f



Parallels or BootCamp? - - - BootCamp or Parallels?

I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.

Completely messed up a backup file itself.

Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it 
soon enough.


Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a 
whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.



Looking at the good side of this, it forced me to make a decision I have 
been trying to make for over a year.


Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?

REALLY tough choice, at least for me.  How one chooses depends a lot on 
the applications one is trying to run.

I am going to switch back to using Parallels, because lots of available 
disk space is (slightly) more important to me than lots of available RAM.


Besides, it is a heck of a lot easier to backup a Parallels virtual 
memory file, than it is to backup a BootCamp created partition.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/5/2007 12:54:56 PM
comp.sys.mac.system 33446 articles. 2 followers. jfmezei.spamnot (9455) is leader. Post Follow

96 Replies
1110 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 53

In article <noneof-9F9ADE.05560905072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.
> 
> Completely messed up a backup file itself.
> 
> Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it 
> soon enough.
> 
> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a 
> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
> 
> Looking at the good side of this, it forced me to make a decision I have 
> been trying to make for over a year.
> 
> Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?
> 
> REALLY tough choice, at least for me.  How one chooses depends a lot on 
> the applications one is trying to run.
> 
> I am going to switch back to using Parallels, because lots of available 
> disk space is (slightly) more important to me than lots of available RAM.
> 
> Besides, it is a heck of a lot easier to backup a Parallels virtual 
> memory file, than it is to backup a BootCamp created partition.

Why is this of any interest to us?
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/5/2007 2:24:56 PM
Mark Conrad wrote:
> I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.
> 
> Completely messed up a backup file itself.
> 
> Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it 
> soon enough.
> 
> 
> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a 
> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.

An intelligent person might pause at this point, and reflect on whether
one's backup needs might be better served by using a tool written by
someone who actually knows what they are doing.

But instead we see:

> Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?

Sad...
0
7/5/2007 4:16:05 PM


On 7/5/07 11:16 AM, in article JKpruu.HGu@news.boeing.com, "James Glidewell"
<jimglidewell@comcast.net> wrote:

> Mark Conrad wrote:
>> I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.
>> 
>> Completely messed up a backup file itself.
>> 
>> Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it
>> soon enough.
>> 
>> 
>> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a
>> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
> 
> An intelligent person might pause at this point, and reflect on whether
> one's backup needs might be better served by using a tool written by
> someone who actually knows what they are doing.
> 
> But instead we see:
> 
>> Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?
> 
> Sad...
Yuk-yuk!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
7/5/2007 4:58:56 PM
In article <JKpruu.HGu@news.boeing.com>,
 James Glidewell <jimglidewell@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a 
> > whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
> 
> An intelligent person might pause at this point, and reflect on whether
> one's backup needs might be better served by using a tool written by
> someone who actually knows what they are doing.

Backup tool has nothing to do with it.


ANY backup tool would fail if you accidentally zap the backup file, like 
I did.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/5/2007 11:51:04 PM
In article <tomstiller-C64E3B.10245605072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
 Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Besides, it is a heck of a lot easier to backup a Parallels virtual 
> > memory file, than it is to backup a BootCamp created partition.
> 
> Why is this of any interest to us?

You tell me.  You are the guy who responded to this post, so obviously 
you had a slight interest in the thread topic.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/5/2007 11:53:32 PM
In article <C2B28D80.2FD4B%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/5/07 11:16 AM, in article JKpruu.HGu@news.boeing.com, "James Glidewell"
> <jimglidewell@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > Mark Conrad wrote:
> >> I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.
> >> 
> >> Completely messed up a backup file itself.
> >> 
> >> Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it
> >> soon enough.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a
> >> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
> > 
> > An intelligent person might pause at this point, and reflect on whether
> > one's backup needs might be better served by using a tool written by
> > someone who actually knows what they are doing.
> > 
> > But instead we see:
> > 
> >> Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?
> > 
> > Sad...
> Yuk-yuk!

Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.

I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".

That is a decision thingy, not a funny.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/5/2007 11:59:37 PM
In article <noneof-6B7031.17005005072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.
> 
> I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".
> 
> That is a decision thingy, not a funny.

Have you considered VM Ware as an alternative to either?

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/6/2007 12:04:11 AM
Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <noneof-6B7031.17005005072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.
>>
>> I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".
>>
>> That is a decision thingy, not a funny.
> 
> Have you considered VM Ware as an alternative to either?
> 
Or a glass of warm milk and an early night?
0
The
7/6/2007 12:14:01 AM
In article <michelle-2B75E7.17041105072007@news.east.cox.net>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <noneof-6B7031.17005005072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.
> > 
> > I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".
> > 
> > That is a decision thingy, not a funny.
> 
> Have you considered VM Ware as an alternative to either?

Oooh, evil Michelle!
-- 
Kevin Michael Vail | a billion stars go spinning through the night,
kevin@vaildc.net � | blazing high above your head.
�. . . . . . . . . | But _in_ you is the presence that
� . . . . . . . .� | will be, when all the stars are dead.
�. . . . . . . . . | � � (Rainer Maria Rilke)

0
kevin135 (224)
7/6/2007 12:23:25 AM
In article <kevin-CD773F.20232405072007@news.verizon.net>,
 Kevin Michael Vail <kevin@vaildc.net> wrote:

> > > Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.
> > > 
> > > I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".
> > > 
> > > That is a decision thingy, not a funny.
> > 
> > Have you considered VM Ware as an alternative to either?
> 
> Oooh, evil Michelle!

Moi?  Evil?

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/6/2007 12:25:26 AM
In article <noneof-BC3276.16544605072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> In article <tomstiller-C64E3B.10245605072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
>  Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > > Besides, it is a heck of a lot easier to backup a Parallels virtual 
> > > memory file, than it is to backup a BootCamp created partition.
> > 
> > Why is this of any interest to us?
> 
> You tell me.  You are the guy who responded to this post, so obviously 
> you had a slight interest in the thread topic.

I find the long winded recounting of your foibles hugely entertaining.  
The more you ramble on, the more likely you are to say something absurd.
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/6/2007 12:32:48 AM
In article <1183680975.24387.0@proxy00.news.clara.net>,
The Natural Philosopher  <a@b.c> wrote:
>Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <noneof-6B7031.17005005072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hmm, hard to tell what you are yuking about.
>>>
>>> I assume it is the last line, "Parallels or BootCamp?".
>>>
>>> That is a decision thingy, not a funny.
>> 
>> Have you considered VM Ware as an alternative to either?
>> 
>Or a glass of warm milk and an early night?

Perhaps the master would like a nice glass of Ovaltine?

0
pack14 (132)
7/6/2007 5:43:52 AM
On Jul 5, 1:54 pm, Mark Conrad <non...@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> I paid a heck of a price today for being senile.
>
> Completely messed up a backup file itself.
>
> Usually make a backup of my backup, but in this case I did not do it
> soon enough.
>
> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a
> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
>
> Looking at the good side of this, it forced me to make a decision I have
> been trying to make for over a year.
>
> Parallels or BootCamp?  - - -  BootCamp or Parallels?
>
> REALLY tough choice, at least for me.  How one chooses depends a lot on
> the applications one is trying to run.
>
> I am going to switch back to using Parallels, because lots of available
> disk space is (slightly) more important to me than lots of available RAM.
>
> Besides, it is a heck of a lot easier to backup a Parallels virtual
> memory file, than it is to backup a BootCamp created partition.
>
> Mark-

I'm going to regret this, I'm sure, but here goes.

What do you want to do with your machine?
I'm presuming you want to run Windows.  If not, forget BootCamp.
If you need absolute max performance under Windows or weird direct
access to hardware at a level that Parallels won't give you (highly
unlikely, I'd say) then go with BootCamp.  It's free.

Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports 3D hardware
acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an existing bootcamp Windows
partition* - although I personally prefer not to.
You can run your virtualised OS full screen (use Virtue Desktops to
allow you to flip between that an OS X at a keystroke), you can run it
in a Window (with Windows automatically changing the desktop
resolution to match your Parallels window size), and you can run it in
Coherence mode where your apps and Windows windows (!) appear on the
OS X desktop, and the dock.
You can drag and drop files from one environment to another, and have
Parallels either make one OS's files transparently available to the
other, or have it copy them.
You can access your Mac's files and folders in Windows via Parallels
Shared Folders.

Parallels is flat-out the most impressive single piece of software
I've ever used.  It's cheap, and the company has the fastest release
cycle I've come across.  Their forums are helpful, too.

With RAM being so cheap these days the overhead of OS X and another OS
running side by side isn't really a factor.

Obviously if you're backup-obsessed you can just backup the .hdd file
very readily, too.

There's a free trial available that'll cost you nothing to try,
anyway.  Have a look.

Ric

0
publicmail (118)
7/6/2007 11:05:56 AM
In article <1183719956.924520.139400@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
 ric <publicmail@infobubble.co.uk> wrote:

> I'm going to regret this, I'm sure, but here goes.

I admire your adventurous spirit, I will be gentle.



> What do you want to do with your machine?

Everything! - ...but of course that is not feasible.



> I'm presuming you want to run Windows.

Well, more like _have_ to, I do not want to.



> Personally, I love Parallels.

Same here, but like you mentioned, sometimes BootCamp has to be used for 
performance reasons.



> Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports 
> 3D hardware acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an
> existing bootcamp Windows partition*

Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.

Apparently $MS is not yet willing to allow it, for Vista.

Windows XP runs on a combination Parallels/BootCamp setup, though.



> There's a free trial available that'll cost you nothing to try,
> anyway.  Have a look.

No need to, I already have extensive experience with Parallels, like it 
very much.



> With RAM being so cheap these days the overhead of OS X and
> another OS running side by side isn't really a factor.

It is a big factor for me, from the performance standpoint, which is why 
I am forced to use BootCamp at times.

The Vista program "Dragon NaturallySpeaking Pro 9.5" was showing 
definite stress of being 'pushed' when running in Parallels.

(on MacBook Pro, 2GB ram)



By contrast, it showed no signs of being pushed in BootCamp.

This situation will be aggravated when I get the $1,200 medical version 
of Dragon shortly, so that limits me to using BootCamp, unfortunately.


No way in heck am I going to throw Dragon on real PC hardware, I would 
not wish that fate on any application.

(although I did briefly run the cheapy $900 version of Dragon on a 
modern ASUS laptop, just to satisfy myself that Dragon runs better on a 
Mac than it does on a PC)

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/6/2007 3:40:31 PM
Mark Conrad wrote:
> In article <JKpruu.HGu@news.boeing.com>,
>  James Glidewell <jimglidewell@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>>> Waaaah, it is going to take me months to recover from this, I had a 
>>> whole bunch of stuff on that Mac.
>> An intelligent person might pause at this point, and reflect on whether
>> one's backup needs might be better served by using a tool written by
>> someone who actually knows what they are doing.
> 
> Backup tool has nothing to do with it.
> 
> 
> ANY backup tool would fail if you accidentally zap the backup file, like 
> I did.

This is why one has *multiple* backup copies, and/or uses a system that does
"base + incremental" dumps.

This is particularly important if one is prone to constantly deleting or
reloading data as part of one's "experiments".

A decent backup system (I still like Retrospect, as it supports network
backups of Mac, PCs, and Linux boxes), in conjunction with an adequate amount
of external storage dedicated to backup, *WILL* protect you from a single
mistake of any magnitude.

Your pretense that no commercial products are available that meet your "exacting
standards" is foolishness - even if your backup system does _something_ better,
it is clearly not adequate to protect you from yourself. Multiple backup systems,
with at least one copy off site, would have protected you from any error you could
have made.

