Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!

Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is 
happening to the future of computing...

http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad

And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:

http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action

-

On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed

Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.


-- 
Rick

In comp.os.linux.advocacy Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
> 
> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is 
> happening to the future of computing...
> 

The future of gay computing.

Micoshaft Appil asstroturfing fraudster with a big girlie butt
pounding the sock Oxford wrote on behalf of Half Wits from
Micoshaft Appil Department of Marketing:



> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
> 
> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is
> happening to the future of computing...
> 
> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
> 
> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
> 
> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action



Appil marketing is known to invent fake bloggers like
you and plant fake stories and not attribute their fake stories
to their very real paymasters.

Admit it, there is no source level tech support for the product
because it doesn't do Linux and its closed source.

We learned to stop spending and love free software with Android
now No.2 best seller ahead of No.3 seller iPone which is being
pushed back all the time.

owl formulated the question :
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
>> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
>> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
>> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
>> 
>> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is 
>> happening to the future of computing...
>> 
>
> The future of gay computing.

I know I shouldn't laugh at that - but, holly crap that was funny.

-- 
Tom Shelton

In article <8sert.hga0@rooftop.invalid>, owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> 
wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> > Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
> > worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
> > past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
> > 
> > Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is 
> > happening to the future of computing...
> > 
> 
> The future of gay computing.

NTTAWT

7 <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:

> > Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is
> > happening to the future of computing...
> > 
> > http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
> > 
> > And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
> > 
> > http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
> 
> Appil marketing is known to invent fake bloggers like
> you and plant fake stories and not attribute their fake stories
> to their very real paymasters.
> 
> Admit it, there is no source level tech support for the product
> because it doesn't do Linux and its closed source.
> 
> We learned to stop spending and love free software with Android
> now No.2 best seller ahead of No.3 seller iPone which is being
> pushed back all the time.

no, there was nothing fake in their latest demo... they are just showing 
the latest features so everyone can be informed... sweet...

no, the ipad is mainly opensource, you can download the latest distro 
here:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/

no, the Andriod will never become no 2, the software and hardware is 
just too poor.

why are you so against the top quality products? you can learn how the 
ipad works here...

http://www.apple.com/ipad/design/

enjoy!

Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote:

> > The future of gay computing.
> 
> I know I shouldn't laugh at that - but, holly crap that was funny.

exactly, he doesn't yet realize palm was bought by HP...

Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
> 
> > Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
> > worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
> 
> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.

what would be the point? linux faded out several years ago... now most 
of the unix market is on freebsd... it's used 10 to 1 more than linux.

http://www.freebsd.org/

"Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> wrote in message
news:apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net...
>
<snip>
>
> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
>
> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action

Except you'd be a couple of years too late. The app-goldrush has long
passed. Unless you have a really good idea and are a really competent
developer, you're unlikely to "get rich". There's a lot of apps on the App
Store that makes very little or nothing for the developer (even not
including the free stuff) ... mind you, there would be WAY WAY WAY more
garbage apps if Apple did not have the approval process.

Your Name wrote:

> 
> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> wrote in message
> news:apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net...
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
>>
>> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
> 
> Except you'd be a couple of years too late. The app-goldrush has long
> passed. Unless you have a really good idea and are a really competent
> developer, you're unlikely to "get rich". There's a lot of apps on the App
> Store that makes very little or nothing for the developer (even not
> including the free stuff) ... mind you, there would be WAY WAY WAY more
> garbage apps if Apple did not have the approval process.

The one flaw in your argument is that the increased size of the iPad brings
with it more capabilities. There will be a lot of apps developed for the
iPad that aren't practical on the iPhone. I'd expect this to bring
a "second app goldrush" for iPad only apps.
-- 
A.

In article <apony-2CB1EE.15081413052010@news.qwest.net>, Oxford
<apony@pasture.com> wrote:

> no, the ipad is mainly opensource, you can download the latest distro 
> here:

the ipad is *not* open source, except maybe the kernel, which is no
doubt very different than darwin anyway.

"Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> wrote:

> > http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
> 
> Except you'd be a couple of years too late. The app-goldrush has long
> passed. Unless you have a really good idea and are a really competent
> developer, you're unlikely to "get rich". There's a lot of apps on the App
> Store that makes very little or nothing for the developer (even not
> including the free stuff) ... mind you, there would be WAY WAY WAY more
> garbage apps if Apple did not have the approval process.

what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd 
gold rush has barely begun...

and what? the approval process is excellent, it filters out the crud so 
the user's experience is "the very best"... are you mad because you only 
make crap?

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Oxford:
> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>> 
>> > Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>> > worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>> 
>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
>
> what would be the point? linux faded out several years ago... now most 
> of the unix market is on freebsd... it's used 10 to 1 more than linux.

Rofl. I *love* FreeBSD, but this is patent nonsense.

Cue the "but-OSX-is-FreeBSD" angle.

-- 
BOFH excuse #415:

Maintenance window broken

Rick <none@mail.invalid> writes:

> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>
>> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>
> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.

I am so totally agreeing with you again Rick - you are like me so much
of an advocate or roKKing Linux. I use Ubuntu which roxxers.  The Linux
pads are so much better than iSanitaryPad LOLZ! because we can use bash
my friendZ.

In article <PbZGn.32208$bq.2259@newsfe30.ams2>,
 7 <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:

> Appil marketing is known to invent fake bloggers like you and plant fake 
> stories and not attribute their fake stories to their very real 
> paymasters.

And you have evidence to prove this?

Of course you don't, because it just ain't so.  I'd ask you to stop 
spreading your lies, but I know that would be futile because lies are the 
stock in trade of you Rovesque fanatics.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:18:55 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>> 
>> > Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>> > worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>> 
>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
> 
> what would be the point? 

Does it run Linux? No?. Not interested.

-- 
Rick

On 5/13/2010 10:51 PM, Rick wrote:
> On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:18:55 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>
>> Rick<none@mail.invalid>  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>>>> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>>>
>>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
>>
>> what would be the point?
>
> Does it run Linux? No?. Not interested.


Then why are you running Windows at work, bozo?

On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:44:36 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> "Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> wrote:
> 
>> > http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
>> 
>> Except you'd be a couple of years too late. The app-goldrush has long
>> passed. Unless you have a really good idea and are a really competent
>> developer, you're unlikely to "get rich". There's a lot of apps on the
>> App Store that makes very little or nothing for the developer (even not
>> including the free stuff) ... mind you, there would be WAY WAY WAY more
>> garbage apps if Apple did not have the approval process.
> 
> what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd
> gold rush has barely begun...

Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.

-- 
Rick

On Thu, 13 May 2010 22:52:04 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/13/2010 10:51 PM, Rick wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:18:55 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>>
>>> Rick<none@mail.invalid>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 12:09:41 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>>>>> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>>>>
>>>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
>>>
>>> what would be the point?
>>
>> Does it run Linux? No?. Not interested.
> 
> 
> Then why are you running Windows at work, bozo?

I rarely get to choose the machines, the software of the operating system 
at work. I did get to choose for 2. One is a Ubuntu web/print/file/ftp 
server. The other is a Ubuntu desktop, and yes they are both next to 
Windows machines, not my choice.

-- 
Rick

Rick stated in post VpidncTYzIFAJ3HWnZ2dnUVZ_rEAAAAA@supernews.com on
5/13/10 7:52 PM:

> On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:44:36 -0600, Oxford wrote:
> 
>> "Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
>>> 
>>> Except you'd be a couple of years too late. The app-goldrush has long
>>> passed. Unless you have a really good idea and are a really competent
>>> developer, you're unlikely to "get rich". There's a lot of apps on the
>>> App Store that makes very little or nothing for the developer (even not
>>> including the free stuff) ... mind you, there would be WAY WAY WAY more
>>> garbage apps if Apple did not have the approval process.
>> 
>> what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd
>> gold rush has barely begun...
> 
> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.

I am not surprised you are not interested.  Rather predictable, really.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article <apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net>,
 Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:

> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
> 
> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is 
> happening to the future of computing...
> 
> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
> 
> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
> 
> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
> 
> -

Why you would include comp.os.linux.advocacy and alt.cellular.attws is 
beyond me. 

Perhaps you're just a troll.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

At 14 May 2010 08:26:39 -0500 Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article <apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net>,
>  Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> 
> > Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become, 
> > worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed 
> > past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
> > 
> > Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that
is 
> > happening to the future of computing...
> > 
> > http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
> > 
> > And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
> > 
> > http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
> > 
> > -
> 
> Why you would include comp.os.linux.advocacy and alt.cellular.attws is 
> beyond me. 
> 
> Perhaps you're just a troll.


Gee, d'ya think?

When the "Apple Bashers" talk about "fanboys," Oxymoron is the team
captain.

Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> > what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd
> > gold rush has barely begun...
> 
> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.

you aren't perhaps today, but when you get older and ready to move up 
from linux you'll be better informed.

On 2010-05-14, Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
>
>
> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd
>> > gold rush has barely begun...
>> 
>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
>
> you aren't perhaps today, but when you get older and ready to move up 
> from linux you'll be better informed.

....the iphone has been made to run Android, so an iPad hack isn't that far 
off. Perhaps the SoC can be made to do something besides h264 efficiently.
That would be a hand thing regardless of which OS you're running.

-- 
"Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don't evaluate whether 
the idea will move the industry forward, they ask,                    |||
'how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?'"                  / | \

                         -- Bill Gates

Jolly Roger wrote:

> In article <apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net>,
>  Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> 
>> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
>> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
>> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
>> 
>> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is
>> happening to the future of computing...
>> 
>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>> 
>> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
>> 
>> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action
>> 
>> -
> 
> Why you would include comp.os.linux.advocacy and alt.cellular.attws is
> beyond me.
> 
> Perhaps you're just a troll.
> 

OxRetard is a typical Mac user from CSMA. Stupid way beyond imagination
-- 
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a
significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

In article <slrnhuqo1s.te0.jedi@nomad.mishnet>,
 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

> ...the iphone has been made to run Android,

Only the first model of the iPhone.  The 3G and 3GS haven't been made to 
run it.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination

poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that 
OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost 
town, just as i predicted years ago.

check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on FreeBSD...

http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad

On 10-05-14 14:48 , Oxford wrote:
> Peter K=F6hlmann<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>  wrote:
>
>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imaginat=
ion
>
> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that=

> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
> town, just as i predicted years ago.

Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.

> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad

Yeah, too bad it's not the Mac OS X that's in there.


--=20
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

"Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht 
news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
> Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination
>
> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>
> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on FreeBSD...
>
> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad


Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a Macbook for 
his son and his daughter uses windows!
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His Holy 
Steve" and his draconian censorship".
<muffled laughter /> 

On Fri, 14 May 2010 08:02:10 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> > what do you mean? the iPad has only been out for 1 month, so the 2nd
>> > gold rush has barely begun...
>> 
>> Does it run Linux? No? Not interested.
> 
> you aren't perhaps today, but when you get older and ready to move up
> from linux you'll be better informed.

My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.

Do I need to remind you that I moved **from** OS X **to** Linux based 
systems?


-- 
Rick

In article <34OdnXlrTevyKnDWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
 Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.

Yes, Oxford is.  He's one of the very very few who are actually fanbois.  
But he's outnumbered, way outnumbered, by the apple haters.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <34OdnXlrTevyKnDWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
>  Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.
>
> Yes, Oxford is.  He's one of the very very few who are actually fanbois.  
> But he's outnumbered, way outnumbered, by the apple haters.

Ah, the martyr syndrome.

-- 
Q:	How can you tell when a Burroughs salesman is lying?
A:	When his lips move.

Michelle Steiner wrote:

> In article <34OdnXlrTevyKnDWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
>  Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.
> 
> Yes, Oxford is.  He's one of the very very few who are actually fanbois.

He is a typical Mac user. Incredibly stupid

> But he's outnumbered, way outnumbered, by the apple haters.
> 
He is outnumbered by OxRetard haters. Nobody here would give a shit about 
apple or apple cultists if not for apple filth like OxRetard, Znut or Snit 
Michael Glasser

Those cretins are the very ones who make sure that apple fans are 
perceived as the filth they really are
-- 
The probability of someone watching you is proportional to the
stupidity of your action.

Peter K�hlmann stated in post hskke7$1ib$00$1@news.t-online.com on 5/14/10
3:56 PM:

> Michelle Steiner wrote:
> 
>> In article <34OdnXlrTevyKnDWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
>>  Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.
>> 
>> Yes, Oxford is.  He's one of the very very few who are actually fanbois.
> 
> He is a typical Mac user. Incredibly stupid
> 
>> But he's outnumbered, way outnumbered, by the apple haters.
>> 
> He is outnumbered by OxRetard haters. Nobody here would give a shit about
> apple or apple cultists if not for apple filth like OxRetard, Znut or Snit
> Michael Glasser
> 
> Those cretins are the very ones who make sure that apple fans are
> perceived as the filth they really are

Anyone wonder if Peter displays his insecurities like this on purpose or do
you think he just cannot help himself?


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On 5/14/2010 6:56 PM, Peter K�hlmann wrote:


> He is a typical Mac user. Incredibly stupid

> Those cretins are the very ones who make sure that apple fans are
> perceived as the filth they really are


I'm thinking you might want to step in front of a bus tonight.

In article <hskke7$1ib$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> My, my. Aren't you the condescending little fanboi.
> > 
> > Yes, Oxford is.  He's one of the very very few who are actually 
> > fanbois.
> 
> He is a typical Mac user. Incredibly stupid

Incredibly obnoxious, yes.  Stupid, maybe.  Typical Mac user, not even.

> Those cretins are the very ones who make sure that apple fans are 
> perceived as the filth they really are

Actually, the filth are the Apple-haters like you.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

"Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> wrote in message 
news:apony-9C277A.12094113052010@news.qwest.net...
> Apple has just released more info on how great the iPad has become,
> worth a quick view... it really shows how development has now pushed
> past 200,000 Apps... Sweet!
>
> Here is the great demo... watch it a couple times to catch all that is
> happening to the future of computing...
>
> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>
> And if you want to get rich on the iPad, go here:
>
> http://developer.apple.com/iphone/index.action

Apple has brought some pretty cool stuff to market that stands on its own 
pretty well. So why hype it like a snake-oil salesman? It's a natural 
assumption that product hyped like snake-oil likely is snake-oil.

Let the product stand on its own. If there's some new feature that you think 
people aren't aware of great, tell us about it. But most of the crowd here 
is pretty familiar with the capabilities of Apple products. Some even own 
them. But over-hype it and you only cause people to question if they might 
have been duped.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA 

Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> Do I need to remind you that I moved **from** OS X **to** Linux based 
> systems?

did you lose your job? or did your girlfriend kick you out on the street?

nobody would move in that retrograde direction unless they had a tragedy 
in their life...

Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Those cretins are the very ones who make sure that apple fans are 
> perceived as the filth they really are

poor peter, he forgets apple created our current computer world, all 
others are paper puppets to the apple dream...

In article <apony-8A7C90.18295514052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com>,
 Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:

> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Do I need to remind you that I moved **from** OS X **to** Linux based 
> > systems?
> 
> did you lose your job? or did your girlfriend kick you out on the 
> street?
> 
> nobody would move in that retrograde direction unless they had a tragedy 
> in their life...

Go away, Oxford.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On 5/13/10 1:22 PM, Tom Shelton wrote:
> holly crap

Unusual horticultural byproduct, that. Most plants don't shit.
-- 
JDG

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:

> Apple has brought some pretty cool stuff to market that stands on its own 
> pretty well. So why hype it like a snake-oil salesman? It's a natural 
> assumption that product hyped like snake-oil likely is snake-oil.

apple certainly hasn't hyped it, they've been very quiet about the ipad, 
they know there isn't enough resources in the world to build enough of 
them, so they have remained silent.

> Let the product stand on its own. If there's some new feature that you think 
> people aren't aware of great, tell us about it. But most of the crowd here 
> is pretty familiar with the capabilities of Apple products. Some even own 
> them. But over-hype it and you only cause people to question if they might

yes, the product has really taken off because of word of mouth, it's 
really the biggest revolution since the macintosh when you think about 
it... so it's good apple is letting the product speak for itself.

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > did you lose your job? or did your girlfriend kick you out on the 
> > street?
> > 
> > nobody would move in that retrograde direction unless they had a tragedy 
> > in their life...
> 
> Go away, Oxford.

are you STILL angry that I exposed you as a crossdresser?

let it go...

In article <apony-2464F0.21272114052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com>,
 Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:

> are you STILL angry that I exposed you as a crossdresser?

You never did any such thing, fuckwit.

You are one of the very few fanboi assholes that Apple haters try to 
portray all Mac and iPhone adherents as being.  You are despised by just 
about everyone on both sides of the issue.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote in news:apony-8A7C90.18295514052010@n003-
000-000-000.static.ge.com:

> nobody would move in that retrograde direction unless they had a tragedy 
> in their life...
> 
> 

He had one.....Safari.


-- 
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
 Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> He had one.....Safari.

so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post here.

You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On Fri, 14 May 2010 18:29:55 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Do I need to remind you that I moved **from** OS X **to** Linux based
>> systems?
> 
> did you lose your job? or did your girlfriend kick you out on the
> street?
> 
> nobody would move in that retrograde direction unless they had a tragedy
> in their life...

Start taking your meds again, Oxford. You've lost your grip on reality. 
Again.

-- 
Rick

"Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:

> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht 
> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination
>>
>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>
>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on FreeBSD...
>>
>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>
> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a Macbook for 
> his son and his daughter uses windows!
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His Holy 
> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
> <muffled laughter /> 

According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
C code.....

Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.

Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
no".

Still. What do we know?

Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> writes:

> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>
>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht 
>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination
>>>
>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
>>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>
>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on FreeBSD...
>>>
>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>
>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a Macbook for 
>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His Holy 
>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>> <muffled laughter /> 
>
> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
> C code.....
>
> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>
> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
> no".
>
> Still. What do we know?


Is Raytard there? I dropped a "k" ... Should keep him happy for a few
posts ....

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> 
>> He had one.....Safari.
> 
> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post here.
> 
> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
> 


Which makes you the edge.

In article <5KydneZje7w_FHPWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
 News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

> > In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
> >  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> He had one.....Safari.
> > 
> > so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post 
> > here.
> > 
> > You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
> 
> Which makes you the edge.

Not even.  You, though, share one side with Larry.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <5KydneZje7w_FHPWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>  News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
> 
>>> In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>>>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> He had one.....Safari.
>>> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post 
>>> here.
>>>
>>> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
>> Which makes you the edge.
> 
> Not even.  You, though, share one side with Larry.
> 


And you one with Oxtard.

Look him up on Cupid, er, Stupidtino.

In article <hfGdnXOMXPOZOXPWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
 News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

> >>>> He had one.....Safari.
> >>> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post 
> >>> here.
> >>>
> >>> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
> >> Which makes you the edge.
> > 
> > Not even.  You, though, share one side with Larry.
> 
> And you one with Oxtard.

Wrong yet again, retard.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <hfGdnXOMXPOZOXPWnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>  News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> He had one.....Safari.
>>>>> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post 
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
>>>> Which makes you the edge.
>>> Not even.  You, though, share one side with Larry.
>> And you one with Oxtard.
> 
> Wrong yet again, retard.
> 


So you didn't find him on Stupidtino?

In article <hskuid$b4v$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 James Dale Guckert <Dipthot@Yahoo.Invalid> wrote:

> On 5/13/10 1:22 PM, Tom Shelton wrote:
> > holly crap
> 
> Unusual horticultural byproduct, that. Most plants don't shit.

Maybe Mr. Shelton referred to a woman named Holly.
-- 
Remove blown from email address to reply.

In article <sNCdnQStmrPfLHPWnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
 News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

> So you didn't find him on Stupidtino?

I peeked there, and saw you, Larry, and Oxford having a circle jerk.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht 
news:hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org...
> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>
>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht
>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond 
>>>> imagination
>>>
>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
>>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>
>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on FreeBSD...
>>>
>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>
>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a Macbook 
>> for
>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His 
>> Holy
>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>> <muffled laughter />
>
> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
> C code.....
>
> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>
> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
> no".
>
> Still. What do we know?


Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
b.t.w.
Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security 
risk?
<chuckle> 

Clogwog wrote:

> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
> news:hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>>
>>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht
>>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond
>>>>> imagination
>>>>
>>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset
>>>> that OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a
>>>> ghost town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>>
>>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on
>>>> FreeBSD...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>>
>>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a
>>> Macbook for
>>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>>> 
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His
>>> Holy
>>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>>> <muffled laughter />
>>
>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
>> C code.....
>>
>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>
>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
>> no".
>>
>> Still. What do we know?
> 
> 
> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
> b.t.w.
> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security
> risk?
> <chuckle>

Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what 
circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both 
files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)

Be precise
-- 
Yield to Temptation ... it may not pass your way again.
                -- Lazarus Long, "Time Enough for Love"

CROSSPOSTING SNIPPED

Peter K�hlmann pulled this Usenet boner:

> Clogwog wrote:
>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>
>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
>>> C code.....
>>>
>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>
>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
>>> no".
>>>
>>> Still. What do we know?
>> 
>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>> b.t.w.
>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security
>> risk?
>> <chuckle>
>
> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what 
> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both 
> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)

Good to know that "Hadron" now has help with producing his lietorrent.

Or should we call it a lyetorrent?

Well, at least "Hadron" answers his own oft-posed request:  "Post a link to
a lie, please."

-- 
Your supervisor is thinking about you.

On 2010-05-14, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
> On 10-05-14 14:48 , Oxford wrote:
>> Peter Köhlmann<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>  wrote:
>>
>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination
>>
>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>
> Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.

Nope.

It's the other way around.

Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package management,
or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't be in
the form of some restrictive "apps store".

>
>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>
> Yeah, too bad it's not the Mac OS X that's in there.
>

Yeah, about that...

iPad:/Applications root# uname -a
Darwin iPad 10.3.1 Darwin Kernel Version 10.3.1: Mon Mar 15 23:15:33 PDT 2010; root:xnu-1504.2.27~18/RELEASE_ARM_S5L8930X iPad1,1 arm K48AP Darwin

iPad:/Applications root# ls
AppStore.app/        Maps.app/               MobileNotes.app/      Terminal.app/  
Cydia.app/           MobileAddressBook.app/  MobileSafari.app/     Web.app/
DataActivation.app/  MobileCal.app/          MobileSlideShow.app/  WebSheet.app/
DemoApp.app/         MobileMail.app/         MobileStore.app/      WhatIP.app/
FieldTest.app/       MobileMusicPlayer.app/  Preferences.app/      YouTube.app/


-- 
     This is a consumer product.                                      |||
     World domination simply isn't necessary.                        / | \

In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
<jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
> 
> Nope.
> 
> It's the other way around.

hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
can.

> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
> management,
> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't be in
> the form of some restrictive "apps store".

there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.

nospam wrote:

> In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
> <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
> 
>> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>> 
>> Nope.
>> 
>> It's the other way around.
> 
> hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> can.

Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, for 
that matter)
And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.

>> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
>> management,
>> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it
>> won't be in the form of some restrictive "apps store".
> 
> there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
> much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.

You mean the dumbest way to do it (even dumber than the windows way)?

In fact, that way is so incredibly stupid it has to be the OSX way
-- 
Support your local Search and Rescue unit -- get lost.

"Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht 
news:hsogvc$sm6$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> Clogwog wrote:
>
>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>> news:hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>>>
>>>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht
>>>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond
>>>>>> imagination
>>>>>
>>>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset
>>>>> that OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a
>>>>> ghost town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on
>>>>> FreeBSD...
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>>>
>>>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a
>>>> Macbook for
>>>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>>>>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>>>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of "His
>>>> Holy
>>>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>>>> <muffled laughter />
>>>
>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
>>> C code.....
>>>
>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>
>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
>>> no".
>>>
>>> Still. What do we know?
>>
>>
>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>> b.t.w.
>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security
>> risk?
>> <chuckle>
>
> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both
> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>
> Be precise

It's *your* claim, so why do *I* have to tell you why those collisions *are* 
indeed a risk?, as you just admitted, you dense krautkopf tit!
It has been noted that most of your claims suck!
Feel free to proof otherwise!

Be precise!

Some other amazing Peter Kohlman claims:

* The apps with "Quit" do not exit, they continue to run in the background
[Your reply: .....................................]
* A swap partition is more efficient than a contiguous swap file on
Linux. (The kernel tracks swap space by contiguous regions of disk. It
doesn't care if they come from a file or a dedicated partition.).
[Your reply: .....................................]
* A screen shot of an antialiased image will not show the antialiasing.
(Trivially disproved by experiment).
[Your reply: .....................................]
* MD5 collisions are not a security risk.
[Your reply: .....................................]
* 64-bit pointers do not take up more memory than 32-bit pointers.
[Your reply: .....................................]
* KDE apps will not work on Cygwin.
[Your reply: .....................................]
* Posting your WPA key to a public forum is not a security risk for your
wireless network.
[Your reply: .....................................]
* Peter claimed that the answer given by Excel for multiplying 29513736
by 92842033 shows Excel is slop ware. Unfortunately, Peter didn't
bother to check with any other spreadsheets, as all versions of
OpenOffice *agree* with Excel. Peter was too dumb to realize that many
spreadsheets give results to a set number of significant figures.
[Your reply: .....................................]
* If X makes a statement, for example "the sky is blue", and Y says that
X is wrong, that does NOT mean that Y disagrees with the statement "the
sky is blue" or agrees with the statement "the sky is not blue".
[Your reply: .....................................]
* LCD displays cannot look good at anything other than their native
resolution.
[Your reply: .....................................]
PIK's (Peter Idiot Köhlmanns) "classic" cockups:
<quote>
Peter Köhlmann wrote "quatsch" in COLA: "Linux is perfect at everything, the 
Linux advocates said so!"; Peter Köhlmann: "It is"
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f31c2035e5494b57?dmode=source&output=gplain
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann lied in COLA "I program Windows systems yes. But I am not a 
Windows user." Peter Köhlmann, COLA.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/aa52a85a3acc798a?dmode=source
[Your reply: .....................................]
Question in cola: > You're back!
Quoting PIK (Peter Idiot Kohlmann): "Not really. I am no longer interested 
in cola, as it has degenerated into a cesspit full of the worst filth 
imaginable."
< Of course, the liar Peter Köhlmann kept spewing his rants into this NG, he 
called a "degenerated cesspit". >
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann piffled in COLA:"Visio is available only seperately and not 
included in any MS Office package"
http://office.microsoft.com/nl-nl/getstarted/FX101055081043.aspx
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann fiddle-faddled in COLA : The apps with "Quit" do not exit, 
they continue to run in the background
<BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAH!!>
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann wrote balderdash in COLA: I don't care what that guy has to 
say. Anyone chosing Gnome as DE is already disqualified. Gnome is hideous, 
technically (for programmers) and optically
< Linus Torvalds: I thought KDE 4.0 was such a disaster, I switched to 
GNOME.>
[Your reply: .....................................]
Snit: Doing a quick search on the web I find this: 
http://www.cann.ca/apa-template.doc
Peter Köhlmann: Naturally you fail to provide the URL, as usual
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann bullshitted in COLA "it's okay to dereference a NULL pointer"
"an attempt to dereference a null pointer usually causes a run-time error"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_(computing)
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann waffled in COLA: "Hulu Desktop is not Hulu"
http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop
post: h065qd$jfe$02$1@news.t-online.com
< lol >
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann blabbed in COLA: "Three hours is actually a short time for a 
windows install"
Ad Hominem: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAH!, you stupid tit!
http://www.google.nl/search?source=ig&hl=nl&rlz=&q=Windows+7+install+takes+15+minutes&btnG=Google+zoeken&meta=lr%3D&aq=f&oq=
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann's gobshitter in COLA: There is *no* single user linux system. 
They are *all* multiuser.
Ezekiel: Puppy Linux is a single user distro. All your denial won't change 
this.
[ "Puppy is a single user operating system so you are running as root all 
the time." ]
http://www.penguinway.net/?p=89
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann's yipped stupidity in COLA:
About FINALE music technology software: John Fuhrer: "Next he'll (kohlmann) 
be telling people that Finale can't do music composition. Oh wait... he did 
that too."
Peter Köhlmann: "Well, it can't"
See how Kohlmann gets his a$$ kicked seriously.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/f8541219be92f15f
[Your reply: .....................................]
Peter Köhlmann's snotted stupidity in COLA:
> Well, at least apple provides a migration app to get the personal stuff
> from the old to the new machine.
>
> With windows, you are entirely on your own. You redo practically
> everything
>
Clogwog: Another fine example of a *Kohltard* cock-up, LMFAO!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Windows_Easy_Transfer.png
[Your reply: .....................................]

More to come.............

