Linux-Advocacy Digest #721, Volume #28 Tue, 29 Aug 00 01:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Drestin Lack-of-facts... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:04:00 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:11:30 +0100, C Lund wrote:
> >> Fuck you. I've never been a republican.
> >
> >You sure sound like one.
>
> According to Kulkis, the Republicans are "socialists".
>
> >I wasn't talking about "welfare slobs", I was talking about the working poor.
>
> According to Kulkis, the world is neatly partitioned into "philosopher kings"
> and "welfare slobs". A welfare slob is anyone who's not a philosopher king.
>
You will never discern shades of grey if you do not first acknowledge
the existance of black and white.
> --
> Donovan
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:05:36 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > And then pay to have them sit in jail. Which is much more
> > > expensive. Smart.
> >
> > Why should we pay for their incarceration. Put them to work doing
> > something to earn their keep.
>
> Even if I go along with the idea that people who misbehave in school
> should be expelled and forced into slave labor, it still doesn't solve
You idiot. You only incercerate them if they commit crimes.
> the problem. Do you have any idea what it costs to keep someone in
> prison? You can go to college for less.
They either work to support themselves, or...we let them starve
to death. It's their call.
>
> > > > > > The public schools can expel those who disrupt the school,
> > > > > > but they refuse to do so.
> > > > >
> > > > > And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their
> > > > > schooling now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
> > > >
> > > > Where they will serve as an example to others.
> > >
> > > If it were that simple, there wouldn't be kids causing trouble in
> > > school right now.
> > >
> > > > > > Hoisted by their own petards.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually, it's the tax-paying public who is paying for an
> > > > > > K-12 "education" but the money is instead being used for
> > > > > > left-wing indoctrination.
> > > > >
> > > > > What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids
> > > > > about
> > > >
> > > > Global warming and other Eco-leftism
> > >
> > > Global warming is not "Eco-leftism" any more than quantum mechanics
> > > is.
> > >
> > > > Pro-homosexuality propaganda
> > >
> > > Examples?
> >
> > "Daddy has a roommate" "Heather has two mommies"
>
> They also teach kids about tribal life in Africa. Do you think this is
> intended to encourage kids to go join African tribes? If kids aren't
> exposed to the different ways in which people live they often turn into
> bigots. Which is what you seem to want.
>
> > > > Socialism
> > >
> > > Examples? Most school history texts I've seen have an
> > > American/capitalist bias, actually.
> >
> > Your information is at least 10 years out of date.
>
> Examples?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:08:13 -0400
Mike Marion wrote:
>
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> > I pretty much agree with you on this one. I believe that everyone should
> > be allowed to work at their own pace, but I don't believe that they can
> > both work at a different pace *and* graduate in the same time.
>
> Yep, we're in total agreement here.
>
> BTW, in those cases where a student is "socially promoted" when their family
> complains enough, I think that not only in the school screwed up but the
> family is too. To push your child into the next grade when they aren't ready
> is far worse IMO, then the social slight they will have for being held back.
My aunt actually had to fight with the school board to PREVENT my
cousin from being socially promoted. It's a good thing she did.
It totally changed his life from feeling like a failure to one of
accomplishment.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:31:37 -0500
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8oe1jv$ddc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >Also, Win9x's design goal was to run on the same
> hardware
> > that typical Windows 3.x machines were running on in 1995 and be as
> fast, or
> > faster than Windows 3.x. All of which it achieved.
>
> What?! I have never heard anyone claim thet win 95 is as fast as win3.x.
> This also goes directly against my personal experience and the
> experience of many people that I know. Try running them on an old 486.
> 95 is a little sluggish. On a fast pentium, win311 flies.
On a 386 or 486 with 4 MB of memory, Win95 is just as fast as Win 3.1 is.
Win95 is *MUCH* faster than Win 3.1 if you give it a few more megs.
We're talking Windows 95 without anything else. No IE, no FAT32, whatever.
> > Again, this is subjective. I don't find them to be a poor design at
> all.
> > Anywhere you put them, people will accidentally hit them.
>
> It is much easier to hit them accidently in Windows, where they are next
> to other commonly used buttons. I used macs for quite a while (a while
> ago) and I never _once_ accidently hit close when I didn't mean to. I
> cannot (still) say the same about windows.