Note that I am not posting this for your benefit, as I have long considered you a
lost cause, but rather for those who read this thinking that "No backup is really
a guarantee, so why bother?" Backup has never been easier or cheaper, and Leopard's
Time Machine will make both backup _and_ restore more user friendly. For those with
no backup, though, the time to do something about it is *now*. A large external HD,
in conjunction with SuperDuper or similar, provides a great amount of protection at
a nominal cost. When Time Machine arrives, the external HD can be used with it to
provide an Apple-supported, zero-effort means of backing up a single Mac.

And, as I'm sure that others can attest, the humor value of Mark Conrad's "backup
solution" increases greatly when one has a backup system that actually works.

0
7/6/2007 5:04:45 PM
On 2007-07-06 12:04:45 -0500, James Glidewell <jimglidewell@comcast.net> said:

> And, as I'm sure that others can attest, the humor value of Mark 
> Conrad's "backup
> solution" increases greatly when one has a backup system that actually works.

I can surely attest to that.  As the proud and worry-free owner of a 
well-implemented, completely automated, daily, incremental, unattended 
Retrospect-to-Exabyte tape backup system that backs up 6 computers of 
various makes, models, and platforms in my house every evening without 
fail for years, Mark's "dd backup solution" provides me with endless 
giggles.  : )

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/6/2007 5:59:53 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 13:59:53 -0400, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article <2007070612595377923-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>):

> On 2007-07-06 12:04:45 -0500, James Glidewell <jimglidewell@comcast.net> 
said:
> 
>> And, as I'm sure that others can attest, the humor value of Mark 
>> Conrad's "backup
>> solution" increases greatly when one has a backup system that actually 
>> works.
> 
> I can surely attest to that.  As the proud and worry-free owner of a 
> well-implemented, completely automated, daily, incremental, unattended 
> Retrospect-to-Exabyte tape backup system that backs up 6 computers of 
> various makes, models, and platforms in my house every evening without 
> fail for years, Mark's "dd backup solution" provides me with endless 
> giggles.  : )
> 
> 

I use Retro at work, and have since whatever version of Retro was available 
for A/UX. I use SuperDuper! to make bootable clones of my system volumes and 
SilverKeeper to back up my data volumes. It works quite well, it's 
semi-automatic (all I have to do is to remember to connect the backup drives 
before going to bed and to remember to unmount and disconnect them in the 
morning) and allows me to have a weekly system-level backup and a rotating 
thrice-weekly data backup. True Image does a good job on the Windows end of 
things.

If I ever spring for a tape drive for home use I'd probably get one of those 
drives that has Retro bundled in and use that.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 6:18:02 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:40:31 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-2FEF3B.08414506072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

>> Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports 
>> 3D hardware acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an
>> existing bootcamp Windows partition*
> 
> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.

Lying scum. He specifically said version 3, which _does_ support Vista, you 
batshit insane subcretin.

> 
> Apparently $MS is not yet willing to allow it, for Vista.

Bullshit. You haven't gone near Parallels' site since version 3 came out, in 
May. You're wrong. As you always are.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 6:20:46 PM
On 2007-07-06 13:18:02 -0500, J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> said:

> If I ever spring for a tape drive for home use I'd probably get one of those
> drives that has Retro bundled in and use that.

You want an Exabyte drive (and they come with Retrospect Workgroup, IIRC):

<http://exabyte.com/products/products/get_products.cfm?prod_id=480>

The packet technology used in these drives is next-generation, and is 
way ahead of the competition.

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/6/2007 6:52:43 PM
In article <0001HW.C2B4003E02019E44F0284648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:




Mark Conrad clearly posted about
a BOOTCAMP created Vista partition:

> > Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
> 

Blind J.J. O'Shea responded:
> Lying scum. He specifically said version 3, which _does_ support Vista, you 
> batshit insane subcretin.

LEARN TO READ you ignoramous, I posted BOOTCAMP.



Good Grief, you did it a 2nd time, that makes you doubly ignorant:

> Markie-poo, dearest, from the Installing Parallels Desktop for Mac PDF, 
> available at the Parallels site and when you buy Parallels:
> 
> "Parallels Desktop for Mac currently supports:
> . Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, 2000, XP, 2003, and Vista Ultimate,
> Business, and Enterprise
> . All distributions of Linux, as well as FreeBSD, OS/2, eComStation,
> Solaris, and MS-DOS"
> 
> From the Parallels Desktop For Mac Datasheet, as of 22 May 2007,
> also available in the same places:
> 
> "NEW! Supports Windows Vista."

My post plainly referred to BootCamp, NOT Parallels




Below is my post to "ric" which you managed 
to get completely screwed up:

From "ric":
> > Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports 
> > 3D hardware acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an
> > existing bootcamp Windows partition*
> 
Reply from Mark Conrad:
> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
> 
> Apparently $MS is not yet willing to allow it, for Vista.
> 
> Windows XP runs on a combination Parallels/BootCamp setup, though.

Geez, how dense can you be!


ric posted a remark stating that Parallels could be used with a BootCamp 
created Windows partition, LOOK at his post!

I responded to him, noting that it would not work that way when using 
Vista, which remark of mine I still stand by.

I further added that it WOULD work that way, if XP-Pro was used instead 
of Vista.

In other words, to spell it out for mentally impaired people like you, 
if Parallels is used on a BootCamp created Windows XP partition, it WILL 
work.

However if an attempt is made to use Parallels on a BootCamp created 
Vista partition, it WILL NOT WORK.

YOU STUPID IDIOT, IF YOU DOUBT THAT THEN TRY IT, LIKE I DID.

Everything else was the same, I have successfuly installed both Vista 
Ultimate and XP Pro many times, using BootCamp or Parallels or the 
combination of Parallels used with BootCamp; invariably, the combination 
will not work with Vista.

I Googled about that issue, and it was reflected in other people's posts 
- - - and no, I am not going to waste my time supplying you with 
references, do your own Googling, you will remember it longer if you 
have to do a little work.


At some point, your mistaken knee-jerk reaction was that ric and I were 
posting about a simple Parallels/Vista setup.

We were NOT, we were posting about Parallels being used with a BootCamp 
partition in which Vista was installed, which is a much more complex 
situation.

Read the fucking posts!!!

PLEASE, if you do not understand a NG comment in the future, ask for an 
explanation, rather than going off half cocked and calling people names 
and attempting to ridicule them, when the root problem is that you fail 
to follow the logic of a post due to your extreme ignorance.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/6/2007 8:12:35 PM
In article <noneof-D8C3FC.13134906072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> In other words, to spell it out for mentally impaired people like 
> you, if Parallels is used on a BootCamp created Windows XP partition, 
> it WILL work.
> 
> However if an attempt is made to use Parallels on a BootCamp created 
> Vista partition, it WILL NOT WORK.

Are you saying that Vista formats the disk differently from the way that 
XP formats it?

Does that mean that when you install Vista on an existing XP volume, you 
have to reformat the entire drive?

Or does it really mean that you didn't know what you were doing?

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/6/2007 8:35:10 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:12:35 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-D8C3FC.13134906072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B4003E02019E44F0284648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Conrad clearly posted about
> a BOOTCAMP created Vista partition:
> 
>>> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
>> 
> 
> Blind J.J. O'Shea responded:
>> Lying scum. He specifically said version 3, which _does_ support Vista, you 
>> batshit insane subcretin.
> 
> LEARN TO READ you ignoramous, I posted BOOTCAMP.

And Parallels supports Boot Camp. Page 19 of the user guide which you clearly 
have not read, states:

"Supported Types of Hard Disks
The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use 
virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows 
Vista installations only."

> 
> 
> 
> Good Grief, you did it a 2nd time, that makes you doubly ignorant:
> 
>> Markie-poo, dearest, from the Installing Parallels Desktop for Mac PDF, 
>> available at the Parallels site and when you buy Parallels:
>> 
>> "Parallels Desktop for Mac currently supports:
>> . Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, 2000, XP, 2003, and Vista Ultimate,
>> Business, and Enterprise
>> . All distributions of Linux, as well as FreeBSD, OS/2, eComStation,
>> Solaris, and MS-DOS"
>> 
>> From the Parallels Desktop For Mac Datasheet, as of 22 May 2007,
>> also available in the same places:
>> 
>> "NEW! Supports Windows Vista."
> 
> My post plainly referred to BootCamp, NOT Parallels

And you _quoted_ where Parallels supports Boot Camp partitions...

> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is my post to "ric" which you managed 
> to get completely screwed up:
> 
> From "ric":
>>> Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports 
>>> 3D hardware acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an
>>> existing bootcamp Windows partition*
>> 
> Reply from Mark Conrad:
>> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
>> 
>> Apparently $MS is not yet willing to allow it, for Vista.
>> 
>> Windows XP runs on a combination Parallels/BootCamp setup, though.

"Supported Types of Hard Disks
The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use 
virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows 
Vista installations only."

"NEW! Supports Windows Vista."

"Parallels Desktop for Mac currently supports:
.. Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, 2000, XP, 2003, and Vista Ultimate, Business, 
and Enterprise
.. All distributions of Linux, as well as FreeBSD, OS/2, eComStation, Solaris, 
and MS-DOS"

I don't know how much more clear it could be:

Parallels supports Vista. Parallels supports hard drives formatted with Boot 
Camp partitions for OS X and Windows. Supported versions of Windows are 
XP(SP2 only) and Vista.

> 
> Geez, how dense can you be!
> 
> 
> ric posted a remark stating that Parallels could be used with a BootCamp 
> created Windows partition, LOOK at his post!

He did. He's right.

> 
> I responded to him, noting that it would not work that way when using 
> Vista, which remark of mine I still stand by.
> 
> I further added that it WOULD work that way, if XP-Pro was used instead 
> of Vista.

Parallels works with Vista, cretin.

> 
> In other words, to spell it out for mentally impaired people like you, 
> if Parallels is used on a BootCamp created Windows XP partition, it WILL 
> work.
> 
> However if an attempt is made to use Parallels on a BootCamp created 
> Vista partition, it WILL NOT WORK.
> 
> YOU STUPID IDIOT, IF YOU DOUBT THAT THEN TRY IT, LIKE I DID.

I have. It worked. I suspect that you're doing something wrong. (Gee. What a 
surprise, a batshit insane subcetin doing something wrong!)

> 
> Everything else was the same, I have successfuly installed both Vista 
> Ultimate and XP Pro many times, using BootCamp or Parallels or the 
> combination of Parallels used with BootCamp; invariably, the combination 
> will not work with Vista.
> 
> I Googled about that issue, and it was reflected in other people's posts 
> - - - and no, I am not going to waste my time supplying you with 
> references, do your own Googling, you will remember it longer if you 
> have to do a little work.
> 

Bullshit.

> 
> At some point, your mistaken knee-jerk reaction was that ric and I were 
> posting about a simple Parallels/Vista setup.

Nope.

> 
> We were NOT, we were posting about Parallels being used with a BootCamp 
> partition in which Vista was installed, which is a much more complex 
> situation.

Nope.

> 
> Read the fucking posts!!!

I did.

> 
> PLEASE, if you do not understand a NG comment in the future, ask for an 
> explanation, rather than going off half cocked and calling people names 
> and attempting to ridicule them, when the root problem is that you fail 
> to follow the logic of a post due to your extreme ignorance.

That's a third irony-o-meter blown up.