"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> schreef in bericht 
news:hsor2m$u5v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> CROSSPOSTING SNIPPED
>
> Peter K�hlmann pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Clogwog wrote:
>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>>
>>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
>>>> C code.....
>>>>
>>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>>
>>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
>>>> no".
>>>>
>>>> Still. What do we know?
>>>
>>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>>> b.t.w.
>>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security
>>> risk?
>>> <chuckle>
>>
>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both
>> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>
> Good to know that "Hadron" now has help with producing his lietorrent.
>
> Or should we call it a lyetorrent?
>
> Well, at least "Hadron" answers his own oft-posed request:  "Post a link 
> to
> a lie, please."
>
Wow!, I hear these sucking noises in the direction of Germany, with this 
western wind we have in Holland today!
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/rnlgppznjl--Sucking-noisesHuman-People- 

Clogwog wrote:

> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
> news:hsogvc$sm6$00$1@news.t-online.com...
>> Clogwog wrote:
>>
>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>>> news:hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht
>>>>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>>>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond
>>>>>>> imagination
>>>>>>
>>>>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset
>>>>>> that OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a
>>>>>> ghost town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on
>>>>>> FreeBSD...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>>>>
>>>>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a
>>>>> Macbook for
>>>>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>>>>>
>> 
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>>>>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of
>>>>> "His Holy
>>>>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>>>>> <muffled laughter />
>>>>
>>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter"
>>>> of C code.....
>>>>
>>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>>
>>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a
>>>> "no no".
>>>>
>>>> Still. What do we know?
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>>> b.t.w.
>>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a
>>> security risk?
>>> <chuckle>
>>
>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control
>> both files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>>
>> Be precise
> 
> It's *your* claim, so why do *I* have to tell you why those collisions
> *are* indeed a risk?, 

They aren't, except under very rare conditions

> as you just admitted, you dense krautkopf tit!

Your infamous reading disability just showed up again


-- 
It's sweet to be remembered, but it's often cheaper to be forgotten.

"Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht 
news:hsru5j$jsi$03$2@news.t-online.com...
> Clogwog wrote:
>
>> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
>> news:hsogvc$sm6$00$1@news.t-online.com...
>>> Clogwog wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>>>> news:hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> schreef in bericht
>>>>>> news:apony-47B6EA.12484314052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com...
>>>>>>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond
>>>>>>>> imagination
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset
>>>>>>> that OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a
>>>>>>> ghost town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> check out the new demo peter, it's the dream of Linux done on
>>>>>>> FreeBSD...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ha, ha yes, lol , a *very* bitter twit Kohltars is, he bought a
>>>>>> Macbook for
>>>>>> his son and his daughter uses windows!
>>>>>>
>>>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.system/msg/af256d8b0cbb308f?hl=nl&dmode=source&output=gplain
>>>>>> His son is a "MAK retard" now, a follower of the "dictatorship of
>>>>>> "His Holy
>>>>>> Steve" and his draconian censorship".
>>>>>> <muffled laughter />
>>>>>
>>>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter"
>>>>> of C code.....
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>>>
>>>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a
>>>>> "no no".
>>>>>
>>>>> Still. What do we know?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>>>> b.t.w.
>>>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a
>>>> security risk?
>>>> <chuckle>
>>>
>>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control
>>> both files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>>>
>>> Be precise
>>
>> It's *your* claim, so why do *I* have to tell you why those collisions
>> *are* indeed a risk?,
>
> They aren't, except under very rare conditions

I can feel your pain Peter "Clueless".
>
>> as you just admitted, you dense krautkopf tit!
>
> Your infamous reading disability just showed up again
>
Nothing wrong with my reading, cos you just  made a subtle distinction in 
your (false) claim, to be precise!
"MD5 collisions are not a security risk" is now "MD5 collisions are not a 
security risk, *except* under very rare conditions"
lol ,  You're such a daft little angry boy! O' Clueless one! 

In article <hsrt9t$thr$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> > there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
> > much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.
> 
> You mean the dumbest way to do it (even dumber than the windows way)?
> 
> In fact, that way is so incredibly stupid it has to be the OSX way

Oh, you mean that you prefer the Rube Goldberg way?

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

In article <hsrt9t$thr$00$1@news.t-online.com>, Peter K�hlmann
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
> >> 
> >> Nope.
> >> 
> >> It's the other way around.
> > 
> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> > can.
> 
> Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, for 
> that matter)

long ago. just about all linux software has been ported.

now what about photoshop, lightroom, final cut pro, garmin gps and the
other software i mentioned? not available on linux.

that's why linux users must resort to wine or actually running windows
in vmware or dual boot.

> And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.

quite a bit is available via fink, but for the ones that aren't, you
can compile it yourself. 

> >> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
> >> management,
> >> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it
> >> won't be in the form of some restrictive "apps store".
> > 
> > there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
> > much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.
> 
> You mean the dumbest way to do it (even dumber than the windows way)?

it's actually the smartest and easiest way. apps are self-contained.
they don't scatter files all over the place. if you want to remove it,
you drag it to the trash, just as you would any other file. 

> In fact, that way is so incredibly stupid it has to be the OSX way

wrong again.

"Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:

> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht 
> news:hsogvc$sm6$00$1@news.t-online.com...
>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both
>> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>>
>> Be precise
>
> It's *your* claim, so why do *I* have to tell you why those collisions *are* 
> indeed a risk?, as you just admitted, you dense krautkopf tit!
> It has been noted that most of your claims suck!
> Feel free to proof otherwise!
>
> Be precise!
>
> Some other amazing Peter Kohlman claims:
>
> * The apps with "Quit" do not exit, they continue to run in the background
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * A swap partition is more efficient than a contiguous swap file on
> Linux. (The kernel tracks swap space by contiguous regions of disk. It
> doesn't care if they come from a file or a dedicated partition.).
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * A screen shot of an antialiased image will not show the antialiasing.
> (Trivially disproved by experiment).
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * MD5 collisions are not a security risk.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * 64-bit pointers do not take up more memory than 32-bit pointers.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * KDE apps will not work on Cygwin.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * Posting your WPA key to a public forum is not a security risk for your
> wireless network.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * Peter claimed that the answer given by Excel for multiplying 29513736
> by 92842033 shows Excel is slop ware. Unfortunately, Peter didn't
> bother to check with any other spreadsheets, as all versions of
> OpenOffice *agree* with Excel. Peter was too dumb to realize that many
> spreadsheets give results to a set number of significant figures.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * If X makes a statement, for example "the sky is blue", and Y says that
> X is wrong, that does NOT mean that Y disagrees with the statement "the
> sky is blue" or agrees with the statement "the sky is not blue".
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> * LCD displays cannot look good at anything other than their native
> resolution.
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> PIK's (Peter Idiot Köhlmanns) "classic" cockups:
> <quote>
> Peter Köhlmann wrote "quatsch" in COLA: "Linux is perfect at everything, the 
> Linux advocates said so!"; Peter Köhlmann: "It is"
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f31c2035e5494b57?dmode=source&output=gplain
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann lied in COLA "I program Windows systems yes. But I am not a 
> Windows user." Peter Köhlmann, COLA.
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/aa52a85a3acc798a?dmode=source
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Question in cola: > You're back!
> Quoting PIK (Peter Idiot Kohlmann): "Not really. I am no longer interested 
> in cola, as it has degenerated into a cesspit full of the worst filth 
> imaginable."
> < Of course, the liar Peter Köhlmann kept spewing his rants into this NG, he 
> called a "degenerated cesspit". >
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann piffled in COLA:"Visio is available only seperately and not 
> included in any MS Office package"
> http://office.microsoft.com/nl-nl/getstarted/FX101055081043.aspx
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann fiddle-faddled in COLA : The apps with "Quit" do not exit, 
> they continue to run in the background
> <BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAH!!>
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann wrote balderdash in COLA: I don't care what that guy has to 
> say. Anyone chosing Gnome as DE is already disqualified. Gnome is hideous, 
> technically (for programmers) and optically
> < Linus Torvalds: I thought KDE 4.0 was such a disaster, I switched to 
> GNOME.>
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Snit: Doing a quick search on the web I find this: 
> http://www.cann.ca/apa-template.doc
> Peter Köhlmann: Naturally you fail to provide the URL, as usual
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann bullshitted in COLA "it's okay to dereference a NULL pointer"
> "an attempt to dereference a null pointer usually causes a run-time error"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_(computing)
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann waffled in COLA: "Hulu Desktop is not Hulu"
> http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop
> post: h065qd$jfe$02$1@news.t-online.com
> < lol >
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann blabbed in COLA: "Three hours is actually a short time for a 
> windows install"
> Ad Hominem: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAH!, you stupid tit!
> http://www.google.nl/search?source=ig&hl=nl&rlz=&q=Windows+7+install+takes+15+minutes&btnG=Google+zoeken&meta=lr%3D&aq=f&oq=
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann's gobshitter in COLA: There is *no* single user linux system. 
> They are *all* multiuser.
> Ezekiel: Puppy Linux is a single user distro. All your denial won't change 
> this.
> [ "Puppy is a single user operating system so you are running as root all 
> the time." ]
> http://www.penguinway.net/?p=89
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann's yipped stupidity in COLA:
> About FINALE music technology software: John Fuhrer: "Next he'll (kohlmann) 
> be telling people that Finale can't do music composition. Oh wait... he did 
> that too."
> Peter Köhlmann: "Well, it can't"
> See how Kohlmann gets his a$$ kicked seriously.
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/f8541219be92f15f
> [Your reply: .....................................]
> Peter Köhlmann's snotted stupidity in COLA:
>> Well, at least apple provides a migration app to get the personal stuff
>> from the old to the new machine.
>>
>> With windows, you are entirely on your own. You redo practically
>> everything
>>
> Clogwog: Another fine example of a *Kohltard* cock-up, LMFAO!
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Windows_Easy_Transfer.png
> [Your reply: .....................................]
>
> More to come.............

LOL. He really is a clueless idiot. Still, he's still got Liarmutt to
lick his backside as he sticks his head in the sand whislting Dixie once
more.

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> CROSSPOSTING SNIPPED
>
> Peter Köhlmann pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Clogwog wrote:
>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>>
>>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
>>>> C code.....
>>>>
>>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>>
>>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
>>>> no".
>>>>
>>>> Still. What do we know?
>>> 
>>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>>> b.t.w.
>>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a security
>>> risk?
>>> <chuckle>
>>
>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what 
>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control both 
>> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>
> Good to know that "Hadron" now has help with producing his lietorrent.
>
> Or should we call it a lyetorrent?
>
> Well, at least "Hadron" answers his own oft-posed request:  "Post a link to
> a lie, please."

Please post a link to me telling lies you creepy little arse kisser. I
can and will post them to YOUR lies. Dont you ever tire of humiliating
yourself?

Hint : that list WERE all Peter's mistakes. He is a clueless
idiot. Trust you to support him, you sycophantic little suck up.

"Peter K�hlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote in message 
news:hsrt9t$thr$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> nospam wrote:
>
>> > Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, 
>> > for
> that matter)

Or windows for that matter?

Ever heard of bootcamp?

On 2010-05-17, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
><jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>
>> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>> 
>> Nope.
>> 
>> It's the other way around.
>
> hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> can.

     You will have to be a bit more specific than that.

>
>> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
>> management,
>> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't be in
>> the form of some restrictive "apps store".
>
> there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
> much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.

     Yes, because we all know that n00b consumers want to have to remember
some obscure system detail rather than just double clicking on an installer
or just having it all happen automatically.

-- 
	OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop.      |||
				                               / | \   

Peter K=F6hlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
> > In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.j...@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
> > <j...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>
> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>
> >> Nope.
>
> >> It's the other way around.
>
> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> > can.
>
> Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, for
> that matter)
> And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.

So why is there this seemingly-arbitrary "can't do it via Fink"
constraint?

And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?

....just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
again, and a Linux tool at that.



-hh

In article <slrnhv34dm.e1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
<jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
> >> 
> >> Nope.
> >> 
> >> It's the other way around.
> >
> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> > can.
> 
>      You will have to be a bit more specific than that.

i've mentioned several. here's a list of a few:

photoshop, illustrator, the rest of the adobe creative suite,
lightroom, aperture, final cut pro, itunes, garmin gps software, camera
manufacturer's software (nikon nx, canon dpp, etc.), timbuktu,
microsoft office and firmware updaters.

don't forget that os x can run just about all linux software *plus* all
of that.

> >> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
> >> management,
> >> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't
> >> be in
> >> the form of some restrictive "apps store".
> >
> > there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
> > much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.
> 
>      Yes, because we all know that n00b consumers want to have to remember
> some obscure system detail rather than just double clicking on an installer
> or just having it all happen automatically.

what's to remember? drag the app to the applications folder or wherever
you happen to want it to be. done.

not only is it easier than running an installer which a lot of times
makes you click through several pages of options, but you can put it
exactly where you want it, not where the installer thinks it should go.

Hadron wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
> 
>> CROSSPOSTING SNIPPED
>>
>> Peter Köhlmann pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> Clogwog wrote:
>>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
>>>
>>>>> According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter"
>>>>> of C code.....
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
>>>>>
>>>>> Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a
>>>>> "no no".
>>>>>
>>>>> Still. What do we know?
>>>> 
>>>> Peter makes a lot of mistakes and he's an angry individual!
>>>> b.t.w.
>>>> Did you know that he once claimed that MD5 collisions are not a
>>>> security risk?
>>>> <chuckle>
>>>
>>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control
>>> both files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>>
>> Good to know that "Hadron" now has help with producing his lietorrent.
>>
>> Or should we call it a lyetorrent?
>>
>> Well, at least "Hadron" answers his own oft-posed request:  "Post a
>> link to a lie, please."
> 
> Please post a link to me telling lies you creepy little arse kisser. 

Easy. Take around 10 of your posts. At least 9 of them contain outright 
lies or are nothing but lies
Your lies have been shown you (with links) hundreds of times. Your 
reaction is to simply ignore them and continue as if they had never been 
posted

> I can and will post them to YOUR lies. 

Please do so

> Dont you ever tire of humiliating yourself?
> 
Just because you say he does does not make it so.
Quite to the contrary

> Hint : that list WERE all Peter's mistakes. 

Certainly. So you are a "kernel hacker". *You* said so. So it must be 
true, as you never lie, according to you. Yet you know less about "kernel 
hacking" then the cow next door
And you are a "CUPS guru". CUPS is crap, as it is not a windows 
technology. You told us often how badly CUPS sucks
That apple too uses CUPS for printing should give you /some/ clue

And then your infamous idiocy about tripwire being a AV-type of software. 
Which it never was, never was intended to be and has no usage to serve in 
that matter
Your "./configure" lunacy just served as the icing on the cake, as you 
obviously had no idea at all about the "./" sequence

> He is a clueless
> idiot. Trust you to support him, you sycophantic little suck up.

And now continue to tell us how you run "Debian". Some heartily laugh now 
and then is absolutely needed
-- 
You're not my type.  For that matter, you're not even my species

-hh wrote:

> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> nospam wrote:
>> > In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.j...@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
>> > <j...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>>
>> >> Nope.
>>
>> >> It's the other way around.
>>
>> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
>> > can.
>>
>> Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows,
>> for that matter)
>> And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.
> 
> So why is there this seemingly-arbitrary "can't do it via Fink"
> constraint?

Because you can't run all linux software with Fink. Not even the majority 
of it. Making your claim that OSX can run the most software of OSX, 
windows and linux quite ludicrous. If not an outright lie

And nativly compiled unix-software for OSX? Forget it. That percentage is 
too small to be even on the radar, compared with the linux numbers
 
> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?

It still has nothing to do with linux. You want to run non-OSX software on 
your substandard OS. Too bad that it sucks so extremely badly at that

> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
> again, and a Linux tool at that.

I don't "blame" any tools. I have them setup exactly like they are 
intended to be

And now I activly bypass the setup. To bring your idiocy back to where it 
belongs.
If you like it or not: You are filth, and I don't want your inane 
balderdash in COLA. You are way too stupid to debate with
-- 
Modern man is the missing link between apes and human beings.

"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> schreef in bericht 
news:hsrvij$ce$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> "Clogwog" <clogwog@anon.eu> writes:
>
>> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
>> news:hsogvc$sm6$00$1@news.t-online.com...
>>> Feel free to tell us how those collisions *are* a risk and under what
>>> circumstances, and how you would go at cases where you can't control 
>>> both
>>> files (the one you want to fake, and the faked one)
>>>
>>> Be precise
>>
>> It's *your* claim, so why do *I* have to tell you why those collisions 
>> *are*
>> indeed a risk?, as you just admitted, you dense krautkopf tit!
>> It has been noted that most of your claims suck!
>> Feel free to proof otherwise!
>>
>> Be precise!
>>
>> Some other amazing Peter Kohlman claims:
>>
>> * The apps with "Quit" do not exit, they continue to run in the 
>> background
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * A swap partition is more efficient than a contiguous swap file on
>> Linux. (The kernel tracks swap space by contiguous regions of disk. It
>> doesn't care if they come from a file or a dedicated partition.).
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * A screen shot of an antialiased image will not show the antialiasing.
>> (Trivially disproved by experiment).
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * MD5 collisions are not a security risk.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * 64-bit pointers do not take up more memory than 32-bit pointers.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * KDE apps will not work on Cygwin.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * Posting your WPA key to a public forum is not a security risk for your
>> wireless network.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * Peter claimed that the answer given by Excel for multiplying 29513736
>> by 92842033 shows Excel is slop ware. Unfortunately, Peter didn't
>> bother to check with any other spreadsheets, as all versions of
>> OpenOffice *agree* with Excel. Peter was too dumb to realize that many
>> spreadsheets give results to a set number of significant figures.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * If X makes a statement, for example "the sky is blue", and Y says that
>> X is wrong, that does NOT mean that Y disagrees with the statement "the
>> sky is blue" or agrees with the statement "the sky is not blue".
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> * LCD displays cannot look good at anything other than their native
>> resolution.
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> PIK's (Peter Idiot Köhlmanns) "classic" cockups:
>> <quote>
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote "quatsch" in COLA: "Linux is perfect at everything, 
>> the
>> Linux advocates said so!"; Peter Köhlmann: "It is"
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f31c2035e5494b57?dmode=source&output=gplain
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann lied in COLA "I program Windows systems yes. But I am not 
>> a
>> Windows user." Peter Köhlmann, COLA.
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/aa52a85a3acc798a?dmode=source
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Question in cola: > You're back!
>> Quoting PIK (Peter Idiot Kohlmann): "Not really. I am no longer 
>> interested
>> in cola, as it has degenerated into a cesspit full of the worst filth
>> imaginable."
>> < Of course, the liar Peter Köhlmann kept spewing his rants into this NG, 
>> he
>> called a "degenerated cesspit". >
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann piffled in COLA:"Visio is available only seperately and 
>> not
>> included in any MS Office package"
>> http://office.microsoft.com/nl-nl/getstarted/FX101055081043.aspx
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann fiddle-faddled in COLA : The apps with "Quit" do not exit,
>> they continue to run in the background
>> <BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAH!!>
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote balderdash in COLA: I don't care what that guy has 
>> to
>> say. Anyone chosing Gnome as DE is already disqualified. Gnome is 
>> hideous,
>> technically (for programmers) and optically
>> < Linus Torvalds: I thought KDE 4.0 was such a disaster, I switched to
>> GNOME.>
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Snit: Doing a quick search on the web I find this:
>> http://www.cann.ca/apa-template.doc
>> Peter Köhlmann: Naturally you fail to provide the URL, as usual
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann bullshitted in COLA "it's okay to dereference a NULL 
>> pointer"
>> "an attempt to dereference a null pointer usually causes a run-time 
>> error"
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_(computing)
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann waffled in COLA: "Hulu Desktop is not Hulu"
>> http://www.hulu.com/labs/hulu-desktop
>> post: h065qd$jfe$02$1@news.t-online.com
>> < lol >
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann blabbed in COLA: "Three hours is actually a short time for 
>> a
>> windows install"
>> Ad Hominem: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAH!, you stupid tit!
>> http://www.google.nl/search?source=ig&hl=nl&rlz=&q=Windows+7+install+takes+15+minutes&btnG=Google+zoeken&meta=lr%3D&aq=f&oq=
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann's gobshitter in COLA: There is *no* single user linux 
>> system.
>> They are *all* multiuser.
>> Ezekiel: Puppy Linux is a single user distro. All your denial won't 
>> change
>> this.
>> [ "Puppy is a single user operating system so you are running as root all
>> the time." ]
>> http://www.penguinway.net/?p=89
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann's yipped stupidity in COLA:
>> About FINALE music technology software: John Fuhrer: "Next he'll 
>> (kohlmann)
>> be telling people that Finale can't do music composition. Oh wait... he 
>> did
>> that too."
>> Peter Köhlmann: "Well, it can't"
>> See how Kohlmann gets his a$$ kicked seriously.
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/f8541219be92f15f
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>> Peter Köhlmann's snotted stupidity in COLA:
>>> Well, at least apple provides a migration app to get the personal stuff
>>> from the old to the new machine.
>>>
>>> With windows, you are entirely on your own. You redo practically
>>> everything
>>>
>> Clogwog: Another fine example of a *Kohltard* cock-up, LMFAO!
>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Windows_Easy_Transfer.png
>> [Your reply: .....................................]
>>
>> More to come.............
>
> LOL. He really is a clueless idiot. Still, he's still got Liarmutt to
> lick his backside as he sticks his head in the sand whislting Dixie once
> more.


This cluelessness goes on for many years now, the above is just a tiny part 
of the idiocy he posted on Usenet until now.
I have to admit: I can't keep up to write down all of this tard's 
fuckwittery! 

On 2010-05-17, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>
> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> nospam wrote:
>> > In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.j...@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
>> > <j...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>>
>> >> Nope.
>>
>> >> It's the other way around.
>>
>> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
>> > can.
>>
>> Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, for
>> that matter)
>> And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.
>
> So why is there this seemingly-arbitrary "can't do it via Fink"
> constraint?

    It's the difference between being the rule rather than the exception.

    This is why Ubuntu can manage automated installation of codecs right from 
it's media player. This would be an example of that "pervasive integration"
that Mac fanboys occaisionally like to crow about. The shell also has a nice
"perhaps you should install this package" feature if you try to run something
that isn't installed. It even does a decent job with misspellings.

[deletia]


-- 
	OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop.      |||
				                               / | \   

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
7DFB1F.21430014052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi:

> In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> 
>> He had one.....Safari.
> 
> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post here.
> 
> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
> 

No, actually if you'll notice this message comes from alt.cellular.attws 
the message was crossposted to.  I didn't even look to see how many 
crosspostings it was done on before replying.

I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.  What 
happened?  Why the crossposting any more?  I think I even saw a few on 
Verizon's newsgroup.

I'll respond to posts on the cellular newsgroups if you continue to 
crosspost to it.  Just take the cellular groups out and I won't see it.

Your choice.


-- 
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

On 2010-05-17, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> In article <slrnhv34dm.e1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
><jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>
>> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>> >> 
>> >> Nope.
>> >> 
>> >> It's the other way around.
>> >
>> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
>> > can.
>> 
>>      You will have to be a bit more specific than that.
>
> i've mentioned several. here's a list of a few:

    Actually, a lot of that comes under the heading of expensive payware
that is likely only used by pros or things that probably don't have Mac
versions either.

    Macs are only slightly ahead of Linux when it comes to 3rd party 
support and occasionally sometimes behind.

>
> photoshop, illustrator, the rest of the adobe creative suite,
> lightroom, aperture, final cut pro, itunes, garmin gps software, camera
> manufacturer's software (nikon nx, canon dpp, etc.), timbuktu,
> microsoft office and firmware updaters.
>
> don't forget that os x can run just about all linux software *plus* all
> of that.

    You can keep iTunes. Short of that whole ipod encryption thing, it's not
really useful for much. The same goes for monopoly office. I haven't needed 
to bother with it for years.

>
>> >> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package
>> >> management,
>> >> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't
>> >> be in
>> >> the form of some restrictive "apps store".
>> >
>> > there is package management, but very few people care about that. users
>> > much prefer drag install and drag to trash to delete.
>> 
>>      Yes, because we all know that n00b consumers want to have to remember
>> some obscure system detail rather than just double clicking on an installer
>> or just having it all happen automatically.
>
> what's to remember? drag the app to the applications folder or wherever

    Where you left it for one, if you decide to leave it in some some strange
out of the way place. Otherwise, you have to remember where "stuff is supposed
to go". Otherwise, if someone else tries to use you machine they will be 
unable to deal with it.

> you happen to want it to be. done.
>
> not only is it easier than running an installer which a lot of times

    No it isn't. You're just full of it.

> makes you click through several pages of options, but you can put it
> exactly where you want it, not where the installer thinks it should go.

    Shiny happy installers have always allowed for this while also typically
making sure that there is some pointer in some standard place so that you can
find the app again. Lemmings love to hammer this particular point.

-- 
	OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop.      |||
				                               / | \   

Peter K=F6hlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Peter K=F6hlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> nospam wrote:
> >> > In article <slrnhv2p88.ma6.j...@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
> >> > <j...@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>
> >> >> Nope.
>
> >> >> It's the other way around.
>
> >> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or window=
s
> >> > can.
>
> >> Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows,
> >> for that matter)
> >> And no, you can't run all the linux software on OSX via Fink.
>
> > So why is there this seemingly-arbitrary "can't do it via Fink"
> > constraint?
>
> Because you can't run all linux software with Fink. Not even the majority
> of it.

But isn't there a gross fallacy here in your logic because its
probably true of all OSs that one can't literally run *everything*
that has ever been written for even that OS?

Specifically, I'm thinking of OSs that have undergone many revisions
over the years, and as such, the latest version of the OS isn't
necessarily still 100% backwards-compatible with applications that
were compiled for the eariler versions.

And sure, one could suggest that one recompiles the source code to
take care of this problem, but golly gee:  even the allowed calls in
various higher level languages haven't remained utterly static over
the past 30+ years either:  running a modern compiler on old source
code isn't guarenteed to **never** choke.


>  Making your claim that OSX can run the most software of OSX,
> windows and linux quite ludicrous. If not an outright lie

Really, *I* made such a claim?  Golly, I can't ever recall doing so:
perhaps you could prove that you're not LYING again by providing a
citation where I did _alledgedy_ make such a claim.

....or at the very least, you can admit that you're using your bigotry
to try to slander every member of a particular community, based on the
isolated comments & wishes of just a few (or one).


> And nativly compiled unix-software for OSX? Forget it. That percentage is
> too small to be even on the radar, compared with the linux numbers
>
> > And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
> > this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
> > trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>
> It still has nothing to do with linux. You want to run non-OSX software o=
n
> your substandard OS. Too bad that it sucks so extremely badly at that

Actually, it does, since for the period that I was running Linux, I
found utterly ZERO compelling applications to justify keeping that OS
around.

Please note that I'm not claiming that OS X is the best OS, nor am I
claiming the same for Windows OS, or whatever else:  merely that Linux
didn't offer me any clear, obvious advantage in actual productive
applications to merit its adoption.

If you wish to actually advocate Linux, just build a convincing case:
what is compelling about the platform today that would actually make
it worthwhile for me to consider re-adopting it?


> > ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
> > again, and a Linux tool at that.
>
> I don't "blame" any tools. I have them setup exactly like they are
> intended to be

Oh, so then your prior claim that it automatically defaults to just
one, but this is "overlooked" by you (human error) is where you
previously lied ... "Check!"


> And now I activly bypass the setup.

Unfortunately, you are incorrect:  your follow-ups were once again set
to only CSMA, instead of all of the groups in the message you were
replying to.

So....are you going to now finally blame your (linux) tools again,
Peter?

Whoo - Hoo!  Golly, this really makes me want to go back to using
Linux...just like Peter!  :-)


> To bring your idiocy back to where it
> belongs.
> If you like it or not: You are filth, and I don't want your inane
> balderdash in COLA. You are way too stupid to debate with

Gosh, your lies are so obvious.   You're quite pathetic, Peter.    Now
here's a suggestion to you:  so that at least you're consistant in
your lies, take a few hours and *write them all down*.


-hh

-hh pulled this Usenet boner:

> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?

Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?

> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
> again, and a Linux tool at that.

Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.

-- 
Do not sleep in a eucalyptus tree tonight.

Hadron pulled this Usenet boner:

> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>
> Please post a link to me telling lies you creepy little arse kisser.

How many times can "Hadron" ask the same question, get at least one answer,
and yet ask it again and again.  'Tis the very definition of insanity.

> I can and will post them to YOUR lies.

No, "Hadron" can't.

> Dont you ever tire of humiliating yourself?

I have actually humiliated myself here in COLA only one time, when I
casually mentioned trying to download an illegal copy of PartitionMagic, a
few years ago.

I learned well from that mistake.  

Other mistakes that I made here have not bothered me as much as that one.

> Hint : that list WERE all Peter's mistakes.

"Hadron" can't even grok his *own* post!

   Message-ID: <hslgrr$ovp$2@news.eternal-september.org>

   > According to Creepy Chris Ahlstrom he's also a world class "crafter" of
   > C code.....
   >
   > Apparently he and Chris have read "articles" on C.
   >
   > Amazingly neither new that dereferencing a  null pointer in  C is a "no
                      ^k
   > no".

> He is a clueless idiot. Trust you to support him, you sycophantic little
> suck up.