Really? I've never hit close accidentally on Windows. Ever. I have,
however hit the wrong buttons on the MacOS, since they do not give any
indication of what they do. I always get the rollup button confused with
other buttons.
> > No "inconsistent version of explorer" is used. Explorer is used. The
> start
> > menu is just another directory in your file system, and explorer is
> opened
> > up in that directory.
>
> You can't go up from that directory to a higher one, though. It,
> therefore works differently to most instances of explorer, therefore it
> is inconsistent. That's how it woprks on this 95 machine here, anyway.
Explorer can be configured to put the root directory anywhere. And you can
in fact go up higher if you enable the toolbar. You can click the "up"
button or choose with the path combobox.
> > I don't see what's so hard about right clicking on the start menu and
> > choosing "open" to find where to edit it. Although with IE4 and 5 you
>
> That's another inconsistency. it uses a slightly different instanec of
> explorer top edit it, if invoked from there,
No, it doesn't. It's exactly the same.
> > > Ever try to drag and drop to an app running on the taskbar? Again,
> > > they went to the trouble to describe how drag and drop should work
> in
> > > their own guidelines, then disregard those guidelines entirely
> > > themselves.
> >
> > And what part of the guideline does this violate? I notice your
> arguments
> > are getting to be more hand waving than substance as your argument
> rolls on.
>
> You cannot just drag an icon to a running app on the taskbar. You drag
Apps don't "run" on the taskbar. The taskbar is just a button bar with
process names. It makes no sense to drop icons on buttons.
> the icon on to the task bar, wait for the app to be raised, then drag it
> on to the app. That is not how the rest of DnD on win 95 works. The rest
> of DnD is consistent with MS's guidelines, this is different, therefore
> it does not comply with the guidelines. That is not a handwaving
> argument. Try it, I did just a second ago.
No, you simply cannot drag files onto buttons, anywhere in Win95.
> So the operation of bits on the systray is not consistent. It would be
> easy to make it consistent for instance if you click (or was that double
> click) on a tray button used only for visual notification, it could
> bring up a box telling you there was nothing to do. That would be better
> than leaving the user wondering why it hasn't worked.
You don't understand. The systray is *ENTIRELY* applicaiton defined.
Windows doesn't do any intervention there.
> > This is a legacy application left over from the 3.x days. They can't
> change
> > it because many applications rely on it being there, and having the
> same
> > menu items. Screen readers, for instance.
>
> Why did they nedd to change it? Is inttroduced a quite unnecessary
> inconsistency, where there was none before.
They didn't. Notepad has always had the same menus. The UI guidelines were
changed years after notepads creation (which was in Windows 2.x I believe).
> > > You close (alt-f c) a window, you exit (alt-f x) an application.
> Well,
> > > at least in Win3.1 you did. In 95 and later, that's still usually
> > > true, but not always - another consistency problem detracting from
> > > useability, and very typical.
> >
> > There is a certain amount of inconsistency here. But I've seen lots
> of Mac
> > apps that use inconsistent interfaces in the past as well.
>
> Just becuase Macs have the same inconsistency doesn't make it OK. It is
> still a bad thing.
The point is that Microsoft can no more control what apps do than Apple can.
> (interface hall of shame comment...)
> > He also makes the proclamation that seperate windows for folders and
> files
> > is the correct way of doing things. I disagree. A single, unified
> > interface is much easier to learn and use than seperate ones. Apple
> > understands this, which is why their finder has a unified interface.
> I have to disagree. Having 2 panes makes it much easier to navigate than
> a single unified one. And again, if Apple got it worong, it doesn't make
> it OK that MS got it wrong too.
The thing that this doesn't take into account is long file names. 2 windows
makes your available space to display names much smaller.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:33:09 -0500
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8oe5s0$2gbj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Arguably. Lots of things run in kernel space on various Unix servers.
> > Linux now has a new kernel space web server. There are telnet servers
that
> > run in kernel space and sockets that run in kernel space.
>
> Measuring 'telnet servers' and 'sockets' running in kernel space against
> video drivers running in kernel space betrays your extreme inexperience
> in this area. You've just argued against yourself.
Please explain the difference then. I doubt you can.