> 
> Mark-



-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 8:45:17 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:35:10 -0400, Michelle Steiner wrote
(in article <michelle-82D4A7.13351006072007@news.east.cox.net>):

> In article <noneof-D8C3FC.13134906072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> In other words, to spell it out for mentally impaired people like 
>> you, if Parallels is used on a BootCamp created Windows XP partition, 
>> it WILL work.
>> 
>> However if an attempt is made to use Parallels on a BootCamp created 
>> Vista partition, it WILL NOT WORK.
> 
> Are you saying that Vista formats the disk differently from the way that 
> XP formats it?

He has no clue what he's saying. Vista uses the same version of NTFS that XP 
does. It has a different boot setup, something called the BCD; old versions 
of Parallels didn't know how to handle the boot setup. 
<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919529> New versions of Parallels _do_ know 
how to boot Vista.

> 
> Does that mean that when you install Vista on an existing XP volume, you 
> have to reformat the entire drive?

He's as clear as mud.

> 
> Or does it really mean that you didn't know what you were doing?

Bingo.

Of course, it might be that the guys at Parallels are wrong. If anyone wants, 
I can post the damn PDFs in question and you can read for yourselves. Or just 
go to the Parallels website and have a look.

Parallels supports Vista.

Parallels supports the use of Boot Camp volumes.

Parallels supports Vista _on_ Boot Camp volumes.


-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 8:51:50 PM
In article <0001HW.C2B423A60209E9E5F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> > Are you saying that Vista formats the disk differently from the way 
> > that XP formats it?
> 
> He has no clue what he's saying.

I know that; I'm trying to figure out what he thinks he's saying.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/6/2007 9:08:41 PM
In article <0001HW.C2B4221D02098DA1F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> And Parallels supports Boot Camp. Page 19 of the user guide which you 
> clearly have not read, states:
> 
> "Supported Types of Hard Disks The current version of Parallels 
> Desktop allows virtual machines to use virtual hard disks and Boot 
> Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows Vista installations 
> only."

Well, obviously Parallels is either lying or is mistaken.  Mark has said 
so.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/6/2007 9:10:25 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 17:08:41 -0400, Michelle Steiner wrote
(in article <michelle-5EE3B9.14084106072007@news.east.cox.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B423A60209E9E5F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>>> Are you saying that Vista formats the disk differently from the way 
>>> that XP formats it?
>> 
>> He has no clue what he's saying.
> 
> I know that; I'm trying to figure out what he thinks he's saying.
> 
> 

You need a brain to think and it's pretty clear that he's solid oak from ear 
to ear.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 9:31:01 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 17:10:25 -0400, Michelle Steiner wrote
(in article <michelle-8D3D16.14102506072007@news.east.cox.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B4221D02098DA1F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>> And Parallels supports Boot Camp. Page 19 of the user guide which you 
>> clearly have not read, states:
>> 
>> "Supported Types of Hard Disks The current version of Parallels 
>> Desktop allows virtual machines to use virtual hard disks and Boot 
>> Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows Vista installations 
>> only."
> 
> Well, obviously Parallels is either lying or is mistaken.  Mark has said 
> so.
> 
> 

That's gotta be it.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/6/2007 9:32:08 PM
On Jul 6, 4:45 pm, J.J. O'Shea <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:12:35 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
> (in article <noneof-D8C3FC.13134906072...@news.west.earthlink.net>):
>
>
>
> > In article <0001HW.C2B4003E02019E44F0284...@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> >  J.J. O'Shea <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> > Mark Conrad clearly posted about
> > a BOOTCAMP created Vista partition:
>
> >>> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
>
> > Blind J.J. O'Shea responded:
> >> Lying scum. He specifically said version 3, which _does_ support Vista, you
> >> batshit insane subcretin.
>
> > LEARN TO READ you ignoramous, I posted BOOTCAMP.
>
> And Parallels supports Boot Camp. Page 19 of the user guide which you clearly
> have not read, states:
>
> "Supported Types of Hard Disks
> The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use
> virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows
> Vista installations only."
>
>
>
>
>
> > Good Grief, you did it a 2nd time, that makes you doubly ignorant:
>
> >> Markie-poo, dearest, from the Installing Parallels Desktop for Mac PDF,
> >> available at the Parallels site and when you buy Parallels:
>
> >> "Parallels Desktop for Mac currently supports:
> >> . Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, 2000, XP, 2003, and Vista Ultimate,
> >> Business, and Enterprise
> >> . All distributions of Linux, as well as FreeBSD, OS/2, eComStation,
> >> Solaris, and MS-DOS"
>
> >> From the Parallels Desktop For Mac Datasheet, as of 22 May 2007,
> >> also available in the same places:
>
> >> "NEW! Supports Windows Vista."
>
> > My post plainly referred to BootCamp, NOT Parallels
>
> And you _quoted_ where Parallels supports Boot Camp partitions...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Below is my post to "ric" which you managed
> > to get completely screwed up:
>
> > From "ric":
> >>> Personally, I love Parallels.  Latest version 3 supports
> >>> 3D hardware acceleration, USB 2.0, and can *boot off an
> >>> existing bootcamp Windows partition*
>
> > Reply from Mark Conrad:
> >> Not off a Vista BootCamp partition, check it out, I did.
>
> >> Apparently $MS is not yet willing to allow it, for Vista.
>
> >> Windows XP runs on a combination Parallels/BootCamp setup, though.
>
> "Supported Types of Hard Disks
> The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use
> virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows
> Vista installations only."
>
> "NEW! Supports Windows Vista."
>
> "Parallels Desktop for Mac currently supports:
> . Windows 3.1, 95, 98, Me, NT, 2000, XP, 2003, and Vista Ultimate, Business,
> and Enterprise
> . All distributions of Linux, as well as FreeBSD, OS/2, eComStation, Solaris,
> and MS-DOS"
>
> I don't know how much more clear it could be:
>
> Parallels supports Vista. Parallels supports hard drives formatted with Boot
> Camp partitions for OS X and Windows. Supported versions of Windows are
> XP(SP2 only) and Vista.
>
>
>
> > Geez, how dense can you be!
>
> > ric posted a remark stating that Parallels could be used with a BootCamp
> > created Windows partition, LOOK at his post!
>
> He did. He's right.
>
>
>
> > I responded to him, noting that it would not work that way when using
> > Vista, which remark of mine I still stand by.
>
> > I further added that it WOULD work that way, if XP-Pro was used instead
> > of Vista.
>
> Parallels works with Vista, cretin.
>
>
>
> > In other words, to spell it out for mentally impaired people like you,
> > if Parallels is used on a BootCamp created Windows XP partition, it WILL
> > work.
>
> > However if an attempt is made to use Parallels on a BootCamp created
> > Vista partition, it WILL NOT WORK.
>
> > YOU STUPID IDIOT, IF YOU DOUBT THAT THEN TRY IT, LIKE I DID.
>
> I have. It worked. I suspect that you're doing something wrong. (Gee. What a
> surprise, a batshit insane subcetin doing something wrong!)
>
>
>
> > Everything else was the same, I have successfuly installed both Vista
> > Ultimate and XP Pro many times, using BootCamp or Parallels or the
> > combination of Parallels used with BootCamp; invariably, the combination
> > will not work with Vista.
>
> > I Googled about that issue, and it was reflected in other people's posts
> > - - - and no, I am not going to waste my time supplying you with
> > references, do your own Googling, you will remember it longer if you
> > have to do a little work.
>
> Bullshit.
>
>
>
> > At some point, your mistaken knee-jerk reaction was that ric and I were
> > posting about a simple Parallels/Vista setup.
>
> Nope.
>
>
>
> > We were NOT, we were posting about Parallels being used with a BootCamp
> > partition in which Vista was installed, which is a much more complex
> > situation.
>
> Nope.
>
>
>
> > Read the fucking posts!!!
>
> I did.
>
>
>
> > PLEASE, if you do not understand a NG comment in the future, ask for an
> > explanation, rather than going off half cocked and calling people names
> > and attempting to ridicule them, when the root problem is that you fail
> > to follow the logic of a post due to your extreme ignorance.
>
> That's a third irony-o-meter blown up.
>
>
>
> > Mark-
>
> --
> email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

BootCamp won't work on my mac book too fragmented... if you want boot
camp, you need to do it first when you first get the machine
parallels work s great but I don't trust windows enough to run
anything for too long.

Tom
www.seo9oneone.com
www.itspuresoap.com

0
reitz (3)
7/7/2007 12:18:16 AM
In article <1183767496.026653.309360@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
 "reitz@seo9oneone.com" <reitz@seo9oneone.com> wrote:

> BootCamp won't work on my mac book too fragmented...

So defragment it.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/7/2007 12:45:28 AM
In article <0001HW.C2B4221D02098DA1F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> "Supported Types of Hard Disks
> The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use 
> virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows 
> Vista installations only."

What part of  "OR"  don't you understand?


It specifically states "OR Vista installations ONLY"

Perhaps it is ONLY that you do not understand.

"Windows Vista installations only" means exactly that.

IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.

Sheesh!

Only way an incredibly stupid shit like you will accept that is to try 
it yourself, as I did, and as others on Google did, who found out the 
hard way that the Parallels description is VERY misleading.

After you actually try to do what the Parallels description _implies_ 
can be done, I will accept your sincere apology for creating all this 
bullshit in this NG.

Unless and until you know what you are talking about, SHUT UP.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/7/2007 1:26:51 AM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:26:51 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-6BB935.18280506072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B4221D02098DA1F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>> "Supported Types of Hard Disks
>> The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use 
>> virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows 
>> Vista installations only."
> 
> What part of  "OR"  don't you understand?
> 
> 
> It specifically states "OR Vista installations ONLY"
> 
> Perhaps it is ONLY that you do not understand.
> 
> "Windows Vista installations only" means exactly that.
> 
> IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.

Actually, it does mean Windows plus Boot Camp. I've done it.

> 
> Sheesh!
> 
> Only way an incredibly stupid shit like you will accept that is to try 
> it yourself, as I did, and as others on Google did, who found out the 
> hard way that the Parallels description is VERY misleading.
> 
> After you actually try to do what the Parallels description _implies_ 
> can be done, I will accept your sincere apology for creating all this 
> bullshit in this NG.
> 
> Unless and until you know what you are talking about, SHUT UP.

Oh, the irony.

> 
> Mark-



-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 2:18:59 AM
Mark Conrad wrote:
> In article <0001HW.C2B4221D02098DA1F060B648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>> "Supported Types of Hard Disks
>> The current version of Parallels Desktop allows virtual machines to use 
>> virtual hard disks and Boot Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows 
>> Vista installations only."
> 
> What part of  "OR"  don't you understand?
> 
> 
> It specifically states "OR Vista installations ONLY"
> 
> Perhaps it is ONLY that you do not understand.
> 
> "Windows Vista installations only" means exactly that.
> 
> IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.
> 
> Sheesh!
> 
> Only way an incredibly stupid shit like you will accept that is to try 
> it yourself, as I did, and as others on Google did, who found out the 
> hard way that the Parallels description is VERY misleading.
> 
> After you actually try to do what the Parallels description _implies_ 
> can be done, I will accept your sincere apology for creating all this 
> bullshit in this NG.
> 
> Unless and until you know what you are talking about, SHUT UP.
> 

Damn, you're getting stupider by the minute.  I only thought that could 
happen with serious drug abuse.

Greg
-- 
http://ticketmastersucks.org

Le Petite Dejeuner au Tour de Farce:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6131132
0
getnews1 (2029)
7/7/2007 2:27:45 AM
In article <noneof-6BB935.18280506072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> > "Supported Types of Hard Disks The current version of Parallels 
> > Desktop allows virtual machines to use virtual hard disks and Boot 
> > Camp partition with Windows XP /SP2 or Windows Vista installations 
> > only."
> 
> What part of  "OR"  don't you understand?
> 
> 
> It specifically states "OR Vista installations ONLY"
> 
> Perhaps it is ONLY that you do not understand.
> 
> "Windows Vista installations only" means exactly that.
> 
> IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.

Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that Boot Camp 
does is format the frigging disk!!!!!  Once the disk is formatted, Boot 
Camp is out of the picture completely!!!!!!

If you knew what the fuck you were doing, you wouldn't have all these 
problems!!!!!!!!!!

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/7/2007 5:25:02 AM
In article <michelle-712A62.22250206072007@news.east.cox.net>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that Boot Camp 
> does is format the frigging disk!!!!!

Bullshit - easy enough to prove you are wrong.

Merely format the disk ANY OTHER WAY THAN WITH BOOTCAMP, and it should 
be readily apparent to even a dummy like you that BootCamp does much 
more than:

        "All that Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!"


For one obvious thing, the ordinary Mac user would never be able to 
install Vista onto any partition formated by ordinary Disk Utility, for 
example.

Smarten up, your ignorance is showing.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/7/2007 9:04:46 AM
In article <0001HW.C2B47053000219CCF0509648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> > IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.
> 
> Actually, it does mean Windows plus Boot Camp. I've done it.

Nope, not Windows Vista plus BootCamp, no way; that was what the 
misleading passage in the Parallels users manual was referring to.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/7/2007 9:11:22 AM
In article <noneof-D78365.02060107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Smarten up, your ignorance is showing.

You're an ignorant cum-guzzler, Conrad.
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/7/2007 10:23:41 AM
In article <2007070612595377923-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

> I can surely attest to that.  As the proud and worry-free owner of a 
> well-implemented, completely automated, daily, incremental, unattended 
> Retrospect-to-Exabyte tape backup system that backs up 6 computers of 
> various makes, models, and platforms in my house every evening without 
> fail for years, Mark's "dd backup solution" provides me with endless 
> giggles.  : )

I loved it when he "zapped" (his expression) his backup copy before he 
could restore it. Usually I don't take pleasure in the misfortunes of 
the mentally challenged, but I'm pleased to make an exception for Mark.
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/7/2007 10:26:56 AM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 05:11:22 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-75F18D.02123807072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B47053000219CCF0509648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>>> IT DOES NOT MEAN WINDOWS PLUS BOOTCAMP, you incredibly stupid shit.
>> 
>> Actually, it does mean Windows plus Boot Camp. I've done it.
> 
> Nope, not Windows Vista plus BootCamp, no way; that was what the 
> misleading passage in the Parallels users manual was referring to.
> 
> Mark-

Now, which is more likely:

1 the guys at Parallels lied in their user's guide, and that despite this _I_ 
was able to get Parallels to work quite nicely with a Boot Camp formatted 
NTFS partition.

or

2 they didn't lie, Parallels works with Vista and a Boot Camp formatted NTFS 
partition just like they said, and what really happened was that a batshit 
insane subcretin totally fucked up his system and is laying the blame 
everywhere but where it belongs (that is, with himself) as usual.

Decisions, decisions. Who to believe.

And, Markie-poo, you said that others had your problems. Who, exactly, and 
where can we find the records of they problems? Inquiring minds wanna know. 
There is, for example, a conflict with MacFUSE... which is to be expected 
given that MacFUSE is early alpha! This conflict doesn't prevent Parallels 
from reading the NTFS partition, and, of course, does not exist when 
accessing FAT32 or FAT partitions, such as those on a thumb drive.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 12:14:19 PM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 05:04:46 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-D78365.02060107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

> In article <michelle-712A62.22250206072007@news.east.cox.net>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>> Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that Boot Camp 
>> does is format the frigging disk!!!!!
> 
> Bullshit - easy enough to prove you are wrong.
> 
> Merely format the disk ANY OTHER WAY THAN WITH BOOTCAMP,

You mean like just slapping in a Vista DVD and installing?

> and it should 
> be readily apparent to even a dummy like you that BootCamp does much 
> more than:
> 
>         "All that Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!"

Boot Camp also automatically generates drivers for various Apple-specific 
hardware. If you're willing to run without those items (such as, oh, the 
iSight camera) or if you already have the drivers, Boot Camp really does 
merely format and partition the disk.

> 
> 
> For one obvious thing, the ordinary Mac user would never be able to 
> install Vista onto any partition formated by ordinary Disk Utility, for 
> example.

So slap the Vista disc into the drive and use the tools that ship on the 
disc.

> 
> Smarten up, your ignorance is showing.


Oh, the irony. I'm running out of irony-o-meters, Markie-poo, and you just 
blew up another one. And these were Talk.Origins Special Duty(tm) GigaMcCoy 
rated GopherWood(r) brand Super Irony-O-Meters, with the special unobtainium 
filter guaranteed to stand up to ten posts from John 'nameless' McCoy, five 
posts from UC the cunning linguist or any combination of the above, or your 
money back.


-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 12:24:04 PM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 06:23:41 -0400, Warren Oates wrote
(in article <01d00497$0$16810$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>):

> In article <noneof-D78365.02060107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Smarten up, your ignorance is showing.
> 
> You're an ignorant cum-guzzler, Conrad.
> 

Oy! I _like_ ignorant cum-guzzlers! They're fun to have around!

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 12:24:59 PM
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 14:52:43 -0400, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article <200707061352437987-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>):

> On 2007-07-06 13:18:02 -0500, J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> said:
> 
>> If I ever spring for a tape drive for home use I'd probably get one of those
>> drives that has Retro bundled in and use that.
> 
> You want an Exabyte drive (and they come with Retrospect Workgroup, IIRC):
> 
> <http://exabyte.com/products/products/get_products.cfm?prod_id=480>
> 
> The packet technology used in these drives is next-generation, and is 
> way ahead of the competition.
> 
> 

Yeah... it's also $1600. It's a whole lot easier to persuade She Who Must Be 
Obeyed that I need another $150-350 hard drive than it is to persuade her 
that I need a $1600 tape drive.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 12:28:04 PM
In article <noneof-D78365.02060107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Merely format the disk ANY OTHER WAY THAN WITH BOOTCAMP, and it 
> should be readily apparent to even a dummy like you that BootCamp 
> does much more than:
> 
>         "All that Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!"
> 
> 
> For one obvious thing, the ordinary Mac user would never be able to 
> install Vista onto any partition formated by ordinary Disk Utility, 
> for example.

You really are a dumb shit, Mark.  Tell us what Boot Camp does in 
addition to formatting the disk.

I predict that in Leopard, there will be no such thing as a Boot Camp 
application; the Boot Camp functionality will be rolled into Disk 
Utility.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/7/2007 1:18:57 PM
On 2007-07-07 07:28:04 -0500, J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> said:

> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 14:52:43 -0400, Jolly Roger wrote
> (in article <200707061352437987-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>):
> 
>> On 2007-07-06 13:18:02 -0500, J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> said:
>> 
>>> If I ever spring for a tape drive for home use I'd probably get one of those
>>> drives that has Retro bundled in and use that.
>> 
>> You want an Exabyte drive (and they come with Retrospect Workgroup, IIRC):
>> 
>> <http://exabyte.com/products/products/get_products.cfm?prod_id=480>
>> 
>> The packet technology used in these drives is next-generation, and is
>> way ahead of the competition.
> 
> Yeah... it's also $1600. It's a whole lot easier to persuade She Who Must Be
> Obeyed that I need another $150-350 hard drive than it is to persuade her
> that I need a $1600 tape drive.

Ironically, my wife bought mine for my birthday.  : D  Seriously, 
though - yes, it's an investment.  But in my mind,  it's a sound 
investment, because the data stored on these tapes is safer than data 
stored on most other tapes as a result of this technology.

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/7/2007 5:39:29 PM
On 2007-07-07 04:04:46 -0500, Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> said:

> In article <michelle-712A62.22250206072007@news.east.cox.net>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>> Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that Boot Camp
>> does is format the frigging disk!!!!!
> 
> Bullshit - easy enough to prove you are wrong.

You've failed in your endeavor to prove him wrong.

> Merely format the disk ANY OTHER WAY THAN WITH BOOTCAMP, and it should
> be readily apparent to even a dummy like you that BootCamp does much
> more than:
> 
>         "All that Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!"
> 
> For one obvious thing, the ordinary Mac user would never be able to
> install Vista onto any partition formated by ordinary Disk Utility, for
> example.

Bullshit. It's perfectly possible to partition and install Vista on a 
Mac without Boot Camp.

> Smarten up, your ignorance is showing.

The only ignorance here is your own.  It's perfectly possible to 
partition and install Vista on a Mac without Boot Camp.

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/7/2007 5:43:51 PM
In article <2007070712435150878-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

> > In article <michelle-712A62.22250206072007@news.east.cox.net>,
> >  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that 
> >> Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!
> > 
> > Bullshit - easy enough to prove you are wrong.
> 
> You've failed in your endeavor to prove him wrong.

"her"  I'm a girly-girl, remember? <g>

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/7/2007 6:35:04 PM
On 2007-07-07 13:35:04 -0500, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <2007070712435150878-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>>> In article <michelle-712A62.22250206072007@news.east.cox.net>,
>>> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Bootcamp is not an operating system, you nincompoop.  All that
>>>> Boot Camp does is format the frigging disk!!!!!
>>> 
>>> Bullshit - easy enough to prove you are wrong.
>> 
>> You've failed in your endeavor to prove him wrong.
> 
> "her"  I'm a girly-girl, remember? <g>

Oops sorry.

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/7/2007 7:23:34 PM
Do "zero" and "nothing" mean the same?

No, far from it.

Beware, do not confuse TextEdit with HexEdit in the following, they are 
two different utilities.



For example, I created two TextEdit files, their names are:

"contains nothing"

"contains 1024 hex zeros"


Get Info shows the size of the 'nothing' file as zero bytes.

Get Info shows the size of the 'hex zeros' file as 1024 bytes.



Opening 'nothing' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...nothing.

Opening 'hex zeros' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...exactly 
1024 "00" groups, re-enforcing the fact that Get Info was showing the 
correct size of the 'hex zeros' file.

Therefore, logic tells us that 'nothing'  and  'zero'  refer to entirely 
different things, i.e. 'zero' does NOT mean 'nothing'.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/7/2007 8:56:04 PM
In article <0001HW.C2B4FE2400235766F058A648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> You mean like just slapping in a Vista DVD and installing?

Okay, I will admit it when I am wrong.

I tried to directly install Windows XP Pro and it appears it will work.

(I manually aborted the install)

So I learned something new today, whoopie!


That brings up the question, why do we need BootCamp at all?

I have successfully ran Windows XP Pro in the past, when I forgot to 
install the "Drivers" disk that is part of the BootCamp install 
procedure.  Seems to me therefore, that the drivers are not 100% 
necessary in order to run Windows.


Up until right now, I thought there was something 'Magic' about using 
BootCamp, like a  _lot_  of ordinary Mac users no doubt  _still_  think.


My Magic illusions have been completely destroyed, do not know whether I 
can live in the vacuum that has been created.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/7/2007 9:31:35 PM
In article <noneof-65FB43.14325107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> My Magic illusions have been completely destroyed, do not know whether I 
> can live in the vacuum that has been created.

.... we should be so lucky ...
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/7/2007 9:53:25 PM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 17:31:35 -0400, Mark Conrad wrote
(in article <noneof-65FB43.14325107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>):

> In article <0001HW.C2B4FE2400235766F058A648@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
>> You mean like just slapping in a Vista DVD and installing?
> 
> Okay, I will admit it when I am wrong.