"Hadron" seems to be a nancy-boy who has to puff himself up by insulting
others.  What did Edgar Rice Burroughs write about hate in his Tarzan
novels?

   http://www.classicreader.com/book/41/6/

   "...for one and all feared Rabba Kega, and to fear is to hate.

   "Thus it was that to his host of passive enemies, Tarzan of the Apes added
   that day two active foes, both of whom remained awake long into the night
   planning means of revenge upon the white devil-god who had brought them
   into ridicule and disrepute, but with their most malevolent schemings was
   mingled a vein of real fear and awe that would not down."

-- 
Never reveal your best argument.

In article <hss30m02m29@news2.newsguy.com>,
 "John B. Coarsey, PE" <jcoarsey<nospam>@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Peter K�hlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote in message 
> news:hsrt9t$thr$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> > nospam wrote:
> >
> >> > Let us know when OSX can run all the software linux can (or windows, 
> >> > for
> > that matter)
> 
> Or windows for that matter?
> 
> Ever heard of bootcamp?

Or Windows and Linux, at the same time, through one of a handful of 
virtualization solutions.

In article <Xns9D7BB667A320noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
 Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.  
> What happened?  Why the crossposting any more? 

Because Oxford is an idiot fanboi troll.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

In article <slrnhv3esi.624.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
<jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

> >> > hah. let me know when linux can run all the software a mac or windows
> >> > can.
> >> 
> >>      You will have to be a bit more specific than that.
> >
> > i've mentioned several. here's a list of a few:
> 
>     Actually, a lot of that comes under the heading of expensive payware
> that is likely only used by pros or things that probably don't have Mac
> versions either.

nope. photoshop elements, for example, is typically $50 new and often
bundled for *free* with cameras, scanners, etc., pros use the *full*
version of photoshop. garmin gps software is used by millions of
ordinary people hiking, driving and traveling. 

nikon and canon sold tens of millions of cameras last year, and a lot
of them use the nikon or canon software. not everyone uses lightroom or
aperture.

furthermore, everything i listed has a mac version except the
occasional firmware updater. 

>     Macs are only slightly ahead of Linux when it comes to 3rd party 
> support and occasionally sometimes behind.

it's way ahead. nothing i listed has any equivalence on linux.
openoffice is somewhat close to the real office, but there's still a
lot it doesn't get right, and it will *always* be a step behind the
current release of office.

> > photoshop, illustrator, the rest of the adobe creative suite,
> > lightroom, aperture, final cut pro, itunes, garmin gps software, camera
> > manufacturer's software (nikon nx, canon dpp, etc.), timbuktu,
> > microsoft office and firmware updaters.
> >
> > don't forget that os x can run just about all linux software *plus* all
> > of that.
> 
>     You can keep iTunes. Short of that whole ipod encryption thing, it's not
> really useful for much. The same goes for monopoly office. I haven't needed 
> to bother with it for years.

you may not need it but millions of people use both itunes and office
every day. 

apple has sold 250 million ipods and 50 million iphones, so that's 300
million right there, plus some unknown number of users who use itunes
without an ipod or an iphone. 

microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute. 

> >>      Yes, because we all know that n00b consumers want to have to remember
> >> some obscure system detail rather than just double clicking on an installer
> >> or just having it all happen automatically.
> >
> > what's to remember? drag the app to the applications folder or wherever
> 
>     Where you left it for one, if you decide to leave it in some some strange
> out of the way place. Otherwise, you have to remember where "stuff is supposed
> to go". Otherwise, if someone else tries to use you machine they will be 
> unable to deal with it.

oh please. people don't drag things to random locations. they almost
always drag it to the applications folder or sometimes the desktop (for
convenience). nevertheless, for those who do forget, they can use
spotlight search and type in the first few letters to find the app,
wherever it may be. in fact, some users find this to be faster.

and what if they had an installer, installed it to a non-standard
location and forgot? or does that not apply in your twisted world?

> > you happen to want it to be. done.
> >
> > not only is it easier than running an installer which a lot of times
> 
>     No it isn't. You're just full of it.

that's a solid argument. not.

> > makes you click through several pages of options, but you can put it
> > exactly where you want it, not where the installer thinks it should go.
> 
>     Shiny happy installers have always allowed for this while also typically
> making sure that there is some pointer in some standard place so that you can
> find the app again. Lemmings love to hammer this particular point.

sure, there are installers with all sorts of options. meanwhile,
drag-install is simple and quick.

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
4197F5.15440617052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi:

> In article <Xns9D7BB667A320noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> 
>> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.  
>> What happened?  Why the crossposting any more? 
> 
> Because Oxford is an idiot fanboi troll.
> 

If that's the explanation, expect to see reply posts from alt.cellular far 
into the future.



-- 
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

On May 17, 6:11=A0pm, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>
> > And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
> > this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
> > trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>
> Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?

Not plausible, since Peter only cuts & runs when he's lost the point.
As such, it is quite obvious that it's an attempt to not look bad in
front of his "peers".  Congratulations.


> > ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
> > again, and a Linux tool at that.
>
> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.


Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's all
very predictable.


-hh
> --
> Do not sleep in a eucalyptus tree tonight.

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
>> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
>> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>
> Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?

LOL! Even MORE sucking up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Koehlmann only snips when he has been made to look an arse as usual. And
as usual, the sight of an "advocate's" arse to kiss has you skipping
over with your tail wagging.


>
>> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
>> again, and a Linux tool at that.
>
> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.

We know which tool you're thinking of. And it's underneath Peter's
leather shorts ....

Ye Gods. Do you never tire of sucking up?

Hadron wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
> 
>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
>>> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
>>> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>> Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?
> 
> LOL! Even MORE sucking up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Koehlmann only snips when he has been made to look an arse as usual. And
> as usual, the sight of an "advocate's" arse to kiss has you skipping
> over with your tail wagging.
> 
> 
>>> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
>>> again, and a Linux tool at that.
>> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
> 
> We know which tool you're thinking of. And it's underneath Peter's
> leather shorts ....
> 
> Ye Gods. Do you never tire of sucking up?
> 

Hadron, read back what you just wrote then think to yourself what would 
a casual reader (who doesn't know about your previous posting fetishes) 
think about you.

Who is really looking the "arse" here?

Grow up Hadron.  Most of us grew out of your behaviour years ago before 
we hit 16.

-- 
Openbytes the Linux/FOSS Blogazine! - http://www.openbytes.wordpress.com
"Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui."
Catch me in #boycottnovell on freenode.net

Goblin <bytes4free@googlemail.com> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>> 
>>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
>>>> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
>>>> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>>> Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?
>> 
>> LOL! Even MORE sucking up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> 
>> Koehlmann only snips when he has been made to look an arse as usual. And
>> as usual, the sight of an "advocate's" arse to kiss has you skipping
>> over with your tail wagging.
>> 
>> 
>>>> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
>>>> again, and a Linux tool at that.
>>> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>> 
>> We know which tool you're thinking of. And it's underneath Peter's
>> leather shorts ....
>> 
>> Ye Gods. Do you never tire of sucking up?
>> 
>
> Hadron, read back what you just wrote then think to yourself what would 
> a casual reader (who doesn't know about your previous posting fetishes) 
> think about you.
>
> Who is really looking the "arse" here?
>
> Grow up Hadron.  Most of us grew out of your behaviour years ago before 
> we hit 16.


Pathetic Gobbler. Truly pathetic.

Ahlstrom shows a trait for sucking up and ANYONE that follows the
threads will see that.

So yes Peter was made to look an arse. Yes he did snip and run and yes
he only does that when proven wrong AGAIN.

And guess who comes riding into town to kiss his butt and try to protect
him? Yup. Liarmutt.

Hadron wrote:
> Goblin <bytes4free@googlemail.com> writes:
> 
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> And since this is a question about running Linux, that clearly makes
>>>>> this subthread on-topic to COLA, so then why was COLA (once again)
>>>>> trimmed from Peter's "Follow-ups-To" field?
>>>> Probably because he doesn't want to inflict your posts on us?
>>> LOL! Even MORE sucking up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> Koehlmann only snips when he has been made to look an arse as usual. And
>>> as usual, the sight of an "advocate's" arse to kiss has you skipping
>>> over with your tail wagging.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> ...just waiting to see if Peter is going to try to blame his tools
>>>>> again, and a Linux tool at that.
>>>> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>>> We know which tool you're thinking of. And it's underneath Peter's
>>> leather shorts ....
>>>
>>> Ye Gods. Do you never tire of sucking up?
>>>
>> Hadron, read back what you just wrote then think to yourself what would 
>> a casual reader (who doesn't know about your previous posting fetishes) 
>> think about you.
>>
>> Who is really looking the "arse" here?
>>
>> Grow up Hadron.  Most of us grew out of your behaviour years ago before 
>> we hit 16.
> 
> 
> Pathetic Gobbler. Truly pathetic.
> 
> Ahlstrom shows a trait for sucking up and ANYONE that follows the
> threads will see that.
> 
> So yes Peter was made to look an arse. Yes he did snip and run and yes
> he only does that when proven wrong AGAIN.
> 
> And guess who comes riding into town to kiss his butt and try to protect
> him? Yup. Liarmutt.
> 

"Pathetic Gobbler. Truly pathetic."

Yep.  Challenging your childish behaviour must be truly pathetic.

I hope you will forgive me for not holding any worth in your comment. 
After all, many of your posts seem to be about bottoms.

Youre a very naughty boy Hadron.

-- 
Openbytes the Linux/FOSS Blogazine! - http://www.openbytes.wordpress.com
"Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui."
Catch me in #boycottnovell on freenode.net

On 10-05-17 11:47 , JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2010-05-14, Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10-05-14 14:48 , Oxford wrote:
>>> Peter K=C3=B6hlmann<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagin=
ation
>>>
>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset th=
at
>>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>
>> Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>
> Nope.
>
> It's the other way around.
>
> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package man=
agement,
> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won'=
t be in
> the form of some restrictive "apps store".

Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that=20
Linux cert?

I've had no trouble with any installs for Mac OS X (other than a recent=20
DL of two items for which workarounds worked).  I've had all sorts of=20
Linux package installation issues over the last 10 years with packages=20
that would not install (and _work_) w/o repair magic from assorted web=20
wizards.

Face it, Linux for the masses is just not going to happen.

>>> http://www.apple.com/ipad/gallery/#ad
>>
>> Yeah, too bad it's not the Mac OS X that's in there.
>>
>
> Yeah, about that...
>
> iPad:/Applications root# uname -a
> Darwin iPad 10.3.1 Darwin Kernel Version 10.3.1: Mon Mar 15 23:15:33 PD=
T 2010; root:xnu-1504.2.27~18/RELEASE_ARM_S5L8930X iPad1,1 arm K48AP Darw=
in
>
> iPad:/Applications root# ls
> AppStore.app/        Maps.app/               MobileNotes.app/      Term=
inal.app/
> Cydia.app/           MobileAddressBook.app/  MobileSafari.app/     Web.=
app/
> DataActivation.app/  MobileCal.app/          MobileSlideShow.app/  WebS=
heet.app/
> DemoApp.app/         MobileMail.app/         MobileStore.app/      What=
IP.app/
> FieldTest.app/       MobileMusicPlayer.app/  Preferences.app/      YouT=
ube.app/

I said "Max OS X" not 'iPad OS X' - do pay attention.

--=20
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

In article <Xns9D7BB667A320noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
> 7DFB1F.21430014052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi:
> 
> > In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
> >  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> He had one.....Safari.
> > 
> > so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post here.
> > 
> > You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
> > 
> 
> No, actually if you'll notice this message comes from alt.cellular.attws 
> the message was crossposted to.  I didn't even look to see how many 
> crosspostings it was done on before replying.
> 
> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.  What 
> happened?  Why the crossposting any more?  I think I even saw a few on 
> Verizon's newsgroup.

It's the idiot trolls like you who crosspost their nonsense to multiple
newsgroups because they think they're being funny  or clever ... in fact
they're neither, just immmature idiots.

On 2010-05-18, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> On May 17, 6:11 pm, Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:

>> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>
>
> Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's all
> very predictable.

Wonderful another filter to add:

	X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit

>> --
>> Do not sleep in a eucalyptus tree tonight.

Can't even do a proper signature delimiter. App-hole is getting as
sloppy as MICROS~1. Then again, maybe they already were and I never
noticed.

-- 
It's been lovely, but I have to scream now.
Aspire One, Linux Mint 8 (LXDE)
Friends don't let friends use Windows

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
> spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
> it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute. 

Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.

And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.

If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs with
OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office users, and
they will quite likely never be the wiser.

There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go out
of your way to find them.

-- 
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time
to reform.
		-- Mark Twain

Goblin pulled this Usenet boner:

> Hadron wrote:
>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>
>>>> LOL! Even MORE sucking up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>> Koehlmann only snips when he has been made to look an arse as usual. And
>>>> as usual, the sight of an "advocate's" arse to kiss has you skipping
>>>> over with your tail wagging.
>>>>
>>>> We know which tool you're thinking of. And it's underneath Peter's
>>>> leather shorts ....
>>>>
>>>> Ye Gods. Do you never tire of sucking up?
>> 
>> Pathetic Gobbler. Truly pathetic.
>> 
>> Ahlstrom shows a trait for sucking up and ANYONE that follows the
>> threads will see that.
>> 
>> So yes Peter was made to look an arse. Yes he did snip and run and yes
>> he only does that when proven wrong AGAIN.
>> 
>> And guess who comes riding into town to kiss his butt and try to protect
>> him? Yup. Liarmutt.
>
> "Pathetic Gobbler. Truly pathetic."
>
> Yep.  Challenging your childish behaviour must be truly pathetic.
>
> I hope you will forgive me for not holding any worth in your comment. 
> After all, many of your posts seem to be about bottoms.
>
> Youre a very naughty boy Hadron.

"Hadron" is a kid who likes to troll, and look quite ridiculous doing it.

This "sucking up" talk is for childish morons.

"Hadron"'s interpretations of events and posts have always been seriously
askew, sometimes to an insane degree.

The strange thing is that "Hadron" thinks his kindergarten insults impress
people.  Sorry, "Hadron", anyone who sees words like "Liarmutt", "arse
kiss", "Gobbler", and "sucking up" thinks you are childish, stupid, an
annoying troll, or all of the above.

-- 
He is now rising from affluence to poverty.
		-- Mark Twain

In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
> > spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
> > it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute. 
> 
> Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.

i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.

> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.

it's good, but not perfect. 

> If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs with
> OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office users, and
> they will quite likely never be the wiser.

in other words, sharing documents with those who use ms office itself
may not always work. thanks for proving my point.

> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go out
> of your way to find them.

not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
openoffice failed to handle them properly.

On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:31 -0400, nospam wrote:

> In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
>> > microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
>> > spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
>> > it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute.
>> 
>> Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.
> 
> i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
> unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.
> 
>> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
> 
> it's good, but not perfect.
> 
>> If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs
>> with OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office
>> users, and they will quite likely never be the wiser.
> 
> in other words, sharing documents with those who use ms office itself
> may not always work. thanks for proving my point.
> 
>> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to
>> go out of your way to find them.
> 
> not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
> weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
> openoffice failed to handle them properly.

I've heard similar complaints from MS Office users who were sent
documents prepared by other MS Office users.

hotfoot stated in post nbSdnRtt8ISTk2_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/17/10 8:48 PM:

> On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:31 -0400, nospam wrote:
> 
>> In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
>>>> spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
>>>> it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute.
>>> 
>>> Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.
>> 
>> i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
>> unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.
>> 
>>> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>> 
>> it's good, but not perfect.
>> 
>>> If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs
>>> with OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office
>>> users, and they will quite likely never be the wiser.
>> 
>> in other words, sharing documents with those who use ms office itself
>> may not always work. thanks for proving my point.
>> 
>>> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to
>>> go out of your way to find them.
>> 
>> not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
>> weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
>> openoffice failed to handle them properly.
> 
> I've heard similar complaints from MS Office users who were sent
> documents prepared by other MS Office users.

The idea it is hard to find examples where OO does not handle Word files
well is rather silly:

    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OfficeComp/>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/OfficeComp2/>


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article <170520102208311235%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
> > > microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
> > > spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
> > > it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute. 
> > 
> > Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.
> 
> i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
> unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.

True. Probably for about 1% of people even the Mac version of MS Office
won't be good enough, especially the current version without VBA / macro
support.




> > And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
> 
> it's good, but not perfect. 
> 
> > If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs with
> > OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office users, and
> > they will quite likely never be the wiser.
> 
> in other words, sharing documents with those who use ms office itself
> may not always work. thanks for proving my point.

Sharing documents between different versions of Office itself, whether Mac
or Windows, isn't 100% guaranteed to work (even ignoring the new "docx"
file formats).



> > There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go out
> > of your way to find them.
> 
> not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
> weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
> openoffice failed to handle them properly.

One of the  problems will be missing fonts. When you install Mac Office
you also get the standard Windows fonts like Arial, Verdana, etc. Those
fonts won't come with Open Office, iWork or any other alternative,
although there may be alternative fonts that are "close enough" and a good
application will try hard to make the substitutes work. 

There are also problems caused by the difference in the way the OSes
render of fonts that can cause lines of text to alter ... even when using
Mac Office.

In article
<your.name-1805101621190001@203-109-169-111.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, Your
Name <your.name@isp.com> wrote:

> > i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
> > unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.
> 
> True. Probably for about 1% of people even the Mac version of MS Office
> won't be good enough, especially the current version without VBA / macro
> support.

that was an unfortunate omission that's coming back in the next version.

however, mac office 2004 has vba and the entire suite is significantly
faster, even when emulated.

Michelle Steiner wrote:

> In article <Xns9D7BB667A320noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> 
>> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.
>> What happened?  Why the crossposting any more?
> 
> Because Oxford is an idiot fanboi troll.
> 

He is one of yours. He is a fanboi and cargo cult member.
He is going out of his way to demonstrate that apple fans are childish, 
stupid people.
A typical Mac user from CSMA. Calling him "dumb" would insult real dumb 
people
-- 
You're not my type.  For that matter, you're not even my species

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that 
> Linux cert?

 *chuckle*

> I've had no trouble with any installs for Mac OS X (other than a recent 
> DL of two items for which workarounds worked).  I've had all sorts of 
> Linux package installation issues over the last 10 years with packages 
> that would not install (and _work_) w/o repair magic from assorted web 
> wizards.

Are you installing OS X on non-Apple hardware?

> Face it, Linux for the masses is just not going to happen.

It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted response from
Microsoft for quite a few years now.

-- 
Give him an evasive answer.

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> > microsoft office is the defacto standard for word processing,
>> > spreadsheets and presentations. openoffice is not fully compatible.
>> > it's not bad, but it is *not* a substitute. 
>> 
>> Actually, for about 95% of the people who use MS Office, it is.
>
> i said it's not bad, and for the remaining 5% (assuming your
> unsubstantiated numbers are true), it's not a substitute.
>
>> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>
> it's good, but not perfect. 

It doesn't need to be perfect.

>> If you never let MS Office corrupt the document, you can create docs with
>> OpenOffice and Save As when you need to share them with MS Office users, and
>> they will quite likely never be the wiser.
>
> in other words, sharing documents with those who use ms office itself
> may not always work. thanks for proving my point.

Some people will oblige if you ask them to stick with open formats.

Others are more stubborn.

>> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go
>> out of your way to find them.
>
> not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
> weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
> openoffice failed to handle them properly.

Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to Microsoft's
latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously dependent on the
fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.

The OpenOffice people do a marvelous job in reverse engineering.  I've found
this application to be *indispensible* in our Microsoft-soaked office
environment at work.  I regulary generate spreadsheets with OO and export
them to MSO to distribute to fellow workers.  And this is from a 64-bit
system to others' 32-bit systems.

I have found issues, but, since I use styles properly, and make sure I
install the Windows fonts, I've had to go out of the way to find problems.

As far as editing goes, although I'm not fond of either product, I do like
some aspects of how OO handles editing.

-- 
Q:	Are we not men?
A:	We are Vaxen.

hotfoot pulled this Usenet boner:

> On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:31 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
>> In article <hssrio$219$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to
>>> go out of your way to find them.
>> 
>> not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
>> weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
>> openoffice failed to handle them properly.
>
> I've heard similar complaints from MS Office users who were sent
> documents prepared by other MS Office users.

Exactly.  I had somebody complain about my edits affecting spreadsheet
pagination, when I had edited the spreadsheet in Excel 2003 in an XP VM.

Turns out that my default printer could not handle 11x17, so Excel
obligingly disabled it for me, and *saved* the setting.  Truly stupid in a
office/drafting environment with multiple varieties of printers.

-- 
Rebellion lay in his way, and he found it.
		-- William Shakespeare, "Henry IV"

In article <hstf94$n9j$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.
> >> What happened?  Why the crossposting any more?
> > 
> > Because Oxford is an idiot fanboi troll.
> > 
> 
> He is one of yours. 

Unfortunately.

> He is a fanboi and cargo cult member.

True, but fortunately, they are a rare breed.

> He is going out of his way to demonstrate that apple fans are childish, 
> stupid people.

No, he demonstrates that his is a childish, stupid person.  And you 
demonstrate that you are equally childish and stupid.

> A typical Mac user from CSMA.

I wouldn't know; the only times I see messages which are posted to CMSA are 
when they are crosspost to the iPhone newsgroup.

But if you hate Apple so much, why do you bother to post in a Mac 
newsgroup?  Oh, don't bother to answer because (1) I won't see your 
response since you changed the follow-ups, and (2) I already know why you 
do: you're an Apple-hating troll.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Your Name wrote:
> In article <Xns9D7BB667A320noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
> <noone@home.com> wrote:
> 
>> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
>> 7DFB1F.21430014052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi:
>>
>>> In article <Xns9D7944424988noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>>>  Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> He had one.....Safari.
>>> so your "goodbye" was a lie, just like almost everything you post here.
>>>
>>> You and Oxford are two sides of the same coin: bigots and trolls.
>>>
>> No, actually if you'll notice this message comes from alt.cellular.attws 
>> the message was crossposted to.  I didn't even look to see how many 
>> crosspostings it was done on before replying.
>>
>> I thought you iphone/ipad people were going to your own newsgroups.  What 
>> happened?  Why the crossposting any more?  I think I even saw a few on 
>> Verizon's newsgroup.
> 
> It's the idiot trolls like you who crosspost their nonsense to multiple
> newsgroups because they think they're being funny  or clever ... in fact
> they're neither, just immmature idiots.


So what's your excuse, fuckwit?  Stuck in a three-way on Cupidtino with 
little mickey and Oxtard?

In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
> >
> > it's good, but not perfect. 
> 
> It doesn't need to be perfect.

yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
like when things do not work.

and what about outlook? 

> >> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go
> >> out of your way to find them.
> >
> > not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
> > weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
> > openoffice failed to handle them properly.
> 
> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to Microsoft's
> latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously dependent on the
> fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.

i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the
fact that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to be
fully compatible with the rest of the world.

On 2010-05-18, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
> On 10-05-17 11:47 , JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> On 2010-05-14, Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10-05-14 14:48 , Oxford wrote:
>>>> Peter Köhlmann<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oxford is a brillant Mac user from Earth. A genius way beyond imagination
>>>>
>>>> poor Peter, still bitter after all these years... he's still upset that
>>>> OSX neutered Linux as it was trying to sprout. Now Linux is a ghost
>>>> town, just as i predicted years ago.
>>>
>>> Mac OS X - what Linux wants to be when it grows up.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> It's the other way around.
>>
>> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package management,
>> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't be in
>> the form of some restrictive "apps store".
>
> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that 
> Linux cert?
>
> I've had no trouble with any installs for Mac OS X (other than a recent 
> DL of two items for which workarounds worked).  I've had all sorts of 
> Linux package installation issues over the last 10 years with packages 

    Bullshit.

[deletia]
>> iPad:/Applications root# uname -a
>> Darwin iPad 10.3.1 Darwin Kernel Version 10.3.1: Mon Mar 15 23:15:33 PDT 2010; root:xnu-1504.2.27~18/RELEASE_ARM_S5L8930X iPad1,1 arm K48AP Darwin
>>
>> iPad:/Applications root# ls
>> AppStore.app/        Maps.app/               MobileNotes.app/      Terminal.app/
>> Cydia.app/           MobileAddressBook.app/  MobileSafari.app/     Web.app/
>> DataActivation.app/  MobileCal.app/          MobileSlideShow.app/  WebSheet.app/
>> DemoApp.app/         MobileMail.app/         MobileStore.app/      WhatIP.app/
>> FieldTest.app/       MobileMusicPlayer.app/  Preferences.app/      YouTube.app/
>
> I said "Max OS X" not 'iPad OS X' - do pay attention.
>

What part of DARWIN didn't you get?

This must be like those "package problems" of yours.

-- 
	OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop.      |||
				                               / | \   

Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>
> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions. =A0It's all
> > very predictable.
>
> Wonderful another filter to add:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit


Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.

I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.




> >> --
> >> Do not sleep in a eucalyptus tree tonight.
>
> Can't even do a proper signature delimiter. App-hole is getting as
> sloppy as MICROS~1. Then again, maybe they already were and I never
> noticed.

Actually, try continuing to read those headers:  you'll find that it
is Google's web based interface that doesn't do it properly (as is
also the case here, under a different OS).

While I've not bothered to test this in Linux, I believe that this is
OS independent, and based on web standards, *should* be OS
independent.

If you wish to test this under Linux, please go knock yourself out.

However, do realize that this is a "damned if you do, and damned if
you don't" situation of a Pyrrhic victory (at best):   the
implications are that if Linux OS is different in that it strips
the .SIG, then this action also proves that Linux thus fails on
consistency in webpage viewing/use convention.  In other words, if you
win this little battle, you lose the war.  Of course, if you lose the
battle, your above claim is also wrong, so you still lost anyway.

So...are you feeling lucky?  Feel free to choose which way you
lose ;-)



-hh

On 2010-05-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
><ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>> >
>> > it's good, but not perfect. 
>> 
>> It doesn't need to be perfect.
>
> yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
> like when things do not work.

      If it needs to be perfect then only the lastest release of the 
Windows version of MSO will do. They Mac only loses with an argument
like this one.

>
> and what about outlook? 
>
>> >> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have to go
>> >> out of your way to find them.
>> >
>> > not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
>> > weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text) and
>> > openoffice failed to handle them properly.
>> 
>> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to Microsoft's
>> latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously dependent on the
>> fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.
>
> i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the
> fact that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to be
> fully compatible with the rest of the world.

    No not really.

    Although that's no place that an Apple fanboy even wants to go.

    The only way a Mac will be "fully compatible" is the same way Linux is.

-- 
	OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop.      |||
				                               / | \   

-hh wrote:

> Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>>
>> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's all
>> > very predictable.
>>
>> Wonderful another filter to add:
>>
>> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
> 
> 
> Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
> 
> I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
> personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.

No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight

And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because up 
to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a frothing 
imbecile
-- 
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

In article <slrnhv59bk.qhr.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH
<jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:

>       If it needs to be perfect then only the lastest release of the 
> Windows version of MSO will do. They Mac only loses with an argument
> like this one.

nope. mac office and windows office leapfrog each other. when mac
office 2010 comes out, it will do more than the current version of
windows office. then, when the next version of windows office comes
out, it will do more than the mac version.

On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:12:54 -0400, nospam wrote:

> In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
>> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>> >
>> > it's good, but not perfect.
>> 
>> It doesn't need to be perfect.

Don't you know, Chris? MS is the end-all and be-all of technological
innovation. They set the standard by which all other software is judged.
If it isn't 110% compatible with its Microsoft counterpart then nobody
will ever use it in a million billion years.

Of course, since Microsoft holds the source code, keeps the data formats
to itself, and can freely introduce arbitrary changes to foil would-be
competitors, nobody has any hope whatsoever of ever achieving 110%
compatibility. So, I guess MS will just rule our lives forever and ever.

/sarcasm

> 
> yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
> like when things do not work.

That's why a bunch of them got together and created OpenOffice and the
ODF standard.

> and what about outlook?

Somehow I've managed to live without it all these decades...

>> >> There are some weak areas in OO to MSO compatibility, but you have
>> >> to go out of your way to find them.
>> >
>> > not really. i've had people send me complex documents (actually, they
>> > weren't really that complex, but more than just paragraphs of text)
>> > and openoffice failed to handle them properly.
>> 
>> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to
>> Microsoft's latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously
>> dependent on the fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.
> 
> i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the fact
> that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to be fully
> compatible with the rest of the world.

OpenOffice uses an open document format that has been accepted as an
international standard and is used worldwide by corporations,
governments, and hundreds of millions of users. According to wikipedia,
15-20% of businesses were using OpenOffice in 2004 and a 2010 study put
usage at 9% in the US and UK and over 20% in Poland, the Czech
Republic, and Germany. That's just for OpenOffice, which is only one of
about 15 office applications that now read/write ODF.

If MS Office can't reliably process ODF then it's MS Office that needs to
do the catching-up.

