f



When is an error not an error?

When it's OSS slopware, of course.

http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png




0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 12:42:22 AM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

36 Replies
4419 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 15

On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
> 
> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
> 

Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.

Should I name it a feature?



-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 1:25:29 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:25:29 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>> 
>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>> 
> 
> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
> other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
> 
> Should I name it a feature?

DFS posted proof.

Where's yours?



0
flatfish4 (6248)
9/12/2006 1:29:36 AM
Andrea wrote:
> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>
>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>
>
> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line
> to other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
>
> Should I name it a feature?

Depends.  How long ago was this?  Did it show you an error message?  Is the 
bug still there?



0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 1:31:02 AM
Andrea wrote:
> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>
>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>
> 
> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
> other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
> 
> Should I name it a feature?

I think Dumbo is making reference to the lack of verbosity in the error
message - "lack of verbosity" being a concept practically invented by
Microsoft.

How about this Internot Exploder classic:

"An Internet error occurred"

Windows slopware at it's finest.

-- 
K.
http://slated.org - Slated, Rated & Blogged
This message has not been photoshopped in any way.

Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.16-1.2133_FC5
 02:36:15 up 86 days,  2:53,  3 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.05
0
spam95 (5695)
9/12/2006 1:37:44 AM
On 2006-09-12 03:31, * DFS wrote:
> Andrea wrote:
>> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>>
>>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>>
>> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line
>> to other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
>>
>> Should I name it a feature?
> 
> Depends.  How long ago was this?  Did it show you an error message?  Is the 
> bug still there?
> 

It was about 2 years ago. There was an error message, then crash. I
don't know if the bug is still here, because I've ceased to use OE and
switched to Thunbderbird. My Windows XP partition is anyway gone due to
hdd malfunction, so I can't try to reproduce the problem.

Best regards,

-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 1:43:30 AM
On 2006-09-12 03:29, * flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:25:29 +0200, Andrea wrote:
> 
>> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>>
>>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>>
>> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
>> other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
>>
>> Should I name it a feature?
> 
> DFS posted proof.
> 
> Where's yours?
> 

It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)


-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 1:45:36 AM
Andrea wrote:
> On 2006-09-12 03:31, * DFS wrote:
>> Andrea wrote:
>>> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>>>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>>>
>>> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference
>>> line to other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then
>>> crashed.
>>>
>>> Should I name it a feature?
>>
>> Depends.  How long ago was this?  Did it show you an error message?
>> Is the bug still there?
>>
>
> It was about 2 years ago. There was an error message, then crash.

Sounds normal for a bug - at least you got an error message.

So how can I reproduce it?





0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 2:00:12 AM
On 2006-09-12 04:00, * DFS wrote:
> 
> Sounds normal for a bug - at least you got an error message.
> 
> So how can I reproduce it?
> 
> 

Try to reply to the post on the end of extremely long thread (at least
couple of dozens replies, maybe more). You should get a message like,
IIRC: "Error in line 3: line too long"(which was in my case a reference
line). Then my OE crashed...


-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 2:08:17 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 03:29, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:25:29 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>>>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>>>>
>>> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
>>> other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
>>>
>>> Should I name it a feature?
>> 
>> DFS posted proof.
>> 
>> Where's yours?
>> 
> 
> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
> that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)


Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.



0
flatfish4 (6248)
9/12/2006 2:24:41 AM
On 2006-09-12 04:24, * flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>>
>> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
>> that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)
> 
> 
> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
> 

Could you be more precise?


-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 2:29:43 AM
flatfish+++ wrote:

> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.

whooo!  I'll remember that one...


0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 2:33:27 AM
Andrea wrote:
> On 2006-09-12 04:24, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>>>
>>> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots
>>> for that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without
>>> OE :)
>>
>>
>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>
> Could you be more precise?

That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
Linux "advocates" here in cola.



0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 2:39:52 AM
On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>> Could you be more precise?
> 
> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
> 

I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
understand what flatfish+++ meant...

Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)

-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 2:45:20 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:25:29 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 02:42, * DFS wrote:
>> When it's OSS slopware, of course.
>> 
>> http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Knode_send_error.png
>> 
> 
> Well, some time ago I had a problem with OE - too long reference line to
> other posts, and OE of course refused to send... then crashed.
> 
> Should I name it a feature?


I've got kind of a weird problem with Internet Explorer at work.
The hospital runs Windows XP, what service packs are installed is
anybodies guess. This happens at various different machines through
out the complex. When viewing Google groups, if I try to expand the left
pane to see the full width of the threads Explorer freezes. The only
way to get rid of IE is to click the close button on it's window until
the "End Task" box pops up. When you click okay IE closes but the the
desktop only shows the back ground image. Even the task bar disappears.
Everything except for IE pops back up after a few seconds. I can do this
over and over, even the IT guys can figure it out.

Oh well.

-- 
Bobbie the Triple Killer
http://members.shaw.ca/bobbie4/index.htm

email Bobbie @ bobbie4R3MOV3TH1S@shaw.ca
remember to 'remove this'

Bobbie recently switched to Ubuntu 6.
Why? Cause he can, that's why.


0
9/12/2006 2:48:36 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>> 
> 
> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
> 
> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)

Sorry if I offended you Andrea,I didn't mean to.

What I meant is that kelsey and Rex Ballard post all these long, drawn out
tales of woe (kelsey) or tales of personal success (Rex) yet neither of
them can ever seem to pony up some proof of their claims.

They are both rabid Linux zealots who live in a world where nothing works
properly except Linux.

FWIW I believe you and I take you at your word that what you said about IE
really happened.
IE is not perfect, it is far from perfect as is Windows XP in general.

However, if you stick around COLA long enough you will find that some
people have Windows horror stories that just don't ring true when
scrutinized.

Keep you eyeball on kelsey and Rex Ballard, or do a google on them and you
can see for yourself.

Peace...

flatfish+++
 

0
flatfish4 (6248)
9/12/2006 2:58:05 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>> 
> 
> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
> 
> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)


Nope, no need to feel offended.

None of us here on C.O.L.A. really know what flatfish??? means. 


-- 
Bobbie the Triple Killer
http://members.shaw.ca/bobbie4/index.htm

email Bobbie @ bobbie4R3MOV3TH1S@shaw.ca
remember to 'remove this'

Bobbie recently switched to Ubuntu 6.
Why? Cause he can, that's why.


0
9/12/2006 2:58:16 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 02:58:16 +0000, Bobbie wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:
> 
>> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>> Could you be more precise?
>>> 
>>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
>>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>>> 
>> 
>> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
>> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
>> 
>> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)
> 
> 
> Nope, no need to feel offended.
> 
> None of us here on C.O.L.A. really know what flatfish??? means.

Like I was saying................................


0
flatfish4 (6248)
9/12/2006 2:59:57 AM
On 2006-09-12 04:58, * flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:
> 
>> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>> Could you be more precise?
>>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
>>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>>>
>> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
>> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
>>
>> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)
> 
> Sorry if I offended you Andrea,I didn't mean to.

Well, I do not feel offended, so no worries :)

> 
> What I meant is that kelsey and Rex Ballard post all these long, drawn out
> tales of woe (kelsey) or tales of personal success (Rex) yet neither of
> them can ever seem to pony up some proof of their claims.
> 
> They are both rabid Linux zealots who live in a world where nothing works
> properly except Linux.

I'm no zealot. I'm believer of Murphy's Laws, and one of them says that
if something can broke, it will, eventually.

> 
> FWIW I believe you and I take you at your word that what you said about IE
> really happened.
> IE is not perfect, it is far from perfect as is Windows XP in general.

Perfection is unreachable, unless we consider God-written software. Even
then there can be accidental crash...

And by the way, my problems was with OE, not IE.

> 
> However, if you stick around COLA long enough you will find that some
> people have Windows horror stories that just don't ring true when
> scrutinized.

Horror stories seems to be relatively common.

> 
> Keep you eyeball on kelsey and Rex Ballard, or do a google on them and you
> can see for yourself.
> 
> Peace...
> 
> flatfish+++

Peace then.