So, did the guys at Parallels lie or not, Markie-poo?

> 
> I tried to directly install Windows XP Pro and it appears it will work.
> 
> (I manually aborted the install)
> 
> So I learned something new today, whoopie!

You're still a batshit insane subcretin.

> 
> 
> That brings up the question, why do we need BootCamp at all?

Answered in the part of my post you snipped, cretin. Also, if you want to be 
able to run OS X as well, Boot Camp will set up _two_ partitions for you, one 
HFS+, one NTFS.

> 
> I have successfully ran Windows XP Pro in the past, when I forgot to 
> install the "Drivers" disk that is part of the BootCamp install 
> procedure.  Seems to me therefore, that the drivers are not 100% 
> necessary in order to run Windows.

I said that already, cretin.

> 
> 
> Up until right now, I thought there was something 'Magic' about using 
> BootCamp, like a  _lot_  of ordinary Mac users no doubt  _still_  think.
> 
> 
> My Magic illusions have been completely destroyed, do not know whether I 
> can live in the vacuum that has been created.

Damn. You're more of a cretin than I'd thought.

> 
> Mark-



-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 10:01:02 PM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 17:53:25 -0400, Warren Oates wrote
(in article <46900b2d$0$16865$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>):

> In article <noneof-65FB43.14325107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> My Magic illusions have been completely destroyed, do not know whether I 
>> can live in the vacuum that has been created.
> 
> ... we should be so lucky ...
> 

He's beyond stupid. Way, way, way beyond stupid.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/7/2007 10:01:28 PM
In article <noneof-65FB43.14325107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> That brings up the question, why do we need BootCamp at all?

Because Boot Camp makes it easy to partition the disk in preparation to 
install Windows.

> Seems to me therefore, that the drivers are not 100% necessary in 
> order to run Windows.

That should have been obvious from the beginning.  The drivers merely 
allow Windows to access certain hardware features of the Mac that most 
PCs do not have.  One of them, though, installs a Startup Disk utility 
so you can easily choose what OS to startup in at the next boot without 
having to do the option-key thing.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/7/2007 10:03:46 PM
On 2007-07-07 16:31:35 -0500, Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> said:

> Up until right now, I thought there was something 'Magic' about using
> BootCamp

And you had this belief despite the fact that those of us in this news 
group who know better have told you *repeatedly* that there is nothing 
magic going on, that Boot Camp does only two things: partitions and 
burns driver CDs.  This proves to the rest of us what we already know 
about you: you disregard what knowledgeable people here say as false.  
This is the way you thank those who bother to give you good advice.

Purely rhetorical question for you, Mark:

	Why should anyone help you when you clearly don't believe a single 
word we say?

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/8/2007 2:46:08 AM
On 2007-07-07 17:03:46 -0500, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <noneof-65FB43.14325107072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Seems to me therefore, that the drivers are not 100% necessary in
>> order to run Windows.
> 
> That should have been obvious from the beginning.

Especially considering this is exactly what everyone in this news group 
has been trying to hammer into his thick head for the past couple 
months straight.

....unbelievable...

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/8/2007 2:48:17 AM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 22:46:08 -0400, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article <2007070721460875249-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>):

> On 2007-07-07 16:31:35 -0500, Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> said:
> 
>> Up until right now, I thought there was something 'Magic' about using
>> BootCamp
> 
> And you had this belief despite the fact that those of us in this news 
> group who know better have told you *repeatedly* that there is nothing 
> magic going on, that Boot Camp does only two things: partitions and 
> burns driver CDs.  This proves to the rest of us what we already know 
> about you: you disregard what knowledgeable people here say as false.  
> This is the way you thank those who bother to give you good advice.
> 
> Purely rhetorical question for you, Mark:
> 
> 	Why should anyone help you when you clearly don't believe a single 
> word we say?
> 
> 

The only thing that Markie-poo is good for is to provide a punching bag, and 
he's not that good even at that, given the total lack of real resistance. 
Beating on him isn't much of a challenge.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/8/2007 3:51:03 AM
Windows questions in a Mac NG?

Very good idea, very good indeed.

I recently got more smarts here in Mac NGs than I ever got from those 
sorry Windows NGs.

Some Mac idiots claim that Windows questions are off topic here, then 
THEY turn right around and flood these Mac NGs with all sorts of 
personal remarks, not related to Macs, what hypocrites they are!

Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
fact that Macs can run Windows.

Of course, one has to put up with the idiots who claim that Windows 
questions are off topic here, a minority of highly insulting people who 
believe in all sorts of negative, destructive things.

Those sick people rant and rave, they are always the ones who START 
using foul language, insults, provocation, ridicule, and other highly 
destructive actions in these otherwise great Mac NGs.

Those foul people try to censor anyone who does not think in their 
constipated fashion.  They are intolerant, abusive, intimidating, they 
have no compassion whatever, in short they adopt 'gang terrorism' 
tactics on their unfortunate victims.

I for one refuse to be intimidated by them.  Their steady stream of 
abuse merely makes me more determined than ever to INCREASE my questions 
about Windows subjects in these Mac NGs.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/8/2007 4:51:23 AM
Mark Conrad wrote:
> Windows questions in a Mac NG?
> 
> Very good idea, very good indeed.
> 
> I recently got more smarts here in Mac NGs than I ever got from those 
> sorry Windows NGs.
> 
> Some Mac idiots claim that Windows questions are off topic here, then 
> THEY turn right around and flood these Mac NGs with all sorts of 
> personal remarks, not related to Macs, what hypocrites they are!
> 
> Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
> fact that Macs can run Windows.
> 
> Of course, one has to put up with the idiots who claim that Windows 
> questions are off topic here, a minority of highly insulting people who 
> believe in all sorts of negative, destructive things.
> 
> Those sick people rant and rave, they are always the ones who START 
> using foul language, insults, provocation, ridicule, and other highly 
> destructive actions in these otherwise great Mac NGs.
> 
> Those foul people try to censor anyone who does not think in their 
> constipated fashion.  They are intolerant, abusive, intimidating, they 
> have no compassion whatever, in short they adopt 'gang terrorism' 
> tactics on their unfortunate victims.
> 
> I for one refuse to be intimidated by them.  Their steady stream of 
> abuse merely makes me more determined than ever to INCREASE my questions 
> about Windows subjects in these Mac NGs.
> 
> Mark-


Mark:  You're a complete and utter cunt.

Don't expect any help from now on.
0
nospam216 (227)
7/8/2007 5:10:25 AM
In article <noneof-84DB22.21524007072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
> fact that Macs can run Windows.

That is sophistry, Mark.
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!
WINDOWS TOPICS ARE NOT ON TOPIC HERE, PERIOD!!!

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/8/2007 5:32:51 AM
In article <noneof-84DB22.21524007072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> I for one refuse to be intimidated by them.  Their steady stream of 
> abuse merely makes me more determined than ever to INCREASE my 
> questions about Windows subjects in these Mac NGs.

Fuck you too, you self-centered asshole who doesn't give a shit about 
anything or anyone but yourself.

You got an F in "plays well with others", didn't you?

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/8/2007 5:34:50 AM
Comparing Parallels to BootCamp -

A lot of advanced considerations are "glossed over" here in order to 
make this comparison easier for beginners.

One such "glossed over" thing is whether to decide to use the ancient 
FAT file system for Windows, or the modern NTFS (file system)

I would highly advise to choose the newer NTFS system, especially when 
installing Windows Vista, and not to fall prey to the siren calls of 
those Mac users who favor the ancient FAT system for its easier way of 
moving files between Windows and Macs.  Nuff' said.



A Mac user generally has to make a decision up front as to which method 
of running Windows is best for him, BootCamp or Parallels.

BootCamp allows for use of all the Macs ram for Windows.

BootCamp runs Windows app's noticeably faster than Parallels.

With Parallels, only half of the ram is allowed to be used for Windows.

Parallels also has a very crappy users manual, they do not define a 
bunch of the terms they use, so a new user has to guess what all the 
confusing installation and configuration options mean.


Despite Parallels drawbacks, a lot of users including me actually prefer 
it over the BootCamp approach, at least for running Windows app's that 
are not too demanding as regards ram usage and speed of operation.

For one thing, it is extremely easy to backup Windows when using 
Parallels, all one has to do is copy the VM file to another disk drive.

If Windows crashes badly, merely throw the existing bad VM file in the 
trash, and move your backup VM file into its place.

Only precaution you need to observe is that the VM file names are 
identical - - - and of course place the VM backup file in the exact same 
location as where the bad backup file was.


When using BootCamp, Windows backup and restore is a bigger problem, 
particularly with Windows Vista.  A lot of backup schemes that work okay 
with XP will refuse to work with Vista.

I am in no position to offer advice about how to back up a badly crashed 
Windows Vista partition for "general" Mac users who run BootCamp, 
however other Mac users claim "TrueImage" from Acronis will do an 
adequate job.

Myself, I use a custom backup scheme which is not suitable for average 
Mac users, but is ideal for my backup purposes.

One last thing, with BootCamp it is almost imperative that you install 
into Windows a utility named "MacDrive 7", because that utility allows 
you to move files from the Windows partition to the Mac partition, and 
move files from the Mac partition to the Windows partition.

That Windows util' only works while you are booted from Windows.

When you are booted from the Mac and using BootCamp, you are generally 
out of luck so far as moving files between the Mac and Windows 
partitions are concerned.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/8/2007 6:13:31 AM
Heh heh, you can judge for yourselves what sort of pathetic sick 
sub-humans they are by their responses to this sub-thread, 'nuff said.

I really hope I can get them riled up enough where they do something or 
post something really stupid, from a legal standpoint.

I have several good legal beagle friends who have an excellent track 
record extracting legal damages from unstable terrorist-oriented people 
like this, basically unstable people who should be removed from society 
before they do any real harm.

Maybe I can get enough financial damages to finance a new Mac, all my 7 
year old Macs are wearing out.

Not to mention the medical expenses they might be good for, when one 
considers all the damages I might recoup for grievous mental anguish 
that I might be able to nail them for.

Was hoping people like them would come along, having lotsa trouble 
paying my recent medical expenses, lots of which was brought on by their 
abusive posts according to my one 'mad dog' legal advisor here.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/8/2007 6:35:05 AM
In article <noneof-713E42.23362307072007@news.west.earthlink.net>, Mark
Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Heh heh, you can judge for yourselves what sort of pathetic sick 
> sub-humans they are by their responses to this sub-thread, 'nuff said.
> 
> I really hope I can get them riled up enough where they do something or 
> post something really stupid, from a legal standpoint.
> 
> I have several good legal beagle friends who have an excellent track 
> record extracting legal damages from unstable terrorist-oriented people 
> like this, basically unstable people who should be removed from society 
> before they do any real harm.

You have no friends.

> Maybe I can get enough financial damages to finance a new Mac, all my 7 
> year old Macs are wearing out.
> 
> Not to mention the medical expenses they might be good for, when one 
> considers all the damages I might recoup for grievous mental anguish 
> that I might be able to nail them for.

Any court you managed to bring an action before would laugh you out of
the building.

> Was hoping people like them would come along, having lotsa trouble 
> paying my recent medical expenses, lots of which was brought on by their 
> abusive posts according to my one 'mad dog' legal advisor here.

What a complete twat you are. Do the world a favour and swallow a gun.
0
dave16 (4224)
7/8/2007 8:31:34 AM
In article <noneof-464619.23144807072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Parallels also has a very crappy users manual, they do not define a 
> bunch of the terms they use, so a new user has to guess what all the 
> confusing installation and configuration options mean.