In article <n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
<hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
> > like when things do not work.
> 
> That's why a bunch of them got together and created OpenOffice and the
> ODF standard.

which doesn't matter if someone sends you a .doc file.

> > and what about outlook?
> 
> Somehow I've managed to live without it all these decades...

maybe you have managed to do so, but there are millions of people who
use it daily, many of whom are *required* to use it for work. 

> According to wikipedia,
> 15-20% of businesses were using OpenOffice in 2004 and a 2010 study put
> usage at 9% in the US and UK and over 20% in Poland, the Czech
> Republic, and Germany. That's just for OpenOffice, which is only one of
> about 15 office applications that now read/write ODF.

which means that 80-91% are not. that's a *lot* of people.

> If MS Office can't reliably process ODF then it's MS Office that needs to
> do the catching-up.

maybe so, but since over 80% of people use office by your numbers, it's
the defacto standard.

your.name@isp.com (Your Name) wrote in news:your.name-1805101313560001@203-
109-168-207.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz:

> It's the idiot trolls like you who crosspost their nonsense to multiple
> newsgroups because they think they're being funny  or clever ... in fact
> they're neither, just immmature idiots.
> 
> 

No, it's the idiot fanboiz like YOU who keep crossposting trying to stir up 
the non-Apple people outside the Apple Reality Distortion Zone you live in.  
You are constantly trolling everyone who isn't a fan on his knees when Jobs 
enters the shithouse.



-- 
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> -hh wrote:
> 
> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
> >>
> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's all
> >> > very predictable.
> >>
> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
> >>
> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
> > 
> > 
> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
> > 
> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
> > personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
> 
> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
> 
> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because up 
> to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a frothing 
> imbecile

I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious 
asshole you are.

I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere 
else.  So what exactly DO you like?

-- 
Lloyd

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>> >
>> > it's good, but not perfect. 
>> 
>> It doesn't need to be perfect.
>
> yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
> like when things do not work.

Why does it need to be perfect when MS Office itself is not perfect, unless
both parties that share documents have:

   -  The same OS version and updates
   -  The same MS Office version
   -  The same installed fonts
   -  The same printer driver

> and what about outlook? 

I've found Evolution to be indispensible as a near-replacement for Outlook.
I use it many times per day, on Linux, in an all-Windows office environment.

You can also use davmail.  It is a lot more flexible, but of course the most
recent version of MS Exchange apparently no longer supports WebDAV access.

>> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to Microsoft's
>> latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously dependent on the
>> fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.
>
> i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the
> fact that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to be
> fully compatible with the rest of the world.

Nah, that's Mr-Gotta-Be-Perfect fanboi nonsense.

For almost all use cases I've encountered at work, and for ALL use cases at
home, OpenOffice and MS Office are essentially fully compatible.

And if they aren't I would ask the other party to download and install this
wonderful free/Free product!

-- 
You definitely intend to start living sometime soon.

Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> writes:

> In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
>  Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> -hh wrote:
>> 
>> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>> >>
>> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's all
>> >> > very predictable.
>> >>
>> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
>> >>
>> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>> > 
>> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
>> > personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>> 
>> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>> 
>> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because up 
>> to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a frothing 
>> imbecile
>
> I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious 
> asshole you are.
>
> I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere 
> else.  So what exactly DO you like?

He likes Chris Ahlstrom sucking up to him (Creepy Chris referred to
Kohlkopf as a "world class master programmer" or words to that affect,
and he likes getting publicly humiliated on a regular basis. He has made
some strange claims including but not limited to:-

You can not see Anti Aliasing in a snapshot image.
It is perfectly legal to dereference a null pointer in C.

In short he is a frothing arsehole as you rightly surmise.

Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
>  Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> -hh wrote:
>> 
>> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>> >>
>> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
>> >> > all very predictable.
>> >>
>> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
>> >>
>> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>> > 
>> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
>> > your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>> 
>> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>> 
>> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
>> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
>> frothing imbecile
> 
> I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
> asshole you are.

You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet 
hasn't been needed
You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like 
Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of 
apple cretins

> I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
> else.  So what exactly DO you like?
> 
I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last 
laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say 
so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either 
except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been 
set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth 
like flatfish or Hadron Quark

Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?
-- 
Only two things are infinite,
 the Universe and Stupidity.
And I'm not quite sure about the former.
        - Albert Einstein

Peter Köhlmann stated in post hsul7g$7mh$03$1@news.t-online.com on 5/18/10
11:10 AM:

> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> 
>> In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
>>  Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> -hh wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>>>>>> avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
>>>>>> all very predictable.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wonderful another filter to add:
>>>>> 
>>>>> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>>>> 
>>>> I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>>>> blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
>>>> your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>>> 
>>> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>>> 
>>> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
>>> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
>>> frothing imbecile
>> 
>> I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
>> asshole you are.
> 
> You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet
> hasn't been needed
> You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like
> Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of
> apple cretins
> 
>> I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
>> else.  So what exactly DO you like?
>> 
> I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last
> laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
> In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say
> so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either
> except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been
> set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth
> like flatfish or Hadron Quark
> 
> Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?

You again proved how much you loath yourself.  It is the reason you put
others down, even when you cannot support a single one of your accusations.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article <hsul7g$7mh$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> 
> > In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
> >  Peter K?hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> > 
> >> -hh wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> >> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> >> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
> >> >> > all very predictable.
> >> >>
> >> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
> >> >>
> >> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
> >> > 
> >> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> >> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
> >> > your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
> >> 
> >> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
> >> 
> >> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
> >> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
> >> frothing imbecile
> > 
> > I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
> > asshole you are.
> 
> You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet 
> hasn't been needed
> You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like 
> Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of 
> apple cretins
> 
And yet I've not seen an 'expert' post by you.  Always the same, 
regardless if it is Apple people or others, always negative, always 
snide, always boorish.  Even to most Linux advocates that are here.

> > I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
> > else.  So what exactly DO you like?
> > 
> I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last 
> laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
> In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say 
> so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either 
> except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been 
> set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth 
> like flatfish or Hadron Quark
>
Very nice, an equal opportunity hater!  At least you are consistent.
 
> Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?

Oh it is very clear, you have described your total outlook about 
everything while trying to hide it in hatred of all things not Linux, 
except that most of your Linux posts aren't any better.

-- 
Lloyd

On Tue, 18 May 2010 13:58:51 -0500, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>In article <hsul7g$7mh$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
> Peter K??hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

>> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> 
>> > In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
>> >  Peter K?hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> -hh wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>> >> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>> >> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
>> >> >> > all very predictable.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>> >> > 
>> >> > 
>> >> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>> >> > 
>> >> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>> >> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
>> >> > your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>> >> 
>> >> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>> >> 
>> >> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
>> >> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
>> >> frothing imbecile
>> > 
>> > I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
>> > asshole you are.
>> 
>> You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet 
>> hasn't been needed
>> You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like 
>> Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of 
>> apple cretins
>> 
>And yet I've not seen an 'expert' post by you.  Always the same, 
>regardless if it is Apple people or others, always negative, always 
>snide, always boorish.  Even to most Linux advocates that are here.

>> > I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
>> > else.  So what exactly DO you like?
>> > 
>> I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last 
>> laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
>> In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say 
>> so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either 
>> except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been 
>> set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth 
>> like flatfish or Hadron Quark
>>
>Very nice, an equal opportunity hater!  At least you are consistent.
> 
>> Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?

>Oh it is very clear, you have described your total outlook about 
>everything while trying to hide it in hatred of all things not Linux, 
>except that most of your Linux posts aren't any better.

Oh you poor baby.  

In article <slrnhv5p4f.trf.aznomad.3@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net>,
 AZ Nomad <aznomad.3@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote:

> On Tue, 18 May 2010 13:58:51 -0500, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> 
> wrote:
> >In article <hsul7g$7mh$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
> > Peter K??hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
> >> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> >> 
> >> > In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
> >> >  Peter K?hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> > 
> >> >> -hh wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> >> >> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> >> >> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
> >> >> >> > all very predictable.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> >> >> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
> >> >> > your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
> >> >> 
> >> >> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
> >> >> 
> >> >> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
> >> >> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
> >> >> frothing imbecile
> >> > 
> >> > I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
> >> > asshole you are.
> >> 
> >> You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet 
> >> hasn't been needed
> >> You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like 
> >> Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of 
> >> apple cretins
> >> 
> >And yet I've not seen an 'expert' post by you.  Always the same, 
> >regardless if it is Apple people or others, always negative, always 
> >snide, always boorish.  Even to most Linux advocates that are here.
> 
> >> > I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
> >> > else.  So what exactly DO you like?
> >> > 
> >> I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last 
> >> laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
> >> In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say 
> >> so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either 
> >> except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been 
> >> set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth 
> >> like flatfish or Hadron Quark
> >>
> >Very nice, an equal opportunity hater!  At least you are consistent.
> > 
> >> Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?
> 
> >Oh it is very clear, you have described your total outlook about 
> >everything while trying to hide it in hatred of all things not Linux, 
> >except that most of your Linux posts aren't any better.
> 
> Oh you poor baby.  

Why thanks for your sympathy.  But I haven't been a baby or even very 
young, for a lot of years.  But I do like to call an asshole out now and 
then.

-- 
Lloyd

On May 18, 10:40=A0am, Peter K=F6hlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de>
wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>
> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions. =A0It's al=
l
> >> > very predictable.
>
> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
>
> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>
> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>
> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
> > personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>
> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight

Too bad I was talking to Sinister Midget...or are you claiming him to
be a sockpuppet?


> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea.

Yet you missed the point.  Hardly surprising.


> Because up to now there hasn't been a single poster from
> CSMA who isn't a frothing imbecile

....and to which the COLA posters are **Jealous**?  :-)


BTW Peter, I do owe you a brief apology:  I missed that Apple has flip-
flopped on the inclusion of a firewire port on the $999 MacBook; it
currently (and again) doesn't have any FW port.   YMMV to what degree
this oversight on my part is in comparison to how broadly Apple still
has FW ports across their Macintosh product lines (ie, the others
being the three MacBook Pro sizes, the two iMac sizes, and the Mac Pro
tower), which is something which you chose to totally overlook.

Similarly YMMV, this is also before also considering the degree to
which wireless interfaces have been increasingly usurping the need to
physically plug in for anything other than power (and even power may
very well go wireless within the next decade too, via inductive
coupling), which has the potential to make nearly all debates on
hardwired interfaces - - be it between FW, USB, eSATA  or Ethernet - -
increasingly moot.


-hh

--
YA post that's pisses off fanboys while not using X-HTTP-
UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit

"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> I have found issues, but, since I use styles properly, and make sure I
> install the Windows fonts, I've had to go out of the way to find problems.

The Windows fonts are copyright to Microsoft. You are not allowed to install
them separately - that's called piracy.

That's why the Mac version of Office comes with the appropriate
cross-platform fonts. It's the only legal way to get them.

On Tue, 18 May 2010 12:04:34 -0400, nospam wrote:

> In article <n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> > yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users
>> > don't like when things do not work.
>> 
>> That's why a bunch of them got together and created OpenOffice and the
>> ODF standard.
> 
> which doesn't matter if someone sends you a .doc file.

That's right, it doesn't matter because problems and glitches are a
daily fact of life with computers. Document incompatibilities are so
commonplace that nobody thinks a thing of it if you ask them to resend a
document in a different format. Conversion programs abound, and most
offices of any size have a machine sitting in a corner somewhere that's
used to convert other word processor formats to and from their own.

>> > and what about outlook?
>> 
>> Somehow I've managed to live without it all these decades...
> 
> maybe you have managed to do so, but there are millions of people who
> use it daily, many of whom are *required* to use it for work.

Yes! Microsoft applications are the end-all, be-all of software
creation. Nobody else in the UNIVERSE is brilliant enough to write
anything as Grand and Powerful, and nothing not written anyone else
could ever possibly replace MS's mind-blowingly innovative software.
People HAVE to have Microsoft ____________ because Nothing Else Will
Ever Do! (tm)(c)(all rights reserved)(by reading this EULA you agree...)

>> According to wikipedia,
>> 15-20% of businesses were using OpenOffice in 2004 and a 2010 study put
>> usage at 9% in the US and UK and over 20% in Poland, the Czech
>> Republic, and Germany. That's just for OpenOffice, which is only one of
>> about 15 office applications that now read/write ODF.
> 
> which means that 80-91% are not. that's a *lot* of people.

But not enough that businesses can afford to ignore the rest.

> 
>> If MS Office can't reliably process ODF then it's MS Office that needs
>> to do the catching-up.
> 
> maybe so, but since over 80% of people use office by your numbers, it's
> the defacto standard.

That's about 10-20% less than they had before OpenOffice came along. :-)

"hotfoot" <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:12:54 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
> > In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> > <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
> >> >
> >> > it's good, but not perfect.
> >>
> >> It doesn't need to be perfect.
>
> Don't you know, Chris? MS is the end-all and be-all of technological
> innovation. They set the standard by which all other software is judged.
> If it isn't 110% compatible with its Microsoft counterpart then nobody
> will ever use it in a million billion years.
>
> Of course, since Microsoft holds the source code, keeps the data formats
> to itself, and can freely introduce arbitrary changes to foil would-be
> competitors, nobody has any hope whatsoever of ever achieving 110%
> compatibility. So, I guess MS will just rule our lives forever and ever.
>
> /sarcasm

You may think that's sarcasm, but unfortunately it is Microsoft's mantra and
they're idea of good business practice.  :-(

"News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
news:NYCdnQJFX4Pc4G_WnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>
> So what's your excuse, fuckwit?  Stuck in a three-way on Cupidtino with
> little mickey and Oxtard?

Here we go. Now the second moron has to stick their nose in with an inane
comment.  :-\

Your Name pulled this Usenet boner:

> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
> news:hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> I have found issues, but, since I use styles properly, and make sure I
>> install the Windows fonts, I've had to go out of the way to find problems.
>
> The Windows fonts are copyright to Microsoft. You are not allowed to install
> them separately - that's called piracy.

No it isn't.  In fact, you can download the core fonts and install them.

For example, the ttf-mscorefonts-installer in Debian Linux will do that for
you.

If you want to avoid these fonts, but use something similar, try Red Hat's
ttf-liberation package.

> That's why the Mac version of Office comes with the appropriate
> cross-platform fonts. It's the only legal way to get them.

Nah, you can purchase or license the fonts directly.  A bit pricey.

If you're talking about more recently-added fonts, and you have Windows
installed in a dual-boot, simply point the font-manager to the Windows fonts
directory and index them.

-- 
The better part of valor is discretion.
		-- William Shakespeare, "Henry IV"

Your Name wrote:
> "News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
> news:NYCdnQJFX4Pc4G_WnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> So what's your excuse, fuckwit?  Stuck in a three-way on Cupidtino with
>> little mickey and Oxtard?
> 
> Here we go. Now the second moron has to stick their nose in with an inane
> comment.  :-\
> 
> 


Second moron?  That would be you.

In article <iO6dneajabdrn27WnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
<hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > which doesn't matter if someone sends you a .doc file.
> 
> That's right, it doesn't matter because problems and glitches are a
> daily fact of life with computers.

maybe for you they are, but it's rare that i have any such problems.

> Document incompatibilities are so
> commonplace that nobody thinks a thing of it if you ask them to resend a
> document in a different format. Conversion programs abound, and most
> offices of any size have a machine sitting in a corner somewhere that's
> used to convert other word processor formats to and from their own.

ask to resend? hah. you're funny. if i visit a web site and there's a
..xls file, exactly whom am i going to ask to resend and how long will
it take? bonus points if it's a government site. what if they don't
have any other software with which to resave it? what if they say tough
shit?

fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
powerpoint file.

> >> > and what about outlook?
> >> 
> >> Somehow I've managed to live without it all these decades...
> > 
> > maybe you have managed to do so, but there are millions of people who
> > use it daily, many of whom are *required* to use it for work.
> 
> Yes! Microsoft applications are the end-all, be-all of software
> creation. Nobody else in the UNIVERSE is brilliant enough to write
> anything as Grand and Powerful, and nothing not written anyone else
> could ever possibly replace MS's mind-blowingly innovative software.
> People HAVE to have Microsoft ____________ because Nothing Else Will
> Ever Do! (tm)(c)(all rights reserved)(by reading this EULA you agree...)

straw man.

the reality is that most of the world uses microsoft office, like it or
not, and unfortunately, to interact with the rest of the world, people
sometimes need the real thing. 

if open office works for you that's wonderful, but it doesn't work for
everyone.

In article <hsuit8$tqh$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users don't
> > like when things do not work.
> 
> Why does it need to be perfect when MS Office itself is not perfect, unless
> both parties that share documents have:

it needs to be compatible with what others use.

>    -  The same OS version and updates
>    -  The same MS Office version
>    -  The same installed fonts
>    -  The same printer driver

nonsense. 

> > and what about outlook? 
> 
> I've found Evolution to be indispensible as a near-replacement for Outlook.
> I use it many times per day, on Linux, in an all-Windows office environment.

'near replacement' ?

> You can also use davmail.  It is a lot more flexible, but of course the most
> recent version of MS Exchange apparently no longer supports WebDAV access.

in other words, it's not a replacement. 

> >> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to Microsoft's
> >> latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are hideously dependent on the
> >> fonts and printer drivers installed on your system.
> >
> > i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the
> > fact that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to be
> > fully compatible with the rest of the world.
> 
> Nah, that's Mr-Gotta-Be-Perfect fanboi nonsense.

nope. it's the reality. i don't have time to try to get things resent
or get a compatible converter. 

> For almost all use cases I've encountered at work, and for ALL use cases at
> home, OpenOffice and MS Office are essentially fully compatible.

great. not everyone has that experience.

> And if they aren't I would ask the other party to download and install this
> wonderful free/Free product!

not always an option. in fact, a number of companies prohibit
installing any software unless it's approved by management.

On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:36:17 -0400, nospam wrote:

> In article <hsuit8$tqh$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
>> > yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users
>> > don't like when things do not work.
>> 
>> Why does it need to be perfect when MS Office itself is not perfect,
>> unless both parties that share documents have:
> 
> it needs to be compatible with what others use.
> 
>>    -  The same OS version and updates
>>    -  The same MS Office version
>>    -  The same installed fonts
>>    -  The same printer driver
> 
> nonsense.

No, it isn't. Compare the out put of a document created one machine with 
a certain set of fonts, with the output of another with different fonts.

> 
>> > and what about outlook?
>> 
>> I've found Evolution to be indispensible as a near-replacement for
>> Outlook. I use it many times per day, on Linux, in an all-Windows
>> office environment.
> 
> 'near replacement' ?

Yes, near replacement. Much of "near replacement" depends on how Outlook 
is being used.

> 
>> You can also use davmail.  It is a lot more flexible, but of course the
>> most recent version of MS Exchange apparently no longer supports WebDAV
>> access.
> 
> in other words, it's not a replacement.

You can thank Microsoft.

> 
>> >> Are they 2003 or 2007 versions?  It takes awhile to catch up to
>> >> Microsoft's latest churnings.  Also, Microsoft documents are
>> >> hideously dependent on the fonts and printer drivers installed on
>> >> your system.
>> >
>> > i don't know what version was used to author the documents, but the
>> > fact that it needs to catch up means that you need the real thing to
>> > be fully compatible with the rest of the world.
>> 
>> Nah, that's Mr-Gotta-Be-Perfect fanboi nonsense.
> 
> nope. it's the reality. i don't have time to try to get things resent or
> get a compatible converter.

Then you had better make sure you and the people you are trading 
documents have the same OS version, the same app version, the same 
extensions, the same fonts, the same etc.

> 
>> For almost all use cases I've encountered at work, and for ALL use
>> cases at home, OpenOffice and MS Office are essentially fully
>> compatible.
> 
> great. not everyone has that experience.

No, they don't. But then there's problems sharing documents between users 
of MS Office, too.

> 
>> And if they aren't I would ask the other party to download and install
>> this wonderful free/Free product!
> 
> not always an option. in fact, a number of companies prohibit installing
> any software unless it's approved by management.

-- 
Rick

On 10-05-18 6:54 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that
>> Linux cert?
>
>   *chuckle*

... all you like.  Mac OS X passed that milestone over 2 years ago.

Where's Linux in this regard?

>
>> I've had no trouble with any installs for Mac OS X (other than a recent
>> DL of two items for which workarounds worked).  I've had all sorts of
>> Linux package installation issues over the last 10 years with packages
>> that would not install (and _work_) w/o repair magic from assorted web
>> wizards.
>
> Are you installing OS X on non-Apple hardware?

No - and nor would I, though many people do, successfully, albeit with 
Linux-like fixes from the dedicata.

>
>> Face it, Linux for the masses is just not going to happen.
>
> It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted response from
> Microsoft for quite a few years now.

The progress is stunted.  The "aficionados" base of Linux users is 
saturated.  Further use and adoption of Linux is limited to 
industrial|commercial|IT|embedded use and straggling nerds here and there.

Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with 
its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.

You'd think "free" Linux would beat the hell out of very expensive 
(since you have to buy the hardware too) Mac OS X, but Linux is a mere 
1.15% of OS' v. Mac OS X @ 6.15

(Never mind Windows at about 88.4% overall).

New private "home" adoption of Linux is all but dead.

-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 10-05-18 10:06 , JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2010-05-18, Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10-05-17 11:47 , JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>> Someday perhaps MacOS will get proper commercial Unix style package management,
>>> or even non-commercial Unix style package management. Hopefully it won't be in
>>> the form of some restrictive "apps store".
>>
>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that
>> Linux cert?
>>
>> I've had no trouble with any installs for Mac OS X (other than a recent
>> DL of two items for which workarounds worked).  I've had all sorts of
>> Linux package installation issues over the last 10 years with packages
>
>      Bullshit.

Prove it.  Fact is I've had horrible problems with (esp.) video drivers 
for two machines and 4 flavours of Linux/Unix.  Mostly solvable but 
there were always little annoying issues.  I don't recall the details 
now (last Linux misadventure was over 2 years ago...) but one package 
update under Red Hat simply would not install at all.  Another was a 
catch-22 involving a video driver that would not retain settings from a 
previous session.  Again the details are in murky memory, but it 
demanded a root access and when logged as root or when updating via 
sudo, those settings were lost when logged in as an ordinary user. 
Change them as an ordinary user and the settings were not retained.

I gave up on it after wasting many, many hours (which was only tolerable 
due to the many helpful Linux people on various forums).  Just not worth 
my time in the end.

Max OS X just works.

> [deletia]
>>> iPad:/Applications root# uname -a
>>> Darwin iPad 10.3.1 Darwin Kernel Version 10.3.1: Mon Mar 15 23:15:33 PDT 2010; root:xnu-1504.2.27~18/RELEASE_ARM_S5L8930X iPad1,1 arm K48AP Darwin
>>>
>>> iPad:/Applications root# ls
>>> AppStore.app/        Maps.app/               MobileNotes.app/      Terminal.app/
>>> Cydia.app/           MobileAddressBook.app/  MobileSafari.app/     Web.app/
>>> DataActivation.app/  MobileCal.app/          MobileSlideShow.app/  WebSheet.app/
>>> DemoApp.app/         MobileMail.app/         MobileStore.app/      WhatIP.app/
>>> FieldTest.app/       MobileMusicPlayer.app/  Preferences.app/      YouTube.app/
>>
>> I said "Max OS X" not 'iPad OS X' - do pay attention.
>>
>
> What part of DARWIN didn't you get?
>
> This must be like those "package problems" of yours.

No.  The iPad runs a variant of iPhone OS X which is a variant of OS X 
(not Mac).  The GUI is distinctly not that of the Mac.  Multi-tasking is 
crippled.  No Finder.  Print support?  (One day says St-Jobs).

-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 5/18/2010 5:13 PM, Your Name wrote:
> "hotfoot"<hotfoot@nospam.invalid>  wrote in message
> news:n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com...
>> On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:12:54 -0400, nospam wrote:
>>
>>> In article<hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>>>>>
>>>>> it's good, but not perfect.
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't need to be perfect.
>>
>> Don't you know, Chris? MS is the end-all and be-all of technological
>> innovation. They set the standard by which all other software is judged.
>> If it isn't 110% compatible with its Microsoft counterpart then nobody
>> will ever use it in a million billion years.
>>
>> Of course, since Microsoft holds the source code, keeps the data formats
>> to itself, and can freely introduce arbitrary changes to foil would-be
>> competitors, nobody has any hope whatsoever of ever achieving 110%
>> compatibility. So, I guess MS will just rule our lives forever and ever.
>>
>> /sarcasm
>
> You may think that's sarcasm, but unfortunately it is Microsoft's mantra and
> they're idea of good business practice.  :-(


X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106

Sure thing, Linux "advocate"

On 2010-05-18, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> claimed:
> -hh wrote:
>
>> Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Wonderful another filter to add:
>>>
>>> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>> 
>> 
>> Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>> 
>> I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>> blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
>> personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.

I filter on the poster. I decided to dump before I found that header,
so the header isn't what made me decide to filter on it.

Go ahead, use another OS. I'll find a header that separates you on that
one, too, unless you don't do anything that makes me want to dump you
on the other OSen.

> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>
> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because up 
> to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a frothing 
> imbecile

Which is why I made the decision that I'd most likely not miss a thing
if I chose to filter out that agent. I'm betting time will prove me
right. Oxturd and the grunge s/h/it pulls in with s/h/it are excellent
examples of what I won't miss.

-- 
Circular Definition: see Definition, Circular.
Aspire One, Linux Mint 8 (LXDE)
Friends don't let friends use Windows

 Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Peter K=F6hlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de> claimed:
>
> > -hh wrote:
>
> >> Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Wonderful another filter to add:
>
> >>> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>
> >> Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>
> >> I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
> >> blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals your
> >> personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>
> I filter on the poster. I decided to dump before I found that header,
> so the header isn't what made me decide to filter on it.
>
> Go ahead, use another OS.  I'll find a header that separates you on that =
one, too...

Golly Midget, you're using Peter's post to try to talk to me, after
you've already claimed to have killfiled me.

This means that you are defeating your own filters.
As such, what does that say about your lack of willpower?


> ...unless you don't do anything that makes me want to dump you
> on the other OSen.

Oh, sorry:  I'm supposed to play nice to avoid damaging your delicate
ego.

....even though it was your delicate ego that's trying to play OS
Religious War bullshit again.

"Check".


> > And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because =
up
> > to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a frothing
> > imbecile
>
> Which is why I made the decision that I'd most likely not miss a thing
> if I chose to filter out that agent. I'm betting time will prove me
> right.

Except that here, you've already been shown that the Agent approach
won't work here.  Oopsie.

My apologies if my words are so damaging to your poor little ego that
you want to killfile the messenger.   However, if you insist in
sticking your head in the sand, then simply put my domain name in your
filters, since I own it outright.   Afterall, I picked up this domain
several years ago just to make killfile filters easier..


-hh

-hh stated in post 
4507b2b3-df97-4be3-a8d6-2925dd33bf2e@q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com on 5/18/10
8:20 PM:

> Afterall, I picked up this domain
> several years ago just to make killfile filters easier..

Just looked at http://huntzinger.com/

On that page you complain about wasting bandwidth, complaining about how
tools add a "100% bandwidth overhead!"... and then have an image that is
1.42 MB... even when saved with a very high level of quality, it can
*easily* be made to be less than 1/5th the size with no visible loss of
quality... really, 1/8th or even 1/10th would not hurt it.

Just thought it was a bit ironic and funny.  :)


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> writes:

> In article <hsul7g$7mh$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
>  Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> 
>> > In article <hsu8t0$cag$03$2@news.t-online.com>,
>> >  Peter K?hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> -hh wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > Sinister Midget III <fardblos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> claimed:
>> >> >> > Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Maybe you're the tool he is thinking of.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Oh, he will certainly try to blame anyone & anything, in order to
>> >> >> > avoid taking personal responsibility for his own actions.  It's
>> >> >> > all very predictable.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Wonderful another filter to add:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent:.*AppleWebKit
>> >> > 
>> >> > 
>> >> > Go ahead and knock yourself out by sticking your head in the sand.
>> >> > 
>> >> > I use multiple OSs (not a secret), so your myoptic approach of
>> >> > blocking by UserAgent is not only ineffective, but merely reveals
>> >> > your personal bigotry in the silly OS Religous Wars.
>> >> 
>> >> No. It helps to keep the more lunatic fanboiz out of sight
>> >> 
>> >> And a filter on a apple useragent seems like a real good idea. Because
>> >> up to now there hasn't been a single poster from CSMA who isn't a
>> >> frothing imbecile
>> > 
>> > I can feel the love you radiate from here, Peter.  What an obnoxious
>> > asshole you are.
>> 
>> You have seen my "nice mode" to apple fanboiz. My "asshole mode" as of yet 
>> hasn't been needed
>> You see, I think of you guys as utterly worthless trash. And posters like 
>> Snit Michael Glasser or OxRetard just serve to enhance this view I have of 
>> apple cretins
>> 
> And yet I've not seen an 'expert' post by you.  Always the same, 
> regardless if it is Apple people or others, always negative, always 
> snide, always boorish.  Even to most Linux advocates that are here.
>
>> > I've yet to see you post any kind of positive post here or anywhere
>> > else.  So what exactly DO you like?
>> > 
>> I like *not* to see the latest news about the fart-app #10.311 or the last 
>> laptop costing twice as much for no discernible advantage.
>> In short: Whenever I feel like needing info about apple stuff, I will say 
>> so. Until then, keep out of COLA. After all, I don't post into CSMA either 
>> except when answering crosspost. Which practically all the time have been 
>> set by filthy scum like Snit Glasser, OxRetard or the COLA-resident filth 
>> like flatfish or Hadron Quark
>>
> Very nice, an equal opportunity hater!  At least you are consistent.
>
>> Was that clear enough or should I have used smaller words?
>
> Oh it is very clear, you have described your total outlook about 
> everything while trying to hide it in hatred of all things not Linux, 
> except that most of your Linux posts aren't any better.


I believe the following scenario happened :-

Years ago the company that Kohlkopf worked for decided to cover all
bases. Koehlmann decided to pin his hopes on promotion on the fact he
knew some C Shell. (It was years ago). He told his Masters at work that
Linux would rule and he would lead the Linux push. So they asked him to
port the Windows system. Imagine their horror a year later when only
about 50% of the systems windows came up and they were goddam ugly and
"motif style". Linux then failed to take off because it was a little bit
too little and a bit too late and didnt install on their customers
HW. Peter got to "maintain" the Linux branch for a year or two until
some new Manager came in (earning double his salary) and slapped him
around and shelved his project. Think about this for a while. It would
leave Peter bitter. And so now he programs Windows system using his
Linux WS.  But he's NOT a Windows user. Oh no. He told us .....

Meanwhile Creepy claims he edits his company's docs with OO without them
knowing.

If these morons told the truth it would be real advocacy, as it is, we
must read "advocacy".

And for May the "advocate" of the month is Raytard for picking on a
typo. Nice one Raytard. You really sold yourself there ....

"Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> writes:

> "hotfoot" <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com...
>> On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:12:54 -0400, nospam wrote:
>>
>> > In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> > <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
>> >> >
>> >> > it's good, but not perfect.
>> >>
>> >> It doesn't need to be perfect.
>>
>> Don't you know, Chris? MS is the end-all and be-all of technological
>> innovation. They set the standard by which all other software is judged.
>> If it isn't 110% compatible with its Microsoft counterpart then nobody
>> will ever use it in a million billion years.
>>
>> Of course, since Microsoft holds the source code, keeps the data formats
>> to itself, and can freely introduce arbitrary changes to foil would-be
>> competitors, nobody has any hope whatsoever of ever achieving 110%
>> compatibility. So, I guess MS will just rule our lives forever and ever.
>>
>> /sarcasm
>
> You may think that's sarcasm, but unfortunately it is Microsoft's mantra and
> they're idea of good business practice.  :-(

They're certainly good at getting you to use the lamest news reader in
existence.

Great "advocacy" !

Have you met chrisv or raytard?


Hint : he posted using OE. How sad is that?

"Rick" <none@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:DuCdnYenJrbokW7WnZ2dnUVZ_hmmnZ2d@supernews.com...
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:36:17 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
> > In article <hsuit8$tqh$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> > <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > yes it does if users expect to be able to share documents. users
> >> > don't like when things do not work.
> >>
> >> Why does it need to be perfect when MS Office itself is not perfect,
> >> unless both parties that share documents have:
> >
> > it needs to be compatible with what others use.
> >
> >>    -  The same OS version and updates
> >>    -  The same MS Office version
> >>    -  The same installed fonts
> >>    -  The same printer driver
> >
> > nonsense.
>
> No, it isn't. Compare the out put of a document created one machine with
> a certain set of fonts, with the output of another with different fonts.

To be fair that's not a Microsoft problem. It happens with pretty much any
piece of software. PDFs are about the only way to get your documents across
looking (almost) exactly like they do on your computer ... but even that's
not foolproof.

Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.
:-\

"News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
news:y5WdnS1xRcxGmW7WnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Your Name wrote:
> > "News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
> > news:NYCdnQJFX4Pc4G_WnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> >> So what's your excuse, fuckwit?  Stuck in a three-way on Cupidtino with
> >> little mickey and Oxtard?
> >
> > Here we go. Now the second moron has to stick their nose in with an
inane
> > comment.  :-\
>
> Second moron?  That would be you.

Good to see your counting ability is as "usefull" as the rest of your
brainless nonsense.  :-\

In article <ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
<your.name@isp.com> wrote:

> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
> other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.

not if you're colour managed.

"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hsvv1l$m3v$8@news.eternal-september.org...
> "Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> writes:
>
> > "hotfoot" <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:n-6dnVZMUPpDLG_WnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> >> On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:12:54 -0400, nospam wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <hsts2m$i56$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> >> > <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >> And you can get very good results in reading MS Office documents.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > it's good, but not perfect.
> >> >>
> >> >> It doesn't need to be perfect.
> >>
> >> Don't you know, Chris? MS is the end-all and be-all of technological
> >> innovation. They set the standard by which all other software is
judged.
> >> If it isn't 110% compatible with its Microsoft counterpart then nobody
> >> will ever use it in a million billion years.
> >>
> >> Of course, since Microsoft holds the source code, keeps the data
formats
> >> to itself, and can freely introduce arbitrary changes to foil would-be
> >> competitors, nobody has any hope whatsoever of ever achieving 110%
> >> compatibility. So, I guess MS will just rule our lives forever and
ever.
> >>
> >> /sarcasm
> >
> > You may think that's sarcasm, but unfortunately it is Microsoft's mantra
and
> > they're idea of good business practice.  :-(
>
> They're certainly good at getting you to use the lamest news reader in
> existence.
>
> Great "advocacy" !
>
> Have you met chrisv or raytard?
>
>
> Hint : he posted using OE. How sad is that?

Unfortunately the newsreader is not my choice and this isn't my computer to
change it ... thanks to the useless morons at Vodafone who refuse to fix
their system to allow my Mac OS 9 computer to be able to log on!  X-(

The only Mac OS X10.2 Internet applications I've so far found are a bit
flakey.  :-(

Your Name wrote:
> "News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
> news:y5WdnS1xRcxGmW7WnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Your Name wrote:
>>> "News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
>>> news:NYCdnQJFX4Pc4G_WnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>> So what's your excuse, fuckwit?  Stuck in a three-way on Cupidtino with
>>>> little mickey and Oxtard?
>>> Here we go. Now the second moron has to stick their nose in with an
> inane
>>> comment.  :-\
>> Second moron?  That would be you.
> 
> Good to see your counting ability is as "usefull" as the rest of your
> brainless nonsense.  :-\
> 
> 
> 

You and Oxtard?  That's one, two.  Or if you prefer, three with little 
mickey.

Make yourself 'usefull', show us your best, smiley face.

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
> powerpoint file.

Even PDF isn't a perfect solution.  Sometimes I am requested to fill out
some PDF forms, and some of them have given me difficulties, not only
in xpdf and evince (on the Linux side), but in Foxit and other PDF readers
(on the Windows side).  The only recourse then is to download and install
the latest Adobe bloatware.

<rest of submission to Microsoft snipped>

-- 
Your life would be very empty if you had nothing to regret.

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 10-05-18 6:54 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that
>>> Linux cert?
>>
>>   *chuckle*
>
> .. all you like.  Mac OS X passed that milestone over 2 years ago.
>
> Where's Linux in this regard?

I dunno.  I'm still trying to figure why it matters.

>> It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted response from
>> Microsoft for quite a few years now.
>
> The progress is stunted.  The "aficionados" base of Linux users is 
> saturated.  Further use and adoption of Linux is limited to 
> industrial|commercial|IT|embedded use and straggling nerds here and there.

Nonsense.  *Millions* of people use Linux directly, daily.

> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with 
> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.

As a consumer OS.

> You'd think "free" Linux would beat the hell out of very expensive 
> (since you have to buy the hardware too) Mac OS X, but Linux is a mere 
> 1.15% of OS' v. Mac OS X @ 6.15
>
> (Never mind Windows at about 88.4% overall).
>
> New private "home" adoption of Linux is all but dead.

Nope.  It is actually *increasing*.

Our resident trolls used to wave around a "0.24%" adoption rate, a few years
ago.

Now they wave around a number that is four times larger, and that number is
still increasing.  Hardly what one would call "dead".

-- 
You seek to shield those you love and you like the role of the provider.

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> Max OS X just works.

Of course it does.  It is installed for you on a very limited hardware base.

And yet...

-- 
Q:	Why do ducks have big flat feet?
A:	To stamp out forest fires.
Q:	Why do elephants have big flat feet?
A:	To stamp out flaming ducks.

On May 18, 11:39=A0pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> Just looked at http://huntzinger.com/
>
> On that page you complain about wasting bandwidth, complaining about how
> tools add a "100% bandwidth overhead!"... and then have an image that is
> 1.42 MB...

Really?  There's only a single image on the homepage, namely:

<http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2006/tanzania/
mufindi_starry(20D_20060621_1437).jpg>

And its size all of 168,381 *bytes* (0.168 MB).

Now if you want to claim that I'm lying by quickly changing the file
before replying, here's the URL to where Google has it cached as of on
May 14, 2010 07:00:03 GMT ...yes, 5 days ago...where it can be
verified:

<http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=3Dcache:
92asOh3koJYJ:www.huntzinger.com/
+huntzinger.com&cd=3D1&hl=3Den&ct=3Dclnk&gl=3Dus&client=3Dsafari>

or:   http://preview.tinyurl.com/255s3l8


FYI, this website benchmarking website agrees on the file's small
size:

<http://analyze.websiteoptimization.com/authenticate.php?
url=3Dwww.huntzinger.com&>



> ... even when saved with a very high level of quality, it can
> *easily* be made to be less than 1/5th the size with no visible loss of
> quality... really, 1/8th or even 1/10th would not hurt it.

At 0.168MB, its already ~1/100th of the size you're claiming.


> Just thought it was a bit ironic and funny.  :)

Yes, but not in the fashion that you were expecting, Michael.

The way that your error likely occurred was that you viewed the page,
right-clicked & copied it to your clipboard, then pasted it into an
application such as Photoshop.  When one does this, Photoshop does say
(bottom left corner) "Doc: 1.42M/1.42M", which is 100% consistent with
your claimed size.

But that number in Photoshop is the size of the  ---> uncompressed
image <--- which is not the the size of the original --> compressed
JPEG file <-- in question.

The question was file size (not image size), so you used the wrong
tool & wrong metric.

Golly gee, its a good thing that you've never claimed to be any sort
of "Pro" or "Teacher" of anything in this field, eh?



-hh

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> On 10-05-18 6:54 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that
>>>> Linux cert?
>>>
>>>   *chuckle*
>>
>> .. all you like.  Mac OS X passed that milestone over 2 years ago.
>>
>> Where's Linux in this regard?
> 
> I dunno.  I'm still trying to figure why it matters.

It doesn't. Apple paid for the certificate, which linux too would get with 
ease. Why pay for soemthing though when it is quite obvious to the users 
of linux that it is indeed a unix system?
Just paying for bragging rights is stupid. Apple may find it worthwile to 
have another checkbox item, but that kind of money can be put to better 
use in linux lands

>>> It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted
>>> response from Microsoft for quite a few years now.
>>
>> The progress is stunted.  The "aficionados" base of Linux users is
>> saturated.  Further use and adoption of Linux is limited to
>> industrial|commercial|IT|embedded use and straggling nerds here and
>> there.
> 
> Nonsense.  *Millions* of people use Linux directly, daily.

It is naturally balderdash. Just because OSX has a higher marketshare in 
the US does not mean that it is the same everywhere else.
In europe the roles are quite reversed, due to the rather ridiculous 
prices apple commands there
 
>> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with
>> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.
> 
> As a consumer OS.

The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has nothing 
at all to do with unix
Android is *far* more unix than iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its 
base, and since android has bypassed the iPhone-OS...

You guessed it: Alan Browne is full of it

< snip more apple fanboi idiocy >
-- 
The liar Michael Glasser (Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Bruce Chambers/Sigmond/Brock 
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend: and inside a dog,
it's too dark to read."                -- Groucho Marx

In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

[snip]

> > As a consumer OS.
> 
> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has 
> nothing at all to do with unix Android is *far* more unix than 
> iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its base, and since android has 
> bypassed the iPhone-OS...

Android apps are mostly written in a custom Java environment (though you 
can use some C through JNI), while iPhone apps are written in 
Objective-C, which is a strict superset of C. With iPhone OS, most of 
the *nix system calls you'd expect are trivially accessible anywhere in 
your code.

So from the perspective of doing something like, say, porting an app, 
iPhone OS is far more *nix than Android is.

I'm continually amazed by how many people who talk up Android have no 
idea how it actually works, and just sort of assume it works the way 
they want it to. The number of people who just blithely assume Android 
supports the desktop-style multitasking they're angry at Apple for not 
implementing is quite amusing, for instance. (It doesn't support 
desktop-style multitasking.)

[snip]

-- 
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>, Peter K�hlmann
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with
> >> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.
> > 
> > As a consumer OS.
> 
> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, 

nonsense.

> and it quite certainly has nothing 
> at all to do with unix

it *is* unix.

> Android is *far* more unix than iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its 
> base, and since android has bypassed the iPhone-OS...

you have that backwards, as usual.

-hh stated in post 
76f3740a-72e3-4673-bd73-bc9046638df8@m33g2000vbi.googlegroups.com on 5/19/10
4:38 AM:

> On May 18, 11:39�pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Just looked at http://huntzinger.com/
>> 
>> On that page you complain about wasting bandwidth, complaining about how
>> tools add a "100% bandwidth overhead!"... and then have an image that is
>> 1.42 MB...
> 
> Really?  There's only a single image on the homepage, namely:
> 
> <http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2006/tanzania/
> mufindi_starry(20D_20060621_1437).jpg>
> 
> And its size all of 168,381 *bytes* (0.168 MB).

Gee, for some reason http://huntzinger.com/

No longer works.  Oh well.

It is still available here:

<http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=cache:h
ttp://www.huntzinger.com/&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8>

But the archive did not save the image.  The link to the image shows the
same path you give... but, again, it is gone.  So, drats... no evidence one
way or the other.

But wait!  There is the wayback machine.  And as luck would have it, it has
a copy of your site:

<http://web.archive.org/web/20080624151223/http://www.huntzinger.com/>

And the image:

<http://web.archive.org/web/20061205232051/huntzinger.com/photo/2006/tanzani
a/mufindi_starry(20D_20060621_1437).jpg>

And that image is there.  And not the size I said.  I was mistaken... and I
made the mistake in much the way you guessed, below:

.... 
>> ... even when saved with a very high level of quality, it can
>> *easily* be made to be less than 1/5th the size with no visible loss of
>> quality... really, 1/8th or even 1/10th would not hurt it.
> 
> At 0.168MB, its already ~1/100th of the size you're claiming.
> 
>> Just thought it was a bit ironic and funny.  :)
> 
> Yes, but not in the fashion that you were expecting, Michael.
> 
> The way that your error likely occurred was that you viewed the page,
> right-clicked & copied it to your clipboard, then pasted it into an
> application such as Photoshop.  When one does this, Photoshop does say
> (bottom left corner) "Doc: 1.42M/1.42M", which is 100% consistent with
> your claimed size.

Well, just dragged it to Photoshop... but same idea. So, yup, my mistake...
and a rather silly one.  Guilty as charged.  Sorry 'bout that.

Actual size is 172 KB. I can shrink it down to somewhat less without
significant loss of visual quality, but nothing wrong with the image as it
is.  Not like it is absurdly large or anything - as I claimed before.

> But that number in Photoshop is the size of the  ---> uncompressed
> image <--- which is not the the size of the original --> compressed
> JPEG file <-- in question.
> 
> The question was file size (not image size), so you used the wrong
> tool & wrong metric.

Agreed.  My mistake.

> Golly gee, its a good thing that you've never claimed to be any sort
> of "Pro" or "Teacher" of anything in this field, eh?

Well, I have taught Photoshop classes... and, yes, this was my mistake.
Yes, teachers can make mistakes, too.  Now you know.  :)



-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

ZnU pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
>  Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has 
>> nothing at all to do with unix Android is *far* more unix than 
>> iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its base, and since android has 
>> bypassed the iPhone-OS...
>
> Android apps are mostly written in a custom Java environment (though you 
> can use some C through JNI), while iPhone apps are written in 
> Objective-C, which is a strict superset of C. With iPhone OS, most of 
> the *nix system calls you'd expect are trivially accessible anywhere in 
> your code.
>
> So from the perspective of doing something like, say, porting an app, 
> iPhone OS is far more *nix than Android is.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29

   Native code

   Libraries written in C and other languages can be compiled to ARM native
   code and installed using the Android Native Development Kit. Native
   classes can be called from Java code running under the Dalvik VM using
   the System.loadLibrary call, which is part of the standard Android Java
   classes.

   Complete applications can be compiled and installed using traditional
   development tools. The ADB debugger gives a root shell under the
   Android Emulator which allows native ARM code to be uploaded and
   executed. ARM code can be compiled using GCC on a standard PC.
   Running native code is complicated by the fact that Android uses a
   non-standard C library (known as Bionic). The underlying graphics device
   is available as a framebuffer at /dev/graphics/fb0. The graphics
   library that Android uses to arbitrate and control access to this device
   is called the Skia Graphics Library (SGL), and it has been released under
   an open source license. Skia has backends for both win32 and Cairo,
   allowing the development of cross-platform applications, and it is the
   graphics engine underlying the Google Chrome web browser.

> I'm continually amazed by how many people who talk up Android have no 
> idea how it actually works, and just sort of assume it works the way 
> they want it to. The number of people who just blithely assume Android 
> supports the desktop-style multitasking they're angry at Apple for not 
> implementing is quite amusing, for instance. (It doesn't support 
> desktop-style multitasking.)

I'm continually amazed that people don't do a simple sanity-check on their
assertions first.

-- 
The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the
difference between lightning and the lightning bug.
		-- Mark Twain

Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>> 
>>> On 10-05-18 6:54 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that
>>>>> Linux cert?
>>>>
>>>>   *chuckle*
>>>
>>> .. all you like.  Mac OS X passed that milestone over 2 years ago.
>>>
>>> Where's Linux in this regard?
>> 
>> I dunno.  I'm still trying to figure why it matters.
>
> It doesn't. Apple paid for the certificate, which linux too would get with 
> ease. Why pay for soemthing though when it is quite obvious to the users 
> of linux that it is indeed a unix system?
> Just paying for bragging rights is stupid. Apple may find it worthwile to 
> have another checkbox item, but that kind of money can be put to better 
> use in linux lands
>
>>>> It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted
>>>> response from Microsoft for quite a few years now.
>>>
>>> The progress is stunted.  The "aficionados" base of Linux users is
>>> saturated.  Further use and adoption of Linux is limited to
>>> industrial|commercial|IT|embedded use and straggling nerds here and
>>> there.
>> 
>> Nonsense.  *Millions* of people use Linux directly, daily.
>
> It is naturally balderdash. Just because OSX has a higher marketshare in 
> the US does not mean that it is the same everywhere else.
> In europe the roles are quite reversed, due to the rather ridiculous 
> prices apple commands there
>
>>> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with
>>> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.
>> 
>> As a consumer OS.
>
> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has nothing 
> at all to do with unix

As usual you are clueless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_OS

In article <ht1041$448$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> ZnU pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
> > In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
> >  Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> >
> >> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has 
> >> nothing at all to do with unix Android is *far* more unix than 
> >> iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its base, and since android has 
> >> bypassed the iPhone-OS...
> >
> > Android apps are mostly written in a custom Java environment (though you 
> > can use some C through JNI), while iPhone apps are written in 
> > Objective-C, which is a strict superset of C. With iPhone OS, most of 
> > the *nix system calls you'd expect are trivially accessible anywhere in 
> > your code.
> >
> > So from the perspective of doing something like, say, porting an app, 
> > iPhone OS is far more *nix than Android is.
> 
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29
> 
>    Native code
> 
>    Libraries written in C and other languages can be compiled to ARM native
>    code and installed using the Android Native Development Kit. Native
>    classes can be called from Java code running under the Dalvik VM using
>    the System.loadLibrary call, which is part of the standard Android Java
>    classes.
> 
>    Complete applications can be compiled and installed using traditional
>    development tools. The ADB debugger gives a root shell under the
>    Android Emulator which allows native ARM code to be uploaded and
>    executed. ARM code can be compiled using GCC on a standard PC.
>    Running native code is complicated by the fact that Android uses a
>    non-standard C library (known as Bionic). The underlying graphics device
>    is available as a framebuffer at /dev/graphics/fb0. The graphics
>    library that Android uses to arbitrate and control access to this device
>    is called the Skia Graphics Library (SGL), and it has been released under
>    an open source license. Skia has backends for both win32 and Cairo,
>    allowing the development of cross-platform applications, and it is the
>    graphics engine underlying the Google Chrome web browser.
> 
> > I'm continually amazed by how many people who talk up Android have no 
> > idea how it actually works, and just sort of assume it works the way 
> > they want it to. The number of people who just blithely assume Android 
> > supports the desktop-style multitasking they're angry at Apple for not 
> > implementing is quite amusing, for instance. (It doesn't support 
> > desktop-style multitasking.)
> 
> I'm continually amazed that people don't do a simple sanity-check on their
> assertions first.

The second paragraph of what you post above is newish information that I 
wasn't aware of (I thought apps still needed to at least have a Java 
wrapper still even if most of the app was native), but it doesn't 
actually change my point because of that "non-standard C library" bit it 
mentions.

-- 
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> ZnU pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
>>  Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has 
>>> nothing at all to do with unix Android is *far* more unix than 
>>> iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its base, and since android has 
>>> bypassed the iPhone-OS...
>>
>> Android apps are mostly written in a custom Java environment (though you 
>> can use some C through JNI), while iPhone apps are written in 
>> Objective-C, which is a strict superset of C. With iPhone OS, most of 
>> the *nix system calls you'd expect are trivially accessible anywhere in 
>> your code.
>>
>> So from the perspective of doing something like, say, porting an app, 
>> iPhone OS is far more *nix than Android is.
>
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29
>
>    Native code
>
>    Libraries written in C and other languages can be compiled to ARM native
>    code and installed using the Android Native Development Kit. Native
>    classes can be called from Java code running under the Dalvik VM using
>    the System.loadLibrary call, which is part of the standard Android Java
>    classes.
>
>    Complete applications can be compiled and installed using traditional
>    development tools. The ADB debugger gives a root shell under the
>    Android Emulator which allows native ARM code to be uploaded and
>    executed. ARM code can be compiled using GCC on a standard PC.
>    Running native code is complicated by the fact that Android uses a
>    non-standard C library (known as Bionic). The underlying graphics device
>    is available as a framebuffer at /dev/graphics/fb0. The graphics
>    library that Android uses to arbitrate and control access to this device
>    is called the Skia Graphics Library (SGL), and it has been released under
>    an open source license. Skia has backends for both win32 and Cairo,
>    allowing the development of cross-platform applications, and it is the
>    graphics engine underlying the Google Chrome web browser.
>
>> I'm continually amazed by how many people who talk up Android have no 
>> idea how it actually works, and just sort of assume it works the way 
>> they want it to. The number of people who just blithely assume Android 
>> supports the desktop-style multitasking they're angry at Apple for not 
>> implementing is quite amusing, for instance. (It doesn't support 
>> desktop-style multitasking.)
>
> I'm continually amazed that people don't do a simple sanity-check on their
> assertions first.

Not as amazed as the rest of us who stand here open mouthed with
amazement each and every time you post some drivel to suck up. YOU are
the one on record as saying any info out side of COLA is irrlevant when
it comes to proving Roy an insane Liar and manipulator. You are the one
who claimed that your Master Peter was correct in thinking it is ok to
dereference a null pointer in C.

And now you post some extract from a wiki that you dont understand or
understand the ramifications of and you are Mr Big and High and Mighty
again. Maybe you could tell your Master Peter about the iPhone's links
to *IX type Osen while you're ferreting around.

ZnU pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht1041$448$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> ZnU pulled this Usenet boner:
>> 
>> > In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
>> >  Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has 
>> >> nothing at all to do with unix Android is *far* more unix than 
>> >> iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its base, and since android has 
>> >> bypassed the iPhone-OS...
>> >
>> > Android apps are mostly written in a custom Java environment (though you 
>> > can use some C through JNI), while iPhone apps are written in 
>> > Objective-C, which is a strict superset of C. With iPhone OS, most of 
>> > the *nix system calls you'd expect are trivially accessible anywhere in 
>> > your code.
>> >
>> > So from the perspective of doing something like, say, porting an app, 
>> > iPhone OS is far more *nix than Android is.
>> 
>>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29
>> 
>>    Complete applications can be compiled and installed using traditional
>>    development tools. The ADB debugger gives a root shell under the
>>    Android Emulator which allows native ARM code to be uploaded and
>>    executed. ARM code can be compiled using GCC on a standard PC.
>>    Running native code is complicated by the fact that Android uses a
>>    non-standard C library (known as Bionic). The underlying graphics device
>>    is available as a framebuffer at /dev/graphics/fb0. The graphics
>>    library that Android uses to arbitrate and control access to this device
>>    is called the Skia Graphics Library (SGL), and it has been released under
>>    an open source license. Skia has backends for both win32 and Cairo,
>>    allowing the development of cross-platform applications, and it is the
>>    graphics engine underlying the Google Chrome web browser.
>
> The second paragraph of what you post above is newish information that I 
> wasn't aware of (I thought apps still needed to at least have a Java 
> wrapper still even if most of the app was native), but it doesn't 
> actually change my point because of that "non-standard C library" bit it 
> mentions.

I'll meet you half-way on this one, then.  :-)

-- 
Slow day.  Practice crawling.

In article <ht0ou3$s9h$00$1@news.t-online.com>, Peter K�hlmann
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and with
> >> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.
> > 
> > As a consumer OS.
> 
> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has nothing 
> at all to do with unix

it *is* unix.

> Android is *far* more unix than iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its 
> base, and since android has bypassed the iPhone-OS...

no it has not.

On 10-05-19 6:57 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet truth:
>
>> Max OS X just works.
>
> Of course it does.  It is installed for you on a very limited hardware base.

OTOH, Windows works perfectly well on almost all computers for which it 
is sold.  Unlike Linux's magic-incantation requirements for many platforms.

It's absolutely no surprise that Linux has saturated its potential 
amongst personal users at about 1% of OS' overall.


-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

In article <ht0fra$5st$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
> > powerpoint file.
> 
> Even PDF isn't a perfect solution.  Sometimes I am requested to fill out
> some PDF forms, and some of them have given me difficulties, not only
> in xpdf and evince (on the Linux side), but in Foxit and other PDF readers
> (on the Windows side).  The only recourse then is to download and install
> the latest Adobe bloatware.

then you're using software that's not fully compliant with the pdf spec.

On 10-05-19 9:26 , Peter K=F6hlmann wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> On 10-05-18 6:54 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> Mac OS X 10.5 and up is Unix compliant and certified.  Where's that=

>>>>> Linux cert?
>>>>
>>>>    *chuckle*
>>>
>>> .. all you like.  Mac OS X passed that milestone over 2 years ago.
>>>
>>> Where's Linux in this regard?
>>
>> I dunno.  I'm still trying to figure why it matters.
>
> It doesn't. Apple paid for the certificate, which linux too would get w=
ith
> ease. Why pay for soemthing though when it is quite obvious to the user=
s
> of linux that it is indeed a unix system?

It's not like they went to the store and paid for it.  They had to show=20
compliance to the standard.  Why is it useful?  The same as any=20
compliance certificate is useful to managers who need to demonstrate=20
compliance in their own processes.

> Just paying for bragging rights is stupid. Apple may find it worthwile =
to
> have another checkbox item, but that kind of money can be put to better=

> use in linux lands

Too bad that it isn't - and again it's not like you send in for a=20
questionable University diploma.

>
>>>> It is already in progress, and has been generating a concerted
>>>> response from Microsoft for quite a few years now.
>>>
>>> The progress is stunted.  The "aficionados" base of Linux users is
>>> saturated.  Further use and adoption of Linux is limited to
>>> industrial|commercial|IT|embedded use and straggling nerds here and
>>> there.
>>
>> Nonsense.  *Millions* of people use Linux directly, daily.

Fine.  And Tens of millions use Mac OS X.  And Billions use Windows.

>
> It is naturally balderdash. Just because OSX has a higher marketshare i=
n
> the US does not mean that it is the same everywhere else.
> In europe the roles are quite reversed, due to the rather ridiculous
> prices apple commands there

Show the figures please.  Real data.  Real links.

>
>>> Per this graph even "iPhone" OS is overtaking Linux as an OS - and wi=
th
>>> its inclusion in the iPad this is sure to bypass Linux quite soon.
>>
>> As a consumer OS.
>
> The iPhone OS is barely any OS at all, and it quite certainly has nothi=
ng
> at all to do with unix

BS: It is OS X (just not "Mac" OS X).

> Android is *far* more unix than iPhone-OS. And adroid is linux at its
> base, and since android has bypassed the iPhone-OS...
>
> You guessed it: Alan Browne is full of it

Full of the truth, yes.

Network measurements of OS types are the broadest statistical base=20
possible and the figures (link above) can't be disputed.

Linux is for an extremely narrow segment of OS users - those who are=20
prepared to trade a few dollars (cost of a Mac + OS X or Windows V. MANY =

HOURS of screwing around to make things work.)  At that, the most common =

business and graphics tools do not run directly under Linux forcing the=20
use of 2nd class tools or the use of band-aid s/w such as WINE.

Meanwhile, the real world is mostly oblivious to Linux and runs on with=20
Windows with Mac OS X getting second billing.

Linux will not grow beyond its current level of penetration other than=20
in embedded systems, IT, industrial and commercial use.  Personal use is =

bound by those who have an innate desire to tinker.

--=20
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
> <your.name@isp.com> wrote:
>
> > Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
> > other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.
>
> not if you're colour managed.

Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:190520101526362899%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <ht0fra$5st$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
> > > fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
> > > powerpoint file.
> >
> > Even PDF isn't a perfect solution.  Sometimes I am requested to fill out
> > some PDF forms, and some of them have given me difficulties, not only
> > in xpdf and evince (on the Linux side), but in Foxit and other PDF
readers
> > (on the Windows side).  The only recourse then is to download and
install
> > the latest Adobe bloatware.
>
> then you're using software that's not fully compliant with the pdf spec.

Or simply an older version of Adobe's software and the PDF was created in a
newer version. Trying to open some PDFs in an older verion of Illustrator
(for example) just gives me an error warning and then a completely "blank"
page with all the elements invisible - I can select elements, but not
actually see anything.

On 10-05-19 17:08 , Your Name wrote:
> "nospam"<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote in message
> news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
>> In article<ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
>> <your.name@isp.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
>>> other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.
>>
>> not if you're colour managed.
>
> Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)

And only a small slice of those properly so.

-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 10-05-19 6:57 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet truth:
>>
>>> Max OS X just works.
>>
>> Of course it does.  It is installed for you on a very limited hardware base.
>
> OTOH, Windows works perfectly well on almost all computers for which it 
> is sold.  Unlike Linux's magic-incantation requirements for many platforms.

Uh, Beavis... the vendors of Windows-based computers supply the
"magic-incantation requirements" of Windows for the buyer.

<rest of troll snipped>

-- 
Your goose is cooked.
(Your current chick is burned up too!)

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht0fra$5st$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> > fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
>> > powerpoint file.
>> 
>> Even PDF isn't a perfect solution.  Sometimes I am requested to fill out
>> some PDF forms, and some of them have given me difficulties, not only
>> in xpdf and evince (on the Linux side), but in Foxit and other PDF readers
>> (on the Windows side).  The only recourse then is to download and install
>> the latest Adobe bloatware.
>
> then you're using software that's not fully compliant with the pdf spec.

No shit Sherlock.

So we're left with almost the same situation we are with Microsoft Word
formats ...  A constantly shifting specification controlled by a single
company, and everyone else who implements the specification is always in
catch-up mode.

-- 
There is a 20% chance of tomorrow.

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> Network measurements of OS types are the broadest statistical base 
> possible and the figures (link above) can't be disputed.

Yes, they can.  Web sites show wide variations in such measurements.

> Linux is for an extremely narrow segment of OS users - those who are 
> prepared to trade a few dollars (cost of a Mac + OS X or Windows V. MANY 
> HOURS of screwing around to make things work.)  At that, the most common 
> business and graphics tools do not run directly under Linux forcing the 
> use of 2nd class tools or the use of band-aid s/w such as WINE.

Actually, there are quite a lot of GOOD tools on Linux.

As one of our resident trolls likes to say, "all the best OSS software runs
on Windows, too".

Products like OpenOffice, GIMP, Firefox, VideoLAN client, etc. make a nice
bridge from Windows to Linux.

> Meanwhile, the real world is mostly oblivious to Linux and runs on with 
> Windows with Mac OS X getting second billing.
>
> Linux will not grow beyond its current level of penetration other than 
> in embedded systems, IT, industrial and commercial use.  Personal use is 
> bound by those who have an innate desire to tinker.

True.  As long as Microsoft has the desktop/laptop vendors in its thrall,
Linux won't get much play amongst consumers.

But, if the vendors can't/won't do it, there is always the Johnny Linuxseeds
of the world, administering their boxes for them.  (As I do.)

And why not?  We have been administering their Windows boxes for them.
So much easier if we can get them on a Linux box.

And it's been working.  Steady, but slow, increase in Linux numbers.

-- 
It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion
that makes horse-races.
		-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 10-05-19 17:08 , Your Name wrote:
>> "nospam"<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote in message
>> news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
>>> In article<ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
>>> <your.name@isp.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
>>>> other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.
>>>
>>> not if you're colour managed.
>>
>> Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)
>
> And only a small slice of those properly so.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Operating_system_level

   Operating system level

   Beginning with Windows Vista, color management in Windows is handled at
   the OS level through an ICC color management standard and API known as
   Windows Color System.WCS supplements the Image Color Management (ICM)
   system in Windows 2000 and Windows XP, originally written by
   Heidelberg.

   Apple's Mac operating systems have provided OS-level color management
   since 1993, through ColorSync.

   Operating systems which use the X Window System for graphics use ICC
   profiles, but support for color management on Linux is still quite
   nascent, with only a handful of applications supporting, some through
   LittleCMS.

I wonder if that last sentence is really true:

   http://www.littlecms.com/

   Since the initial release, back in 1998, Little CMS has grown to become
   one of the most popular open-source color management libraries, and has
   been used in a large number of production projects, in areas as printer
   firmware, monitors, digital cameras, RIPs, publishing, scientific, and
   many others. You can find Little CMS in most Linux distributions, and
   It's free, so why not check it out? 

-- 
Q:	How do you keep a moron in suspense?

In article <ht1lfi$sui$4@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
> > Network measurements of OS types are the broadest statistical base 
> > possible and the figures (link above) can't be disputed.
> 
> Yes, they can.  Web sites show wide variations in such measurements.
> 
> > Linux is for an extremely narrow segment of OS users - those who are 
> > prepared to trade a few dollars (cost of a Mac + OS X or Windows V. MANY 
> > HOURS of screwing around to make things work.)  At that, the most common 
> > business and graphics tools do not run directly under Linux forcing the 
> > use of 2nd class tools or the use of band-aid s/w such as WINE.
> 
> Actually, there are quite a lot of GOOD tools on Linux.
> 
> As one of our resident trolls likes to say, "all the best OSS software runs
> on Windows, too".
> 
> Products like OpenOffice, GIMP, Firefox, VideoLAN client, etc. make a nice
> bridge from Windows to Linux.
> 
> > Meanwhile, the real world is mostly oblivious to Linux and runs on with 
> > Windows with Mac OS X getting second billing.
> >
> > Linux will not grow beyond its current level of penetration other than 
> > in embedded systems, IT, industrial and commercial use.  Personal use is 
> > bound by those who have an innate desire to tinker.
> 
> True.  As long as Microsoft has the desktop/laptop vendors in its thrall,
> Linux won't get much play amongst consumers.
> 
> But, if the vendors can't/won't do it, there is always the Johnny Linuxseeds
> of the world, administering their boxes for them.  (As I do.)
> 
> And why not?  We have been administering their Windows boxes for them.
> So much easier if we can get them on a Linux box.
> 
> And it's been working.  Steady, but slow, increase in Linux numbers.

On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more 
descriptive.

Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial venture 
does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going to do 
that for no money?

-- 
Lloyd

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Network measurements of OS types are the broadest statistical base 
>> possible and the figures (link above) can't be disputed.
>
> Yes, they can.  Web sites show wide variations in such measurements.

But OS agnostic ones show Linux to be about 0.6-1% if that. And looking
around me that seems about right.

>
>> Linux is for an extremely narrow segment of OS users - those who are 
>> prepared to trade a few dollars (cost of a Mac + OS X or Windows V. MANY 
>> HOURS of screwing around to make things work.)  At that, the most common 
>> business and graphics tools do not run directly under Linux forcing the 
>> use of 2nd class tools or the use of band-aid s/w such as WINE.
>
> Actually, there are quite a lot of GOOD tools on Linux.

There are.

>
> As one of our resident trolls likes to say, "all the best OSS software runs
> on Windows, too".

It does. Or MOST of it does.

>
> Products like OpenOffice, GIMP, Firefox, VideoLAN client, etc. make a nice
> bridge from Windows to Linux.

They actually encourage people to stay on Windows. There is no need for
them to move to Linux to take advantage of some great OSS stuff. And
until people provide drivers/SW to sync phones/pdas etc on Linux they
wont be in any hurry to move as the number prove.

I mean, hey, if the numbers were so good surely there would be
programming jobs for the likes of you with Linux systems? I mean we all
know you program Windows.

>
>> Meanwhile, the real world is mostly oblivious to Linux and runs on with 
>> Windows with Mac OS X getting second billing.
>>
>> Linux will not grow beyond its current level of penetration other than 
>> in embedded systems, IT, industrial and commercial use.  Personal use is 
>> bound by those who have an innate desire to tinker.
>
> True.  As long as Microsoft has the desktop/laptop vendors in its
> thrall,

Huh? Lots of people have tried Linux. As you well know. But being the
dishonest little sycophant you are you will pretend Linux never gets a
chance. Didnt it have 100% of the netbook market at one point? How did
Asus manage that if MS have them by the balls?

> Linux won't get much play amongst consumers.

And you keep developing Windows SW of course, you slimy little hypocrite
you.

>
> But, if the vendors can't/won't do it, there is always the Johnny Linuxseeds
> of the world, administering their boxes for them.  (As I do.)

Sure ....

>
> And why not?  We have been administering their Windows boxes for them.
> So much easier if we can get them on a Linux box.

Who administers your Windows box?

>
> And it's been working.  Steady, but slow, increase in Linux numbers.

It seems to have all but dried up unfortunately.

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> On 10-05-19 17:08 , Your Name wrote:
>>> "nospam"<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote in message
>>> news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
>>>> In article<ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
>>>> <your.name@isp.com>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different
>>>>> on other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma
>>>>> settings.
>>>>
>>>> not if you're colour managed.
>>>
>>> Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)
>>
>> And only a small slice of those properly so.
> 
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Operating_system_level
> 
>    Operating system level
> 
>    Beginning with Windows Vista, color management in Windows is handled
>    at the OS level through an ICC color management standard and API
>    known as Windows Color System.WCS supplements the Image Color
>    Management (ICM) system in Windows 2000 and Windows XP, originally
>    written by Heidelberg.
> 
>    Apple's Mac operating systems have provided OS-level color management
>    since 1993, through ColorSync.
> 
>    Operating systems which use the X Window System for graphics use ICC
>    profiles, but support for color management on Linux is still quite
>    nascent, with only a handful of applications supporting, some through
>    LittleCMS.
> 
> I wonder if that last sentence is really true:
> 
>    http://www.littlecms.com/
> 
>    Since the initial release, back in 1998, Little CMS has grown to
>    become one of the most popular open-source color management
>    libraries, and has been used in a large number of production
>    projects, in areas as printer firmware, monitors, digital cameras,
>    RIPs, publishing, scientific, and many others. You can find Little
>    CMS in most Linux distributions, and It's free, so why not check it
>    out?
> 

It is part of Suse, for example

And unless you work a lot with images, there is no real need to install it
-- 
We may not return the affection of those who like us, 
but we always respect their good judgement.

On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>
> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more 
> descriptive.

Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?

The desktop is dead.

The future is with the portable...

> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial venture 
> does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going to do 
> that for no money?

Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
exclusive deals with OEMs are outlawed.

-- 
Regards,

Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>  wrote:
>>
>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>> descriptive.
>
> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>
> The desktop is dead.
>
> The future is with the portable...
>
>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial venture
>> does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going to do
>> that for no money?
>
> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
> exclusive deals with OEMs

There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive 
minds of Linux bozos.

On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:44:56 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>>> descriptive.
>>
>> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>>
>> The desktop is dead.
>>
>> The future is with the portable...
>>
>>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial
>>> venture does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going
>>> to do that for no money?
>>
>> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
>> exclusive deals with OEMs
> 
> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
> minds of Linux bozos.

OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal 
exclusive deals with OEMs


-- 
Rick

On 5/19/2010 8:34 PM, Rick wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:44:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>>>> descriptive.
>>>
>>> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>>>
>>> The desktop is dead.
>>>
>>> The future is with the portable...
>>>
>>>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial
>>>> venture does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going
>>>> to do that for no money?
>>>
>>> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>>
>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
>> minds of Linux bozos.
>
> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
> exclusive deals with OEMs

Left side of your idiot mouth: "MS illegal exclusive deals with OEMs"

Right side of your idiot mouth: "herd mentality"

On Wed, 19 May 2010 21:01:29 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/19/2010 8:34 PM, Rick wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:44:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>>>> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>>>>> descriptive.
>>>>
>>>> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>>>>
>>>> The desktop is dead.
>>>>
>>>> The future is with the portable...
>>>>
>>>>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial
>>>>> venture does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is
>>>>> going to do that for no money?
>>>>
>>>> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
>>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>>>
>>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
>>> minds of Linux bozos.
>>
>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
>> exclusive deals with OEMs
> 
> Left side of your idiot mouth: "MS illegal exclusive deals with OEMs"

Out of the mouth of the US District and Appeals courts... Microsoft 
violated US anti-trust law. Out of the mouth of the EU court ... 
Microsoft violated anti-competition law.

> 
> Right side of your idiot mouth: "herd mentality"

And yes, out of my mouth... herd mentality.



-- 
Rick

Rick stated in post VaWdnVt4OfB1DWnWnZ2dnUVZ_jgAAAAA@supernews.com on
5/19/10 6:31 PM:

> And yes, out of my mouth... herd mentality.

Absolutely agree.  100%.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article <ht1l3l$sui$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> So we're left with almost the same situation we are with Microsoft Word
> formats ...  A constantly shifting specification controlled by a single
> company, and everyone else who implements the specification is always in
> catch-up mode.

but unlike microsoft, pdf is an iso standard and the reader is free. 

for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.

On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:33:05 -0400, nospam wrote:

> In article <iO6dneajabdrn27WnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> > which doesn't matter if someone sends you a .doc file.
>> 
>> That's right, it doesn't matter because problems and glitches are a
>> daily fact of life with computers.
> 
> maybe for you they are, but it's rare that i have any such problems.

Then you must not exchange very many documents with a diversity of users
and businesses.

>> Document incompatibilities are so
>> commonplace that nobody thinks a thing of it if you ask them to resend
>> a document in a different format. Conversion programs abound, and most
>> offices of any size have a machine sitting in a corner somewhere that's
>> used to convert other word processor formats to and from their own.
> 
> ask to resend? hah. you're funny. 

You said, "...if someone sends you a .doc file" and I said you could ask
them to resend it in a format you can handle. How is that response
"funny"?

> if i visit a web site and there's a .xls file, exactly whom am i going
> to ask to resend and how long will it take?

When that happens to me, I just break out gnumeric. I don't know what
it's compatibility level is supposed to be, but it's flawlessly handled
every .xls I've ever thrown at it.

However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced commercial
application that doesn't run on my OS?"

Well, if you're a dumb whiny wimp incapable of basic problem-solving
then you're screwed. Otherwise, you politely ask the webmaster for the
data in a format you can use, or email the file or its link to a friend
or acquaintance who has the necessary program and ask him to convert it
to something you can use, or take it to work or the library and use one
of their computers. As a last resort you can always buy just one copy of
the necessary program and install it in a Windows VM or (on Linux)
Crossover Office for occasional problems like this.

What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get your
critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
come up.

> ? bonus points if it's a government site.

What if it's one of those governments that legally requires all public
business to be conducted in an open format, and MS Office can't properly
handle it?

> what if they don't have any other software with which to resave it? what
> if they say tough shit?

See above.

> fortunately, pdf is common, but i still encounter a word, excel or
> powerpoint file.
>
>> >> > and what about outlook?
>> >> 
>> >> Somehow I've managed to live without it all these decades...
>> > 
>> > maybe you have managed to do so, but there are millions of people who
>> > use it daily, many of whom are *required* to use it for work.
>> 
>> Yes! Microsoft applications are the end-all, be-all of software
>> creation. Nobody else in the UNIVERSE is brilliant enough to write
>> anything as Grand and Powerful, and nothing not written anyone else
>> could ever possibly replace MS's mind-blowingly innovative software.
>> People HAVE to have Microsoft ____________ because Nothing Else Will
>> Ever Do! (tm)(c)(all rights reserved)(by reading this EULA you
>> agree...)
> 
> straw man.

Sarcasm, based on fact.

> the reality is that most of the world uses Microsoft office, like it or
> not, and unfortunately, to interact with the rest of the world, people
> sometimes need the real thing.

The reason some people sometimes need the real thing is because so many
who don't actually need the real thing buy it and distribute their
documents in its proprietary format anyway because they believe the
shills who tell them they have to use it because sometimes some people
need it.

> if open office works for you that's wonderful, but it doesn't work for
> everyone.

Neither does MS Office.

In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
<hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> >> That's right, it doesn't matter because problems and glitches are a
> >> daily fact of life with computers.
> > 
> > maybe for you they are, but it's rare that i have any such problems.
> 
> Then you must not exchange very many documents with a diversity of users
> and businesses.

enough that i need to use the real microsoft office.

> >> Document incompatibilities are so
> >> commonplace that nobody thinks a thing of it if you ask them to resend
> >> a document in a different format. Conversion programs abound, and most
> >> offices of any size have a machine sitting in a corner somewhere that's
> >> used to convert other word processor formats to and from their own.
> > 
> > ask to resend? hah. you're funny. 
> 
> You said, "...if someone sends you a .doc file" and I said you could ask
> them to resend it in a format you can handle. How is that response
> "funny"?

because it's often impossible to ask someone to resend. 
> 
> > if i visit a web site and there's a .xls file, exactly whom am i going
> > to ask to resend and how long will it take?
> 
> When that happens to me, I just break out gnumeric. I don't know what
> it's compatibility level is supposed to be, but it's flawlessly handled
> every .xls I've ever thrown at it.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnumeric>

  Pivot tables and conditional formatting are not yet supported but are
  planned for future versions.

not supporting conditional formatting makes it a non-starter for me. i
also use pivot tables on occasion.

> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced commercial
> application that doesn't run on my OS?"

overpriced is subjective.

> Well, if you're a dumb whiny wimp incapable of basic problem-solving
> then you're screwed. Otherwise, you politely ask the webmaster for the
> data in a format you can use, or email the file or its link to a friend
> or acquaintance who has the necessary program and ask him to convert it
> to something you can use, or take it to work or the library and use one
> of their computers. As a last resort you can always buy just one copy of
> the necessary program and install it in a Windows VM or (on Linux)
> Crossover Office for occasional problems like this.

i don't have time to fuck with that nonsense, nor do a lot of people,
and i'm certainly not going to go to library to use a public computer
with a confidential document.

> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get your
> critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
> off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
> come up.

it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.

"hotfoot" <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com...
>
> Well, if you're a dumb whiny wimp incapable of basic problem-solving
> then you're screwed. Otherwise, you politely ask the webmaster for the
> data in a format you can use, or email the file or its link to a friend
> or acquaintance who has the necessary program and ask him to convert it
> to something you can use, or take it to work or the library and use one
> of their computers. As a last resort you can always buy just one copy of
> the necessary program and install it in a Windows VM or (on Linux)
> Crossover Office for occasional problems like this.

There are also quite a few websites around that convert files from one
format to another, some are free and some you have to pay for ... of course
that may not be a good idea for sensitve / private data, but would be fine
for any old file downloaded from an already public source.

On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:38:34 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post VaWdnVt4OfB1DWnWnZ2dnUVZ_jgAAAAA@supernews.com on
> 5/19/10 6:31 PM:
> 
>> And yes, out of my mouth... herd mentality.
> 
> Absolutely agree.  100%.

Another example of Snit's dishonest snipping.



-- 
Rick

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht1l3l$sui$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> So we're left with almost the same situation we are with Microsoft Word
>> formats ...  A constantly shifting specification controlled by a single
>> company, and everyone else who implements the specification is always in
>> catch-up mode.
>
> but unlike microsoft, pdf is an iso standard and the reader is free. 

Geez, I thought Microsoft rammed OOXML through ISO as a "standard".

Anyway, I have a free reader for Microsoft:  OpenOffice.

> for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
> even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.

I thought Apple didn't like Adobe having undue influence on Apple's
platform?  Does Apple license a PDF library from Adobe, in order to stay
current with Adobe's constant churning of that format?

-- 
Your society will be sought by people of taste and refinement.

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced commercial
>> application that doesn't run on my OS?"

Well said.

>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get your
>> critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
>> off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
>> come up.
>
> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.

With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it make
sense to keep incurring these costs?

-- 
Q:	What's a WASP's idea of open-mindedness?
A:	Dating a Canadian.

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
>> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced commercial
>>> application that doesn't run on my OS?"
>
> Well said.
>
>>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get your
>>> critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
>>> off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
>>> come up.
>>
>> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
>
> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it make
> sense to keep incurring these costs?

Do you give your SW away for free Creepy? Or do your clients keep
paying?

Please answer. We would love to know.

Hadron wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
> 
>> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
>>> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>>>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>>>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced
>>>> commercial application that doesn't run on my OS?"
>>
>> Well said.
>>
>>>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get
>>>> your critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just
>>>> on the off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might*
>>>> perhaps come up.
>>>
>>> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
>>
>> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it
>> make sense to keep incurring these costs?
> 
> Do you give your SW away for free Creepy? Or do your clients keep
> paying?

Come on, Hadron Larry, tell us exactly how much you paid for OpenOffice

> Please answer. We would love to know.

Who is "we"? You and that turd in your pocket, or is it your fellow POS 
Snit Michael Glasser?
-- 
Another name for a Windows tutorial is crash course

Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>> 
>>> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
>>>> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>>>>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>>>>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced
>>>>> commercial application that doesn't run on my OS?"
>>>
>>> Well said.
>>>
>>>>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get
>>>>> your critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just
>>>>> on the off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might*
>>>>> perhaps come up.
>>>>
>>>> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
>>>
>>> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it
>>> make sense to keep incurring these costs?
>> 
>> Do you give your SW away for free Creepy? Or do your clients keep
>> paying?
>
> Come on, Hadron Larry, tell us exactly how much you paid for
> OpenOffice

What are you talking about? I paid nothing for it. But its not me
claiming all sw should be free like that sycophantic little minion of
yours.

>
>> Please answer. We would love to know.
>
> Who is "we"? You and that turd in your pocket, or is it your fellow POS 
> Snit Michael Glasser?

Everyone who laughs at Creepy's double standards.

But of course you claim to be a Windows programmer too. How much of YOUR
SW do YOU give away?

I am a professional programmer. I dont advocate things being free OR
Free. Realy "Freedom" is the ability to decide whether to do it or free
or GPL compliant. Not like hypocrites like you and Creepy Chris who
whine about "closed source" yet are closed source programmers and
Windows users yourselves.

Don't you ever tire of being made to look like an arse?

Rick stated in post maSdnSAyssW1mGjWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/20/10 2:47 AM:

> On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:38:34 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> Rick stated in post VaWdnVt4OfB1DWnWnZ2dnUVZ_jgAAAAA@supernews.com on
>> 5/19/10 6:31 PM:
>> 
>>> And yes, out of my mouth... herd mentality.
>> 
>> Absolutely agree.  100%.
> 
> Another example of Snit's dishonest snipping.

I agree that herd mentality comes out of your mouth.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Peter K�hlmann pulled this Usenet boner:

> Hadron wrote:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>> 
>>> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
>>>> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>>>>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>>>>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced
>>>>> commercial application that doesn't run on my OS?"
>>>
>>> Well said.
>>>
>>>>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get
>>>>> your critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just
>>>>> on the off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might*
>>>>> perhaps come up.
>>>>
>>>> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
>>>
>>> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it
>>> make sense to keep incurring these costs?
>> 
>> Do you give your SW away for free Creepy? Or do your clients keep
>> paying?
>
> Come on, Hadron Larry, tell us exactly how much you paid for OpenOffice
>
>> Please answer. We would love to know.
>
> Who is "we"? You and that turd in your pocket, or is it your fellow POS 
> Snit Michael Glasser?

It's creepy the way "Hadron" expects me to answer his impertinent queries
that are accompanied by insulting nomenclature.

*Maybe* if "Hadron" would ask *nicely*, he would get his answers, in a
civilized debate.

But nice is the *last* thing that "Hadron" is.  "Hadron" is all crank.

-- 
A vivid and creative mind characterizes you.

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> Peter Köhlmann pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <lvKdnf_SI7CxLGnWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@supernews.com>, hotfoot
>>>>> <hotfoot@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I think what you're really trying to say here is, "What if a
>>>>>> website has a file I absolutely can't live without and it's in a
>>>>>> proprietary format that can only be handled by an overpriced
>>>>>> commercial application that doesn't run on my OS?"
>>>>
>>>> Well said.
>>>>
>>>>>> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get
>>>>>> your critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just
>>>>>> on the off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might*
>>>>>> perhaps come up.
>>>>>
>>>>> it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
>>>>
>>>> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it
>>>> make sense to keep incurring these costs?
>>> 
>>> Do you give your SW away for free Creepy? Or do your clients keep
>>> paying?
>>
>> Come on, Hadron Larry, tell us exactly how much you paid for OpenOffice
>>
>>> Please answer. We would love to know.
>>
>> Who is "we"? You and that turd in your pocket, or is it your fellow POS 
>> Snit Michael Glasser?
>
> It's creepy the way "Hadron" expects me to answer his impertinent queries
> that are accompanied by insulting nomenclature.
>
> *Maybe* if "Hadron" would ask *nicely*, he would get his answers, in a
> civilized debate.
>
> But nice is the *last* thing that "Hadron" is.  "Hadron" is all crank.

Says the man who insulted Jorge Schilling, and called others "fuckheads"
and "cunts" in this very group while showing off to the other
"advocates". Your hypocrisy is what makes you such a nasty little
"advocate".

In article <ht3335$hgm$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
> > even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.
> 
> I thought Apple didn't like Adobe having undue influence on Apple's
> platform?  Does Apple license a PDF library from Adobe, in order to stay
> current with Adobe's constant churning of that format?

it's not constantly churning and pdf is no longer owned by adobe. it's
iso 32000-1.

In article <ht33fh$hgm$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> >> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get your
> >> critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
> >> off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
> >> come up.
> >
> > it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
> 
> With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it make
> sense to keep incurring these costs?

sometimes yes. many times the free stuff is crap. it might be good
enough for a casual user though, but not for someone who relies on it.
the suggestion to drive to a library to convert a file is exactly why
it can't be used.

on the other hand, sometimes the free stuff is not crap, like apache.

in the case of office, and certainly in the case of photoshop, free
alternatives are not an option for most people.

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht33fh$hgm$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>
> in the case of office, and certainly in the case of photoshop, free
> alternatives are not an option for most people.

How mand consumers (not businesses) do you know who have actually purchased
the full Photoshop suite?

And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office for
home use?

-- 
Q:	Minnesotans ask, "Why aren't there more pharmacists from Alabama?"
A:	Easy.  It's because they can't figure out how to get the little
	bottles into the typewriter.

In article <ht1n7d$ral$00$2@news.t-online.com>,
 Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> > Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
> > 
> >> On 10-05-19 17:08 , Your Name wrote:
> >>> "nospam"<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote in message
> >>> news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> >>>> In article<ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
> >>>> <your.name@isp.com>  wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different
> >>>>> on other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma
> >>>>> settings.
> >>>>
> >>>> not if you're colour managed.
> >>>
> >>> Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)
> >>
> >> And only a small slice of those properly so.
> > 
> >    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Operating_system_level
> > 
> >    Operating system level
> > 
> >    Beginning with Windows Vista, color management in Windows is handled
> >    at the OS level through an ICC color management standard and API
> >    known as Windows Color System.WCS supplements the Image Color
> >    Management (ICM) system in Windows 2000 and Windows XP, originally
> >    written by Heidelberg.
> > 
> >    Apple's Mac operating systems have provided OS-level color management
> >    since 1993, through ColorSync.
> > 
> >    Operating systems which use the X Window System for graphics use ICC
> >    profiles, but support for color management on Linux is still quite
> >    nascent, with only a handful of applications supporting, some through
> >    LittleCMS.
> > 
> > I wonder if that last sentence is really true:
> > 
> >    http://www.littlecms.com/
> > 
> >    Since the initial release, back in 1998, Little CMS has grown to
> >    become one of the most popular open-source color management
> >    libraries, and has been used in a large number of production
> >    projects, in areas as printer firmware, monitors, digital cameras,
> >    RIPs, publishing, scientific, and many others. You can find Little
> >    CMS in most Linux distributions, and It's free, so why not check it
> >    out?
> > 
> 
> It is part of Suse, for example

Color management in OS X is a pervasive system-level service. It works 
in word processing apps, in e-mail apps, in web browsers. It's 
integrated with the device management system, so displays and printers 
can be transparently color managed.

On Linux there's some library that allows apps to do ICC profile 
conversions, and maybe a few apps actually use it.

That's not really the same thing. At all.

> And unless you work a lot with images, there is no real need to install it

-- 
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes

On 5/20/2010 12:11 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<ht3335$hgm$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com>  wrote:
>
>>> for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
>>> even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.
>>
>> I thought Apple didn't like Adobe having undue influence on Apple's
>> platform?  Does Apple license a PDF library from Adobe, in order to stay
>> current with Adobe's constant churning of that format?
>
> it's not constantly churning and pdf is no longer owned by adobe. it's
> iso 32000-1.


Now you went and took a whine away from an ignorant cola weenie.  Not 
very nice of you.

On Thu, 20 May 2010 12:38:33 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> nospam pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
>> In article <ht33fh$hgm$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>>
>> in the case of office, and certainly in the case of photoshop, free
>> alternatives are not an option for most people.
> 
> How mand consumers (not businesses) do you know who have actually purchased
> the full Photoshop suite?

Probably very few because it is basically a vertical application
and kind of like swatting a fly with an elephant gun.

Besides, many cameras, scanners, printers etc come with light
versions of Adobe or other programs that work fine for basic
stuff.
People who truly need high end features, like professional
photographers are going to purchase Photoshop because it's just
another business expense.
 
> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office for
> home use?

Plenty.
Crippling Wordpad was a brilliant marketing maneuver by Microsoft.

A better question would be, why are people purchasing MS Office
rather than using free OpenOffice?

DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2010 12:11 PM, nospam wrote:
>> In article<ht3335$hgm$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>> for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
>>>> even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.
>>>
>>> I thought Apple didn't like Adobe having undue influence on Apple's
>>> platform?  Does Apple license a PDF library from Adobe, in order to stay
>>> current with Adobe's constant churning of that format?
>>
>> it's not constantly churning and pdf is no longer owned by adobe. it's
>> iso 32000-1.
>
> Now you went and took a whine away from an ignorant cola weenie.  Not 
> very nice of you.

He IS a weenie. I don't think I ever heard a Usenet poster that likes to
hand it out whine like a little girl about how everyone is horrible to
him quite as much as Creepy Chris does. This is the man who "proof read"
Joerge Schilling's C code and also claimed that some OSS contributors
were "fuckheads". All the while he is a closed source Windows
programmer. He really IS a weenie.

On Thu, 20 May 2010 19:00:43 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> writes:
> 
>> On 5/20/2010 12:11 PM, nospam wrote:
>>> In article<ht3335$hgm$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>> for mac os x users, pdf is part of the os itself, so nothing extra is
>>>>> even needed. a pdf file is as native as a text file.
>>>>
>>>> I thought Apple didn't like Adobe having undue influence on Apple's
>>>> platform?  Does Apple license a PDF library from Adobe, in order to stay
>>>> current with Adobe's constant churning of that format?
>>>
>>> it's not constantly churning and pdf is no longer owned by adobe. it's
>>> iso 32000-1.
>>
>> Now you went and took a whine away from an ignorant cola weenie.  Not 
>> very nice of you.
> 
> He IS a weenie. I don't think I ever heard a Usenet poster that likes to
> hand it out whine like a little girl about how everyone is horrible to
> him quite as much as Creepy Chris does. This is the man who "proof read"
> Joerge Schilling's C code and also claimed that some OSS contributors
> were "fuckheads". All the while he is a closed source Windows
> programmer. He really IS a weenie.

I still can't see how Ahlstrom can be a professional, at work,
programmer.
He is on this board 24x7, just about.

I suspect he is a sys admin who pings servers all day long and
calls IBM, HP whomever to come and repair the ones that don't
respond.

On 5/20/2010 12:50 PM, Moshe wrote:

>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office for
>> home use?
>
> Plenty.


A boatload

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Office-Home-and-Student-accounts-for-85-of-US-Office-retail-share/1249677290



> Crippling Wordpad was a brilliant marketing maneuver by Microsoft.
>
> A better question would be, why are people purchasing MS Office
> rather than using free OpenOffice?

Some people have standards for software quality and don't jump at every 
free piece of junk (ie OpenOffice).

In article <ht3oia$1q4$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office 
> for home use?

A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home edition, 
costs only $145.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> writes:

> In article <ht3oia$1q4$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office 
>> for home use?
>
> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home edition, 
> costs only $145.

Chris knows how much it costs. He is a professional Windows programmer
and can't possibly be ignorant of the costs of Windows/MS SW for both
home and office.

Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht3oia$1q4$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office 
>> for home use?
>
> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home edition, 
> costs only $145.

Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint finally
supports connection points).

-- 
You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny.

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> writes:

> Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> In article <ht3oia$1q4$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office 
>>> for home use?
>>
>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home edition, 
>> costs only $145.
>
> Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint finally
> supports connection points).

How much does your company charge? How much do you think programmers get
paid? You do know dont you? You ARE a Windows programmer after all.

Why do you, hypocrite that you are, object to paying for SW?

You're a tight arse as well as a hypocrite. Embarrassing to see.

In article <ht3oia$1q4$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > in the case of office, and certainly in the case of photoshop, free
> > alternatives are not an option for most people.
> 
> How mand consumers (not businesses) do you know who have actually purchased
> the full Photoshop suite?

quite a few, actually.

even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp or other free
alternatives can do. elements is typically $50 or so and often bundled
for free with some hardware.

> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS Office for
> home use?

also quite a few.

In article <ht3s5l$u9c$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> >> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS 
> >> Office for home use?
> >
> > A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home 
> > edition, costs only $145.

I made a minor error; the price is $150.

> Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint 
> finally supports connection points).

MS Office Standard ($400) includes Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, and Word.
MS Office Home and Student ($150) includes Excel OneNote, PowerPoint, and 
Word.

Neither contains a database, and neither contains a drawing program.

To get a database (Access), you need Professional ($500), Ultimate ($680) 
Professional Plus (volume license only) or Enterprise (volume license 
only).  Or buy it separately, of course.

Unless Publisher is a drawing program, there is no drawing program included 
in Office.

<http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/FX101677751033.aspx>

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:
> > =A0Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
> >> And how many consumers do you know who have actually
> >> purchased MS Office for home use?
>
> > A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home editi=
on,
> > costs only $145.
>
> Only. =A0With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint fina=
lly
> supports connection points).

As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
the gate.

In any case, touting Access as an important "feature" is a fallacy in
of itself.

Afterall, its use isn't anywhere near as common or pervasive even in
many (dare I say "most") Business settings.  Why?   To speculate, I'd
say its partly because of minimal local training, but also less
frequent application (need) for the tool, which results in a much
lower degree of familiarity.   As such, workers use what they're
comfortable with, which is generally a "good enough" approach of using
(misapplying) MS-Excel as an information organizer tool, classically
in a simple table summary view.

Based on personal observations,  I just searched my HDD for .acc*
files and found that in all of the years & years worth of docs I have
stored & archived, I'm yet to have my first actual MS-Access datafile
emailed to me.  Note that I am discounting the .accdb file that is
created by default when one simply runs the MS-Access software for the
first time, even if one never does any data entry.

Continuing, what real use does a home PC user have for a tool such as
Access?  Particualrly one that can't be "good enough" managed with a
more familiar too (ie, a 'good enough' Excel-based table), just like
what these people typically also do at work?   Yes, I know that DB's
are more powerful in certain ways, but where's the home-based
application that creates the need?   To inventory how many cans of
soup are in the kitchen cabinet?   Apparently, we're all expected to
have a 10,000 title comic book collection...one that we're probably
telling ourselves that will be listed on eBay to get rid of..."as soon
as I find time to get it organized" :-)

To illustrate, how many retail copies has Filemaker sold of Bento?
I'm don't know either, but as per their website, one can be pretty
cynical when reading their claim of:  "...With more than seven million
units of software distributed, FileMaker..."  For example, is this the
sales of the current version of FM, or the sum of all copies of all
versions (including all Bento's) ever sold?   Given that the PC market
today is roughly 1B units, even the best case is a very small relative
number.  My point is that there isn't much evidence to claim any
strength of a marketplace "pull" for the product.

Similarly, when it comes to computer-based drawing programs, what are
we really talking about?

Is this for the generic homeowner to make the construction drawings
for the patio deck?   If so, you might be very surprised to find what
people have done with MS-Powerpoint, again from the "good enough"
klunge perspective.   And again, is quite obvious that more dedicated
Graphical Artists aren't going to find the tool that they desire
within MS-Office.


Tangentially, I think that Microsoft's apparent business plan is a
pretty good one (for MS, at least):  they're maintaining the status
quo ...and price ... for the Enterprise customer of MS-Office, but
they then repackage it by chopping out features that we all know
aren't generally needed by most people and sell this core as a "Home"
application at a relatively steep discount, and presto! you've expand
the sales base at a very minimal expense.

And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
customers to prevent business from being tempted.


-hh

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp ...

I call bullshit.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMP

   GIMP 2.6 has been reviewed twice by Ars Technica. In the first review,
   Ryan Paul noted that GIMP provides "Photoshop-like capabilities and
   offers a broad feature set that has made it popular with amateur artists
   and open source fans. Although GIMP is generally not regarded as a
   sufficient replacement for high-end commercial tools, it is beginning to
   gain some acceptance in the pro market."[14] While previously it had been
   recognised that GIMP had extensive capabilities, few noteworthy reviewers
   have cited GIMP as a tool used in professional environments. Dave Girard
   also reviewed GIMP 2.6, specifically with the aim of testing GIMP's
   fitness for professional tasks. He noted at the beginning that GIMP was a
   high-end tool, but the review conclusion noted that although many of
   GIMP's tools were of high quality, he felt that it lacked in some areas
   such as non-destructive editing, tools such as a saturation brush and
   that GIMP did not integrate well to Mac OS X

Wikipedia won't even include PS Elements in its comparison of graphics
editors.

-- 
The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the
difference between lightning and the lightning bug.
		-- Mark Twain

-hh pulled this Usenet boner:

> <and there befell much snipping>
>
> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
> customers to prevent business from being tempted.

Good luck with that one, Microsoft.

Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
Office did not include PowerPoint.

-- 
Behold, the fool saith, "Put not all thine eggs in the one basket"--which is
but a manner of saying, "Scatter your money and your attention;" but the wise
man saith, "Put all your eggs in the one basket and--WATCH THAT BASKET."
		-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"

On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> <and there befell much snipping>
>>
>> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
>> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
>> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
>> customers to prevent business from being tempted.
>
> Good luck with that one, Microsoft.
>
> Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
> Office did not include PowerPoint.


Doesn't surprise me you would lie your chintzy ass off:



Microsoft Office 2003 Small Business Edition includes:

     * Microsoft Word 2003
     * Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager
     * Microsoft Excel 2003
     * Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
     * Microsoft Publisher 2003.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AZJVD?tag=npdee-20

Also: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/ha102122501033.aspx




Office Small Business 2007
What's included: Excel, Outlook with Business Contact Manager, 
PowerPoint, Publisher, and Word
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/fx101674111033.aspx

-hh stated in post 
44013fc8-1938-434b-bb3c-afae38128e43@a20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com on 5/20/10
12:46 PM:

> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:
>>> �Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually
>>>> purchased MS Office for home use?
>> 
>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home edition,
>>> costs only $145.
>> 
>> Only. �With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint finally
>> supports connection points).
> 
> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
> the gate.

Why?  Did he say it included Access?
....


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Thu, 20 May 2010 16:11:56 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> <and there befell much snipping>
>>>
>>> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
>>> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
>>> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
>>> customers to prevent business from being tempted.
>>
>> Good luck with that one, Microsoft.
>>
>> Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
>> Office did not include PowerPoint.
> 
> 
> Doesn't surprise me you would lie your chintzy ass off:
> 
> 
> 
> Microsoft Office 2003 Small Business Edition includes:
> 
>      * Microsoft Word 2003
>      * Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager
>      * Microsoft Excel 2003
>      * Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
>      * Microsoft Publisher 2003.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AZJVD?tag=npdee-20
> 
> Also: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/ha102122501033.aspx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Office Small Business 2007
> What's included: Excel, Outlook with Business Contact Manager, 
> PowerPoint, Publisher, and Word
> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/fx101674111033.aspx

And down goes Liarmutt once again.
This is like shooting humans in a barrel.
Or in this case, canines in a barrel.

In article <ht4411$ubv$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> > even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp ...
> 
> I call bullshit.

call it whatever you want. the gimp is roughly where photoshop was ten
years ago. 

the gimp is missing some basic features such as adjustment layers,
which makes it a non-starter right there. it lacks smart objects and
non-destructive editing as well as cmyk and lab modes. it's also
significantly slower than photoshop on the same hardware. 

the raw support is awful (dcraw/ufraw) compared to adobe camera raw,
especially camera raw 6. also, the gimp doesn't have anywhere near the
number of plugins (it can only run a small subset of photoshop
plugins).

anyone who thinks the gimp can replace photoshop does not know what can
be done with photoshop. it's that simple.

>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMP
> 
>    GIMP 2.6 has been reviewed twice by Ars Technica. In the first review,
>    Ryan Paul noted that GIMP provides "Photoshop-like capabilities and
>    offers a broad feature set that has made it popular with amateur artists
>    and open source fans.

amateur artists do basic manipulations such as exposure adjustment,
colour balance and cropping. for them, photoshop and even the gimp is
overkill. open source fans don't care about features, only that it's
open source.

>    Although GIMP is generally not regarded as a
>    sufficient replacement for high-end commercial tools, 

bingo.

In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS 
> >>>> Office for home use?
> >> 
> >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home 
> >>> edition, costs only $145.
> >> 
> >> Only. �With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint 
> >> finally supports connection points).
> > 
> > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer 
> > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave 
> > the gate.
> 
> Why?  Did he say it included Access?

He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database 
that Microsoft sells.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On 5/20/2010 4:15 PM, Moshe wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 16:11:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> <and there befell much snipping>
>>>>
>>>> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
>>>> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
>>>> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
>>>> customers to prevent business from being tempted.
>>>
>>> Good luck with that one, Microsoft.
>>>
>>> Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
>>> Office did not include PowerPoint.
>>
>>
>> Doesn't surprise me you would lie your chintzy ass off:
>>
>>
>>
>> Microsoft Office 2003 Small Business Edition includes:
>>
>>       * Microsoft Word 2003
>>       * Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager
>>       * Microsoft Excel 2003
>>       * Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
>>       * Microsoft Publisher 2003.
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AZJVD?tag=npdee-20
>>
>> Also: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/ha102122501033.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Office Small Business 2007
>> What's included: Excel, Outlook with Business Contact Manager,
>> PowerPoint, Publisher, and Word
>> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/fx101674111033.aspx
>
> And down goes Liarmutt once again.
> This is like shooting humans in a barrel.
> Or in this case, canines in a barrel.


Oh, I'm sure it's just an innocent "mistake" on Linosuck's part.  Just 
like the many hundreds of Rex Ballard "mistakes" that somehow go against 
MS\Windows every single time.

With very few exceptions, "Linux advocate" == liar about MS\Windows.

On 5/20/2010 4:39 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>   Snit<usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>  wrote:
>
>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
>>>>>> Office for home use?
>>>>
>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>>>>> edition, costs only $145.
>>>>
>>>> Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>>>> finally supports connection points).
>>>
>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
>>> the gate.
>>
>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>
> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
> that Microsoft sells.


Michelle,

It's better that you not comment from a position of ignorance.

Michelle Steiner stated in post
michelle-5C1E09.13393820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi on 5/20/10
1:39 PM:

> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
>>>>>> Office for home use?
>>>> 
>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>>>>> edition, costs only $145.
>>>> 
>>>> Only. �With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>>>> finally supports connection points).
>>> 
>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
>>> the gate.
>> 
>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> 
> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
> that Microsoft sells.

I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where this was
implied?


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:200520100915345543%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <ht33fh$hgm$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
> > >> What you *don't* do is waste money on an overpriced program and get
your
> > >> critical data locked in to a proprietary format for life, just on the
> > >> off-chance that someday some odd situation like this *might* perhaps
> > >> come up.
> > >
> > > it's not a waste at all. it's a cost of doing business.
> >
> > With so much good software now available as a free commodity, does it
make
> > sense to keep incurring these costs?
>
> sometimes yes. many times the free stuff is crap. it might be good
> enough for a casual user though, but not for someone who relies on it.
> the suggestion to drive to a library to convert a file is exactly why
> it can't be used.
>
> on the other hand, sometimes the free stuff is not crap, like apache.

And on the other hand sometimes the commercial stuff is crap.


> in the case of office, and certainly in the case of photoshop, free
> alternatives are not an option for most people.

Few people actually need Photoshop. For most people the free / cheaper
alternatives are more than adequate, even if that's the cut-down Elements
version. I run my own one-person business that includes doing desktop
publishing and pre-press work, and I've never used Photoshop - in fact I use
an alternative application that cost me nothing because it was on a magazine
cover disk many years ago (it used to be a commercial application, but now
the company no longer exists ... Adobe bought them).

"Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
news:michelle-3B2A72.10560120052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
> In article <ht3s5l$u9c$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
> > >> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
> > >> Office for home use?
> > >
> > > A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
> > > edition, costs only $145.
>
> I made a minor error; the price is $150.
>
> > Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
> > finally supports connection points).
>
> MS Office Standard ($400) includes Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, and Word.
> MS Office Home and Student ($150) includes Excel OneNote, PowerPoint, and
> Word.
>
> Neither contains a database, and neither contains a drawing program.
>
> To get a database (Access), you need Professional ($500), Ultimate ($680)
> Professional Plus (volume license only) or Enterprise (volume license
> only).  Or buy it separately, of course.
>
> Unless Publisher is a drawing program, there is no drawing program
included
> in Office.
>
> <http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/FX101677751033.aspx>

This is the real problem with commerical software - companies like
Microsoft, Adobe, etc. (and even smaller ones like Avast anti-virus) charge
hidious amounts of money for the "business" software, largely because they
believe in the greedy adage "you're using our software to make money, so we
want out cut". Some idiot management types will try to tell you that the
businesses are subsidising the cheaper "home" versions, which is nonsense
since the problem being that the businesses simply pass that extra cost
along to their customers, so it's us the general public who is indeed paying
for this software, whether or not we actually use the "home" version.  :-(

"Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
news:michelle-5C1E09.13393820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> > >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
> > >>>> Office for home use?
> > >>
> > >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
> > >>> edition, costs only $145.
> > >>
> > >> Only. With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
> > >> finally supports connection points).
> > >
> > > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
> > > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
> > > the gate.
> >
> > Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>
> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
> that Microsoft sells.

Technically not. Excel can be used as a database, but it's a lot more
difficult for a novice to properly set-up and use as such, so realistically
you're correct.  :-)

I don't know if they still sell Microsoft Works, but that has a database
part to it as well.


>
> --
> Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
> <http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht4411$ubv$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> > even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp ...
>> 
>> I call bullshit.
>
> call it whatever you want. the gimp is roughly where photoshop was ten
> years ago. 

Ah, the old goal-post shift.  You said "photoshop elements".

> the gimp is missing some basic features such as adjustment layers,
> which makes it a non-starter right there. it lacks smart objects and
> non-destructive editing as well as cmyk and lab modes. it's also
> significantly slower than photoshop on the same hardware. 
>
> the raw support is awful (dcraw/ufraw) compared to adobe camera raw,
> especially camera raw 6. also, the gimp doesn't have anywhere near the
> number of plugins (it can only run a small subset of photoshop
> plugins).
>
> anyone who thinks the gimp can replace photoshop does not know what can
> be done with photoshop. it's that simple.
>
>>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMP
>> 
>>    GIMP 2.6 has been reviewed twice by Ars Technica. In the first review,
>>    Ryan Paul noted that GIMP provides "Photoshop-like capabilities and
>>    offers a broad feature set that has made it popular with amateur artists
>>    and open source fans.
>
> amateur artists do basic manipulations such as exposure adjustment,
> colour balance and cropping. for them, photoshop and even the gimp is
> overkill. open source fans don't care about features, only that it's
> open source.
>
>>    Although GIMP is generally not regarded as a
>>    sufficient replacement for high-end commercial tools, 
>
> bingo.

That same statement applied to Photoshop *Elements*, which was the
target of my "bullshit" claim.

Stay on topic.

-- 
Good day for overcoming obstacles.  Try a steeplechase.

Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS 
>> >>>> Office for home use?
>> >> 
>> >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home 
>> >>> edition, costs only $145.
>> >> 
>> >> Only. �With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint 
>> >> finally supports connection points).
>> > 
>> > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer 
>> > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave 
>> > the gate.
>> 
>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>
> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database 
> that Microsoft sells.

Except for SQL Server, of course.

-- 
"I understand this is your first dead client," Sabian was saying.  The
absurdity of the statement made me want to laugh but they don't call me
Deadpan Allie and lie.
		-- Pat Cadigan, "Mindplayers"

On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:19:58 +1200, Your Name wrote:

> "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
> news:michelle-5C1E09.13393820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
>> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased
>> > >>>> MS Office for home use?
>> > >>
>> > >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>> > >>> edition, costs only $145.
>> > >>
>> > >> Only. With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>> > >> finally supports connection points).
>> > >
>> > > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>> > > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to
>> > > leave the gate.
>> >
>> > Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>>
>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
>> that Microsoft sells.
> 
> Technically not. Excel can be used as a database, but it's a lot more
> difficult for a novice to properly set-up and use as such, so
> realistically you're correct.  :-)
> 
> I don't know if they still sell Microsoft Works, but that has a database
> part to it as well.
> 

They still sell Microsoft Works.


-- 
Rick

On 10-05-19 17:40 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> On 10-05-19 17:08 , Your Name wrote:
>>> "nospam"<nospam@nospam.invalid>   wrote in message
>>> news:190520100249202825%nospam@nospam.invalid...
>>>> In article<ht017v$73k$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name
>>>> <your.name@isp.com>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Even something like a standard GIF or JPEG image will look different on
>>>>> other computers with different brightness / contrast and gamma settings.
>>>>
>>>> not if you're colour managed.
>>>
>>> Which is about 2% of the world's computers.  :-)
>>
>> And only a small slice of those properly so.
>
>     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Operating_system_level
>
>     Operating system level
>
>     Beginning with Windows Vista, color management in Windows is handled at
>     the OS level through an ICC color management standard and API known as
>     Windows Color System.WCS supplements the Image Color Management (ICM)
>     system in Windows 2000 and Windows XP, originally written by
>     Heidelberg.

The ability for a system to do "color management" does not mean that any 
one computer display, never mind inputs and outputs are correctly 
managed, measured, calibrated or that s/w (such as Photoshop or the 
Gimp) is properly used in a color managed workflow.



-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 10-05-19 17:19 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> On 10-05-19 6:57 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet truth:
>>>
>>>> Max OS X just works.
>>>
>>> Of course it does.  It is installed for you on a very limited hardware base.
>>
>> OTOH, Windows works perfectly well on almost all computers for which it
>> is sold.  Unlike Linux's magic-incantation requirements for many platforms.
>
> Uh, Beavis... the vendors of Windows-based computers supply the
> "magic-incantation requirements" of Windows for the buyer.

Name calling is the first sign of a loser.

The dis-interest of all component suppliers in the "miracle" of Linux 
just reflects the majority opinion of those manufacturers that it is not 
something to be taken very seriously.  Where a particular component is 
well supported for Windblows, support for Linux is usually half hearted 
or defective.

Face it, Linux is not going to get much more than its current share of 
the market.  It may not be fair but it's the fact.

 >> It's absolutely no surprise that Linux has saturated its potential
 >> amongst personal users at about 1% of OS' overall.

Oh, did I say that already?  Guess it still stands.


-- 
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 5/19/2010 8:34 PM, Rick wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:44:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>>>> descriptive.
>>>
>>> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>>>
>>> The desktop is dead.
>>>
>>> The future is with the portable...
>>>
>>>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial
>>>> venture does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is going
>>>> to do that for no money?
>>>
>>> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>>
>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
>> minds of Linux bozos.
>
> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
> exclusive deals with OEMs


I thought Linux was just the kernel?

Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:

> On 10-05-19 17:19 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> Uh, Beavis... the vendors of Windows-based computers supply the
>> "magic-incantation requirements" of Windows for the buyer.
>
> Name calling is the first sign of a loser.

LOL.  Nice comeback.

We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
and is already eating away at Microsoft.

-- 
Q:	Why did Menachem Begin invade Lebanon?
A:	To impress Jodie Foster.

In article
<44013fc8-1938-434b-bb3c-afae38128e43@a20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, -hh
<recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> > Michelle Steiner pulled this Usenet boner:
> > > =A0Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> And how many consumers do you know who have actually
> > >> purchased MS Office for home use?
> >
> > > A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home editi=
> on,
> > > costs only $145.
> >
> > Only. =A0With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint fina=
> lly
> > supports connection points).
> 
> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
> the gate.
> 
> In any case, touting Access as an important "feature" is a fallacy in
> of itself.
> 
> Afterall, its use isn't anywhere near as common or pervasive even in
> many (dare I say "most") Business settings.  Why?   To speculate, I'd
> say its partly because of minimal local training, but also less
> frequent application (need) for the tool, which results in a much
> lower degree of familiarity.   As such, workers use what they're
> comfortable with, which is generally a "good enough" approach of using
> (misapplying) MS-Excel as an information organizer tool, classically
> in a simple table summary view.

By coincidence, the latest issue of the UK magazine MacFormat I've got has
a letter in it about using / converting an old AppleWorks database on a
new iMac. The end of the reply has the magazine's "expert" (his replies
often indicate that he's nothing of the kind, but then he *is* an
ex-Windows magazine person) saying:

     ... But my advice is to experiment with a spreadsheet 
     first.

     Spreadsheets are basically databases with a looser 
     approach to record structure. Short of very complex 
     queries, there's nothing you can do in a database 
     that you can't duplicate in a spreadsheet.

     One of the main reasons that both Apple and Microsoft 
     have dropped databases from their home productivity 
     suites is that most people long ago rightly decided 
     that spreadsheets were an easier way to get the job 
     done.

In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
> and is already eating away at Microsoft.

um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.

In article <ht48vd$mdv$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, "Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> 
wrote:

> I don't know if they still sell Microsoft Works, but that has a database 
> part to it as well.

I had completely forgotten about that product.  They do sell it, for $40, 
and it does contain a database module.  But it's not a stand-alone database 
like Access is.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

In article <ht4936$dq1$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
<ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:

> >> > even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp ...
> >> 
> >> I call bullshit.
> >
> > call it whatever you want. the gimp is roughly where photoshop was ten
> > years ago. 
> 
> Ah, the old goal-post shift.  You said "photoshop elements".

it's not a goalpost shift. both statements are true. it doesn't matter
which version of photoshop you pick. the gimp doesn't do as much.

photoshop elements is closer in features to the gimp. both lack cmyk,
for example, but elements still does a *lot* more and a lot faster too.


like i said, no adjustment layers makes it a non-starter.

In article <C81AF09A.70F0E%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> >>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS 
> >>>>>> Office for home use?
> >>>> 
> >>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home 
> >>>>> edition, costs only $145.
> >>>> 
> >>>> ***Only. �With no database,*** and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint 
> >>>> finally supports connection points).
> >>> 
> >>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer 
> >>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave 
> >>> the gate.
> >> 
> >> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> > 
> > He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only 
> > database that Microsoft sells.
> 
> I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where this 
> was implied?

It's right in the quoted material.  I blocked it out with triple asterisks 
to make it easier for you to see.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner stated in post
michelle-715844.18302820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi on 5/20/10
6:30 PM:

> In article <C81AF09A.70F0E%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
>>>>>>>> Office for home use?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>>>>>>> edition, costs only $145.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ***Only. �With no database,*** and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>>>>>> finally supports connection points).
>>>>> 
>>>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>>>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
>>>>> the gate.
>>>> 
>>>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>>> 
>>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only
>>> database that Microsoft sells.
>> 
>> I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where this
>> was implied?
> 
> It's right in the quoted material.  I blocked it out with triple asterisks
> to make it easier for you to see.

You highlighted how it does *not* have a database... how does that imply it
does?  


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:00:54 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/19/2010 8:34 PM, Rick wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:44:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/19/2010 6:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>>>> On 2010-05-19, Lloyd Parsons<lloydparsons@mac.com>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On the desktop?  Steady, but slower than a dead snail would be more
>>>>> descriptive.
>>>>
>>>> Who cares about the desktop, "Lloyd"?
>>>>
>>>> The desktop is dead.
>>>>
>>>> The future is with the portable...
>>>>
>>>>> Linux on the desktop will not get the numbers until a commercial
>>>>> venture does the pushing.  Of course, which commercial vendor is
>>>>> going to do that for no money?
>>>>
>>>> Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's criminal
>>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>>>
>>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
>>> minds of Linux bozos.
>>
>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
>> exclusive deals with OEMs
> 
> 
> I thought Linux was just the kernel?

Your point?



-- 
Rick

On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:21:13 -0700, nospam wrote:

> In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
>> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely
>> flexible, and is already eating away at Microsoft.
> 
> um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.

um, yes it is.

-- 
Rick

In article <C81B32AB.70F83%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> >>>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased 
> >>>>>>>> MS Office for home use?
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and 
> >>>>>>> home edition, costs only $145.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> ***Only. �With no database,*** and no drawing program (unless 
> >>>>>> PowerPoint finally supports connection points).
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer 
> >>>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to 
> >>>>> leave the gate.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> >>> 
> >>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only 
> >>> database that Microsoft sells.
> >> 
> >> I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where 
> >> this was implied?
> > 
> > It's right in the quoted material.  I blocked it out with triple 
> > asterisks to make it easier for you to see.
> 
> You highlighted how it does *not* have a database... how does that imply 
> it does?  

I highlighted that he said that one difference between student and home 
edition and the more expensive versions is that home and student does not 
have a data base; thereby, he implied that the more expensive versions do 
have a data base.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

In article <OpCdnenjuK12dGjWnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@supernews.com>, Rick
<none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> >> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely
> >> flexible, and is already eating away at Microsoft.
> > 
> > um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.
> 
> um, yes it is.

got some numbers to back that up?

<http://mobile.itwire.com/your-it-news/home-it/24793-linux-breaks-throug
h-one-percent-web-share>

  Windows' continuing loss of web share is primarily to the benefit of
  Mac OS X, though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.

looking at their numbers, windows dropped about 4% while linux went up
about 0.4%. it's not linux that's eating at microsoft.

Michelle Steiner stated in post
michelle-45DE79.19122220052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi on 5/20/10
7:12 PM:

> In article <C81B32AB.70F83%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased
>>>>>>>>>> MS Office for home use?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and
>>>>>>>>> home edition, costs only $145.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ***Only. �With no database,*** and no drawing program (unless
>>>>>>>> PowerPoint finally supports connection points).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>>>>>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to
>>>>>>> leave the gate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>>>>> 
>>>>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only
>>>>> database that Microsoft sells.
>>>> 
>>>> I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where
>>>> this was implied?
>>> 
>>> It's right in the quoted material.  I blocked it out with triple
>>> asterisks to make it easier for you to see.
>> 
>> You highlighted how it does *not* have a database... how does that imply
>> it does?  
> 
> I highlighted that he said that one difference between student and home
> edition and the more expensive versions is that home and student does not
> have a data base; thereby, he implied that the more expensive versions do
> have a data base.

Don't they?


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Thu, 20 May 2010 19:16:10 -0700, nospam wrote:

> In article <OpCdnenjuK12dGjWnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@supernews.com>, Rick
> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> >> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely
>> >> flexible, and is already eating away at Microsoft.
>> > 
>> > um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.
>> 
>> um, yes it is.
> 
> got some numbers to back that up?
> 
> <http://mobile.itwire.com/your-it-news/home-it/24793-linux-breaks-throug
> h-one-percent-web-share>
> 
>   Windows' continuing loss of web share is primarily to the benefit of
>   Mac OS X, though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
> 
> looking at their numbers, windows dropped about 4% while linux went up
> about 0.4%. it's not linux that's eating at microsoft.

.... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.



-- 
Rick

In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
<none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.

mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop. 

claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
because something like android is based on it is specious. people don't
buy android devices because it's linux. 

a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.

On 10-05-20 11:56 AM, in article
michelle-3B2A72.10560120052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi, "Michelle
Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <ht3s5l$u9c$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
>>>> Office for home use?
>>> 
>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>>> edition, costs only $145.
> 
> I made a minor error; the price is $150.
> 
>> Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>> finally supports connection points).
> 
> MS Office Standard ($400) includes Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, and Word.
> MS Office Home and Student ($150) includes Excel OneNote, PowerPoint, and
> Word.
> 

What I've always found funny about this pricing is does Outlook really
retail for $250 the difference between Office Standard and Office Home and
Student never mind that Home and Student also includes OneNote and provides
three licenses?  I don't think so.  Of course if you really need Outlook or
Entourage you can pay for Exchange hosting and download it as it is included
for free with Exchange hosting.
  
> Neither contains a database, and neither contains a drawing program.
> 
> To get a database (Access), you need Professional ($500), Ultimate ($680)
> Professional Plus (volume license only) or Enterprise (volume license
> only).  Or buy it separately, of course.
> 
> Unless Publisher is a drawing program, there is no drawing program included
> in Office.
> 
> <http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/FX101677751033.aspx>

On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:

> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
> 
> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
> 
> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
> because something like android is based on it is specious. people don't
> buy android devices because it's linux.
> 
> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
> going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.

Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any 
reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.

-- 
Rick

In article <ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com>, Rick
<none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> >> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
> > 
> > mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
> > 
> > claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
> > because something like android is based on it is specious. people don't
> > buy android devices because it's linux.
> > 
> > a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
> > going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
> 
> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any 
> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.

and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os x
that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.

In article <TtOdnZbsHtxAN2jWnZ2dnUVZ_vSnnZ2d@supernews.com>,
 Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:19:58 +1200, Your Name wrote:
> 
> > "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
> > news:michelle-5C1E09.13393820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
> >> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> >>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased
> >> > >>>> MS Office for home use?
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
> >> > >>> edition, costs only $145.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Only. With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
> >> > >> finally supports connection points).
> >> > >
> >> > > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
> >> > > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to
> >> > > leave the gate.
> >> >
> >> > Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> >>
> >> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
> >> that Microsoft sells.
> > 
> > Technically not. Excel can be used as a database, but it's a lot more
> > difficult for a novice to properly set-up and use as such, so
> > realistically you're correct.  :-)
> > 
> > I don't know if they still sell Microsoft Works, but that has a database
> > part to it as well.
> > 
> 
> They still sell Microsoft Works.

Couldn't they be sued for False Advertising in that case?
-- 
Remove blown from email address to reply.

In article <200520101821139917%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
> 
> > We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
> > and is already eating away at Microsoft.
> 
> um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.

Not to mention Goolge trying to become the new Microsoft by sticking their
noses into EVERYTHING.  :-\

In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
linonut@be11south-sucks.net wrote:

> Alan Browne pulled this Usenet boner:
> 
> > On 10-05-19 17:19 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >>
> >> Uh, Beavis... the vendors of Windows-based computers supply the
> >> "magic-incantation requirements" of Windows for the buyer.
> >
> > Name calling is the first sign of a loser.
> 
> LOL.  Nice comeback.
> 
> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
> and is already eating away at Microsoft.

Actually, what's eating away at Microsoft is their own incompetence, their
useless, buggy software, and their stubborn ignorance of sticking to
established standards.

In article <tkettler-217401.23585620052010@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Thomas R. Kettler" <tkettler@blownfuse.net> wrote:

> In article <TtOdnZbsHtxAN2jWnZ2dnUVZ_vSnnZ2d@supernews.com>,
>  Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:19:58 +1200, Your Name wrote:
> > 
> > > "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
> > > news:michelle-5C1E09.13393820052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
> > >> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> > >>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased
> > >> > >>>> MS Office for home use?
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
> > >> > >>> edition, costs only $145.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Only. With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
> > >> > >> finally supports connection points).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
> > >> > > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to
> > >> > > leave the gate.
> > >> >
> > >> > Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> > >>
> > >> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
> > >> that Microsoft sells.
> > > 
> > > Technically not. Excel can be used as a database, but it's a lot more
> > > difficult for a novice to properly set-up and use as such, so
> > > realistically you're correct.  :-)
> > > 
> > > I don't know if they still sell Microsoft Works, but that has a database
> > > part to it as well.
> > > 
> > 
> > They still sell Microsoft Works.
> 
> Couldn't they be sued for False Advertising in that case?

They probably have been numerous times, but wriggled out of it thanks to
false promises and a weak-kneeded "Justice" system just like they usually
do.  :-\

Rick stated in post OpCdne7juK0jdGjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com on
5/20/10 7:02 PM:

>>>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little non-competitive
>>>> minds of Linux bozos.
>>> 
>>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>> 
>> 
>> I thought Linux was just the kernel?
> 
> Your point?

His point went over your head...


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Rick stated in post OpCdnenjuK12dGjWnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/20/10 7:03 PM:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:21:13 -0700, nospam wrote:
> 
>> In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely
>>> flexible, and is already eating away at Microsoft.
>> 
>> um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.
> 
> um, yes it is.

On the desktop, Linux based OSs have gone essentially nowhere.  Netbooks
might be a bit of an exception.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Rick stated in post ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/20/10 8:49 PM:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:
> 
>> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
>> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>> 
>> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>> 
>> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
>> because something like android is based on it is specious. people don't
>> buy android devices because it's linux.
>> 
>> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
>> going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
> 
> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.

From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at less
than 2%, many any less than 1%.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

In article <C81B5B00.24B2C%Megabyte.NoSPAM@sent.com>,
 Megabyte <Megabyte.NoSPAM@sent.com> wrote:

> > MS Office Standard ($400) includes Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, and 
> > Word. MS Office Home and Student ($150) includes Excel OneNote, 
> > PowerPoint, and Word.
> 
> What I've always found funny about this pricing is does Outlook really 
> retail for $250 the difference between Office Standard and Office Home 
> and Student never mind that Home and Student also includes OneNote and 
> provides three licenses?  I don't think so.

When Office is upgraded, you can buy an upgrade version for less than the 
full retail price, except for the Home and Student version; there is no 
upgrade version.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

In article <C81B47A8.70FA5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> >>>>>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually 
> >>>>>>>>>> purchased MS Office for home use?
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and 
> >>>>>>>>> home edition, costs only $145.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> ***Only. �With no database,*** and no drawing program (unless 
> >>>>>>>> PowerPoint finally supports connection points).
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no 
> >>>>>>> longer include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it 
> >>>>>>> tries to leave the gate.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only 
> >>>>> database that Microsoft sells.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I have not been following the thread... can you point me to where 
> >>>> this was implied?
> >>> 
> >>> It's right in the quoted material.  I blocked it out with triple 
> >>> asterisks to make it easier for you to see.
> >> 
> >> You highlighted how it does *not* have a database... how does that 
> >> imply it does?  
> > 
> > I highlighted that he said that one difference between student and 
> > home edition and the more expensive versions is that home and student 
> > does not have a data base; thereby, he implied that the more expensive 
> > versions do have a data base.
> 
> Don't they?

as the above quote shows, not all of them do.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Rick  <n...@mail.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
> > reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>
> and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os x
> that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.

On the desktop shares metric, Linux is an ankle-biter.

Anyone who claims otherwise is utterly unable to comprehend the
concept of there being any noise in data.


-hh

On Fri, 21 May 2010 02:12:02 -0700 (PDT), -hh wrote:

> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Rick  <n...@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>>
>> and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os x
>> that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.
> 
> On the desktop shares metric, Linux is an ankle-biter.
> 
> Anyone who claims otherwise is utterly unable to comprehend the
> concept of there being any noise in data.
> 
> 
> -hh

Linux has had 15+ years to make it to the desktop.
It has failed.

On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:27:58 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post OpCdne7juK0jdGjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com on
> 5/20/10 7:02 PM:
> 
>>>>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little
>>>>> non-competitive minds of Linux bozos.
>>>> 
>>>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's
>>>> illegal exclusive deals with OEMs
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I thought Linux was just the kernel?
>> 
>> Your point?
> 
> His point went over your head...

You sure beg for my attention  lot.



-- 
Rick

On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:52:11 -0700, nospam wrote:

> In article <ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com>, Rick
> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> >> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>> > 
>> > mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>> > 
>> > claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
>> > because something like android is based on it is specious. people
>> > don't buy android devices because it's linux.
>> > 
>> > a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
>> > going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
>> 
>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
> 
> and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os x
> that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.

go check any reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.



-- 
Rick

On Fri, 21 May 2010 05:22:38 -0400, Moshe wrote:

> On Fri, 21 May 2010 02:12:02 -0700 (PDT), -hh wrote:
> 
>> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> Rick  <n...@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>>>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>>>
>>> and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os
>>> x that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.
>> 
>> On the desktop shares metric, Linux is an ankle-biter.
>> 
>> Anyone who claims otherwise is utterly unable to comprehend the concept
>> of there being any noise in data.
>> 
>> 
>> -hh
> 
> Linux has had 15+ years to make it to the desktop. It has failed.

It has not.



-- 
Rick

On Fri, 21 May 2010 02:12:02 -0700, -hh wrote:

> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Rick  <n...@mail.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>> > reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>>
>> and it will show mac usage increasing even more, which is why it's os x
>> that's nibbling away at windows, not linux.
> 
> On the desktop shares metric, Linux is an ankle-biter.
> 
> Anyone who claims otherwise is utterly unable to comprehend the concept
> of there being any noise in data.
> 
> 
And yet Apple's small market share is so meaningful </sarcasm>





-- 
Rick

On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:29:18 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
> 5/20/10 8:49 PM:
> 
>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
>>> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>>> 
>>> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>>> 
>>> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
>>> because something like android is based on it is specious. people
>>> don't buy android devices because it's linux.
>>> 
>>> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
>>> going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
>> 
>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
> 
> From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at less
> than 2%, many any less than 1%.

<http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
4.5%

-- 
Rick

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
>> and is already eating away at Microsoft.
>
> um, no it isn't. os x is what's eating away at microsoft.

I totally agree.  And I am actually quite happy about that.

   1. At least *one* consumer computer vendor is not in the thrall
      of Microsoft (and their gaggle of "Partners").

   2. It gets UNIX (in the form of FreeBSD) into more hands.

   3. It provides an actual avenue of innovation.

Apple is to be commended for their performance, even if we don't always
agree on elements of their strategy.

But Linux (and other OSS) *is* eating away at Microsoft, even if not so
strongly on the desktops of mainly unknowing consumers.  Just check out MS's
SEC filings of late.

-- 
Never look up when dragons fly overhead.

Your Name pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht4mjq$n01$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> linonut@be11south-sucks.net wrote:
>> 
>> > On 10-05-19 17:19 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> 
>> We'll see about how Linux grows.  It's a good system, extremely flexible,
>> and is already eating away at Microsoft.
>
> Actually, what's eating away at Microsoft is their own incompetence, their
> useless, buggy software, and their stubborn ignorance of sticking to
> established standards.

Ironically, that's part of what got Microsoft so dominant in the first
place.

The game, though, is slowly shifting away from their areas of "competence".

-- 
You will feel hungry again in another hour.

Your Name pulled this Usenet boner:

>      ... But my advice is to experiment with a spreadsheet 
>      first.
>
>      Spreadsheets are basically databases with a looser 
>      approach to record structure. Short of very complex 
>      queries, there's nothing you can do in a database 
>      that you can't duplicate in a spreadsheet.

Spreadsheets don't scale; they're difficult to program; you can't
read their source code; they have no concept of relational connections.

>      One of the main reasons that both Apple and Microsoft 
>      have dropped databases from their home productivity 
>      suites is that most people long ago rightly decided 
>      that spreadsheets were an easier way to get the job 
>      done.

Nobody runs even a small web site on a spreadsheet.

But the home user's needs are simple, so spreadsheets are fine.

-- 
"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"

nospam pulled this Usenet boner:

> In article <ht4936$dq1$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <ahlstromc@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>
>> >> > even photoshop elements blows away anything the gimp ...
>> >> 
>> >> I call bullshit.
>> >
>> > call it whatever you want. the gimp is roughly where photoshop was ten
>> > years ago. 
>> 
>> Ah, the old goal-post shift.  You said "photoshop elements".
>
> it's not a goalpost shift. both statements are true. it doesn't matter
> which version of photoshop you pick. the gimp doesn't do as much.
>
> photoshop elements is closer in features to the gimp. both lack cmyk,
> for example, but elements still does a *lot* more and a lot faster too.
>
> like i said, no adjustment layers makes it a non-starter.

No, it doesn't.

-- 
Save energy: be apathetic.

Rick pulled this Usenet boner:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:00:54 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's illegal
>>> exclusive deals with OEMs
>> 
>> I thought Linux was just the kernel?
>
> Your point?

Anyone who argues about the exact coverage of the term "Linux" has no point.

"Linux" is a multifaceted beastie, and what you see depends on which facet
your are observing.

-- 
Your lucky color has faded.

Rick stated in post ycydnfoIcY53xmvWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/21/10 3:09 AM:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:29:18 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> Rick stated in post ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>> 5/20/10 8:49 PM:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
>>>> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>>>> 
>>>> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>>>> 
>>>> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
>>>> because something like android is based on it is specious. people
>>>> don't buy android devices because it's linux.
>>>> 
>>>> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
>>>> going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
>>> 
>>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>> 
>> From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at less
>> than 2%, many any less than 1%.
> 
> <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
> 4.5%

Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have a
higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Rick stated in post ycydnf4IcY6vxmvWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/21/10 3:06 AM:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:27:58 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> Rick stated in post OpCdne7juK0jdGjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com on
>> 5/20/10 7:02 PM:
>> 
>>>>>> There's no such thing.  It's all in the deluded little
>>>>>> non-competitive minds of Linux bozos.
>>>>> 
>>>>> OK ...Linux won't do any good on the desktop until Microsoft's
>>>>> illegal exclusive deals with OEMs
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I thought Linux was just the kernel?
>>> 
>>> Your point?
>> 
>> His point went over your head...
> 
> You sure beg for my attention  lot.
> 
> 
Nope... I note facts you do not like.  And then you run away, telling me I
"want" the last word... as if I do not want you to prove me wrong and
actually say something that shows some understanding.

You do that very rarely.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> <and there befell much snipping>
>>>
>>> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
>>> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
>>> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
>>> customers to prevent business from being tempted.
>>
>> Good luck with that one, Microsoft.
>>
>> Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
>> Office did not include PowerPoint.
>
> Doesn't surprise me you would lie your chintzy ass off:
>
> Microsoft Office 2003 Small Business Edition includes:
>
>      * Microsoft Word 2003
>      * Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager
>      * Microsoft Excel 2003
>      * Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
>      * Microsoft Publisher 2003.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AZJVD?tag=npdee-20
>
> Also: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/ha102122501033.aspx
>
> Office Small Business 2007
> What's included: Excel, Outlook with Business Contact Manager, 
> PowerPoint, Publisher, and Word
> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/fx101674111033.aspx

Wasn't Creepy Chris lecturing people the other day about googling facts
first before making fools of themselves? Yet again the sycophantic
little suck up whines and cringes when people put him right  but
is all stout and noble when it comes to telling others how its
done. What a weenie.

DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> writes:

> On 5/20/2010 4:15 PM, Moshe wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 16:11:56 -0400, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/20/2010 4:03 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> -hh pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> <and there befell much snipping>
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course, even though business could very easily 'make due'
>>>>> without having the full version on every desktop, MS slaps a licencing
>>>>> term on the 'Home' version that excludes so-called 'business use'
>>>>> customers to prevent business from being tempted.
>>>>
>>>> Good luck with that one, Microsoft.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, it did surprise me to find that the Small Business edition of MS
>>>> Office did not include PowerPoint.
>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't surprise me you would lie your chintzy ass off:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Microsoft Office 2003 Small Business Edition includes:
>>>
>>>       * Microsoft Word 2003
>>>       * Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager
>>>       * Microsoft Excel 2003
>>>       * Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
>>>       * Microsoft Publisher 2003.
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AZJVD?tag=npdee-20
>>>
>>> Also: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/ha102122501033.aspx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Office Small Business 2007
>>> What's included: Excel, Outlook with Business Contact Manager,
>>> PowerPoint, Publisher, and Word
>>> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/suites/fx101674111033.aspx
>>
>> And down goes Liarmutt once again.
>> This is like shooting humans in a barrel.
>> Or in this case, canines in a barrel.
>
> Oh, I'm sure it's just an innocent "mistake" on Linosuck's part.  Just 
> like the many hundreds of Rex Ballard "mistakes" that somehow go against 
> MS\Windows every single time.
>
> With very few exceptions, "Linux advocate" == liar about MS\Windows.

It#s not a mistake when the creepy one pronounces with such
authority. It's what he does when left to his own devices and is not
pulled back into line  - he starts getting all excited and starts
showing off in front of the other "advocates". He uses vi you know.

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:32:59 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post ycydnfoIcY53xmvWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
> 5/21/10 3:09 AM:
> 
>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:29:18 -0700, Snit wrote:
>> 
>>> Rick stated in post ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>>> 5/20/10 8:49 PM:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
>>>>> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>>>>> 
>>>>> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>>>>> 
>>>>> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of
>>>>> windows because something like android is based on it is specious.
>>>>> people don't buy android devices because it's linux.
>>>>> 
>>>>> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody
>>>>> is going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
>>>> 
>>>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>>>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>>> 
>>> From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at
>>> less than 2%, many any less than 1%.
>> 
>> <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
> 
> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have
> a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.

YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"

Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%

-- 
Rick

Rick stated in post ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/21/10 6:50 AM:

>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have
>> a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%

Please re-read my above comments and see if you can understand it.  Thanks!


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:03:24 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
> 5/21/10 6:50 AM:
> 
>>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users
>>> have a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
>> 
>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>> 
>> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
> 
> Please re-read my above comments and see if you can understand it. 
> Thanks!

YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"

Do you now deny them?



-- 
Rick

In article <ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com>,
 Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:

> > Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have
> > a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%

In context, it is obvious to all but the most stupid or belligerent that he 
meant highest estimates for the entire personal computer population, not 
for browsing one particular web site.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> writes:

> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> >>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS 
>> >>>> Office for home use?
>> >> 
>> >>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home 
>> >>> edition, costs only $145.
>> >> 
>> >> Only.  With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint 
>> >> finally supports connection points).
>> > 
>> > As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer 
>> > include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave 
>> > the gate.
>> 
>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>
> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database 
> that Microsoft sells.

Are you another hpt nymshift (which would explain your stupidity) or
just ignorant and in need of education?

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:

> Rick stated in post ycydnfoIcY53xmvWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
> 5/21/10 3:09 AM:
>
>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 21:29:18 -0700, Snit wrote:
>> 
>>> Rick stated in post ycydnfwIcY5Fn2vWnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>>> 5/20/10 8:49 PM:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:30:10 -0700, nospam wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <OpCdnerjuK30ZmjWnZ2dnUVZ_ggAAAAA@supernews.com>, Rick
>>>>> <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> ... though Linux and mobile platforms are also picking up share.
>>>>> 
>>>>> mobile platforms are not linux on the desktop.
>>>>> 
>>>>> claiming that linux is gaining market share at the expense of windows
>>>>> because something like android is based on it is specious. people
>>>>> don't buy android devices because it's linux.
>>>>> 
>>>>> a lot of routers use linux, such as the linksys wrt54g, but nobody is
>>>>> going to run the gimp or openoffice for it either.
>>>> 
>>>> Hey, it was your reference. As for desktop share... go check any
>>>> reference. it will show Linux system usage increasing.
>>> 
>>> From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at less
>>> than 2%, many any less than 1%.
>> 
>> <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
>> 4.5%
>
> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have a
> higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.


Terry "Telnet" Porter once came gushing into COLA spouting nonsense
about Linux having 74% market share or thereabouts. The source for his
magical discovery? His own Linux centric support web.... I kid you not.

Between him, Ahlstrom and HPT one has to wonder if a lobotomy is a
pre-req to becoming an "advocate".

Rick stated in post WYydnf5026MIDmvWnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/21/10 7:07 AM:

> On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:03:24 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> Rick stated in post ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>> 5/21/10 6:50 AM:
>> 
>>>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users
>>>> have a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
>>> 
>>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>>> 
>>> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
>> 
>> Please re-read my above comments and see if you can understand it.
>> Thanks!
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
> Do you now deny them?
> 
> 
You did not do as I requested.  And of course I do not deny my words.  Why
would I?  The stats you point to are *only* from the w3schoolslogs.  They
are not representative of a wide range of sites... they are not reasonable
estimates of OS usage.  I know - this will go over your head.  Explaining
basic facts to you is, well, simply a waste of time - until your herd gives
the go-ahead, you will not admit that even the page you pointed to admits
that those are the only log files those stats represent.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Michelle Steiner stated in post
michelle-3B4A77.07251521052010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi on 5/21/10
7:25 AM:

> In article <ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com>,
>  Rick <none@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have
>>> a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
>> 
>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>> 
>> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
> 
> In context, it is obvious to all but the most stupid or belligerent that he
> meant highest estimates for the entire personal computer population, not
> for browsing one particular web site.

Exactly.  Rick is just desperate to be right about something, no matter how
pedantic or absurd he has to be.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Hadron stated in post ht65tj$4dv$2@news.eternal-september.org on 5/21/10
7:38 AM:

>>>> From inconsequential to minuscule.  The highest estimates put it at less
>>>> than 2%, many any less than 1%.
>>> 
>>> <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
>>> 4.5%
>> 
>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users have a
>> higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep up.
> 
> 
> Terry "Telnet" Porter once came gushing into COLA spouting nonsense
> about Linux having 74% market share or thereabouts. The source for his
> magical discovery? His own Linux centric support web.... I kid you not.
> 
> Between him, Ahlstrom and HPT one has to wonder if a lobotomy is a
> pre-req to becoming an "advocate".

It is amazing how deluded some folks will allow themselves to get, just to
support their own bias.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

Hadron stated in post ht65o3$4dv$1@news.eternal-september.org on 5/21/10
7:35 AM:

> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> writes:
> 
>> In article <C81AE5EF.70EF0%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
>>  Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>>> And how many consumers do you know who have actually purchased MS
>>>>>>> Office for home use?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> A lot of them have; don't forget that MS Office, student and home
>>>>>> edition, costs only $145.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Only. �With no database, and no drawing program (unless PowerPoint
>>>>> finally supports connection points).
>>>> 
>>>> As others have pointed out, the basic versions of Office no longer
>>>> include MS-Access.  As such, the argument fails as it tries to leave
>>>> the gate.
>>> 
>>> Why?  Did he say it included Access?
>> 
>> He implied that it includes a database, and Access is the only database
>> that Microsoft sells.
> 
> Are you another hpt nymshift (which would explain your stupidity) or
> just ignorant and in need of education?

The claim was that the student version did not count as Office because it
does not have Access... but only the higher end versions do, more don't than
do.  The whole claim of Access was silly...


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:38:52 -0700, Snit wrote:

> Rick stated in post WYydnf5026MIDmvWnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
> 5/21/10 7:07 AM:
> 
>> On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:03:24 -0700, Snit wrote:
>> 
>>> Rick stated in post ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>>> 5/21/10 6:50 AM:
>>> 
>>>>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users
>>>>> have a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep
>>>>> up.
>>>> 
>>>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>>>> 
>>>> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
>>> 
>>> Please re-read my above comments and see if you can understand it.
>>> Thanks!
>> 
>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>> 
>> Do you now deny them?
>> 
>> 
> You did not do as I requested.  And of course I do not deny my words. 
> Why would I?  The stats you point to are *only* from the w3schoolslogs. 

YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"

> They are not representative of a wide range of sites... 

YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"

> they are not
> reasonable estimates of OS usage.  I know - this will go over your head.
>  Explaining basic facts to you is, well, simply a waste of time - until
> your herd gives the go-ahead, you will not admit that even the page you
> pointed to admits that those are the only log files those stats
> represent.

YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"

Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%

-- 
Rick

Rick stated in post iMidnSRrq4YXAGvWnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@supernews.com on
5/21/10 7:49 AM:

> On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:38:52 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> Rick stated in post WYydnf5026MIDmvWnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>> 5/21/10 7:07 AM:
>> 
>>> On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:03:24 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Rick stated in post ArGdncPleZAAEmvWnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@supernews.com on
>>>> 5/21/10 6:50 AM:
>>>> 
>>>>>> Nobody has said that there are not some websites where Linux users
>>>>>> have a higher percentage of viewers.  Please, Rick, do try to keep
>>>>>> up.
>>>>> 
>>>>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%
>>>> 
>>>> Please re-read my above comments and see if you can understand it.
>>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
>>> 
>>> Do you now deny them?
>>> 
>>> 
>> You did not do as I requested.  And of course I do not deny my words.
>> Why would I?  The stats you point to are *only* from the w3schoolslogs.
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
>> They are not representative of a wide range of sites...
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
>> they are not
>> reasonable estimates of OS usage.  I know - this will go over your head.

See: it did!

>>  Explaining basic facts to you is, well, simply a waste of time - until
>> your herd gives the go-ahead, you will not admit that even the page you
>> pointed to admits that those are the only log files those stats
>> represent.
> 
> YOUR WORDS: "The highest estimates put it at less than 2%"
> 
> Reality: <http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp> 4.5%

A new species of parrot has been found... one completely controlled by herd
mentality!

LOL!

Seriously, Rick, are you just playing around mocking yourself or are you
sinking even deeper into your desperation to be right, no matter how absurd
your "interpretation"?


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]