> >> The placement of the menus - the Windows design where they are placed
> >> below the top window border is clearly an inferior design to the Mac
> >> placement of the menus along the top edge of the desktop.
> >
> > You say this without explaining why this is "clearly superior".
> >
> > Actually, I believe the Mac design is clearly inferior. The apple
design
> > forces you to move the mouse to the top of the screen everytime you want
to
> > use a menu.
>
> You are misinformed. When was the last time you used MacOS? (or read the
> instructions?)
Gee.. I don't know what having a menu at the top of the screen means
otherwise.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 29 Aug 2000 04:18:46 GMT
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 01:23:28 GMT, ZnU wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>Even if I go along with the idea that people who misbehave in school
>should be expelled and forced into slave labor, it still doesn't solve
>the problem. Do you have any idea what it costs to keep someone in
>prison? You can go to college for less.
IIRC it's about 37K. I remember anyway that it's a respectable salary.
For someone to "earn their keep" and make prisons profitable would be
a miracle, especially given the skills of the prison population.
>They also teach kids about tribal life in Africa. Do you think this is
>intended to encourage kids to go join African tribes?
Not quite. It's a sinister communist plot to expose everyone to African
culture, because if they spend enough time studying it, they'll get AIDs.
Don't you know anything ??? (-;
> If kids aren't
>exposed to the different ways in which people live they often turn into
>bigots. Which is what you seem to want.
I wonder why he'd want that ? Personally, I'd choose almost anything over
a society of Aaron Kulkis's ( just the thought of such a thing makes one
shudder ... )
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:13:31 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:31:25 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> They don't refuse to do so. The problem is that "discipline"
> > > > > >> doesn't always work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Then expel them.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your emphasis on "expelling" people is not going to raise
> > > > > educational standards. In short, you seek to raise "performance"
> > > > > statistics by hiding weaker students from those statistics. In
> > > > > short, this is a scam, because it doesn't do anything to increase
> > > > > the nation's education level. It merely makes certain statistics
> > > > > easier to misapply.
> > > > >
> > > > > >> And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their
> > > > > >> schooling now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Where they will serve as an example to others.
> > > > >
> > > > > "serve as an example" ? If the point of the criminal justice system
> > > > > was to "make examples" of people, wouldn't it be more effective to
> > > > > publically execute them or stone them to death ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Be aware that the kind of barbarism you are advocating no longer
> > > > > exists in civilised countries.
> > > > >
> > > > > >> What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids
> > > > > >> about
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Global warming and other Eco-leftism
> > > > >
> > > > > What is wrong with discussing environmental issues in schools ? I
> > > > > don't recall any given view being "pushed".
> > > >
> > > > Pushing LIES is directly contrary to the purpose of education.
> > >
> > > Why are all those scientists telling lies?
> > >
> > > > > >Pro-homosexuality propaganda
> > > > >
> > > > > Why are you so strongly opposed to homosexuality ? I notice you
> > > > > offered no
> > > >
> > > > Ever hear of AIDS?
> > >
> > > AIDS spreads just as well or better though heterosexual sex. Some of the
> >
> > Then where is the much-ballyhood heterosexual explosion of AIDS
> > in the US, which the AIDS activists have been predicting for over
> > 2 decades now.
> >
> > AIDS is an epidemic in among two groups
> > 1) I.V. drug users
> > 2) homosexual men.
>
> The homosexual community is less than a 15th of the size of the
> heterosexual community, which means any disease that gets into it will
> infect a much larger portion much faster.
Are you saying that AIDS infects a set number N of new victims every
day, regardless of behavior?
By the way, gays have a lower population density, so this should
counteract all of that.
> It also looks like AIDS began
> in the homosexual community in the US, so homosexual men have a head
> start.
I wonder why *that* is.
...it couldn't be the fact that heterosexuals can come in contact
with the AIDS virus, and due to their non-AIDS-friendly behavior,
fail to infect either themselves, nor loved ones...
>
> > > countries with the highest AIDS rates in the world have virtually no
> > > homosexuality.
> >
> > Nobody has ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of
> > the population of sub-Saharan Africa.
>
> Quite a bit of it is cultural. Many people don't yet accept the modern
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> models of disease.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Reconfirming what I said: Nobody has ever lost money underestimating the
intelligence of the population of sub-Saharan Africa.
>
> > Also, there is a *LOT* more homosexual behavior there than people are
> > admitting to.
>
> Studies have been made. For a variety of reasons, there is very little.
> Less than the US, and certainly not enough to account for the 50% HIV
> rate some of these countries have, and the fact that it seems to infect
> men and women equally.
Either somebody is lying, or it's magic.
>
> > Simply put, it *extremely* rare for a man to get AIDS from
> > heterosexual sex.
>
> Heterosexual contact now results in 16% of US HIV cases. World wide,
And how much of that is due to anal sex?
> that figure is much higher.
Remove the African anamoly from the stats, and it's lower.
>
> --
> This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
> occurred during shipment.
>
> ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Drestin Lack-of-facts...
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:16:07 -0400
Troll must have crawled back under his bridge.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 04:23:39 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The MS supporters prefer to keep handing over their $$$
> > to get their hands on "the only(sic) operating system
> > designed just for you and your home PC."
> >
> > http://shop.microsoft.com/product/windows/msline.htm
> >
> > $289 for Windows ME...
>
> That's $2*0*9, not $289. Which is the same price that Win95 sold for in
> 1995.
And that's LIST PRICE! I've already found a mail order vendor that's selling it
(full sealed box product, not oem or academic) for $179 at
http://www.pcnation.com/asp/details.asp?item=033754. Then there's OEM resellers
like http://www.neutronet.com/static/prdinfo_331525.html selling for $96!!!
They are supposed to sell OEM version with a motherboard, CPU or hard drive but
MANY DO NOT REQUIRE IT since they sell sufficient amounts of those products to
satisfy Microsoft's auditors. So you all bitch about how corrupt Microsoft is
when it's really an industry wide corruption (and a government corruption, etc.)
Seems the only folks not corrupt are the Mac and linux users :-)
Either way. That's the way the world works. Get used to it. Windows Millenium
is available to those who want it for $96. Full version. Not an upgrade.
Legal. Licensed. And MacOS upgrades are $90 bwahhahaaa!
> > ...that's MORE EXPENSIVE than Windows 2000 Professional.
>
> http://shop.microsoft.com/store/products/ProductOverview.asp?strOvType=prici
> ng&intProductIID=76026
>
> Microsoft� Windows� 2000 Professional English North America - $289.00, $319
> if you need the media (ie, you can buy one copy of the media for $319 and
> and any number of additional liscense only versions)
Or get it in an OEM deal for $135 at
http://www.downsoftwaretech.com/micwin20proo1.html. You might have to buy a
cheap hard drive for ~$80 though. It's like getting a hard drive for free!
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 04:28:22 GMT
Joe Kiser wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, fungus
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ...that's MORE EXPENSIVE than Windows 2000 Professional.
>
> Kinda OT, but does the upgrade install over Win95?
The upgrade or full versions of Windows Me and Windows 2000 Pro both
will upgrade Windows 95 back to the first version.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 04:33:31 GMT
Voltage Spike wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:00:33 GMT, fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
> heard to say:
>
> >$289 for Windows ME...
> >
> >...that's MORE EXPENSIVE than Windows 2000 Professional.
> >
> >
> >I don't want to get overly cynical here[1] but it seems to
> >me like this is a marketing excercise to find out just how
> >ignorant/gullible the "buying public" really is.
> >
> >[1] I'm sure that this *must* be more that Windows 98 with a
> >copy of the latest Windows Media Player added.... right?
>
> Not that I support Microsoft in any way, the site (at least now)
> says $209. I was actually planning on buying a copy (IE 3.0 (which comes
> with 95) crashes while going to the download page for IE 5, even on a
> clean install) so that I would not have to download the updates.
Funny that hasn't happened for any of my customers but anyway just go to
www.tucows.com or whatever download site you prefer and get the IE5
installer. It's only a meg or so and with it you can download and install
only what you want. I'd recommend just getting the base install and then get
other things as you need them. IE5 install on demand will tell you when you
encounter content that requires more software and will even download and
install it for you. If you like Windows 95 then stay with it. You probably
have installed some software along the way that has ignored the installation
rules and replaced internet software. The IE5 install will fix it.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