-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 3:17:37 AM
Bobbie wrote:

> I've got kind of a weird problem with Internet Explorer at work.
> The hospital runs Windows XP, what service packs are installed is
> anybodies guess. This happens at various different machines through
> out the complex. When viewing Google groups, if I try to expand the
> left pane to see the full width of the threads Explorer freezes. The
> only way to get rid of IE is to click the close button on it's window
> until the "End Task" box pops up. When you click okay IE closes but
> the the desktop only shows the back ground image. Even the task bar
> disappears. Everything except for IE pops back up after a few
> seconds. I can do this over and over, even the IT guys can figure it
> out.
>
> Oh well.

I assume you're using the 'view as tree' outline view?

Like this? http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Google_groups_IE7.PNG

Works for me in IE7.

* you need to upgrade
* user error
* RTFM
* it's free - if you don't like it don't use it
* blah, blah, blah I'm a Linux advocate

(actually, go to Tools | Options | Advanced and look for the JavaScript 
options and change them (turn off and try, then back on and try).



0
nospam11 (18349)
9/12/2006 3:20:40 AM
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 23:20:40 -0400, DFS wrote:

> Bobbie wrote:
> 
>> I've got kind of a weird problem with Internet Explorer at work.
>> The hospital runs Windows XP, what service packs are installed is
>> anybodies guess. This happens at various different machines through
>> out the complex. When viewing Google groups, if I try to expand the
>> left pane to see the full width of the threads Explorer freezes. The
>> only way to get rid of IE is to click the close button on it's window
>> until the "End Task" box pops up. When you click okay IE closes but
>> the the desktop only shows the back ground image. Even the task bar
>> disappears. Everything except for IE pops back up after a few
>> seconds. I can do this over and over, even the IT guys can figure it
>> out.
>>
>> Oh well.
> 
> I assume you're using the 'view as tree' outline view?
> 

Correct


> Like this? http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0/Google_groups_IE7.PNG
> 

Looks good.


> Works for me in IE7.
> 

Works for me too at the Internet Cafe down the street from me. They run XP
as well.

> * you need to upgrade

Not my machines, so not my worry.

> * user error

Yup, should be using Linux instead.

> * RTFM

I can't seem to find one. I've typed man IE7, to no avail.

> * it's free - if you don't like it don't use it

It's all we've got at work and I need to kill time over my lunch break.

> * blah, blah, blah I'm a Linux advocate

No you're not.

> 
> (actually, go to Tools | Options | Advanced and look for the JavaScript 
> options and change them (turn off and try, then back on and try).

I try this tomorrow.
It's odd though cause almost everything else seems to be fine. Just that
one little oddity. I wouldn't be surprised really if they never have
patched or upgraded a majority of the machines at the hospital.

-- 
Bobbie the Triple Killer
http://members.shaw.ca/bobbie4/index.htm

email Bobbie @ bobbie4R3MOV3TH1S@shaw.ca
remember to 'remove this'

Bobbie recently switched to Ubuntu 6.
Why? Cause he can, that's why.


0
9/12/2006 3:33:04 AM
Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:

> On 2006-09-12 04:24, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>>>
>>> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
>>> that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)
>> 
>> 
>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>> 
>
> Could you be more precise?

He is suggesting that you are telling lies or that you are incompetent
or it was an aberration that you are claiming is "normal".

Millions of people use OE daily with no problems : and to try and say
its "rubbish" based on a non proven crash over 2 years ago is a little,
well, silly. That's not Linux advocacy, it is MS hating.

-- 
Turn off engine while fueling.
0
qadronhuark (2734)
9/12/2006 7:48:43 AM
Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:

> On 2006-09-12 04:58, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>> However, if you stick around COLA long enough you will find that some
>> people have Windows horror stories that just don't ring true when
>> scrutinized.
>
> Horror stories seems to be relatively common.

Especially in this NG for some reason.... and never a shred of proof.

We keep asking, why does MS own 97% of their market if all these stories
are true? And then there are relatively new Linux converts like myself
who used XP for years without any virii or worms or trojans or "Blue
Screens Of Death" and we ask "why are you having all these issues"?
Especially when you consider the nightmares I could tell you about
installing and maintaining Linux : but its SW and I expect teething
problems - just dont whine about it and make it appear worse than it is
like Kelsey is prone to do.