Like what Mark? "Keyboard" or "mouse?"
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/8/2007 9:59:48 AM
In article <noneof-713E42.23362307072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> I really hope I can get them riled up enough where they do something or 
> post something really stupid, from a legal standpoint.
> 
> I have several good legal beagle friends who have an excellent track 
> record extracting legal damages from unstable terrorist-oriented people 
> like this, basically unstable people who should be removed from society 
> before they do any real harm.

I love it when these morons really start to lose it. "I've instruked my 
lawyers to begin legal procedur. I have a lits ..."

You're a mentally ill incompetent asshole, Mark. You are less 
intelligent than the large wet glob of shit I just dumped into the 
sewers. You are human scum Mark. Fuck off and die slowly, then go to 
hell where My Sweet Lord Satan and all his minions will fuck you up the 
ass for all eternity.
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/8/2007 10:05:24 AM
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 06:05:24 -0400, Warren Oates wrote
(in article <4690b6ba$0$16881$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>):

> In article <noneof-713E42.23362307072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> I really hope I can get them riled up enough where they do something or 
>> post something really stupid, from a legal standpoint.
>> 
>> I have several good legal beagle friends who have an excellent track 
>> record extracting legal damages from unstable terrorist-oriented people 
>> like this, basically unstable people who should be removed from society 
>> before they do any real harm.
> 
> I love it when these morons really start to lose it. "I've instruked my 
> lawyers to begin legal procedur. I have a lits ..."
> 
> You're a mentally ill incompetent asshole, Mark. You are less 
> intelligent than the large wet glob of shit I just dumped into the 
> sewers. You are human scum Mark. Fuck off and die slowly, then go to 
> hell where My Sweet Lord Satan and all his minions will fuck you up the 
> ass for all eternity.
> 

It's especially good when they throw around insults equal to or worse than 
the ones they say caused them so much harm. Assuming they have a case, that 
means that others (such as, oh, _me_ for one, and the guys at Parallels for 
another) have a case too.

-- 
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

0
try.not.to (2779)
7/8/2007 10:08:48 AM
In article <f6qd3g0qbn@news5.newsguy.com>,
 J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:

> 
> It's especially good when they throw around insults equal to or worse than 
> the ones they say caused them so much harm. Assuming they have a case, that 
> means that others (such as, oh, _me_ for one, and the guys at Parallels for 
> another) have a case too.

I'm feeling a really bad case of the cross-posts coming on ...

I prob'ly shouldn't do that to y'all, but ...
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/8/2007 10:20:06 AM
In article <noneof-84DB22.21524007072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Windows questions in a Mac NG?
> 
> Very good idea, very good indeed.
> 
> I recently got more smarts here in Mac NGs than I ever got from those 
> sorry Windows NGs.
> 
> Some Mac idiots claim that Windows questions are off topic here, then 
> THEY turn right around and flood these Mac NGs with all sorts of 
> personal remarks, not related to Macs, what hypocrites they are!
> 
> Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
> fact that Macs can run Windows.

That might be true if this was the comp.mac.misc group, but it's the 
comp.sys.mac.system group.  It's not a goup for systems that run on 
Macs; it's a group issues with the Mac system.
> 
> Of course, one has to put up with the idiots who claim that Windows 
> questions are off topic here, a minority of highly insulting people who 
> believe in all sorts of negative, destructive things.
> 
> Those sick people rant and rave, they are always the ones who START 
> using foul language, insults, provocation, ridicule, and other highly 
> destructive actions in these otherwise great Mac NGs.

You overlook the fact that those sick people who rant and rave are also 
the ones who provide the very smarts you so desperately seek.  The rants 
are payback for the idiotic way you go about seeking help.

Rather than simply asking a question, with followups as necessary, you 
begin with some outlandish statement of pseudo-fact and wait for the 
group to correct your misstatements.  You then frequently challenge the 
responses because they don't meet your expectations.  You're confident 
that the group's sense of obligation to protect lurkers from thinking 
your technobabble is fact will ultimately produce the solution to your 
"problem".

You somehow operate under the delusion that you speak for the "average", 
"novice", or "typical" Mac user when, in fact, you operate on the 
extreme fringe of the user population.

The price we extract for this ill-conceived strategy is to turn up the 
contrast on your erroneous statements and absurd reasoning in an attempt 
to modify your adversarial approach to learning.  That it hasn't worked 
so far means we've been going too easy on you.  
> 
> Those foul people try to censor anyone who does not think in their 
> constipated fashion.  They are intolerant, abusive, intimidating, they 
> have no compassion whatever, in short they adopt 'gang terrorism' 
> tactics on their unfortunate victims.
> 
> I for one refuse to be intimidated by them.  Their steady stream of 
> abuse merely makes me more determined than ever to INCREASE my questions 
> about Windows subjects in these Mac NGs.

And you can expect more nit-picking responses to your every post.  
> 
> Mark-
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/8/2007 11:14:48 AM
Does the ".mac" I this newsgroup's name refer to Mac hardware or Mac OS?
-- 
Steve  = : ^ )


Mark Conrad:

> Windows questions in a Mac NG?
> 
> Very good idea, very good indeed.
> 
> I recently got more smarts here in Mac NGs than I ever got from those
> sorry Windows NGs.
> 
> Some Mac idiots claim that Windows questions are off topic here, then
> THEY turn right around and flood these Mac NGs with all sorts of
> personal remarks, not related to Macs, what hypocrites they are!
> 
> Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the
> fact that Macs can run Windows.
> 
> Of course, one has to put up with the idiots who claim that Windows
> questions are off topic here, a minority of highly insulting people who
> believe in all sorts of negative, destructive things.
> 
> Those sick people rant and rave, they are always the ones who START
> using foul language, insults, provocation, ridicule, and other highly
> destructive actions in these otherwise great Mac NGs.
> 
> Those foul people try to censor anyone who does not think in their
> constipated fashion.  They are intolerant, abusive, intimidating, they
> have no compassion whatever, in short they adopt 'gang terrorism'
> tactics on their unfortunate victims.
> 
> I for one refuse to be intimidated by them.  Their steady stream of
> abuse merely makes me more determined than ever to INCREASE my questions
> about Windows subjects in these Mac NGs.
> 
> Mark-

0
steveb (47)
7/8/2007 12:31:45 PM
Mark Conrad:

> 
> Do "zero" and "nothing" mean the same?
> 
> No, far from it.
> 
> Beware, do not confuse TextEdit with HexEdit in the following, they are
> two different utilities.
> 
> 
> 
> For example, I created two TextEdit files, their names are:
> 
> "contains nothing"
> 
> "contains 1024 hex zeros"
> 
> 
> Get Info shows the size of the 'nothing' file as zero bytes.
> 
> Get Info shows the size of the 'hex zeros' file as 1024 bytes.
> 
> 
> 
> Opening 'nothing' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...nothing.
> 
> Opening 'hex zeros' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...exactly
> 1024 "00" groups, re-enforcing the fact that Get Info was showing the
> correct size of the 'hex zeros' file.
> 
> Therefore, logic tells us that 'nothing'  and  'zero'  refer to entirely
> different things, i.e. 'zero' does NOT mean 'nothing'.

So, if I change my name, I can be somebody else?

-- 
Steve  = : ^ )

0
steveb (47)
7/8/2007 12:33:26 PM
In article <noneof-6131C1.13572007072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Do "zero" and "nothing" mean the same?
> 
> No, far from it.
> 
> Beware, do not confuse TextEdit with HexEdit in the following, they are 
> two different utilities.
> 
> For example, I created two TextEdit files, their names are:
> 
> "contains nothing"
> 
> "contains 1024 hex zeros"
> 
> Get Info shows the size of the 'nothing' file as zero bytes.
> 
> Get Info shows the size of the 'hex zeros' file as 1024 bytes.
> 
> Opening 'nothing' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...nothing.
> 
> Opening 'hex zeros' file with HexEdit shows that it contains...exactly 
> 1024 "00" groups, re-enforcing the fact that Get Info was showing the 
> correct size of the 'hex zeros' file.
> 
> Therefore, logic tells us that 'nothing'  and  'zero'  refer to entirely 
> different things, i.e. 'zero' does NOT mean 'nothing'.

On the other hand, consider the following perl script:

#! /usr/bin/perl

if($Mark) {
   print "Mark is not nothing.\n";
} else {
   print "Mark is nothing.\n";
}

$Mark = 0;
if($Mark) {
   print "Mark is not a zero.\n"
} else {
   print "Mark is a zero.\n"
}

Running that yields:

tms@imac% perl Mark.pl
Mark is nothing.
Mark is a zero.
tms@imac% 

proving that Mark, zero,0 and nothing are all the same thing.
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/8/2007 1:09:57 PM
On 2007-07-08 08:09:57 -0500, Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> said:

> proving that Mark, zero,0 and nothing are all the same thing.

HAHAHA!   Lovely illustration!

Tom Stiller++

-- 
JR

0
Jolly
7/8/2007 2:20:08 PM
In article <4690b569$0$16881$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Parallels also has a very crappy users manual, they do not define a 
> > bunch of the terms they use, so a new user has to guess what all 
> > the confusing installation and configuration options mean.
> 
> Like what Mark? "Keyboard" or "mouse?"

Hey, he was actually on topic for a change.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/8/2007 3:44:00 PM
In article <C2B71651.C117%steveb@bigpond.net.au>,
 Steve Ball <steveb@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Does the ".mac" I this newsgroup's name refer to Mac hardware or Mac 
> OS?

It's not what the ".mac" refers to; it's that ".system" refers to the 
Mac OS.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/8/2007 3:47:36 PM
In article <tomstiller-51CA6B.07144808072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
 Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:

> You somehow operate under the delusion that you speak for the 
> "average", "novice", or "typical" Mac user when, in fact, you operate 
> on the extreme fringe of the user population.

He operates in a bubble that's divorced from the rest of the user 
population.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/8/2007 3:49:14 PM
In article <4690ba2c$0$16881$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, Warren Oates
<warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <f6qd3g0qbn@news5.newsguy.com>,
>  J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@but.see.sig> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > It's especially good when they throw around insults equal to or worse than 
> > the ones they say caused them so much harm. Assuming they have a case, that 
> > means that others (such as, oh, _me_ for one, and the guys at Parallels for 
> > another) have a case too.
> 
> I'm feeling a really bad case of the cross-posts coming on ...
> 
> I prob'ly shouldn't do that to y'all, but ...

What AUK award d'ya think we should nominate Mark for?
0
dave16 (4224)
7/8/2007 4:20:50 PM
In article <080720071020503410%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>,
 Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:

> What AUK award d'ya think we should nominate Mark for?

He hasn't gotten anywhere near that kind of status yet. I'd wait until 
he actually pays a lawyer for something, or until he posts a "cease and 
descist"  notice here, that would put him on the 2nd rung of the ladder.
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/8/2007 4:27:58 PM
In article <noneof-713E42.23362307072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
Mark Conrad  <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:
......
>Not to mention the medical expenses they might be good for, when one 
>considers all the damages I might recoup for grievous mental anguish 
>that I might be able to nail them for.

Curious. People who want to avoid mental anguish stay off line.
If you are actively pursuing these problems, you might find
legal recovery difficult. If you really want to increase problems
in your life, keep fooling around with windows.



0
pack14 (132)
7/8/2007 5:58:05 PM
In article <C2B716B7.C118%steveb@bigpond.net.au>,
Steve Ball  <steveb@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
.....
>So, if I change my name, I can be somebody else?

Certainly, but a new hat is helpful as well.


0
pack14 (132)
7/8/2007 6:02:29 PM
In article <f6r8rl$3lt$1@shell.dim.com>,
 pack@shell.dim.com (Daniel Packman) wrote:

> In article <C2B716B7.C118%steveb@bigpond.net.au>,
> Steve Ball  <steveb@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> ....
> >So, if I change my name, I can be somebody else?
> 
> Certainly, but a new hat is helpful as well.

  Or even subtle changes in your outward appearance, like, say
Groucho glasses.
0
kurtullman (1679)
7/8/2007 6:19:15 PM
In article <tomstiller-51CA6B.07144808072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
 Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
> > fact that Macs can run Windows.
> 
> That might be true if this was the comp.mac.misc group, but it's the 
> comp.sys.mac.system group.  It's not a goup for systems that run on 
> Macs; it's a group issues with the Mac system.

So, YOU would resign such questions to a Mac NG that is seldom used by 
anyone?

What about the periodic questions about BootCamp and Parallels that pop 
up in this NG?

As dictator, would you do what the Windows MVP's do and refuse to answer 
those questions also, steering them to the "misc" NG that no one 
frequents, least of all any people who KNOW those subjects and can 
dispense the proper advice.

Some solution!




> You overlook the fact that those sick people who rant 
> and rave are also the ones who provide the very smarts
> you so desperately seek. 

I have no guilty conscience about that at all, because those same people 
deserve the way I treat them; because they use foul language, ridicule, 
intimidation, threats, they gang up on people they do not like, they 
flood a thread with off-topic remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread 
topic in order to make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond 
to the main topic of the thread.

Such people I will USE for my own purposes, to hell with them!

If I find a topic that irritates them, I will repeatedly jam that topic 
down their throats.

As you can see, I do not respond kindly to such people who attempt to 
'manipulate' me by those foul tactics.



> The price we extract for this ill-conceived strategy is to 
> turn up the contrast on your erroneous statements and absurd
> reasoning in an attempt to modify your adversarial approach
> to learning.

"Turning up the contrast" will not work with me, because your misleading 
phrase of "Turning up the contrast" is YOUR shorthand for:

"foul language, ridicule, intimidation, threats, they gang up
 on people they do not like, they flood a thread with off-topic 
 remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread topic in order to 
 make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond to 
 the main topic of the thread."



> That it hasn't worked so far means we've been going too 
> easy on you.

....and it appears I have been too easy on those detestable people, so 
you can expect me to be a lot harder on them, should they escalate their 
attacks on me.




> And you can expect more nit-picking responses to your every post.

Nit picking I do not mind.


What I  _do_  mind is:

"foul language, ridicule, intimidation, threats, they gang up
 on people they do not like, they flood a thread with off-topic 
 remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread topic in order to 
 make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond to 
 the main topic of the thread."

....which I will fight whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head.



The ball is in your court.  If you or others want war, I have 24 hours a 
day to devote to what I consider a just cause, namely to fight terrorism 
in any form, even in a Mac NG.

I am certain I can recruit the many members of my local church to join 
the fray because I have helped them with computing matters.

Yeah, they already know I am an agnostic heathen, but they like me 
anyhow and I know they would not shirk from any war involving the 
nasties in this NG.

It is easy enough to dig up dirt on any troublemakers in this NG from 
Google records, plus we are all fairly good at recognizing sock puppets.

Of course, we are handicapped because we refuse to fight dirty like our 
adversaries, But I am sure the various ISPs and local law enforcement 
agencies will find our records 'interesting' about whomever decides to 
attack our group in this public NG.

The terrorists and you can decide whether or not you want to destroy 
this NG.  If they do not bug me, I will not bug them; otherwise I am 
fully prepared to escalate whatever nastyness they have in mind for me 
and dump the same trash back onto them, in spades.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/9/2007 4:46:51 AM
In article <noneof-7F8997.21480908072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> The ball is in your court.  If you or others want war, I have 24 hours a 
> day to devote to what I consider a just cause, namely to fight terrorism 
> in any form, even in a Mac NG.
> 
> I am certain I can recruit the many members of my local church to join 
> the fray because I have helped them with computing matters.
> 
> Yeah, they already know I am an agnostic heathen, but they like me 
> anyhow and I know they would not shirk from any war involving the 
> nasties in this NG.
> 
> It is easy enough to dig up dirt on any troublemakers in this NG from 
> Google records, plus we are all fairly good at recognizing sock puppets.
> 
> Of course, we are handicapped because we refuse to fight dirty like our 
> adversaries, But I am sure the various ISPs and local law enforcement 
> agencies will find our records 'interesting' about whomever decides to 
> attack our group in this public NG.
> 
> The terrorists and you can decide whether or not you want to destroy 
> this NG.  If they do not bug me, I will not bug them; otherwise I am 
> fully prepared to escalate whatever nastyness they have in mind for me 
> and dump the same trash back onto them, in spades.
> 
> Mark-

Ah, Mark. You're well on your way, lad. We eagerly await the arrival of 
the South Arkansas Gawd Squawd to teach us some manners. In the 
meantime, have a nice day. Have you found a good lawyer yet?
-- 
W. Oates
0
warren.oates (3828)
7/9/2007 9:54:32 AM
In article <noneof-7F8997.21480908072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> > > Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of 
> > > the fact that Macs can run Windows.
> > 
> > That might be true if this was the comp.mac.misc group, but it's 
> > the comp.sys.mac.system group.  It's not a goup for systems that 
> > run on Macs; it's a group issues with the Mac system.
> 
> So, YOU would resign such questions to a Mac NG that is seldom used 
> by anyone?

No, those questions should be resigned to one or more Windows 
newsgroups, where they belong.

> What about the periodic questions about BootCamp and Parallels that 
> pop up in this NG?

Questions about Boot Camp and Parallels themselves are on topic for this 
newsgroup and/or the comp.sys.mac.applications newsgroup.

> If I find a topic that irritates them, I will repeatedly jam that 
> topic down their throats.

Fuck you too, you egomaniacal self-centered asshole.

You are acting like a five year old, throwing a tantrum if you don't get 
your own way.

> The terrorists and you can decide whether or not you want to destroy 
> this NG.

Wrong!!!!  If you destroy the newsgroup, it is your doing, Mark; learn 
how to take responsibility for your own actions.  "You made me do it" is 
bullshit.  No one would have made you do it; it would be an 
ill-considered, deliberate act of malice of your own, period.

-- 
Support the troops:  Bring them home ASAP.
0
michelle14 (19004)
7/9/2007 11:47:13 AM
In article <noneof-7F8997.21480908072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> In article <tomstiller-51CA6B.07144808072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
>  Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > > Windows topics of course are right on topic here, just because of the 
> > > fact that Macs can run Windows.
> > 
> > That might be true if this was the comp.mac.misc group, but it's the 
> > comp.sys.mac.system group.  It's not a group for systems that run on 
> > Macs; it's a group issues with the Mac system.
> 
> So, YOU would resign such questions to a Mac NG that is seldom used by 
> anyone?

They're off topic questions questions of interest to hardly anyone, so 
yeah, that's where they belong.
> 
> What about the periodic questions about BootCamp and Parallels that pop 
> up in this NG?

Parallels and the *running* of BootCamp are on topic. Windows and its 
associated foibles are not.
> 
> As dictator, would you do what the Windows MVP's do and refuse to answer 
> those questions also, steering them to the "misc" NG that no one 
> frequents, least of all any people who KNOW those subjects and can 
> dispense the proper advice.
> 
> Some solution!

If it works for the Windows MVPs, why not here as well?
> 
> > You overlook the fact that those sick people who rant 
> > and rave are also the ones who provide the very smarts
> > you so desperately seek. 
> 
> I have no guilty conscience about that at all, because those same people 
> deserve the way I treat them; because they use foul language, ridicule, 
> intimidation, threats, they gang up on people they do not like, they 
> flood a thread with off-topic remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread 
> topic in order to make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond 
> to the main topic of the thread.
> 
> Such people I will USE for my own purposes, to hell with them!
> 
> If I find a topic that irritates them, I will repeatedly jam that topic 
> down their throats.
> 
> As you can see, I do not respond kindly to such people who attempt to 
> 'manipulate' me by those foul tactics.

Nor do we.  What goes around comes around.  You treat us with 
disrespect, you can expect the same in return.
> 
> > The price we extract for this ill-conceived strategy is to 
> > turn up the contrast on your erroneous statements and absurd
> > reasoning in an attempt to modify your adversarial approach
> > to learning.
> 
> "Turning up the contrast" will not work with me, because your misleading 
> phrase of "Turning up the contrast" is YOUR shorthand for:
> 
> "foul language, ridicule, intimidation, threats, 

Pot, kettle, black.

>  they gang up on people they do not like, they flood a thread with 
>  off-topic remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread topic in order 
>  to make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond to the main 
>  topic of the thread."

As far as I know, no-one has _initiated_ such a thread.  As I've said, 
your defective strategy for problem resolution leaves only tow options: 
ignore you and let your misstatements go unchallenged, or correct them 
and label you for the miscreant that you show yourself to be.  By 
definition, the first option produces no response so the entire group 
sees you cast in the light of the latter group.
> 
> > That it hasn't worked so far means we've been going too 
> > easy on you.
> 
> ...and it appears I have been too easy on those detestable people, so 
> you can expect me to be a lot harder on them, should they escalate their 
> attacks on me.

What you label as attacks, I see as retaliation for the way you abuse 
the good intentions of the helpful people in this group.

> > And you can expect more nit-picking responses to your every post.
> 
> Nit picking I do not mind.
> 
> What I  _do_  mind is:
> 
> "foul language, ridicule, intimidation, threats, they gang up
>  on people they do not like, they flood a thread with off-topic 
>  remarks in an attempt to dilute the thread topic in order to 
>  make it impossible for legitimate posters to respond to 
>  the main topic of the thread."
> 
> ...which I will fight whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head.

You can fight all you want, but the way to reverse the trend is to adopt 
a more social form of interaction.  Abandon the "have you stopped 
beating your wife" approach to asking a question and adopt a format that 
helps us help you.  For example, see 
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>. 
>
> The ball is in your court.  If you or others want war, I have 24 hours a 
> day to devote to what I consider a just cause, namely to fight terrorism 
> in any form, even in a Mac NG.
> 
> I am certain I can recruit the many members of my local church to join 
> the fray because I have helped them with computing matters.
> 
> Yeah, they already know I am an agnostic heathen, but they like me 
> anyhow and I know they would not shirk from any war involving the 
> nasties in this NG.

I am confident that if the members or your church, or any other group, 
took a look at the threads you have initiated, they would see what we 
find so objectionable in your manner.
> 
> It is easy enough to dig up dirt on any troublemakers in this NG from 
> Google records, plus we are all fairly good at recognizing sock puppets.

You have much more to lose taking that approach than anyone else here.  
Much as you dislike being told what to do, I really think you'd better 
reconsider that particular threat.
> 
> Of course, we are handicapped because we refuse to fight dirty like our 
> adversaries, But I am sure the various ISPs and local law enforcement 
> agencies will find our records 'interesting' about whomever decides to 
> attack our group in this public NG.
> 
> The terrorists and you can decide whether or not you want to destroy 
> this NG.  If they do not bug me, I will not bug them; otherwise I am 
> fully prepared to escalate whatever nastyness they have in mind for me 
> and dump the same trash back onto them, in spades.

The newsgroup will survive with or without you or any one of us.  It's 
easy enough to killfile you and only respond to followups from those you 
might have confused.  However, I must admit there is a certain 
entertainment value in reading your posts.
> 
> Mark-
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/9/2007 12:10:42 PM
Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> > That might be true if this was the comp.mac.misc group, but it's the
> > comp.sys.mac.system group.  It's not a goup for systems that run on
> > Macs; it's a group issues with the Mac system.
> 
> So, YOU would resign such questions to a Mac NG that is seldom used by
> anyone?

First, comp.sys.mac.misc is _NOT_ "seldom used", as I pointed out before
the last time I saw you make that allegation.  It gets about half the
traffic of comp.sys.mac.apps, and more than comp.sys.mac.comm.

Second, this newsgroup gets such high traffic largely because it's used
as a general dumping ground for all things Mac, which was never its
intention.  A lot of the threads here belong in c.s.m.apps, c.s.m.comm,
the c.s.m.hardware hierarchy, etc., and those that don't fit in any of
these belong in c.s.m.misc.

If you're so hell bent, as you claim, on educating the "average Mac
user," why don't you educate them on the proper usage of all the Mac
newsgroups?

-- 
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/musings.cgi> Muckraking T-shirts
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/dance.cgi> Ballroom dance shirts & gifts
0
mikePOST (4990)
7/9/2007 12:13:58 PM
In article <469205ab$0$16869$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> Have you found a good lawyer yet?

There is no such thing as a good lawyer. 

I tolerate them as friends only, they know better than to speak law 
issues in my presence.

Mark-

--
Win in Iraq, elect Russ Limbaugh as president.
0
noneof (1053)
7/9/2007 12:53:40 PM
In article <noneof-2CFA8D.05550009072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> In article <469205ab$0$16869$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Have you found a good lawyer yet?
> 
> There is no such thing as a good lawyer. 
> 
> I tolerate them as friends only, they know better than to speak law 
> issues in my presence.

Heaven forbid that anyone should speak about their area of expertise in 
Mark's presence.  It's much better to follow his example and speak of 
things about which you know nothing.
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/9/2007 1:08:57 PM
"Mark Conrad" <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote in message 
news:noneof-464619.23144807072007@news.west.earthlink.net...
>
> Comparing Parallels to BootCamp -
>

For the archives.

To all readers of "Mark Conrad"'s posts to Usenet:

IGNORE HIS MUSINGS, THERE'S LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT THEY WILL BE 
RELEVANT.  THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS RELEVANT MUSINGS ARE 
COHERENT.  AND THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS COHERENT MUSINGS ARE 
WELL-INFORMED.

So do yourselves favors and ignore 99.9999% of what he writes. 
Unfortunately it's up to you to determine which .0001% just might be 
worthwhile.

Greg
-- 
Ticketbastard tax tracker:
http://ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html

Dethink to survive - Mclusky



0
getnews1 (2029)
7/10/2007 2:20:34 AM
In article <1395r7j4v7bli64@corp.supernews.com>, G.T.
<getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> "Mark Conrad" <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:noneof-464619.23144807072007@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >
> > Comparing Parallels to BootCamp -
> >
> 
> For the archives.
> 
> To all readers of "Mark Conrad"'s posts to Usenet:
> 
> IGNORE HIS MUSINGS, THERE'S LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT THEY WILL BE 
> RELEVANT.  THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS RELEVANT MUSINGS ARE 
> COHERENT.  AND THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS COHERENT MUSINGS ARE 
> WELL-INFORMED.
> 
> So do yourselves favors and ignore 99.9999% of what he writes. 
> Unfortunately it's up to you to determine which .0001% just might be 
> worthwhile.

Do you want to collaborate on a revamp of the Mark Conrad FAQ? I think
it's time...
0
dave16 (4224)
7/10/2007 3:39:11 AM
In article <tomstiller-2EF65F.08104109072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
 Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:

> > ...which I will fight whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head.
> 
> You can fight all you want, but the way to reverse the trend is...

Blah blah blah...




> > It is easy enough to dig up dirt on any troublemakers in this NG from 
> > Google records, plus we are all fairly good at recognizing sock puppets.
> 
> You have much more to lose taking that approach than anyone else here.  
> Much as you dislike being told what to do, I really think you'd better 
> reconsider that particular threat.

First off, there is nothing in what I posted there that can even 
remotely be considered a threat, unless you have a really warped mind.

I am merely stating the obvious, that anyone so inclined can dig up dirt 
on anyone else in these NGs.

Look at politicians for example, as soon as someone states they want to 
run for public office, machinery immediately goes into action to see if 
they were an evil infant in their crib.



> The newsgroup will survive with or without you or any one of us.

First thing you posted so far that makes any sense.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/10/2007 8:24:07 AM
In article <michelle-7F7A94.04471309072007@news.east.cox.net>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > So, YOU would resign such questions to a Mac NG that is seldom used 
> > by anyone?
> 
> No, those questions should be resigned to one or more Windows 
> newsgroups, where they belong.

Yes, dictator.



> > What about the periodic questions about BootCamp and Parallels that 
> > pop up in this NG?
> 
> Questions about Boot Camp and Parallels themselves are on topic for this 
> newsgroup and/or the comp.sys.mac.applications newsgroup.

Thank you, dictator, at least you are not all bad.




> > What about the periodic questions about BootCamp and Parallels that 
> > pop up in this NG?
> 
> Questions about Boot Camp and Parallels themselves are on topic for this 
> newsgroup and/or the comp.sys.mac.applications newsgroup.

Yes, oh high exalted dictator.



> You are acting like a five year old, throwing a tantrum if you don't get 
> your own way.

Who is throwing the tantrum.  Sounds like you are.   Waa, Waa, nasty man 
spoke about Windows, I will stamp my feet and whine and cry and hold my 
breath until I turn blue, Waa, Waaa.


Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/10/2007 8:24:09 AM
In article <tomstiller-8EF853.09085709072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
 Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:

> > > Have you found a good lawyer yet?
> > 
> > There is no such thing as a good lawyer. 
> > 
> > I tolerate them as friends only, they know better than to speak law 
> > issues in my presence.
> 
> Heaven forbid that anyone should speak about their area of expertise in 
> Mark's presence.  It's much better to follow his example and speak of 
> things about which you know nothing.

Hey, don't knock it unless you tried it.

Talking about things I know nothing about has _always_ benefitted me in 
the long run.

Benefits the people who correct me also, they get to rave about how they 
saved impressionably new Mac users from believing my statements.

They feel all warm and cozy inside about saving mankind from me, gives 
them a real purpose in life.




Let's try an example not even remotely associated with computing, to 
demonstrate the value of my approach.

Arab terrorists, the ones that cause us no end of grief.

In their own minds, probably the majority of them actually believe they 
are doing the 'right thing' by killing us.

They do not talk in any except the 'approved' places that their leaders 
pick.


If those same people had direct access to talking to anyone they wanted 
to talk to, no doubt they might see the folly of their beliefs.


But n-o-o, there is some dictator there telling them where to do their 
talking, and what to say when they do talk.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/10/2007 8:24:18 AM
In article <1i0z57e.w9r6v4q4e2pyN%mikePOST@TOGROUPmacconsult.com>,
 mikePOST@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:

> Second, this newsgroup gets such high traffic largely because it's used
> as a general dumping ground for all things Mac...<snip>...

Wrong, it gets high traffic because people know their post will be read 
by the maximum number of knowledgeable people.



Now I agree there is such a thing as a NG that has way too many posts.

A good example of such a NG is the Windows NG:

   microsoft.public.windowsxp.general


That NG is totally unwieldy.

As regards Mac NGs, fortunately none of them have reached that stage 
yet, so stop whining about something that is not a problem.


If anything, the reverse approach should be considered, to junk the Mac 
NG  comp.sys.mac.general  because it has not seen a new post in weeks.

Even the  mac.portables  NG gets precious little traffic; people there 
realize if they want solutions to their portables problems, they better 
post in this 'system' NG instead.

Closest Mac NG that even comes close to being cluttered is c.s.m.a

....however I have seen days there when I went to c.s.m.a for 
entertainment, and there were not enough new posts to see.


Try being a bit more realistic in your NG appraisals.

Mark-
0
noneof (1053)
7/10/2007 8:24:27 AM
Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> Wrong, it gets high traffic because people know their post will be read
> by the maximum number of knowledgeable people

And you know everyone's reasons for posting here how exactly?

-- 
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/musings.cgi> Muckraking T-shirts
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers
<http://designsbymike.info/shop/dance.cgi> Ballroom dance shirts & gifts
0
mikePOST (4990)
7/10/2007 11:40:49 AM
In article <noneof-1AE0CA.01254110072007@news.west.earthlink.net>,
 Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> In article <tomstiller-8EF853.09085709072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
>  Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > > > Have you found a good lawyer yet?
> > > 
> > > There is no such thing as a good lawyer. 
> > > 
> > > I tolerate them as friends only, they know better than to speak law 
> > > issues in my presence.
> > 
> > Heaven forbid that anyone should speak about their area of expertise in 
> > Mark's presence.  It's much better to follow his example and speak of 
> > things about which you know nothing.
> 
> Hey, don't knock it unless you tried it.
> 
> Talking about things I know nothing about has _always_ benefitted me in 
> the long run.
> 
> Benefits the people who correct me also, they get to rave about how they 
> saved impressionably new Mac users from believing my statements.
> 
> They feel all warm and cozy inside about saving mankind from me, gives 
> them a real purpose in life.

Hmmm, I never felt that way.  Maybe I should reconsider my approach to 
helping you.  OK, I have; I won't.


[Mistaken attempt to justify actions snipped]
0
tomstiller (3053)
7/10/2007 12:28:04 PM
Tom Stiller <tomstiller@comcast.net> writes:
>  Mark Conrad <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote:

> > Talking about things I know nothing about has _always_ benefitted me in 
> > the long run.

> > Benefits the people who correct me also, they get to rave about how they 
> > saved impressionably new Mac users from believing my statements.
> > 
> > They feel all warm and cozy inside about saving mankind from me, gives 
> > them a real purpose in life.
> 
> Hmmm, I never felt that way.  Maybe I should reconsider my approach to 
> helping you.  OK, I have; I won't.

I'm one of those folks who used to try to help.  I gave up
and now simply warn folks periodically.

If the Conrad FAQ were posted on a webpage somewhere, I suppose
I'd post a link to it, too, every once in a while.  That'd be
a lot easier than retyping the warnings.

Oh, and every once in a while, just to get it off of my chest:
Mark, you're an asshole.


-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! --    http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
   http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
7/10/2007 3:33:51 PM
Dave Balderstone wrote:
> In article <1395r7j4v7bli64@corp.supernews.com>, G.T.
> <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> 
>> "Mark Conrad" <noneof@urbusiness.invalid> wrote in message 
>> news:noneof-464619.23144807072007@news.west.earthlink.net...
>>> Comparing Parallels to BootCamp -
>>>
>> For the archives.
>>
>> To all readers of "Mark Conrad"'s posts to Usenet:
>>
>> IGNORE HIS MUSINGS, THERE'S LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT THEY WILL BE 
>> RELEVANT.  THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS RELEVANT MUSINGS ARE 
>> COHERENT.  AND THERE IS LESS THAN A 1% CHANCE THAT HIS COHERENT MUSINGS ARE 
>> WELL-INFORMED.
>>
>> So do yourselves favors and ignore 99.9999% of what he writes. 
>> Unfortunately it's up to you to determine which .0001% just might be 
>> worthwhile.
> 
> Do you want to collaborate on a revamp of the Mark Conrad FAQ? I think
> it's time...

I'm up for it.

Greg
0
getnews1 (2029)
7/10/2007 4:23:05 PM
Reply: