
>>
>> You are lying, as usual, fsckwit.  Only a complete idiot would
>> "realize" anything so obviously false.
>>
>>>> (snip utter lack of support for the fsckwit's claim)
>>
>> Poor "Ezekiel".  Is that the best you can do?  Not a single quote of
>> someone saying that XP would be a "complete failure".  Nothing even
>> *close* to a declaration that the market would reject XP-based
>> machines from OEM's.
>
> Huh? You snipped them all. Let me put them back so your lies can be
> further documented. Now, we all realise you're an idiot, but
> really. Must you quite so open about it. Have you no shame?
>
> ,----
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
> | > If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, 
> selling
> | > *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that 
> they
> | > aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it 
> all
> | > over the advocacy newsgroups.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end 
> days
> | > are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware 
> out
> | > there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
> | > sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking 
> off.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying 
> XP,
> | > and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the 
> MS
> | > marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try 
> and
> | > foster *some* interest in XP ?
> `----

Seriously - how absolutely idiotic is the chrisv moron?  His argument is - 
"We didn't say XP was going to be a failure. We said that it's going to be a 
flop, that it's not going anywhere, nobody is buying it, and that the end 
days are near for the OS and that MSFT is going to be doomed by it. But we 
never said that it will be a failure."

Unfortunately for his 3 brain cells the cummulative sum of what the 
"advocates" predicted is a claim that XP would be a failure. Perhaps chrisv 
is stupid enough to believe his own stupid droolings but anyone with an IQ 
greater than their shoe-size realizes that he's a complete idiot.








0
not-zeke (902)
10/16/2009 1:57:12 PM
chrisv pulled this Usenet boner:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>>Win 7?
>>No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.
>
> No matter how good any product is, it will not be the best choice for
> everyone on the planet.  No product is, in *any* product category.
> People want choice.  People *need* choice.
>
> The desktop OS market is simply in an unhealthy state, with people
> believing that they have to use what "everyone else" uses, regardless
> of alternatives which may offer better performance or value.

What company on earth would get away with pushing advertising trialware (MS
Office 2010 Starter) on a device that has become a common household device
that nearly everyone has, that is an important device for connecting and
communicating with other, akin to the telephone?  And worse, that company is
essentially the only company providing the engine of that device!

Microsoft not only has this predatory monopoly on desktop operating systems,
it is allowed to use it to push its other products onto people.

Even more incredibly, this scheme is partly funded by other, smaller
companies paying fees to have their products (or trial versions of their
products) loaded onto the desktop.

It smacks of racketeering.

My recent laptop purchase was a real eye-opener.  I thought the situation
was bad a couple of years ago when we bought my wife's DELL.  But this Acer
not only had the Vista pig on it, it was loaded with garbageware, including
a Microsoft Office 60-day trial edition, Microsoft Works (feh!), around 20
games, Winlocker, and still more stuff that I did not want.

What hope does the average user have of escaping from this trap?  At the
very best, most will just ignore it -- uninstalling all that crap is an
incredible chore.  It was far easier for me to slick the machine and install
Win 7 (for development purposes) and Linux (for development and all my other
computing.)

What hope does another operating-system company have of inserting itself
into this racketeering scheme?  Even a well-subsidized company sporting a
high-quality Windows clone would not make it -- and no one has even tried.

The only answer, it seems, is to do an end-around -- a different market, a
la Apple, or an arena where Microsoft either cannot tread or will not bother
to tread.

Unhealthy market, yes.

-- 
Bank error in your favor.  Collect $200.
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/16/2009 2:32:30 PM
"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote in message 
news:hb9vr0$a14$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> chrisv pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>>Win 7?
>>>No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.
>>
>> No matter how good any product is, it will not be the best choice for
>> everyone on the planet.  No product is, in *any* product category.
>> People want choice.  People *need* choice.
>>
>> The desktop OS market is simply in an unhealthy state, with people
>> believing that they have to use what "everyone else" uses, regardless
>> of alternatives which may offer better performance or value.
>
> What company on earth would get away with pushing advertising trialware 
> (MS
> Office 2010 Starter) on a device that has become a common household device
> that nearly everyone has, that is an important device for connecting and
> communicating with other, akin to the telephone?  And worse, that company 
> is
> essentially the only company providing the engine of that device!

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.


> Microsoft not only has this predatory monopoly on desktop operating 
> systems,
> it is allowed to use it to push its other products onto people.

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.


> Even more incredibly, this scheme is partly funded by other, smaller
> companies paying fees to have their products (or trial versions of their
> products) loaded onto the desktop.
>
> It smacks of racketeering.

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.


> My recent laptop purchase was a real eye-opener.  I thought the situation
> was bad a couple of years ago when we bought my wife's DELL.  But this 
> Acer
> not only had the Vista pig on it, it was loaded with garbageware, 
> including
> a Microsoft Office 60-day trial edition, Microsoft Works (feh!), around 20
> games, Winlocker, and still more stuff that I did not want.

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.


> What hope does the average user have of escaping from this trap?  At the
> very best, most will just ignore it -- uninstalling all that crap is an
> incredible chore.  It was far easier for me to slick the machine and 
> install
> Win 7 (for development purposes) and Linux (for development and all my 
> other
> computing.)

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.



> What hope does another operating-system company have of inserting itself
> into this racketeering scheme?  Even a well-subsidized company sporting a
> high-quality Windows clone would not make it -- and no one has even tried.

Take it up with the OEM. They're the one's who bundle all of this trialware.


> The only answer, it seems, is to do an end-around -- a different market, a
> la Apple, or an arena where Microsoft either cannot tread or will not 
> bother
> to tread.
>
> Unhealthy market, yes.

Unhealthy obsession with MS, yes.


0
not-zeke (902)
10/16/2009 2:33:23 PM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> What hope does the average user have of escaping from this trap?  At the
> very best, most will just ignore it -- uninstalling all that crap is an
> incredible chore.  It was far easier for me to slick the machine and install
> Win 7 (for development purposes) and Linux (for development and all my other
> computing.)
> 
> What hope does another operating-system company have of inserting itself
> into this racketeering scheme?  Even a well-subsidized company sporting a
> high-quality Windows clone would not make it -- and no one has even tried.
> 
> The only answer, it seems, is to do an end-around -- a different market, a
> la Apple, or an arena where Microsoft either cannot tread or will not bother
> to tread.

Please, and a <Bitch Slap> on the cry baby whine! No one cares as to 
what he thinks as he in no one of any importance in the grand scheme of 
things. He has no control over any thing, and he can hardly control his 
little world.

He is making no money none whatsoever using Linux,  and he MUST use 
Windows, which he hates, to put food on the table. He is too 
hypocritical for words.



0
Toro1 (58)
10/16/2009 2:39:58 PM
Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> chrisv pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>>Win 7?
>>>No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.
>>
>> No matter how good any product is, it will not be the best choice for
>> everyone on the planet.  No product is, in *any* product category.
>> People want choice.  People *need* choice.
>>
>> The desktop OS market is simply in an unhealthy state, with people
>> believing that they have to use what "everyone else" uses, regardless
>> of alternatives which may offer better performance or value.
>
> What company on earth would get away with pushing advertising trialware (MS
> Office 2010 Starter) on a device that has become a common household device
> that nearly everyone has, that is an important device for connecting and
> communicating with other, akin to the telephone?  And worse, that company is
> essentially the only company providing the engine of that device!

Huh? I thought you used Linux at home. I do. So do others. So just what
the feck are you whining about?

Do you hate the fact that the iPhone rules the roost in the touchscreen
mobile market too? Are they a "monopoly" too?

Stop whining you horrible, creepy little hypocrite and try advocating
Linux. You could start by leaving your windows programming job.

> communicating with other, akin to the telephone?  And worse, that company is
> essentially the only company providing the engine of that device!

You think that Linux is not providing the Engine?

God, you're whiny little tit.


0
hadronquark (21814)
10/16/2009 2:45:26 PM
"Kholmann is aka little 'Petey Toro' OLAY!" <Toro1@toro1.net> schreef in 
bericht news:QvGdnT-evIilDErXnZ2dnUVZ_rhi4p2d@earthlink.com...
> Clogwog wrote:
>>> chrisv - Just another typical low-life idiot.
>>>
>> He will claim he has you kill filed, so he doesn't see your posts, but he 
>> always sees my posts, so I'm not plonked, but off course he will slink 
>> away as always.
>> When chrisv noticed that XP was a big success back in 2002, he started 
>> trolling / tried to disrupt alt.os.windows-xp, together with Ahlstrom 
>> (Linonut) and (OE-crash code) Kohlmann.
>> Very soon alt.os.windows-7 will start. History will repeat itself, I bet.
>>
>
> So these so called high and mighty clowns will go low mighty I see.
>
> LOL!


These *CLOWNS* are waiting for a signal from their boss, Roy Schestowitz to 
go and troll Windows 7 NG's
These *CLOWNS*  Ahlstrom, Kohlmann, chrisv are completely "Assimilated" into 
Roy's sigmoid colon. 







0
BWAHAHAHAAA (2032)
10/16/2009 3:10:12 PM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>My recent laptop purchase was a real eye-opener.  I thought the situation
>was bad a couple of years ago when we bought my wife's DELL.  But this Acer
>not only had the Vista pig on it, it was loaded with garbageware, including
>a Microsoft Office 60-day trial edition, Microsoft Works (feh!), around 20
>games, Winlocker, and still more stuff that I did not want.
>
>What hope does the average user have of escaping from this trap?  At the
>very best, most will just ignore it -- uninstalling all that crap is an
>incredible chore.  It was far easier for me to slick the machine and install
>Win 7 (for development purposes) and Linux (for development and all my other
>computing.)
>
>What hope does another operating-system company have of inserting itself
>into this racketeering scheme?  Even a well-subsidized company sporting a
>high-quality Windows clone would not make it -- and no one has even tried.

Yeah, Microshaft and their OEM "parters" have a nice scam going, and
the general populace is either too ignorant or lazy to rebel against
it.

Pre-loaded with shit?  "Doesn't bother me."  Poor performance?  "It
works."   Soon to be owned by malware?  "I can't tell."  Machine
grinding to a halt?  "Time for a new one."

0
chrisv (22840)
10/16/2009 9:03:06 PM
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hb9tjj$eq5$4@news.eternal-september.org...
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
>> Timmy wrote:
>>
>>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>
>>>> "chrisv" wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > bbgruff wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was 
>>>> >>> introduced.
>>>> >>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure 
>>>> >>> for MS
>>>> >>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product 
>>>> >>> activation.
>>>> >>> How did those predictions work out?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any 
>>>> >>sort of
>>>> >>serious failure.
>>>> >
>>>> > There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>>>> > The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least 
>>>> attempt
>>>> to hide it a little better.
>>
>> You are lying, as usual, fsckwit.  Only a complete idiot would
>> "realize" anything so obviously false.
>>
>>>> (snip utter lack of support for the fsckwit's claim)
>>
>> Poor "Ezekiel".  Is that the best you can do?  Not a single quote of
>> someone saying that XP would be a "complete failure".  Nothing even
>> *close* to a declaration that the market would reject XP-based
>> machines from OEM's.
>
> Huh? You snipped them all. Let me put them back so your lies can be
> further documented. Now, we all realise you're an idiot, but
> really. Must you quite so open about it. Have you no shame?
>
> ,----
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
> | > If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, 
> selling
> | > *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that 
> they
> | > aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it 
> all
> | > over the advocacy newsgroups.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end 
> days
> | > are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware 
> out
> | > there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
> | > sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking 
> off.
> | >
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying 
> XP,
> | > and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
> | >
> | > 
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
> | > de=source&hl=en
> | > Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from 
> the MS
> | > marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try 
> and
> | > foster *some* interest in XP ?
> `----


no wonder he's so confused. the poor fool doesn't understand the definition 
of simple english words. if he was literate he would realize that "flop" is 
a synonym for "fail."


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flop

Function: verb
- to fail completely <the play flopped>




0
fred5023 (176)
10/16/2009 10:31:48 PM
Ezekiel <somewhere@overthere.com> said on 2009-10-16:
>
> "Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> news:reply_in_group-AA79B9.17015615102009@news.supernews.com...
>> In article <hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote:
>
>   (SNIP)
>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
>>> de=source&hl=en
>>> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
>>> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
>>> de=source&hl=en
>>> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
>>> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
>>> foster *some* interest in XP ?
>>
>> Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a
>> whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
>> and Terry Porter, respectively.
>
> The scary thing is that just by reading the last two examples I can tell who 
> wrote what. And in a way I feel sorry for the likes of Terry Porter.
>

People with little real world experience may end up writing extreme
statements such as Windows XP is dead, desktop is dead, nobody uses
Solaris etc. It is best to ignore such radical people regardless of
what OS they claim to advocate.

0
NoWay2 (985)
10/17/2009 2:07:09 AM
Marti van Lin <ml2mst@gmail.com> said on 2009-10-15:
>
> Vista 7 is going to crush Linux right?
>
> I have tested Vista 7 RC1 (build 7100) and IMHO it's going nowhere. It's
> simply Vista SP2 with a bad paint-job.

No, Windows 7 has implemented certain good interfaces such as its
fancy taskbar. It definitely stood out as one of the time-saving
features. Now, is Windows 7 going to crush Linux? I don't think so.
Linux will continue to grow at a slow but steady rate. In the server
area, Linux will be steady or will grow. Windows 2008 Server has some
really nice features including managing remote users running Windows
7. Windows-shops will probably move over to a combination of Windows
Server 2008/Windows 7/SQL Server 2008 combination. I am not sure if
anyone will drop their Linux servers in favor of Windows 2008. In
fact, my Linux and Windows servers and desktops will remain unchanged
unless some users prefer Windows 7 for their desktops, replacing XP.

>
> Nothing but the same old 20'st century junk.
>

Windows 7, as far as I have tested, is a good OS in many ways. It is
not as responsive as XP on the same hardware. I have little
experience with Vista, so I can't really say much.
0
NoWay2 (985)
10/17/2009 2:15:08 AM
some nym-shifter wrote:

Who knows?  I didn't read it.

One shot, one *plonk*

:-D
0
chrisv (22840)
10/17/2009 3:09:33 AM
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:01:56 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <hb7n3g$prn$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  "Ezekiel" <not-zeke@the-zeke.com> wrote:
> 
>> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
>> news:vcled51l5qvf6e8gk61k5rnb1bnjgk2fsl@4ax.com...
>>> bbgruff wrote:
>>>
>>>> trolling fsckwit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Look at some of the moronic COLA posts from when WinXP was introduced.
>>>>> "Advocates" were predicting that XP would be a complete failure for MS
>>>>> because of things like the "Fisher Price theme" and product activation.
>>>>> How did those predictions work out?
>>>>
>>>>Oh, I'm certainly not predicting a complete failure, or indeed any sort of
>>>>serious failure.
>>>
>>> There were no such predictions for XP, either.
>>> The fsckwit is lying, as usual.
>> 
>> Everyone realizes that you're a complete idiot chrisv, but at least attempt 
>> to hide it a little better.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/233f910508884d34?
>> If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
>> *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/afa456aed4790229?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
>> aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/baa3d0853c3bad49?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> XP can't be selling well, or we'd have the wintrolls crowing about it all
>> over the advocacy newsgroups.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/b84e058c04f089e4?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> BOY is Microsoft doomed!  LOL!
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/48cc9c97d6103ee9?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
>> are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e464190936694f8f?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> I really think XP is going to be a flop. Between the glut of hardware out
>> there (and slowing down of purchasing), and the fact that W2K is
>> sufficient for so many casual users.... I just don't see it taking off.
>> 
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2ac9ec2e762ed4a4?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> It explains a lot.  I've not heard of anyone I know, anywhere, buying XP,
>> and I've not seen it sold whilst I've been in any shops.
>> 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5479b6593a4da17d?dmo
>> de=source&hl=en
>> Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
>> marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
>> foster *some* interest in XP ?
> 
> Haha...we may not have a woodshed in COLA, but you gave that boy a 
> whuppin' anyway. Note that the last two examples are from Mark Kent
> and Terry Porter, respectively.

And for those that don't know, those people, Mark Kent and Terry
Porter are amongst the biggest idiots in COLA.
0
moshegoldfarb (3146)
10/17/2009 4:45:54 AM
Ruel Smith wrote:

> People with little real world experience may end up writing extreme
> statements such as Windows XP is dead, desktop is dead, nobody uses
> Solaris etc. It is best to ignore such radical people regardless of
> what OS they claim to advocate.

Yep, Linux will be around for a long time. Windows 7 is not even a blip 
on my radar. (Which puts me pretty much in the same boat as 90% of 
corporate America on this issue.)

-- 
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
0
ronb02noSPAM (7426)
10/17/2009 6:00:11 AM
"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:3L2dnRFfu9rwqETXnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@giganews.com...
> some nym-shifter wrote:
>
> Who knows?  I didn't read it.

everyone is certain you read it. but if you're trying to protect your frail 
ego then it's no wonder you don't want to see people point out how 
absolutely clueless you are. here's a reminder of your dimwit argument that 
people only predicted XP would be a "flop" and not a "complete failure" - 
which is the definition of flop you dick swab.


chrisv was stupid enough to write -

"Not a single quote of  someone saying that XP would be a "complete 
failure".  Nothing even *close*.. Words like "flop" and "not selling well" 
refer to..."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flop


Function: verb
- to fail completely <the play flopped>





0
fred5023 (176)
10/17/2009 5:58:52 PM
Ruel Smith wrote:

>People with little real world experience may end up writing extreme
>statements such as Windows XP is dead, desktop is dead, nobody uses
>Solaris etc. It is best to ignore such radical people regardless of
>what OS they claim to advocate.

Mostly it's those who are "dishonest" or "idiots" who make such
statements.  Mark Kent's one of them, and his statements can often be
disregarded.  Our Wintrolls do it a lot, of course.

0
chrisv (22840)
10/20/2009 1:49:06 PM
On Oct 15, 5:32=A0pm, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> Rick pulled this Usenet boner:
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:07:31 -0700, Doug Miller wrote:

> >> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
> >> around like rotting garbage.

It would be interesting if this were true, but even the preview
reviews are less than wonderful.  Most of the reviewers who have spent
any time with it end up with "Mac Envy" even worse than before.

As usual, Microsoft has decided to create a bunch of legal and
technology obstacles to prevent users from using the virtualization
(it's built in, but requires an enterprise level agreement).

The virtualized XP suffers from the same problem as virtual XP on XP,
very slow due to memory management and disk I/O thrashing.

Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
your netbook.

Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.

> > Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
> > Oh, you were serious?

Sad thing is that he probably is serious.

> > Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...

> Yeah, the tossers said that about Win 2000.

Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever produced.  Fast, lean, and
reliable.
Then they messed it up - - because it was unprofitable.

> Win XP.
>
> Win Vista.
>
> Linux is still growing (and for good reason -- it gets better continually=
).

> Win 7?
>
> No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.

http://www.open4success.org/song2.html


> --
> Every why hath a wherefore.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- William Shakespeare, "A Comedy of Erro=
rs"

0
rex.ballard (3732)
10/20/2009 2:04:24 PM
Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> writes:

> On Oct 15, 5:32 pm, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> Rick pulled this Usenet boner:
>> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:07:31 -0700, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> >> Windows 7 will obliterate what scraps of Linux are still left lying
>> >> around like rotting garbage.
>
> It would be interesting if this were true, but even the preview
> reviews are less than wonderful.  Most of the reviewers who have spent
> any time with it end up with "Mac Envy" even worse than before.

Why not Linux envy? That is what you should be concerned about.

>
> As usual, Microsoft has decided to create a bunch of legal and
> technology obstacles to prevent users from using the virtualization
> (it's built in, but requires an enterprise level agreement).
>
> The virtualized XP suffers from the same problem as virtual XP on XP,
> very slow due to memory management and disk I/O thrashing.

That is bullshit Rexx and you know it.

>
> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
> your netbook.

More bullshit.

>
> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.

More bullshit.

>
>> > Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
>> > Oh, you were serious?
>
> Sad thing is that he probably is serious.
>
>> > Aah hahah HAhaha HAHha ahahah hah ahaha hha ha...
>
>> Yeah, the tossers said that about Win 2000.
>
> Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever produced.  Fast, lean, and
> reliable.
> Then they messed it up - - because it was unprofitable.

They seemed to do well with XP which could be a good desktop and a
server for many roled into one.

>
>> Win XP.
>>
>> Win Vista.
>>
>> Linux is still growing (and for good reason -- it gets better continually).
>
>> Win 7?
>>
>> No matter how good it is, it is still ... Windows.
>
> http://www.open4success.org/song2.html

Is that bit still there about you performing fellatio on men in order to
get a date with a girl?

>
>> --
>> Every why hath a wherefore.
>>                 -- William Shakespeare, "A Comedy of Errors"
>

-- 
0
hadronquark (21814)
10/20/2009 2:11:45 PM
Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> Rex Ballard pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> The virtualized XP suffers from the same problem as virtual XP on XP,
>> very slow due to memory management and disk I/O thrashing.
>
> Not a surprise.  2000/XP thrash on real equipment, too.

Shit real equipment maybe. But on "spec" machines.

Why do you lie to garner favour with "advocate$"? Why are you so
insecure you feel the need to support these blatant lies?

>
>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>> your netbook.
>
> Nah, I'm running it on a single core (Core 2 Solo).  'sokay.
>
>> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.
>
> The RAM does make up for having a single core and a laptop-speed
> hard-drive.

Duh.

0
hadronquark (21814)
10/20/2009 2:20:07 PM
Rex Ballard pulled this Usenet boner:

> The virtualized XP suffers from the same problem as virtual XP on XP,
> very slow due to memory management and disk I/O thrashing.

Not a surprise.  2000/XP thrash on real equipment, too.

> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
> your netbook.

Nah, I'm running it on a single core (Core 2 Solo).  'sokay.

> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.

The RAM does make up for having a single core and a laptop-speed hard-drive.

-- 
You are number 6!  Who is number one?
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/20/2009 2:22:00 PM
Rex Ballard wrote:

> 
> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
> your netbook.

I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7 Ultimate 
runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.


> 
> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.
> 

Wrong again. My PC 1000HE shipped with 1GB of RAM, which is sufficient. 
The bottleneck was the hard drive, which has been replaced by an Intel 
X25-M G2. This same netbook also runs Ubuntu 9.04 very well.
0
ecarter (34)
10/20/2009 3:48:59 PM
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:

> Rex Ballard wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>> your netbook.
> 
> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7 Ultimate 
> runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.

The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
He makes it up.


0
moshegoldfarb (3146)
10/20/2009 4:00:44 PM
Eddie Carter wrote:

> Rex Ballard wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>> your netbook.
> 
> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7 Ultimate
> runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
 
For sufficiently tiny values of "fine"

>> 
>> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.
>> 
> 
> Wrong again. My PC 1000HE shipped with 1GB of RAM, which is sufficient.

Really? Pray tell, does minesweeper run without heavy swapping?

> The bottleneck was the hard drive, which has been replaced by an Intel
> X25-M G2. 

Certainly. Can't be the memory. Naturally not

> This same netbook also runs Ubuntu 9.04 very well.

That I tend to believe
-- 
It's not about, 'Where do you want to go today?' It's more like,
'Where am I allowed to go today?'

0
10/20/2009 4:01:44 PM
On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>
>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>> your netbook.
>> 
>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7 Ultimate 
>> runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>
> The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
> He makes it up.

I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
single core CPUs. Only yesterday I tried to install it on a 4 year old
P-IV machine, and while the install went pretty smooth, actually
running W7 on that machine was 'problematic' to say the least.

Another odd thing I noticed with W7 is the 'restore' partition it
creates. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. I haven't figured
out a pattern yet, but it seems to be not created when you have chosen
to format the partition with the tool in the installer. Whatever the
case may be, how hard can it be to add a little option to tick, saying
'create restore partition'.

-- 
Perilous to all of us are the devices of an art deeper than we ourselves
possess.
		-- Gandalf the Grey [J.R.R. Tolkien, "Lord of the Rings"]
0
10/20/2009 9:14:11 PM
TomB pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>
>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>>> your netbook.
>>> 
>>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7 Ultimate 
>>> runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>>
>> The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
>> He makes it up.
>
> I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
> single core CPUs. Only yesterday I tried to install it on a 4 year old
> P-IV machine, and while the install went pretty smooth, actually
> running W7 on that machine was 'problematic' to say the least.
>
> Another odd thing I noticed with W7 is the 'restore' partition it
> creates. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. I haven't figured
> out a pattern yet, but it seems to be not created when you have chosen
> to format the partition with the tool in the installer. Whatever the
> case may be, how hard can it be to add a little option to tick, saying
> 'create restore partition'.

Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
"BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when you
install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
primary partitions for Linux.

Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.

-- 
You will pay for your sins.  If you have already paid, please disregard
this message.
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/20/2009 9:55:06 PM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> 
> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when you
> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
> primary partitions for Linux.
> 
> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.
> 


The 100MB partition does not have to be created in the first place. It 
is used for BitLocker, WinRE, and EFI.

http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproinstall/thread/51442b60-c2dc-457d-92a7-a49cbbcbbf2f
0
ecarter (34)
10/20/2009 10:49:36 PM
Eddie Carter pulled this Usenet boner:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
>> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when you
>> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
>> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
>> primary partitions for Linux.
>> 
>> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.
>
> The 100MB partition does not have to be created in the first place. It 
> is used for BitLocker, WinRE, and EFI.
>
> http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproinstall/thread/51442b60-c2dc-457d-92a7-a49cbbcbbf2f

Indeed.  But that is not made clear during the installation.  And removing
it after the fact is tricky.

-- 
Good night to spend with family, but avoid arguments with your mate's
new lover.
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/20/2009 11:13:27 PM
TomB wrote:
> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>
>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>>> your netbook.
>>>
>>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7
>>> Ultimate runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>>
>> The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
>> He makes it up.
>
> I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
> single core CPUs.

You mean problems with *your* single-core CPU.  Win7 Ultimate runs fine on 
my P4, 3.0e system.




0
nospam11 (18349)
10/21/2009 3:38:30 AM
Rex Ballard wrote:

> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
> your netbook.
>
> Seems to require 4 gig of RAM to be a fully functional system.


You seem to lie like a 3rd-grader.




0
nospam11 (18349)
10/21/2009 3:45:24 AM
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:38:30 -0400, DFS wrote:

> TomB wrote:
>> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>>>> your netbook.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7
>>>> Ultimate runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>>>
>>> The same place Rex gets most of his information from. He makes it up.
>>
>> I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
>> single core CPUs.
> 
> You mean problems with *your* single-core CPU.  Win7 Ultimate runs fine
> on my P4, 3.0e system.

Sure it does.



-- 
Rick
0
none5467 (1279)
10/21/2009 9:30:09 AM
On 2009-10-21, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
> TomB wrote:
>> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>>>> your netbook.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7
>>>> Ultimate runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>>>
>>> The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
>>> He makes it up.
>>
>> I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
>> single core CPUs.
>
> You mean problems with *your* single-core CPU.  Win7 Ultimate runs fine on 
> my P4, 3.0e system.

Indeed. I still haven't figured out yet why it won't run on that
machine. Vista and XP run just fine. As does Ubuntu.

-- 
Q:	How many Marxists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A:	None:  The light bulb contains the seeds of its own revolution.
0
10/21/2009 9:46:30 AM
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Windows 7 seems to REQUIRE multi-core CPUs, so don't expect much on
>>>>> your netbook.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't know where you get your information from, but Windows 7
>>>> Ultimate runs just fine on the 1.66GHz Atom N270/N280.
>>>
>>> The same place Rex gets most of his information from.
>>> He makes it up.
>>
>> I know from first hands experience that W7 *does* have problems with
>> single core CPUs. Only yesterday I tried to install it on a 4 year old
>> P-IV machine, and while the install went pretty smooth, actually
>> running W7 on that machine was 'problematic' to say the least.
>>
>> Another odd thing I noticed with W7 is the 'restore' partition it
>> creates. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. I haven't figured
>> out a pattern yet, but it seems to be not created when you have chosen
>> to format the partition with the tool in the installer. Whatever the
>> case may be, how hard can it be to add a little option to tick, saying
>> 'create restore partition'.
> 
> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when
> you
> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
> primary partitions for Linux.
> 
> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.

Sorry old son - I don't follow.  Perhaps I'm missing something.
Why does one need a primary partition for Linux?
0
bbgruff (6628)
10/21/2009 11:53:50 AM
On 2009-10-21, bbgruff <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>> 
>>> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
[deletia]
>> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
>> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when
>> you
>> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
>> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
>> primary partitions for Linux.
>> 
>> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.
>
> Sorry old son - I don't follow.  Perhaps I'm missing something.
> Why does one need a primary partition for Linux?

You don't. Infact, a lot of distros have defaulted to extended partitions.

-- 

     These Mac Fanboys want vi imposed on everyone.                   |||
                                                                     / | \
0
jedi (14754)
10/21/2009 12:54:34 PM
JEDIDIAH pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 2009-10-21, bbgruff <bbgruff@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>> 
>>>> On 2009-10-20, the following emerged from the brain of Moshe Goldfarb:
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:48:59 -0700, Eddie Carter wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
> [deletia]
>>> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
>>> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when
>>> you
>>> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
>>> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
>>> primary partitions for Linux.
>>> 
>>> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.
>>
>> Sorry old son - I don't follow.  Perhaps I'm missing something.
>> Why does one need a primary partition for Linux?
>
> You don't. Infact, a lot of distros have defaulted to extended partitions.

Well, as I remember it, the laptop had three partitions already there,
devoted to Windows, and all were primary.  I had shrunk the Vista partition,
leaving a couple-hundred Gb for Linux.  When it came time to allocate the
partition, the remaining space was marked "Unusable".

I deleted the goddam recovery partition in order to render the remaining
large partition usable.  Then I created all kinds of logical partitions for
Linux.

-- 
"Speak, thou vast and venerable head," muttered Ahab, "which, though
ungarnished with a beard, yet here and there lookest hoary with mosses; speak,
mighty head, and tell us the secret thing that is in thee.  Of all divers,
thou has dived the deepest.  That head upon which the upper sun now gleams has
moved amid the world's foundations.  Where unrecorded names and navies rust,
and untold hopes and anchors rot; where in her murderous hold this frigate
earth is ballasted with bones of millions of the drowned; there, in that awful
water-land, there was thy most familiar home.  Thou hast been where bell or
diver never went; has slept by many a sailer's side, where sleepless mothers
would give their lives to lay them down.  Thou saw'st the locked lovers when
leaping from their flaming ship; heart to heart they sank beneath the exulting
wave; true to each other, when heaven seemed false to them.  Thou saw'st the
murdered mate when tossed by pirates from the midnight deck; for hours he fell
into the deeper midnight of the insatiate maw; and his murderers still sailed
on unharmed -- while swift lightnings shivered the neighboring ship that would
have borne a righteous husband to outstretched, longing arms.  O head! thou has
seen enough to split the planets and make an infidel of Abraham, and not one
syllable is thine!"
		-- H. Melville, "Moby Dick"
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/21/2009 3:33:57 PM
bbgruff pulled this Usenet boner:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Are you talking about the +100 Mb partition?  That's supposed to support
>> "BitLocker", IIRC.  Personally, I think it is there to fsck you up when
>> you
>> install Linux.  Small partition for vendor "recovery", 100 Mb partition
>> for BitLocker, one more for Windows and *bam*, sorry squire!  No more
>> primary partitions for Linux.
>> 
>> Irritating as hell, and typical Microsoft.
>
> Sorry old son - I don't follow.  Perhaps I'm missing something.
> Why does one need a primary partition for Linux?

Linux doesn't need it, but it does need a usable partition to be available.

See my other post.

Here's the current state of the laptop's partition table, according to
cfdisk:

                     Unusable   12 Gb  (Acer recovery partition)
sda2  Boot  Primary  NTFS      104 Mb  (Bitlocker, etc. for Windows)
sda3        Primary  NTFS       60 Gb  (Win 7)
                     Unusable    1 Mb  (?)
sda1        Primary  Linux ext3  2 Gb  (/)
sda5        Logical  Linux ext3  8 Gb  (/var)
   . . .
sda10       Logical  Linux ext3  ...

If I had known about the 104 Mb ahead of time, I would have figured out how
to avoid it.  My other mistake was in not just trashing the useless 12 Gb
recovery partition, since I was blowing away Vista anyway.

Live and learn.

By the way, the recovery partition is an implicit admission that Windows
*will* inevitably shit the bed.

-- 
Q:	How many IBM 370's does it take to execute a job?
A:	Four, three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.
0
ahlstromc1 (7605)
10/21/2009 3:51:33 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Windows 7 Sale! - 7 Day Sale! - Product Scope 7.9
Windows 7 Sale! - 7 Day Sale! - Product Scope 7.9 - EZChangeLog Reporter 1.7 http://www.encouragersoftware.com/secureorder.htm Windows 7 SALE! For 7 Days! - $10 OFF SALE for 7 Days - We ARE Windows 7 READY! Product Scope 7.9 ($29.95, normally $39.95) and EZChangeLog Reporter 1.7 ($9.95, normally $19.95) - Special Combo Pricing - normally $49.95 - $34.95! Check our Buy Now Page for Other Specials! Never a better time (BUT a limited time) to buy Product Scope 7.9 or EZChangeLog Reporter 1.7 OR BOTH! We ARE Windows 7 ready - both 64 bit and 32 bit! Windows 7 install compatible, ...

LabVIEW RTE 7 does not work on Linux with Mozilla (1.7) or Netscape (7.2)
LabVIEW RTE 7 does not work on Linux (Mandrake 10.1 or Knoppix 3.7) with Mozilla (1.7) or Netscape (7.2). We tried everything described in <http://exchange.ni.com/servlet/ProcessRequest?RHIVEID=101&RNAME=ViewQuestion&HOID=506500000008000000EFBC0000&ECategory=LabVIEW.LabVIEW+General> copying plugins, but always the gray window on Mandrake or error setting up plugin on Knoppix. We are trying to drive remote applications on your web site with Linux (if possible) to decide about purchasing LabVIEW for Linux. Is there a demo version for Linux we could try? Apparently, LabVIEW fo...

GnuPG / PGP signed checksums for PostgreSQL 7.4.5, 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.3.6, 7.3.5. 7.2.5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is a PGP-signed copy of the checksums for following PostgreSQL versions: 7.4.5 7.4.4 7.3.7 7.3.6 7.3.5 7.2.5 The latest copy of the checksums for these and other versions, as well as information on how to verify the files you download for yourself, can be found at: http://www.gtsm.com/postgres_sigs.html ## Created with md5sum: 97e750c8e69c208b75b6efedc5a36efb postgresql-7.4.5.tar.bz2 bffc3fe775c885489f9071e97f43ab9b postgresql-base-7.4.5.tar.bz2 548a73c898e65f901dbc06d622a2bc63 postgresql-docs-7.4.5.tar.bz2 8be416baeeb32518f2b17a91c4caafba postgresql-opt-7.4.5.tar.bz2 73b8ee0f7ff0ca24cca50434b7276dc1 postgresql-test-7.4.5.tar.bz2 a68d368159319a620074e70d76fbd14b postgresql-7.4.5.tar.gz f18c3d6e88b0b7d7dfcccf06d2884bf9 postgresql-base-7.4.5.tar.gz 4caf0e0f3f094ac21e4b4ff5c49ef6e9 postgresql-docs-7.4.5.tar.gz c23937f00f1d3421a9c2d3ba608d130c postgresql-opt-7.4.5.tar.gz 86174904ccb9a2898836010b016183cf postgresql-test-7.4.5.tar.gz 0433f4b34cbd16dd30e922cefa286db5 postgresql-7.4.4.tar.bz2 3c03ac47ecd7fadffff4c09bf1b0b223 postgresql-base-7.4.4.tar.bz2 6b32dd938322ae8a97504e42abb10697 postgresql-docs-7.4.4.tar.bz2 c9e073c292148bed6bc2b5e72ab5cdea postgresql-opt-7.4.4.tar.bz2 444cf315b44f134c6f31292b49d2e1b1 postgresql-test-7.4.4.tar.bz2 c74d816f5d771fb1f835b43286251165 postgresql-7.4.4.tar.gz 1e21526c90a0b735d4d663fbdfa626be postgresql-base-7.4.4.tar.gz eec55a1b5...

Buy Labview 7, 7.1 for Linux
Hi, The company i work for is interested in porting existing Labview project onto the Linux platform. Although they willing to buy Labview 8, it seems that this release needs stronger CPU and more memory to operate, and the startup time has extended compering to LV7. Therefore they want to buy LV7 or LV7.1 for Linux. Has anyone have any informations where could they buy LabView 7, 7.1 Full suite. Maybe some companies wants to get rid of LV7? Regards Albert Dear Albert, If you are wishing to use an earlier version of LabVIEW for Linux (7.0/7.1) you can purchase a current copy of LabVIEW 8....

Lowering The Boom on False Linux Advocacy. Was Nvidia. Was Linux vs Windows 7.
Zealots and cults are bad no matter what their cause may be. They do little to further the acceptance of their POV and in fact tend to do harm to the legitimate portions of the cause. All cults and thus the zealots that comprise them are based in some form of truth and reality. The cult of Linux is no different in this matter. One thing about a cult and the cultists themselves is that it is generally trivial for lucid people to expose them for what they really are. In the case of the Linux cult, the misguided people who believe they are edifying Linux are easy to expose. I posted a fa...

Coming soon: PG 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.2.5
The core committee has agreed that this bug http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-08/msg00639.php is serious enough that we'd better push out update releases for all the affected versions. I want to hold off a day or so and see if a couple of currently-open bug reports can be resolved, but it's going to happen soon. If anyone has any back-patches that they've been thinking of getting in, now would be a good time. BTW, I realized this morning that 7.1.* also has a version of the bug, because it too writes and flushes an XLOG COMMIT record before it does anyt...

test #7 #7
test ...

Upgrading - 7.0 - 7.5(?)
Heya Group, I recently upgraded my main box and am into the reinstalling of software. Realized I'm a few LW patches behind, but before I muck with the install, wanted to ask a little advice. (and yes, I've saved out my configs and license key already) I'll be starting with a clean install from the 7.0 CD. My question, to get to 7.5c, do I need to first install vanilla 7.5? or can 7.5c go right over top of 7.0? The Newtek site did not mention which was needed. I guess it's a question of 2 installs or 3 installs. Thanks for your assistance. ....Pete I did the whole 3 i...

LeaderTask Company Management 7.3.7.7
LeaderTask is a system for employee management, assignment control, project. Contains all the necessary features for comfortable employee management: giving and controlling assignments, working over the local area network and the Internet, working in the autonomous mode, shared access to documents and contacts for employees, instant messaging, e- mail, viewing employees' calendars, centralized file storage, mobile version for Android, iPad, iPhone. LeaderTask is used to effectively control the employees over the network, distribute tasks among employees, set deadlines, monitor th...

LeaderTask Personal Organizer 7.3.7.7
LeaderTask planning software is a popular business organizer and email client. It helps you plan your tasks, meetings, manage projects and employees and process your email messages. LeaderTask has all necessary features for a businessman: task list, appointment calendar, address book, email client, file storage in the organizer, mobile version for Android, iPad, iPhone, synchronization with Outlook and even more... Why LeaderTask: 1. LeaderTask is a popular business organizer thousands of people already use worldwide! 2. The leading experts in time management recommend LeaderTask! ...

Why will this document open with Acrobat Reader 7.0.7 but not with Acrobat Professional 7.0.7
Take a look at the PDF files available for download from http://www.metropoint.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Metropoint.woa/3/wo/CkXkH38Bh0F9J2y8bU8GR0/0.13.1.1.1.3.3 Try opening the one from New York. I find that this PDF opens in Acrobat Reader 7.0.7, but it fails to open in Acrobat Professional 7.0.7; some sort of "drawing error" comes up in the latter, and it seems to have a problem with one of the embedded fonts (Corpid). This same embedded font has an unusual icon in front of it when I check the fonts in the document: an "F" icon. What type of font is that? Is there something wrong with the PDF, or something wrong with Acrobat Professional? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. Mxsmanic <mxsmanic@gmail.com> wrote: > >I find that this PDF opens in Acrobat Reader 7.0.7, but it fails to >open in Acrobat Professional 7.0.7; some sort of "drawing error" comes >up in the latter, and it seems to have a problem with one of the >embedded fonts (Corpid). This same embedded font has an unusual icon >in front of it when I check the fonts in the document: an "F" icon. >What type of font is that? Works fine for me in Acrobat Professional 7.0.0, Windows XP. Corpid looks like a normal enough Type 1 CID font (CIDFontType0). ---------------------------------------- Aandi Inston quite@dial.pipex.com http://www.quite.com Please support usenet! Post replies and follow-ups, don't e-mail them. Aandi...

[News] 7 Reasons Why GNU/Linux Overshadows Vista 7
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 7 reasons I choose Linux over Windows 7 ,----[ Quote ] | Many have marked the 22nd of October on their calendars,but they seem to have | forgotten the presence of the penguin.Mind you my friend the penguin is | everywhere.Here are some of the Linux distributions releasing around that | date | | Ubuntu Karmic : October 29th | | Fedora 12 : November 3rd | | OpenSuse 11.2 : November 12th `---- http://www.abhishekrane.com/2009/08/23/7-reasons-i-choose-linux-over-windows-7/ Recent: Linux vs Windows 7 ,----[ Quote ] | And this is where Li...

pgsql-server: Preliminary release notes for 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.2.5.
Log Message: ----------- Preliminary release notes for 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.2.5. Will add to the back branches later. Modified Files: -------------- pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml: release.sgml (r1.281 -> r1.282) (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/release.sgml.diff?r1=1.281&r2=1.282) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html ...

Upgrading from 7.2 to 7.4.1 on Redhat 7
Hi, I have owned a server for about a year, and apparently PostgreSQL 7.2 was originally installed with Redhat. I made an attempt to set up a database on the current Postgres setup, but when trying to set up my configure files in WHM (Cpanel) I received the error: Setting up Postgres Config...Done Reloading Postgres...pg_ctl: cannot find /var/lib/pgsql/data/postmaster.pid And when I tried to set up a database or user from Cpanel, it just wouldn't work. There wasn't an error, but when I would add a user or database, it wouldn't show up afterwords in my list of users...

More Windows 7 WTF with Eudora 7
In addition to my clipboard still refusing to copy any HTML into Eudora (which has been going on for several weeks now), a few minutes ago Eudora disappeared off my screen completely. I clicked on the icon, nothing happened. I rebooted several times, re-clicking on the icon. The logo image came up once, but no files. I finally went into the whole B.S. Windows 7 string (C:/Users/jj/application data/roaming/Qualcomm/Eudora/Eudora 7.1....scuze me for a second, I'm out of breath), found the In.mbx and clicked on it, just to see if anything would happen. Whadaya know? It opened my ma...

Matlab 7.1 on window 7
I am currently using window 7 ultimate 32bit.. After finish install MATLAB 7.1, the software won't work.. It's appear window with coding..i think it is a error.. before I used vista and the installer work fine... please help.. or should i download another MATLAB version that compatible with Window 7? thanks~ You may have this problem because Matlab needs a Java virtual machine, and the one that is included could not be 100% compatible with Windows 7... you can download an update for the JVM and copy the exe file to the bin matlab folder.... "Khairizan " <commwarr...

Eudora 7 + Comcast + Windows 7 = ?
Colleagues, Last July, a lady friend asked me to get her Eudora set up with her new Comcast internet service account. This was a piece of cake, because I was already using Eudora 7 on Comcast, although my operating system was XP and she has Win7. But all the settings I used for my own setup worked for her, and away she went. Later, however, everything quit working. Eudora gets refused by Comcast both for checking and sending email with an "authentication refused" error message. I've since moved and no longer use Comcast, but I kept careful notes on my prev...

Eudora 7 & Windows 7
I'm about to install Eudora 7 on a new PC running Windows 7. What files from my old Eudora 7 installation on a computer running Windows XP do I need to transfer to my new installation in order to preserve my in and out email files? Does anything else need to be transferred? Thanks riserman On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 15:45:58 -0500, riserman <riserman@optonline.net> declaimed the following: >I'm about to install Eudora 7 on a new PC running Windows 7. What files >from my old Eudora 7 installation on a computer running Windows XP do I >need to transfer to my...

Eudora 7.1 and Windows 7?
Hi, do you know if Eudora 7.1 works fine with Windows 7? Thanks On 27 Dec 2009 in comp.mail.eudora.ms-windows, wrote: > Hi, do you know if Eudora 7.1 works fine with Windows 7? I run it on Win 7 Enterprise 64 with no problems. Just make sure that the data files are separate from the program files. -- Joe Makowiec http://makowiec.org/ Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ >Just make sure that >the data files are separate from the program files. What do you mean precisely please? thanks...

CentOS 7 Comes on the Heels of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
http://www.eweek.com/enterprise-apps/slideshows/centos-7-comes-on-the-heels-of-red-hat-enterprise-linux-7.html "The CentOS 7 Linux operating system became generally available July 7, providing users with a freely available desktop, server and cloud operating system platform. CentOS, an acronym for Community Enterprise Operating System, is based on the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7 enterprise OS, released June 10. Unlike RHEL 7, which is a commercially supported enterprise Linux release that requires users to have a paid subscription, CentOS is free. That said, CentOS ...

[News] [Linux] Fedora 7 and Ubuntu 7.10 Look Solid
The Linux Battle: Ubuntu vs. Fedora ,----[ Quote ] | Up to this point, Ubuntu appears to be taking the lead in the open | source operating system world with a strong backing from Dell | Computers. Both operating systems are fully functional and have | surprisingly strong features. `---- http://www.romow.com/computer-blog/the-linux-battle-ubuntu-vs-fedora/ Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon 7.10 Tribe 1 - A Review? ,----[ Quote ] | I did not experience any ill-effects while using Gutsy, but I | was only browsing the web using Firefox. One more note on Tribe 1, | Pidgin has replaced GAIM as the instan...

pgsql-server: Minor copy-editing for 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.2.5 release notes.
Log Message: ----------- Minor copy-editing for 7.4.4, 7.3.7, 7.2.5 release notes. Modified Files: -------------- pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml: release.sgml (r1.282 -> r1.283) (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/release.sgml.diff?r1=1.282&r2=1.283) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly ...

Windows 7 vs. Linux: Hardware Acceleration. Linux Fails Again......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay_20ESjixs Linux doesn't seem to be doing too well..... Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa! -- flatfish+++ Please visit our hall of Linux idiots. http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/ Watching Linux Fail: http://limuxwatch.blogspot.com/ Linux's dismal desktop market share: http://royal.pingdom.com/2011/05/12/the-top-20-strongholds-for-desktop-linux/ Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead "By the time Microsoft released the Windows 7 beta in January 2009, Linux had clearly lost its chance at desktop glory." http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/207999/deskto...

C compiler Version 5.7 and Xdesigner Version 7.7
Hi, Ok I tried posting this in the solaris group with no replies. So I decided I'll ask the C gurus. First off, I'm a total beginner using xdesigner and solaris. I'm using the Sun cc compiler Version 5.7 on Solaris 10. I created a simple GUI using xdesigner version 7.7. After I generated the C code, I tried to compile the main. I get many warnings and errors that are similar to the ones below (I cut and pasted the last 4 errors because most of the compiling issues are similar.): mach1# cc test_gui.c mach1# ... "/usr/include/X11/Xresource.h", line 3...

Web resources about - 7 N 7. Windows 7 here in 7 days. Goodbye Linux. - comp.os.linux.advocacy

Window - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the part of a building. For the Microsoft operating system, see Microsoft Windows . For other uses, see Window (disambiguation) ...

Microsoft Windows Information, Solutions, Tools - Windows IT Pro
Microsoft Windows information and solutions for IT pros. Topics include cloud computing, Windows Server, Exchange, Outlook, PowerShell, virtualization, ...

The Windows Blog
The Windows Blog is Microsoft's Official Blog for the Windows Operating System.

Apple confirms it will livestream March 21st event for iOS, Mac, Apple TV and Windows users
Apple has confirmed it will be livestreaming its just-announced March 21st media event , expected to feature several product unveilings including ...

Hands-On With the Android N Developer Beta: Multi-Window & More
Yesterday Google surprised a number of people by launching the developer beta of the next release of Android, which is codenamed Android N. Normally ...

Android N’s multi-window multitasking mode is a very promising start
Andrew Cunningham Here's Android N's multi-window mode on a Nexus 9 running the first Android N preview. Note how the normally square recent ...

Windows 10 Mobile Insider Preview Build 14283 arrives on the Fast ring
Microsoft is still working on polishing up the Mobile version of Windows 10 , introducing new features and improvements, with no word yet on ...

Microsoft is using an Internet Explorer security patch to shove more 'Upgrade to Windows 10' nagware ...
If you've got a Windows 7 or Windows 8x computer that is not owned and managed by your company, and you haven't upgraded it to Windows 10 yet, ...

Sydney mom drops baby and toddler from 2nd floor window
... say a mother trapped by fire in her Sydney apartment has safely dropped her 2-day-old baby and 2 year-old toddler from a second-floor window ...

Windows 10 release cadence in flux as Microsoft tries to figure out suitable tempo
Microsoft is still struggling to figure out the best cadence for Windows 10 updates, a process that may result in fewer updates annually than ...

Resources last updated: 3/11/2016 4:19:38 PM