-- 
Turn off engine while fueling.
0
qadronhuark (2734)
9/12/2006 7:52:21 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2006-09-12, Bobbie spake thusly:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 23:20:40 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> Bobbie wrote:
>> 
>>> I've got kind of a weird problem with Internet Explorer at work.
>>> The hospital runs Windows XP, what service packs are installed is
>>> anybodies guess. This happens at various different machines through
>>> out the complex. When viewing Google groups, if I try to expand the
>>> left pane to see the full width of the threads Explorer freezes. The
>>> only way to get rid of IE is to click the close button on it's window
>>> until the "End Task" box pops up. When you click okay IE closes but
>>> the the desktop only shows the back ground image. Even the task bar
>>> disappears. Everything except for IE pops back up after a few
>>> seconds. I can do this over and over, even the IT guys can figure it
>>> out.

 -------------------------8<------------------------

 ....pausing to enjoy synth of Fugue in D minor from linux boxen

>> * user error
>
> Yup, should be using Linux instead.

Dig it, use it. You like Linux, outstanding!

El Trollo likes windows. Right on. Go for it.

>
>> * RTFM
>
> I can't seem to find one. I've typed man IE7, to no avail.
>
>> * it's free - if you don't like it don't use it
>
> It's all we've got at work and I need to kill time over my lunch break.
>
>> * blah, blah, blah I'm a Linux advocate
>
> No you're not.
>
>> 
>> (actually, go to Tools | Options | Advanced and look for the JavaScript 
>> options and change them (turn off and try, then back on and try).

Why? If IE were processing the information properly, you wouldn't have
to use the scientific method to get it to work.

> I try this tomorrow.
> It's odd though cause almost everything else seems to be fine. Just that
> one little oddity. I wouldn't be surprised really if they never have
> patched or upgraded a majority of the machines at the hospital.

It's suprising that IE works in mission critical environments at all. In the
medical center where I work, it's used to load a system called Cerner which
controls lab order fulfillment and patient tracking. IT is on top of it
24/7 practically spinning the cooling fans with thier thumbs to keep it going
and as a result the crashes are kept to a minimum. We do however, lose 
_alot_ of data from our use of Word. We use it to write our shift change log
and it locks up, dumps data, loses templates in the middle of saves or prints
and dissapears multiple screens of data, in no particular order and at
unpredictable intervals. IT has *not* figured out that one.

Regards,

Mathew

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFBoNvlkJ5K/IU2ToRArrqAJ4m5LqQm899DEVZ7nf9pRv86n0ybQCdGJzj
Hjci9RMDsA192BtFsvynh+c=
=Heq2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
"Always do the right thing: It will delight /  Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanies  
some and astound the rest" - Mark Twain    / Psychotronic protection, low prices
0
Mathew1 (618)
9/12/2006 9:52:54 AM
On 2006-09-12 09:48, * Hadron Quark wrote:
> Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:
> 
>> On 2006-09-12 04:24, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>>> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
>>>> that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)
>>>
>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>
>> Could you be more precise?
> 
> He is suggesting that you are telling lies or that you are incompetent
> or it was an aberration that you are claiming is "normal".

Thanks for the explanation.

> 
> Millions of people use OE daily with no problems : and to try and say
> its "rubbish" based on a non proven crash over 2 years ago is a little,
> well, silly. That's not Linux advocacy, it is MS hating.
>

I did not said that it is a rubbish. Or did I? I merely mentioned one
error, hopefully long gone.

Speaking of millions of people using something, in my country there is a
quote (i don't know if I translated it properly): "People, eat shit!
Billions of flies cannot be mistaken!"

So, massive usage is not a proof that something is NOT a rubbish. No
offence.

Best regards,

-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 10:23:43 AM
Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:

D> On 2006-09-12 09:48, * Hadron Quark wrote:
>> Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:
>> 
>>> On 2006-09-12 04:24, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:45:36 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>>>> It was about 2 years ago, should I keep error message screenshots for
>>>>> that long? Anyway I can't try to reproduce the problem without OE :)
>>>>
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>>
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> He is suggesting that you are telling lies or that you are incompetent
>> or it was an aberration that you are claiming is "normal".
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
>> 
>> Millions of people use OE daily with no problems : and to try and say
>> its "rubbish" based on a non proven crash over 2 years ago is a little,
>> well, silly. That's not Linux advocacy, it is MS hating.
>>
>
> I did not said that it is a rubbish. Or did I? I merely mentioned one
> error, hopefully long gone.
>
> Speaking of millions of people using something, in my country there is a
> quote (i don't know if I translated it properly): "People, eat shit!
> Billions of flies cannot be mistaken!"
>
> So, massive usage is not a proof that something is NOT a rubbish. No
> offence.

You're trolling is very professionally done. You seemed quite reasonable
: but mentioned a 2 year old "one off" bug and then suggest that
millions of people using OE express every day *without problems* is the
same as flys eating shit... I think its safe to see that you are a newly
recruited zealot with an anti-MS agenda as opposed to a "pro Linux"
agenda which are, in my eyes, two totally different things.

I use and love Linux. I do not, however, accuse everything and everyone
to do with MS of being "idiots" or "retarded". MS application SW for
offices etc is way above most alternatives Linux has to offer in terms
of usability and functionality and even stability. But then that should
be obvious to anyone who actually uses both systems. There are some
exceptions, not many.

>
> Best regards,

-- 
What's this script do?
    unzip ; touch ; finger ; mount ; gasp ; yes ; umount ; sleep
Hint for the answer: not everything is computer-oriented.  Sometimes you're
in a sleeping bag, camping out with your girlfriend.
		-- Contributed by Frans van der Zande
0
qadronhuark (2734)
9/12/2006 10:42:44 AM
On 2006-09-12 09:52, * Hadron Quark wrote:
> Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> writes:
> 
>> On 2006-09-12 04:58, * flatfish+++ wrote:
>>> However, if you stick around COLA long enough you will find that some
>>> people have Windows horror stories that just don't ring true when
>>> scrutinized.
>> Horror stories seems to be relatively common.
> 
> Especially in this NG for some reason.... and never a shred of proof.
> 
> We keep asking, why does MS own 97% of their market if all these stories
> are true? And then there are relatively new Linux converts like myself
> who used XP for years without any virii or worms or trojans or "Blue
> Screens Of Death" and we ask "why are you having all these issues"?
> Especially when you consider the nightmares I could tell you about
> installing and maintaining Linux : but its SW and I expect teething
> problems - just dont whine about it and make it appear worse than it is
> like Kelsey is prone to do.
> 

I'm also relatively new to linux. I've also used XP, from the last beta
version. I've experienced mysterious crashes from time to time, BSoDs -
but rarely. Viruses and other malicious software was another story as
long as I used IE for browsing. Firefox and then Opera solved that. No
viruses for the last two years.

I do not have XP now, due to HDD malfunction. As signs of doom to my HDD
vere evident, I've tried to transfer XP partition from ATA to my new
SATA drive, only to discover beautiful BSODs. Maybe it was a transfer
error caused by malfunctioning HDD, so I did clean installation on the
new hdd (using F6 to add sata driver - fortunately i have a fdd), only
to discover that MS will not activate my OS, because it was activated
too many (means two) times before. Now I'm waiting for ATA drive. When
it will arrive, I will recover partition from an image. Maybe this will
work. Besides that, my XP worked relatively flawlessly.

My ubuntu also works almost flawlessly. Installation was like a dream,
all hardware detected and set up. Two changes in xorg.conf: one to turn
radeon's 3D hardware acceleration and second to activate all buttons of
my Microsoft mouse. Yes, I know that ubuntu also have bugs. But nothing
I can't handle myself up to this moment, even if I'm relatively new to
Linux.

Best regards,

-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 11:08:20 AM
On 2006-09-12 12:42, * Hadron Quark wrote:

>>>
>> I did not said that it is a rubbish. Or did I? I merely mentioned one
>> error, hopefully long gone.
>>
>> Speaking of millions of people using something, in my country there is a
>> quote (i don't know if I translated it properly): "People, eat shit!
>> Billions of flies cannot be mistaken!"
>>
>> So, massive usage is not a proof that something is NOT a rubbish. No
>> offence.
> 
> You're trolling is very professionally done. You seemed quite reasonable
> : but mentioned a 2 year old "one off" bug and then suggest that

But DFS also mentioned elsewhere a bug in the old version of the
software (Kuickshow, IIRC...) - is he trolling also?

> millions of people using OE express every day *without problems* is the
> same as flys eating shit... I think its safe to see that you are a newly
> recruited zealot with an anti-MS agenda as opposed to a "pro Linux"
> agenda which are, in my eyes, two totally different things.

As I said elsewhere, I do not believe in zealotry. I prefer Murphy's Laws.

*Sarcasm on*

My suggestion about millions of people applies not only to the software,
but also to the hardware (IPod is the best, isn't it?) and even to the
politics and politicians.  OE is just one example of human herd
instincts. There are many more.

*Sarcasm off*

> 
> I use and love Linux. 

I use but do not love. Love is reserved for my familly, especially for
my wife and daughter. How one can love a piece of software I wonder?

> I do not, however, accuse everything and everyone
> to do with MS of being "idiots" or "retarded". MS application SW for
> offices etc is way above most alternatives Linux has to offer in terms
> of usability and functionality and even stability. But then that should
> be obvious to anyone who actually uses both systems. There are some
> exceptions, not many.

I've used Open Office for Windows for a long time, and in my work i
still use it. But I must admitt that MS Office is more powerfull. I
simply don't need that additional power - it cost too much to use it at
home. And I did not wanted to use pirated versions.


-- 
Andrea
0
nospam27 (128)
9/12/2006 11:29:03 AM
This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on  Tue, 12 Sep 2006
04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the
>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>> 
>> 
> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
> 
> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)

YHBT.

-- 
  Linux is not a desktop OS for people 

whose VCRs are still flashing  "12:00".

  That eliminates a lot of wintrolls then.
0
wp4619 (233)
9/12/2006 2:31:23 PM
[snips]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:52:54 +0000, Mathew P. wrote:

> It's suprising that IE works in mission critical environments at all. In
> the medical center where I work, it's used to load a system called Cerner
> which controls lab order fulfillment and patient tracking. IT is on top of
> it 24/7 practically spinning the cooling fans with thier thumbs to keep it
> going and as a result the crashes are kept to a minimum. We do however,
> lose _alot_ of data from our use of Word. We use it to write our shift
> change log and it locks up, dumps data, loses templates in the middle of
> saves or prints and dissapears multiple screens of data, in no particular
> order and at unpredictable intervals. IT has *not* figured out that one.

But remember, that's "commercial quality", not "OSS crapware".  So it must
be doing what it's intended to.  Don't like it?  Change your expectations. :)


0
kbjarnason1 (1541)
9/12/2006 2:42:53 PM
On or about 2006-09-12 Tuesday 15:42, I did witness the following events
concerning Kelsey Bjarnason:

> [snips]
> 
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:52:54 +0000, Mathew P. wrote:
> 
>> It's suprising that IE works in mission critical environments at all. In
>> the medical center where I work, it's used to load a system called Cerner
>> which controls lab order fulfillment and patient tracking. IT is on top
>> of it 24/7 practically spinning the cooling fans with thier thumbs to
>> keep it going and as a result the crashes are kept to a minimum. We do
>> however, lose _alot_ of data from our use of Word. We use it to write our
>> shift change log and it locks up, dumps data, loses templates in the
>> middle of saves or prints and dissapears multiple screens of data, in no
>> particular order and at unpredictable intervals. IT has *not* figured out
>> that one.
> 
> But remember, that's "commercial quality", not "OSS crapware".  So it must
> be doing what it's intended to.  Don't like it?  Change your expectations.
> :)

It does specify in the EULA on any and every Microsoft product that said
products are /not/ to be used in *mission* *critical* environments.

The only financial liability Microsoft has if its software causes you to
have a catastrophic loss of data or even a computer hardware failure is to
replace or refund the cost of the installation media - even if the problem
is their fault, and even if you can prove that they knew that the problem
existed.

As for the number of customers dropping off, the OS is installed on the
computer when you buy it. Microsoft has been paid. OEM tech support will
blame Windows for your problems (but note that most of them will void your
hardware warranty if you wipe Windows off the HD and go with something
else) and Microsoft will blame the OEMs. Rinse. Repeat.

It's a win-win situation for Microsoft, if they can make the EULA stick
(which they usually do in the USofA, results vary elsewhere - Germany
laughed in their faces, as did Belgium). Either way, it's
lose-lose-get-stiffed-every-orifice-filled for the end user/ICT manager.
Microsoft get their money, no question about that. The guy on the console
has to bear the litigation.
-- 
I hereby testify that the above statement is an accurate recollection of the
events mentioned therein.
http://dotware.co.uk
Registered Linux user #426308 -*- http://counter.li.org
0
james199 (2531)
9/12/2006 2:54:01 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2006-09-12, Jim spake thusly:
> On or about 2006-09-12 Tuesday 15:42, I did witness the following events
> concerning Kelsey Bjarnason:
>
>> [snips]
>> 
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:52:54 +0000, Mathew P. wrote:
>> 
>>> It's suprising that IE works in mission critical environments at all. In
>>> the medical center where I work, it's used to load a system called Cerner
>>> which controls lab order fulfillment and patient tracking. IT is on top
>>> of it 24/7 practically spinning the cooling fans with thier thumbs to
>>> keep it going and as a result the crashes are kept to a minimum. We do
>>> however, lose _alot_ of data from our use of Word. We use it to write our
>>> shift change log and it locks up, dumps data, loses templates in the
>>> middle of saves or prints and dissapears multiple screens of data, in no
>>> particular order and at unpredictable intervals. IT has *not* figured out
>>> that one.
>> 
>> But remember, that's "commercial quality", not "OSS crapware".  So it must
>> be doing what it's intended to.  Don't like it?  Change your expectations.
>> :)

:-)

> It does specify in the EULA on any and every Microsoft product that said
> products are /not/ to be used in *mission* *critical* environments.

No it dosen't. Not on "any and every" as you put it.

It seems my selection of terminology requires rephrasing. So for this context,
Change "mission critical" to "systems essential for the therapeutic treatment
of patients in the hospital environment". Not that the semantics really matter.
It's plain enough. As for the EULA, whatever.

Eula's are for plausible denial of accountability. Microsoft is fast and loose
with Eula's and decides when they amount to anything more than the cost of
a hologram.

That 'no mission critical' clause is BS, as anyone can determine if they follow
MS attempts to enter into mission critical markets such as air traffic control
and defense contracting. I'm not going to bother looking it up (google if you
like) an incident in which a navy missle carrier was outfitted with an automation
system controlling essential, one might conclude, mission critical, ship operations.
Sarcasm intended. The system was based on Windows NT. The ship went to a navy test
range and began a series of ship systems exercises. At some point during these
trials, the OS crashed, and the ship network went offline. It would not restart
and the ship was helpless. It had to be towed back to port. IIRC MS OS was
stripped before the ship left berth again. Keep in mind, this was a
defense contract granted to Microsoft. God help us if MS ever gets a fission
reactor control system contract.

> The only financial liability Microsoft has if its software causes you to
> have a catastrophic loss of data or even a computer hardware failure is to
> replace or refund the cost of the installation media - even if the problem
> is their fault, and even if you can prove that they knew that the problem
> existed.
>
> As for the number of customers dropping off, the OS is installed on the
> computer when you buy it. Microsoft has been paid.
> OEM tech support will
> blame Windows for your problems (but note that most of them will void your
> hardware warranty if you wipe Windows off the HD and go with something
> else) and Microsoft will blame the OEMs. Rinse. Repeat.

Not talking OEM installations here. But that hardly matters. Back to
topic.

> It's a win-win situation for Microsoft, if they can make the EULA stick
> (which they usually do in the USofA, results vary elsewhere - Germany
> laughed in their faces, as did Belgium). Either way, it's
> lose-lose-get-stiffed-every-orifice-filled for the end user/ICT manager.
> Microsoft get their money, no question about that. The guy on the console
> has to bear the litigation.

Agreed. Which is why there are so many people jumping the Microsoft ship.

Rinse, repeat.

Regards,

Mathew


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFBx/3lkJ5K/IU2ToRAmVZAJ4/jJV7/fHOL15he7C7iiiXmTuF+wCgk04p
7xyoat0Pi3Ek4oHBwSWO0eQ=
=MZsX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
"Always do the right thing: It will delight /  Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanies  
some and astound the rest" - Mark Twain    / Psychotronic protection, low prices
0
Mathew1 (618)
9/12/2006 9:00:45 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2006-09-12, William Poaster spake thusly:
> This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on  Tue, 12 Sep 2006
> 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>
>> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>> Could you be more precise?
>>> 
>>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the
>>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>>> 
>>> 
>> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
>> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
>> 
>> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)
>
> YHBT.

YHBT?

What the heck is that?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFByIElkJ5K/IU2ToRApB2AJ9rO3fD8D8TgG5XdN8UUujzTa1SGgCgxQqe
3hFC+PGifFyLVkRd2EIswH4=
=in3h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
"Always do the right thing: It will delight /  Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanies  
some and astound the rest" - Mark Twain    / Psychotronic protection, low prices
0
Mathew1 (618)
9/12/2006 9:09:24 PM
Jim wrote:
> It does specify in the EULA on any and every Microsoft product that
> said products are /not/ to be used in *mission* *critical*
> environments.

Does it now?  I've never seen such a statement - be so kind as to point to
it...


> The only financial liability Microsoft has if its software causes you
> to have a catastrophic loss of data or even a computer hardware
> failure is to replace or refund the cost of the installation media -
> even if the problem is their fault, and even if you can prove that
> they knew that the problem existed.

Can you get a better deal elsewhere?




0
nospam11 (18349)
9/13/2006 2:34:32 AM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:09:24 +0000, Mathew P. wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 2006-09-12, William Poaster spake thusly:
>> This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on  Tue, 12 Sep 2006
>> 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:
>>
>>> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>>>> Could you be more precise?
>>>> 
>>>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of
>>>> the Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
>>> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
>>> 
>>> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)
>>
>> YHBT.
> 
> YHBT?
> 
> What the heck is that?

"You Have Been Trolled".


0
kbjarnason1 (1541)
9/13/2006 9:52:00 PM
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 04:45:20 +0200, Andrea wrote:

> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the
>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>> 
>> 
> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
> understand what flatfish+++ meant...
> 
> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)

If you don't understand the flatfish, what you should feel mostly is
relieved.


0
kbjarnason1 (1541)
9/13/2006 9:52:23 PM
On 2006-09-12, Andrea <nospam@nospam.pl> posted something concerning:
> On 2006-09-12 04:39, * DFS wrote:
>>>> Another graduate of the Kelsey-Ballard institute.
>>> Could you be more precise?
>> 
>> That one's a classic!  But it's over your head without knowledge of the 
>> Linux "advocates" here in cola.
>> 
>
> I must admitt that I'm new here on cola, but this do not help me to
> understand what flatfish+++ meant...

You can't be new here. That's impossible. The Windolts keep harping on
how new people happening by will think this group is no more than a
newfeed, then move on to other environs.

If you're telling the truth (and I have to be leery of buying that
since all of our really honest trolls say it's not possible) then our
trolls have to be incorrect or lying. Since they're never incorrect (as
they're wont to tell us) they'd have to be lying. But they don't lie
either. They say so.

> Perhaps should I feel offended? ;)

Flatso, DuFS, Zoomie, KittyKatty Man, Anti-Theme, Bilge and other
Winders users are never offensive here. I'm beginning ot think you must
be here as an anti-troll.
</sarcasm>

-- 
Mobler: Innovative Microsoft peer-to-peer software.
0
phydeaux (1064)
9/13/2006 10:54:50 PM
Reply: