
                   comp.os.os2.advocacy             (Usenet)

                 Saturday, 04-Dec-1999 to Friday, 10-Dec-1999

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               03-Dec-99 20:17:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:31:57 -0700, Steven C. Britton wrote:

=>It isn't the same quantity of merchandise.  One has Windows, the other
=>doesn't.  Microsoft is offering a large discount on Windows when it is
=>bundled with a computer.  You still pay more for a computer with Windows
=>than a computer with no OS at all.

False. I tried to get a rebate on blank computer, sans OS, but couldn't. The
reseller was willing to rebate for a refused software bundle, but NOT for a
refused OS. Guess which OS!

Clearly, someone is setting things up so that I, the consumer, can'y buy a
machine without that damn OS. It's not the reseller -- he's just conforming
to pressures bought to bear on him by the >>very large<< bully who co-ercing
him. That bully's actions are immoral. Therefore, they ought to be illegal.
This has nothing whatver to do with property roights, BTW, and everything to
do with the consumer's right to be offered a fair choice.

All machines should be sold at cost of hardware + cost of selected OS + cost
of selected software. If the reseller offers bundles, fine; but the machine
without the bundle had better be cheaper. If MS wants to deal with resellers
to offer their OS at a deep discount, that's fair enough. But a blank machine
should still be cheaper.

BTW, I wonder why the $xyz value of the budnles software always comes out to
hundreds of dollars. Some deceptive pricing going on here, no question!




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 20:34:19
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

What seems to be the problem, Karel?  Don't you think I'm a "cool guy to talk
to"?

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> I see Marty is up to his usual tricks again.

What alleged "usual tricks", Karel?

> Consistent with common sense,

Whose common sense?  Yours?

> I am deleting all but the relevant elements from his post:

How convenient.  I see you removed all the evidence against you.  I guess you
found it too embarrassing.  Nevertheless, you have yet to answer many relevant
points.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

> > > > what

What's allegedly relevant about a single word taken completely out of context? 

That's illogical as your "buddy" would say.
 
> Well, that just about sums it all up, doesn't it?

Not really, but this does [PS: Here's your context back]:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > (Note to the original poster: "See what I mean?")
> 
> Which alleged "original poster" Karel?

Note: no response.

> > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:09:32, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You are erroneously presupposing intelligence and sanity from the
> > > > participants of this group (including yours truly).
> > >
> > > On what basis do you make this claim, Karel?
> > >
> > By extrapolating from MGF-numbers (*).
> 
> Making unwarranted extrapolations Karel?

Note: no response.

> > Of course, it takes basic MGF skills to understand this.
> 
> Irrelevant, as the truth is independent of your "gut feelings".

Note: no response.

> > I see you're not quite there yet.
> 
> To where am I allegedly going, Karel?

Note: no response.

> > > > <Don't listen to him! It's all lies!! Lies, I tell ya!!!!!>
> > >
> > > Illogical.
> > >
> > You're talking to the wrong personality.
> 
> That's your problem, Karel, not mine.

Note: no response.

> > > > {And why, pray, do you use a Micro$oft O/S to post to this group? You
> > > > are unworthy to become a member of Warp Metropolis.
> > >
> > > Taking inappropriate citation of OS's in message header lessons from Tim
> > > "Master of Inappropriate Citation of OS's in Message Headers" Martin?
> > >
> > Don't look now, but there's a poppycock in your balderdash garden,
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing the existence of my "balderdash garden".

Note: no response.

> > and it's not tending your flowers.
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing the existence of my "balderdash garden".

Note: no response.

> > > > (I heard Tim is better, so I figured, What the heck.)}
> > >
> > > What you figured is irrelevant.
> > 
> > Well, I figured that the irrelevancy of my figuring would add up to
> > the figure eight. 
> 
> Illogical.

Note: no response.

> > So go figure...
> 
> Unnecessary, Karel.

Note: no response.

> > (*) MGF: My Gut Feeling
> 
> Irrelevant, as the truth is independent of your "gut feelings".

Note: no response.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               03-Dec-99 20:03:20
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Right vs left 

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:49:31 -0700, Steven C. Britton wrote:

=>Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
=>>
=>> =>Totalitarian is leftist.  Rightist is the opposite of totalitarian.
=>>
=>> Now THERE's a brilliantly stupid remark!
=>
=>Totalitarian is collectivist.  Collectivist is leftist.  Ergo, totalitarian
=>is leftist.
=>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=>What have YOU done to bust a union today?
=>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=>
=>Work better: Work union-free.
=>
=>Steven C. Britton
=>Calgary
=>
=>www.cadvision.com/sbritton
=>
=>
=>

Valid but unsound -- depends on a false premise.

Totalitarian is not necessarily collectivist. Read Orwell.

BTW, fascism, wh/ is extreme right, is also collectivist -- very!

Seems to me you're confusing libertariansim with rightist p.o.v.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               03-Dec-99 20:19:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest Episode IV - A New Hope

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:26:13 -0500, Marty wrote:

=>How ironic, coming from someone who just wasted bandwidth posting the above
=>"crap".  If you desire to make a difference, however, you'd be better
advised
=>to aim your comments at the "base of the flames".

Which by this time is lost in the mists of antiquity, so how the hell should
I know?

Well, I've filtered out this thread. If you have comments on other subjects,
I'll be pleased to read them!




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: irvin@clara.co.uk                                 04-Dec-99 01:24:05
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: irvin@clara.co.uk (Andrew Irvine)

Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:

> COMA clipped. I'm not brain-dead (enough).
> 
> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:24:32, irvin@clara.co.uk (Andrew Irvine) wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I agree, windows only became an imitation of the mac by windows 95...
> > 


> Isn't that an insult to just about every Mac in existence?
>

he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
82) had that :)?


-- 
Andrew Irvine

Monty Python: "He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!"
Need a web page designed? http://www.irvin.clara.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 20:52:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> I see Marty is up to his usual tricks again. Consistent with common
> sense, I am deleting all but the relevant elements from his post:
> 
> > > > what
> 
> Well, that just about sums it all up, doesn't it?

Additionally, the reader may note another of Karel's blunders.  As Karel noted
in his article, the "what" he quoted must have come from the following
statement, if it were not fabricated by Karel entirely:
M] On what basis do you make this claim, Karel?

The reader will note that this statement appeared as new material 3 (!!)
postings before Karel made the above statement.  How illogical and
inappropriate of him to respond to it now.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 20:54:09
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest Episode IV - A New Hope

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:26:13 -0500, Marty wrote:
> 
> =>How ironic, coming from someone who just wasted bandwidth posting the
above
> =>"crap".  If you desire to make a difference, however, you'd be better
advised
> =>to aim your comments at the "base of the flames".
> 
> Which by this time is lost in the mists of antiquity, so how the hell should
> I know?
> 
> Well, I've filtered out this thread.

A wise move, for which I commend you.

> If you have comments on other subjects, I'll be pleased to read them!

Thank you for keeping an open mind.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 20:54:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451516

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <828a0p$8fu$7@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> Here's today's Dimsdale digest

What alleged "Dimsdale digest", Dave?

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 21:00:12
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38474FB3.5D4CD09E@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Jeff Glatt wrote:
> > 
> > >>Aaron Dimsdale
> > >>It's not a newsgroup FOR FLAMING OS/2 ADVOCATES.
> > 
> > >Eric Bennett
> > >if this group is just for saying positive things about OS/2
> > 
> > But it isn't. Aaron has obviously not read the charter for this
> > newsgroup. It specifically mentions that it's for flaming of OS/2. His
> > initial assumption is incorrect, and therefore the remainder of his
> > post has no relevancy
> 
> Besides, Eric Bennett is a proven liar, and therefore can be dismissed

Common sense makes a cameo appearance.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 20:55:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38475CD2.8B6B5DCC@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:


> I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.


It's too bad you still don't realize how your behavior is perceived, 
Marty.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 20:57:16
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384752BD.CD9FE2B1@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> > Typical invective.
> 
> What's allegedly typical about it?

More evidence of your inconsistency.

> > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?

On the basis of him posting as TholenBot Pro.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 20:58:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > >
> > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > >
> > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > 
> > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> 
> Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.

What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.

> > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to Marty's post.
> 
> Prove it, if you think you can

Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?  I have already proven it.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 21:04:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Man, I'm outta here.

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38474EE3.9745B16C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-7bUCgq7KjC5q@localhost>,
> > jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:10:27, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As prize for his award, he can have his own personalized copy of
> > > > Question 32 from the comp.sys.mac.advocacy FAQ:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Whoa! You guys have a *FAQ*!?
> > > Kewl!
> > 
> > It's more like a collection of snide remarks, but we call it a FAQ.
> 
> A digest of sorts?  How infantile

Balderdash.  The accurate Tholenesque response is to criticize its true 
reason for coming into existence... providing entertainment.

The FAQ was created primarily for entertainment purposes.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      03-Dec-99 18:06:17
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

"josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991203170714.25151A-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Chad Mulligan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > "josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991202122122.24407A-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> > > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> > > What boob gave you that unacceptable definition of Y2K compliance ?
> > >
> >
> > That would be Boob Gerbil.
>
> No such person.  Maybe name calling is best left to the children and their
> child games.
>

The person to whom I referred does exist and lives under a bridge in cooa.

> Y2K compliance is serious to people responsible for Y2K compliance.  The
> lack of help and clarity a vendor provides impacts their business and
> customer relations.
>

Which, coincidently are the same people who were responsible for the
problems to begin with. The boob in question was responsible for the lack of
clarity with a piece of disinformation.

> We'll see in 2000 what damages result and with those damages, we'll see
> what are the impacts and losses.  After then, lawyers, oh the lawyers.
> Not even the Lidless Eye of Mordor could lose such a hoard on the world.
>

Only forty-odd years of sloppy programming could accomplish that.


--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hipcrime Vocabulary Organization (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 21:00:17
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about OS/2, how
> > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> 
> What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?

How ironic.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                03-Dec-99 21:01:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Originality makes a cameo appearance

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <3847526E.B98A8A46@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <0bo14.7925$Rp1.280843@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 00:43:44 -0500, tholenbot wrote:
> > >
> > > >In article <wvn14.7872$Rp1.279472@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron "Ian"
> > > >Dimsdale <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> 
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> >I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
> > > >>
> > > >> An obvious lie.
> > > >
> > > >What is "obvious" about it, Aaron?
> > >
> > > Don't you know, tholenbot-who-is-Eric?
> > 
> > I see you didn't answer the question.
> 
> Incorrect.

See what I mean?
 
> > How predictable.
> 
> Logic is quite predictable.

Non sequitur.
 
> > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your behavior is perceived, 
> > Aaron.
> 
> Perceived by who, Eric?  You?

How rich!  Taking English lessons from Dave "Master Butcher of the 
English Language" Wang again, Marty?

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ericb@pobox.com                                   03-Dec-99 21:03:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Man, I'm outta here.

From: Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com>

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dNed2gPCqL22@localhost>, 
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:26:39, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-7bUCgq7KjC5q@localhost>, 
> > jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:10:27, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > [snip]
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > As prize for his award, he can have his own personalized copy of 
> > > > Question 32 from the comp.sys.mac.advocacy FAQ:
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Whoa! You guys have a *FAQ*!?
> > > Kewl!
> > 
> > 
> > It's more like a collection of snide remarks, but we call it a FAQ.
> > 
> 
> How shocking! An advocacy group where politeness and consideration for
> others are not respected principles!
> I shall refrain from frequenting your premises, Sir.

Actually, they are respected to some minimal degree in the FAQ, because 
it contains snide remarks from both camps.

-- 
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ ) 
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say 'ask'.
-Bill Gates, in his deposition in US v. Microsoft

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:32:20
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38474FB3.5D4CD09E@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Jeff Glatt wrote:
> > >
> > > >>Aaron Dimsdale
> > > >>It's not a newsgroup FOR FLAMING OS/2 ADVOCATES.
> > >
> > > >Eric Bennett
> > > >if this group is just for saying positive things about OS/2
> > >
> > > But it isn't. Aaron has obviously not read the charter for this
> > > newsgroup. It specifically mentions that it's for flaming of OS/2. His
> > > initial assumption is incorrect, and therefore the remainder of his
> > > post has no relevancy
> >
> > Besides, Eric Bennett is a proven liar, and therefore can be dismissed
> 
> Common sense makes a cameo appearance.

Certainly not in your postings, Eric.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: huffd@nls.net                                     04-Dec-99 02:29:11
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Man, I'm outta here.

From: "David D. Huff Jr." <huffd@nls.net>

Geez! I feel like a child watching the Wizard of Oz ten minutes before the
news comes on. Is she really gone?

Kelly Robinson wrote:

> I'll submit that I do have a nasty side and negative attitude.
>
> And one way or the other, regardless of opinion or attitude, I've now
> realized something - and this applies to every other person in this
> forum whether they are pro-OS/2 or against-OS/2 or affilliated with OS/2
> such as Stardock or Opera.
>
> I no longer feel I have the amount of stupidity necessary to hang around
> here.
>
> OS/2 is out of my life.  I should be grateful that my years of using it
> hadn't cost me any more and that I should be spending my energies
> finding a social life rather than arguing (either for or against
> something.)
>
> Why I'm clinging to it in any way shape or form is still something I
> don't understand, especially since I hate IBM for all I'm worth, but I'm
> going to let it go.  Unlike Ishmael, Khan, Picard, or other vengeful
> lunatics I refuse to let hatred take me over.  I choose to walk away
> from it.
>
> Y'all can live in your state of grand delusion and sing all you want
> about whatever you want.
>
> You can consider this a victory for yourselves if you want.  I merely
> want to be free of such infintile arguements.  I'll leave those to you
> since you seem to enjoy them more than me.  I personally could care less
> about this victory I bestow upon you since there are better things to do
> in life than priss on about something as shallow as a computer operating
> system.
>
> Even I pointed out, without fully realizing it, that applications make
> the computer.  What's the point of having something if you cannot use it
> to its full potential?  I won't go into examples since that would
> instantly betray what I have already said.  As if you'd have the
> capability to comprehend anyway.
>
> If nothing else, I hope that only the previous two paragraphs will sink
> into your teensy little brains.
>
> Cheers,
>
> K. R.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:40:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384752BD.CD9FE2B1@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> >
> > > Typical invective.
> >
> > What's allegedly typical about it?
> 
> More evidence of your inconsistency.

Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?
 
> > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> >
> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> 
> On the basis of him posting as TholenBot Pro.

Evidence, please.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:28:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Man, I'm outta here.

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38474EE3.9745B16C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-7bUCgq7KjC5q@localhost>,
> > > jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:10:27, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As prize for his award, he can have his own personalized copy of
> > > > > Question 32 from the comp.sys.mac.advocacy FAQ:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Whoa! You guys have a *FAQ*!?
> > > > Kewl!
> > >
> > > It's more like a collection of snide remarks, but we call it a FAQ.
> >
> > A digest of sorts?  How infantile

Misquoting me Eric?  I guess I shouldn't be surprised.  For the reader's
reference, here is the original quote:
M] A digest of sorts?  How infantile.
                                    ^

> Balderdash.

Giving Aaron a hand tending his Balderdash garden, Eric?

> The accurate Tholenesque response is to criticize its true
> reason for coming into existence...

You are presupposing that I was attempting to achieve an accurate Tholenesque
response.

> providing entertainment.

Yet another person posting here for entertainment purposes.

> The FAQ was created primarily for entertainment purposes.

Irrelevant.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:35:00
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about OS/2, how
> > > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> >
> > What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?
> 
> How ironic.

On what basis do you make this claim?

"I do not 'approve' phrases.
 -Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:39:01
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38475CD2.8B6B5DCC@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
> 
> It's too bad

On what basis do you make this claim?

> you still

You're erroneously presupposing that I ever

> don't realize how

On the contrary, I do realize how.

> your behavior

What alleged behavior?

> is perceived, Marty.

By who Eric?  You?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:49:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > >
> > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > >
> > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> >
> > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> 
> What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.

Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.  That this behavior was expected is
common knowledge.

> > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to Marty's post.
> >
> > Prove it, if you think you can
> 
> Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?

I see you have failed to provide proof.  No surprise there.

> I have already proven it.

Evidence, please.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:41:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451516

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenbot wrote:
> 
> In article <828a0p$8fu$7@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu
> wrote:
> 
> > Here's today's Dimsdale digest
> 
> What alleged "Dimsdale digest", Dave?

Don't you know Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               03-Dec-99 21:46:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Originality makes a cameo appearance

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <3847526E.B98A8A46@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <0bo14.7925$Rp1.280843@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 00:43:44 -0500, tholenbot wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <wvn14.7872$Rp1.279472@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron "Ian"
> > > > >Dimsdale <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> >I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> An obvious lie.
> > > > >
> > > > >What is "obvious" about it, Aaron?
> > > >
> > > > Don't you know, tholenbot-who-is-Eric?
> > >
> > > I see you didn't answer the question.
> >
> > Incorrect.
> 
> See what I mean?

I cannot see the dirt on your glasses as I am not currently wearing them.

> > > How predictable.
> >
> > Logic is quite predictable.
> 
> Non sequitur.

Logic is quite sequitur in my argument.  Perhaps not in yours.

> > > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your behavior is perceived,
> > > Aaron.
> >
> > Perceived by who, Eric?  You?
> 
> How rich!

Wealth is irrelevant, Eric.

> Taking English lessons

On what basis do you make this claim?

> from Dave "Master Butcher of the English Language" Wang 

Which alleged "Dave 'Master Butcher of the English Language' Wang"?

> again, Marty?

You're erroneously presupposing that I have taken English lessons from Dave
"Master Butcher of the English Language" Wang, Eric.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             04-Dec-99 16:27:12
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
news:mroeder-E6AAFD.22512802121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> In article <LhJ14.38013$zd.426149@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>, "Brent
> Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com> wrote:
>
> > Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
> > news:mroeder-ABEDBD.21394902121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > [snip]
> > |
> > | "Year 2000 conformity shall mean that neither performance nor
> > | functionality is affected by dates prior to, during and after
> > | the Year 2000.
> > |
> > | In particular,
> > |
> > |        Rule 1: No value for current date will cause any interruption
in
> > | operation
> > |        Rule 2: Date-based functionality must behave consistently for
> > | dates prior to, during and after Year 2000
> > |        Rule 3: In all interfaces and data storage, the century in any
> > | date must be specified either explicitly or by
> > |        unambiguous algorithms or inferencing rules
> > |        Rule 4: Year 2000 must be recognised as a leap year."
> > |
> >
> > I don't understand this thread.  Are you arguing about the
> > concept of "largely compliant"?  If so, I would think that
> > you're nit-picking a little bit.  I forgot the exact date, but
> > Windows 95 is said to be totally unaffected by date field
> > deficiencies until the mid 2030s (I think the number was
> > 2035).  Will there actually be people using Win95 40
> > years after its release?  Remember that the Windows
> > life cycle is much shorter than that of DOS or Unix.
> >
> > Then again, I read this thing about 2035 a while ago.
> > The most recent patches may bring it into full
> > compliance.
> >
> > I would go so far as to say that Windows 95/98/NT,
> > with the correct patches, are all fully compliant.  If an
> > application keeps its own time and isn't able to handle
> > a date after Dec. 31, 1999, I wouldn't blame the OS
> > for that.  That situation doesn't make any particular OS
> > any less Y2K ready.
>
> The person I replied to seemed to think that "Y2k Compliant" means "Not
> crashing on New Years Eve." If a program uses only a 2-digit date field,
> then it is likely to have some kind of y2k problem.

Read the thread again.  I gave an instance where a machine could be
partially compliany=t, not fully compliant.
>
> So just not crashing is hardly enough to certify a system as compliant.

Didn't claim that is was. Read the thread, and comprehend.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             04-Dec-99 16:33:15
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
news:mroeder-ABEDBD.21394902121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> In article <827g43$e3k$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, "Stuart Fox"
> >
> > So define Y2K compliance in words a simple Windows lemming can
> > understand.
> > And besides, the definition I gave above was how an OS could be
partially
> > Y2K compliant, and still be OK.
>
> Don't you think it's a little late to be getting informed about the
> issues?
>
I gave a situation where an OS could be partially Y2K compliant, and still
OK.  I didn't say anything about what constituted full compliance, except
for a dig at someone else who can't read.  Learn to comprehend, then think,
then post.  Please.

>
> "Year 2000 conformity shall mean that neither performance nor
> functionality is affected by dates prior to, during and after
> the Year 2000.
>
> In particular,
>
>        Rule 1: No value for current date will cause any interruption in
> operation
>        Rule 2: Date-based functionality must behave consistently for
> dates prior to, during and after Year 2000
>        Rule 3: In all interfaces and data storage, the century in any
> date must be specified either explicitly or by
>        unambiguous algorithms or inferencing rules
>        Rule 4: Year 2000 must be recognised as a leap year."
>
>



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             04-Dec-99 16:31:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

<unix and mac advocacy groups trimmed>
Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:3847e3a4$14$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <826imu$c803u$2@titan.xtra.co.nz>, on 12/03/99 at 08:52 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
> > So Boob has just proved that he cannot read.  I have suspected this for
> > a while after reading his posts, but here is conclusive proof.  The
> > Microsoft web page I check (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/year2k)
> > states Windows 95 all English versions to be compliant (I didn't check
> > foreign languages), provided you install the y2k patch.
>
> And read and comprehend certain unspecified documentation. Tell the whole
> truth.

I was.  Windows 95 is classed as compliant with user action - which is "The
product is compliant with recommended customer action. This indicates a
prerequisite action is recommended which may include loading a software
update or reading a document" .  See the word "may"?  Understand that it
doesn't say definitely?  Here's the full document

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/year2k/product/user_view32163EN.htm

Nothing about reading unspecified documentation.  You really can't read can
you Boob?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         04-Dec-99 04:07:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest Episode IV - A New Hope

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Wolf Kirchmeir writes:

> Why do you guys waste bandwidth on this crap. Get a life!

Marty has admitted to playing an "infantile game" in this newsgroup.
He and Eric Bennett entertain themselves here at the expense of other
people.  You figure they'll grow out of it eventually.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nolambourn@my-deja.com                            04-Dec-99 04:31:13
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: nolambourn@my-deja.com

In article <3847c174.0@nntp2.borg.com>,
  "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com> wrote:
> Gads, this Germer fellow's a real bore.  How can someone claims to be
> a "computer professional" and yet be stuck with buying Windows each
> and every time he assembles a computer?  Inquiring minds want to know!
> I, too, got my last two machines with no OS installed, but I guess I'm
> even smarter than Germer himself...
>
> - Joe

Well "Joe," if you're so-o-o smart and so-o-o computer-literate, WHAT
THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING CROSS-POSTING THIS BULLSHIT TO BC.POLITICS???
[shouting intentional]


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fegehrke@worldnet.att.net                         03-Dec-99 23:00:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net>

Bob Germer wrote:
> 
> 

> 
> Yep, and one of the TV News networks did a piece about a woman born in
> 1895 being sent a solicitation to attend a private kindergarten. It was
> also in Reader's Digest a few months ago.
> 
There was a news item in the newspaper about a county court sending
out jury selection notices for next February; only problem was
the date given was in February 1900!
//

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fegehrke@worldnet.att.net                         03-Dec-99 23:20:28
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net>

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> > Which is a direct violation of U. S. Fair Trade Laws
> 
> Precisely the point.
> 
> Why on earth is such a straightforward transaction illegal?  What kind of
> crazy law is that?
> 
Lars,
I don't happen to know, but are you telling us that Canada
does not have an antitrust law?  Most of the G7 nations
do, and I find it hard to believe Canada does not.

Please look into it and report back what that law has
to say about predatory pricing.
//

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            03-Dec-99 21:04:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Chad Mulligan wrote:

> "josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message

> > > That would be Boob Gerbil.
> >
> > No such person.  Maybe name calling is best left to the children and their
> > child games.
> >
> 
> The person to whom I referred does exist and lives under a bridge in cooa.

No. None under a bridge.  


> > Y2K compliance is serious to people responsible for Y2K compliance.  The
> > lack of help and clarity a vendor provides impacts their business and
> > customer relations.
> 
> Which, coincidently are the same people who were responsible for the
> problems to begin with. The boob in question was responsible for the lack of
> clarity with a piece of disinformation.

That's the first time I've ever heard that suggestion.  Someone who's
using COTS is responsible to the customer and they in turn are asking for
answers.  Sweet sounding answers late in coming and with a lot of fine
print.  An IT manager is & IS manager is responsible but dependent on
those who have sold technologies, software and tools. 

> > We'll see in 2000 what damages result and with those damages, we'll see
> > what are the impacts and losses.  After then, lawyers, oh the lawyers.
> > Not even the Lidless Eye of Mordor could lose such a hoard on the world.
> >
> 
> Only forty-odd years of sloppy programming could accomplish that.

I have an OS sold in 1997 that's NOT Y2K compliant.  

I would NOT that say a 1960's program should have been made Y2K compliant. 
If Y2K considerations isn't in the specification then it's bad to suggest
a programmer should waste money and time adding non-specified features. 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Thingfishhhh@yahoo.com                            03-Dec-99 20:30:07
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 05:22:12
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Thingfishhhh <Thingfishhhh@yahoo.com>

In article <s4fcj7p6gsp174@corp.supernews.com>, "Ruel Smith" 
<ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

> Let me quote a PC magazine's article on the subject:
> 
> PCWorld, December 1999, in a sidebar named 'Copy This' on page 142.
> 
> "Some folks say Steve Jobs pulled the heist of the century when he struck 
> a
> deal with Xerox in 1979. The firm could invest $1 million in Apple if 
> Jobs
> could visit its Palo Alto Research Center. Xerox said yes, and a 
> Pandora's
> box swung open.
> 
> At PARC, Jobs spied the Alto, 

Balderdash. Jobs did'nt "spy" anything - the tour was specifically given 
to show the Alto, which Jeff Raskin had already seen and worked with and 
had prepped the rest of the group on what to ask.

and experimental PC with a graphical user
> interface. Within minutes, it's been reproted, Jobs realized that in the
> future, all computers would use GUI.

Nonsense. Goes against every other version of the story told. 

I'd ask if this was Haiawatha, but it makes Jobs look good, by implying 
that the GUI vision was all his, which we all know it was'nt.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: SBC Internet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Dec-99 21:26:16
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Andrew Stephenson write:
> >          bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com "Bob Germer" writes:
> 
> > > If you did, you would be charged with a crime. A restaurant
> > > must serve everyone regardless of race, creed, color, national
> > > origin, etc. The civil rights laws apply to you as to everyone
> > > else.
> >
> > Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
> > paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
> > can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.
> 
> It's called property rights.
> 
> Your "paradise-on-earth" is only from the point of view of the person
> getting the product.  The person with the product isn't in paradise if his
> property can be taken when he doesn't want it to be.

Hey, I can make that same nutty argument about my property rights. I
think it can be fun.  Let me try.....

I just bought a baseball bat.  I have the right to swing my baseball bat
anywhere I want so if your pumpkin head is in its way tough because it's
my freedom and right to swing my property any time I want.  OH, you live
in Canada....hmmm.. I'll drive.

I have the right to own and drive my car to Canada and to own and carry
my gun so if I drive my car into Canada and it's searched then I'll tell
the border police to stuff it!  

I have rights and there is no way in hell they can take my car and gun
at the border.  I have a right to own that gun and what the hell does
taking my car have to do with a gun any how? Huh Lars?  What the
hell!?!  I want my gun in Canada and I have ever right to drive to
Canada and carry my personal property, my gun.  Yes sir!  

I know so much about property rights - just like you.

:^)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Dec-99 21:33:20
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Stuart Fox wrote:
> 
> josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991202122122.24407A-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Stuart Fox wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Boob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > An OS to me and most professionals is either absolutely complaint or
> > > > non-compliant. There is no more in-between possible. It's like being a
> > > > little bit pregnant. Can't be.
> > > >
> > > It's pretty simple actually Boob.  If an OS won't crash over the Y2K
> period,
> > > and the majority of it's apps will have no issues, then it is largely
> > > compliant.
> >
> > What boob gave you that unacceptable definition of Y2K compliance ?
> 
> So define Y2K compliance in words a simple Windows lemming can understand.
> And besides, the definition I gave above was how an OS could be partially
> Y2K compliant, and still be OK.

You create contradictions.  "Partially compliant" is funny as is "Jumbo
Shrimp", or "distributed center".  

Want a Y2K definition ?  See http://www.y2k.gov

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Dec-99 21:37:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Stuart Fox wrote:
> 
> Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
> news:mroeder-ABEDBD.21394902121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > In article <827g43$e3k$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, "Stuart Fox"
> > >
> > > So define Y2K compliance in words a simple Windows lemming can
> > > understand.
> > > And besides, the definition I gave above was how an OS could be
> partially
> > > Y2K compliant, and still be OK.
> >
> > Don't you think it's a little late to be getting informed about the
> > issues?
> >
> I gave a situation where an OS could be partially Y2K compliant, and still
> OK.  I didn't say anything about what constituted full compliance, except
> for a dig at someone else who can't read.  Learn to comprehend, then think,
> then post.  Please.

You can say the system is NOT compliant and still okay to use. 

I'm not ISO-9000 compliant in my home but it is okay.  I don't need to
be ISO-9000 compliant at home - just at work.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Dec-99 21:26:19
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Stuart Fox wrote:
> 
> Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message

> > The person I replied to seemed to think that "Y2k Compliant" means "Not
> > crashing on New Years Eve." If a program uses only a 2-digit date field,
> > then it is likely to have some kind of y2k problem.
> 
> Read the thread again.  I gave an instance where a machine could be
> partially compliany=t, not fully compliant.
> >
> > So just not crashing is hardly enough to certify a system as compliant.
> 
> Didn't claim that is was. Read the thread, and comprehend.

"Partially compliant"  is a nonsense term.  It is a contradiction.  

Comprehend. 

Search the http://www.y2k.gov web site and find the term.  


Maybe running

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         04-Dec-99 04:37:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like we've hit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         04-Dec-99 04:44:17
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:13
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> That you actually believe this is truly sad.

What's allegedly "sad" about it, Curtis?

> After all, your question was, "What is 'up' doing at the beginning of
> that phrase?"

And your excuse was to avoid writing a preposition at the end, which
is what you said.  So, why is it "sad" that I believe in what really
transpired?

> The implication was that "up" at the beginning of a phrase was
> somehow wrong.

I see you still don't understand the difference between "implication"
and "inference".  I see you still don't understand whether "measure up"
ends with a preposition.

> Are you seriously suggesting that "up to which you failed to measure" is
> gramatically incorrect?

I made no suggestions about those seven words, Curtis.  Perhaps you
should look at your entire sentence again.

Are you seriously suggesting that you were sincere when you claimed that
your posting of many days ago would be your last in this sub-thread?

> If so, then "evidence, please," in the form of urls or actual books to
> which I may refer in a typical bookstore (Border's, Barnes and Noble,
> etc).

If so, then why are you still posting in this sub-thread, Curtis?

> Your pontifications will not suffice.

What alleged pontifications, Curtis?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     03-Dec-99 21:14:02
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
> 
> In article <0OQ14.45$GL5.12522@news.uswest.net>,
> Steve <nojunkmailsteve@standardprintingco.com> wrote:
> >Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
support
> >your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so great,
why
> >does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC? Hmm, welcome to the real
> >world.
> 
> Because a product doesn't have to be "great" in order to capture the
> majority market.  It only needs to be good enough that consumers don't
> consider it worth their while to look for something better.  Beyond that,
> there are reasons that have nothing at all to do with technology that gave
> DOS and Win 3.1 the majority over the Mac.

Yes.  So am I to think a BWM 700 series is inferior to the more popular
Toyota Corrolla?  I think not and they all run on the same roads and in
the same traffic.  And anyway -- what does popularity really mean
....The most popular personal computer model is the iMac, and the most
popular notebook is the iBook!

And lastly, will those who think Macs and OS/2 are outdated please post
that opinion in a format exclusively for Windows users!  After all the
majority of users is supposed to be what matters.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      03-Dec-99 22:22:00
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

"josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991203205036.25239B-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Chad Mulligan wrote:
>
> > "josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
>
> > > > That would be Boob Gerbil.
> > >
> > > No such person.  Maybe name calling is best left to the children and
their
> > > child games.
> > >
> >
> > The person to whom I referred does exist and lives under a bridge in
cooa.
>
> No. None under a bridge.
>
>
> > > Y2K compliance is serious to people responsible for Y2K compliance.
The
> > > lack of help and clarity a vendor provides impacts their business and
> > > customer relations.
> >
> > Which, coincidently are the same people who were responsible for the
> > problems to begin with. The boob in question was responsible for the
lack of
> > clarity with a piece of disinformation.
>
> That's the first time I've ever heard that suggestion.  Someone who's
> using COTS is responsible to the customer and they in turn are asking for
> answers.  Sweet sounding answers late in coming and with a lot of fine
> print.  An IT manager is & IS manager is responsible but dependent on
> those who have sold technologies, software and tools.
>

You've missed Stuart's posts in direct response then. Bob Germer statement
wasn't even close to the facts of the matter, that is the crux of the
matter.

> > > We'll see in 2000 what damages result and with those damages, we'll
see
> > > what are the impacts and losses.  After then, lawyers, oh the lawyers.
> > > Not even the Lidless Eye of Mordor could lose such a hoard on the
world.
> > >
> >
> > Only forty-odd years of sloppy programming could accomplish that.
>
> I have an OS sold in 1997 that's NOT Y2K compliant.
>

Will it run after 1/1/00? OS's weren't the problem here, except those that
may have trouble crossing the threshold of the oughts. A one time date reset
doesn't seem like much, for almost the first four years IBM sold PC's the
user had to manually set the time at startup.

> I would NOT that say a 1960's program should have been made Y2K compliant.
> If Y2K considerations isn't in the specification then it's bad to suggest
> a programmer should waste money and time adding non-specified features.
>

Though, if I were, say Fox Mulder, or were I writing for the National
Enquirer or The Register, I could speculate, credibly, that this whole
"crisis" was planned in the '60's by IBM, Bourroughs, Sperry/Univac, Digital
Equipment or Honeywell. The market then was solely monolithic systems,
maintained by company trained acolytes. The customers did what they were
told because they had no choice. These companies have set other shady deals
up, look at UNISYS's fraud case.

IBM has been in business for more than One Hundred and Ten Years. A company
with that long a history could plan by decade instead of quarter as is the
current practice.  In fact that would explain why IBM's business moves are
often hard to understand. IBM then, as now (I'll explain later,) control's
the technology market.  They know that their systems, because of their size
will have massive inertia in the market. They saturate the market, now what
do they do for revenue. In the 'sixties they standardized the industry on
the six digit date, remember that:  991203.  Why six instead of eight?
Eight is a power of two, important in the binary world, nope they did six.

Who cares that now, 35 years after establishing the very standard that bit
everyone in the ass, they aren't being punished for selling a defective
product that is potentially dangerous.  No way, they are raking in more
money than MS, Sun, Netscape, HP, Compaq, Dell and Intel combined, just for
fixing this suprise problem.  These guys designed computers by soldering
transistors together and they missed something like date calculations.  They
calculated with these same systems, the trajectory to send men to the moon,
a hell of a bit of Trig, but they missed this date problem, that
fortuitously became extremely profitable for them.

Earlier I said that they still control the industry. Some find this hard to
believe. Those people also think the mainframe market has gone away.  IBM
had record sales of 390's in 1997. But that's just the icing. Think back to
the beginnings of the PC era. Remember all the different companies (all
leaders now) who had partnerships with IBM.  They all made money right?  So
did and does IBM, one of their less known business practices is that in a
strategic partnership stock is exchanged, large quantities of stock.  IBM,
to this day, owns ~10% of Intel, Compaq, MS and almost half of Apple.  Who's
the real monopolist here?

Some of what I write is speculation and educated guessing, but some is
verifiable fact.  I'm not going to supply where to find that information or
which is which. If you are interested and start digging, you may even
uncover more than I have so far.  Enjoy.

--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hipcrime Vocabulary Organization (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 01:29:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38487F2C.9FE44E21@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <384752BD.CD9FE2B1@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > > Typical invective.
> > >
> > > What's allegedly typical about it?
> > 
> > More evidence of your inconsistency.
> 
> Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?

See what I mean?
 
> > > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > >
> > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> > 
> > On the basis of him posting as TholenBot Pro.
> 
> Evidence, please

Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 01:29:09
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron 
> > > > Dimsdale
> > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > >
> > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > >
> > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > 
> > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> 
> Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.

Incorrect.

> That this behavior was 
> expected is
> common knowledge.

But it is still irrelevant.
 
> > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to Marty's 
> > > > post.
> > >
> > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > 
> > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> 
> I see you have failed to provide proof. 

I see you snipped the proof.  How predictable.

> No surprise there.

Illogical.
 
> > I have already proven it.
> 
> Evidence, please

Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ericb@pobox.com                                   04-Dec-99 01:27:20
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest Episode IV - A New Hope

From: Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com>

In article <82a42h$dt1$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> Wolf Kirchmeir writes:
> 
> > Why do you guys waste bandwidth on this crap. Get a life!
> 
> Marty has admitted to playing an "infantile game" in this newsgroup.
> He and Eric Bennett entertain themselves here at the expense of other
> people.  You figure they'll grow out of it eventually.

No, recently I have primarily entertained myself at the expense of your 
pseudo-"Eliza" responses.  Is "Eliza" a person, Dave?

Lots of people laugh at folderol.  I don't see any reason why one should 
"grow out" of that.  Particularly when the folderol is as amusing as 
yours.  Of course, for you, "posting for entertainment purposes" seems 
to be the ultimate sin.  Which, given that you claim to have a sense of 
humor and apparently do not think this is a bad thing... is just more 
evidence of your inconsistency.

-- 
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ ) 
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say 'ask'.
-Bill Gates, in his deposition in US v. Microsoft

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 01:30:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451516

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38487F45.51EB7452@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote:
> > 
> > In article <828a0p$8fu$7@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Here's today's Dimsdale digest
> > 
> > What alleged "Dimsdale digest", Dave?
> 
> Don't you know Eric?

I see you failed to answer the question.  Of course, such behavior is to 
be expected of one who admits to engaging in infantile games taking 
taking posting lessons from David Sutherland.

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 01:39:07
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451516

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <8289v2$8fu$5@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> I see that not only did Marty fail to admit to his lie, he lied yet
> again by claiming that my evidence was nowhere to be seen, despite the
> fact that the evidence was right up there in the introductory text.
> His mimicking style is yet more evidence that his "infantile game" is
> continuing.  Here's today's digest:
> 
> 1> What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?

Note: no response.

> 2> Truly amazing that Dave started off his posting with a lie.  The
> 2> evidence was nowhere to be seen in his posting, yet he felt justified
> 2> in hypocritically accusing me of lying.  A rather dull and typical
> 2> development in Dave's infantile game.  Here are more issues that Dave
> 2> is too embarrassed to address with his excuse for "logic":
> 
> "Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

See what he means?

-- 
I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 01:43:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38487DD4.FFB4C956@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about 
> > > > OS/2, how
> > > > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> > >
> > > What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?
> > 
> > How ironic.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?

On the basis of your participation in the activity whose existence you 
wish me to demonstrate.
 
> "I do not 'approve' phrases.
>  -Dave Tholen"
> - Eric Bennett

Your infantile quoting game is irrelvant, Marty.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.
-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 01:46:12
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <829169$gbi$10@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/03/99 at 06:12 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> Guess what?  If Intel has agreed to a deal, or all Intel vendors on
> earth have agreed to a deal, wherein Windows must be sold in tandem,
> that isn't the sign of a monopoly.  That is the sign of a set of
> agreements amoungst private individuals.

> Or do you believe Microsoft cannot sign contracts?

You are so full of shit you have mushrooms growing out of your ears.
MicroSoft has been proven to have coerced those companies to sign those
deals. That is not a valid contract, it is extortion.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 01:48:00
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <8290kr$gbi$9@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/03/99 at 06:03 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> > 
> > You have absolutely no say in what our laws are or ought to be.  You are a
> > Canadian, a foreigner.

> So you say that you have absolutely no right to speak out against, say,
> China's one-child policy?  Or totalitarian regimes where thousands of
> citizens are killed each year?

No, I do not have the right to tell China, Canada, or any other country or
any state in the United States other than New Jersey how to run their
country or state.

> >                      I do not presume to tell you what your laws should
> > provide and you have no right to do so to the United States.

> An unjust law is an unjust law, whether it is in your country or not.

Only in your eyes if the law exists in a democracy or a representative
democracy. Our elected representatives and President or Governor in the
case of a state pass laws the majority wants as evidenced by their votes
in the elections. The courts make sure the majority does not infringe on
the constitutional rights of the minority. No damn, frozen brain Canuck
has the right to tell anyone here what to do.

> > Our citizens decided that actions such as MicroSoft has been proven to
> > engage in violate laws we found necessary for our society.

> That's when things get interesting.  For the sake of your society, a
> person's property is not deemed to be of their own control.  How does
> that jive with the right to own property?  Or the American slogan of
> being for "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"?

One does not own any property. One owns a bundle of rights to use, sell,
lease, improve, subdivide, quietly enjot, etc. a property. Those rights
are subject to escheat, eminent domain, taxation, and police power.

> >                                                            If the majority
> > of our citizens speaking via their respective Senators and Congressmen and
> > our President decide what MS is doing is illegal, it is illegal

> And when the citizens had spoken through their Senators and Congressman
> in the past, was it always right?  

If not, the courts struck down the law or those portions of same which
violated the rights of minorities. As times and conditions change we
change laws accordingly if necessary.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 01:55:07
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <828upp$gbi$6@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/03/99 at 05:31 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> I don't have the right to take away the right of a property-owner to do
> with his property as he sees fit.  If a law says otherwise, that law is
> wrong.

Try to run a whorehouse in your home or an opium den. The law will stomp
all over you in Canada as here in the US. Tell me that law is wrong.

If you really think so, then you are in my killfile and on my website as a
person to be avoided at all costs.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 01:58:00
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Simply put, a single manufacturer cannot compete against the multitudes of
PC manufacturers. It's David vs. Goliath.

I'm not quoting any facts that I'm not sure of. I simply cannot ever recall
seeing an Amiga until 1986 or so (despite what Amiga fans are proclaiming).
It is a fact that Commodore was still selling the 64/128 model in 1984.
Judging from the screenshots from the web page, Windows 1.0 was DOS 2.0 with
mouse support - nothing more. All other info is not mine at all, but merely
a quote.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Steve" <nojunkmailsteve@standardprintingco.com> wrote in message
news:0OQ14.45$GL5.12522@news.uswest.net...
> Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
support
> your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so great,
why
> does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC? Hmm, welcome to the
real
> world.
>
> "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:s4fcj7p6gsp174@corp.supernews.com...
> > Let me quote a PC magazine's article on the subject:
> >
> > PCWorld, December 1999, in a sidebar named 'Copy This' on page 142.
> >
> > "Some folks say Steve Jobs pulled the heist of the century when he
struck
> a
> > deal with Xerox in 1979. The firm could invest $1 million in Apple if
Jobs
> > could visit its Palo Alto Research Center. Xerox said yes, and a
Pandora's
> > box swung open.
> >
> > At PARC, Jobs spied the Alto, and experimental PC with a graphical user
> > interface. Within minutes, it's been reproted, Jobs realized that in the
> > future, all computers would use GUI.
> >
> > According to conventional wisdom, Apple then cloned the Alto with its
> > Macintosh - before Microsoft, in turn, mimicked the Mac with Windows.
But
> > Apple's work on the Mac had already begun when Jobs toured Xerox. And
Jeff
> > Raskin, an Apple employee, had been exploring graphical interfaces as
> early
> > as 1967. 'The only thing (Apple) took,' says historian Owen W.
Linzmayer,
> > 'was inspiration.' Indeed, the company was lolely responsible for many
> > elements of the modern GUI, including the clipboard, trash can, and
> > drag-and-drop file management - making the visit to PARC seem like
> something
> > less than grand larceny." - Harry McCracken
> >
> > Yes folks, work on the Mac had begun as early as 1979, probably as the
> > Lisa - before Microsoft ever thought of it. Was PC-DOS or MS-DOS even
out
> > that early? I know Microsoft had Altair BASIC for the Altair 8800 much
> > earlier, but I'm not sure if the IBM PC was ever released yet.
> >
> > Secondly, Windows 1.0 was not even graphical at all. It was merely DOS
> with
> > mouse support. Graphical interfaces use graphics. Also, I'm not sure,
but
> I
> > don't seem to remember even hearing of the Amiga in 1984. Commodore was
> > still selling the Commodore 64/128 back then, from what I remember. I
> don't
> > have any recollection of hearing anything about Amiga until 1986 or so.
> >
> > So get a life naysayers...
> >
> > --
> > Ruel Smith
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
> > CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
> >
> > "Lord Foul" <lord@foul.com> wrote in message
> > news:383dce64$0$224@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > > R. Tang <gwangung@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:81i9pu$oka$1@nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > > > Mr. Biddlesworth <mr@biddlesworth.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >So the code of Windows 1.0 (or its prototype) plausibly predated
> MacOS
> > 1.0 by a year
> > > > >(unless LisaOS and MacOS 1.0 were virtually identical???).
> > > >
> > > > No, it does not. Not if you can do math.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC
Theatre
> > >
> > >
> > > You should open your mind, face facts, and quit believing Job's
> > propaganda.
> > >
> > > I have >>proof<< that Microsoft Windows 1.0 was running in 1983.
> > >
> > > Read this 1983 Byte article:
> > http://www.pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/win1983.html
> > > It's so old that Apple's Lisa is mentioned but not Macintosh.
> > >
> > > So that debunks the myth that Windows >>originated<< was an imitation
of
> > Mac.
> > >
> > > History lesson is over.  Class, dismissed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Mr. Biddlesworth
> > > (not speaking for Intel Corporation)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 02:00:11
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fm6dtm3.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/03/99 at
12:27 PM,
   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:

> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:19:00 -0700, Steven C. Britton wrote:

> =>Totalitarian is leftist.  Rightist is the opposite of totalitarian.

> Now THERE's a brilliantly stupid remark!

Absolutely. Well, almost absolutely. The Nazi's in Germany did not
expropriate the businesses, property, etc. of "Aryans" (for lack of a
better term), only that of Jews, Gypsies, the handicapped, and
non-Germans. Ditto for the Facists in Spain and Italy. But most
totalitarian dictatorships do.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        04-Dec-99 07:04:05
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Illya Vaes <ivaes@hr.nl> wrote in message news:3847B895.6C30D471@hr.nl...
| Brent Davies wrote:
| >I don't understand this thread.  Are you arguing about the
| >concept of "largely compliant"?  If so, I would think that
| >you're nit-picking a little bit.  I forgot the exact date, but
| >Windows 95 is said to be totally unaffected by date field
| >deficiencies until the mid 2030s (I think the number was
| >2035).  Will there actually be people using Win95 40
| >years after its release?  Remember that the Windows
| >life cycle is much shorter than that of DOS or Unix.
|
| That's *because* of always having such issues. There's always another
| "problem" with the current version of Windows to "entice" people to get
the
| next version (which will always solve all problems and famine in the
world).
|
| So, having another "issue" is no problem because we always have so many
| "issues" that this version won't last long...

That's not being fair.  All of the Unix admins I know would call any
admin stupid for not using the latest revision of the favorite *nix
flavor.  There are patches galore for *nix systems, as well as
revision updates.  Just because MS decided to name their OS
after the year in which it was released, which makes the
revision changes more noticeable, doesn't meant the *nix
goes through fewer revisions.  What is HP/UX up to now?
Version 12?

-B


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: @Home Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 02:03:06
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384802b8_1@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/03/99 at 10:49 AM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:


> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
> >
> > =>Totalitarian is leftist.  Rightist is the opposite of totalitarian.
> >
> > Now THERE's a brilliantly stupid remark!

> Totalitarian is collectivist.  Collectivist is leftist.  Ergo,
> totalitarian is leftist.

Nazi Germany was a totalitarian state. So was Facist Italy. So was Spain.
So was Argentina under Peron. So was Japan until 1945.

Totalitarianism is not the same as collectivist. Your logic would give you
an F in fourth grade.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 02:01:19
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Because Apple was on top of the world back then. They were selling the Mac
IIci for about $5000 for the CPU alone. They were raking it in. They weren't
about to let clone makers take that from them. Then, later, reality set in
and the Mac's marketshare dwindled considerably. You can't gouge customers
forever. They'll leave you eventually...

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"kiwi" <slurp@cc.usu.edu> wrote in message news:384849D5.657D@cc.usu.edu...
> Steve wrote:
> > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
support
> > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so great,
why
> > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
>
>   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> time period, the market would probably look quite a
> bit different right now.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 02:05:02
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <3847fe97_2@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/03/99 at 10:31 AM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> It isn't the same quantity of merchandise.  One has Windows, the other
> doesn't.  Microsoft is offering a large discount on Windows when it is
> bundled with a computer.  You still pay more for a computer with Windows
> than a computer with no OS at all.

From Dell, Gateway, Compaq, and even IBM for Aptivas, ThinkPads, and
certain low end workstation models, you cannot buy without Windows. I was
in CompUSA today and looked at every computer they had for sale. Other
than iMACs, I couldn't buy a machine without paying for Windows. The same
was true at Best Buys, Sears, and Pennys.



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 02:09:25
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fm6yy54.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/03/99 at
08:03 PM,
   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:

> Totalitarian is not necessarily collectivist. Read Orwell.

> BTW, fascism, wh/ is extreme right, is also collectivist -- very!

No, facism did not sieze the property, business, etc. of the majority,
only the undesirables. And the state did not run the confiscated
businesses, they were given to favored capitalists.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 02:12:12
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

You call including the entire pathname into the name of a file long filename
support? You need the seriously long filename support to fit all that in
there... "C:\My Documents\Microsoft Office\Microsoft
PictureIt\Favorites\Family\Uncle John.jpg" is the name of the file. On a
Mac, the name is "Uncle John". No path and no stupid three letter suffix.

File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files of
the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that all
apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Andrew Irvine" <irvin@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1e29kh9.1qoi8ije6hm86N%irvin@clara.co.uk...
> Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
>
> > COMA clipped. I'm not brain-dead (enough).
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:24:32, irvin@clara.co.uk (Andrew Irvine) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I agree, windows only became an imitation of the mac by windows 95...
> > >
>
>
> > Isn't that an insult to just about every Mac in existence?
> >
>
> he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
> meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
> more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
> 82) had that :)?
>
>
> --
> Andrew Irvine
>
> Monty Python: "He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!"
> Need a web page designed? http://www.irvin.clara.net
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           04-Dec-99 02:29:12
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <Pine.SGI.3.93.991203205036.25239B-100000@sea.monterey.edu>, on
12/03/99 at 09:04 PM,
   josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> said:

> I have an OS sold in 1997 that's NOT Y2K compliant.  

> I would NOT that say a 1960's program should have been made Y2K
> compliant.  If Y2K considerations isn't in the specification then it's
> bad to suggest a programmer should waste money and time adding
> non-specified features. 

Quite correct. An in fairness to IBM and its programmers 35 years ago, one
must remember that they were mostly folks in their late 20's and early
30's. The decision makers were even older. To a person of 35 the year 2000
was at best a time he would only have a 30% chance of living to see.

Moreover, back then memory was hugely expensive. Additionally, those
managers and many programmers came from the 80 column punch card world
where there really was no room for a 4 digit year since each digit took a
column.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               04-Dec-99 03:09:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

>> >The real truth is that companies that DON'T have unions have better, more
>> >productive workforces, higher wages, and treat their employees better.
>> >If I owned a corporation, I would do whatever I could to keep a union OUT
>> >of my company.  If one formed, I would do whatever I could to get it
>> >decertified.
>>
>> And you would not survive. Not because of unions, but you're too stupid to
>> treat people as human beings -- which is what gave rise to unions in the
>> first place.

>Actually, I would treat people as human beings first and foremost --
>that's HOW I would prevent a union from walking in an destroying my
>company.  I'd pay them well, give them excellent working conditions, and
>ensure that they are happy with their jobs.

Got caught with your pants down again, eh. 

This is in contradiction to your attitude in the first message -- not to
mention that in another message you feel people should left homeless and
starving and begging for help -- but here you try to tell us how you care!
 In still another post you talked about the guys making the big bucks from
taking the risk, which then became the investors when you got caught in
your own words. 

The truth is that you Steven C. Britton go way beyond nincompoop. You're
one stark raving  asshole.




_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         04-Dec-99 08:37:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Here's today's Haakmat digest:

1> Say no more, old chap, say no more.

How ironic, coming from someone saying more.

1> I missed you too.

You're erroneously presupposing that I missed you.

1> Thank goodness.

That's your response to my identification of your erroneous
statement?

1> Whatever it is you think I'm doing, I hope you like it.

What I like or dislike is irrelevant.

1> There you have me again! I keep saying these stupid things and
1> you never tire of correcting me. That's true friendship.

Illogical.

1> As a said, you are a considerate gentleman.

And you are not.

1> No, really, you are a considerate gentleman.

And you are not.

1> Will you lead the way?

It's off limits to Starfleet.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:07:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38487DD4.FFB4C956@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about
> > > > > OS/2, how
> > > > > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> > > >
> > > > What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?
> > >
> > > How ironic.
> >
> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> 
> On the basis of your participation

What alleged participation?

> in the activity whose existence

You are erroneously presupposing the existence of this alleged "activity".

> you wish me to demonstrate.

On what basis do you make this claim?  I demonstrated no desire for you to
demonstrate something which does not exist.
 
> > "I do not 'approve' phrases.
> >  -Dave Tholen"
> > - Eric Bennett
> 
> Your infantile quoting game is irrelvant, Marty.

How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile quoting game is irrelevant.

> ""I do not 'approve' phrases.
> -Dave Tholen"
> - Eric Bennett"
> -Marty Amodeo

"> 'I do not "approve" phrases.
 >  -Dave Tholen'
 > - Eric Bennett

Your infantile quoting game is irrelvant, Marty."
- Eric Bennett

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:13:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451516

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38487F45.51EB7452@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > tholenbot wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <828a0p$8fu$7@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenantispam@hawaii.edu
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's today's Dimsdale digest
> > >
> > > What alleged "Dimsdale digest", Dave?
> >
> > Don't you know Eric?
> 
> I see you failed to answer the question.

Balderdash, Eric.  My answer is right above.

> Of course, such behavior is to be expected of one who admits to engaging 
> in infantile games

You're presupposing that I have admitted to engaging in infantile games.

> taking taking posting lessons from David Sutherland.

How does one take "taking posting" lessons?  I was unaware that such a skill
was in Sutherland's repotoire.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:17:06
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38487F2C.9FE44E21@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <384752BD.CD9FE2B1@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > > Typical invective.
> > > >
> > > > What's allegedly typical about it?
> > >
> > > More evidence of your inconsistency.
> >
> > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?
> 
> See what I mean?

Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is not evidence
of inconsistency.

> > > > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > > >
> > > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> > >
> > > On the basis of him posting as TholenBot Pro.
> >
> > Evidence, please
> 
> Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?

Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed how you
dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to cover up your
embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:

> > Evidence, please.
> 
> Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?

As you can clearly see, I

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:23:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> 
> In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron
> > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > >
> > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > >
> > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> >
> > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> 
> Incorrect.

Typical pontification.
 
> > That this behavior was
> > expected is
> > common knowledge.
> 
> But it is still irrelevant.

Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" Tholen?

> > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to Marty's
> > > > > post.
> > > >
> > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > >
> > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> >
> > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> 
> I see you snipped the proof.

What alleged "proof".  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.

> How predictable.

Your pontification was quite predictable.
 
> > No surprise there.
> 
> Illogical.

"How predictable."

> > > I have already proven it.
> >
> > Evidence, please
> 
> Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?

How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal of
key context.  Here's your context back:

> > Evidence, please.
> 
> Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?

I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already proven"
pontification.  No surprise there.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              04-Dec-99 03:20:15
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Porting codecs...

From: Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

I cant say I know for sure if the source is available, but the codecs
for Linux's Xanime program could possibly be ported for use with OS/2?

BTW, I'm pretty sure a compiled version of the X libraries are also
available for OS/2, has anyone tried to compile an X program with
success, and been able to use it?

If so, upload it to hobbes ..or something! :)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:37:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest Episode IV - A New Hope

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Wolf Kirchmeir writes:
> 
> > Why do you guys waste bandwidth on this crap. Get a life!
> 
> Marty has admitted to playing an "infantile game" in this newsgroup.

That admission occurred on 8/4/1999 (according to Deja.com).  That's some 4
(!!) months ago.

> He and Eric Bennett entertain themselves here at the expense of other
> people.  You figure they'll grow out of it eventually.

Funny, but Dave hypocritically doesn't think so.  He feels that whenever
someone points out his own illogic and inconsistency that they are being
infantile.  How convenient.  

Yet, where is Dave's admission to his own incorrectness when he stated:
"Yet, to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE- the OS/2 JDK], one must have
run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"

... in light of the incontrovertible evidence presented in:
http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg

You won't find such an admission from Dave.  And why?  Two words spring to
mind:  "infantile game".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              04-Dec-99 03:24:21
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>


Maarten Van Horenbeeck wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I'm 18 years old, student Computer-sciences in Belgium,
> and a very huge OS/2-fan, to call it like that.  I just mean that I have
> never
> found a system more stable (yes, including some UNIX's) than OS/2 4...
> Now I was unaware that some of the OS/2-sourcecode had been released.
> Does anyone know where I can find this piece of code, since I am very
> interested in
> expanding OS/2 for my own desktop, so I can include new functions myself,
> and take
> a look at the insides of what I clearly see as the most innovative operating
> system of the 90's.
>
> Thanks in advance, c ya,
>
> Maarten Van Horenbeeck
> whistler@dma.be
>
> Trancser wrote:
>

Well, I cant say I know for sure where you'd be able to get a copy but, I hope
you do. I would really like to see anyones personal enhancements that are made
to OS/2's source!

good luck!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              04-Dec-99 03:39:17
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

>
> You don't need the source code to OS/2 for that.   OS/2 was designed from
the
> ground up to be rather extensible.    Take a look at a package call XFolder.
>  The author released the full source to it and you can do A LOT to extend
> OS/2 through that package.
>
> Have fun!

True, you can create add-on's for the /2 desktop, but OS/2 could use
additional
improvments, internally as well, that in which I'm sure would require source
for
like the Kernel, the HPFS IFS driver and possible improvments to the base
multimedia system itself!

With some of the possible bloat-code that might still be contained w/in OS/2's
source, removed. Any or all possible improvments to OS/2's memory managment,
as
well as of course additional h/w support added, of course some of that might
be
more technical for some of the OS/2 programmers out there, I cant say for sure
really, just guessing.

Even though I've heard that the source thats available out there is of older
source for /2, I'm sure there could be something inside the source that could
be
used? At least, I'd hope so.

I do hope though, that someone out there (maybe a hard-core OS/2 user :)
exploits
the source code for use with OS/2, since theres not to much stopping any
programmers from using the source to improve alternate OS's! I know there has
to
be some people out there that might not any trouble at all adjusting the code,
w/o the end result having to many problems if used for OS/2!

After all, this could be the opportunity some of us have been waiting for - a
chance to do with (and give) OS/2 what we'd like to see....maybe.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:52:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451516

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

I see that not only did Dave fail to provide evidence for his erroneous
claims,
but he pontificated yet again that the evidence was "right up there in the
introductory text" while it was clearly nowhere to be seen.  His irksome
"style" is yet more evidence that his "infantile game" is continuing.  Here
are
yet more issues which Tholen took completely out of context, irrelevantly
crossposted, and yet somehow still failed to address:

> 1> What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?

Dave seems to think he is "tholenbot" now.
 
> 2> Truly amazing that Dave started off his posting with a lie.  The
> 2> evidence was nowhere to be seen in his posting, yet he felt justified
> 2> in hypocritically accusing me of lying.  A rather dull and typical
> 2> development in Dave's infantile game.  Here are more issues that Dave
> 2> is too embarrassed to address with his excuse for "logic":

Note: no response.

> 2> Note the lack of evidence.  What alleged claim?  Which alleged article?

Note: no response.

> 2> I warned you about going down that path, Dave.

Note: no response.

> 2> Note: no response

Note: still no response.

> 2> Note: no response

Note: still no response.

> 3> Truly amazing that Dave started off his posting with a lie.  The
> 3> evidence was nowhere to be seen in his posting, yet he felt justified
> 3> in hypocritically accusing me of lying.  A rather dull and typical
> 3> development in Dave's infantile game.  Here are more issues that Dave
> 3> is too embarrassed to address with his excuse for "logic":

Note: no response.

> 3> Note the lack of evidence.  What alleged claim?  Which alleged article?

Note: no response.

> 3> I warned you about going down that path, Dave.

Note: no response.

> 3> Note: no response

Note: no response.

> 3> Note: no response

Note: no response.

> 4> Yup.  He chants, "O-wha Tadi kiam"

Note: no response.

> 4> Yes, digest form is quite convenient for playing infantile games and
> 4> avoiding issues.

Note: no response.

> 4> Incorrect.

Note: no response.

> 4> On what basis do you make this erroneous claim?

Note: no response.

> 4> A semantic argument, as is what you'd expect from someone lacking a
> 4> logical argument.

Note: no response.

> 4> - irrelevantly -

Note: no response.

> 4> Glad I haven't done such a thing.  I'd hate to have to deal with
> 4> Dave's infantile "wrath".

Note: no response.

Whoa... he almost snuck this one by me:
> 5> That's proprietary information, David.
> 
> On what basis do you make that claim, Marty?

"'Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?'

I warned you about going down that path, Marty."
 
> Sutherland can be pretty humorous at times.

Irrelevant.

> How I spend my time at work isn't even relevant to this newsgroup.

Then why discuss astronomy with Jansens?

PS:  Star Trek isn't relevant to this (or should I say, either of these)
newsgroup(s) either.

"It's off limits to Starfleet."
- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 04:55:02
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451516

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> Go to Talos IV.

"How I spend my time at work isn't even relevant to this newsgroup."
- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              04-Dec-99 03:50:05
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: Trancser <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

>
> Just remember that you don't have to go at it alone.  There are plenty of
OS/2
> coders out there willing to help from the most basic to the most advance
> problems you have.  COOProgrammer.Misc is a superb resource, as well as
various
> developer web sites, and even IRC sometimes.
>
> - Marty

Do you develope OS/2 software yourself? Btw, is that a news group
(COOProgrammer.Misc)?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 05:12:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of his
home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:

1> What alleged "FUD", Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> What alleged "lies", Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Illogical, as it is Pott's garden, not mine.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> How ironic, cmoing from the Master of Infantile Gameplay.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Prove it, if you think you can.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Irrelevant.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.
1> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> His supposition was not "erronesoul," Marty. Still can't spell above 
2> kindergraten level?

How ironic, coming from someone who couldn't spell "kindergarten".

2> Irrelevant, because the topic is your inability to recognize the 
2> existant pontiffs.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> Incorrect.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> Prove it, if you think you can.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> What alleged pontification, Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> How ironic, coming from Marty "Monarch of Pontification" Amodeo.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> Using sentence fragments again, Marty?

How ironic, coming from someone who just failed to form a complete sentence.

2> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> How ironic, coming from one of the rulebook writers employed by the 
2> Infantile Little Games Rules Committee.

I didn't know IBM was in that line of business, Aaron.

3> Couldn't have said it better myself, Jason.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

4> Because it's not specific to this newsgroup.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

5> Jumping into others' conversations, Eric? How ironic.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

5> Prove it, if you think you can.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

5> Balderdash, Eric.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> You don't remember, Dave?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Self-evident.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Balderdash, Dave.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

6> Irrelevant.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 05:14:09
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Wake Up !

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Trancser wrote:
> 
> >
> > Just remember that you don't have to go at it alone.  There are plenty of
OS/2
> > coders out there willing to help from the most basic to the most advance
> > problems you have.  COOProgrammer.Misc is a superb resource, as well as
various
> > developer web sites, and even IRC sometimes.
> >
> > - Marty
> 
> Do you develope OS/2 software yourself?

Yup.  http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com

> Btw, is that a news group (COOProgrammer.Misc)?

Yes.  comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 05:20:23
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Porting codecs...

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Trancser wrote:
> 
> I cant say I know for sure if the source is available, but the codecs
> for Linux's Xanime program could possibly be ported for use with OS/2?
> 
> BTW, I'm pretty sure a compiled version of the X libraries are also
> available for OS/2, has anyone tried to compile an X program with
> success, and been able to use it?
> 
> If so, upload it to hobbes ..or something! :)

XAnim has already been ported to XFree86/2.

ftp://24.2.168.186/pub/os2/unix/xfree86/ports/multimedia/xanim.zip

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         04-Dec-99 10:36:19
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Once again, Marty persisted with his lie, denying the existence of the
evidence in the relevant introductory text.  Interestingly, he states
that his "infantile game" admission was "some 4 months ago", as if that
precludes the continuation of his "infantile game" now.  Here's today's
digest:

1> I see that not only did Dave fail to provide evidence for his erroneous
1> claims, but he pontificated yet again that the evidence was "right up
1> there in the introductory text" while it was clearly nowhere to be seen.
1> His irksome "style" is yet more evidence that his "infantile game" is
1> continuing.  Here are yet more issues which Tholen took completely out
1> of context, irrelevantly crossposted, and yet somehow still failed to
1> address:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Dave seems to think he is "tholenbot" now.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
 
1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: still no response.

1> Note: still no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: no response.

1> Whoa... he almost snuck this one by me:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Irrelevant.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Then why discuss astronomy with Jansens?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> PS:  Star Trek isn't relevant to this (or should I say, either of these)
1> newsgroup(s) either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> - Dave Tholen

Non sequitur.

3> That admission occurred on 8/4/1999 (according to Deja.com).  That's
3> some 4 (!!) months ago.

And you're still at it!

3> Funny, but Dave hypocritically doesn't think so.  He feels that whenever
3> someone points out his own illogic and inconsistency that they are being
3> infantile.  How convenient.  

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Yet, where is Dave's admission to his own incorrectness when he stated:
3> "Yet, to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE- the OS/2 JDK], one must
have
3> run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> You won't find such an admission from Dave.  And why?  Two words spring to
3> mind:  "infantile game".

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      04-Dec-99 12:10:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 02:09:50 -0500, Bob Germer
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

>On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fm6yy54.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/03/99 at
>08:03 PM,
>   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:
>
>> Totalitarian is not necessarily collectivist. Read Orwell.
>
>> BTW, fascism, wh/ is extreme right, is also collectivist -- very!
>
>No, facism did not sieze the property, business, etc. of the majority,
>only the undesirables. And the state did not run the confiscated
>businesses, they were given to favored capitalists.


They were given to favoured cronies, who may or may not have been
capitalists; notwithstanding that, you don't have to 'own' something
to control it and in Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy, control
was the watchword.  If they had lasted, I'm sure actual ownership as
in Soviet style state ownership would have evolved.  As it was, Coal,
Steel and other core heavy industry was directly 'controlled' under
Goering's ham handed ministry.
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
>Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
>MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
>Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>

EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      04-Dec-99 12:13:08
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 21:26:32 -0500, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

>Lars P Ormberg wrote:
>> 
>> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Andrew Stephenson write:
>> >          bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com "Bob Germer" writes:
>> 
>> > > If you did, you would be charged with a crime. A restaurant
>> > > must serve everyone regardless of race, creed, color, national
>> > > origin, etc. The civil rights laws apply to you as to everyone
>> > > else.

Wrong. Any restaurant can refuse service to anyone, regardless of the
above designations, given they don't meet the rules or requirments;
i.e. proper dress, for instance.
>> >
>> > Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
>> > paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
>> > can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.
>> 
>> It's called property rights.
>> 
>> Your "paradise-on-earth" is only from the point of view of the person
>> getting the product.  The person with the product isn't in paradise if his
>> property can be taken when he doesn't want it to be.
>
>Hey, I can make that same nutty argument about my property rights. I
>think it can be fun.  Let me try.....
>
>I just bought a baseball bat.  I have the right to swing my baseball bat
>anywhere I want so if your pumpkin head is in its way tough because it's
>my freedom and right to swing my property any time I want.  OH, you live
>in Canada....hmmm.. I'll drive.
>
>I have the right to own and drive my car to Canada and to own and carry
>my gun so if I drive my car into Canada and it's searched then I'll tell
>the border police to stuff it!  
>
>I have rights and there is no way in hell they can take my car and gun
>at the border.  I have a right to own that gun and what the hell does
>taking my car have to do with a gun any how? Huh Lars?  What the
>hell!?!  I want my gun in Canada and I have ever right to drive to
>Canada and carry my personal property, my gun.  Yes sir!  
>
>I know so much about property rights - just like you.
>
>:^)

EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      04-Dec-99 12:15:06
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 10:37:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 01:55:15 -0500, Bob Germer
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

>On <828upp$gbi$6@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/03/99 at 05:31 PM,
>   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
>
>> I don't have the right to take away the right of a property-owner to do
>> with his property as he sees fit.  If a law says otherwise, that law is
>> wrong.
>
>Try to run a whorehouse in your home or an opium den. The law will stomp
>all over you in Canada as here in the US. Tell me that law is wrong.

What about Nevada?

>
>If you really think so, then you are in my killfile and on my website as a
>person to be avoided at all costs.
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
>Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
>MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
>Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>

EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               04-Dec-99 09:37:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

kiwi wrote:
> 
> Steve wrote:
> > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
support
> > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so great,
why
> > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> 
>   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> time period, the market would probably look quite a
> bit different right now.

There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a win; if
anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the difference
was that there were so many vendors producing it.

The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft didn't
make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all competed on
an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because Apple
clearly made sure that Apple came first.

This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after Microsoft
gave up on it.

One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels the
playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be stifled
by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware vendors
have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server space as
a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               04-Dec-99 09:43:16
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Ruel Smith wrote:
> You call including the entire pathname into the name of a file long filename
> support? You need the seriously long filename support to fit all that in
> there... "C:\My Documents\Microsoft Office\Microsoft
> PictureIt\Favorites\Family\Uncle John.jpg" is the name of the file. On a
> Mac, the name is "Uncle John". No path and no stupid three letter suffix.

The path is there, it's just not exposed to the average user.  Whether this is
a benefit or a drawback depends a lot on what you're trying to do, but I think
we can all agree that most end users aren't so big on typing paths.

> File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
> letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files of
> the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
> launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that all
> apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.

Actually MacOS does assume that two files with the same file type should be
manipulated by the same program.  What it doesn't do is store the file type in
the file name.  This is good for all kinds of reasons, although it does
complicate issues since most of the file transfer systems in wide use assume a
single data stream for each file.

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            04-Dec-99 15:53:29
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:15
Subj: Re: Man, I'm outta here.

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 02:03:09, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dNed2gPCqL22@localhost>, 
> jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:26:39, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-7bUCgq7KjC5q@localhost>, 
> > > jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:10:27, Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > As prize for his award, he can have his own personalized copy of 
> > > > > Question 32 from the comp.sys.mac.advocacy FAQ:
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Whoa! You guys have a *FAQ*!?
> > > > Kewl!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It's more like a collection of snide remarks, but we call it a FAQ.
> > > 
> > 
> > How shocking! An advocacy group where politeness and consideration for
> > others are not respected principles!
> > I shall refrain from frequenting your premises, Sir.
> 
> Actually, they are respected to some minimal degree in the FAQ, because 
> it contains snide remarks from both camps.
> 
Oh, I get it: everyone is bashing everyone else.

I can dig that.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            04-Dec-99 15:54:02
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:15
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 01:52:54, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > I see Marty is up to his usual tricks again. Consistent with common
> > sense, I am deleting all but the relevant elements from his post:
> > 
> > > > > what
> > 
> > Well, that just about sums it all up, doesn't it?
> 
> Additionally, the reader may note another of Karel's blunders.  As Karel
noted
> in his article, the "what" he quoted must have come from the following
> statement, if it were not fabricated by Karel entirely:
> M] On what basis do you make this claim, Karel?
> 
> The reader will note that this statement appeared as new material 3 (!!)
> postings before Karel made the above statement.  How illogical and
> inappropriate of him to respond to it now.

I do my best to make your posts show at least a basic level of 
coherence and readability, and this is my thanks?

The ingratitude...

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wernerkn@telus.net                                04-Dec-99 08:31:27
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:16
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: Werner Knoll <wernerkn@telus.net>


"E. Barry Bruyea" wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 02:09:50 -0500, Bob Germer
> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> 
> >On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fm6yy54.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/03/99 at
> >08:03 PM,
> >   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:
> >
> >> Totalitarian is not necessarily collectivist. Read Orwell.
> >
> >> BTW, fascism, wh/ is extreme right, is also collectivist -- very!
> >
> >No, facism did not sieze the property, business, etc. of the majority,
> >only the undesirables. And the state did not run the confiscated
> >businesses, they were given to favored capitalists.
> 
> They were given to favoured cronies, who may or may not have been
> capitalists; notwithstanding that, you don't have to 'own' something
> to control it and in Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy, control
> was the watchword.  If they had lasted, I'm sure actual ownership as
> in Soviet style state ownership would have evolved.  As it was, Coal,
> Steel and other core heavy industry was directly 'controlled' under
> Goering's ham handed ministry.

Who controlled the heavy industry in the US and great Britain from 1939
to 1945?

Werner Knoll

> >
> >--
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
> >Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
> >Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
> >MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
> >Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
> >
> 
> EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Knoll's (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 09:15:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 14:21:16
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> "josco" <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991203205036.25239B-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> >
> > That's the first time I've ever heard that suggestion.  Someone who's
> > using COTS is responsible to the customer and they in turn are asking for
> > answers.  Sweet sounding answers late in coming and with a lot of fine
> > print.  An IT manager is & IS manager is responsible but dependent on
> > those who have sold technologies, software and tools.
> >
>
> You've missed Stuart's posts in direct response then. Bob Germer statement
> wasn't even close to the facts of the matter, that is the crux of the
> matter.

What do you say that?  I read Stuart Fox's posts and replied to them.

You are aware that Stuart is trying to argue a contradiction.  Partially
compliant is a nonsense term.    What he says is partially compliant means is
a
situation where a system is NOT compliant but it is still acceptable.  NOT Y2K
compliant but acceptable.

He also doesn't know what Y2K is and needed s few URL pointers to show him the
way when he asked -- me -- what a sensible definition of Y2K would be.


> > > Only forty-odd years of sloppy programming could accomplish that.
> >
> > I have an OS sold in 1997 that's NOT Y2K compliant.
> >
>
> Will it run after 1/1/00?

No.  By definition it will not run - as "run" is defined by being Y2K
compliant.   Any other questions?

How about, "Will it blow up in a fire ball?"
Maybe.  It is always a possibility as possibilities include  events ever so
improbable.  So we can guess what are the effects on non Y2K compliance. 
These
are possible places of failure and sources for future problems.

> OS's weren't the problem here, except those that
> may have trouble crossing the threshold of the oughts. A one time date reset
> doesn't seem like much, for almost the first four years IBM sold PC's the
> user had to manually set the time at startup.

The PCs had no clocks but the user knew there was no clock so the IBM PC
system
worked as specified.   And were these IBM PCs sold after 1995?   No.  You MS
advocates always swing at some past transgression of IBM - at one time there
were no clocks in PCs.

A simple fix to a non complaint systems can be acceptable but what is NOT
acceptable is to incorrectly assert the system is compliant.  It is not.  If
it
were made and sold after 1995 and not Y2K compliant then the systems is
defective and not defensible since Y2K was well known by then - the Social
Security Office began Y2K work in 1989.  If the system were made by IBM , HP
or
MS it would be defective. Sadly MS's response to Y2K as been armature.  It's
defenders naive.






>
>
> > I would NOT that say a 1960's program should have been made Y2K compliant.
> > If Y2K considerations isn't in the specification then it's bad to suggest
> > a programmer should waste money and time adding non-specified features.
> >
>
> Though, if I were, say Fox Mulder, or were I writing for the National
> Enquirer or The Register, I could speculate, credibly, that this whole
> "crisis" was planned in the '60's by IBM, Bourroughs, Sperry/Univac, Digital
> Equipment or Honeywell. The market then was solely monolithic systems,
> maintained by company trained acolytes. The customers did what they were
> told because they had no choice. These companies have set other shady deals
> up, look at UNISYS's fraud case.
>
> IBM has been in business for more than One Hundred and Ten Years. A company
> with that long a history could plan by decade instead of quarter as is the
> current practice.  In fact that would explain why IBM's business moves are
> often hard to understand. IBM then, as now (I'll explain later,) control's
> the technology market.  They know that their systems, because of their size
> will have massive inertia in the market. They saturate the market, now what
> do they do for revenue. In the 'sixties they standardized the industry on
> the six digit date, remember that:  991203.  Why six instead of eight?
> Eight is a power of two, important in the binary world, nope they did six.
>
> Who cares that now, 35 years after establishing the very standard that bit
> everyone in the ass, they aren't being punished for selling a defective
> product that is potentially dangerous.  No way, they are raking in more
> money than MS, Sun, Netscape, HP, Compaq, Dell and Intel combined, just for
> fixing this suprise problem.  These guys designed computers by soldering
> transistors together and they missed something like date calculations.  They
> calculated with these same systems, the trajectory to send men to the moon,
> a hell of a bit of Trig, but they missed this date problem, that
> fortuitously became extremely profitable for them.
>
> Earlier I said that they still control the industry. Some find this hard to
> believe. Those people also think the mainframe market has gone away.  IBM
> had record sales of 390's in 1997. But that's just the icing. Think back to
> the beginnings of the PC era. Remember all the different companies (all
> leaders now) who had partnerships with IBM.  They all made money right?  So
> did and does IBM, one of their less known business practices is that in a
> strategic partnership stock is exchanged, large quantities of stock.  IBM,
> to this day, owns ~10% of Intel, Compaq, MS and almost half of Apple.  Who's
> the real monopolist here?
>
> Some of what I write is speculation and educated guessing, but some is
> verifiable fact.  I'm not going to supply where to find that information or
> which is which. If you are interested and start digging, you may even
> uncover more than I have so far.  Enjoy.
>
> --
> Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: user@host.com                                     04-Dec-99 12:04:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:18
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: user@host.com (Roman)

E. Barry Bruyea:

> They were given to favoured cronies, who may or may not have been
> capitalists; notwithstanding that, you don't have to 'own' something
> to control it and in Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy, control
> was the watchword.  If they had lasted, I'm sure actual ownership as
                      ************************************************
> in Soviet style state ownership would have evolved.
 ***************************************************

Not necessarily. Many industrialists (including Henry Ford, a personal
friend of Hitler's) were quite pleased with the way things were being run
in Germany and Italy. They didn't see what all the fuss was about. Sure,
the fascists were a bit heavyhanded but business was booming. There was
also good money to be made selling technology and arms to the Nazis and
many companies from Britain and N. America (ITT for example) jumped in and
took advantage of this. It was a mutually beneficial relationship and both
the fascist regimes and industry were satisfied. The fact that millions of
people were being killed or persecuted didn't bother the industrialists as
long as there was still a buck to be made. The same is still true today.

-- 
http://www.crosswinds.net/~berlin13/index.html 
 
E-mail: europa<AT>smartt<DOT>com
--
I am no Marxist.
     (Karl Marx)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Bis zum bitteren Ende (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 12:56:22
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:19
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
IMHO, dooms Linux.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> kiwi wrote:
> >
> > Steve wrote:
> > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
support
> > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
great, why
> > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> >
> >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > bit different right now.
>
> There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a win; if
> anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
difference
> was that there were so many vendors producing it.
>
> The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
didn't
> make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all competed
on
> an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because Apple
> clearly made sure that Apple came first.
>
> This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after Microsoft
> gave up on it.
>
> One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels the
> playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
stifled
> by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
vendors
> have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server space
as
> a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
>
> jim
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cfischer@ieee.org                                 04-Dec-99 13:25:29
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Chris Fischer <cfischer@ieee.org>

Ruel Smith wrote:

> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>

RedHat and several other have found a way to make a profit on it.


--

Chris Fischer                       cfischer@ieee.org
Coda Software, Limited


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Coda Software Limited (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: forgitaboutit@fake.com                            04-Dec-99 13:48:13
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com>

In article <38472d77@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu says...
>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
>: In article <384628ac@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu says...
>:>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
>:>
>:>:>:>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
>:>:>:>: WOW! And the OS/2 version only had a two year head start!
>:>
>:><big snip>
>:>
>:>: You are being silly. The OS/2 version of Opera started in 1997. It went
nowhere 
>:>: and now a new team has stepped up to bat. In the meantime even the BeOS 
>:>: released a beta and both Linux and the Mac are ahead.
>:>
>:>: Stop being silly.
>:>
>:>Stop avoiding the question and back up your statements.
>:>
>:>Since you have reading problems:
>:>
>:>HOW HAS THE OS/2 VERSION OF THE OPERA WEB BROWSER HAD A 2 YEAR HEAD START 
>:>ON ANY OF THE OTHER PLATFORMS FOR OPERA???
>:>
>:>This is what you claimed.  This is what I disproved.  Stop grandstanding 
>:>and be a man. Explain your statements or admit you were wrong (or ignore 
>:>my post altogether)
>:>
>:>BeOS started: 1997
>:>Epoch started: 1997
>:>MacOS started: 1997
>:>Linux started: 1997
>:>OS/2 started: 1997 (scrapped and started again in 1999)
>:>Amiga stated: 1997 (srapped altogether)
>:>Windows started: way before all of this
>:>
>:>Now, how does OS/2 have a two year head start on any of these 
>:>platforms???  At worse case OS/2 started at the same time as any of the 
>:>non-windows platforms.  In which case, what the hell is the point of your 
>:>posts.  All this to complain that the previous developers for the OS/2 
>:>version sucked?  What does this prove?
>:>
>:>-Jason
>:>
>
>: You are being silly. I told you to stop. Neither Epoch nor Linux had ports
back 
>: in 1997.
>
>: Stop being silly.
>
>Stop being difficult
>
>Show me how the OS/2 version had a two year head start on any 
>other platform for Opera.
>
>You can't, because you are wrong.  This is why you keep ignoring the 
>question.  Because you made a really stupid statement and now you have no 
>where to go but avoid the question.  It's funny to see that you are so 
>little of a man that you can't eaither ignore my post or admit that you 
>are wrong.  

You are pathetic. You cannot win an arguement, so like the other fanatics in 
this you merely resort to insults because you lover OS/2 is in such dire 
straits. 

Bye.

>Stop being difficult
>
>-Jason
>

The BeOS a

-- 
---------------------------------------
David H. McCoy
dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
---------------------------------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: OminorTech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  04-Dec-99 18:53:02
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Glenn Davies write:
> On 3 Dec 1999 08:25:14 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:

> >> Under MS's per-processor licensing agreements, which the '95 consent
> >> decree eliminated, customers paid for DOS and Windows even if they
> >> didn't want those products.
> >
> >How was that?  I know the answer.  I can't wait to see how you express it.
> 
> If you ordered a computer from a OEM and stated that you didn't want a
> copy of DOS with it they would say fine it won't come with a copy of
> DOS. And when you asked how much did you save they would answer $0.00.

What was to stop you from saying "fuck you, then, no sale?"  Or what was to
stop you from going to a computer company that would sell you no
DOS-equipped computers?  Or what was to stop your from STARTING a computer
company that would sell you no DOS-equipped computers?

Here's that ever-important reminder for you: if an OEM enters a contract, a
term may well state that everything they sell has DOS.  This is a contract.
A _contract_.  If you want the OEM to violate their contract, they won't do
that, and no company in their right mind would.  You will have to find an
OEM that doesn't sign such a contract.  And the best part is, if EVERY
business in the world entered contracts which had conditions that made your
purchasing the product unacceptible, then I guess you just don't get it.

Par example, if you wanted to never buy food in a blue container, and EVERY
producer entered into a contract to sell all their food in a blue container,
and you wanted to keep up your little blue-boycott, then you would starve.
It isn't the company's duty to insure that every person gets their food
needs met.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 14:00:23
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <3848DC19.4B7D9B21@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> > > Evidence, please.
> > 
> > Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?
> 
> As you can clearly see, I

Taking forgery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again, 
Marty?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                04-Dec-99 14:04:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > 
> > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty 
> > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron
> > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > >
> > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > >
> > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > 
> > Incorrect.
> 
> Typical pontification.

How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons from the 
pontiff.  More evidence of your hypocrisy.
 
> > > That this behavior was
> > > expected is
> > > common knowledge.
> > 
> > But it is still irrelevant.
> 
> Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" Tholen?

See above.

> > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to 
> > > > > > Marty's
> > > > > > post.
> > > > >
> > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > >
> > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > >
> > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > 
> > I see you snipped the proof.
> 
> What alleged "proof".  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.

Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?

> > How predictable.
> 
> Your pontification was quite predictable.

See above.
  
> > > No surprise there.
> > 
> > Illogical.
> 
> "How predictable."

Why?

> > > > I have already proven it.
> > >
> > > Evidence, please
> > 
> > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal 
> of
> key context.  Here's your context back:

Illogical.

> > > Evidence, please.
> > 
> > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> 
> I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already proven"
> pontification.  No surprise there.

See above.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            04-Dec-99 19:15:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:56:44, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.
> 
Where *did* you get that silly idea that writing software for Linux 
means you have to give it away?

Been reading Halloween documents?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: float@incandescent.firedrake.org                  04-Dec-99 19:10:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: float@incandescent.firedrake.org (void)

In article <82abt4$4dh$1@news.campuscwix.net>, Chad Mulligan wrote:
>
>Some of what I write is speculation and educated guessing, but some is
>verifiable fact.  I'm not going to supply where to find that information or
>which is which.

And this differs from your usual posting style how exactly?

-- 
 Ben

[X] YES! I'm a brain-damaged lemur on crack, and I'd like to
    order your software package for $459.95!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Firedrake Synthesis (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ssivier@best.com                                  04-Dec-99 23:38:00
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Steve Sivier <ssivier@best.com>

In article <s4ilh6orqeg172@corp.supernews.com>, "Ruel Smith" 
<ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point 
> because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, 
> and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers 
> are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.

I quite doubt it. I believe it will only get worse for traditional 
software companies. For some bizarre reason, I kind of enjoy writing 
code and I have no problem with giving it away. A lack of spare time is 
all that keeps me from being more involved with it right now. But when I 
retire, I fully intend to devote a large amount of my time to doing 
that. It beats just sitting around waiting to die. I think a lot of 
programmers will do the same.

Steve

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Epoch Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      04-Dec-99 19:50:16
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 08:31:55 -0800, Werner Knoll <wernerkn@telus.net>
wrote:

>
>
>"E. Barry Bruyea" wrote:
>> 
>> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 02:09:50 -0500, Bob Germer
>> <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fm6yy54.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/03/99 at
>> >08:03 PM,
>> >   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:
>> >
>> >> Totalitarian is not necessarily collectivist. Read Orwell.
>> >
>> >> BTW, fascism, wh/ is extreme right, is also collectivist -- very!
>> >
>> >No, facism did not sieze the property, business, etc. of the majority,
>> >only the undesirables. And the state did not run the confiscated
>> >businesses, they were given to favored capitalists.
>> 
>> They were given to favoured cronies, who may or may not have been
>> capitalists; notwithstanding that, you don't have to 'own' something
>> to control it and in Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy, control
>> was the watchword.  If they had lasted, I'm sure actual ownership as
>> in Soviet style state ownership would have evolved.  As it was, Coal,
>> Steel and other core heavy industry was directly 'controlled' under
>> Goering's ham handed ministry.
>
>Who controlled the heavy industry in the US and great Britain from 1939
>to 1945?
>
>Werner Knoll

My reference was meant to indicate pre-war conditions; certainly,
during wartime, governments generally determine who builds what where.

>
>> >
>> >--
>>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>> >Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
>> >Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
>> >MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
>> >Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>> >
>> 
>> EBB

EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: znu@znu.dhs.org                                   04-Dec-99 20:09:06
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 16:31:20
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org>

In article <38492895.38017B0A@frostbytes.com>, Jim Frost 
<jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:

> Ruel Smith wrote:

> > File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
> > letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files 
> > of
> > the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
> > launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that 
> > all
> > apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.
> 
> Actually MacOS does assume that two files with the same file type should 
> be
> manipulated by the same program.

No, it doesn't. I have some HTML files (which are really just text files 
anyway) that open in Communicator, and some that open in Dreamweaver. I 
have some text files that open in BBEdit, and others that open in 
SimpleText. This is all very useful, as quite often I want to use a 
specific program with a specific file all/most of the time, but not with 
other files of the same type. For example, I want a JPEG file I've just 
downloaded to open with GraphicConverter, but I want a JPEG file that's 
part of my web site to open with Photoshop.

The Mac stores both a "type" and a "creator" for every file.

-- 
All parts should go together without forcing.  You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.  Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason.  By all means, do
not use a hammer.
           --IBM maintenance manual, 1925

ZnU <znu@znu.dhs.org> | <http://znu.dhs.org>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Black Helicopter People (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  04-Dec-99 20:15:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> > Guess what?  If Intel has agreed to a deal, or all Intel vendors on
> > earth have agreed to a deal, wherein Windows must be sold in tandem,
> > that isn't the sign of a monopoly.  That is the sign of a set of
> > agreements amoungst private individuals.
> 
> > Or do you believe Microsoft cannot sign contracts?
> 
> You are so full of shit you have mushrooms growing out of your ears.

I'm not the one speaking out against Microsoft signing a contract.

> MicroSoft has been proven to have coerced those companies to sign those
> deals.

How have they coerced them?  By making them a good deal?  Oooh, the horror.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  04-Dec-99 15:23:05
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451517.420340653277045023746720356234^-99999

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Once again, Tholen persisted with his lie, denying the existence of the
evidence in the relevant introductory text.  Interestingly, he states that
his "infantile game" admission was "some 4 months ago", as if that precludes
the continuation of his "infantile game" now.    Here's today's digest:

[nothing new, same old claptrap]

De nada!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  04-Dec-99 15:25:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Something like a <tholenantispam@hawaii.edu> tholened us:

> 1> I missed you too.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I missed you.

No, he's erroneously presupposing that Tholen can think.  It has not been
proven that Tholen thinks logically.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: karl@dontspam.org                                 04-Dec-99 20:32:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Right vs left 

From: karl@dontspam.org (Karl Pollak)

x-no-archive: yes
Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

>No, facism did not sieze the property, business, etc. of the majority,
>only the undesirables. And the state did not run the confiscated
>businesses, they were given to favored capitalists.

You are right Bob, but only on a minor technicality.  The National
Socialist regime may not have seized the property itself, but it seized
CONTROL of the property.  If the enterpreneur was not willing to gear his
production "to the service of the Fatherland" he automatically became one
of those "undesirables", was removed and his enterprise was given new
management, one that was willing to do what it was told by the government.


Which pretty much amounts to the same thing as confiscation.

-- 
Greetings from Lotusland

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 16:28:25
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's your
context
back:

> > > > > > Typical invective.
> > > > >
> > > > > What's allegedly typical about it?
> > > >
> > > > More evidence of your inconsistency.
> > >
> > > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?
> > 
> > See what I mean?
> 
> Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is not
evidence
> of inconsistency.

Note:  no response
 
> > > > > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > > > >
> > > > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> > > >
> > > > On the basis of him posting as TholenBot Pro.
> > >
> > > Evidence, please
> > 
> > Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?
> 
> Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed how you
> dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to cover up your
> embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:

Note:  no response
 
Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> > > > Evidence, please.
> > >
> > > Having trouble finishing your sentences, Marty?
> >
> > As you can clearly see, I
> 
> Taking forgery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
> Marty?

You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 16:38:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > >
> > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron
> > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > > >
> > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > > >
> > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.
> >
> > Typical pontification.
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons from the
> pontiff.

You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified to teach me
about pontification, Eric.

> More evidence of your hypocrisy.

You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
 
> > > > That this behavior was
> > > > expected is
> > > > common knowledge.
> > >
> > > But it is still irrelevant.
> >
> > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" Tholen?
> 
> See above.

The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.

> > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to
> > > > > > > Marty's
> > > > > > > post.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > >
> > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > >
> > > I see you snipped the proof.
> >
> > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.
> 
> Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?

I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to provide proof. 
Par
for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.

> > > How predictable.
> >
> > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> 
> See above.

The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.

> > > > No surprise there.
> > >
> > > Illogical.
> >
> > "How predictable."
> 
> Why?

"Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?

> > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > >
> > > > Evidence, please
> > >
> > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal
> > of key context.  Here's your context back:
> 
> Illogical.

Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone lacking a logical
argument.

> > > > Evidence, please.
> > >
> > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> >
> > I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already proven"
> > pontification.  No surprise there.
> 
> See above.

The above still fails to provide justification for your pontification, Eric.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 17:03:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451517

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Once again Dave failed to provide evidence for his lie.  No surprises.  He
also
seems to believe that I could and would want to persist in the same "infantile
game" for 4 (!!) months, in spite of the fact that my postings today in no way
resemble what they were those 4 months ago.  Tholen's mind is so closed that
it
refuses to acknowledge the possibility that the game is over and Tholen lost. 
It is far easier to live in his fantasy world where he can respond to whatever
he feels like, having free reign to remove all context from my statements, and
respond to statements he finds uncomfortable with an inappropriate canned
quote.  While quite convenient, it does little to counter the evidence against
him.  After persisting with all of the above mentioned dishonest tactics, he
then somehow feels justified in pontificating that I am playing an infantile
game, as if that could somehow justify his dismisal of the incontrovertible
evidence I have place before him.  This is nothing new to anyone familiar with
Tholen's "baby-talk tripe" (as he is fond of calling it himself).

> 1> I see that not only did Dave fail to provide evidence for his erroneous
> 1> claims, but he pontificated yet again that the evidence was "right up
> 1> there in the introductory text" while it was clearly nowhere to be seen.
> 1> His irksome "style" is yet more evidence that his "infantile game" is
> 1> continuing.  Here are yet more issues which Tholen took completely out
> 1> of context, irrelevantly crossposted, and yet somehow still failed to
> 1> address:

Note: no response.

> 1> Dave seems to think he is "tholenbot" now.

Note: no response.

> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: still no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: still no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
> 1> Whoa... he almost snuck this one by me:

Note: no response.

> 1> Irrelevant.

Note: no response.

> 1> Then why discuss astronomy with Jansens?

Note: no response.

> 1> PS:  Star Trek isn't relevant to this (or should I say, either of these)
> 1> newsgroup(s) either.

Note: no response.

Oops.  Tholen "accidentally" hacked a bit too much off of this one.  Here's
your context back:

> 2] "It's off limits to Starfleet."
> 2> - Dave Tholen
> 
> Non sequitur.

Quite sequitur to my comment.  Completely non sequitur to what is appropriate
for this newsgroup.  Glad you agree that you posted inappropriately.

> 3> That admission occurred on 8/4/1999 (according to Deja.com).  That's
> 3> some 4 (!!) months ago.
> 
> And you're still at it!

Typical pontification.  How convenient of you to pretend so, to "justify" your
infantile non-responses.

> 3> Funny, but Dave hypocritically doesn't think so.  He feels that whenever
> 3> someone points out his own illogic and inconsistency that they are being
> 3> infantile.  How convenient.

Note: no response.

> 3> Yet, where is Dave's admission to his own incorrectness when he stated:
> 3> "Yet, to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE- the OS/2 JDK], one must
have
> 3> run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"

Note: no response.

Also note that Dave has removed the incontrovertible evidence again.  Further
evidence of his own hypocritical infantile game.  No real surprise there, as
he
must have found it too inconvenient to include in this digest.  Here's your
incontrovertible evidence back, hypocrite: 
http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg

> 3> You won't find such an admission from Dave.  And why?  Two words spring
to
> 3> mind:  "infantile game".

Note: no response.  Looks like he's "still at it!"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             05-Dec-99 10:51:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:38492213.5F1966AA@ibm.net...
> > >
> >
> > You've missed Stuart's posts in direct response then. Bob Germer
statement
> > wasn't even close to the facts of the matter, that is the crux of the
> > matter.
>
> What do you say that?  I read Stuart Fox's posts and replied to them.
>
> You are aware that Stuart is trying to argue a contradiction.  Partially
> compliant is a nonsense term.    What he says is partially compliant means
is a
> situation where a system is NOT compliant but it is still acceptable.  NOT
Y2K
> compliant but acceptable.

Exactly - it's a more pragmatic approach to Y2K compliance.  Will it provide
continued service to the customer - Yes?  Might some display formatting
issues appear in some infrequently used apps - Yes?  Big deal.  The biggest
thing is - will the customer have continued service, and will the bills they
send out have the correct date on them :)


>
> He also doesn't know what Y2K is and needed s few URL pointers to show him
the
> way when he asked -- me -- what a sensible definition of Y2K would be.

Actually I do, sarcasm is hard to spot on usenet - you might have picked up
on that when I asked  to point a Windows lemming to resources.

And the fact remains, Boob Germer's statement on the Y2K compliance of Win95
is completely and utterly wrong.  I provided him with the URL's to prove
this.  Win95 is classed as Compliant with User Action, not Compliant with
Minor issues.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 17:15:04
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 01:34:38, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > What seems to be the problem, Karel?  Don't you think I'm a "cool guy to
talk
> > to"?
> >
> Here's a thermometer...

Where?  The one I have here only seems to indicate a double-standard on your
part.
 
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > I see Marty is up to his usual tricks again.
> >
> > What alleged "usual tricks", Karel?
> >
> Why do you need to ask?

I see you failed to answer the question.

> > > Consistent with common sense,
> >
> > Whose common sense?  Yours?
> >
> Why do you need to ask?

I see you failed to answer the question.

> > > I am deleting all but the relevant elements from his post:
> >
> > How convenient.  I see you removed all the evidence against you.  I guess
you
> > found it too embarrassing.  Nevertheless, you have yet to answer many
relevant
> > points.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
> >
> The mere fact of snippeage should give an indication of the observed
> level of relevance.

How convenient that you view evidence against you as irrelevant.  Also further
evidence of your inconsistency how you fail to "snip" anything when replying
to
Tholen's irrelevant claptrap.  Typical of your blind double-standard I
suppose.
 
> [snip]

Here's your context back:

> > > > > what
> 
> What's allegedly relevant about a single word taken completely out of
context? 
> That's illogical as your "buddy" would say.

Note: no response
  
> > Well, that just about sums it all up, doesn't it?
> 
> Not really, but this does [PS: Here's your context back]:

Note: no response

> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > 
> > > (Note to the original poster: "See what I mean?")
> > 
> > Which alleged "original poster" Karel?
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:09:32, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > You are erroneously presupposing intelligence and sanity from the
> > > > > participants of this group (including yours truly).
> > > >
> > > > On what basis do you make this claim, Karel?
> > > >
> > > By extrapolating from MGF-numbers (*).
> > 
> > Making unwarranted extrapolations Karel?
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > Of course, it takes basic MGF skills to understand this.
> > 
> > Irrelevant, as the truth is independent of your "gut feelings".
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > I see you're not quite there yet.
> > 
> > To where am I allegedly going, Karel?
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > > > <Don't listen to him! It's all lies!! Lies, I tell ya!!!!!>
> > > >
> > > > Illogical.
> > > >
> > > You're talking to the wrong personality.
> > 
> > That's your problem, Karel, not mine.
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > > > {And why, pray, do you use a Micro$oft O/S to post to this group?
You
> > > > > are unworthy to become a member of Warp Metropolis.
> > > >
> > > > Taking inappropriate citation of OS's in message header lessons from
Tim
> > > > "Master of Inappropriate Citation of OS's in Message Headers" Martin?
> > > >
> > > Don't look now, but there's a poppycock in your balderdash garden,
> > 
> > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of my "balderdash garden".
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > and it's not tending your flowers.
> > 
> > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of my "balderdash garden".
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > > > (I heard Tim is better, so I figured, What the heck.)}
> > > >
> > > > What you figured is irrelevant.
> > > 
> > > Well, I figured that the irrelevancy of my figuring would add up to
> > > the figure eight. 
> > 
> > Illogical.
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > So go figure...
> > 
> > Unnecessary, Karel.
> 
> Note: no response.
> 
> > > (*) MGF: My Gut Feeling
> > 
> > Irrelevant, as the truth is independent of your "gut feelings".
> 
> Note: no response.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 17:16:25
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:21
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 01:52:54, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > I see Marty is up to his usual tricks again. Consistent with common
> > > sense, I am deleting all but the relevant elements from his post:
> > >
> > > > > > what
> > >
> > > Well, that just about sums it all up, doesn't it?
> >
> > Additionally, the reader may note another of Karel's blunders.  As Karel
noted
> > in his article, the "what" he quoted must have come from the following
> > statement, if it were not fabricated by Karel entirely:
> > M] On what basis do you make this claim, Karel?
> >
> > The reader will note that this statement appeared as new material 3 (!!)
> > postings before Karel made the above statement.  How illogical and
> > inappropriate of him to respond to it now.
> 
> I do my best to make your posts show at least a basic level of
> coherence and readability, and this is my thanks?

Your "best" is both ineffective and unnecessary.

> The ingratitude...

The inconsistency...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: uno@40th.com                                      04-Dec-99 22:22:20
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)

 http://www.statmarket.com/SM?c=Operating_System


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Yanaguana (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            04-Dec-99 14:23:25
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm>

In article <38492895.38017B0A@frostbytes.com>, Jim Frost 
<jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:
> Ruel Smith wrote:
> > File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
> > letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files 
> > of
> > the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
> > launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that 
> > all
> > apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.
> 
> Actually MacOS does assume that two files with the same file type should 
> be
> manipulated by the same program.  What it doesn't do is store the file 
> type in
> the file name.  This is good for all kinds of reasons, although it does
> complicate issues since most of the file transfer systems in wide use 
> assume a
> single data stream for each file.

Sorry, guys; you're both wrong. 

Actually MacOS[1] does *not* assume that two files with the same file 
type should be manipulated by the same program. 

The Mac OS stores a four-letter creator code and a separate  four-letter 
file type code in the file-information chunk in the file system, along 
with the name of the file, its label, creation and modification dates, 
and whether it's locked. These pieces of information are separate from 
the data fork and from the resource fork -- you can't get at them with 
filesystem read calls or with resource manager calls. 

I've got bunches of JPEGs on my hard drive. They all have the same type 
code, but they are of about half a dozen different creator codes 
(Photoshop, GIFconverter, JpegViewer, Fireworks...)

Any file system in wide use written by competent programmers can deal 
with multiple-fork files. Novell and NT file servers have supported the 
Mac filesystem for many years. (And any server administrator who whines 
about this is incompetent.) 

[1]  Mac OS up to 9 anyway. I don't know how OS X does it.

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Infernosoft (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 22:44:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: (1/2) Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451492

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Tue, 09 Nov 1999 21:21:28 -0500, Marty wrote:

>Well, unfortunately Dave hasn't stopped wasting bandwidth (or even slowed
>down), having excreted his invective and illogic

How ironic coming from Marty "Monarch of Invectives and Ill Logic" (sic)
Amodeo.

>all over his keyboard 
>and
>passing on said excretion to the readers of COOA.  Of course, by his
response,
>he effectively admitted that his postings are "baby-talk tripe", because he
>claimed that I was incorrect when I said that I don't respond to such
>postings.  He has even tried that tired old "I'm a programmer" line, but when
>asked to present evidence he has failed to do so time and time again, and
only
>serves to make him look like a fool, as he has already demonstrated a high
>degree of ignorance in the field.  Unfortunately, he doesn't confine his
>ignorance to the field of software, either.  He also decided that I not only
>have a wagon, but I've hitched it to Curtis Bass' alleged horse, while again
>ignoring the incontrovertible evidence presented to him.  No surprise there. 
>Why do you think he was twice elected Kook of the Month?

DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?

>One wonders who Dave perceives he is currently addressing and for whose
benefit
>is his infantile "digest" game.  It certainly doesn't benefit him, as it
>further shows what a hypocritical buffoon he is.  I guess it's part of his
>infantile tantrum and "wrath" (denoted by "I warned you about going down this
>path") because I embarassed him so much.  Too bad his "wrath" is completely
>ineffective, as I would assume any wrath emanating from him would be.
>
>You have to ask yourself, is it because of Dave's sex life that he is going
>through all of this?

DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?

>Dave Tholen wrote:
>> 
>> Well, unfortunately Marty is back to wasting more bandwidth, having
>> expanded his invective and illogic into eight more articles today.
>> Of course, by responding, he effectively admitted that my postings
>> are not "baby-talk tripe", because he claimed that he would not respond
>> to such postings.  He's even trying that tired old "astrologer" line,
>> which has never had any effect on me here and only serves to make the
>> person uttering the line look like a fool.  He also decided to hitch
>> his wagon to Curtis Bass' horse regarding Timbol's reference to
>> classes.zip.  But what neither Marty nor Curtis seem to recall is
>> that Timbol was referring to classes.zip long before javainuf.exe was
>> brought up.  Why do you think I had to ask Timbol repeatedly which
>> top-level file contained classes.zip?
>> 
>> 1> It would appear that Dave's threshold of embarassment has still
>> 1> not been breached, as he continues to post "baby-talk tripe" (by
>> 1> his own admission) further embarassing himself.  Today he decided
>> 1> he would hypocritically concentrate on accusing others of "invective"
>> 1> while attempting to hurl his own pathetically weak and stale brand
>> 1> of insults towards others in order to avoid admitting to his many
>> 1> mistakes.  This is a refreshing change of pace from his previous
>> 1> schtick of ignoring (by his own admission) hard evidence presented
>> 1> to him and erroneously claiming it is irrelevant, whilst attempting
>> 1> to cover up his blatant ineptitude and embarassing mistakes.
> 
>Note: no response

Irrelevant, Marty.

>> 1> Tholen has time and again claimed that he addresses issues.
>> 1> Nevertheless, he's been responding to postings that he insists are
>> 1> part of an "infantile game" on my part, which is evidence for the
>> 1> dishonesty of his earlier claim.  As for his own "infantile game",
>> 1> there's more evidence in all the invective and unsubstantiated
>> 1> claims contained in all of his postings in this thread.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 1> I can swear I've read that somewhere else before, only it had more
>> 1> of a hypocritical angle to it as I remember.
> 
>Note: no response
>
>> 2> Perhaps because there was none.  How ironic coming from a person
>> 2> (?) who repeatedly ignored factual information presented to him
>> 2> from persons less inept than he.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> How ironic and hypocritical, coming from a person (?) who reposts
>> 2> the same irrelevant questions some 20 odd times in a given post.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> And Dave's ineptitude was further highlighted.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> One can't ignore what isn't there.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> By anyone who mistakenly thought that Dave was forthright enough
>> 2> to check his own "evidence" before shooting off his hypocritical
>> 2> mouth.  Who would make such an assumption at this stage in the
>> 2> game is beyond me.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> It was nothing more than an infantile guessing game.  How immature
>> 2> to deliberately postpone revealing such a fact to play little
>> 2> infantile games and cover up Dave's embarassment.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> An irrelevant one, no less.  But that won't stop Dave from shooting
>> 2> off his hypocritical mouth and speaking about the other archive that
>> 2> he didn't even bother to view.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Right.  Dave always waits until after he makes a complete jackass
>> 2> out of himself to change his claims.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Dave had no evidence to support anything he was saying, but that
>> 2> never stops him.  This is par for the course for our alleged
>> 2> "scientist".
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Note:  Dave ineptly asks an irrelevant, yet obvious question,
>> 2> avoiding answering the straightforward, relevant question addressed
>> 2> to him.  No surprise there.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Like Dave's inability to extract the archive, or his inability to
>> 2> download it.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Only, instead of informing those with whom he was arguing about this
>> 2> he chose to play an infantile guessing game.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> So Dave didn't check his facts until *after* he was proven wrong.
>> 2> Par for the course for our astrologer.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> How completely ironic, coming from the person who refused to view
>> 2> relevant evidence yet persisted to argue about it.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> Wrong.  He correctly asserted that calling *Dave Tholen* self-deluded
>> 2> is not "invective".
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> There only seems to be a lack of a logical argument up there.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 2> How ironic.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 3> How absurd and ironic to respond with such a leading question.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 3> What alleged "reasoning"?
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 3> Then change them to something that suits you better, the way Dave does.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 3> Incorrect, as Dave has proven he is incapable of using logic, proof,
>> 3> and common sense.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 3> How ironic and hypocritical, given Dave's approach of cutting a
>> 3> sentence in half and using the second half without regard to the first.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 4> Note the hypocritically indignant tone.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 4> How hypocritical to expect other to remain civil whilst Dave hurls
>> 4> insults and non-civility toward whomever he chooses.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 4> And I note that Dave is a complete hypocrite as he has insulted my
>> 4> abilities, without witnessing or experiencing them, by saying that
>> 4> my employer had low standards for hiring me.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 4> What Dave fails to realize is that Curtis wasn't calling him a name,
>> 4> but, in fact describing the behavior he witnessed.  Dave's behavior
>> 4> itself is what insults Dave.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 4> How ironic, coming from the arch-hypocrite himself.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 5> The following are self-substantiating:
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 6> Indeed.  But I am certain that we will see the arch-hypocrite ignore
>> 6> the written evidence that I just presented proving him dead wrong as
>> 6> usual.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 7> And now to show how utterly wrong Dave is again, let's examine
classes.zip
>> 7> ourselves, shall we?
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 7> That's the first few lines.  The rest of the files within the zip
>> 7> follow a similar pattern.  Note if you will the compression method
>> 7> for these files, namely "STORED".  This means the files have a
>> 7> compression ratio of 0%, resulting in the overall classes.zip file
>> 7> being uncompressed but combined (a la "tar").  How then could Mike
>> 7> Timbol have been referring to the contents of classes.zip when he said
>> 7> it was compressed at 57%?
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 7> Classes.Zip only appears to be compressed when examining the contents
>> 7> of JAVAINUF.EXE.  Thus proving that Mike Timbol, in quoting the
>> 7> statistics above, was proving that he could read JAVAINUF.EXE, just
>> 7> as Curtis claimed, and the rest of Tholen's hollow argument comes
>> 7> tumbling down again.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 7> Man, it must be really embarassing to be as wrong as Tholen, as often
>> 7> as he is.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 8> Dave can't even comprehend his own words, as evidenced below:
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 8> How embarassingly incorrect and hypocritical.  Par for the course
>> 8> for Dave.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> How typically hypocritical.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Apparently Tholen thinks that he can make a definitive statement
>> 9> such as an answer to a question by posing an irrelevant, unrelated
>> 9> question.  Is he that stupid, hypocritical, and utterly brain dead?
>> 9> Actually, in light of that question, I may see his point.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> And I have shown Tholen to be utterly incorrect by showing that
>> 9> classes.zip was not compressed at all, unless one views it from
>> 9> inside of JAVAINUF.EXE.  How embarassing.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Clearly Tholen made another erroneous statement without bothering
>> 9> to check his facts.  No surprise there.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Again Tholen defers to a previously lost argument to cover up and
>> 9> distract readers from his mistakes in this one.  Too bad the
>> 9> technique is so transparent.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Note how Tholen changes gears yet again to the subject of the
>> 9> correctly downloaded file.  And he has the nerve to complain about
>> 9> chronology and consistency.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> And Tholen chooses whichever one happens to suit his "argument" on
>> 9> a minute by minute basis.  Too bad this technique is so transparent
>> 9> as well.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> And he didn't bother to verify his facts before shooting off his
>> 9> mouth either.  How embarassing.  If I were him, I'd try to sweep
>> 9> that embarassment under the rug.  Thank goodness I'm not.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Which is just as ambiguous, as Tholen possessed both the runtime
>> 9> and the development environment.  Too bad he just slipped up again.
>> 9> Quite unfortunate that he can't keep his own argumentative tripe in
>> 9> order in his own mind, let alone in public Usenet postings.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Switch gears yet again back to Dave's incomplete downloaded file.
>> 9> Talk about inconsistency...
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> An obvious lie, which unfortunately is also quite transparent.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> How ironic.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Too bad the JPG image was already available in that time frame,
>> 9> soundly disproving Tholen, as usual.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Of course Dave had no evidence to support any of his claims since
>> 9> he never bothered checking up on them before shooting off his
>> 9> arrogant buzz-phrases.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Funny how no one else involved in this thread had a problem
>> 9> downloading the file.  Using Netscape for OS/2 or otherwise.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> And Dave still doesn't see the illogic in relying on this as
>> 9> evidence.  How absurd, given that in order to see that message,
>> 9> one has to run it in another operating system.  But don't let
>> 9> that side-issue distract you from the true error that Tholen
>> 9> just made, namely that the file needed to be executed at all
>> 9> to extract its contents.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Too bad this is completely inappropriate "evidence".
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> The error is that there is no need to execute the program to
>> 9> extract its contents.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Yes.  He's suffered enough embarassment misusing simple phrases
>> 9> like "stub", "bound executable", and "display".  No need to
>> 9> torment the poor man(?).
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Unfortunately, the poor ignoramus Tholen doesn't realize that Mike
>> 9> only gave the statistics on classes.zip as an example to show that
>> 9> he could read the contents of JAVAINUF.EXE.  I won't counter-accuse
>> 9> Dave of lying here because he just seems too stupid to grasp what

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 22:44:10
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: (2/2) Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451492

>> 9> actually happened.  It's not his fault.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Dave doesn't need to see solid evidence, Curtis.  You should know
>> 9> that he'll just ignore it by now if it doesn't suit his argument.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Just like I said..
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> I suppose the 32 bit CRC of a file contained within the archive is
>> 9> not "hard" enough evidence for Tholen who hypocritically didn't even
>> 9> successfully extract his own version of said archive before shooting
>> 9> off his mouth.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> And Dave has mastered them both in his writings.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> Why bother when we have a living(?) breathing(?) example of the
>> 9> very incarnation of "inept" right here in COOA?
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>> 9> No surprise there.  Typical arrogance in the face of incontrovertible
>> 9> evidence.
> 
>Note: no response

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 22:58:03
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:

>Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of his
>home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:

I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the 
Balderdash garden which you claim I tend, nor have you proven that I 
even tend it, as opposed to perhaps buying Balderdash from a store. How 
predictable.

>1> What alleged "FUD", Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

An obvious lie, Marty.

>1> What alleged "lies", Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Illogical, as it is Pott's garden, not mine.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> How ironic, cmoing from the Master of Infantile Gameplay.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Prove it, if you think you can.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Irrelevant.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>1> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> His supposition was not "erronesoul," Marty. Still can't spell above 
>2> kindergraten level?
>
>How ironic, coming from someone who couldn't spell "kindergarten".

If you weren't too busy writing new sections of the Infantile Little 
Games Official Rulebook to check the facts, you would've noticed 
that I've spelled "kindergarten" correctly every time I used the word 
except for the above digested quotation. For the feeble-minded (That's 
you, Marty) I'll explain: "kindergraten" was a typo.

>2> Irrelevant, because the topic is your inability to recognize the 
>2> existant pontiffs.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.

>2> Incorrect.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> Prove it, if you think you can.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> What alleged pontification, Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> How ironic, coming from Marty "Monarch of Pontification" Amodeo.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> Using sentence fragments again, Marty?
>
>How ironic, coming from someone who just failed to form a complete sentence.

I see you've snipped the evidence again, Marty. How predictable.

>2> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU SAID THAT ALREADY. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.

>2> How ironic, coming from one of the rulebook writers employed by the 
>2> Infantile Little Games Rules Committee.
>
>I didn't know IBM was in that line of business, Aaron.

Shouldn't you know things like that about your employer, Marty?

>3> Couldn't have said it better myself, Jason.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

Using something from another thread, Marty? How ironic, coming from 
someone who claims that everything which embarrasses him is irrelevant.

>4> Because it's not specific to this newsgroup.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>5> Jumping into others' conversations, Eric? How ironic.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>5> Prove it, if you think you can.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>5> Balderdash, Eric.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> You don't remember, Dave?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Self-evident.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Balderdash, Dave.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>6> Irrelevant.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fru...               04-Dec-99 22:51:08
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

Message sender: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar)

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-3tf7iNW2UxWg@localhost>,
Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:56:44, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
>> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
>> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
>> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
>> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
>> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>> 
>Where *did* you get that silly idea that writing software for Linux 
>means you have to give it away?
>Been reading Halloween documents?

  Right.  And even open-source software can be profitable.  Cygnus, for
instance, made a profit giving away their development labors and then 
charging $$$ for support contracts.  They also made a profit from ports
to new platforms.  For instance, BigCompany Inc. has a new hardware 
platform and/or a new OS, and now it wants to develop software for it.  
All of their programmers are accustomed to using the GNU software dev
tools, so BigCompany makes a deal with Cygnus to port the GNU tools to 
their new platform for a lump sum -- sometimes several millions of 
dollars -- and when the port is finished, the sources get donated to 
the public.  BigCompany is happy, because their developers can write
software, and the open source community is happy, because they can port
their pet projects to yet another platform.

  Even ignoring the profit angle, Ruel is still wrong about those of us
who develop free software on our own time.  I don't have as *much* time
as I used to for working on open-source projects, but I'll be damned if
I'm going to let it get squeezed out of my life entirely.  He misses the
point -- this is something we *want* to do.  Some people like to go to
movies, or go on long bike trips, or ski.  Some people also like to write
software.

  -- TTK

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Subtle, but there (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 23:01:13
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451501^-999999999

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 01:38:37 -0500, Marty wrote:

>Aaron Dimsdale wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 16:57:39 -0500, Joe Malloy wrote:
>> 
>> >Tholen's still at his infantile game.  Here everything of value Tholen has
>> >ever written:
>> >
>> >[null, void, and codswallop]
>> >
>> >Thanks for reading your guide to instant Tholen!
>> 
>> Balderdash, Joe.
>
>Still too busy tending

You erronously presuppose that I've ever tended

>your

You erronously presuppose that I own a

>Balderdash garden

What alleged "garden", Marty?

>to form a logical argument?

Balderdash, Marty.

>No
>surprise there.

Where, Marty?

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu                     04-Dec-99 18:37:07
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: WickedDyno <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu>

In article <s4ilh6orqeg172@corp.supernews.com>, "Ruel Smith" 
<ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

>For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point 
>because
>people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
>software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
>developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers 
>are
>paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
>IMHO, dooms Linux.
>

Tell that to RedHat.

-- 
|           Andrew M. Glasgow <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu>          |
|"The Library is a sphere whose exact center is any one of its hexagons|
|   and whose circumference is inaccessible." -- Jorge Luis Borges     |
|"One feels as if one is dissolved and merged into nature." -- Einstein|

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 23:39:05
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 13:25:58 -0500, Chris Fischer wrote:

>Ruel Smith wrote:
>
>> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
>> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
>> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
>> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
>> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
>> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>>
>
>RedHat and several other have found a way to make a profit on it.

Red Hat Software, along with most companies (as opposed to non-profit 
organizations) that distribute their own distribution of Linux, makes 
almost 0 profit. Revenue and profit are two very different things. Most 
of the money that Red Hat gets, is piped back to the Linux community in 
various ways.

It doesn't matter anyway, because Linux developers tend to ENJOY writing
software and giving it away. Just because they could make a profit on it
instead of giving it away, doesn't mean they're low on motivation to 
give it away.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      04-Dec-99 15:48:24
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>

Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> wrote in message
news:82c2f3$1mi$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz...
>
> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:38492213.5F1966AA@ibm.net...
> > > >
> > >
> > > You've missed Stuart's posts in direct response then. Bob Germer
> statement
> > > wasn't even close to the facts of the matter, that is the crux of the
> > > matter.
> >
> > What do you say that?  I read Stuart Fox's posts and replied to them.
> >
> > You are aware that Stuart is trying to argue a contradiction.  Partially
> > compliant is a nonsense term.    What he says is partially compliant
means
> is a
> > situation where a system is NOT compliant but it is still acceptable.
NOT
> Y2K
> > compliant but acceptable.
>
> Exactly - it's a more pragmatic approach to Y2K compliance.  Will it
provide
> continued service to the customer - Yes?  Might some display formatting
> issues appear in some infrequently used apps - Yes?  Big deal.  The
biggest
> thing is - will the customer have continued service, and will the bills
they
> send out have the correct date on them :)
>

This is the usual approach, the braying about perfect compliance is largely
a management issue. If the system will stay up and deliver proper data on
36526 who cares except those who are billing thousands of hours worrying if
the date field on their paychecks have four digit years.

>
> >
> > He also doesn't know what Y2K is and needed s few URL pointers to show
him
> the
> > way when he asked -- me -- what a sensible definition of Y2K would be.
>
> Actually I do, sarcasm is hard to spot on usenet - you might have picked
up
> on that when I asked  to point a Windows lemming to resources.
>
> And the fact remains, Boob Germer's statement on the Y2K compliance of
Win95
> is completely and utterly wrong.  I provided him with the URL's to prove
> this.  Win95 is classed as Compliant with User Action, not Compliant with
> Minor issues.
>
>
>


--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hipcrime Vocabulary Organization (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      04-Dec-99 23:50:18
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 01:58:01 -0500, Ruel Smith wrote:

>Simply put, a single manufacturer cannot compete against the multitudes of
>PC manufacturers. It's David vs. Goliath.

Don't forget the fact that there are no convenient pebbles nearby.

>I'm not quoting any facts that I'm not sure of. I simply cannot ever recall
>seeing an Amiga until 1986 or so (despite what Amiga fans are proclaiming).
>It is a fact that Commodore was still selling the 64/128 model in 1984.
>Judging from the screenshots from the web page, Windows 1.0 was DOS 2.0 with
>mouse support - nothing more. All other info is not mine at all, but merely
>a quote.

Last I checked, Windows 1.0 was a file manager for DOS, not a mouse 
driver and GUI for DOS.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            05-Dec-99 00:04:01
  To: All                                               04-Dec-99 19:48:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 22:51:16, 
ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar) 
wrote:

>   Even ignoring the profit angle, Ruel is still wrong about those of us
> who develop free software on our own time.  I don't have as *much* time
> as I used to for working on open-source projects, but I'll be damned if
> I'm going to let it get squeezed out of my life entirely.  He misses the
> point -- this is something we *want* to do.  Some people like to go to
> movies, or go on long bike trips, or ski.  Some people also like to write
> software.
> 
I belong in a third category then: I *would* like to write software, 
but I'm just no bloody good. <sigh>

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com                                05-Dec-99 00:30:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: jhimmel@i-2000.com (James Himmelman)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 18:48:26, David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> 
wrote:

> In article <38472d77@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu says...
> >David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> >: In article <384628ac@oit.umass.edu>, malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu says...
> >:>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> >:>
> >:>:>:>David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:
> >:>:>:>: WOW! And the OS/2 version only had a two year head start!
> >:>
> >:><big snip>
> >:>
> >:>: You are being silly. The OS/2 version of Opera started in 1997. It went 
nowhere 
> >:>: and now a new team has stepped up to bat. In the meantime even the BeOS 

> >:>: released a beta and both Linux and the Mac are ahead.
> >:>
> >:>: Stop being silly.
> >:>
> >:>Stop avoiding the question and back up your statements.
> >:>
> >:>Since you have reading problems:
> >:>
> >:>HOW HAS THE OS/2 VERSION OF THE OPERA WEB BROWSER HAD A 2 YEAR HEAD START 

> >:>ON ANY OF THE OTHER PLATFORMS FOR OPERA???
> >:>
> >:>This is what you claimed.  This is what I disproved.  Stop grandstanding 
> >:>and be a man. Explain your statements or admit you were wrong (or ignore 
> >:>my post altogether)
> >:>
> >:>BeOS started: 1997
> >:>Epoch started: 1997
> >:>MacOS started: 1997
> >:>Linux started: 1997
> >:>OS/2 started: 1997 (scrapped and started again in 1999)
> >:>Amiga stated: 1997 (srapped altogether)
> >:>Windows started: way before all of this
> >:>
> >:>Now, how does OS/2 have a two year head start on any of these 
> >:>platforms???  At worse case OS/2 started at the same time as any of the 
> >:>non-windows platforms.  In which case, what the hell is the point of your 

> >:>posts.  All this to complain that the previous developers for the OS/2 
> >:>version sucked?  What does this prove?
> >:>
> >:>-Jason
> >:>
> >
> >: You are being silly. I told you to stop. Neither Epoch nor Linux had
ports back 
> >: in 1997.
> >
> >: Stop being silly.
> >
> >Stop being difficult
> >
> >Show me how the OS/2 version had a two year head start on any 
> >other platform for Opera.
> >
> >You can't, because you are wrong.  This is why you keep ignoring the 
> >question.  Because you made a really stupid statement and now you have no 
> >where to go but avoid the question.  It's funny to see that you are so 
> >little of a man that you can't eaither ignore my post or admit that you 
> >are wrong.  
> 
> You are pathetic. You cannot win an arguement, so like the other fanatics in 

> this you merely resort to insults because you lover OS/2 is in such dire 
> straits. 
> 
> Bye.
> David H. McCoy

And STILL David has avoided the question. I wonder how David will 
defend HIS OWN use of insults. I guess it was his solution whenever he
could not win an argument. The fact is that David DID make "a really 
stupid statement", and he HAS "avoided the question" over and over, 
and David has often "resorted to insults".

God bless him for coming here to entertain us though!

[[[ James Himmelman - jhimmel@i-2000.com ]]]

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 19:57:15
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Yes, but they are only distributors. Yes, they do some developing, but the
majority of the major stuff that makes up the OS is done by people doing it
pro-bono. Red Hat is merely capitalizing on their work. Don't get me wrong,
I think Linux is interesting, but don't think the wave will last forever.
I've even spoken to some Linux fanatics that also say that it will be
difficult to maintain the development of all this free stuff in the long
run.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Chris Fischer" <cfischer@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:38495CB6.B9A1CEEB@ieee.org...
> Ruel Smith wrote:
>
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit
motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
>
> RedHat and several other have found a way to make a profit on it.
>
>
> --
>
> Chris Fischer                       cfischer@ieee.org
> Coda Software, Limited
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 20:00:01
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

I'm talking about developers of Apache, Samba, gnu software, and everything
that makes up the majority of the Linux OS itself and the apps that are
truely useful.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-3tf7iNW2UxWg@localhost...
> On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:56:44, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit
motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
> Where *did* you get that silly idea that writing software for Linux
> means you have to give it away?
>
> Been reading Halloween documents?
>
> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
> =======================================================
> "Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
> Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
> (Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
> =======================================================
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   04-Dec-99 20:03:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

Again, Red Hat doesn't do alot of development, but distributes Linux itself
with its own spin. Look at Mandrake Linux. I know that Red Hat isn't too
happy about it, but Mandrake redistributes Red Hat, since it's all open
source. What's to stop others from taking business away from Red Hat? When
it gets popular enough, nothing. Then Red Hat will feel like Apple...ripped
off...

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"WickedDyno" <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:amg39.REMOVE-THIS-28E2F0.18371504121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
> In article <s4ilh6orqeg172@corp.supernews.com>, "Ruel Smith"
> <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>
> >For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
> >because
> >people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> >software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
and
> >developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
> >are
> >paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> >IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
>
> Tell that to RedHat.
>
> --
> |           Andrew M. Glasgow <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu>          |
> |"The Library is a sphere whose exact center is any one of its hexagons|
> |   and whose circumference is inaccessible." -- Jorge Luis Borges     |
> |"One feels as if one is dissolved and merged into nature." -- Einstein|
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             05-Dec-99 01:32:29
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82a5qm$dt8$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like we've
hit
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk                     05-Dec-99 01:44:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Who does Microsoft push around?

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk (Glen D)

(Part of the thrilling 'Who runs this country?' thread)

As I understand it, Microsoft would only allow OEMs to sell Windows on
their machines if they signed a contract with them.  The contract 
forbid them to remove Windows or to sell any other OS on their 
machines.  This is the area where Microsoft has been throwing its 
weight around.  It hasn't forced *consumers* to buy Windows, it's only
made it difficult for them not to.

We're all experienced users and if we want to use OS/2 or Linux or 
BeOS then we know how to get it and what to do with it.  Newbies, on 
the other hand, don't have this privilege.  Since all computer users 
will be newbies at one stage of their life then Microsoft can be 
assured that Windows will be on the majority of PCs.


Glen D
-<remove Z from my e-mail Address>-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RemarQ http://www.remarQ.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 17:47:00
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Chad Mulligan wrote:

> Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:82c2f3$1mi$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz...

>
> > > You are aware that Stuart is trying to argue a contradiction.  Partially
> > > compliant is a nonsense term.    What he says is partially compliant
> means
> > is a
> > > situation where a system is NOT compliant but it is still acceptable.
> NOT
> > Y2K
> > > compliant but acceptable.
> >
> > Exactly - it's a more pragmatic approach to Y2K compliance.  Will it
> provide
> > continued service to the customer - Yes?  Might some display formatting
> > issues appear in some infrequently used apps - Yes?  Big deal.

Y2K NON COMPLIANCE .   You can say "Big Deal" but spare us the ad hoc analysis
and justification.  NOT COMPLAINT might be acceptable but that system is not
partially complaint if YOU decide to accept the Y2K defect.   Win95 OSR2 is
not
compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance - your choice.

> The
> biggest
> > thing is - will the customer have continued service, and will the bills
> they
> > send out have the correct date on them :)
> >
>
> This is the usual approach, the braying about perfect compliance is largely
> a management issue. If the system will stay up and deliver proper data on
> 36526 who cares except those who are billing thousands of hours worrying if
> the date field on their paychecks have four digit years.

Non compliance might NOT  be a big deal but lying about non compliance or
cooking up Orwellian terms "partially compliant"  would be a big deal.  The
customer can decide if the issue is a big deal or not.  The vendor's are
obligated to truthfully address Y2K compliance.

You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS maker you
advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither of you are in
the position of being responsible for these decisions.

> > And the fact remains, Boob Germer's statement on the Y2K compliance of
> Win95
> > is completely and utterly wrong.  I provided him with the URL's to prove
> > this.  Win95 is classed as Compliant with User Action, not Compliant with
> > Minor issues.

You both have to let go of this Bob Germer thing.  Don't blame someone else
for
a mistaken and nonsensical understanding of Y2K compliance.  The OSR2 Win95 OS 
I
have as part of my lab (bought 1997) was NOT Y2K compliant.  It  needed 3
patches for Y2K compliance.  2 were Y2K fixes and the last was a patch on the
that fix.  All had to be administered at the systems by support.  That cost
money.  That patching  is a defect and indicates poor quality and a company
not
in full command of it's projects.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 17:48:11
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Glenn Davies write:
> > On 3 Dec 1999 08:25:14 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
>
> > >> Under MS's per-processor licensing agreements, which the '95 consent
> > >> decree eliminated, customers paid for DOS and Windows even if they
> > >> didn't want those products.
> > >
> > >How was that?  I know the answer.  I can't wait to see how you express
it.
> >
> > If you ordered a computer from a OEM and stated that you didn't want a
> > copy of DOS with it they would say fine it won't come with a copy of
> > DOS. And when you asked how much did you save they would answer $0.00.
>
> What was to stop you from saying "fuck you, then, no sale?"

Civility.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 17:57:18
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

And the Windows PC is behind Nintendo and Sony's game console in sales.
So be careful about bragging when the PC is  a smaller niche.  And
before you whine to me about PC game quality read and weep.

January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the top
100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the Dreamcast
surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
current PC state-of-the-art."

$200 for the console with a 56kb modem.  Windows 2000 costs $200 for a
Windows 98 user upgrade and $149 for an NT 4.0 upgrade!

So why would OS/2 users want to spend money on PC upgrades for games?

"uno@40th.com" wrote:

>  http://www.statmarket.com/SM?c=Operating_System

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         05-Dec-99 01:56:22
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like we've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.


Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 18:04:20
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Stuart Fox wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:38492213.5F1966AA@ibm.net...
> > > >
> > >
> > > You've missed Stuart's posts in direct response then. Bob Germer
> statement
> > > wasn't even close to the facts of the matter, that is the crux of the
> > > matter.
> >
> > What do you say that?  I read Stuart Fox's posts and replied to them.
> >
> > You are aware that Stuart is trying to argue a contradiction.  Partially
> > compliant is a nonsense term.    What he says is partially compliant means
> is a
> > situation where a system is NOT compliant but it is still acceptable.  NOT
> Y2K
> > compliant but acceptable.
>
> Exactly - it's a more pragmatic approach to Y2K compliance.  Will it provide
> continued service to the customer - Yes?  Might some display formatting
> issues appear in some infrequently used apps - Yes?  Big deal.  The biggest
> thing is - will the customer have continued service, and will the bills they
> send out have the correct date on them :)

That's one possible interpretation out of an infinite set of possible
situations.

The facts are an OS is not compliant.  The decision can be to keep the non
compliant OS and accept the non compliance. It is always a risk.  The decision
to accept risk does not mean the OS is partially complaint.  It means the user
has accepted a risk.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 18:15:10
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Ruel Smith wrote:

> Yes, but they are only distributors. Yes, they do some developing, but the
> majority of the major stuff that makes up the OS is done by people doing it
> pro-bono. Red Hat is merely capitalizing on their work. Don't get me wrong,
> I think Linux is interesting, but don't think the wave will last forever.
> I've even spoken to some Linux fanatics that also say that it will be
> difficult to maintain the development of all this free stuff in the long
> run.

That's why god created FreeBSD.


>
>
> --
> Ruel Smith
> Cincinnati, OH
>
> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>
> "Chris Fischer" <cfischer@ieee.org> wrote in message
> news:38495CB6.B9A1CEEB@ieee.org...
> > Ruel Smith wrote:
> >
> > > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
> because
> > > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
> and
> > > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
> are
> > > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit
> motive,
> > > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> > >
> >
> > RedHat and several other have found a way to make a profit on it.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Chris Fischer                       cfischer@ieee.org
> > Coda Software, Limited
> >
> >
> >

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     04-Dec-99 18:13:02
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Red Hat is signing a lot of LINUX support contracts.

If someone wants to seed the market with Red Hat LINUX distributions then more
power to them.  I think I know where the customers will buy support.  As you
all
know EDS made a lot of money servicing the hardware IBM sold.  There has been
and will continue to be a large profit in servicing software and systems.
$49-99 CDs are pennies compared to the estimated $300-$400 per PC seat costs
that most service support companies charge PER MONTH.

Ruel Smith wrote:

> Again, Red Hat doesn't do alot of development, but distributes Linux itself
> with its own spin. Look at Mandrake Linux. I know that Red Hat isn't too
> happy about it, but Mandrake redistributes Red Hat, since it's all open
> source. What's to stop others from taking business away from Red Hat? When
> it gets popular enough, nothing. Then Red Hat will feel like Apple...ripped
> off...
>
> --
> Ruel Smith
> Cincinnati, OH
>
> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>
> "WickedDyno" <amg39.REMOVE-THIS@cornell.edu> wrote in message
> news:amg39.REMOVE-THIS-28E2F0.18371504121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
> > In article <s4ilh6orqeg172@corp.supernews.com>, "Ruel Smith"
> > <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
> >
> > >For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
> > >because
> > >people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > >software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
> and
> > >developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
> > >are
> > >paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> > >IMHO, dooms Linux.
> > >
> >
> > Tell that to RedHat.

If LINUX were not viable LINUX would not have happened.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               04-Dec-99 21:34:08
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

James Himmelman wrote:
> 
> And STILL David has avoided the question. I wonder how David will
> defend HIS OWN use of insults. I guess it was his solution whenever he
> could not win an argument. The fact is that David DID make "a really
> stupid statement", and he HAS "avoided the question" over and over,
> and David has often "resorted to insults".
> 
> God bless him for coming here to entertain us though!

This is the same David who thought that vertical refresh rates on monitors
were
measured in MHz, and then accused me of being behind the times when I pointed
out his error.  Don't expect too much.  ;-)

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hwstock@wizard.com                                04-Dec-99 18:52:16
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "H.W. Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com>

"Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:s4ef4aqrgsp91@corp.supernews.com...
> DOS with a mouse extension? This is the product that beat the Mac to
market?
> Give me a break. And this is proof?
>
> This is a sad day win Windows advocates claim Windows was out before the
> Mac. Have you no dignity?

Windows was actually demonstrated back about 1982.  The thorny issue was
whether to go with a tiled windowing system (which windows 1.0 was),
or try arbitrary windows and risk the patience of Job(s).  I didn't see
a real working version till about 1984, well after the Lisa was out (for a
mere
$10000 in 1983).  There were character-based windowing systems
on the PC well before 1984; and there was even a mouse available for
the PC back about 1982 (it looked like a brick, and only a few programs
had drivers for it).

The precedence issue seems so bizarre now.  Clearly all modern
computer systems have borrowed to survive.  The first Mac OS
didn't have subdirectories, and the system had almost no method
of adding fast peripherals, or even hard disks.  I recall my
friends connecting the first Mac hard drive through a serial line
(a SLOW serial line); then risking the patience of Job(s) by adding
a Hyperdrive (voiding the warranty) or the non-Apple (only $700)
upgrade to 512K.  It was such a different world.  People were
kinder, we ate all our vegetables, and a kindly old senile
gent was the president.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com                          05-Dec-99 03:47:02
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com (Buddy Donnelly)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 22:48:22, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> > As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Glenn Davies write:
> > > On 3 Dec 1999 08:25:14 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
> >
> > > >> Under MS's per-processor licensing agreements, which the '95 consent
> > > >> decree eliminated, customers paid for DOS and Windows even if they
> > > >> didn't want those products.
> > > >
> > > >How was that?  I know the answer.  I can't wait to see how you express
it.
> > >
> > > If you ordered a computer from a OEM and stated that you didn't want a
> > > copy of DOS with it they would say fine it won't come with a copy of
> > > DOS. And when you asked how much did you save they would answer $0.00.
> >
> > What was to stop you from saying "fuck you, then, no sale?"
> 
> Civility.

You could have said "common civility" but then again it has obviously 
grown less common, hasn't it? Especially around the campus at U of 
L...


-- 

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
donnelly@tampabay.rr.com


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               04-Dec-99 23:35:18
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Ruel Smith wrote:
> 
> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.

Even disregarding outfits like Cygnus and Red Hat (which make money off of
this stuff) it's been clear that open source projects survive the test of
time.  Look at how many GNU packages are still under active development and
support after a decade.

But you just wait; the real technology drivers are going to be the hardware
companies: SGI, Compaq, VA Linux, 3dfx, etc.  Kind of like we saw with good
'ol UNIX back in the day.

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               04-Dec-99 23:46:08
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

> 
> I quite doubt it. I believe it will only get worse for traditional
> software companies. For some bizarre reason, I kind of enjoy writing
> code and I have no problem with giving it away. A lack of spare time is
> all that keeps me from being more involved with it right now. But when I
> retire, I fully intend to devote a large amount of my time to doing
> that. It beats just sitting around waiting to die. I think a lot of
> programmers will do the same.
> 

This is a really interesting point; I've been thinking the same thing.  But
there are a number of other labor pools to draw on too.  Academic environments
will be interesting because students have time and do stuff just to say they
did it, and classes will study this stuff and encourage extension.  (Remember
BSD?  Look how fast that got driven forward using the academic labor pool.) 
And professional programmers will put time into it either as a hobby, because
they need something to get their job done, or because it's not working right
and it's faster to fix it yourself than to try to get a vendor like Red Hat to
do it.

I don't think a lack of interest will kill this stuff off.  Far from it.  If
anything is going to kill it it'll be a shift to a hardware platform that it
can't support for some reason.  And honestly I don't see that being much of a
possibility any time soon, what with the range of support it has already
shown.

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               04-Dec-99 23:56:02
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Joseph wrote:
> January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the top
> 100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the Dreamcast
> surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
> current PC state-of-the-art."

The Dreamcast is good, been using it for the better part of a year now, but
it's nowhere near as good as current state of the art on PCs.  It is about as
good as you could get a year ago in terms of gaming systems -- but we've gone
two generations beyond that at this point, not even counting the really
high-end cards (the ones that cost more than the PC and are bought by people
who traditionally bought high-end workstations).

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 00:19:10
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Jim Frost wrote:
> 
> Joseph wrote:
> > January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the top
> > 100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the Dreamcast
> > surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
> > current PC state-of-the-art."
> 
> The Dreamcast is good, been using it for the better part of a year now, but
> it's nowhere near as good as current state of the art on PCs.  It is about
as
> good as you could get a year ago in terms of gaming systems -- but we've
gone
> two generations beyond that at this point, not even counting the really
> high-end cards (the ones that cost more than the PC and are bought by people
> who traditionally bought high-end workstations).

That depends entirely on what you are talking about.  If you are talking about
3D graphics, then the up and coming Playstation II blows the doors off of PCs. 

The latest Voodoo 3 cards can handle somewhere around 8 million polygons per
second (with no lighting or fog effects).  The Playstation II's hardware can
handle 53 million polys per second with no effects, and 22 million polys per
second with lighting and fog effects.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ericb@pobox.com                                   05-Dec-99 00:18:06
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Riddle me this:  If Macs are so simple, why do 'dummies' books exis

From: Eric Bennett <ericb@pobox.com>

I'm sure your old buddies over in os2.advocacy will be happy to see that 
you haven't really changed your ways despite your recent comments over 
in that newsgroup.  Instead you just changed the newsgroup you are 
harassing.

However, we already have a troll in csma that behaves (directing foul 
language at people who don't use Windows) as you do... his name is Nate 
Hughes.  So, sorry to say it, but... even as a troll, you are redundant.


In article <3849C2DA.15E5D82D@groovyshow.com>, Kelly Robinson 
<ispy@groovyshow.com> wrote:

> ...then why do Apple Mac/iMac commercials talk about "...Mac
> Professionals who will answer any of your questions and can do any
> hardware updates?"
> 
> I just saw this commercial and I just about vomited.  If the Mac is "for
> the rest of us", "the rest uf us" must have an average I.Q. of 2.
> 
> If we need some guy to answer our questions about something which is "so
> simple that you'll be up in minutes, not hours!" then somebody is
> pulling on hell of a mindfuck.  I'll let you guess who is being fucked.
> No, better not let you think - you think different.  Just think.  It is
> YOU who is getting mindfucked.
> 
> If we need somebody else to come out and do our own work for us since it
> was supposed to be simple for us in the first place!
> 
> See, if you  are inevitably are going to call for help, you may as well
> get something which you can't understand and is therefore more powerful
> and just better to use in the first place!
> 
> Man, y'all are crazy, trying to make us think that Macs are better when
> all sorts of people are making "Macs for Dummies", "Mac professionals
> will help yoooooou", etc...!
> 
> I feel so sorry for you, *sniff*.
>

-- 
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ ) 
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say 'ask'.
-Bill Gates, in his deposition in US v. Microsoft

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Cornell University (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 00:31:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):

What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

> > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > >
> > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty 
> > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron
> > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.
> > >
> > > Typical pontification.
> > 
> > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons from 
> > the
> > pontiff.
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified to teach 
> me
> about pontification, Eric.

You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous presupposition.

> > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.

Feldercarb, Marty.

> > > > > That this behavior was
> > > > > expected is
> > > > > common knowledge.
> > > >
> > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > >
> > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" Tholen?
> > 
> > See above.
> 
> The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.

Illogical.
 
> > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to
> > > > > > > > Marty's
> > > > > > > > post.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > >
> > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > >
> > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.
> > 
> > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> 
> I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to provide 
> proof. 

What you see is incorrect.

> Par
> for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.

Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?
 
> > > > How predictable.
> > >
> > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > 
> > See above.
> 
> The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.

Trying to change the context again to deflect attention from your 
unsubstantiated claims, Marty?  Ineffective.

> > > > > No surprise there.
> > > >
> > > > Illogical.
> > >
> > > "How predictable."
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?

Illogical.
 
> > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Evidence, please
> > > >
> > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > >
> > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the 
> > > removal
> > > of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > 
> > Illogical.
> 
> Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone lacking a 
> logical
> argument.

How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the 
removal of key context.
 
> > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > >
> > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > >
> > > I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already 
> > > proven"
> > > pontification.  No surprise there.
> > 
> > See above.
> 
> The above still fails to provide justification for your pontification, 
> Eric.

Predictable pontification.  It's too bad you still don't recognize how 
your pontification is perceived, Marty.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 00:33:01
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <38498792.F2BFDFEA@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's your 
> context
> back:

Balderdash, Marty.

> > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is not 
> > evidence
> > of inconsistency.
> 
> Note:  no response

More evidence of your lack of response recognition skills.
  
> > Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed how 
> > you
> > dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to cover up your
> > embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:
> 
> Note:  no response

See above.

> > Taking forgery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
> > Marty?
> 
> You've not earned such a title yet, Eric

Evidence, please.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 00:35:26
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <3848D9DF.15F88063@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <38487DD4.FFB4C956@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty 
> > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about
> > > > > > OS/2, how
> > > > > > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> > > > >
> > > > > What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?
> > > >
> > > > How ironic.
> > >
> > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> > 
> > On the basis of your participation
> 
> What alleged participation?

How ironic.

> > in the activity whose existence
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing the existence of this alleged 
> "activity".

See what I mean?
 
> > you wish me to demonstrate.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?  I demonstrated no desire for you 
> to
> demonstrate something which does not exist.

Poppycock.

> > > "I do not 'approve' phrases.
> > >  -Dave Tholen"
> > > - Eric Bennett
> > 
> > Your infantile quoting game is irrelvant, Marty.
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile quoting game is 
> irrelevant.

I have no infantile quoting game, Marty.  You do.  Having Marty 
recognition trouble again, Marty?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 01:08:03
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

It's your pseudonym.  Don't you know, Eric?

> > > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron
> > > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > Typical pontification.
> > >
> > > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons from
> > > the pontiff.
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified to teach
> > me about pontification, Eric.
> 
> You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous presupposition.

Incorrect.
 
> > > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
> 
> Feldercarb, Marty.

Evidence, please.

> > > > > > That this behavior was
> > > > > > expected is
> > > > > > common knowledge.
> > > > >
> > > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" Tholen?
> > >
> > > See above.
> >
> > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> 
> Illogical.

Typical pontification, which further does not justify your previous
pontification.

> > > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied to
> > > > > > > > > Marty's post.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > > >
> > > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.
> > >
> > > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> >
> > I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to provide
> > proof.
> 
> What you see is incorrect.

Evidence, please.  I'm not the one wearing the dirty glasses, remember?

> > Par for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.
> 
> Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?

You're the one using the pseudonym.  You tell me.

> > > > > How predictable.
> > > >
> > > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > >
> > > See above.
> >
> > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> 
> Trying to change the context again

You are erroneously presupposing that I have tried to change the context
before.

> to deflect attention 

What alleged "attention"?

> from your unsubstantiated claims, Marty?

You are erroneously presupposing the existence of unsubstantiated claims on my
part, Eric.

> Ineffective.

Your continued pontifications are ineffective.
 
> > > > > > No surprise there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Illogical.
> > > >
> > > > "How predictable."
> > >
> > > Why?
> >
> > "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?
> 
> Illogical.

Typical pontification.  No surprise there.

> > > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > >
> > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > removal of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > >
> > > Illogical.
> >
> > Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone lacking a
> > logical argument.
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> removal of key context.

How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal of
key context.

> > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > >
> > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already
> > > > proven" pontification.  No surprise there.
> > >
> > > See above.
> >
> > The above still fails to provide justification for your pontification,
> > Eric.
> 
> Predictable pontification.

Redundant, Eric.  I've already pointed out the predictability of your
pontifications.  Glad you agree.

> It's too bad you still don't recognize how your pontification is 
> perceived, Marty.

How can I realize how something is perceived that doesn't exist, Eric?  Do you
still enjoy beating your wife?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 01:15:19
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <38498792.F2BFDFEA@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's your
> > context
> > back:
> 
> Balderdash, Marty.

Still giving Aaron a hand tending his Balderdash garden, Eric?
 
> > > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is not
> > > evidence of inconsistency.
> >
> > Note:  no response

Note: still no response

> > > Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed how
> > > you
> > > dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to cover up your
> > > embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:
> >
> > Note:  no response

Note: still no response

> > > Taking forgery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
> > > Marty?
> >
> > You've not earned such a title yet, Eric

Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.  Here's how
the
above statement was actually written:
M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
 
> Evidence, please.

You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just demonstrated.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 01:22:14
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <3848D9DF.15F88063@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <38487DD4.FFB4C956@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <38474F5F.35614168@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > tholenbot wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyway, if this group is just for saying positive things about
> > > > > > > OS/2, how
> > > > > > > come you participate in the tholenbot wars?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What alleged "tholenbot wars", tholenbot?
> > > > >
> > > > > How ironic.
> > > >
> > > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> > >
> > > On the basis of your participation
> >
> > What alleged participation?
> 
> How ironic.

Nothing ironic about your continued pontification, Eric.
 
> > > in the activity whose existence
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of this alleged
> > "activity".
> 
> See what I mean?

Still having reading comprehension problems?

> > > you wish me to demonstrate.
> >
> > On what basis do you make this claim?  I demonstrated no desire for you
> > to demonstrate something which does not exist.
> 
> Poppycock.

Evidence, please.

> > > > "I do not 'approve' phrases.
> > > >  -Dave Tholen"
> > > > - Eric Bennett
> > >
> > > Your infantile quoting game is irrelvant, Marty.
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile quoting game is
> > irrelevant.
> 
> I have no infantile quoting game, Marty.

That is a lie.

> You do.

Another unsupported lie.

> Having Marty recognition trouble again, Marty?

On the contrary, I recognize your lies quite well, Eric.

"'"I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
 - Eric Bennett'
 -Marty Amodeo"
- tholenbot

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             05-Dec-99 06:53:09
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-ire4Fkr4XtuO@localhost>,
  jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:

-- snip --

> The mere fact of snippeage should give an indication of the observed
> level of relevance.

So, then, if essentially Marty's entire post is "irrelevant," then why
bother to respond at all?

Where is the logic?

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          04-Dec-99 23:07:06
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 03:19:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> 
> >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of his
> >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> 
> I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the 
> Balderdash garden which you claim I tend

Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How typical.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          04-Dec-99 23:22:23
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-7CA0DB.00385502121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
> <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> > 
> > >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> > >today's digest:
> > 
> > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> 
> Typical invective.  

What alleged "invective", Eric?

> Pott is TholenBot Pro.

Common sense makes cameo appearance.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          04-Dec-99 23:26:21
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> 
> >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> >today's digest:
> 
> Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.

Incorrect.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          04-Dec-99 23:29:01
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451513

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <pnn14.7847$Rp1.279209@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 18:43:20 -0500, Marty wrote:
> 
> >Aaron Dimsdale wrote:
> >> 
> >> I'm back!
> >
> >Non sequitur.
> 
> Balderdash, Marty.
> 
> >> Miss me?
> >
> >I wasn't aiming for you, Aaron.
> 
> Sure you weren't, but I'm sure Bennett, Tholen, Pott and the rest of the
> crew all were aiming at me.

On what basis do you make this claim?

> It's Pott's garden, not mine, 

Incorrect.

> and I cleaned my glasses a few posts ago.

Irrelevant, given that you obviously have not opened your eyes.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            04-Dec-99 23:30:14
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm>

In article <dok24.11236$Tp.248494@typ11.nn.bcandid.com>, "H.W. 
Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com> wrote:

> "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:s4ef4aqrgsp91@corp.supernews.com...
> > DOS with a mouse extension? This is the product that beat the Mac to
> market?
> > Give me a break. And this is proof?
> >
> > This is a sad day win Windows advocates claim Windows was out before the
> > Mac. Have you no dignity?
> 
> Windows was actually demonstrated back about 1982.  

Yes, but when did it *ship*? 



>The thorny issue was
> whether to go with a tiled windowing system (which windows 1.0 was),
> or try arbitrary windows and risk the patience of Job(s).  I didn't see
> a real working version till about 1984, well after the Lisa was out (for a
> mere
> $10000 in 1983).  There were character-based windowing systems
> on the PC well before 1984; and there was even a mouse available for
> the PC back about 1982 (it looked like a brick, and only a few programs
> had drivers for it).
> 
> The precedence issue seems so bizarre now.  Clearly all modern
> computer systems have borrowed to survive.  The first Mac OS
> didn't have subdirectories, and the system had almost no method
> of adding fast peripherals, or even hard disks.  I recall my
> friends connecting the first Mac hard drive through a serial line
> (a SLOW serial line); then risking the patience of Job(s) by adding
> a Hyperdrive (voiding the warranty) or the non-Apple (only $700)
> upgrade to 512K.  It was such a different world.  People were
> kinder, we ate all our vegetables, and a kindly old senile
> gent was the president.
> 
>

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Infernosoft (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 00:48:19
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

uno@40th.com <uno@40th.com> wrote:

:  http://www.statmarket.com/SM?c=Operating_System

It looks like it's us and BeOS.

At least it will be harder for the assorted nuts to find 
comp.os.other.advocacy.flame.flame.flame

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 01:06:24
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>>Aaron Dimsdale 
:>>It's not a newsgroup FOR FLAMING OS/2 ADVOCATES.

:>Eric Bennett
:>if this group is just for saying positive things about OS/2

: But it isn't. Aaron has obviously not read the charter for this
: newsgroup. It specifically mentions that it's for flaming of OS/2. His
: initial assumption is incorrect, and therefore the remainder of his
: post has no relevancy

Where in the charter does it mention the flaming of OS/2 advocates?

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 01:40:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

David H. McCoy <forgitaboutit@fake.com> wrote:

Folks, I think we have seen the closest thing to David admitting he was 
wrong:

: You are pathetic. You cannot win an arguement, so like the other fanatics in 

: this you merely resort to insults because you lover OS/2 is in such dire 
: straits. 

: Bye.

David, when you lose an arguement, you aren't suppose to insult someone, 
say something in broken english and then pick up your toys and go home.  
People usually say something like, "whoops, I made a mistake there, my bad"


:>Stop being difficult
:>
:>-Jason
:>

: The BeOS a

???

: -- 
: ---------------------------------------
: David H. McCoy
: dmccoy@EXTRACT_THIS_mnsinc.com
: ---------------------------------------

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 01:18:24
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jeff Glatt
:>>OS/2 Advocacy has always hinged upon "attacking the mainstream",
:>>whether it be developers who support Windows, or Windows users (ie,
:>>"lemmings" in OS/2 Advocacy terminology), or journalists who write
:>>favorable things about anything related to Windows (or commit the
:>>unspeakable crime of merely failing to praise OS/2 in every magazine).
:>>That's one big reason why OS/2 Advocacy has, by and large, been a
:>>complete and utter failure.

:>Aaron Dimsdale
:>Go look at some MacOS users out there

: Mac users have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments. If you're
: having trouble following the topic, let me know, and I'll explain it
: to you. (Pssssst. The clue is in the first two words of my above
: paragraph).

Bullsh*t.  If you have a reading comprehenstion of at least a JR high school 
student you would understand his comments.  Stop being a prententious 
sh*thead.


:>all the other "Gates Is God, Worship Gates" Windows advocates posting to
:>this newsgroup.

: Windows advocacy also has no relevance whatsoever to my above
: comments.

Read my previous comment

:>Funny how you constantly 
:>talk about how much OS/2 sucks and its users suck and how its advocates 
:>are bastards who kill everything that puts a dent in the paint of 
:>OS/2...

: Actually, one of the truly bad things that happened to OS/2 was OS/2
: Fanatics such as yourself and Ian Tholen and those of that ilk. Those
: are the people who really "put a dent in the paint of OS/2", and
: continue to do so to this day. You folks even helped drive away all of
: your own supporters -- OS/2 developers. Maybe if you were more
: productive and less destructive, things would have been different.
: But, that's not the way it was, nor the way it is.

I can't believe just how much sh*t you're shoveling today.  Tell me, how 
does it feel to lead such a non-productive existence on this newsgroup?

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         05-Dec-99 08:47:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451518

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Well, Marty started off with a half-truth this time.  It is true that
I failed to provide evidence for "my" lie.  That's because there is no
lie on my part for which I could provide evidence.  The lie lies in his
erroneous presupposition that there is a lie on my part.  He also
illogically indicates that he believes the only way one can play an
"infantile game" is if his responses resemble those from four months
ago.  Here's today's digest:

1> Once again Dave failed to provide evidence for his lie.  No surprises.
1> He also seems to believe that I could and would want to persist in the
1> same "infantile game" for 4 (!!) months, in spite of the fact that my
1> postings today in no way resemble what they were those 4 months ago.
1> Tholen's mind is so closed that it refuses to acknowledge the possibility
1> that the game is over and Tholen lost.  It is far easier to live in his
1> fantasy world where he can respond to whatever he feels like, having
1> free reign to remove all context from my statements, and respond to
1> statements he finds uncomfortable with an inappropriate canned quote.
1> While quite convenient, it does little to counter the evidence against
1> him.  After persisting with all of the above mentioned dishonest tactics,
1> he then somehow feels justified in pontificating that I am playing an
1> infantile game, as if that could somehow justify his dismisal of the
1> incontrovertible evidence I have place before him.  This is nothing new
1> to anyone familiar with Tholen's "baby-talk tripe" (as he is fond of
1> calling it himself).
 
"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

Note: no response.

Note: no response.

Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: still no response.
 
Note: no response.

Note: no response.

Note: no response.

Note: no response.

Oops.  Tholen "accidentally" hacked a bit too much off of this one.  Here's
your context back:
 
"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

Quite sequitur to my comment.  Completely non sequitur to what is appropriate
for this newsgroup.  Glad you agree that you posted inappropriately.
 
"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

Typical pontification.  How convenient of you to pretend so, to "justify" your
infantile non-responses.
 
"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

Note: no response.

Note: no response.

Also note that Dave has removed the incontrovertible evidence again.  Further
evidence of his own hypocritical infantile game.  No real surprise there, as
he
must have found it too inconvenient to include in this digest.  Here's your
incontrovertible evidence back, hypocrite: 
 
"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

Note: no response.  Looks like he's "still at it!"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 04:19:01
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Sorry wrong newgroup.... {It's an old group, dummy!}

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:
> 
> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-ire4Fkr4XtuO@localhost>,
>   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> 
> -- snip --
> 
> > The mere fact of snippeage should give an indication of the observed
> > level of relevance.
> 
> So, then, if essentially Marty's entire post is "irrelevant," then why
> bother to respond at all?
> 
> Where is the logic?

Why, nowhere to be seen!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 04:23:06
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 05:18:05
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> >
> > >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> > >today's digest:
> >
> > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> 
> Incorrect.

On what basis do you make this claim?  Do you know what he "thought" better
than he does himself?  Illogical.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 05:08:16
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 10:37:07
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

I see Dimsdale is still lying about owning a Balderdash garden.  Of more note,
however, is the new inconsistency he introduced by claiming he doesn't even
tend a Balderdash garden after formerly admitting to doing so.  This is no
surprise for long-time Dimsdale fans, but those not familiar with his
dishonesty and inconsistency may be taken aback and for that I apologize on
his
behalf.  Here's today's Dimsdale digest:

1> I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the
1> Balderdash garden which you claim I tend, nor have you proven that I
1> even tend it, as opposed to perhaps buying Balderdash from a store. How
1> predictable.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
 
1> An obvious lie, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
 
1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
response), as Dr. Sbaitso's first request after noting a repeated statement
is:
YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.
 
1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
response), as Dr. Sbaitso's response at this point would alternate between the
one noted by me above and your statement.  You see, unlike yourself, Dr.
Sbaitso doesn't like to be a hypocrite asking someone else not to repeat,
while
repeating his own statements himself.
 
1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> If you weren't too busy writing new sections of the Infantile Little
1> Games Official Rulebook to check the facts, you would've noticed
1> that I've spelled "kindergarten" correctly every time I used the word
1> except for the above digested quotation. For the feeble-minded (That's
1> you, Marty) I'll explain: "kindergraten" was a typo.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.

Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
response), as Dr. Sbaitso does not say the above statement.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> I see you've snipped the evidence again, Marty. How predictable.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> YOU SAID THAT ALREADY. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.

Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
response), as Dr. Sbaitso does not say the above statement.  Note the
inconsistency within this very post:
AD] YOU SAID THAT ALREADY. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
AD] YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
Now compare these two to the correct response:
DS] YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

Not only was he inconsistent, but all of the variations he attempted were
incorrect.  "Inept".

1> Shouldn't you know things like that about your employer, Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> Using something from another thread, Marty? How ironic, coming from
1> someone who claims that everything which embarrasses him is irrelevant.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

Dimsdale dug this post out of the archives and seemingly went out of his way
to
embarrass himself...
2> How ironic coming from Marty "Monarch of Invectives and Ill Logic" (sic)
2> Amodeo.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> Irrelevant, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

How hypocritical and ironic.

3> You erronously presuppose that I've ever tended

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

3> You erronously presuppose that I own a

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

3> What alleged "garden", Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

3> Balderdash, Marty.

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

3> Where, Marty?

"Balderdash."

I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 05:22:06
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 10:37:07
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451518

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

blah blah blah "baby-talk tripe" blah.  blah lie blah blah, blah blah
evidence.  blah blah blah "infantile game" blah.  Here's today's digest:

> 1> Once again Dave failed to provide evidence for his lie.  No surprises.
> 1> He also seems to believe that I could and would want to persist in the
> 1> same "infantile game" for 4 (!!) months, in spite of the fact that my
> 1> postings today in no way resemble what they were those 4 months ago.
> 1> Tholen's mind is so closed that it refuses to acknowledge the possibility
> 1> that the game is over and Tholen lost.  It is far easier to live in his
> 1> fantasy world where he can respond to whatever he feels like, having
> 1> free reign to remove all context from my statements, and respond to
> 1> statements he finds uncomfortable with an inappropriate canned quote.
> 1> While quite convenient, it does little to counter the evidence against
> 1> him.  After persisting with all of the above mentioned dishonest tactics,
> 1> he then somehow feels justified in pontificating that I am playing an
> 1> infantile game, as if that could somehow justify his dismisal of the
> 1> incontrovertible evidence I have place before him.  This is nothing new
> 1> to anyone familiar with Tholen's "baby-talk tripe" (as he is fond of
> 1> calling it himself).

Note: no response.

> Note: no response.
> Note: no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: still no response.
> Note: no response.
> Note: no response.
> Note: no response.
> Note: no response.

Note: still no response on 23 (!!) separate points.

> Oops.  Tholen "accidentally" hacked a bit too much off of this one.  Here's
> your context back:

Note: no response

Also note that the context was again removed along with Dave's hypocritical
statement in question.  How convenient.

> Quite sequitur to my comment.  Completely non sequitur to what is
appropriate
> for this newsgroup.  Glad you agree that you posted inappropriately.

Note: no response

> Typical pontification.  How convenient of you to pretend so, to "justify"
your
> infantile non-responses.

Note: no response

> Note: no response.

Note: still no response
 
> Note: no response.

Note: still no response

> Also note that Dave has removed the incontrovertible evidence again. 
Further
> evidence of his own hypocritical infantile game.  No real surprise there, as 
he
> must have found it too inconvenient to include in this digest.  Here's your
> incontrovertible evidence back, hypocrite:

Note: no response

Also note that Dave has removed the incontrovertible evidence *again*. 
Further
evidence of his own hypocritical infantile game.  No real surprise there, as
he
must have found it too inconvenient to include in this digest.  Here's your
incontrovertible evidence back, hypocrite:
http://emuos2.vintagegaming.com/downloads/WinZipJava118.jpg

In a fairly transparent attempt to sweep his mistakes under the rug, Tholen
conveniently not only removed the evidence, but his own erroneous claim as
well.  Here it is again for the reader's reference:
"Yet, to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE- the OS/2 JDK], one must have
run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"

> Note: no response.  Looks like he's "still at it!"

Note: still no response.  Looks like he's "still at it!"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               05-Dec-99 10:46:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 10:37:07
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 3 Dec 1999 11:06:04 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
wrote:

>COMA and COMNA snipped - of course.
>
>On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 01:09:35, David Sutherland 
><sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>> >
>> >He could have used that computer before and left a textfile with his 
>> >sig.
>> >Or he has a floppy with his .sig with him...
>> >
>> >Nah, that couldn't be it. It's far too simple.
>> >
>> 
>> It *could* be that simple - bu then again, removing a single entry
>> from a killfile is every bit as simple yet he refuses to do
>> that....and indeed lacks the self-restaraint necessary to simply not
>> read the post.
>> 
>IIRC, Bob has given us the explanation, so hypotheth... hypotess... 
>guessing isn't necessary anymore.
>

Bob has given us a number of explanations, and as I have already said,
I don't think they hang together very well.

>On a personal note (repeated): I still find fillfiles a stupid 
>invention, for which I see no rational use other than p*ssing off 
>somebody. It's far simpler and rewarding just to ignore someone, 
>especially if you don't announce it and make a big fuzz over it (I can
>safely ignore certain posters, watch them foam around the virtual 
>mouth, and yet reply to them whenever I want to. They can't even 
>complain about me ignoring my killfile. True b*st*rds don't have 
>killfiles...
>
>> Bob's explanations become more and more contrived the more desperate
>> he becomes to prove what a techno-wiz he is.  Frankly, I doubt his
>> words now.
>> 
>Of course, especially after those well-phrased and thoroughly 
>consistent arguments from Jeff Glatt. So let me see, I have to choose 
>between the credibility of a couple of ex-OS/2 users, turned to the 
>dark side, spending their time in the old COOA telling everyone how 
>stupid they are - and Bob Germer. Hmmmm, tough one...
>

Hmmm...the problem is that I'm not taking Jeff Glatts arguments as any
kind of "proof" - I am taking Bob Germers' explanations and their
internal inconsistencies as proof that he isn't being honest.

And if you are looking for bias look no further than yourself and your
refusal to correct certain OS/2 advocates  when they are very clearly
wrong (and frequently abusive),  yet you rush to defend them at every
opportunity.   Frankly, if I want an objective opinion, it won't be
yours.

>Karel Jansens
>jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
>=======================================================
>"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
>Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
>(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
>=======================================================


Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: (Posted via) Netcom Internet Ltd. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: veit@borneo.gmd.de                                05-Dec-99 12:59:23
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 10:37:07
Subj: Re: OS/2's source code

From: veit@borneo.gmd.de (Holger Veit)

On Thu, 25 Nov 1999 07:49:34 +0100, 
	Jasper de Keijzer <jasper_de_keijzer@nl.compuware.com> wrote:
>Yeh nice, but did you know that large parts of the OS are written in
>assembler? So it will be very hard to change things or port it to your own
>type of computer. If IBM is gonna release the source code for OS/2 they are
>better of when they do that with the PoverPC version of OS/2. This one is
>based on the Micro-MACH kernel  and written in plain C and some C++.

The Mach kernel is the wrong solution. It is bloatware, and not really
something you would associate with "micro" (unless you are talking that
a "micro"soft operating system is slimline code). Don't argue with increased
CPU speed: we have meanwhile more CPU power in a single mediocre desktop 
PC than in the world's fastest machines 2 decades ago. Yet, what we do is
waiting in front of a sand-glass cursor for some trivial operation 
(like storing a file to disk) to finish. 

You won't get a good system with an inferior concept that mainly relies
on Moore's law.

Holger

-- 
If Microsoft is ever going to produce something that does not suck,
it is very likely a vacuum cleaner.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: GMD-AiS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               05-Dec-99 13:27:04
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:51:52, "Steven C. Britton" 
<sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote in part:
<list of issued unrelated to unionism deleted>
> All of these issues are totally unrelated to unionism.  Unions do not
> effectively prevent these things from happening.
>  
> All unions do is create an environment of mediocrity and laziness; and pay
> the union bosses big bucks to create havoc.
> 

More revisionist history, I recommend that you read up on 
the history of the ALP and the English Labor party and even 
some Canadian period history.
Even if you see no value or purpose in unions today to 
dismiss Mr Donnelley's list as unrelated to unionism is 
ignoring the weight of history.
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au                               05-Dec-99 13:27:03
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: IBM Support for os/2

From: rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane)

On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:04:26, Martin Brown 
<martin.brown@pandora.be> wrote: 
> ALDEL wrote:
> Martin Brown <martin.brown@pandora.be> said:
>Thomas Billert wrote:
> 
> > >> have a look at http://www.warpupdates.de/
> >

Thanks to the poster of this site's address (Thomas I think)
and to the others that have said its down can't be got to 
etc I add that I tried it and got through OK

And if the site maintainer happens to be reading this 
"thanks for the site".
Richard A Crane
Barrister & Solicitor
slightly altered email (anti-spamming) rcrane AT 
octa4.net.au 
OR rcrane AT attglobal.net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Octa4 Pty Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hwstock@wizard.com                                05-Dec-99 05:50:19
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "H.W. Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com>

"Timberwoof" <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
news:mroeder-2EB744.23302904121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> In article <dok24.11236$Tp.248494@typ11.nn.bcandid.com>, "H.W.
> Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com> wrote:
>
[...]
> > Windows was actually demonstrated back about 1982.

> Yes, but when did it *ship*?

Read the next few lines of my *original post* (boy, it's fun to use those
asterisks for emphasis!):

> >The thorny issue was
> > whether to go with a tiled windowing system (which windows 1.0 was),
> > or try arbitrary windows and risk the patience of Job(s).  I didn't see
> > a real working version till about 1984, well after the Lisa was out (for
a
[...]
OK?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            05-Dec-99 14:40:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 01:00:03, "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

> I'm talking about developers of Apache, Samba, gnu software, and everything
> that makes up the majority of the Linux OS itself and the apps that are
> truely useful.
> 
And I was talking about ApplixWare, WordPerfect, Metro X and some 
other apps that can also be considered marginally useful.

Besides, a lot of money gets earned in the distribution and support 
areas of linux. The emerging pattern is that those companies (not 
being complete idiots) are directing funds towards the open source 
developers, to insure continued advances in linux and subsequently 
rake in more cash.

Another thing you seem to miss (as does Microsoft, BTW) is that a 
*lot* of the developers in the open source field seem to do it for the
fun, the glory and the fame. Non-monetary motivations rank very high 
in the linux universe.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            05-Dec-99 14:40:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 10:46:35, David Sutherland 
<sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:

> On 3 Dec 1999 11:06:04 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
> wrote:
> 
> >COMA and COMNA snipped - of course.
> >
> >On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 01:09:35, David Sutherland 
> ><sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >> >
> >> >He could have used that computer before and left a textfile with his 
> >> >sig.
> >> >Or he has a floppy with his .sig with him...
> >> >
> >> >Nah, that couldn't be it. It's far too simple.
> >> >
> >> 
> >> It *could* be that simple - bu then again, removing a single entry
> >> from a killfile is every bit as simple yet he refuses to do
> >> that....and indeed lacks the self-restaraint necessary to simply not
> >> read the post.
> >> 
> >IIRC, Bob has given us the explanation, so hypotheth... hypotess... 
> >guessing isn't necessary anymore.
> >
> 
> Bob has given us a number of explanations, and as I have already said,
> I don't think they hang together very well.
> 
OK.
Your opinion. To which you're entitled.

> >On a personal note (repeated): I still find fillfiles a stupid 
> >invention, for which I see no rational use other than p*ssing off 
> >somebody. It's far simpler and rewarding just to ignore someone, 
> >especially if you don't announce it and make a big fuzz over it (I can
> >safely ignore certain posters, watch them foam around the virtual 
> >mouth, and yet reply to them whenever I want to. They can't even 
> >complain about me ignoring my killfile. True b*st*rds don't have 
> >killfiles...
> >
> >> Bob's explanations become more and more contrived the more desperate
> >> he becomes to prove what a techno-wiz he is.  Frankly, I doubt his
> >> words now.
> >> 
> >Of course, especially after those well-phrased and thoroughly 
> >consistent arguments from Jeff Glatt. So let me see, I have to choose 
> >between the credibility of a couple of ex-OS/2 users, turned to the 
> >dark side, spending their time in the old COOA telling everyone how 
> >stupid they are - and Bob Germer. Hmmmm, tough one...
> >
> 
> Hmmm...the problem is that I'm not taking Jeff Glatts arguments as any
> kind of "proof" - I am taking Bob Germers' explanations and their
> internal inconsistencies as proof that he isn't being honest.
> 
> And if you are looking for bias look no further than yourself and your
> refusal to correct certain OS/2 advocates  when they are very clearly
> wrong (and frequently abusive),  yet you rush to defend them at every
> opportunity.   Frankly, if I want an objective opinion, it won't be
> yours.
> 
I don't recall ever having said that I am objective or unbiased. And 
as for Dave Tholen (to whom I think you're referring, although he 
wouldn't call himself an OS/2 advocate), if I think he's wrong about 
something, I will tell him privately instead of bashing him in public,
because I'm a subjective, biased b*st*rd. And could you please give me
examples of me, rushing "to defend [him] at every opportunity"? 
Frankly, given the amount of "attention" he's been getting lately, 
that would leave me without much time off.

And as for giving opinions, you seemed to ask for one, with your 
"Hmmm.....odd that you wouldn't take...", to which I answered. 
Apologies for misunderstanding you there. Next time, could you be more
clear by adding something like: "I'd like comments, except from Karel 
Jansens, because he doesn't give an objective opinion"?

Thanks.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@fred.net                                   05-Dec-99 15:04:14
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:02
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@fred.net (Mike Trettel)

On 3 Dec 1999 00:43:40 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:
>
>Here's a hint, US LAW DEFINING MONOPOLIES is the entire problem!  I'm not
>trying to argue that MS is acting legally, but rather that its actions
>should never have been illegal in the first place.

I have a perfectly honest question, then.  If you truly believe this is
so, then it follows that you would believe that any of the US
government's antitrust actions over the past hundred or so years were
wrong, no?  That would mean that the Standard Oil antitrust case should
never have been brought, that IBM should not have suffered repeated
antitrust suits, et al.  Otherwise, it would appear that you're just
engaging in a special pleading-that the present day law should not
apply to Microsoft, but should apply to other businesses.

One of the great ironies of the present situation is that IBM went to
an outside source for its new (at the time) PC operating system in
order to cirmcumvent yet another antitrust inquiry from the DOJ.  They
ended up going to MS, along with Digital Research and some other party
whom I can't recall.  This is a situation where antitrust law gave MS
its big break. Yet, if I'm following your logic properly, IBM should
have been allowed to produce and use it's own OS on the PC, and kept
that market closed.

>
>> MS forces computer buyers to pay for Windows whether the customer wants to
>> or not.
>
>MS doesn't force computer buyers to do anything.  Microsoft sells its code.
>People buy it.  This is called a free exchange.

That's an interesting color of sky in your world.  It's, what, rose
colored?

-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com                          05-Dec-99 15:13:15
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:03
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com (Buddy Donnelly)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 13:27:09, rcrane@octa4.net.au (Richard A Crane) 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:51:52, "Steven C. Britton" 
> <sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote in part:
> <list of issued unrelated to unionism deleted>
> > All of these issues are totally unrelated to unionism.  Unions do not
> > effectively prevent these things from happening.
> >  
> > All unions do is create an environment of mediocrity and laziness; and pay
> > the union bosses big bucks to create havoc.
> > 
> 
> More revisionist history, I recommend that you read up on 
> the history of the ALP and the English Labor party and even 
> some Canadian period history.
> Even if you see no value or purpose in unions today to 
> dismiss Mr Donnelley's list as unrelated to unionism is 
> ignoring the weight of history.

I missed the rejoinder because of a freshly applied filter, but I'd 
have answered that there's a lot more to be said for re-evaluating the
need for Limited Liability Companies (Corporations) than for 
re-evaluating the need for organizing labour into bargaining 
collectives to deal with both corporation and proprietor employers. 

I especially think the time has come to eliminate the perfect shield 
that a corporate structure gives its owners for criminal and 
criminally-negligent actions that profit them. Put more of those 
greedy bastards in actual jail (as they do in some other countries) in
full view of their families and neighbours inside the gated 
"communities" and country clubs they live in, and see how fast 
corporate policies get modified.

And, just as is true with the bugaboo of Welfare Fraud, which, even if
as much as 100% of all public welfare is fraudelent is still a tiny 
fraction of the proven fraud in, say, the defense budget or in the 
construction of major public works like highways and sports complexes,
the added cost of using Union Labour, over properly compensated and 
protected non-union workers, pales compared to the fraud costs exacted
by a renegade corporation like Micro$oft. 

And generally the costs of fraud we've seen prosecuted inside the 
unions has been borne by their members, whose pension fund money got 
stolen or misused, but none of that has ever led to any bailouts with 
public money like those we've seen with the S&Ls (corporations), banks
(corporations) defense contractors (corporations) and hedge funds 
(corporations.)


New York City construction contracts are exempted from my argument, 
because I've never seen anything quite like the work rules and general
lethargy of construction there. But then *everybody* expects to take a
bite out of the pie in NY, right?

-- 

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
donnelly@tampabay.rr.com


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  05-Dec-99 10:36:04
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:03
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451518.11111^-99999999999

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Well, Tholen started off with a half-truth this time.  It is true that I
failed to provide evidence for "my" lie.  That's because there is no lie on
my part for which I could provide evidence.  The lie lies in his erroneous
presupposition that there is a lie on my part.  He also illogically
indicates that he believes the only way one can play an "infantile game" is
if his responses resemble those from four months ago.  Here's today's
digest:

{So sorry, but Tholen hasn't had anything new to add since Oct 23, 1993!}

No problem!  You're welcome!




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jim.danvers@mindex.com                            05-Dec-99 10:48:22
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:03
Subj: Re: How do I install fixpack 11 ?

From: Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com>

Folks...

We're talking Warp v4 (client) right?  I just installed it yesterday on a
machine
@work, and managed to get the minimum (?) FP5 installed on it so that I could
get
netscape communicator (4.61) installed.  I work in an NT environment and am
pretty
familiar with all of the stupid service packs and subsequent hot fixes that
need to
be installed on it from time to time - and typically having the latest is
suggested
(after waiting for others to blow up thier systems first of course).

Question(s):  The install on warp on this machine @work is purely for learning 
/
getting experience with the OS and possibly for implementing it for my own use 
@home
- is there a "need" to have a later fixpack applied other than 5?  Is this
synonymous
with saying that NT1 SP1 is adequate and to just leave it @that?  (NOT!)  Also 
- NT
service packs contain all of the fixes from earlier incarnations - in other
words I
can install an NT box and then just go straight to SP5 if I want to - I don't
have to
apply 2-4 in order first.  Does this hold true with Warp?

Thanks for the info folks....

-=- J.D. -=-

"David T. Johnson" wrote:

> josco wrote:
> >
> > http://www.gt-online.com/~bri/fix.html
> > http://members.iquest.net/~dcasey/
> > (links above document how I came to this web page below)
> >
> > http://www.os2voice.org/ez-reference/fixpak.html I followed the directions
> > for an install off my hard drive, not floppy disks which takes too long
> > while this went quickly.  It was easy. I installed FP11.
> >
> > The fixpack files came from this ftp site.
> >
ftp://service.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/v4warp/english-us/xr_m011/

> >
> > My advice is to be sure to at least run chkdsk prior to the install to be
> > sure not to have any disk errors.  I have my system boot with the HPFS
> > automatically checking my drives.  It seems easier than booting off the
> > floppies and running chkdsk.  You can modify the CONFIG.SYS file line
> > where the cache is installed. You add '+' signs in front of all cached
> > disks i.e. +c+d+e
> >
> > OS/2 Help will give you the correct symantics -- search help for "cache"
> > to see the exact syntax.  "Help cache"
> >
> > After the system is okay and running you can edit and remove the forced
> > chkdsk if that slows down boot time.
>
> I suggest installing fixpack 12 rather than fixpack 11.  Fixpack 11 had
> a problem with HPFS and required downleveling to fixpack 10 HPFS files
> (the fix was on Hobbes.)  I download the floppy files and make the
> floppyies with loaddskf.exe and then install them with the corrective
> service tool from an OS/2 window.  It's a little more trouble to make
> floppies than doing the RSU update but also a little more secure, imo.
>
> >
> > -- joseph
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Rime Saad wrote:
> >
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > How do I install fixpack 11 ?  I downloaded the fixpack from the IBM FTP
> > > site, and the file had the extention ".sh".  I do not know how to
> > > install such a file
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > >

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 08:36:29
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:03
Subj: MS drops J++

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

http://www.theregister.co.uk/991203-000009.html

  Microsoft has finally dropped its Visual J++ Java development system.
However, it
  appears to be focusing instead on XML and not the Cool tool it had
originally
  envisaged as the successor to J++.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             05-Dec-99 16:52:19
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 14:26:03
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82cgos$9ij$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like we've
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer
the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: meilinger@wiesbaden.netsurf.de                    05-Dec-99 19:38:13
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Large OS/2 Customers List (LOS2CL) updated

From: meilinger@wiesbaden.netsurf.de

Hi,

http://rover.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~meile/los2cl.html

LOS2CL has been updated.

Thank you for your help to improve the LOS2CL

greetings/2
 Frank

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 11:47:03
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Stuart Fox wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384999E4.ABDADFFB@ibm.net...
> >   Win95 OSR2 is not
> > compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance - your
> choice.
>
> Guess you can't read the web page either.  Win95 OSR2 is compliant.  It
> needs some patches, but all OS'es need patches.

You guessed wrong.

>  You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS maker
> you
> > advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither of you
> are in
> > the position of being responsible for these decisions.
>
> No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.

Then why are there patches?

> So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I guess
> that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it isn't.

As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches to
Win95
OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2 so your
word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service packs
and
the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with MS's
Win95
and the reason for my complaints.

I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a word or
term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then one is saying
they their ideas are confused, their understanding of technology is confused
and
one embraces confusion as a means to cope with problems .   If that display is
done in a public forum then all the worse -- why advertise ?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 14:53:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):

> In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
> <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> > 
> > >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of his
> > >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> > 
> > I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the 
> > Balderdash garden which you claim I tend
> 
> Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How typical.

Argument by redundancy again, Chris?  Illogical.  Of course, such 
behavior is to be expected of you.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 14:56:06
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384A030B.F353703D@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <38498792.F2BFDFEA@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's 
> > > your
> > > context
> > > back:
> > 
> > Balderdash, Marty.

Note: no response.
 
> > > > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is 
> > > > not
> > > > evidence of inconsistency.
> > >
> > > Note:  no response
> 
> Note: still no response

Incorrect.

> > > > Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed 
> > > > how
> > > > you
> > > > dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to cover up 
> > > > your
> > > > embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:
> > >
> > > Note:  no response
> 
> Note: still no response

Incorrect.

> > > > Taking forgery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
> > > > Marty?
> > >
> > > You've not earned such a title yet, Eric
> 
> Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.  Here's 
> how the
> above statement was actually written:
> M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
>  
> > Evidence, please.
> 
> You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just 
> demonstrated

Aren't you certain, Marty?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: doug.bissett"at"attglobal.net                     05-Dec-99 19:56:09
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: How do I install fixpack 11 ?

From: doug.bissett"at"attglobal.net (Doug Bissett)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 15:48:44, Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com> 
wrote:

> Folks...
>  
> We're talking Warp v4 (client) right?  I just installed it yesterday on a
machine
> @work, and managed to get the minimum (?) FP5 installed on it so that I
could get
> netscape communicator (4.61) installed.  I work in an NT environment and am
pretty
> familiar with all of the stupid service packs and subsequent hot fixes that
need to
> be installed on it from time to time - and typically having the latest is
suggested
> (after waiting for others to blow up thier systems first of course).
>  
> Question(s):  The install on warp on this machine @work is purely for
learning /
> getting experience with the OS and possibly for implementing it for my own
use @home
> - is there a "need" to have a later fixpack applied other than 5?  Is this
synonymous
> with saying that NT1 SP1 is adequate and to just leave it @that?  (NOT!) 
Also - NT
> service packs contain all of the fixes from earlier incarnations - in other
words I
> can install an NT box and then just go straight to SP5 if I want to - I
don't have to
> apply 2-4 in order first.  Does this hold true with Warp?
>  
> Thanks for the info folks....
>  
> -=- J.D. -=-
> 

First, welcome to the world of OS/2.

The OS/2 fix packs are cumulative (the latest, contains all of the 
fixes, which may include going back to a lower level file, in some 
cases) up to FP11, when IBM split out a lot of hardware device drivers
into 
their own fix pack. Not ALL hardware drivers are in the DD FP. You 
should check at the Device driver web site, for the latest drivers for
your devices:
http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/html/index.htm

You can get the latest Fix Pack (12, at this time), from:
ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/v4warp/english-us/
(back up a few directories for different languages, or for warp3), and
you can get the Device Driver Fix Pack (1, at this time), from:
ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/DDPak/

This site only keeps certain versions of the fix packs, and you cannot
get them all from there (I think they keep FP5, because that was the 
first Y2K version, the latest, and the latest-1). If you want to try 
some other version, you can get them from HOBBES:
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/

Many people find that there are problems with various fix packs, and 
that one will work better than others, for their specific machine, and
applications. Personally, I found FP9 to be the most stable, but FP12 
is close, as long as you get a fixed version of the PMMerge.DLL file 
(available as PMR00052.ZIP, from HOBBES). I had terrible problems with
FP5 (or was it 6???).

You may, also, want to check out various alternative FP installation 
methods. If you go to the OS/2 SuperSite:
http://www.os2ss.com/
and follow the New User links, you will find a LOT of good information
about OS/2, including different ways to go about installing fix packs.

Finally, the Golden Rule of OS/2 fix packs, is DON'T fix pack it if 
you don't have a problem! Of course Y2K is going to be a "problem" 
shortly.

Other good OS/2 web sites include:
http://service.boulder.ibm.com/asd-bin/doc/en_us/catalog.htm
http://www.leo.org/archiv/software/os2/index_grouped.html
http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/Communicator.html
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/7567/software/english/ind
ex.html
http://www.gt-online.com/~bri/
http://duanec.indelible-blue.com/fixes/LatestWarp4.html
http://ncic.netmag.cz/apps/nase/smartcache_e.html
ftp://ftp.hursley.ibm.com/pub/java/fixes/os2/11/
http://www.os2ss.com/information/kelder/index.html
http://www.musthave.com/
http://www.pmview.com/
http://www.indelible-blue.com/
http://www.RPFSoftware.com/
http://www.kellergroup.com/
http://www.emtec.com/
http://www.cds-inc.com/

(I have no affiliation with any of them, other than as a user of their
products, or information).

Hope this helps...
******************************
From the PC of Doug Bissett
doug.bissett at attglobal.net
The " at " must be changed to "@"
******************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 14:55:13
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<6ED837FA1752F6A5.5F0F85C7B73480C5.815826B519A396FF@lp.airnews.net>, 
TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:

> In article <tholenbot-7CA0DB.00385502121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
> > In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> > > 
> > > >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> > > >today's digest:
> > > 
> > > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> > 
> > Typical invective.  
> 
> What alleged "invective", Eric?

How ironic.
 
> > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> 
> Common sense makes cameo appearance.

What is "common" is not relevant, Chris.  What you can prove is relevant.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 15:05:18
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384A0147.5328467@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):

What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

> > 
> > In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> 
> It's your pseudonym. 

On what basis do you make this claim?

> Don't you know, Eric?

Don't I know what, Marty?

> > > > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty 
> > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>, 
> > > > > > > > > > Aaron
> > > > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Incorrect.
> > > > >
> > > > > Typical pontification.
> > > >
> > > > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons 
> > > > from
> > > > the pontiff.
> > >
> > > You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified to 
> > > teach
> > > me about pontification, Eric.
> > 
> > You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous 
> > presupposition.
> 
> Incorrect.

Poppycock.
  
> > > > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> > >
> > > You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
> > 
> > Feldercarb, Marty.
> 
> Evidence, please.

You deleted the evidence.  How predictable.

> > > > > > > That this behavior was
> > > > > > > expected is
> > > > > > > common knowledge.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So" 
> > > > > Tholen?
> > > >
> > > > See above.
> > >
> > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > 
> > Illogical.
> 
> Typical pontification, which further does not justify your previous
> pontification.

How ironic.
 
> > > > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied 
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > Marty's post.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > > > >
> > > > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.
> > > >
> > > > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> > >
> > > I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to provide
> > > proof.
> > 
> > What you see is incorrect.
> 
> Evidence, please.  I'm not the one wearing the dirty glasses, remember?

Irrelevant, Marty.
 
> > > Par for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.
> > 
> > Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?
> 
> You're the one using the pseudonym.  You tell me.

What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

> > > > > > How predictable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > > >
> > > > See above.
> > >
> > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > 
> > Trying to change the context again
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing that I have tried to change the context
> before.

Incorrect.
 
> > to deflect attention 
> 
> What alleged "attention"?

Don't you know?
 
> > from your unsubstantiated claims, Marty?
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing the existence of unsubstantiated claims 
> on my
> part, Eric.

On the contrary.

> > Ineffective.
> 
> Your continued pontifications are ineffective.

You erroneously presupposed that I have pontificated.
  
> > > > > > > No surprise there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > >
> > > > > "How predictable."
> > > >
> > > > Why?
> > >
> > > "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?
> > 
> > Illogical.
> 
> Typical pontification.  No surprise there.

Balderdash.
 
> > > > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > > >
> > > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > > removal of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > > >
> > > > Illogical.
> > >
> > > Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone lacking 
> > > a
> > > logical argument.
> > 
> > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > removal of key context.
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal 
> of
> key context.

What alleged "someone"?
 
> > > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you have still failed to provide evidence for your "already
> > > > > proven" pontification.  No surprise there.
> > > >
> > > > See above.
> > >
> > > The above still fails to provide justification for your 
> > > pontification,
> > > Eric.
> > 
> > Predictable pontification.
> 
> Redundant, Eric.  I've already pointed out the predictability of your
> pontifications.  Glad you agree.

Comprehend context, Marty.
 
> > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your pontification is 
> > perceived, Marty.
> 
> How can I realize how something is perceived that doesn't exist, Eric?  
> Do you
> still enjoy beating your wife?

What alleged "wife", Marty?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 15:06:16
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384a9d2e.800923@news.borg.com>, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com 
(Jeff Glatt) wrote:

> >Jason
> >Where in the charter does it mention the flaming of OS/2 advocates?
> 
> Where in the charter does it mention the discussion of other operating
> systems, in particular, topics such as Microsoft's business policies?
> 
> In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
> off-topic according to the charter

I see you didn't answer the question.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 15:07:13
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384A04A5.3F00E221@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> That is a lie.

What is a lie, Marty?

> > You do.
> 
> Another unsupported lie.

Incorrect.  Your posts fully support my statement.
 
> > Having Marty recognition trouble again, Marty?
> 
> On the contrary, I recognize your lies quite well, Eric.

Non sequitur.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: atticus@mindspring.com                            05-Dec-99 15:24:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: atticus@mindspring.com (Andy Walton)

In article <tholenbot-97229E.14561205121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

  :> Note: still no response
  :
  :Incorrect.

Shouldn't that be "Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless."?
-- 
 "I've been down so long that down don't worry me."   -- Billie Holiday
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * atticus@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Waltonschauung (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 16:08:03
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384A04A5.3F00E221@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > That is a lie.
> 
> What is a lie, Marty?

Apparently my use of vocabulary is not accessibile to you.  A lie is a
statement which is a deliberate ommission of truth or a statement in a direct
juxtaposition to the truth.
 
> > > You do.
> >
> > Another unsupported lie.
> 
> Incorrect.

How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?

> Your posts fully support my statement.

You are erroneously presupposing you know what a lie is, contrary to your
question:
EB] What is a lie, Marty?
 
> > > Having Marty recognition trouble again, Marty?
> >
> > On the contrary, I recognize your lies quite well, Eric.
> 
> Non sequitur.

How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 16:10:10
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> > In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> > >
> > > >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of his
> > > >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> > >
> > > I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the
> > > Balderdash garden which you claim I tend
> >
> > Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How typical.
> 
> Argument by redundnacy again, Chris?

What alleged "redundnacy" Eric?

> Illogical.  Of course, such behavior is to be expected of you.

You're erroneously presupposing the presence of "redundnacy", Eric.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 16:11:29
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Andy Walton wrote:
> 
> In article <tholenbot-97229E.14561205121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
>   :> Note: still no response
>   :
>   :Incorrect.
> 
> Shouldn't that be "Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless."?

On what basis do you make this claim?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 16:20:00
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384A030B.F353703D@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <38498792.F2BFDFEA@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's
> > > > your context back:
> > >
> > > Balderdash, Marty.
> 
> Note: no response.

I see you've conveniently removed part of the article again.  Here's your
context back:
EB] Balderdash, Marty.
M]  Still giving Aaron a hand tending his Balderdash garden, Eric?

Note: no response

> > > > > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is
> > > > > not evidence of inconsistency.
> > > >
> > > > Note:  no response
> >
> > Note: still no response
> 
> Incorrect.

Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in addition to
failing to provide evidence for my alleged "inconsistency".

> > > > > Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed
> > > > > how you dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to
cover 
> > > > > up your embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:
> > > >
> > > > Note:  no response
> >
> > Note: still no response
> 
> Incorrect.

Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in addition to
failing to account for what you did to the rest of my posting.

> > > > > Taking archery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
> > > > > Marty?
> > > >
> > > > You've not earned such a title yet, Eric

Apparently Eric's clipboard is prone to misquoting (either that or Eric is
dishonestly removing context when he quotes someone).  Here's the actual
statement:
M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.

> > Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.  Here's
> > how the above statement was actually written:
> > M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
> >
> > > Evidence, please.
> >
> > You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just
> > demonstrated.
> 
> Aren't you certain, Marty.

On what basis do you make this claim?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               05-Dec-99 16:35:13
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384A0147.5328467@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennet wrote (using a psuedonym again):
> 
> What alleged "psuedonym", Marty?

I see you've taken the liberty to misquote me yet again.  How convenient. 
Here's the actual statement back:
M] Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):

> > > In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> >
> > It's your pseudonym.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?

Don't you know, Eric?
 
> > Don't you know, Eric?
> 
> Don't I know what, Marty?

EB] What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

> > > > > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > In article <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>,
> > > > > > > > > > > Aaron
> > > > > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise there.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, Marty.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Incorrect.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Typical pontification.
> > > > >
> > > > > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons
> > > > > from the pontiff.
> > > >
> > > > You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified to
> > > > teach me about pontification, Eric.
> > >
> > > You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous
> > > presupposition.
> >
> > Incorrect.
> 
> Poppycock.

Typical pontification, the last line of defense for those who lack a logical
argument.

> > > > > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> > > >
> > > > You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
> > >
> > > Feldercarb, Marty.
> >
> > Evidence, please.
> 
> You deleted the evidence.

What alleged "evidence"?

> How predictable.

You're erroneously presupposing that I have deleted evidence.
 
> > > > > > > > That this behavior was expected is common knowledge.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So"
> > > > > > Tholen?
> > > > >
> > > > > See above.
> > > >
> > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > >
> > > Illogical.
> >
> > Typical pontification, which further does not justify your previous
> > pontification.
> 
> How ironic.

I see you've still failed to justify your pontification.  No surprises there.

> > > > > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he replied
> > > > > > > > > > > to Marty's post.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to provide
> > > > proof.
> > >
> > > What you see is incorrect.
> >
> > Evidence, please.  I'm not the one wearing the dirty glasses, remember?
> 
> Irrelevant, Marty.

On the contrary, it's quite relevant to the topic of "seeing correctly".

> > > > Par for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.
> > >
> > > Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?
> >
> > You're the one using the pseudonym.  You tell me.
> 
> What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

Don't you know, Eric?

> > > > > > > How predictable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > > > >
> > > > > See above.
> > > >
> > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > >
> > > Trying to change the context again
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing that I have tried to change the context
> > before.
> 
> Incorrect.

If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement? 
Illogical.

> > > to deflect attention
> >
> > What alleged "attention"?
> 
> Don't you know?

Don't I know what, Eric?

> > > from your unsubstantiated claims, Marty?
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of unsubstantiated claims
> > on my part, Eric.
> 
> On the contrary.

If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement? 
Illogical.

> > > Ineffective.
> >
> > Your continued pontifications are ineffective.
> 
> You erroneously presupposed that I have pontificated.

My presupposition was not erroneous, as you have just demonstrated.
 
> > > > > > > > No surprise there.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "How predictable."
> > > > >
> > > > > Why?
> > > >
> > > > "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?
> > >
> > > Illogical.
> >
> > Typical pontification.  No surprise there.
> 
> Balderdash.

Prove that there is a surprise there, if you think you can.

> > > > > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > > > removal of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > > > >
> > > > > Illogical.
> > > >
> > > > Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone lacking
> > > > a logical argument.
> > >
> > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > removal of key context.
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the removal
> > of key context.
> 
> What alleged "someone"?

The same "someone" using a pseudonym and giving "someone else" a hand in their
Balderdash garden.

> Comprehend context, Marty.

Unnecessary, Eric, as no context was present thanks to you.

> > > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your pontification is
> > > perceived, Marty.
> >
> > How can I realize how something is perceived that doesn't exist, Eric?
> > Do you still enjoy beating your wife?
> 
> What alleged "wife", Marty?

Analogy recognition problems, Eric?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fru...               05-Dec-99 21:24:24
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

Message sender: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar)

In article <zCh24.758$RI5.18229@newsr1.san.rr.com>,
Aaron Dimsdale  <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
>
>It doesn't matter anyway, because Linux developers tend to ENJOY writing
>software and giving it away. Just because they could make a profit on it
>instead of giving it away, doesn't mean they're low on motivation to 
>give it away.

  Well, there's profit and there's profit..  Many developers actually 
use the tools we develop, and having the tools be as functional and 
stable as possible is worth more than a little more money in the pocket.
By putting the source code up for review and update, many more minds and
fingers can be put to good use making the software better than if it was
hidden in a closet.

  Consider your favorite web browser..  How often has it crashed at an
inopportune time?  Wouldn't it be nice if you had the option of digging
in and eliminating the bug that made it crash, instead of just starting
the old binary back up and hoping it doesn't happen again for a while?

  I'm fortunate enough to use entirely open-sourced tools for a living.
There was a time when I used proprietary software, and I'd rather take
a pay hit than to go back to it.  I don't know which is worse, losing
time and work to buggy applications, or being completely helpless when
bitten by one of those bugs.  Work is hard enough; it doesn't need to
be hellish.

  -- TTK

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Subtle, but there (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fru...               05-Dec-99 21:30:25
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

Message sender: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org

From: ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar)

In article <38499FFF.80C27C5C@ibm.net>, Joseph  <josco@ibm.net> wrote:
>
>If LINUX were not viable LINUX would not have happened.

  This is a crucial point.  People who develop open-source tools do it
because they want those tools to be technically excellent (by some 
measure, be it portability, versatility, functionality, et al).  If a 
project does not hold real value, or at least the promise of real value 
(qv Hurd), then it will not attract developers.

  -- TTK

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Subtle, but there (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jim.danvers@mindex.com                            05-Dec-99 17:17:23
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 19:50:28
Subj: Re: How do I install fixpack 11 ?

From: Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com>

Doug. Lorne, et all...

Outstanding.  Thanks for the help and info.  The fixpack / device driver fix
packs split
more or lesss clears that one up.  (I was wondering about the "dd" fixes... )

Doug:  What exactly (if ~exactly~ can be defined...) will be "the problem"
with respect to
OS/2?  Are there known issues with it that are going to be more effectual (in
a negative
manner) on an OS/2 platformed box than on an MS based one (any variant of 9x - 
NT)?  Known
issues in a ~positive~ manner?

I'm planning on installing the Star Office app suite on the box tommorow, and
then I would
like to look into a backup solution as well as the box has an adaptec scsi
host controller
on it (its a compaq deskpro 6000).  I have access to an external HP 4mm dat
drive that I
would like to put back into service - I'm tentativly looking at something
called "Back
Again/2000" - should I just leave the box @FP5 if everything works, or should
I take it up
to what appears to be a stable FP9 and then be done with it?  Also (now that I 
think about
it), should I install my apps/ util / etc... s/w ~first~ and then apply FP9,
or doesn't it
matter?  It's a general rule of thumb in the NT world that if you install s/w
~after~
having installed a service pack or hotfix, to reload said SP or hot fix
afterwards (in case
any files got stomped...).

Last but not least - I would lke to be able to get it to talk co-operatively
with the NT
based network that I have @work - this appears to be some form of real devil
worship black
magic.  I have bookmarked some good looking resources to assist me with
this...  I'm
keeping my fingers crossed.  The box isn't half bad now as it is - I am
getting name
resolution when it comes to pinging machines in the domain, and I can even get 
out onto the
internet through the proxy server which is located across the wan (  :)  ) - I 
don't know
if I will be able to use any printers or map any drives on the NT boxes though 
(I haven't
tried yet).  For what its worth - the PC is running as an "Easy Install" mode, 
(vs. the
"Advanced Install").  I know of the following resources for doing this:

Colin's how to connect OS/2 PCs to NT domains page:
http://www.haynes97.freeserve.co.uk/os2tont.htm

RokNroB's Electrons
http://www.flash.net/~roknrob/sea.htm

Setting Up OS/2 Peer-to-Peer Networking & Coexistence of Warp & NT Machines on 
the MITNet
http://www.mit.edu/activities/os2/peer/WARPPEER.HTM

... do you folks know of other resources for reference?  I ~should~ be able to 
do this with
what I have @present, shouldn't I?

Thanks again very much for the assistance!  ;)

-=- J.D. -=-

Doug Bissett wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 15:48:44, Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Folks...
> >
> > We're talking Warp v4 (client) right?  I just installed it yesterday on a
machine
> > @work, and managed to get the minimum (?) FP5 installed on it so that I
could get
> > netscape communicator (4.61) installed.  I work in an NT environment and
am pretty
> > familiar with all of the stupid service packs and subsequent hot fixes
that need to
> > be installed on it from time to time - and typically having the latest is
suggested
> > (after waiting for others to blow up thier systems first of course).
> >
> > Question(s):  The install on warp on this machine @work is purely for
learning /
> > getting experience with the OS and possibly for implementing it for my own 
use @home
> > - is there a "need" to have a later fixpack applied other than 5?  Is this 
synonymous
> > with saying that NT1 SP1 is adequate and to just leave it @that?  (NOT!) 
Also - NT
> > service packs contain all of the fixes from earlier incarnations - in
other words I
> > can install an NT box and then just go straight to SP5 if I want to - I
don't have to
> > apply 2-4 in order first.  Does this hold true with Warp?
> >
> > Thanks for the info folks....
> >
> > -=- J.D. -=-
> >
>
> First, welcome to the world of OS/2.
>
> The OS/2 fix packs are cumulative (the latest, contains all of the
> fixes, which may include going back to a lower level file, in some
> cases) up to FP11, when IBM split out a lot of hardware device drivers
> into
> their own fix pack. Not ALL hardware drivers are in the DD FP. You
> should check at the Device driver web site, for the latest drivers for
> your devices:
> http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/html/index.htm
>
> You can get the latest Fix Pack (12, at this time), from:
> ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/v4warp/english-us/
> (back up a few directories for different languages, or for warp3), and
> you can get the Device Driver Fix Pack (1, at this time), from:
> ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/DDPak/
>
> This site only keeps certain versions of the fix packs, and you cannot
> get them all from there (I think they keep FP5, because that was the
> first Y2K version, the latest, and the latest-1). If you want to try
> some other version, you can get them from HOBBES:
> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/
>
> Many people find that there are problems with various fix packs, and
> that one will work better than others, for their specific machine, and
> applications. Personally, I found FP9 to be the most stable, but FP12
> is close, as long as you get a fixed version of the PMMerge.DLL file
> (available as PMR00052.ZIP, from HOBBES). I had terrible problems with
> FP5 (or was it 6???).
>
> You may, also, want to check out various alternative FP installation
> methods. If you go to the OS/2 SuperSite:
> http://www.os2ss.com/
> and follow the New User links, you will find a LOT of good information
> about OS/2, including different ways to go about installing fix packs.
>
> Finally, the Golden Rule of OS/2 fix packs, is DON'T fix pack it if
> you don't have a problem! Of course Y2K is going to be a "problem"
> shortly.
>
> Other good OS/2 web sites include:
> http://service.boulder.ibm.com/asd-bin/doc/en_us/catalog.htm
> http://www.leo.org/archiv/software/os2/index_grouped.html
> http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/Communicator.html
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/7567/software/english/ind
> ex.html
> http://www.gt-online.com/~bri/
> http://duanec.indelible-blue.com/fixes/LatestWarp4.html
> http://ncic.netmag.cz/apps/nase/smartcache_e.html
> ftp://ftp.hursley.ibm.com/pub/java/fixes/os2/11/
> http://www.os2ss.com/information/kelder/index.html
> http://www.musthave.com/
> http://www.pmview.com/
> http://www.indelible-blue.com/
> http://www.RPFSoftware.com/
> http://www.kellergroup.com/
> http://www.emtec.com/
> http://www.cds-inc.com/
>
> (I have no affiliation with any of them, other than as a user of their
> products, or information).
>
> Hope this helps...
> ******************************
> From the PC of Doug Bissett
> doug.bissett at attglobal.net
> The " at " must be changed to "@"
> ******************************

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 18:37:17
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384ADA9E.513E1D2@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):

What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

> > In article <384A0147.5328467@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Eric Bennet wrote (using a psuedonym again):
> > 
> > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> 
> I see you've taken the liberty to misquote me yet again.  How convenient. 
> Here's the actual statement back:
> M] Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):

Illogical.

> > > > In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty 
> > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > >
> > > > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> > >
> > > It's your pseudonym.
> > 
> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> 
> Don't you know, Eric?

Ask your mentor, grasshopper.
 
> > Don't I know what, Marty?
> 
> EB] What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?

What about it, Marty?
 
> > > > > > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > In article 
> > > > > > > > > > > > <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Aaron
> > > > > > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.o
> > > > > > > > > > > > rg>
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise 
> > > > > > > > > > > there.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant, 
> > > > > > > > > > Marty.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Incorrect.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Typical pontification.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons
> > > > > > from the pontiff.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified 
> > > > > to
> > > > > teach me about pontification, Eric.
> > > >
> > > > You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous
> > > > presupposition.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.
> > 
> > Poppycock.
> 
> Typical pontification, the last line of defense for those who lack a 
> logical
> argument.

Balderdash.
 
> > > > > > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
> > > >
> > > > Feldercarb, Marty.
> > >
> > > Evidence, please.
> > 
> > You deleted the evidence.
> 
> What alleged "evidence"?

See what I mean?
 
> > How predictable.
> 
> You're erroneously presupposing that I have deleted evidence.

How are the poppies in your poppycock garden, Marty?
 
> > > > > > > > > That this behavior was expected is common knowledge.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So"
> > > > > > > Tholen?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See above.
> > > > >
> > > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > > >
> > > > Illogical.
> > >
> > > Typical pontification, which further does not justify your previous
> > > pontification.
> > 
> > How ironic.
> 
> I see you've still failed to justify your pontification.  No surprises 
> there.

Incorrect.
 
> > > > > > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he 
> > > > > > > > > > > > replied
> > > > > > > > > > > > to Marty's post.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet 
> > > > > > > again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to 
> > > > > provide
> > > > > proof.
> > > >
> > > > What you see is incorrect.
> > >
> > > Evidence, please.  I'm not the one wearing the dirty glasses, 
> > > remember?
> > 
> > Irrelevant, Marty.
> 
> On the contrary, it's quite relevant to the topic of "seeing correctly".

Prove it, if you think you can.

> > > > > Par for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.
> > > >
> > > > Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?
> > >
> > > You're the one using the pseudonym.  You tell me.
> > 
> > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> 
> Don't you know, Eric?

See above.

> > > > > > > > How predictable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See above.
> > > > >
> > > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > > >
> > > > Trying to change the context again
> > >
> > > You are erroneously presupposing that I have tried to change the 
> > > context
> > > before.
> > 
> > Incorrect.
> 
> If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement? 
> Illogical.

Reading comprehension problems, Marty?  There was a presupposition, but 
it was not made erroneously.

> > > > to deflect attention
> > >
> > > What alleged "attention"?
> > 
> > Don't you know?
> 
> Don't I know what, Eric?

More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.  Of course, that 
is to be expected of you.

> > > > from your unsubstantiated claims, Marty?
> > >
> > > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of unsubstantiated 
> > > claims
> > > on my part, Eric.
> > 
> > On the contrary.
> 
> If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement? 
> Illogical.

See above.
 
> > > > Ineffective.
> > >
> > > Your continued pontifications are ineffective.
> > 
> > You erroneously presupposed that I have pontificated.
> 
> My presupposition was not erroneous, as you have just demonstrated.

Incorrect.
 
> > > > > > > > > No surprise there.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "How predictable."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why?
> > > > >
> > > > > "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?
> > > >
> > > > Illogical.
> > >
> > > Typical pontification.  No surprise there.
> > 
> > Balderdash.
> 
> Prove that there is a surprise there, if you think you can.

Non sequitur.
 
> > > > > > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves 
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > removal of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > >
> > > > > Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone 
> > > > > lacking
> > > > > a logical argument.
> > > >
> > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > removal of key context.
> > >
> > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the 
> > > removal
> > > of key context.
> > 
> > What alleged "someone"?
> 
> The same "someone" using a pseudonym and giving "someone else" a hand in 
> their
> Balderdash garden.

What alleged "pseudonym" and "Balderdash garden"?

> > Comprehend context, Marty.
> 
> Unnecessary, Eric, as no context was present thanks to you.

Typical invective.
 
> > > > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your pontification is
> > > > perceived, Marty.
> > >
> > > How can I realize how something is perceived that doesn't exist, 
> > > Eric?
> > > Do you still enjoy beating your wife?
> > 
> > What alleged "wife", Marty?
> 
> Analogy recognition problems, Eric?

How ironic.  Taking inappropriate analogy lessons from Mike Timbol 
again, Marty?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 18:41:18
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384AD700.C095CA35@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> I see you've conveniently removed part of the article again.  

What did I allegedly remove, Marty?

> > > > > Note:  no response
> > >
> > > Note: still no response
> > 
> > Incorrect.
> 
> Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in 
> addition to
> failing to provide evidence for my alleged "inconsistency".

What "question" have I "failed to answer"?
 
> Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in 
> addition to
> failing to account for what you did to the rest of my posting.

See above.

> Apparently Eric's clipboard is prone to misquoting (either that or Eric 
> is
> dishonestly removing context when he quotes someone).  Here's the actual
> statement:
> M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.

It could be a bug in Eric's recently-upgraded newsreader, since it 
usually displays no punctuation for the last sentence of any of your 
posts.
 
> > > Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.  
> > > Here's
> > > how the above statement was actually written:
> > > M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
> > >
> > > > Evidence, please.
> > >
> > > You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just
> > > demonstrated.
> > 
> > Aren't you certain, Marty.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?

Ask your grasshopper, Marty.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 18:42:02
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<atticus-0512991524120001@user-38lc93t.dialup.mindspring.com>, 
atticus@mindspring.com (Andy Walton) wrote:

> In article <tholenbot-97229E.14561205121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
>   :> Note: still no response
>   :
>   :Incorrect.
> 
> Shouldn't that be "Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless."?

Aren't you certain, Andy?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 18:44:16
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384AD4BC.B2E66522@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > > In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of 
> > > > >his
> > > > >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> > > >
> > > > I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the
> > > > Balderdash garden which you claim I tend
> > >
> > > Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How 
> > > typical.
> > 
> > Argument by redundancy again, Chris?
> 
> What alleged "redundancy" Eric?

Illogical.

Jumping into discussions again, Marty?

> > Illogical.  Of course, such behavior is to be expected of you.
> 
> You're erroneously presupposing the presence of "redundancy", Eric

Incorrect.  That I leave to you.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  06-Dec-99 00:01:18
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Wolf Kirchmeir write:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:31:57 -0700, Steven C. Britton wrote:
> 
> =>It isn't the same quantity of merchandise.  One has Windows, the other
> =>doesn't.  Microsoft is offering a large discount on Windows when it is
> =>bundled with a computer.  You still pay more for a computer with Windows
> =>than a computer with no OS at all.
> 
> False. I tried to get a rebate on blank computer, sans OS, but couldn't.

Well, as you've said before, that is the licensing agreement that the
respective companies signed.  Your problem is with the way they choose to
business.  If this is such a big deal to you, do not purchase their product.

> Clearly, someone is setting things up so that I, the consumer, can'y buy a
> machine without that damn OS.

Every computer company wants to be able to sell their products to every
computer consumer out there.  None of them will ever be successful.  Yet you
want to punish the company that comes closest to that ideal.

>                                 It's not the reseller -- he's just
conforming
> to pressures bought to bear on him by the >>very large<< bully who co-ercing
> him.

Who is asking him.  There's a difference, even if the "very large bully"
asks for something very extreme in return.

> This has nothing whatver to do with property roights, BTW, and everything to
> do with the consumer's right to be offered a fair choice.

The consumer has no such right, anymore than a business has the right to be
protected from bankrupcy.

> All machines should be sold at cost of hardware + cost of selected OS + cost
> of selected software.

Plus profit, of course, right?

>                        If the reseller offers bundles, fine; but the machine
> without the bundle had better be cheaper.

If it isn't, I guess nobody will buy the bundle, eh?

>                                            If MS wants to deal with
resellers
> to offer their OS at a deep discount, that's fair enough. But a blank
machine
> should still be cheaper.

If MS and the dealer want to enter into an agreement where blank machines
aren't cheaper, that is their right.  It is your right not to enter into an
agreement where you purchase said blank machine.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  06-Dec-99 00:11:05
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw letoured@nospam.net write:
>  larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> >> > That's not coercive.  It's a package deal.  Microsoft can't force
> >> > computer distributors to put Windows on their machines; but they _can_
> >> > say that "if you sell a computer with windows, we'll give you a massive
> >> > discount on it".
> >> 
> >> Which is a direct violation of U. S. Fair Trade Laws
> >Precisely the point.
> 
> Are you in Special Ed? The issue is not the discount. The issue is that no
> one gets the discount if they sell anything but Windoze.

So in other words, a company isn't allowed to give a discount for behaviour
that they like?

Most discounts come with a condition.  So did MS's.  And you cry and scream
about it.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  06-Dec-99 00:12:27
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Forrest Gehrke write:
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> > Why on earth is such a straightforward transaction illegal?  What kind of
> > crazy law is that?
> > 
> Lars,
> I don't happen to know, but are you telling us that Canada
> does not have an antitrust law?

Oh, Canada has this lunacy too.  Even more powerful than the antitrust laws
in the U.S.  Propane companies are unable to merge for "the public good",
and the law explicitly states that a lack of evidence is no hindrance on
successful prosecution.

But it isn't Canada's anti-trust laws that persecute the most successful
company in the world today.

> Please look into it and report back what that law has
> to say about predatory pricing.

Oh, you mean the laws stating that any business practise is illegal?

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu                         06-Dec-99 00:03:21
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenantispam@hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests, Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a basic,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like we've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hit another major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B-111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  06-Dec-99 00:14:21
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Mike Trettel write:
> On 3 Dec 1999 00:43:40 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:
> >
> >Here's a hint, US LAW DEFINING MONOPOLIES is the entire problem!  I'm not
> >trying to argue that MS is acting legally, but rather that its actions
> >should never have been illegal in the first place.
> 
> I have a perfectly honest question, then.  If you truly believe this is
> so, then it follows that you would believe that any of the US
> government's antitrust actions over the past hundred or so years were
> wrong, no? That would mean that the Standard Oil antitrust case should
> never have been brought, that IBM should not have suffered repeated
> antitrust suits, et al.

Yes, yes, and yes.

> >> MS forces computer buyers to pay for Windows whether the customer wants
to
> >> or not.
> >
> >MS doesn't force computer buyers to do anything.  Microsoft sells its code.
> >People buy it.  This is called a free exchange.
> 
> That's an interesting color of sky in your world.  It's, what, rose
> colored?

Who do you know who was forced to buy a copy of Windows?

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nomadic@worldnet.att.net                          05-Dec-99 19:22:08
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Middle Brandon Era <nomadic@worldnet.att.net>

In article <82el70$c2r$1@sparky.wolfe.net>, 
ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar) 
wrote:

> Consider your favorite web browser..  How often has it crashed at an
>inopportune time?  Wouldn't it be nice if you had the option of digging
>in and eliminating the bug that made it crash, instead of just starting
>the old binary back up and hoping it doesn't happen again for a while?

I'd rather just have it work properly from the get go, rather than have 
go digging around. I'm bettting most computer users feel the same way.

-- 
-Brandon Blatcher
ICQ#51619871

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Mongowobs, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                05-Dec-99 19:24:07
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <384AD436.E9ABBAC3@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <384A04A5.3F00E221@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > That is a lie.
> > 
> > What is a lie, Marty?
> 
> Apparently my use of vocabulary is not accessibile to you. 

Aren't you certain?

> A lie is a
> statement which is a deliberate ommission of truth or a statement in a 
> direct
> juxtaposition to the truth.

Illogical.  Comprehend context, Marty.

> > > > You do.
> > >
> > > Another unsupported lie.
> > 
> > Incorrect.
> 
> How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?

You erroneously presuppose that I don't know what a lie is.
 
> > Your posts fully support my statement.
> 
> You are erroneously presupposing you know what a lie is, contrary to your
> question:
> EB] What is a lie, Marty?

Incorrect.
  
> > > > Having Marty recognition trouble again, Marty?
> > >
> > > On the contrary, I recognize your lies quite well, Eric.
> > 
> > Non sequitur.
> 
> How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?

See above.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tzs@halcyon.com                                   06-Dec-99 00:20:23
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)

Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org> wrote:
>Why are anti-OS/2-advocate-advocates posting their B.S. on this 
>newsgroup? This is obviously a newsgroup for OS/2 advocates. Read the 
>name. If you want to talk about how much OS/2 and its users suck, talk 

Read the charter.  This group is for "Supporting and flaming OS/2".

--Tim Smith

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            05-Dec-99 16:35:24
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm>

In article <b_t24.12658$Tp.326848@typ11.nn.bcandid.com>, "H.W. 
Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com> wrote:

> "Timberwoof" <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
> news:mroeder-2EB744.23302904121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > In article <dok24.11236$Tp.248494@typ11.nn.bcandid.com>, "H.W.
> > Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > > Windows was actually demonstrated back about 1982.
> 
> > Yes, but when did it *ship*?
> 
> Read the next few lines of my *original post* (boy, it's fun to use those
> asterisks for emphasis!):
> 
> > >The thorny issue was
> > > whether to go with a tiled windowing system (which windows 1.0 was),
> > > or try arbitrary windows and risk the patience of Job(s).  I didn't 
> > > see
> > > a real working version till about 1984, well after the Lisa was out 
> > > (for
> a
> [...]
> OK?
> 
> 

No, actually, it's just mostly okay. 

The web site cited in this thread's seminal post has screen shots of a 
host of GUIs including Windows. The one for Windows 1.0 has a copyright 
date of 198*5*, after the Mac has already been introduced.

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Infernosoft (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tzs@halcyon.com                                   06-Dec-99 00:38:13
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)

On Sat, 27 Nov 1999 23:14:03 +0100, C Lund
<clund@SPAMMY.MUST.DIE.notam.uio.no> wrote:
>> Do you have any idea exactly what Microsoft is alleged to have pilfered
>> from Apple?
>
>(from what I've gathered) The code that lets Window's windows overlap, the
>code dealing with the opening and closing of said windows, and the code

Considering that Apple's code was written in 68k assembly language, and
Microsoft's was in x86 assembly language, it's hard to see how much code
could be borrowed.  The best you could reasonably do in that situation is
use the Apple code to learn some algorithmic tricks, and then write your
x86 code to incorporate those tricks.

I could believe that for the region code, but Microsoft does regions
totally differently, so that's doubtful.  For the rest of the windowing
system, there were much better places for Microsoft to learn algorithmic
tricks (e.g., Reiser's bitblt for Bell Lab's Blit terminal was much better
than anything Apple had, and Rob Pike's windowing system for that same
terminal could have taught Apple and Microsoft both a lot about how it
should be done...and that was from 1981 or 1982).

--Tim Smith

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tzs@halcyon.com                                   06-Dec-99 00:49:08
  To: All                                               05-Dec-99 21:17:16
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)

On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 21:14:45 -0500, Tim Adams <teadams@tea.mv.com> wrote:
>In article <vqjb4skapcpj2k7f1jklna0paagvhu7ib7@4ax.com>, Roger <roger@.>
>wrote:
>> You have mixed up CP/M, QDOS, Tim Patterson, Gary Kildall and more than a
>> bit of whole cloth here.
>> 
>> Do try not to make yourself look so foolish next time?
>
>So why don't you enlighten the world with your understanding of the
>beginnings of DOS for the IBM pc? Mine came from people at IBM, interviews
>with people that talked with Gary Kildall, an historical run down on the
>pbs show Computer chronicles, and a couple magazine articles.

You must have talked to different IBM people than the ones that have talked
to EVERYONE who has written books on the subject.  "Roger", although he
could have phrased it nicer, is basically right.  Enlightenment can be found
in pretty much any library.

--Tim Smith

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          05-Dec-99 17:14:22
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason
>Where in the charter does it mention the flaming of OS/2 advocates?

Where in the charter does it mention the discussion of other operating
systems, in particular, topics such as Microsoft's business policies?

In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
off-topic according to the charter

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          05-Dec-99 17:19:19
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

I see that Jason is once again hypocritically violating the newsgroup
charter even after complaining about others doing so. Typical.

>:>Jeff Glatt
>:>>OS/2 Advocacy has always hinged upon "attacking the mainstream",
>:>>whether it be developers who support Windows, or Windows users (ie,
>:>>"lemmings" in OS/2 Advocacy terminology), or journalists who write
>:>>favorable things about anything related to Windows (or commit the
>:>>unspeakable crime of merely failing to praise OS/2 in every magazine).
>:>>That's one big reason why OS/2 Advocacy has, by and large, been a
>:>>complete and utter failure.
>
>:>Aaron Dimsdale
>:>Go look at some MacOS users out there
>
>: Mac users have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments. If you're
>: having trouble following the topic, let me know, and I'll explain it
>: to you. (Pssssst. The clue is in the first two words of my above
>: paragraph).

>Jason
>Bullsh*t.

So you erroneously presume.

>If you have a reading comprehenstion of at least a JR high school 
>student you would understand his comments.

I understand his comments just fine, which is why I realize that they
have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments, and the subject of
such.

>:>all the other "Gates Is God, Worship Gates" Windows advocates posting to
>:>this newsgroup.

>: Windows advocacy also has no relevance whatsoever to my above
>: comments.

>Read my previous comment

Read my previous response.

>I can't believe just how much sh*t you're shoveling today.

I can't believe that you're posting messages that are off-topic
according to the newsgroup charter, after you've complained that
others are doing that. Are you being deliberately hypocritical, or
just stupid?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          05-Dec-99 17:21:24
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason
>David, when you lose an arguement, you aren't suppose to insult someone, 
>say something in broken english and then pick up your toys and go home.  
>People usually say something like, "whoops, I made a mistake there, my bad"

How ironic that you insulted me when I pointed out that you're being a
foolish hypocrite for posting messages that are off-topic according to
the newsgroup charter, after you have complained that others have done
likewise

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          05-Dec-99 17:31:08
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>Karel Jansens
>>IIRC, Bob has given us the explanation, so hypotheth... hypotess... 
>>guessing isn't necessary anymore.

>David Sutherland
>Bob has given us a number of explanations, and as I have already said,
>I don't think they hang together very well.

Indeed. But Karel is not a particularly bright guy, and obviously
those inconsistencies are not apparent to him. Furthermore, even by
his own admission (not that we need anything beyond his own posts to
demonstrate his undiscerning bias) he admits that he's biased and
therefore is prone to doing what he did here (yet again) -- accept the
word of someone, without regard for any inconsistency, simply because
that person happens to be gungho for Karel's pet product. This is
precisely the "criteria" he has used to come up with his glowing
opinion of Tholen, a renowned Usenet Kook of the Month -- a person who
is lowly regarded by a great number of people spanning all manner of
demographics

>>Of course, especially after those well-phrased and thoroughly 
>>consistent arguments from Jeff Glatt. So let me see, I have to choose 
>>between the credibility of a couple of ex-OS/2 users, turned to the 
>>dark side, spending their time in the old COOA telling everyone how 
>>stupid they are - and Bob Germer. Hmmmm, tough one...

>Hmmm...the problem is that I'm not taking Jeff Glatts arguments as any
>kind of "proof" - I am taking Bob Germers' explanations and their
>internal inconsistencies as proof that he isn't being honest.

Yeah, Karel is sure that absolutely everyone who has told him that his
opinions are naive was compelled by me to say that. Ironically, this
could be regarded as yet more evidence that Karel is naive. Maybe if
he weren't so fixated upon his pet product, he could see the reality
of what's going on.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lsunley@mb.sympatico.ca                           05-Dec-99 17:42:21
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: How do I install fixpack 11 ?

From: lsunley@mb.sympatico.ca (Lorne Sunley)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 15:48:44, Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com> 
wrote:

<snip>
> 
> Question(s):  The install on warp on this machine @work is purely for
learning /
> getting experience with the OS and possibly for implementing it for my own
use @home
> - is there a "need" to have a later fixpack applied other than 5?  Is this
synonymous
> with saying that NT1 SP1 is adequate and to just leave it @that?  (NOT!) 
Also - NT
> service packs contain all of the fixes from earlier incarnations - in other
words I
> can install an NT box and then just go straight to SP5 if I want to - I
don't have to
> apply 2-4 in order first.  Does this hold true with Warp?
> 

<snip>

Fixpacks with Warp are cumulative, each one has everything
earlier ones have. EXCEPT after FP 10 IBM split the FP
set for the OS into two, One for the OS (which continues
the incrementing number scheme - now up to FP 12).
the second is for device drivers now at DD number 1.

The device driver fixpack series updates the set
of device drivers that were included with the GA 
release of the OS. This includes such things as
the base IDE drivers.

Unlike NT, OS/2 fixpacks only do the base OS. There
are separate fixpack series for MPTS (networking protocols
like the TCP/IP stack and NETBIOS), TCP/IP applications,
File and Print Sharing client, Printer drivers updates are 
normally separate files. 

Individual device drivers are downloadable from the
OS/2 Device Driver Pak website
URL http://service.software.ibm.com/os2ddpak/
These are drivers for new devices that are not included
with the base OS, such as USB devices, network cards,
printer drivers, sound cards etc.

Sometines locating the correct FP to solve your
problems can be quite daunting. But the separate
FP method allows you to apply updates to the 
piece of the OS that is broken, usually without
breaking something else :-)

A good site for an overview of the OS/2 updates
available is
URL http://www.warpupdates.de/

I have heard some people day (post) that FP 9
is the most stable and others advocate FP 12
(the current latest). Usually people report
problems with all FP levels, the mix of hardware
and software installed on the machine usually
determines if the FP works.

--

Lorne Sunley

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: MBnet Networking Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 09:46:22
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Jim Frost wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> > January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the top
> > 100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the Dreamcast
> > surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
> > current PC state-of-the-art."
>
> The Dreamcast is good, been using it for the better part of a year now, but
> it's nowhere near as good as current state of the art on PCs.

So write a "Letter to the Editor" to Computer Gaming World, a PC game
magazine.

> It is about as
> good as you could get a year ago in terms of gaming systems -- but we've
gone
> two generations beyond that at this point, not even counting the really
> high-end cards (the ones that cost more than the PC and are bought by people
> who traditionally bought high-end workstations).

There's no way I can defend the game console hardware against a device that
allows someone to plug in a new card  every day and claim it's better.  
There's
also no reason to suggest that particular hardware perspective is or ever has
been the correct perspective.   Computer Gaming World reviews hardware and
software.  The review was for the top 100 games - as #11 that recommended the
Dreamcast software base - best represented by Soul Caliber and NFL 2000.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               05-Dec-99 02:06:09
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: letoured@nospam.net

jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:


Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
without paying for wincrap.   That you rant without knowing this, makes
you a teir-one moron.




>>>>Bob Germer
>>>>Try buying an Intel based computer without paying
>>>>for Windows.

>>>Jeff Glatt
>>> I do it all of the time. But that's because I'm clearly MUCH more
>>> competent than a phony like you who lies about his alleged experience
>>> in setting up and maintaining computers

>>Joe Malloy
>>Gads, this Germer fellow's a real bore.  How can someone claims to be a
>>"computer professional" and yet be stuck with buying Windows each and every
>>time he assembles a computer?  Inquiring minds want to know!  I, too, got my
>>last two machines with no OS installed, but I guess I'm even smarter than
>>Germer himself...

>According to his "testimony", his alleged "clients" (he doesn't really
>have any -- what he claims to have done are things that he read about
>someone else doing via computer magazines or web sites -- but let's
>pretend otherwise for a moment just to analyze just how illogical,
>implausible, and just plain dumb are his contrived anecdotes) don't trust
>him to supply hardware because he's a local guy who doesn't have millions
>of dollars in capital. So, they demand that hardware be purchased from
>non-local companies like IBM or Compaq so that professional,
>uninterrupted "service can be guaranteed years down the road". And yet,
>these same "clients" have eschewed the professional services of companies
>like IBM (whose specialty actually is what Germer claims to be doing) in
>installing and maintaining these computers. Instead, they have hired a
>60-something year old local guy to adminster millions of dollars worth of
>equipment for which they require guarantees of service years down the
>road.

>Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. Suuuuuuuuuure. We believe that.
_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             05-Dec-99 18:15:02
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82a67i$dt8$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > After all, your question was, "What is 'up' doing at the beginning
> > of that phrase?"
>
> And your excuse was to avoid writing a preposition at the end, which
> is what you said.

Which I successfully (and correctly) did.

> So, why is it "sad" that I believe in what really transpired?

I see that you've lost track of the flow of dialog.

Again.

> > The implication was that "up" at the beginning of a phrase was
> > somehow wrong.
>
> I see you still don't understand the difference between "implication"
> and "inference".

That you continue to respond to my posts proves that you are making
implications. If you weren't making such, you would have no reason to
respond.

-- snip --

> > Are you seriously suggesting that "up to which you failed to
> > measure" is gramatically incorrect?
>
> I made no suggestions about those seven words, Curtis.

You made an implication that my grammar was incorrect. I see that
you lack the courage to even make a direct statement about this issue,
but would rather make implications and then deny even that by claiming
that I am simply making (supposedlly unwarranted) inferences.

-- snip --

> Are you seriously suggesting that you were sincere when you claimed
> that your posting of many days ago would be your last in this
> sub-thread?

Absolutely. I see that you still do not understand the meaning of the
words "hypocrisy" and "sincerity," nor the relationship between them.

-- snip --

If you have no implications to make, then you will not respond. If you
respond, then you are making implications.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             06-Dec-99 07:33:25
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384999E4.ABDADFFB@ibm.net...
>   Win95 OSR2 is not
> compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance - your
choice.

Guess you can't read the web page either.  Win95 OSR2 is compliant.  It
needs some patches, but all OS'es need patches.

>
> You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS maker
you
> advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither of you
are in
> the position of being responsible for these decisions.

No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
>
> > > And the fact remains, Boob Germer's statement on the Y2K compliance of
> > Win95
> > > is completely and utterly wrong.  I provided him with the URL's to
prove
> > > this.  Win95 is classed as Compliant with User Action, not Compliant
with
> > > Minor issues.
>
> You both have to let go of this Bob Germer thing.  Don't blame someone
else for
> a mistaken and nonsensical understanding of Y2K compliance.  The OSR2
Win95 OS I
> have as part of my lab (bought 1997) was NOT Y2K compliant.  It  needed 3
> patches for Y2K compliance.  2 were Y2K fixes and the last was a patch on
the
> that fix.  All had to be administered at the systems by support.  That
cost
> money.

So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I guess
that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it isn't.

> That patching  is a defect and indicates poor quality and a company not
> in full command of it's projects.

As opposed to all those patches for all those other operating systems that
show that other companies aren't in full command of their products....



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: scottg@flash.net                                  06-Dec-99 01:22:18
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Gary Scott <scottg@flash.net>

Tim Smith wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Nov 1999 23:14:03 +0100, C Lund
> <clund@SPAMMY.MUST.DIE.notam.uio.no> wrote:
> >> Do you have any idea exactly what Microsoft is alleged to have pilfered
> >> from Apple?
> >
> >(from what I've gathered) The code that lets Window's windows overlap, the
> >code dealing with the opening and closing of said windows, and the code
>
> Considering that Apple's code was written in 68k assembly language, and
> Microsoft's was in x86 assembly language, it's hard to see how much code
> could be borrowed.  The best you could reasonably do in that situation is
> use the Apple code to learn some algorithmic tricks, and then write your
> x86 code to incorporate those tricks.
>
> I could believe that for the region code, but Microsoft does regions
> totally differently, so that's doubtful.  For the rest of the windowing
> system, there were much better places for Microsoft to learn algorithmic
> tricks (e.g., Reiser's bitblt for Bell Lab's Blit terminal was much better
> than anything Apple had, and Rob Pike's windowing system for that same
> terminal could have taught Apple and Microsoft both a lot about how it
> should be done...and that was from 1981 or 1982).
>
> --Tim Smith

Actually, MS learned a lot of this stuff from IBM Hursley.


--

Gary Scott
mailto:scottg@flash.net

mailto:webmaster@fortranlib.com
http://www.fortranlib.com


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Home (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: 1979j@usa.net                                     06-Dec-99 01:24:08
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: I really need your help

From: Jugulator <1979j@usa.net>

Hello,

I am preparing an exam based on operating systems at my college. Nobody
here knows the importance of OS/2 in the history of Personal Computers.
I would like to quote largely OS/2 in my research but I miss maybe the
most
important version, the first ever with Presentation Manager and the
first operating system with a GUI for intel platforms : OS/2 1.1 . I
would like to run it on my PS/2 50, take some screenshots and doing an
original article. Can someone help me? Does anybody here has OS/2 1.1?
If so, please tell me, I really need it and I want my teacher to know
the importance of OS/2.

Thanks in advance, my apologises for this off-topic.
Jugulator

P.S. I am not interested in other 1.x versions, since I am not a
collector. Please, answer me if you have OS/2 1.1 . Thank you very much
again.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: [Infostrada] (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            05-Dec-99 18:04:08
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On 6 Dec 1999, Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> Who do you know who was forced to buy a copy of Windows?

By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows. 

Of course you're not the one defining the anti-trust laws so your
definitions are garbage. 

So a dog can chase after his tail and get further than you with your
insistance on defining the problem in a way that makes your interpretation
of law and common sense neither common nor sensible. 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               05-Dec-99 20:59:11
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

>> 
>> >> > That's not coercive.  It's a package deal.  Microsoft can't force
>> >> > computer distributors to put Windows on their machines; but they _can_
>> >> > say that "if you sell a computer with windows, we'll give you a
massive
>> >> > discount on it".
>> >> 
>> >> Which is a direct violation of U. S. Fair Trade Laws
>> >Precisely the point.
>> 
>> Are you in Special Ed? The issue is not the discount. The issue is that no
>> one gets the discount if they sell anything but Windoze.

>So in other words, a company isn't allowed to give a discount for
>behaviour that they like?

In the US -- No when the purpose of the discount is to take control of a
market. Of course I don't expect you understand that because it requires
reason.


>Most discounts come with a condition.  So did MS's.  And you cry and
>scream about it.

Yea, and they violate their license agreement that states I can refund. Of
course you have no comment on that.

So why are trolling here -- you are not ever going to make an argument
that anyone [except other MS Munchkins] agrees with. 

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                06-Dec-99 02:33:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: How do I install fixpack 11 ?

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:17:47, Jim Danvers <jim.danvers@mindex.com> 
wrote:

Doug. Lorne, et all...

Outstanding.  Thanks for the help and info.  The fixpack / device driver fix
packs split
more or lesss clears that one up.  (I was wondering about the "dd" fixes... )

Doug:  What exactly (if ~exactly~ can be defined...) will be "the problem"
with respect to
OS/2?  Are there known issues with it that are going to be more effectual (in 
a negative
manner) on an OS/2 platformed box than on an MS based one (any variant of 9x
- NT)?  Known
issues in a ~positive~ manner?

The only problem warp has is a dearth of commercial support.  OTOH, 
there is a pile of excellent freeware available for it.  I'd highly 
recommend you go to hobbes and search on emxrt.zip.  This is the EMX 
runtime.  It's part of the EMX development system, which permits the 
easy porting of unix console apps to warp.  There is an XFree86 server
available as well; all can be found on Hobbes:)

I'm planning on installing the Star Office app suite on the box tommorow, and 
then I would
like to look into a backup solution as well as the box has an adaptec scsi
host controller
on it (its a compaq deskpro 6000).  I have access to an external HP 4mm dat
drive that I
would like to put back into service - I'm tentativly looking at something
called "Back
Again/2000" - should I just leave the box @FP5 if everything works, or should 
I take it up
to what appears to be a stable FP9 and then be done with it?  Also (now that
I think about
it), should I install my apps/ util / etc... s/w ~first~ and then apply FP9,
or doesn't it
matter?  It's a general rule of thumb in the NT world that if you install s/w 
~after~
having installed a service pack or hotfix, to reload said SP or hot fix
afterwards (in case
any files got stomped...).

If you're familiar with unix programs, you might find that gtar and 
gtak can be a great solution when using a scsi-hosted tape drive.  
They will require emx; but that's no big deal, I've been using emx for
years with almost no problems.

You don't have to worry about apps stomping on system files in warp; 
there is a sane seperation between the system and the applications.  
In fact, if you hose the system, and if you keep all your apps on a 
seperate partition, you will be able to get probably ~95% of them 
going again without reinstalling; for ~85% of apps, simply creating a 
new program object on the desktop is enough.  For picky windows ports 
like netscape, you'll usually have to futz two or three files on the 
system partition (netscape.ini, found in the \os2\mdos\winos2, comes 
to mind; you need it if you want win3.x plugins to work properly under
netscape in warp) and some path information.  I have apps that I 
installed on this computer three years ago that have never needed to 
be reinstalled; and not just simple ones either.  For example, you can
get staroffice going after a system reinstall by creating a new 
program object.  Again, it might work more to your liking if you do 
some playing with the path and libpath, but it will work if you simply
drag soffice.exe to the desktop to create a program object.

Last but not least - I would lke to be able to get it to talk co-operatively
with the NT
based network that I have @work - this appears to be some form of real devil
worship black
magic.  I have bookmarked some good looking resources to assist me with
this...  I'm
keeping my fingers crossed.  The box isn't half bad now as it is - I am
getting name
resolution when it comes to pinging machines in the domain, and I can even
get out onto the
internet through the proxy server which is located across the wan (  :)  ) -
I don't know
if I will be able to use any printers or map any drives on the NT boxes
though (I haven't
tried yet).  For what its worth - the PC is running as an "Easy Install"
mode, (vs. the
"Advanced Install").  I know of the following resources for doing this:

Colin's how to connect OS/2 PCs to NT domains page:
http://www.haynes97.freeserve.co.uk/os2tont.htm

RokNroB's Electrons
http://www.flash.net/~roknrob/sea.htm

Setting Up OS/2 Peer-to-Peer Networking & Coexistence of Warp & NT Machines
on the MITNet
http://www.mit.edu/activities/os2/peer/WARPPEER.HTM

.... do you folks know of other resources for reference?  I ~should~ be able
to do this with
what I have @present, shouldn't I?

Yes, in fact, I have it set up at work.  It's not as hard as it 
appears.  The important thing that will save you many headaches is to 
script peer in startup.cmd.  If a file called startup.cmd is found in 
the root directory of the boot drive, it will be run before the 
desktop starts.  I use it on the box at work to run a bunch of "net 
use" commands to hook up to the printer and the shared drives that I 
need at work.  Here's an example...

net use \\server\sharename j:

to map to drive j.

Check out the net commands in the OS/2 Warp command reference!

Also, I'd like to point out that the way that networking is set up in 
warp means that you can configure the box to just boot to a command 
line and still have full networking services available to you; this is
a great aid in making a server stable for the really long term.

Welcome to warp, enjoy the trip!

<snip some good stuff>

Ease!

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            05-Dec-99 20:12:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:14
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

josco wrote:

> By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows.

Lars' definitions are the only logical definitions of the situation.  No
monopoly can possibly exist without the express consent, assistance, and
santion of the government.

When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.

Competition in the OS market exists.  Microsoft isn't a monopoly.  Just
because Microsoft chooses to put conditions on their distribution agreements
doesn't make them a monopoly.

In the Canadian automation market, for example, Allen Bradley has an
exclusivity arrangement with Westburne.  Westburne is not allowed to sell
anybody else's PLC technology.  They have a contract.

Now, conversely, Allen Bradley can't approach any other distributors,
because that is also in the contract; however let's assume that the
reciprocity of that was not in the contract.  Theoretically, A-B could sign
up hundreds, if not thousands of distributors, each ONLY permitted to sell
A-B.

Everything A-B has done is legal; all parties have entered into the
contracts knowingly and willingly, and competition in the automation market
still exists: you can still buy a Siemens, or GE PLC if you wish; because
the manufacturers still would sell the equipment.

> Of course you're not the one defining the anti-trust laws so your
> definitions are garbage.

Ever consider that the anti-trust laws are garbage?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm                            05-Dec-99 19:39:27
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Timberwoof <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm>

In article <slrn84m20c.164.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith 
<tzs@halcyon.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 21:14:45 -0500, Tim Adams <teadams@tea.mv.com> wrote:
> >In article <vqjb4skapcpj2k7f1jklna0paagvhu7ib7@4ax.com>, Roger <roger@.>
> >wrote:
> >> You have mixed up CP/M, QDOS, Tim Patterson, Gary Kildall and more 
> >> than a
> >> bit of whole cloth here.
> >> 
> >> Do try not to make yourself look so foolish next time?
> >
> >So why don't you enlighten the world with your understanding of the
> >beginnings of DOS for the IBM pc? Mine came from people at IBM, 
> >interviews
> >with people that talked with Gary Kildall, an historical run down on the
> >pbs show Computer chronicles, and a couple magazine articles.
> 
> You must have talked to different IBM people than the ones that have 
> talked
> to EVERYONE who has written books on the subject.  "Roger", although he
> could have phrased it nicer, is basically right.  Enlightenment can be 
> found
> in pretty much any library.

A library ... you know ... one of those warehouses of those "obsolete" 
permanent power-free analog graphics storage volumes kown as books. 

Books ... you know ... old fashioned sheets of paper bound together 
between pieces of cardboard. The paper is generally white, with some 
kind of dye permanently printed in place to represent the same kinds of 
visual information you normally find on a CRT. 

I guess books never became popular because no one ever found a way to 
port AVI or QuickTime to them.

-- 
Timberwoof; mroeder<at>best<dot>com; http://www.best.com/~mroeder
Ice Hockey QA Engineer (Goalie), 1998 BMW R1100GS rider, and
not your ordinary noncomformist. "You may have the right to say that,
but I will defend to the death my right to disagree."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Infernosoft (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 22:57:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
: I see that Jason is once again hypocritically violating the newsgroup
: charter even after complaining about others doing so. Typical.

I have not complained about people violating the newsgroup charter.  I 
have simply pointed out that flaming OS/2 advocates is not included in 
the charter as on topic.  Stop being so melodramatic Jeff.

:>:>Jeff Glatt
:>:>>OS/2 Advocacy has always hinged upon "attacking the mainstream",
:>:>>whether it be developers who support Windows, or Windows users (ie,
:>:>>"lemmings" in OS/2 Advocacy terminology), or journalists who write
:>:>>favorable things about anything related to Windows (or commit the
:>:>>unspeakable crime of merely failing to praise OS/2 in every magazine).
:>:>>That's one big reason why OS/2 Advocacy has, by and large, been a
:>:>>complete and utter failure.
:>
:>:>Aaron Dimsdale
:>:>Go look at some MacOS users out there
:>
:>: Mac users have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments. If you're
:>: having trouble following the topic, let me know, and I'll explain it
:>: to you. (Pssssst. The clue is in the first two words of my above
:>: paragraph).

:>Jason
:>Bullsh*t.

: So you erroneously presume.

You are correct here.  You actually lacked the intelliegence to 
comprehend his comments.  I thought you were just lying and putting on a 
show while you undertood his comments.  But in fact, you just don't 
understand them.

:>If you have a reading comprehenstion of at least a JR high school 
:>student you would understand his comments.

: I understand his comments just fine, which is why I realize that they
: have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments, and the subject of
: such.

See my previous comment.

:>:>all the other "Gates Is God, Worship Gates" Windows advocates posting to
:>:>this newsgroup.

:>: Windows advocacy also has no relevance whatsoever to my above
:>: comments.

:>Read my previous comment

: Read my previous response.

See my previous comment.

:>I can't believe just how much sh*t you're shoveling today.

: I can't believe that you're posting messages that are off-topic
: according to the newsgroup charter, after you've complained that
: others are doing that. Are you being deliberately hypocritical, or
: just stupid?

Where have I complained about people posting off topic.  I only commented 
at what the newsgroup charter in fact is.  What I have complained about 
is people who hang out in this newsgroup only to insult OS/2 advocates in 
order to incite a flame war and not to talk about OS/2.  My primary 
purpose in the newsgroup is to talk about OS/2, whether it's the good or 
bad points.  I may get drawn into the petty attacks from people of your 
kind, and participate, but this is not my primary purpose.  Without 
people like you, I would only be discussing the good and bad of OS/2.  I 
wish I was a better man and could ingore your posts, but I'm not always 
able to do this.  Especially, when they are spewing there bullshit 
revisionist history. 

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 23:00:19
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Opera/2 50% done

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jason
:>David, when you lose an arguement, you aren't suppose to insult someone, 
:>say something in broken english and then pick up your toys and go home.  
:>People usually say something like, "whoops, I made a mistake there, my bad"

: How ironic that you insulted me when I pointed out that you're being a
: foolish hypocrite for posting messages that are off-topic according to
: the newsgroup charter, after you have complained that others have done
: likewise

Stop being so melodramatic Jeff.  I have never done this.  Please stop 
constructing fantasy worlds out of the fragments of posts you remember 
from various people.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 20:11:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"Steven C. Britton" wrote:

> josco wrote:
>
> > By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows.
>
> Lars' definitions are the only logical definitions of the situation.  No
> monopoly can possibly exist without the express consent, assistance, and
> santion of the government.
>
> When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.

That definition of monopoly is incorrect.

> Competition in the OS market exists.  Microsoft isn't a monopoly.  Just
> because Microsoft chooses to put conditions on their distribution agreements
> doesn't make them a monopoly.

That too is incorrect.
Both of you choose to define words to suite your interpretation.

It is an uncontested fact that MS does not have 100% of the PC OS market as
the
government defines the market.  The case should be thrown out but was not.  
If
MS had you two as lawyers they'd be able to dismiss the case with a summary
judgement and no testimony since MS has less than 100% of the market the
Government has defined.  No monopoly. no case.

Now maybe we and MS's lawyers and the Judge are all just too stupid to
understand the true definition of the word monopoly.  That's one possibility
since you choose to argue your point.  Another suggestion is that you two are
defining monopoly and arguing based on your irrelevant interpretation of the
word monopoly.  Irrelevant in that the meaning you give has NO bearing on the
case and the trial. NONE.  What has happened and how MS has behaved as a
defendant contradicts your definition and logic.  You two cannot even explain
why MS did not use your definition in their defense.

I have to ask, "What's it like to have such little impact and importance?  You
have such a weak understanding since an application of your argument fails to
match with observed  facts? "  Frustrating as I can see it in your posts.  Try
using all caps letters in your reply.







--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      05-Dec-99 23:11:01
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jason
:>Where in the charter does it mention the flaming of OS/2 advocates?

: Where in the charter does it mention the discussion of other operating
: systems, in particular, topics such as Microsoft's business policies?

Where is the answer to my question?  The discussion of other operating 
systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.  By comparing other operating 
systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
it.  Comparing operating systems does not include the typical "OS/2 
sucks, Windows rulez" we get to hear from fringe that hangs out in here.  
Micrsoft is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and failure.  Talking 
about the Microsoft trials is very on topic since it is the story of OS/2.

: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
: off-topic according to the charter

Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?  I don't think so.  
While they would be bettered ignored, I still feel doing so is in spirit 
of this newsgroup.  What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.  But, most threads 
that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
purpose is to talk about OS/2, unlike you.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 04:22:05
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 05:08:33 -0500, Marty wrote:

>I see Dimsdale is still lying about owning a Balderdash garden.

What alleged lies, Marty? You have not yet proven that I own a 
Balderdash garden.

>Of more
>note,
>however, is the new inconsistency he introduced by claiming he doesn't even
>tend a Balderdash garden after formerly admitting to doing so.

What alleged admittal, Marty? I see you're having reading comprehension 
problems again.

>This is 
>no
>surprise for long-time Dimsdale fans, but those not familiar with his
>dishonesty and inconsistency may be taken aback and for that I apologize on
his
>behalf.  Here's today's Dimsdale digest:

Prove it, if you think you can.

>1> I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the
>1> Balderdash garden which you claim I tend, nor have you proven that I
>1> even tend it, as opposed to perhaps buying Balderdash from a store. How
>1> predictable.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

COME ON, POUR OUT YOUR THOUGHTS.
 
>1> An obvious lie, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.
 
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
>it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
>response), as Dr. Sbaitso's first request after noting a repeated statement
is:
>YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

I see you've snipped the evidence that I said something to that effect 
on the first occurance of a repeated statement. How predictable.
 
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
>it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
>response), as Dr. Sbaitso's response at this point would alternate between
the
>one noted by me above and your statement.  You see, unlike yourself, Dr.
>Sbaitso doesn't like to be a hypocrite asking someone else not to repeat,
while
>repeating his own statements himself.

Liar.
 
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> If you weren't too busy writing new sections of the Infantile Little
>1> Games Official Rulebook to check the facts, you would've noticed
>1> that I've spelled "kindergarten" correctly every time I used the word
>1> except for the above digested quotation. For the feeble-minded (That's
>1> you, Marty) I'll explain: "kindergraten" was a typo.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
>
>Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
>it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
>response), as Dr. Sbaitso does not say the above statement.

Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> I see you've snipped the evidence again, Marty. How predictable.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> YOU SAID THAT ALREADY. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
>
>Pretending to run this through Dr. Sbaitso?  You're obviously too inept to do
>it right (or dishonestly trying to pass the above off as a Dr. Sbaitso
>response), as Dr. Sbaitso does not say the above statement.  Note the
>inconsistency within this very post:
>AD] YOU SAID THAT ALREADY. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
>AD] YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. MORE INFORMATION PLEASE.
>Now compare these two to the correct response:
>DS] YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.
>
>Not only was he inconsistent, but all of the variations he attempted were
>incorrect.  "Inept".

How ironic, coming from someone who wrote the section about being inept 
in the Official Major League Infantile Games Rule Book.

>1> Shouldn't you know things like that about your employer, Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> Using something from another thread, Marty? How ironic, coming from
>1> someone who claims that everything which embarrasses him is irrelevant.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>1> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.

>Dimsdale dug this post out of the archives and seemingly went out of his way
to
>embarrass himself...
>2> How ironic coming from Marty "Monarch of Invectives and Ill Logic" (sic)
>2> Amodeo.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>2> DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>2> DOES THIS QUESTION INTEREST YOU?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>2> Irrelevant, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.

>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>2> PLEASE DON'T REPEAT.
>
>How hypocritical and ironic.

How ironic, coming from someone who wrote the "Hypocrisy and Irony" 
section of the Official Major League Infantile Games Rule Book.

>3> You erronously presuppose that I've ever tended
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>3> You erronously presuppose that I own a
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>3> What alleged "garden", Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>3> Balderdash, Marty.
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.
>
>3> Where, Marty?
>
>"Balderdash."
>
>I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

YOU'VE SAID THAT - PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION.


---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 04:30:03
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Marty digest, volume 00AEF0EDAFEDFFAADEEFAFDAEBCDDAFE

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

Marty seems to be up to no good yet again. I leave for a few days and 
watch what havoc Marty tries to get away with. I would make a digest of 
everything he's said, but all he's said since the last Marty Digest are 
things like:

1> "Balderdash."
1>
1> I warned you about going down that path, Aaron.

Apparently, Marty has finally gotten the idea of Tholen Emulation as he 
has thus been posting almost nothing but Pure Tholen. Perhaps he will 
write a product with a name like "Marty Amodeo's TholEmu for OS/2" soon,
and us cooa people will finally have our own native OS/2 Tholen 
emulators, making it much easier for every OS/2 user to be a true 
tholenbotter. It might even help me. (Chris Pott's "TholenBot Pro(tm)" 
Tholen emulation software has so far only said things like "Balderdash, 
Marty" which are true Tholen but apparently not good enough for Marty.)

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 04:36:26
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 18:42:04 -0500, tholenbot wrote:

>In article 
><atticus-0512991524120001@user-38lc93t.dialup.mindspring.com>, 
>atticus@mindspring.com (Andy Walton) wrote:
>
>> In article <tholenbot-97229E.14561205121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
>> 
>>   :> Note: still no response
>>   :
>>   :Incorrect.
>> 
>> Shouldn't that be "Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless."?
>
>Aren't you certain, Andy?

Here's the log from my recent session with "TholenBot Pro(tm) for 
Windows" (copyright Chris Pott):

OUTPUT: Welcome to TholenBot Pro(tm), the best Tholen emulator for 
Windows.
OUTPUT: What would you like TBP to do?
INPUT: TholenCheck Pro(tm)
OUTPUT: Enter a statement for TholenBot Pro(tm) TholenCheck Pro(tm) to
authorize.
INPUT: Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless.
OUTPUT: The statement is not Tholenian. Suggested alternative: 
"Incorrect."

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  06-Dec-99 14:57:04
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
>
>
> Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:384999E4.ABDADFFB@ibm.net...
> > >   Win95 OSR2 is not
> > > compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance - your
> > choice.
> >
> > Guess you can't read the web page either.  Win95 OSR2 is compliant.  It
> > needs some patches, but all OS'es need patches.
>
> You guessed wrong.
>
> >  You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS maker
> > you
> > > advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither of
you
> > are in
> > > the position of being responsible for these decisions.
> >
> > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
>
> Then why are there patches?
>
> > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
guess
> > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
isn't.
>
> As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches to
Win95
> OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2 so
your
> word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
packs and
> the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with MS's
Win95
> and the reason for my complaints.
>
> I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
word or
> term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then one is
saying
> they their ideas are confused, their understanding of technology is
confused and
> one embraces confusion as a means to cope with problems .   If that
display is
> done in a public forum then all the worse -- why advertise ?

Have you bothered to read about what the y2k "fixes" actually "fix" ?  If
you do, it's quite obvious the OS itself is y2k compliant, but some of the
applets that ship with it are not.

It would be like me saying Unix isn't y2k compliant if I could find a couple
of apps that ran on it that weren't.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 04:53:06
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 23:26:43 -0800, TholenBotPro(TM) wrote:

>In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
><postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
>> 
>> >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
>> >today's digest:
>> 
>> Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
>
>Incorrect.

Balderdash, Chris.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 04:51:11
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 16:20:00 -0500, Marty wrote:

>Eric Bennet wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>> 
>> In article <384A030B.F353703D@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>> > >
>> > > In article <38498792.F2BFDFEA@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I see you've conveniently removed the rest of the article.  Here's
>> > > > your context back:
>> > >
>> > > Balderdash, Marty.
>> 
>> Note: no response.
>
>I see you've conveniently removed part of the article again.  Here's your
>context back:
>EB] Balderdash, Marty.
>M]  Still giving Aaron a hand tending his Balderdash garden, Eric?
>
>Note: no response

The following PottWare (tm) TholenBot Pro(tm) For Windows (tm) log says 
it all:

OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has failed to find evidence on 
group(s) "comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy" that Aaron owns or
tends a "Balderdash garden".
OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has failed to find evidence on group(s) 
"comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy" that Eric has ever been 
involved in any way with a "Balderdash garden".
OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenTrace Pro(tm).

>> > > > > Still having reading comprehension problems, Eric?  The above is
>> > > > > not evidence of inconsistency.
>> > > >
>> > > > Note:  no response
>> >
>> > Note: still no response
>> 
>> Incorrect.
>
>Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in addition to
>failing to provide evidence for my alleged "inconsistency".

TholenBot Pro(tm) sure is handy sometimes, as evidenced below.

OUTPUT: TholenDetect Pro(tm) has detected use of Tholenian property 
HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer the 
question"
OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has found evidence of use of Tholenian 
property HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer 
the question". Evidence: Answer expected from Marty to question asked by
Aaron, but answer not found.
OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenDetect Pro(tm) and TholenTrace 
Pro(tm).

>> > > > > Having trouble replying to all of my posting Eric?  I've noticed
>> > > > > how you dishonestly removed a significant piece of my posting to
cover 
>> > > > > up your embarrassment.  How convenient.  Here's your context back:
>> > > >
>> > > > Note:  no response
>> >
>> > Note: still no response
>> 
>> Incorrect.
>
>Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in addition to
>failing to account for what you did to the rest of my posting.

OUTPUT: TholenDetect Pro(tm) has detected use of Tholenian property 
HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer the 
question"
OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has found evidence of use of Tholenian 
property HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer 
the question". Evidence: Answer expected from Marty to question asked by
Aaron, but answer not found.
OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenDetect Pro(tm) and TholenTrace 
Pro(tm).

>> > > > > Taking archery lessons from Eric "Master of Forgery" Bennett again,
>> > > > > Marty?
>> > > >
>> > > > You've not earned such a title yet, Eric
>
>Apparently Eric's clipboard is prone to misquoting (either that or Eric is
>dishonestly removing context when he quotes someone).  Here's the actual
>statement:
>M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.

Irrelevant.

>> > Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.  Here's
>> > how the above statement was actually written:
>> > M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
>> >
>> > > Evidence, please.
>> >
>> > You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just
>> > demonstrated.
>> 
>> Aren't you certain, Marty.
>
>On what basis do you make this claim?

Don't you know, Marty?

- This article has been checked for Tholenianism with TholenCheck 
Pro(tm).

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                06-Dec-99 05:04:04
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:54:31, "Steven C. Britton" 
<sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote:

Look, this is becoming boring.  Microsoft has broken the law.  The 
question that remains is how bad are they going to get it.  A lot will
depend on their behaviour in the negotiatio phase happening now.

Bob Germer wrote:
>
> No, it sends people to the manufacturers and vendors of computers forcing
> them to include Windows on every machine they sell or pay four times as
> much for Windows.

That's not coercive.  It's a package deal.  Microsoft can't force computer
distributors to put Windows on their machines; but they _can_ say that "if
you sell a computer with windows, we'll give you a massive discount on it".

They also say  something like we'll give you a massive discount... 
unless you carry something we don't like.  Such as other office 
suites, or browsers.

The brass tacks of the matter is that Netscape basically created the 
internet as a mass market.  Before Andreeson started cranking the web,
no-one was using the net except for geeks and scientists.  Now, it's 
all over the place.  Andreeson created that market, and has been 
muscled out of receiving his fair piece of the pie by Microsoft.  
First, they killed his main revenue stream, and then they threatened 
OEMs with loss of discount if they carried Netscape, and finally they 
put it into the system, rendering that system, in the opinion of the 
court, "less stable and secure than it was before" which is true.  You
don't think things like Melissa etc have popped out of thin air do 
you?  The old days didn't have problems like this, you know.

Sure, Andreeson is leaving the market with a big pile of cash thanks 
to AOL.  However, he's not a player anymore; he's out of the game.  To
those guys, I suspect that's more important.

Nor is this the first time Gates has done that to people.

The aim of the law is to prevent companies from getting too big.  The 
idea is that a one-company town is no good for anyone.  You really 
ought to look at the history books about life on the railroad, for 
example, to understand what that means.  There's a practical aspect to
this too.  If the masses have crappy living conditions, eventually 
they will get pissed off and do something about it.  One-company towns
lead to crappy living conditions.  If the internet is a one-company 
town, it'll mean crappy living conditions on the net, and (possibly) 
the end of the net as a commercial medium in the long term.

> Thus competition forces vendors to comply since the
> margin on a typical PC is far less than 4 times the price of Windows if
> they do.

Wrong.

If a customer buys a computer without Windows, the store isn't buying
Windows from Microsoft for that particular machine, so it becomes a
non-issue.

If the customer wants to buy Windows as an add-on later, then they pay 4
times as much as they would have paid if they'd bought Windows with the
machine.

That is _not_ a monopoly, nor is it a "monopolistic" practise.

But that's not how it works.  For professionals, you have things like 
bonding and insurance to consider.  If you use bondable products, the 
practical limit on the size of the jobs you can take on gets larger.  
In the case of PCs, that means tier 1 PCs; these mean the client will 
have a manufacturer warranty to fall back on if you fold your tent.  
This ends up being cheaper for the client in the long run, too, thanks
to the improved insurability of their hardware.

That means you (or perhaps more to the point, the client) is paying 
for Windows even if they don't really want it.  There are a few OS/2 
offices that I know of; however, they bought windows, because when 
they were setting up, they bought Micron and that meant they got 
windows, even though they had no intention of using it.

> Valued product? Not to me it is not. It is a piece of garbage I do not and
> will not use but must pay for despite my desire to use an alternate
> operating system.

No you don't.  You just don't buy Windows with the machine.  The store won't
care: they'll just package that Windows system with a different machine and
buy one less package from MicroSoft.

But again, that's not how it worked.  The cost of windows was worked 
into the price of the machine and was not seperable.  Even today, it's
pretty much impossible to get a rebate on the windows license if one 
is bundled with your machine... like on a laptop, for example.  Even 
many desktop models are still unavailable sans Windows.

> I do, however, give those copies away free to friends,
> relatives, etc. who wish to upgrade from Windows 3.1 or 95. I use a couple
> of Windows 95 CD's as frisbees for my dog.

What a silly way to choose to waste your money -- and it is 100% _your_
choice to do so.

As a VAR, he had no choice but to waste that money, if he wanted to 
remain bondable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

Work better: Work union-free.

That's just stupid.  Go read some history books.  You could take a 
look at Toronto in the late 1800s to about 1910 or so vis-a-vis living
and working conditions.  You should also go take a peek at the same 
thing in the early years of the industrial revolution in England.  
Winnipeg in the twenties, or even at Chinese living/working conditions
on the west coast during the railroad years in Canada.  Hey, why don't
you take a look at the eugenics program that Alberta ran for years, 
while you're at it. Didn't they sterilize a whole bunch of people 
against their will? Wasn't Preston Manning's father premiere then?

And just what the hell is this thread doing in comp.os.os2.misc? 
.advocacy I can understand, but it _really_ doesn't belong in .misc.  
In fact, considering the relevance to os2 (y'all are yapping about 
MSFT, not warp) you prolly oughta move it to alt.libertarian, or 
something.  Oh yeah, one other thing... the company's name is 
Microsoft, not MicroSoft.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary
 
www.cadvision.com/sbritton

You know, if you were to put an http:// in front of your website 
their, a lot more people would be able to just click on it in their 
newsreaders to go to the site with their browser.

Like this:

http://www.cadvision.com/sbritton

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             06-Dec-99 18:08:05
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
>
>
> >
> > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
>
> Then why are there patches?

To make them compliant.  If you say "not compliant out of the box" fine, I
agree with you.  To me, saying Windows 95 is not compliant is a blanket
statement, which says that is isn't ever compliant.

>
> > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
guess
> > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
isn't.
>
> As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches to
Win95
> OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2 so
your
> word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
packs and
> the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with MS's
Win95
> and the reason for my complaints.

Funny, because that MS web page says quite clearly Windows 95 OSR2 is
Compliant (with customer action).  I don't have a word game - what I have an
issue with is blanket statements that such and such an OS is non compliant,
when a simple patch is all that is required.  It might look like word games,
but to a customer, the end result is what is important.  If I say to my
customers Windows 95 is not compliant, that's what I mean.  If it requires
some action, I say Compliant, provided you do this - a caveat if you will.

>
> I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
word or
> term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then one is
saying
> they their ideas are confused, their understanding of technology is
confused and
> one embraces confusion as a means to cope with problems .   If that
display is
> done in a public forum then all the worse -- why advertise ?

It's nothing to do with word games - do you say to your clients (if you have
any) Windows 95 is not Y2K compliant?  I know what I say - Windows 95 is
compliant with these patches.  Different points of view is all.

I guess Compaq also don't have a good handle on their product line either -
seeing as how we had to update many of their server BIOS'.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hwstock@wizard.com                                05-Dec-99 21:09:20
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "H.W. Stockman" <hwstock@wizard.com>

"Timberwoof" <mroeder@best.cNOoSPAMm> wrote in message
news:mroeder-FCB492.16354905121999@nntp1.ba.best.com...
> > Read the next few lines of my *original post* (boy, it's fun to use
those
> > asterisks for emphasis!):
[...]
> The web site cited in this thread's seminal post has screen shots of a
> host of GUIs including Windows. The one for Windows 1.0 has a copyright
> date of 198*5*, after the Mac has already been introduced.
***wow,***
****that's****
*****amazing.*****



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org                      06-Dec-99 05:30:14
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Windows Powered (To the tune of She's Too Fat For me)

From: Aaron Dimsdale <postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org>

On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:15:37 +0100, Illya Vaes wrote:

>josco wrote:
>>Just a little song about windows.
>>http://milton.mse.jhu.edu:8001/research/folkindex/S07.htm
>>She's Too Fat For me
>>1.Parker, Chet. Hammered Dulcimer, Folkways FA 2381, LP (1966),
>>cut# 3b
>>Oh I dont want it
>>you can have it
>>it's too fat for me.
>>it's too fat for me.
>>it's too fat for me.
>
>ROTFLMAO!!!!!!
>
>Good return volley, Joseph!! Smash hit!

Return volley? I think I missed something.

I have nothing against OS/2 or Opera's OS/2 dev team or the fact that 
Opera/2 has been RSN for a while. In fact, I'm an OS/2 Advocate, one 
might say. I love OS/2 indefinitely more than Windows. I also applaud 
the Opera/2 dev team for their progress so far. My song was just poking 
fun at them.

I've seen lots of programmers much worse than Opera/2's programmers, and
no offense was intended. Boy, what a messed-up sentence. You know what I
mean.

"I'm as red as a sheet." --Yogi Berra in a flubbed apology for a 
flubbed line in a movie in which he acted.

---------------------------
Aaron Dimsdale
Baseball QA Engineer (Outfielder)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          05-Dec-99 21:56:09
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-231321.14533405121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> > In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> > > 
> > > >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of 
> > > >his
> > > >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> > > 
> > > I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the 
> > > Balderdash garden which you claim I tend
> > 
> > Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How 
> > typical.
> 
> Argument by redundancy again, Chris?  

No.  Problems with your reading comprehension again, Eric?

> Illogical.  Of course, such 
> behavior is to be expected of you.

How ironic, coming from someone who repeatedly posts illogic.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          05-Dec-99 21:59:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <384A2F00.BEA265B4@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> 
wrote:

> Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > 
> > In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> > >
> > > >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> > > >today's digest:
> > >
> > > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> > 
> > Incorrect.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?  Do you know what he "thought" 
> better
> than he does himself?  Illogical

I see that since you have no logical argument, you're resorting to 
Timbol-esque semantic games instead.  How typical.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          05-Dec-99 22:01:14
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-CB995B.14552605121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> In article 
> <6ED837FA1752F6A5.5F0F85C7B73480C5.815826B519A396FF@lp.airnews.net>, 
> TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:

> > > > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> > > 
> > > Typical invective.  
> > 
> > What alleged "invective", Eric?
> 
> How ironic.

What's "ironic" about it, Eric?

> > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > 
> > Common sense makes cameo appearance.
> 
> What is "common" is not relevant, Chris.  What you can prove is relevant.

Evidence, please.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          05-Dec-99 22:07:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <E3H24.1622$RI5.43851@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 18:42:04 -0500, tholenbot wrote:
> 
> >In article 
> ><atticus-0512991524120001@user-38lc93t.dialup.mindspring.com>, 
> >atticus@mindspring.com (Andy Walton) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <tholenbot-97229E.14561205121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
> >> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> >> 
> >>   :> Note: still no response
> >>   :
> >>   :Incorrect.
> >> 
> >> Shouldn't that be "Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless."?
> >
> >Aren't you certain, Andy?
> 
> Here's the log from my recent session with "TholenBot Pro(tm) for 
> Windows" (copyright Chris Pott):

More lies.  How typical.

> OUTPUT: Welcome to TholenBot Pro(tm), the best Tholen emulator for 
> Windows.

Illogical.

> OUTPUT: What would you like TBP to do?
> INPUT: TholenCheck Pro(tm)
> OUTPUT: Enter a statement for TholenBot Pro(tm) TholenCheck Pro(tm) to
> authorize.
> INPUT: Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless.
> OUTPUT: The statement is not Tholenian. Suggested alternative: 
> "Incorrect."

Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would react to 
the information that you're posting forgery.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          05-Dec-99 22:07:28
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <ZiH24.1630$RI5.44075@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 23:26:43 -0800, TholenBotPro(TM) wrote:
> 
> >In article <_on14.7852$Rp1.279245@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
> ><postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 1 Dec 1999 09:21:59 GMT, Dave Tholen wrote:
> >> 
> >> >Does Dimsdale even realize that "tholenbot" is Eric Bennett?  Here's
> >> >today's digest:
> >> 
> >> Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> >
> >Incorrect.
> 
> Balderdash, Chris.

Incorrect.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 22:36:28
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Stuart Fox wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > >
> > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> >
> > Then why are there patches?
>
> To make them compliant.  If you say "not compliant out of the box" fine, I
> agree with you.  To me, saying Windows 95 is not compliant is a blanket
> statement, which says that is isn't ever compliant.

Do you know that OSR2 does not exist after you apply a patch to OSR2.  It
changes and the OS version and OSR2 moniker is no longer valid.  The use of
the
name OSR2 is therefore wrong and indicates a weak understanding of software
and
the concept of versions.

You can only save yourself by telling me what your works mean and how you use
two names to refer to the same thing when in fact they are different things
within the EXACT CONTEXT of the discussion.


> >
> > > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
> guess
> > > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
> isn't.
> >
> > As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> > The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches to
> Win95
> > OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2 so
> your
> > word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
> packs and
> > the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with MS's
> Win95
> > and the reason for my complaints.
>
> Funny, because that MS web page says quite clearly Windows 95 OSR2 is
> Compliant (with customer action).

It says in unambiguous terms that Win95 is not compliant.   I have such a
system  and I know first hand.







--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 22:41:24
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Windows Powered (To the tune of She's Too Fat For me)

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Aaron Dimsdale wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:15:37 +0100, Illya Vaes wrote:
>
> >josco wrote:
> >>Just a little song about windows.
> >>http://milton.mse.jhu.edu:8001/research/folkindex/S07.htm
> >>She's Too Fat For me
> >>1.Parker, Chet. Hammered Dulcimer, Folkways FA 2381, LP (1966),
> >>cut# 3b
> >>Oh I dont want it
> >>you can have it
> >>it's too fat for me.
> >>it's too fat for me.
> >>it's too fat for me.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!!!
> >
> >Good return volley, Joseph!! Smash hit!
>
> Return volley? I think I missed something.

Yes.  You have.

>
> I have nothing against OS/2 or Opera's OS/2 dev team or the fact that
> Opera/2 has been RSN for a while.

This Opera/2 port has just begun.   Opera the company has tried to find a
good 3rd party team to port their code.  They finally have such a team.
Opera/2,  the code port has a new team and new project - starting from
square one.

> In fact, I'm an OS/2 Advocate, one
> might say. I love OS/2 indefinitely more than Windows. I also applaud
> the Opera/2 dev team for their progress so far. My song was just poking
> fun at them.

Yes and for that you might own them an apology.  The team is not Opera but a
3rd party only recently hired.  Poke fun at Opera the company for not
picking a good team the first time.  Praise the developers for their fast
progress and tenacity.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         06-Dec-99 06:36:24
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Which I successfully (and correctly) did.

One can also "successfully" avoid being killed in an airplane crash by
committing suicide.  Does that represent your idea of "successful",
Curtis?

What makes you think that using "measure up" would have ended the
sentence with a preposition>

> I see that you've lost track of the flow of dialog.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> Again.

Again.

> That you continue to respond to my posts proves that you are making
> implications.

Illogical, given that my posts can be quite explicit, and implications
are not explicit, thus the simple existence of my responses does not
prove that I am making implications.

> If you weren't making such, you would have no reason to respond.

Illogical, given that the correction of your misinformation, which is
a reason to respond, can be done quite explicitly, and therefore would
not necessarily involve any implications.

> You made an implication that my grammar was incorrect.

Your grammar involved more than just those seven words, Curtis.

> I see that you lack the courage to even make a direct statement about
> this issue,

Having more reading comprehension problems, Curtis?  I already made a
direct statement about this issue.  I asked you what a "standard up" is.

> but would rather make implications

What alleged implications, Curtis?

> and then deny even that

I never denied that I wasn't making implications, Curtis.  However,
whatever I might have implied and what you inferred are not necessarily
the same thing.

> by claiming that I am simply making (supposedlly unwarranted)
> inferences.

You are, Curtis.

> Absolutely.

Then explain the numerous postings you've made since then, Curtis.
It's not as though you're a victim of circumstances over which you
have no control.

> I see that you still do not understand the meaning of the words
> "hypocrisy" and "sincerity," nor the relationship between them.

Yet another example of your pontification.  Meanwhile, your own failure
to understand the meaning of sincerity has been clearly demonstrated by
your continued postings in this sub-thread.

> If you have no implications to make, then you will not respond.

Illogical, Curtis, as my explanations of your illogic can be (and in
this response are) quite explicit, thus no implications need be made.

> If you respond, then you are making implications.

Illogical, Curtis, as my explanations of your illogic can be (and in
this response are) quite explicit, thus no implications need be made.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     05-Dec-99 22:47:28
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 03:38:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Christopher Smith wrote:

> "Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > Stuart Fox wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
> news:384999E4.ABDADFFB@ibm.net...
> > > >   Win95 OSR2 is not
> > > > compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance - your
> > > choice.
> > >
> > > Guess you can't read the web page either.  Win95 OSR2 is compliant.  It
> > > needs some patches, but all OS'es need patches.
> >
> > You guessed wrong.
> >
> > >  You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS maker
> > > you
> > > > advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither of
> you
> > > are in
> > > > the position of being responsible for these decisions.
> > >
> > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> >
> > Then why are there patches?
> >
> > > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
> guess
> > > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
> isn't.
> >
> > As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> > The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches to
> Win95
> > OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2 so
> your
> > word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
> packs and
> > the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with MS's
> Win95
> > and the reason for my complaints.
> >
> > I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
> word or
> > term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then one is
> saying
> > they their ideas are confused, their understanding of technology is
> confused and
> > one embraces confusion as a means to cope with problems .   If that
> display is
> > done in a public forum then all the worse -- why advertise ?
>
> Have you bothered to read about what the y2k "fixes" actually "fix" ?  If
> you do, it's quite obvious the OS itself is y2k compliant, but some of the
> applets that ship with it are not.
>
> It would be like me saying Unix isn't y2k compliant if I could find a couple
> of apps that ran on it that weren't.

Sorry but the OS is the software that is in addition to the kernel and
includes
all that fun stuff integrated into the OS a la the Microsoft Internet Explorer
and all the baggage that goes with that kind of OS definition.

So are we to now say Windows is a core OS with applets that are not part of
the
OS?  You have to accept the OS definition MS uses in court and that's a
definition that is also consistent with the way MS presents the fixes and
sells
their OS.  Sorry, I do not accept a redefinition of the OS as an excuse.  Let
MS
innovate!!!

IBM's OS/2 has a fix to the FILE.EXE, a Windows for OS/2, executable .  It is
part of the OS/2 OS.





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         06-Dec-99 06:53:22
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 05:15:23
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451519

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Do you really think these so-called "emulations" are anywhere close
to reality, Aaron?  Here's today's digest:

1> On Sun, 05 Dec 1999 18:42:04 -0500, tholenbot wrote:

1> Here's the log from my recent session with "TholenBot Pro(tm) for 
1> Windows" (copyright Chris Pott):

1> OUTPUT: Welcome to TholenBot Pro(tm), the best Tholen emulator for 
1> Windows.
1> OUTPUT: What would you like TBP to do?
1> INPUT: TholenCheck Pro(tm)
1> OUTPUT: Enter a statement for TholenBot Pro(tm) TholenCheck Pro(tm)
1> to authorize.
1> INPUT: Incorrect/inapplicable; fallacious regardless.
1> OUTPUT: The statement is not Tholenian. Suggested alternative: 
1> "Incorrect."

2> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 23:26:43 -0800, TholenBotPro(TM) wrote:

3> The following PottWare (tm) TholenBot Pro(tm) For Windows (tm) log
3> says it all:
3>
3> OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has failed to find evidence on 
3> group(s) "comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy" that Aaron
3> owns or tends a "Balderdash garden".
3> OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has failed to find evidence on group(s) 
3> "comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy" that Eric has ever been 
3> involved in any way with a "Balderdash garden".
3> OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenTrace Pro(tm).

3> TholenBot Pro(tm) sure is handy sometimes, as evidenced below.
3>
3> OUTPUT: TholenDetect Pro(tm) has detected use of Tholenian property 
3> HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer the 
3> question"
3> OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has found evidence of use of Tholenian 
3> property HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer 
3> the question". Evidence: Answer expected from Marty to question asked
3> by Aaron, but answer not found.
3> OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenDetect Pro(tm) and TholenTrace 
3> Pro(tm).

3> OUTPUT: TholenDetect Pro(tm) has detected use of Tholenian property 
3> HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to answer the 
3> question"
3> OUTPUT: TholenTrace Pro(tm) has found evidence of use of Tholenian 
3> property HYPOCRISY by "Marty" in string: "You've still failed to
3> answer the question". Evidence: Answer expected from Marty to question
3> asked by Aaron, but answer not found.
3> OUTPUT: Thank you for using TholenDetect Pro(tm) and TholenTrace 
3> Pro(tm).

3> - This article has been checked for Tholenianism with TholenCheck 
3> Pro(tm).

4> Apparently, Marty has finally gotten the idea of Tholen Emulation
4> as he has thus been posting almost nothing but Pure Tholen. Perhaps
4> he will write a product with a name like "Marty Amodeo's TholEmu for
4> OS/2" soon, and us cooa people will finally have our own native OS/2
4> Tholen emulators, making it much easier for every OS/2 user to be a
4> true tholenbotter. It might even help me. (Chris Pott's "TholenBot
4> Pro(tm)" Tholen emulation software has so far only said things like
4> "Balderdash, Marty" which are true Tholen but apparently not good
4> enough for Marty.)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         06-Dec-99 06:53:00
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 05:15:23
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451519

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

It's so cute to watch Marty pretend to be interested in holding a
serious discussion.  But he exposes the pretense with his opening
remark.  Here's today's digest:

1> blah blah blah "baby-talk tripe" blah.  blah lie blah blah, blah blah
1> evidence.  blah blah blah "infantile game" blah.  Here's today's digest:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Note: no response.

1> Note: still no response on 23 (!!) separate points.

1> Note: no response

1> Also note that the context was again removed along with Dave's hypocritical
1> statement in question.  How convenient.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Note: no response

1> Note: no response

1> Note: still no response
 
1> Note: still no response

1> Note: no response

1> Also note that Dave has removed the incontrovertible evidence *again*.
1> Further evidence of his own hypocritical infantile game.  No real
1> surprise there, as he must have found it too inconvenient to include
1> in this digest.  Here's your incontrovertible evidence back, hypocrite:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> In a fairly transparent attempt to sweep his mistakes under the rug,
1> Tholen conveniently not only removed the evidence, but his own
1> erroneous claim as well.  Here it is again for the reader's reference:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Note: still no response.  Looks like he's "still at it!"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 02:15:05
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:23
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>letoured@nospam.net
>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>without paying for wincrap.

This is, of course, not true.

Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact
that you're unable to do something that many others routinely do
demonstrates your incompetence and ignorance.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbzh@my-deja.com                                  06-Dec-99 09:20:20
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: cbzh@my-deja.com

In article <3847fb91_3@news.cadvision.com>,
  "Steven C. Britton" <scb@scb-group.com> wrote:
[...]
>
> Totalitarian is leftist.  Rightist is the opposite of totalitarian.
>

So only Stalin, but not Adolf Hitler was a totalitarian?????

Cornelis Bockemhl <cbockem@datacomm.ch>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           06-Dec-99 06:29:02
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82euuu$fqg$3@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/06/99 at 12:11 AM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> So in other words, a company isn't allowed to give a discount for
> behaviour that they like?

In the United States, that is the case if the discount amounts to a
restraint of trade which is what the DOJ alleged and the Judge found to be
fact.  --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           06-Dec-99 06:32:04
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384b29c1_4@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/05/99 at 08:12 PM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> > Of course you're not the one defining the anti-trust laws so your
> > definitions are garbage.

> Ever consider that the anti-trust laws are garbage?

Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 06:43:26
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<0C766450CD1F3ED8.7685DC9D6D115D1A.B7364C04109CE6C9@lp.airnews.net>, 
TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:

> In article <tholenbot-CB995B.14552605121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
> > In article 
> > <6ED837FA1752F6A5.5F0F85C7B73480C5.815826B519A396FF@lp.airnews.net>, 
> > TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> > > > 
> > > > Typical invective.  
> > > 
> > > What alleged "invective", Eric?
> > 
> > How ironic.
> 
> What's "ironic" about it, Eric?

Ask your mentor, grasshopper.
 
> > > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > > 
> > > Common sense makes cameo appearance.
> > 
> > What is "common" is not relevant, Chris.  What you can prove is 
> > relevant.
> 
> Evidence, please.

Don't you see the evidence, Chris?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 06:46:05
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<DA75E87B496E91B8.0BC9B0E0C552995E.403C2A34F3D07551@lp.airnews.net>, 
"TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:


> Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would react to 
> the information that you're posting forgery.


I wonder how Louis Freeh would react to the information that you're 
jumping into discussions again, Chris.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 06:48:03
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Marty digest, volume 00AEF0EDAFEDFFAADEEFAFDAEBCDDAFE

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <jZG24.1620$RI5.43769@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale 
<postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:

> Marty seems to be up to no good yet again. I leave for a few days and 
> watch what havoc Marty tries to get away with. I would make a digest of 
> everything he's said, but all he's said since the last Marty Digest are 
> things like:


If you ran your vaunted TholenCheck Pro(tm) on the above, you would find 
that it is not Tholenic, Aaron.  More evidence of your inconsistency.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           06-Dec-99 06:56:20
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82euuu$fqg$3@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/06/99 at 12:11 AM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:


> Most discounts come with a condition.  So did MS's.  And you cry and
> scream about it.

But those conditions violate US law. And rather than scream like helpless
little babies, we urged, begged, cajoled, etc. our DOJ and our state
Attorney's General to do something about it which thankfully they have
done.

As far as you are concerned, you aren't in the US. You have no standing.
Soon you are likely to find yourself in the same condition vis a vis the
University of Alberta.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           06-Dec-99 07:04:11
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net>, on 12/05/99 at 11:47 AM,
   Joseph <josco@ibm.net> said:


> I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
> word or term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then
> one is saying they their ideas are confused, their understanding of
> technology is confused and one embraces confusion as a means to cope
> with problems .   If that display is done in a public forum then all the
> worse -- why advertise ?

And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have to
stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34 modems
at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That was
good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mirage@iae.nl                                     06-Dec-99 13:26:08
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Mr. Gates on crap software

From: Mirage Media <mirage@iae.nl>

Thought this was an interesting story:
http://straitstimes.asia1.com/cpe/cpe1_1206.html


Corey
Mirage Media
Nuenen, The Netherlands

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Mirage Media (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tgalley@pironet.com                               06-Dec-99 13:39:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Thomas Galley <tgalley@pironet.com>


Bob Germer wrote:
> 
> Valued product? Not to me it is not. It is a piece of garbage I do not and
> will not use but must pay for despite my desire to use an alternate
> operating system. I do, however, give those copies away free to friends,
> relatives, etc. who wish to upgrade from Windows 3.1 or 95. I use a couple
> of Windows 95 CD's as frisbees for my dog.
> 

Whow!

Now that's the first time I find a really *intelligent* proposition of
what to do with those MicroCrap CDs. It's a shame I don't have a dog...

Greetings/2 from overseas

Thomas
-- 
PIRONET INTRANET AG
Thomas Paul Galley, MA (CCNA) - Internet/Intranet Trainee
Im Mediapark 5 - 50670 Kln
Tel.: +49 (0)221 454 3833 - FAX: +49 (0)221 454 3810
mailto:tgalley@pironet.com - http://www.pironet.com
certified professional Java Programmer (see link below)
http://www.tekmetrics.com/transcript.shtml?pid=57102

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PIRONET AG News-System (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  06-Dec-99 07:51:25
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451519.1^-495945867943030099999

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Do you really think these so-called "emulations" are anywhere close to
reality, Tholen?  Here's today's digest:

[Oops, still nothing!]

Bye.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  06-Dec-99 07:53:21
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 11:08:24
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451519.1^-938576784397879

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

It's so ugly watching Tholen pretend to be interested in holding a serious
discussion.  But he exposes the pretense with his opening remark.  Here's
today's digest:

{Uh-oh, still nothing!}

Natch.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.c...               06-Dec-99 13:32:26
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

Message sender: sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk

From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>

On 5 Dec 1999 14:40:11 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
wrote:

>On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 10:46:35, David Sutherland 
><sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 3 Dec 1999 11:06:04 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >COMA and COMNA snipped - of course.
>> >
>> >On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 01:09:35, David Sutherland 
>> ><sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >[snip]
>> >> >
>> >> >He could have used that computer before and left a textfile with his 
>> >> >sig.
>> >> >Or he has a floppy with his .sig with him...
>> >> >
>> >> >Nah, that couldn't be it. It's far too simple.
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> It *could* be that simple - bu then again, removing a single entry
>> >> from a killfile is every bit as simple yet he refuses to do
>> >> that....and indeed lacks the self-restaraint necessary to simply not
>> >> read the post.
>> >> 
>> >IIRC, Bob has given us the explanation, so hypotheth... hypotess... 
>> >guessing isn't necessary anymore.
>> >
>> 
>> Bob has given us a number of explanations, and as I have already said,
>> I don't think they hang together very well.
>> 
>OK.
>Your opinion. To which you're entitled.
>
>> >On a personal note (repeated): I still find fillfiles a stupid 
>> >invention, for which I see no rational use other than p*ssing off 
>> >somebody. It's far simpler and rewarding just to ignore someone, 
>> >especially if you don't announce it and make a big fuzz over it (I can
>> >safely ignore certain posters, watch them foam around the virtual 
>> >mouth, and yet reply to them whenever I want to. They can't even 
>> >complain about me ignoring my killfile. True b*st*rds don't have 
>> >killfiles...
>> >
>> >> Bob's explanations become more and more contrived the more desperate
>> >> he becomes to prove what a techno-wiz he is.  Frankly, I doubt his
>> >> words now.
>> >> 
>> >Of course, especially after those well-phrased and thoroughly 
>> >consistent arguments from Jeff Glatt. So let me see, I have to choose 
>> >between the credibility of a couple of ex-OS/2 users, turned to the 
>> >dark side, spending their time in the old COOA telling everyone how 
>> >stupid they are - and Bob Germer. Hmmmm, tough one...
>> >
>> 
>> Hmmm...the problem is that I'm not taking Jeff Glatts arguments as any
>> kind of "proof" - I am taking Bob Germers' explanations and their
>> internal inconsistencies as proof that he isn't being honest.
>> 
>> And if you are looking for bias look no further than yourself and your
>> refusal to correct certain OS/2 advocates  when they are very clearly
>> wrong (and frequently abusive),  yet you rush to defend them at every
>> opportunity.   Frankly, if I want an objective opinion, it won't be
>> yours.
>> 
>I don't recall ever having said that I am objective or unbiased. And 
>as for Dave Tholen (to whom I think you're referring, although he 
>wouldn't call himself an OS/2 advocate), if I think he's wrong about 
>something, I will tell him privately instead of bashing him in public,
>because I'm a subjective, biased b*st*rd.

That would explain your lack of objectivity, and justifies some of the
vitriol your obviously unfair treatment of people has attracted.  Why
should people cut you any slack when you admit that you publicly
berate Tholen's opponents but will not criticise Tholen even if you
know he is wrong!

> And could you please give me
>examples of me, rushing "to defend [him] at every opportunity"? 
>Frankly, given the amount of "attention" he's been getting lately, 
>that would leave me without much time off.
>

Karel,  just look at your responses in the threads related to tholens
completely erroneous claim that OS/2 must be used to view a particular
file.   You tried to argue on his behalf on a couple of nit-picking
semantic points (and failed) but refused to address the real issue -
tholen made a false claim, and has argued that false claim in the
light of evidence that he is wrong, which makes him a liar.   You
didn't see fit to question him on that and instead chose to mimic his
inane semantic arguments.  Do you think that makes you look like
someone who gives a damn about the issues rather than the
personalities?

>And as for giving opinions, you seemed to ask for one, with your 
>"Hmmm.....odd that you wouldn't take...", to which I answered. 
>Apologies for misunderstanding you there. Next time, could you be more
>clear by adding something like: "I'd like comments, except from Karel 
>Jansens, because he doesn't give an objective opinion"?
>

You are welcome to give your opinion, just don't be surprised when you
get flamed for being so obviously biased.

Tholen is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.

Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.

You don't care whether someone is right or wrong, you just care about
what OS they use, which means that you have zero credibility when it
comes to arguing who is being honest or not.


>Thanks.
>

You're welcome.

>Karel Jansens
>jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
>=======================================================
>"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
>Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
>(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
>=======================================================

Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: (Posted via) Netcom Internet Ltd. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             06-Dec-99 13:31:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82eugv$j7m$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
basic,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central question - looks like
we've
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hit another major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               06-Dec-99 07:57:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: letoured@nospam.net

jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:

>>letoured@nospam.net
>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>>without paying for wincrap.

>This is, of course, not true.

>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
>your incompetence and ignorance.

I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
windows?



_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fegehrke@worldnet.att.net                         06-Dec-99 10:15:15
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net>

Joseph wrote:
> 
> "Steven C. Britton" wrote:
> 
> > josco wrote:
> >
> > > By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows.
> >
> > Lars' definitions are the only logical definitions of the situation.  No
> > monopoly can possibly exist without the express consent, assistance, and
> > santion of the government.
> >
> > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
> 
> That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
> 
> > Competition in the OS market exists.  Microsoft isn't a monopoly.  Just
> > because Microsoft chooses to put conditions on their distribution
agreements
> > doesn't make them a monopoly.
> 
> That too is incorrect.
> Both of you choose to define words to suite your interpretation.
> 
> It is an uncontested fact that MS does not have 100% of the PC OS market as
the
> government defines the market.  The case should be thrown out but was not.   
If
> MS had you two as lawyers they'd be able to dismiss the case with a summary
> judgement and no testimony since MS has less than 100% of the market the
> Government has defined.  No monopoly. no case.
> 
As it happened, this was exactly Microsoft's lawyers first course of
action: they asked for a summary dismissal using the same logic.
They were literally laughed out of court with the judge advising
those lawyers to study the law and the definition of monopoly.
//

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Dec-99 07:25:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Forrest Gehrke wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> >
> > "Steven C. Britton" wrote:
> >
> > > josco wrote:
> > >
> > > > By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows.
> > >
> > > Lars' definitions are the only logical definitions of the situation.  No
> > > monopoly can possibly exist without the express consent, assistance, and
> > > santion of the government.
> > >
> > > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
> >
> > That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
> >
> > > Competition in the OS market exists.  Microsoft isn't a monopoly.  Just
> > > because Microsoft chooses to put conditions on their distribution
agreements
> > > doesn't make them a monopoly.

...

>
> > It is an uncontested fact that MS does not have 100% of the PC OS market
as the
> > government defines the market.  The case should be thrown out but was not. 
  If
> > MS had you two as lawyers they'd be able to dismiss the case with a
summary
> > judgement and no testimony since MS has less than 100% of the market the
> > Government has defined.  No monopoly. no case.
> >

> As it happened, this was exactly Microsoft's lawyers first course of
> action: they asked for a summary dismissal using the same logic.
> They were literally laughed out of court with the judge advising
> those lawyers to study the law and the definition of monopoly.

Really?   I thought they tried this kind of tactic in the Caldera case.  In
either
case, the suggestion MS is not a monopoly due to the lack of absolute power
and
market share is not correct.

With the DOJ I thought they tried to argue the PC market did not exist.  Any
references such as a story on http://www.sjmercury.com with it's extensive
collection
of stories?  I'll check tonight.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fegehrke@worldnet.att.net                         06-Dec-99 10:26:22
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net>

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Forrest Gehrke write:
> > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> > > Why on earth is such a straightforward transaction illegal?  What kind
of
> > > crazy law is that?
> > >
> > Lars,
> > I don't happen to know, but are you telling us that Canada
> > does not have an antitrust law?
> 
> Oh, Canada has this lunacy too.  Even more powerful than the antitrust laws
> in the U.S.  Propane companies are unable to merge for "the public good",
> and the law explicitly states that a lack of evidence is no hindrance on
> successful prosecution.

Thank you for finally responding. I was sure the Canadian
government would not subscribe to the lunacy of your
point of view, though they do emulate it very well
for the medical discipline.  Even one of the provincial
prime ministers has now publicly recognized that.
> 
> But it isn't Canada's anti-trust laws that persecute the most successful
> company in the world today.

But, of course, Microsoft is not a Canadian company.

Furthermore, this entire case is about the methods Microsoft
used to became so successful.

> 
> > Please look into it and report back what that law has
> > to say about predatory pricing.
> 
> Oh, you mean the laws stating that any business practise is illegal?
> 
Of course: that's what antitrust laws usually do.
//

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: fegehrke@worldnet.att.net                         06-Dec-99 10:36:23
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Forrest Gehrke <fegehrke@worldnet.att.net>

Joseph wrote:
> 
> Stuart Fox wrote:
> 
> > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> > >
> > > Then why are there patches?
> >
> > To make them compliant.  If you say "not compliant out of the box" fine, I
> > agree with you.  To me, saying Windows 95 is not compliant is a blanket
> > statement, which says that is isn't ever compliant.
> 
> Do you know that OSR2 does not exist after you apply a patch to OSR2.  It
> changes and the OS version and OSR2 moniker is no longer valid.  The use of
the
> name OSR2 is therefore wrong and indicates a weak understanding of software
and
> the concept of versions.
> 
> You can only save yourself by telling me what your works mean and how you
use
> two names to refer to the same thing when in fact they are different things
> within the EXACT CONTEXT of the discussion.
> 
Joseph, these fellows have been reading Alice in Wonderland
where words can mean anything the speaker says they mean.
//

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      06-Dec-99 15:44:00
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Mon, 06 Dec 1999 10:15:31 +0000, Forrest Gehrke
<fegehrke@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>Joseph wrote:
>> 
>> "Steven C. Britton" wrote:
>> 
>> > josco wrote:
>> >
>> > > By using your definitions - no one was forced to buy windows.
>> >
>> > Lars' definitions are the only logical definitions of the situation.  No
>> > monopoly can possibly exist without the express consent, assistance, and
>> > santion of the government.
>> >
>> > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
>> 
>> That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
>> 
>> > Competition in the OS market exists.  Microsoft isn't a monopoly.  Just
>> > because Microsoft chooses to put conditions on their distribution
agreements
>> > doesn't make them a monopoly.
>> 
>> That too is incorrect.
>> Both of you choose to define words to suite your interpretation.
>> 
>> It is an uncontested fact that MS does not have 100% of the PC OS market as 
the
>> government defines the market.  The case should be thrown out but was not.  
 If
>> MS had you two as lawyers they'd be able to dismiss the case with a summary
>> judgement and no testimony since MS has less than 100% of the market the
>> Government has defined.  No monopoly. no case.
>> 
>As it happened, this was exactly Microsoft's lawyers first course of
>action: they asked for a summary dismissal using the same logic.
>They were literally laughed out of court with the judge advising
>those lawyers to study the law and the definition of monopoly.


I guess the Zamboni Co. better get some good lawyers on board to
prepare for the worst; they might be next.


EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             06-Dec-99 16:45:17
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Jugulator <1979j@usa.net> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am preparing an exam based on operating systems at my college. Nobody
> here knows the importance of OS/2 in the history of Personal Computers.
> I would like to quote largely OS/2 in my research but I miss maybe the
> most
> important version, the first ever with Presentation Manager and the
> first operating system with a GUI for intel platforms : OS/2 1.1 

"first" operating system with a GUI for Intel platforms????

What about DOS/Windows and DOS/GEM?

If I remember correctly, OS/2 1.1 was out in 1988.

Windows 2.0 (working GUI) was out in 1987 (?), and on the box it said
"prepares you for the wonders of OS/2".

GEM was out for the Atari ST (m68k) in 1985, and was only a port of
GEMx86, which therefore must have been out before for Intel machines.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             06-Dec-99 16:45:18
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:

> File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
> letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files of
> the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
> launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that all
> apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.

However, the OS does seem to assume that all files with the type ????
and the creator ???? simply _have_ to be opened by the Acrobat Reader
(of course this does not apply to *.PDF files with said type and
creator, as Murphy's law would also indicate).

Also, it can be rather nasty to have to run resedit (an editor for the
resource fork of files on Macintosh filesystems) every time you find a
weird file (probably copied from another operating system) and want to
open it in an editor (type TEXT creator ttxt) or Netscape (type TEXT
creator udog).

I started using the extension .TTXT for Macintosh text files, which
makes it much easier to identify them on Linux for one thing. Altaugh
Emacs seems to be the only editor that will open them correctly.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            06-Dec-99 09:55:01
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Joseph wrote:
> >
> > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
>
> That definition of monopoly is incorrect.

Monopoly:

1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.

Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.

2.  an exclusive privilege to carry on a traffic or service, granted by a
government.

Nope, doesn't have that, either.

3.  the exclusive control of something.

Nope, not that either.

4.  something that is the subject of such control.

Nope...

5.  a company or gorup that has such contol.

Microsoft doesn't have that control.

(Random House dictionary)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            06-Dec-99 10:06:25
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 14:17:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Bob Germer wrote:
>
> > Ever consider that the anti-trust laws are garbage?
>
> Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage.

Hey Lars!  He's a bigot, too!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: service@fromhungary.com                           06-Dec-99 16:25:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 16:29:24
Subj: Join Budapest  4718

From: service@fromhungary.com

!!!! LIVE FROM BUDAPEST !!!!
THE  HOTTEST  SHOW  LIVE  FROM  HUNGARY BUDAPEST
http://www.sex-excess.com

FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS 

Join our new site with a great FREE Picture Gallery

FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS +++ FREE PICS++++


http://www.sex-excess.com


Special ++ HOT COUPLES ++ sweet LESBIAN Girls ++ ..........

http://www.sex-excess.com ++ http://www.sex-excess.com ++
http://www.sex-excess.com

wpsqdlvigzthiwwsdrfuxfvoujqtpcgwvtdqkpgrpmnhnwcpqgefpktkilgliqijhth

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EuroWeb Hungary http://www.euroweb.hu (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: westprog@my-deja.com                              06-Dec-99 17:05:25
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 16:29:24
Subj: (1/2) Re: User interface learning curves

From: westprog <westprog@my-deja.com>

In article <384637B9.B27799A0@frostbytes.com>,
  Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> > > > Yes it does, because clues to CLI options that are invisible
> > > > are shown to
> > > > the user (baloon help, tooltips, hints applets etc) while they
> > > > are performing the operation.

> > > All of this was possible using textual interfaces.  The
> > > information density wasn't as good is all.

> > The information density _IS_ the key difference.  More information
> > can be presented and modified on an effective gui.

> I agree that it *can* be, though I don't agree that it *is* in any of
> the
> common ones.  Rather, I've seen a lot of information hidden behind
> icons.
> Balloon help, tooltips, and the like are necessary to explain
> pictographics that are otherwise meaningless to the new user.

Since GUI's are relatively new as a concept, there are a lot of blind
alleys and mistakes out there. Still, there are a few simple rules
which are applicable for most applications:

Every operation to have a related menu item, toolbar icon, keyboard
shortcut and tooltip.

Every menu item to include the corresponding toolbar button and
keyboard shortcut.

Icons to be recognisable and unique, rather than descriptive.

etc, etc, etc.

The sad thing is that while some programs have improved, many others
have gotten worse. Windows 98 has a lot of disimprovements on 95.

> > > FWIW it's interesting to me to see how a lot of applications have
> > >returned to
> > > the old "give them a big menu" approach, even if it now includes
> > > pictures. Simple menus work better than iconic interfaces.

When the menu has the picture, it allows the user to start off using
the slower menu approach, while at the same time learing the associated
icon for the operation. It is a simple principle - help the novice user
to become more proficient by giving information on the other part of
the interface.

> > But the menus are far different because of use of OO technology has
> > made the menus dynamic rather than static.

> Why is this not possible in a textual application?  (The truth of the
> matter
> is that it IS possible, and some textual applications used the
> technique prior to the widespread use of GUIs.)

I'm not sure what is meant here. A lot of older applications switched
modes frequently, particularly between 'command' and 'edit' mode. This
is not a good idea, precisely because the meaning of a given command
varies according to the mode.

With a GUI application, it is a good idea to disable menu items when
they are not applicable. It isn't a good idea to change the menu
layout, because it is usually confusing.

This may have nothing to do with what you are all discussing.

> > > > How well does your cli function without a keyboard.  GUI's do
> > > >this all the time.

> > > You're changing the subject but as it turns out textual
> > > >interfaces (of which
> > > CLIs are a subset) can do the same things that GUIs can do
> > > without a
> > > keyboard.  A lot of kiosk systems worked that way a few years ago
> > > you might recall.

> > Explain.

> Until recently bitmapped displays were too expensive for kiosk
> operations, so
> they used textual displays.  Touch-screen textual displays were
> (still are)
> effective for a lot of tasks, including POS systems and inventory
> management.
> My local grocery-store had a textual interface with a touch-screen
> system to
> help you find things.  It didn't need the added bandwidth of graphical
> display, and it didn't need a keyboard.

Graphical doesn't necessarily mean high bandwidth. HTML is graphical.
You can make a grocery store text interface into a graphical interface
by putting a picture of an apple on the 'A' key.

> Textual interfaces need not be command-line interfaces.  A lot of
> people seem
> to forget that.  The latter is usually more useful with a keyboard,
> but the former can go either way.

I suppose you could say that a Windows/Mac menu is a text interface -
and the Internet Explorer toolbar is a hybrid text/graphic interface.
A lot of this is a matter of definition and not really worth
quarrelling about (which isn't to say that we won't quarrel about it).

> > Your methods are fundamentally the same as mine, but I don't see the
> > difficulty with the mouse.  Maybe the application of the methods and
> > attitude of the instructor is bearing through.  You don't see the
> > mouse as
> > useful and your students have trouble using them, I do see the
> > mouse as useful and my students don't experience the difficulties.

> I assure you, I do see the mouse as useful.  (In fact it's more than
> useful,
> it's completely necessary for most mainstream applications today.)

Though I would consider the ability to be accessed entirely via the
keyboard as a requirement for most well designed applications.

> It's not
> true that my students have trouble using them; it doesn't take all
> that long
> to pick up.  But there *is* a learning curve associated with mouse
> use: you
> have to teach them how to manage double-click and drag and drop, for
> instance.  It takes practice to do these things reliably.

That is fair enough. Double-click and drag and drop are hard to master.
What you seem to be omitting is the fact that the keyboard is actually
harder to master. We've all seen the 'hunt and peck' technique in
action. What made the keyboard seem easier was all that typewriter
experience that we used to have. Well, anyone under thirty has probably
not seen a typewriter - they learn the keyboard when they use the
computer.

> I'm having a real hard time believing that you've never seen someone
> have
> trouble getting a double-click accomplished because they keep moving
> the
> pointer while clicking.  Or accidentally dragging an icon while
> they're trying
> to select it.  Or having trouble doing a drag because they keep
> letting go of
> the button.  In my experience these things are not only common in
> first-time mouse users, they're universal.

It is possible to do a lot of productive work without ever double-
clicking or drag-and-dropping.


> (Different pointer devices have different requirements in this
> respect.  Pen
> systems are really easily learned (except for double-click),
> presumably
> because most everyone has used a pen or pointing stick before, and
> trackballs
> are easier to keep stable while clicking -- though the latter is a
> lot harder to use for drag-and-drop gestures.)

But in any case, the mouse/pen/trackball is a lot closer to
writing/drawing than the keyboard.

> > > I don't really know what your point is?  Certainly there are
> > > pointer
> > > interfaces with a lot more bandwidth than is typical, but they're
> > > certainly
> > > not what we were talking about and they still don't help with a
> > > variety of common applications (eg a wordprocessor).

> > Yes they do,  selecting text for formatting/cut/paste etc. is much
> > simpler
> > for a beginner to understand and can be used even at views that
> > don't allow
> > for fully displaying text.  Would you rather return to the .
> > commands of
> > Word Star.  Compare selecting cutting and pasting text in WordStar
> > to the methods used in Word8.

> Point taken, but tasks performed during text entry (like font change
> or even
> simple cursor moves like go-back-one-word) are a lot harder to do
> when you
> have to stop and switch to the mouse and then go back to the
> keyboard.  That's
> a big efficiency hit to a touch-typist.  Bandwidth is better if they
> don't have to do that.

Depends on when the formatting is done. If you type in the content
first, and then do your layout, you will do it quicker with the mouse.
For (say) bolding one word in a sentence as you are typing, <CTRL> B
(or equivalent) is certainly quicker than clicking the bold button on
the toolbar, with one proviso - you have to remember it.

> I also have to note that most applications provide keyboard shortcuts
> for
> common features, and that advanced users tend to make a lot of use of
> them. Again, better bandwidth.

If the application is one which involves typing a lot of text.

> > > > Let's take file management for a second here.  Are you saying
> > > > that a '$' and
> > > > some arcane commands ( ls, cp, mv etc ) or a 'c:\' prompt and
> > > > other arcane
> > > > commands (dir, copy, move etc.) are easier for a beginner to
> > > > understand
> > > > than
> > > > a GUI displaying a tree of folders containing sub folders?

> > > Oh no, I'm not saying that at all.  There's no reason why you
> > > can't show that
> > > same tree in either interface, something that a lot of GUI
> > > advocates readily forget.

> > It doesnt have the same impact when it looks like a bunch of words
> > connected by lines.

> Maybe it's not as pretty, but it contains the same information and
> similar information density.

But it isn't interactive. By the time you have made your text-based
directory tree as functional as a graphical file manager, you have a
graphical file manager. Moving files is an application where drag and
drop (or select file, cut, select directory, paste) is naturally
graphical.

> > > What I'm saying that a menu-driven (ie textual) interface that
> > > shows that tree
> > > is going to be easier to learn than a point-and-click interface,
> > > assuming that
> > > you're starting from scratch with both.  This is because there
> > > are a lot
> > > (close to half a dozen) of gestural input conventions that have
> > > to be learned
> > > prior to being able to do anything at all with the point-and-click
> > > interface.

> > Not true.

> Certainly it's true.  Point-and-click is a gesture you have to learn
> to get
> anything at all done, and there are usually at least two variations
> of it
> (left click for select versus right click for an object action
> menu).

That is all that you actually have to know.

> A lot
> of operations require additional variations (shift-click for range
selection,
> control-click for group selection).

That makes you more efficient, but it isn't essential.

> Double-click is a gesture (object open on
> many systems).  Drag is a gesture (needed for menu access on some
> systems, and
> sometimes for delete/eject).  Then there's control-drag (copy on
> Windows).
> There's a half-dozen of them right there in order to be able to use
> most of
> Windows' interface -- and almost all of them are needed just to make
> basic use of the interface.

You can do it all with left click select, right click cut/copy, left
click select, right click paste. Just the simplest use of the mouse and
the copy/cut/paste paradigm. (Of course this is Windows-oriented - the
principle still holds).

> The Mac is in some ways better (fewer gestures for the basic
> interface) and
> some ways worse  (more use of keyboard-and-mouse chording to make up
> for the single mouse button).

The context menu is certainly an advance for GUI's.

> Every one of these gestures requires some motor skills to be
> learned.  They're
> not *hard* skills, but they're necessary prerequisites to using the
> system,
> and they're skills that aren't used outside of computer systems.

Keyboard skills aren't, in general, learned outside computer systems
either. I've posted before that a five-year-old can learn how to use a
mouse just by watching someone. Learning your way around a keyboard is
not instinctive or easy. It can take months before you remember where
all the keys are.

> Again, I'm having a hard time believing that you haven't seen first-
> time
> computer users spend time learning these things.  I've never seen any
> first-time user that didn't have to spend some time getting this stuff
> straight.

It's all hard. But the mouse is easier.

> > > Another thing I'm trying to point out is that there are places
> > > where the
> > > arcane system works a lot better than a GUI system in time-to-
usefulness.
> > > Launching applications is one of them.  Getting someone to type
> > >"edit" is a
> > > lot easier than teaching them how to double-click on an editor
> > >icon; they don't have to learn special motor skills first.

Of course they do. Most users will type edit and wait. This will take
them several minutes, as they can't find the 'i' because it looks like
an 'l'. Then you tell them they have to hit return before anything
happens. You come back ten minutes later and they've typed 'retern' and
they are still waiting.

> > What special motor skills? Moving ones hand is something you are
> >born doing,
> > pushing a button is something one does dialing the phone, and
> > normally
> > intelligent person can combine these actions based on visual cues
> > without
> > much difficulty (barring physical infirmity of course).

> Moving a mouse (or not) while simultaneously pushing a button
> requires some
> practice.  It's not that the individual actions are hard, but that
> the two
> together require some coordination.  There is also some hand/eye
> coordination
> development necessary because the pointing device is usually disjoint
> from the display (pen-based systems are a big improvement here).

Pressing a shift key simultaneously with a letter and associating it
with a character appearing on the screen is just as tricky.

> > > Considering that the first and most common thing anyone does with
> > > a computer
> > > is launch an application I think this is kind of significant to
> > > the learning curve.

> > You are still teaching Open application then open the file?  Time
> > to change
> > paradigm, find the file you want to open, double click and the
> > application starts.  No typing or memorizing required.

> Whether you launch the application by double-clicking the application
> icon or
> double-clicking the file icon is immaterial to my point.  You have to
> master double-click either way.

Or right-click/open. Of course, that requires a bit of text, so there
is something for both viewpoints.

> As for learning the "new paradigm" (keeping in mind that there's
< nothing
> especially new about this, nor even specific to GUIs), perhaps you
> can explain
> to me how the first-time user is going to double-click a file that
> s/he hasn't
> created yet.  You have to start somewhere, and where you start is
> launching an application.

This is where a single click launcher can be helpful.

--
J. (Looking Backward)


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: westprog@my-deja.com                              06-Dec-99 17:05:25
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 16:29:24
Subj: (2/2) Re: User interface learning curves

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             06-Dec-99 17:55:03
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 16:29:24
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82fli1$6au$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
>
> > Which I successfully (and correctly) did.
>
> One can also "successfully" avoid being killed in an airplane crash by
> committing suicide.  Does that represent your idea of "successful",
> Curtis?

Nope.

Here, you are implying that the grammatical constructs I chose are
analogous to "avoid[ing] being killed in an airplane crash by committing
suicide," which, quite simply, is an inappropriate analogy.

And, of course, you would normally now procede to deny that you were
implying anything, but that I was simply making yet another unwarranted
inference.

Since I beat you to the punch line, you will now have to change your
strategy.

> What makes you think that using "measure up" would have ended the
> sentence with a preposition>

What makes you think I "think that using 'measure up' would have ended
the sentence with a preposition?"

-- snip --

> > That you continue to respond to my posts proves that you are making
> > implications.
>
> Illogical,

We've seen the fruits of your "logic," Dave:

"Yet to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE], one must have run the
executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Tholen -- 10/29/1999

When confronted with this absolute error on your part, you have
*invariably* responded with the steps of "logic" that caused you to
arrive at that blatant error, and have never admitted to the error.

That, in and of itself, is hardly "logical."

> given that my posts can be quite explicit

Yeah, anything "can be . . ." Dave.  In the here and now, your posts
have been anything but explicit.

> and implications are not explicit, thus the simple existence of my
> responses does not prove that I am making implications.

Universally? No. You are correct.

In the here and now?  That's another story.

-- snip --

> > You made an implication that my grammar was incorrect.
>
> Your grammar involved more than just those seven words, Curtis.

Nitpicking over grammar, without being explicit as to what my alleged
"error" is, indicates yet another defeat for Tholen, which he will
inevitably deny/question.

> > I see that you lack the courage to even make a direct statement
> > about this issue,
>
> Having more reading comprehension problems, Curtis?  I already made a
> direct statement about this issue.  I asked you what a "standard up"
> is.

Which simply indicated your own reading comprehension, ironically enough
 . . .

Oh, and a question is a far cry from a direct statement, lad.

-- snip --

> Then explain the numerous postings you've made since then, Curtis.
> It's not as though you're a victim of circumstances over which you
> have no control.

There is nothing to explain.  Anyone who understands what hypocrisy and
sincerity are would realize that there is nothing to explain. That you
do not realize this indicates your own lack of understanding.

You seem to think that being a university professor somehow makes you
infallible.  That you never, ever admit to an error during an
adversarial exchange supports such a belief.

"Yet to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE], one must have run the
executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Tholen -- 10/29/1999

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            06-Dec-99 19:24:07
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:14
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:45:35, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
wrote:

> Jugulator <1979j@usa.net> wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I am preparing an exam based on operating systems at my college. Nobody
> > here knows the importance of OS/2 in the history of Personal Computers.
> > I would like to quote largely OS/2 in my research but I miss maybe the
> > most
> > important version, the first ever with Presentation Manager and the
> > first operating system with a GUI for intel platforms : OS/2 1.1 
> 
> "first" operating system with a GUI for Intel platforms????
> 
> What about DOS/Windows and DOS/GEM?
> 
> If I remember correctly, OS/2 1.1 was out in 1988.
> 
> Windows 2.0 (working GUI) was out in 1987 (?), and on the box it said
> "prepares you for the wonders of OS/2".
> 
> GEM was out for the Atari ST (m68k) in 1985, and was only a port of
> GEMx86, which therefore must have been out before for Intel machines.
> 
Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples 
you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the 
case for Windows 9x).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever.
(Terry Pratchett - Hogfather)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 19:26:10
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Bob Germer
>Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage.

... but worth more than Bob Germer, who himself is not even worth as
much as garbage

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             07-Dec-99 07:36:11
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384ba6b4$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net>, on 12/05/99 at 11:47 AM,
>    Joseph <josco@ibm.net> said:
>
>
> > I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
> > word or term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then
> > one is saying they their ideas are confused, their understanding of
> > technology is confused and one embraces confusion as a means to cope
> > with problems .   If that display is done in a public forum then all the
> > worse -- why advertise ?
>
> And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have to
> stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34 modems
> at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That was
> good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.
>
We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 19:24:13
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>David Sutherland
>Why should people cut you [Karel Jensens] any slack when you
>admit that you publicly berate Tholen's opponents but will not
>criticise Tholen even if you know he is wrong!

Indeed. It's for the above reason that people should also discount
*anything* he says about Tholen. If anyone really wants to know about
Tholen, I can provide a lengthy listing of comments about him from
many, many usenet posters, covering a wide demographic -- all of them
more perceptive and unbiased than Karel, and who, unlike Karel,
possess the intelligence to see the inconsistency, illogic, hypocrisy,
and true motivations in Tholen's dim-witted nonsense on usenet.

>Karel,  just look at your responses in the threads related to tholens
>completely erroneous claim that OS/2 must be used to view a particular
>file. You tried to argue on his behalf on a couple of nit-picking
>semantic points (and failed) but refused to address the real issue -
>tholen made a false claim, and has argued that false claim in the
>light of evidence that he is wrong, which makes him a liar. You
>didn't see fit to question him on that and instead chose to mimic his
>inane semantic arguments.  Do you think that makes you look like
>someone who gives a damn about the issues rather than the
>personalities?

Exactly. And Karel's repeated response to this legitimate criticism of
his own behavior on usenet? -- He doesn't address it at all, and
instead struggles to make some sort of implication that everyone who
has noticed this sort of thing on his part has somehow been hypnotized
by me into thinking Karel to be clueness.

I've been telling him for months now that it's his own posts about
Tholen's nonsense in this newsgroup which has convinced others that
Karel is clueless and/or foolishly aligning himself with a renowned
usenet Kook of the Month based strictly upon use of his pet product.
Unfortunately, Karel is not smart enough to figure this out.

>You are welcome to give your opinion, just don't be surprised when you
>get flamed for being so obviously biased.
>
>Tholen is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
>
>Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
>
>You don't care whether someone is right or wrong, you just care about
>what OS they use, which means that you have zero credibility when it
>comes to arguing who is being honest or not.

Indeed. But you're wasting your time. I know from experience that
Karel is not bright enough to even believe you, let alone figure this
out on his own. He will simply assume that I have hypnotized you into
believing this about him, using insidious, mind-altering mental
trickery capable of being transmitted over the internet (which he no
doubt believes was taught to me at some Microsoft-sponsored seminar)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            06-Dec-99 11:48:24
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Stuart Fox wrote:

> 
> Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message

> > And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> > heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have to
> > stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34 modems
> > at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That was
> > good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.
> >
> We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.

CD's are not late 90's technology.  Is this some kind of running gag?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 19:59:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason
>The discussion of other operating 
>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

>By comparing other operating 
>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
>it.

By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

>Micrsoft is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and failure.

OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
failure.

>Talking 
>about the Microsoft trials is very on topic since it is the story of OS/2.

Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
>: off-topic according to the charter

>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
"interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
should add.

Typical. OS/2 Advocates like to exclude themselves from blame, and
point fingers at everyone else for what went wrong, when the truth is,
OS/2 Advocate were (and still are) a very big part of the problem.

>I don't think so.

To quote one of your fellow lunatics: "What you think is irrelevant.
What you can prove is relevant". You've not proven your own posts to
be any more on-topic, according to your own, hypocritically-applied
insistence upon a strict interpretation of the newsgroup charter, than
anyone else's. You're just being a hypocrite about it. That's all.
Typical.

>I still feel doing so is in spirit of this newsgroup.

But not in accordance with your own insistence upon a strict
interpretation of the newsgroup charter when you're attempting to
censor opinions you don't like to hear -- as versus your hypocritical
and illogical "reinterpretation" of the newsgroup charter to excuse
your own off-topic posts. Typical.

>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.

So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.

>But, most threads 
>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
>purpose is to talk about OS/2.

So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            06-Dec-99 12:09:07
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Steven C. Britton wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> > >
> > > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
> >
> > That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
> 
> Monopoly:
> 
> 1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
> a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
> 
> Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.

I would have thought the Judges' finding of fact would be sufficent but I
guess his legal conclusions are not as important as your opinion.
http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/finding.htm

This gets interesting. 
It is not very often that I get to talk with a megalomaniac 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 20:07:18
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>Boob Germer
>> And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
>> heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have to
>> stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34 modems
>> at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That was
>> good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.

>Stuart Fox
>We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.

First of all, Boob Germer has no clients. He makes up his anecdotes
from stories he reads in PC Magazine.

Secondly, he can't supply his "clients" <wink wink> with CDROMs
because he's only a local supplier who doesn't have millions of
dollars of capital, and therefore can't afford those really expensive
items like CDROMs. Besides, his clients refuse to contract with local
people to supply "hardware" such as CDROMs. No, they insist that this
be gotten from IBM. Yeah that's it. His clients insist that those IE
CDROMs be gotten from IBM. And that's why his hands are tied on the
matter.

Understand it now? It's really simple once you suspend disbelief (like
Karel Jensens is prone to doing if he hears you say "I use OS/2") and
all of Boob's numerous, implausible, ridiculous,
absurdly-unbusinesslike "explanations" make perfect "sense"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            06-Dec-99 19:24:08
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 13:32:53, David Sutherland 
<sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:

[snipped some]
> >> 
> >I don't recall ever having said that I am objective or unbiased. And 
> >as for Dave Tholen (to whom I think you're referring, although he 
> >wouldn't call himself an OS/2 advocate), if I think he's wrong about 
> >something, I will tell him privately instead of bashing him in public,
> >because I'm a subjective, biased b*st*rd.
> 
> That would explain your lack of objectivity, and justifies some of the
> vitriol your obviously unfair treatment of people has attracted.  Why
> should people cut you any slack when you admit that you publicly
> berate Tholen's opponents but will not criticise Tholen even if you
> know he is wrong!
> 
I really don't get this at all. I have never, *ever* stated that I was
in this group to give objective, unbiased opinions about anything or 
anyone, and frankly, given the name of this group, I never figured I 
was required to.

And where do you get that silly idea that I am somehow "required" to 
criticise someone? There are oodles of posts going through this NG 
every day who in my opinion are completely wrong. I don't get flamed 
for not replying to those. Why's Dave Tholen different?

> > And could you please give me
> >examples of me, rushing "to defend [him] at every opportunity"? 
> >Frankly, given the amount of "attention" he's been getting lately, 
> >that would leave me without much time off.
> >
> 
> Karel,  just look at your responses in the threads related to tholens
> completely erroneous claim that OS/2 must be used to view a particular
> file.   You tried to argue on his behalf on a couple of nit-picking
> semantic points (and failed) but refused to address the real issue -
> tholen made a false claim, and has argued that false claim in the
> light of evidence that he is wrong, which makes him a liar.   You
> didn't see fit to question him on that and instead chose to mimic his
> inane semantic arguments.  Do you think that makes you look like
> someone who gives a damn about the issues rather than the
> personalities?
> 
IIRC, I made 2 remarks in that thread, both of which only because the 
posters were addressing me directly. I made it clear that I wished to 
stay out of it completely (and seeing where that thread has gone to, I
think I made a good call). I never nit-picked, I asked a 
q-u-e-s-t-i-o-n. I didn't do semantics either.

And as for the issue: it is not _my_ issue, so why in the name of 
seven hells should I get involved? Your remarks would have been 
correct, had I jumped into that discussion, defending Dave against 
better knowledge and flaming everyone else, regardless of their 
arguments. I don't think I did that, but now I get attacked for doing 
absolutely nothing.

Your argument seems to be that I am a Tholen supporter, therefore, by 
not defending Dave Tholen in an argument, I am inconsistent. Please 
remember that it was Jeff Glatt who has "declared" me a Tholen 
supporter (and he hasn't even made clear what that is exactly). I 
*like* Dave Tholen, I am *not* his supporter; I know that that 
distinction is a bit too difficult for Jeff Glatt to grasp, but I had 
put you down for an intelligent (yet sadly misguided Windows-using 
<G>) person. Please don't disappoint me <G again>.

> >And as for giving opinions, you seemed to ask for one, with your 
> >"Hmmm.....odd that you wouldn't take...", to which I answered. 
> >Apologies for misunderstanding you there. Next time, could you be more
> >clear by adding something like: "I'd like comments, except from Karel 
> >Jansens, because he doesn't give an objective opinion"?
> >
> 
> You are welcome to give your opinion, just don't be surprised when you
> get flamed for being so obviously biased.
> 
I don't mind, but please flame me for the right reasons.

> Tholen is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
> 
Where have I defended Dave Tholen, knowing that he was wrong? (OK, 
agreed, I could argue us both silly on the "knowing" thing, because 
you can never actually prove that I knew something, but I promise to 
be reasonable <G>)

> Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
> 
Actually, I think Bob makes quite a lot of sense, in his own - heh - 
unique way. Again, it was Jeff Glatt who started the whole "liar liar"
thing, based on... well, go find out, if you can. Jeff's style of 
"argument" can be easily formalised. It goes something like this:

Poster makes a statement which Jeff doesn't like (or maybe thinks is 
wrong, who knows).
Jeff: "You're wrong".
Poster: "Actually, no. Because..." (poster gives arguments to 
corroborate his statement)
Jeff: "You're so wrong".
Poster: "You have no arguments to defend your position".
Jeff: "You're a liar, because everything you say is a lie".
Sometimes he likes to use variations, like "clueless newbie" or 
"gullible supporter", probably to keep things interesting.

All this wouldn't be that bad (it's quite easy to ignore that kind of 
posts), where it not for the fact that more sane people apparently 
take these rantings as an accepted style of argument or worse, take 
Jeff's "slogans" as some sort of finding of fact.

> You don't care whether someone is right or wrong, you just care about
> what OS they use, which means that you have zero credibility when it
> comes to arguing who is being honest or not.
> 
Before things become too serious, let's not forget this is 
C.O.O.Advocacy. I for one am not exactly losing any sleep pondering 
about who in this group might be honest or not; and as for 
credibility, this really is the first time I've written about that 
issue in COOA. Do you really take this newsgroup that seriously? If 
so, maybe I should quit and come back with an alias.
> 
> >Thanks.
> >
> 
> You're welcome.
> 
Don't mention.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 20:10:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>>letoured@nospam.net
>>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>>>without paying for wincrap.

>>This is, of course, not true.

>>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
>>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
>>your incompetence and ignorance.

>I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
>give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
>windows?

If IBM won't sell you what you want, why are you foolishly buying IBM
products???

I see the problem now, and it's you.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               06-Dec-99 15:00:09
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Marty wrote:
> That depends entirely on what you are talking about.  If you are talking
about
> 3D graphics, then the up and coming Playstation II blows the doors off of
PCs.
> The latest Voodoo 3 cards can handle somewhere around 8 million polygons per
> second (with no lighting or fog effects).  The Playstation II's hardware can
> handle 53 million polys per second with no effects, and 22 million polys per
> second with lighting and fog effects.

	Yes, however these measurements really don't relect much of anything
because they're taken at different resolutions.  You can calculate those
polygons a whole lot faster when you have fewer pixels for them to
intersect with, and the last I checked a standard PC 3D card can do
1024*768 and higher, whereas a game console can do 576 x 430 max, which
has less than 1/3 the total number of pixels to render than a standard
PC display.  The refresh rate is also typically lower.

	I have anecdotal proof that the difference does have an effect:  this
past weekend, I went out and bought myself a nice big Sony Trinitron
Wega TV with the S-Video input on board.  I attached my ATI XPert@Play
8Mb AGP to it via the S-video feed, and fired up some games.  The
difference was immediately noticable, especially in any game which
required precision firing (like Rainbow 6).  You just don't get the same
shape definition due to the lower resolution.  As well, NTSC tends to
suffer from the fact that it's colour seperation is balanced towards
green and other skin tones, and that on lower quality sets and anything
using coaxial or RCA connectors for the video feed are going to suffer
from some colour bleed and chroma crawl, lessening the quality even
further.  Even 640*480 on a PC (where the NTSC:SVGA pixel ratio is
~0.80) produces a better picture than even the best TV set.

	This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with game consoles - it
really isn't their fault that the current TV resolutions are so low. 
But they take advantage of this fact by coding their 3D rendering
firmware to this lower resolution - and with fewer pixels, they can do
it a whole lot faster.

	I'd rather have 8 million pps on a 1024*768 resolution display than 53
million pps on a TV set :).

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          06-Dec-99 19:41:09
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

Once again, Jason reveals himself to be a hypocrite. That he directly
contradicts himself in the course of a single post, and yet fails to
see this, underscores that he truly has no idea what he really is
supposedly saying.

>I have simply pointed out that flaming OS/2 advocates is not included
>in the charter as on topic.

Neither is the discussion of Microsoft trial verdicts. Your own posts
in this newsgroup are hypocritically off-topic. Are you just too
foolish to recognize your own hypocrisy?

>I have not complained about people violating the newsgroup charter.

Nonsense. It's right here in your own post, a statement you make after
noting that flaming OS/2 Advocates is not included in the charter:

>What I have complained about 
>is people who hang out in this newsgroup only to insult OS/2 advocates in 
>order to incite a flame war and not to talk about OS/2.

OS/2 Advocacy *is* about OS/2 -- well, at least it is when *I* am
talking about it. When you're talking about it, it apparently is about
Microsoft trial verdicts. But then, you're obviously a misguided
hypocrite who routinely violates the newsgroup charter, and then
complains when others do likewise.

>:>:Jeff Glatt
>:>: Mac users have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments. If you're
>:>: having trouble following the topic, let me know, and I'll explain it
>:>: to you. (Pssssst. The clue is in the first two words of my above
>:>: paragraph).

>:>Jason
>:>Bullsh*t.

>: So you erroneously presume.

>You are correct here.

Yes, I am. I'm also correct in stating that you're obviously a
misguided hypocrite who routinely violates the newsgroup charter, and
then complains when others do likewise.

>See my previous comment.

It's still just as incorrect and misguided and hypocritical as it was
before.

>My primary 
>purpose in the newsgroup is to talk about OS/2

So you erroneously presume. In fact, your primary, foolishly
hypocritical, misguided posts concern Microsoft trial verdicts and
other off-topic nonsense.

>Without 
>people like you, I would only be discussing the good and bad of OS/2.

I have good reason not to believe you. You're an obvious hypocrite.

>I wish I was a better man

So do I. But you're not. You're a hypocrite.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 15:40:01
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 13:32:53, David Sutherland
> <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
> >
> Actually, I think Bob makes quite a lot of sense, in his own - heh -
> unique way.

Did his racial slur against Arabs "make sense"?  How about his statement
about the opinions of Canadians?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glend@nospam.direct.ca                            06-Dec-99 13:02:07
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Glenn Davies <glend@nospam.direct.ca>

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:55:03 -0700, "Steven C. Britton"
<sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote:

>Joseph wrote:
>> >
>> > When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
>>
>> That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
>
>Monopoly:
>
>1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
>a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
>
>Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.
>
>2.  an exclusive privilege to carry on a traffic or service, granted by a
>government.
>
>Nope, doesn't have that, either.
>
>3.  the exclusive control of something.
>
>Nope, not that either.

Sure - exclusive control of Window related products and technologies.

>
>4.  something that is the subject of such control.
>
>Nope...
>
>5.  a company or gorup that has such contol.
>
>Microsoft doesn't have that control.
>
>(Random House dictionary)

It's a fact that you're just going to have to except. The US legal
definition of "monopoly" is not the same as the commmon dictionary
definition. Just pretend they're are two different words.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            06-Dec-99 14:11:01
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

josco wrote:
> >
> > Monopoly:
> >
> > 1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market,
or
> > a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
> >
> > Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.
>
> I would have thought the Judges' finding of fact would be sufficent but I
> guess his legal conclusions are not as important as your opinion.
> http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/finding.htm

When the judge is fundamentally wrong in his definition, his report becomes
"findings of fiction".

The bottom line is that Microsoft's request to have the case dismissed out
of hand was "laughed out of court" because the court had probably already
decided on the outcome: that Microsoft was guilty of being successful and
therefore must be punished.

I've posted the definition of monopoly.  It's nice to see that you choose to
ignore it.

So much for your grasp on reality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            06-Dec-99 14:14:12
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Glenn Davies wrote:

> >3.  the exclusive control of something.
> >
> >Nope, not that either.
>
> Sure - exclusive control of Window related products and technologies.

What the hell are Quattro Pro, Netscape, and Lotus?

The point is that while Microsoft has control over it's half-baked, buggy,
operating system called Windows (as it should -- it's Microsoft's product),
it does NOT have control over what applications people choose to run under
it.

> It's a fact that you're just going to have to except. The US legal
> definition of "monopoly" is not the same as the commmon dictionary
> definition. Just pretend they're are two different words.

They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other isn't.
I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice Department.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                06-Dec-99 21:16:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On 6 Dec 1999 00:14:42 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:

>> That's an interesting color of sky in your world.  It's, what, rose
>> colored?
>
>Who do you know who was forced to buy a copy of Windows?

Plenty of people.  However, judging from your reactions to the other
replies in this thread you're simply going to ignore any answer I give
that doesn't correspond with the one you want to hear.

Let me put it to you this way.  Not everyone has the freedom to assemble
their own PC for a given situation, and must purchase a name brand PC off
the shelf for that situation.  The reason for such a purchase is
usually to secure an extended warrenty for the hardware or to get a
particular set of hradware, since it comes from a known reliable
manufacturer such as Dell or Compaq.  Since such OEM's are also locked 
into exclusionary contracts with Microsoft, that invariably means that the
PC will come preloaded with some type of Windows, even if the end result
calls for a non Windows OS. But of course, you will reply that the buyer
need not purchase from such OEMs, totally ignoring the first set of facts
I set forth-that the buyer needs to use a PC from these particular OEMs.

-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             06-Dec-99 21:44:00
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <81lio8$sor$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenantispam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
>
> > The remarq.com webserver resets to the initial page, Dave.
>
> That's not my problem, Curtis.

*YOU* requested the evidence, Dave, and I provided it.

If there is something that you  don't *LIKE* about the presentation of
the evidence, well, that, most emphatically, *IS*  your problem.

It sure as hell ain't mine . . .

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                06-Dec-99 21:59:16
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:14:24 -0700, Steven C. Britton <sbritton@cadvision.com> 
wrote:
>Glenn Davies wrote:
>
>> It's a fact that you're just going to have to except. The US legal
>> definition of "monopoly" is not the same as the commmon dictionary
>> definition. Just pretend they're are two different words.
>
>They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other isn't.
>I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice Department.

That's nice, but which one actually applies to the situation at hand?  Do
you really think that Judge Jackson used the Random House definition, or
the well settled definition present in US law?

The RH definition is irrelevant.  It doesn't matter in the slightest.
Here's a US judge with 30 years experience, offering an analysis based
upon 78 days of testimony from two opposing points of view, in an area of
US law with over 100 years of legal precedent.  Yep, I can just see him
cracking open the Random House dictionary, reading the definitions, and
slapping his forehead...

<Doh!!!> It's so clear now!


-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: 1979j@usa.net                                     06-Dec-99 22:01:00
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: OS/2 1.1

From: Nino <1979j@usa.net>

Hello All,

my name's Nino and I am a student at the 'La Sapienza' university in
Rome.
I am preparing a research on the history of PC for my next exam. OS/2
have
a huge importance for the IBM PC compatible platform, I'd like to quote
it
largely, but unfortunately I miss what maybe is the most important
version: OS/2 1.1, the first operating system for PC with a GUI, the
first OS/2 with Presentation Manager.

I would like to write an original article on it and take some
screenshots of OS/2 1.1 with my camera.

If someone please can supply me that version (which is, I suppose, about
4 or 5 5.25 disks) I will be very grateful; I really want my teachers
give OS/2 the importance and the respect that it deserves. Thanks in
advance

I am sorry for any off-topic generated but I really need your help.

Best regards,
Nino Solazzo

P.S. Please, answer me only if you have the 1.1 version. I am not a
collector so I am not interested in any other 1.x versions. Thanks
again.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: [Infostrada] (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    06-Dec-99 17:25:14
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:

: Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples 
: you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the 
: case for Windows 9x).

I think the difference should be if the are sold together as a package.  
As an example, Windows 95 uses the DOS operating systen and the Windows 
GUI while OS/2 users the OS/2 operating system and the PM/WPS GUI.  It 
seems like pretty few operating systems don't have an underlying Text 
based OS level before the GUI level.  

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    06-Dec-99 17:39:18
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Once again Jeff spews crap into the newsgroup

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
: Once again, Jason reveals himself to be a hypocrite. That he directly
: contradicts himself in the course of a single post, and yet fails to
: see this, underscores that he truly has no idea what he really is
: supposedly saying.

No, you just have reading comprehension problems, as you have proved to 
us before.

:>I have simply pointed out that flaming OS/2 advocates is not included
:>in the charter as on topic.

: Neither is the discussion of Microsoft trial verdicts. 

I generally don't talk about the Microsoft trial verdicts.  Stop 
constructing fantasy worlds.

: Your own posts
: in this newsgroup are hypocritically off-topic. Are you just too
: foolish to recognize your own hypocrisy?

You fail to recognize that I was talking about what was on topic or not.  
I was not saying what you must do.  Just because I said I think you are a 
waste of time and should shove your keyboard up your ass, doesn't mean I 
have too stuff my own keyboard up my ass to avoid being a hypocrite.

:>I have not complained about people violating the newsgroup charter.

: Nonsense. It's right here in your own post, a statement you make after
: noting that flaming OS/2 Advocates is not included in the charter:

No if you read the following, I'm not complaing about being on charter, 
I'm complaining about people lower the quaility of this newsgroup by 
inciting flamewars by insulting OS/2 advocates:

:>What I have complained about 
:>is people who hang out in this newsgroup only to insult OS/2 advocates in 
:>order to incite a flame war and not to talk about OS/2.

: OS/2 Advocacy *is* about OS/2 -- well, at least it is when *I* am
: talking about it. When you're talking about it, it apparently is about
: Microsoft trial verdicts. But then, you're obviously a misguided
: hypocrite who routinely violates the newsgroup charter, and then
: complains when others do likewise.

Again, your statement have no basis in reality.  You have constructed 
some fantasy world around me.  In your mind, I'm some guy who sits in the 
newsgroup and talk about Microft trial verdicts all day long, and 
complains that people violate the newsgroup charter.  This is not true.  

:>:>:Jeff Glatt
:>:>: Mac users have no relevance whatsoever to my above comments. If you're
:>:>: having trouble following the topic, let me know, and I'll explain it
:>:>: to you. (Pssssst. The clue is in the first two words of my above
:>:>: paragraph).

:>:>Jason
:>:>Bullsh*t.

:>: So you erroneously presume.

:>You are correct here.

: Yes, I am. 

I'm glad you just agreed with my agruement that you are not bullshiting 
the newsgroup, but a moron who can't read at the level of a Jr High Student.

: I'm also correct in stating that you're obviously a
: misguided hypocrite who routinely violates the newsgroup charter, and
: then complains when others do likewise.

No, you are incorrect here, this is because you are a moron who can't 
read at a Jr. High School level.  I wish you were just trying to bullshit 
the newsgroup, then you would be easier to reason with.  Eventually you 
would know people saw threw your false statements.

:>See my previous comment.

: It's still just as incorrect and misguided and hypocritical as it was
: before.

See my previous comment.

:>My primary 
:>purpose in the newsgroup is to talk about OS/2

: So you erroneously presume. In fact, your primary, foolishly
: hypocritical, misguided posts concern Microsoft trial verdicts and
: other off-topic nonsense.

No, my primary purpose is to talk about OS/2.  Lately, most of my posts 
may involve argueing with you and countering FUD, but it's not why I read 
this newsgroup.  You on the otherhand have no intention about talking 
about OS/2, you only exist here to bring down the quality of the group.

:>Without 
:>people like you, I would only be discussing the good and bad of OS/2.

: I have good reason not to believe you. You're an obvious hypocrite.

I can't force you not to live in ignorance.

:>I wish I was a better man

: So do I. But you're not. You're a hypocrite.

That's an unfounded arguement.  Maybe in the future you should prove you 
point, then rather just saying something over and over.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: florin@anguish.org                                06-Dec-99 23:49:19
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Michiel Denie" <florin@anguish.org>

Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:s4ilh6orqeg172@corp.supernews.com...
> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>
> --
> Ruel Smith
> Cincinnati, OH
>
> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>

The GPL is crucial here. Sure, some people will lose
interest over time, but the GPL means they can't
withdraw what they've made so far and start selling
it as closed source. The source will always be right
there for others to pick up. I think we can count on
the fact that most young people have ideals, even if
they tend to lose them later.

Also, the Linux OS is a godsend for big companies
like IBM, Sun, Novell. It means an equal playing
ground that they can build on independant of whether
Microsoft agrees with what they're doing or not.
They can just add the bits they need.

You don't NEED to make your software free if you
develop on Linux. You don't even need to make it
open source. And because kernel modules are exempt
from the GPL, you can even extend the OS without
giving up your crown jewels. Of course you don't get
the advantages of outside development and peer
review then, but that's for everyone to decide for
themselves.

IMHO, something as indispensable as the operating
system, just like welfare, water management and
street lighting is one of the things that should be
left in the public domain. Profit isn't always the
best motive for everything.

Michiel Denie


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            06-Dec-99 15:43:05
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Mike Trettel wrote:
> >
> >They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other
isn't.
> >I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice
Department.
>
> That's nice, but which one actually applies to the situation at hand?  Do
> you really think that Judge Jackson used the Random House definition, or
> the well settled definition present in US law?

On that point, I will not disagree.  However, I do disagree with the law as
it is written -- which has been my point from day one.

> The RH definition is irrelevant.  It doesn't matter in the slightest.

Sure it does: it is the _correct_ definition of monopoly.  Just because a
bunch of political activists wrote a law to ensure that people get punished
for being successful doesn't mean that they're correct.

> Here's a US judge with 30 years experience, offering an analysis based
> upon 78 days of testimony from two opposing points of view, in an area of
> US law with over 100 years of legal precedent.

Here's a leftist US judge, who, like those who brought the "charges" against
Microsoft to this kangaroo court, is jealous of people who do business well,
and want a slice of the pie.  Yep, I can also see him deliberately choosing
to use the flawed and incorrect definition of monopoly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             07-Dec-99 00:05:20
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 19:57:15
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:45:35, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
> wrote:
> > > important version, the first ever with Presentation Manager and the
> > > first operating system with a GUI for intel platforms : OS/2 1.1 
> > 
> > "first" operating system with a GUI for Intel platforms????
> > 
> > What about DOS/Windows and DOS/GEM?
> > 
> > If I remember correctly, OS/2 1.1 was out in 1988.
> > 
> > Windows 2.0 (working GUI) was out in 1987 (?), and on the box it said
> > "prepares you for the wonders of OS/2".
> > 
> > GEM was out for the Atari ST (m68k) in 1985, and was only a port of
> > GEMx86, which therefore must have been out before for Intel machines.
> > 
> Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples 
> you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the 
> case for Windows 9x).

But this is a circular argument.

Presentation Manager is as much an add-on to OS/2 as Windows (and GEM)
was for DOS.

If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
GUI.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 18:49:14
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:28
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenbot wrote:
> 
> In article <384AD436.E9ABBAC3@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > In article <384A04A5.3F00E221@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > That is a lie.
> > >
> > > What is a lie, Marty?
> >
> > Apparently my use of vocabulary is not accessibile to you.
> 
> Aren't you certain?

I was attempting to grant your intelligence the benefit of the doubt by
assuming you lied about your ignorance, but if you prefer that I think of you
as ignorant then that's fine by me.  The choice is yours.
 
> > A lie is a statement which is a deliberate ommission of truth or a 
> > statement in a direct juxtaposition to the truth.
> 
> Illogical.

Incorrect.  Check your dictionary (after cleaning your glasses).

> Comprehend context, Marty.

Unnecessary, as no context has survived your senseless slaughter.
 
> > > > > You do.
> > > >
> > > > Another unsupported lie.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.
> >
> > How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?
> 
> You erroneously presuppose that I don't know what a lie is.

Then why would you ask:
EB] What is a lie, Marty?

> > > Your posts fully support my statement.
> >
> > You are erroneously presupposing you know what a lie is, contrary to your
> > question:
> > EB] What is a lie, Marty?
> 
> Incorrect.

Then why would you ask:
EB] What is a lie, Marty?
 
> > > > > Having Marty recognition trouble again, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > On the contrary, I recognize your lies quite well, Eric.
> > >
> > > Non sequitur.
> >
> > How do you know, given that you don't know what a lie is?
> 
> See above.

Then why would you ask:
EB] What is a lie, Marty?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 18:41:11
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:28
Subj: Re: Tholen Digest II - Electric Boogaloo

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384ADA9E.513E1D2@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> What alleged "psuedonym", Marty?

Non sequitur, as no "psuedonym" was mentioned.

> > > In article <384A0147.5328467@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eric Bennet wrote (using a psuedonym again):
> > >
> > > What alleged "psuedonym", Marty?
> >
> > I see you've taken the liberty to misquote me yet again.  How convenient.
> > Here's the actual statement back:
> > M] Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> Illogical.

Typical unsupported and erroneous pontification.

> > > > > In article <384989BE.38D1302C@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > >
> > > > > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> > > >
> > > > It's your pseudonym.
> > >
> > > On what basis do you make this claim?
> >
> > Don't you know, Eric?
> 
> Ask your mentor, grasshopper.

My "mentor" is busy rubbing its legs together trying to attract a mating
partner.
 
> > > Don't I know what, Marty?
> >
> > EB] What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> 
> What about it, Marty?

You asked the question, not me.

> > > > > > > In article <3848DD9F.3B81C50@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article <38488123.754DED39@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > In article <384858C5.EB5452F6@stny.rr.com>, Marty
> > > > > > > > > > > <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Qom14.7666$Rp1.277097@newsr1.san.rr.com>,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Aaron
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dimsdale
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.o
> > > > > > > > > > > > > rg>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Are your glasses dirty as well as Aaron's?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bennett does not wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Incorrect.  He does wear glasses.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Note:  no retraction from Dimsdale.  No surprise
> > > > > > > > > > > > there.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What does or does not surprise you is not relevant,
> > > > > > > > > > > Marty.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dimsdale's lack of retraction is relevant.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Incorrect.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Typical pontification.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How ironic, coming from someone who takes pontification lessons
> > > > > > > from the pontiff.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are erroneously presupposing that the "pontiff" is qualified
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > teach me about pontification, Eric.
> > > > >
> > > > > You erroneously presuppose that I have made an erroneous
> > > > > presupposition.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.
> > >
> > > Poppycock.
> >
> > Typical pontification, the last line of defense for those who lack a
> > logical argument.
> 
> Balderdash.

Typical pontification, the last line of defense for those who lack a logical
argument.
 
> > > > > > > More evidence of your hypocrisy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of hypocrisy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Feldercarb, Marty.
> > > >
> > > > Evidence, please.
> > >
> > > You deleted the evidence.
> >
> > What alleged "evidence"?
> 
> See what I mean?

Perhaps your glasses are at fault yet again.

> > > How predictable.
> >
> > You're erroneously presupposing that I have deleted evidence.
> 
> How are the poppies in your poppycock garden, Marty?

Non sequitur.  Meanwhile you've still failed to substantiate your erroneous
claim.  No surprise there.

> > > > > > > > > > That this behavior was expected is common knowledge.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But it is still irrelevant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Taking pontification lessons from Dave "Because I Said So"
> > > > > > > > Tholen?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See above.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > > > >
> > > > > Illogical.
> > > >
> > > > Typical pontification, which further does not justify your previous
> > > > pontification.
> > >
> > > How ironic.
> >
> > I see you've still failed to justify your pontification.  No surprises
> > there.
> 
> Incorrect.

I see you've still failed to justify your pontification, choosing instead to
further pontificate.  No surprises there.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > However, he was wearing contact lenses when he
> > > > > > > > > > > > > replied
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to Marty's post.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prove it, if you think you can
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Marty?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I see you have failed to provide proof.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I see you snipped the proof.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What alleged "proof"?  I see your glasses are dirty yet
> > > > > > > > again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Having trouble with the English language again, Marty?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see you failed to answer the question and still failed to
> > > > > > provide
> > > > > > proof.
> > > > >
> > > > > What you see is incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > Evidence, please.  I'm not the one wearing the dirty glasses,
> > > > remember?
> > >
> > > Irrelevant, Marty.
> >
> > On the contrary, it's quite relevant to the topic of "seeing correctly".
> 
> Prove it, if you think you can.

Self-evident.
 
> > > > > > Par for the course for someone using a fake pseudonym.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should people use "real" pseudonyms, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > You're the one using the pseudonym.  You tell me.
> > >
> > > What alleged "pseudonym", Marty?
> >
> > Don't you know, Eric?
> 
> See above

Having trouble completing your sentences Eric?

> > > > > > > > > How predictable.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your pontification was quite predictable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See above.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The above does not justify your pontification, Eric.
> > > > >
> > > > > Trying to change the context again
> > > >
> > > > You are erroneously presupposing that I have tried to change the
> > > > context
> > > > before.
> > >
> > > Incorrect.
> >
> > If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement?
> > Illogical.
> 
> Reading comprehension problems, Marty?

Not at all, Eric.

> There was a presupposition, but it was not made erroneously.

Ignorance of the truth doesn't not justify telling a lie, Eric.

> > > > > to deflect attention
> > > >
> > > > What alleged "attention"?
> > >
> > > Don't you know?
> >
> > Don't I know what, Eric?
> 
> More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.

You are erroneously presupposing previous evidence of reading comprehension
problems.

> Of course, that is to be expected of you.

Logic is to be expected of me.  I see you failed to answer my question yet
again.  Of course, that is to be expected of you.

> > > > > from your unsubstantiated claims, Marty?
> > > >
> > > > You are erroneously presupposing the existence of unsubstantiated
> > > > claims on my part, Eric.
> > >
> > > On the contrary.
> >
> > If you have not presupposed such a thing, then why make such a statement?
> > Illogical.
> 
> See above.

The above does not justify your erroneous presupposition, Eric.

> > > > > Ineffective.
> > > >
> > > > Your continued pontifications are ineffective.
> > >
> > > You erroneously presupposed that I have pontificated.
> >
> > My presupposition was not erroneous, as you have just demonstrated.
> 
> Incorrect.

Further evidence of your pontification was not necessary, Eric, but thanks
anyway.

> > > > > > > > > > No surprise there.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "How predictable."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Having trouble with the English language again", Eric?
> > > > >
> > > > > Illogical.
> > > >
> > > > Typical pontification.  No surprise there.
> > >
> > > Balderdash.
> >
> > Prove that there is a surprise there, if you think you can.
> 
> Non sequitur.

On the contrary:
M]  No surprise there.
EB] Balderdash.

I see you failed to provide evidence as usual.

> > > > > > > > > > > I have already proven it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Still engaging in your admittedly infantile game, Marty?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > removal of key context.  Here's your context back:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Illogical.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Typical pontification, as is the usual response from someone
> > > > > > lacking
> > > > > > a logical argument.
> > > > >
> > > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > > removal of key context.
> > > >
> > > > How ironic, coming from someone whose infantile game involves the
> > > > removal
> > > > of key context.
> > >
> > > What alleged "someone"?
> >
> > The same "someone" using a pseudonym and giving "someone else" a hand in
> > their Balderdash garden.
> 
> What alleged "psuedonym" and "Balderdash garden"?

I made no mention of a "psuedonym" Eric.

> > > Comprehend context, Marty.
> >
> > Unnecessary, Eric, as no context was present thanks to you.
> 
> Typical invective.

What alleged "invective"?

> > > > > It's too bad you still don't recognize how your pontification is
> > > > > perceived, Marty.
> > > >
> > > > How can I realize how something is perceived that doesn't exist,
> > > > Eric?  Do you still enjoy beating your wife?
> > >
> > > What alleged "wife", Marty?
> >
> > Analogy recognition problems, Eric?
> 
> How ironic.

What's ironic about your inability to recognize an analogy Eric?

> Taking inappropriate analogy lessons from Mike Timbol again, Marty?

You are erroneously presupposing that I have demonstrated evidence of the
fruits such a lesson.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 19:02:28
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:28
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Brad BARCLAY wrote:
> 
> Marty wrote:
> > That depends entirely on what you are talking about.  If you are talking
about
> > 3D graphics, then the up and coming Playstation II blows the doors off of
PCs.
> > The latest Voodoo 3 cards can handle somewhere around 8 million polygons
per
> > second (with no lighting or fog effects).  The Playstation II's hardware
can
> > handle 53 million polys per second with no effects, and 22 million polys
per
> > second with lighting and fog effects.
> 
>         Yes, however these measurements really don't relect much of anything
> because they're taken at different resolutions.  You can calculate those
> polygons a whole lot faster when you have fewer pixels for them to
> intersect with, and the last I checked a standard PC 3D card can do
> 1024*768 and higher, whereas a game console can do 576 x 430 max, which
> has less than 1/3 the total number of pixels to render than a standard
> PC display.  The refresh rate is also typically lower.
> 
>         I have anecdotal proof that the difference does have an effect: 
this
> past weekend, I went out and bought myself a nice big Sony Trinitron
> Wega TV with the S-Video input on board.  I attached my ATI XPert@Play
> 8Mb AGP to it via the S-video feed, and fired up some games.  The
> difference was immediately noticable, especially in any game which
> required precision firing (like Rainbow 6).  You just don't get the same
> shape definition due to the lower resolution.  As well, NTSC tends to
> suffer from the fact that it's colour seperation is balanced towards
> green and other skin tones, and that on lower quality sets and anything
> using coaxial or RCA connectors for the video feed are going to suffer
> from some colour bleed and chroma crawl, lessening the quality even
> further.  Even 640*480 on a PC (where the NTSC:SVGA pixel ratio is
> ~0.80) produces a better picture than even the best TV set.
> 
>         This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with game consoles -
it
> really isn't their fault that the current TV resolutions are so low.
> But they take advantage of this fact by coding their 3D rendering
> firmware to this lower resolution - and with fewer pixels, they can do
> it a whole lot faster.
> 
>         I'd rather have 8 million pps on a 1024*768 resolution display than
53
> million pps on a TV set :).

All in all, very good points.  However, let's look at some numbers, based on a
typical case you've outlined above:

Category                   PC                Playstation II      Performance
advantage
--------                   ----------        --------------     
---------------------
Color Depth                24/32 bit         32 bit (?)             1 : 1
Screen Resolution          1024x768          576 x 430 (?)       3.17 : 1
Mega Polys / s             8 (no effects)    53 (no effects)        1 : 6.62
Cost                       >$1000            $400 (?)            (not
evaluated)

That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise, it
blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface is
less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is far
superior on the Playstation II.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jpolt@bradnet.legend.co.uk                        06-Dec-99 23:50:01
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:28
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.1

From: jpolt@bradnet.legend.co.uk (John Poltorak)

In <384C322F.AB9FA885@usa.net>, Nino <1979j@usa.net> writes:
>Hello All,
>
>my name's Nino and I am a student at the 'La Sapienza' university in
>Rome.
>I am preparing a research on the history of PC for my next exam. OS/2
>have
>a huge importance for the IBM PC compatible platform, I'd like to quote
>it
>largely, but unfortunately I miss what maybe is the most important
>version: OS/2 1.1, the first operating system for PC with a GUI, the
>first OS/2 with Presentation Manager.
>
>I would like to write an original article on it and take some
>screenshots of OS/2 1.1 with my camera.
>
>If someone please can supply me that version (which is, I suppose, about
>4 or 5 5.25 disks) I will be very grateful;

OS/2 v1.1 Extended Edition was my my first copy of OS/2 - it came on around
15-20 3.25 ins disks AFAICR. 

>really want my teachers
>give OS/2 the importance and the respect that it deserves. Thanks in
>advance
>
>I am sorry for any off-topic generated but I really need your help.
>
>Best regards,
>Nino Solazzo
>
>P.S. Please, answer me only if you have the 1.1 version. I am not a
>collector so I am not interested in any other 1.x versions. Thanks
>again.
>
>
>
>
--
John

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Legend Internet Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         07-Dec-99 00:07:15
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:28
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question - looks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lik we've hit another major soft
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to answer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glend@nospam.direct.ca                            06-Dec-99 15:36:12
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Glenn Davies <glend@nospam.direct.ca>

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:14:24 -0700, "Steven C. Britton"
<sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote:

>Glenn Davies wrote:
>
>> >3.  the exclusive control of something.
>> >
>> >Nope, not that either.
>>
>> Sure - exclusive control of Window related products and technologies.
>
>What the hell are Quattro Pro, Netscape, and Lotus?

One's a spreadsheet app, the other two are subsidiary companies to
larger tech companies. None are the equivalent to MS Window's and
related technologies - that after all is the focus of the issue.

>> It's a fact that you're just going to have to except. The US legal
>> definition of "monopoly" is not the same as the commmon dictionary
>> definition. Just pretend they're are two different words.
>
>They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other isn't.
>I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice Department.

There are ten's of thousands (probably in the 100,000's) perfectly
expectable English words and definitions not listed in your version of
the Random House Dictionary. Maybe you can find a condensed, pocket
version with fewer words so it will be easier for you to always be
"correct".

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         06-Dec-99 23:22:22
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Karel Jansens writes:

> Why's Dave Tholen different?

Mine aren't.  Sutherland and Glatt are simply hypocrites who can't stand
not having people immediately jump to their side.  The fact that neither
uses OS/2 should tell you something.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    06-Dec-99 18:03:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: selling quality in software

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Many OS/2 advocates wonder why OS/2 did not sell when it had such high 
quality.  Here is an interesting artcle talking about the lack of 
interest with quality of software:

http://straitstimes.asia1.com/cpe/cpe1_1206.html

Interesting parts:

-They must trade off time between adding new features to the software
-and fixing bugs in the software. Historically, software firms have
-decided that adding features is far more important than fixing bugs. 

-In an interview in 1995, Microsoft's Mr Bill Gates emphasised that "the
-reason that we come up with new versions is not to fix bugs... absolutely
-not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new version that I ever heard of...
-You won't get a single person to say they'd buy a new version because
-of bugs." 

-Mr Gates is not alone in that point of view. Nearly every software
-executive I interviewed while working on a recent book agreed with Mr
-Gates' comment, unanimously saying they believe consumers make
-software purchase or upgrade decisions solely on the basis of glitzy new
-features rather than reliability. 

-Asked hypothetically if they thought a new version with no new features,
-but almost no bugs, would sell, every software bigwig emphatically said
-"no". Asked if they had ever tried it, none could come up with an
-example. 

-Just as common sense in the past had told us that the earth was flat and
-that tomatoes were poison, so also does everyone in the software
-business know that quality will not sell. 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glend@nospam.direct.ca                            06-Dec-99 16:00:15
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Glenn Davies <glend@nospam.direct.ca>

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:43:10 -0700, "Steven C. Britton"
<sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote:

>Mike Trettel wrote:
>> >
>> >They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other
>isn't.
>> >I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice
>Department.
>>
>> That's nice, but which one actually applies to the situation at hand?  Do
>> you really think that Judge Jackson used the Random House definition, or
>> the well settled definition present in US law?
>
>On that point, I will not disagree.  However, I do disagree with the law as
>it is written -- which has been my point from day one.
>
>> The RH definition is irrelevant.  It doesn't matter in the slightest.
>
>Sure it does: it is the _correct_ definition of monopoly.  Just because a
>bunch of political activists wrote a law to ensure that people get punished
>for being successful doesn't mean that they're correct.

No, it's one publishers condensed definintion of an word - hardly the
all encompasing, last statement on how the word is used in the English
language.

>
>> Here's a US judge with 30 years experience, offering an analysis based
>> upon 78 days of testimony from two opposing points of view, in an area of
>> US law with over 100 years of legal precedent.
>
>Here's a leftist US judge, who, like those who brought the "charges" against
>Microsoft to this kangaroo court, is jealous of people who do business well,
>and want a slice of the pie.  Yep, I can also see him deliberately choosing
>to use the flawed and incorrect definition of monopoly.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean he is
"leftist". Judge Jackson is known as a conservative, and was an Reagan
appointee who has decided to uphold US law - isn't that what
conservative judges are supposed to do? I thought it was the liberal
ones who used the bench to override the legislature and rewrite laws
they don't agree.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: via Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com/ (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 18:09:18
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:
> 
> We've seen the fruits of your "logic," Dave:
> 
> "Yet to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE], one must have run the
> executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Tholen -- 10/29/1999
> 
> When confronted with this absolute error on your part, you have
> *invariably* responded with the steps of "logic" that caused you to
> arrive at that blatant error, and have never admitted to the error.

Not true at all, Curtis.  When confronted with this absolute error on his
part,
he invariably either:
a] deflects the comment away to an unrelated topic, removing the evidence
   from his reply
b] removes the evidence from his reply and claims that it is irrelevant
c] "digestifies" the posting, conveniently removing said evidence

He *never* explains any logic behind the statement, not that there is any to
explain.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu                    06-Dec-99 17:55:19
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@lessing.oit.umass.edu>

Unable to create contructive conversation, Jeff responds to one sentance 
at a time, often saying the same thing over and over again.  
Unfortunately this doesn't make what he's saying any more right.

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jason
:>The discussion of other operating 
:>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

: The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

When have you ever discuss this.  You post to incite flames.  The 
intentions of your posting comes through in the message.  Everyone here 
knows why Jeff Glatt is posting in this newsgroup, even though we might 
not know the madness behind the method.

:>By comparing other operating 
:>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
:>it.

: By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
: similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
: marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

So, you don't study this.  You are only here to incite people.  Talking 
about what's wrong with OS/2 to prove why people shouldn't use it, is a 
lot different then talking about whats wrong with OS/2 so it can be fixed.

:>Micrsoft is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and failure.

: OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
: failure.

But this has nothing to do with you are your discussion, even though you 
may try to use it to your ends.

:>Talking 
:>about the Microsoft trials is very on topic since it is the story of OS/2.

: Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
: OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
: years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

Again, this has nothing to do with your posts.  The content of your posts 
is mostly ilrelavent.  The purpose of your posts is to incite bad 
feelings and flames, and I imagine you'll use any content that you have 
available to you.

:>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
:>: off-topic according to the charter

:>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

: It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
: as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
: "interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
: newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
: should add.

How am I a hypocrite Jeff?  Please be specific, and don't contruct a 
fantasy world like you usually have done.

: Typical. OS/2 Advocates like to exclude themselves from blame, and
: point fingers at everyone else for what went wrong, when the truth is,
: OS/2 Advocate were (and still are) a very big part of the problem.

Here is a prime example of what wrong with your posts, thanks for 
providing it.  Your statement here has nothing to do with discussion.  It 
is a put down, based an fragments of facts you have gathered over time.  
you didn't write it to create discussion. You wrote it to put people 
down.

:>I don't think so.

: To quote one of your fellow lunatics: "What you think is irrelevant.
: What you can prove is relevant".  You've not proven your own posts to
: be any more on-topic, according to your own, hypocritically-applied
: insistence upon a strict interpretation of the newsgroup charter, than
: anyone else's. You're just being a hypocrite about it. That's all.
: Typical.

Again you have failed to show where I have chastised people for not 
posting on topic.  I have discussed the charter, but I haven't told 
anyone to follow it.  If I did, that would be quite odd, for I certainly 
don't believe in following charters.  Have I commented on people who I 
feel are a negative force on this newsgroup? yes.

:>I still feel doing so is in spirit of this newsgroup.

: But not in accordance with your own insistence upon a strict
: interpretation of the newsgroup charter when you're attempting to
: censor opinions you don't like to hear -- as versus your hypocritical
: and illogical "reinterpretation" of the newsgroup charter to excuse
: your own off-topic posts. Typical.

Again Jeff, where have I done this?  You are contructing a fantasy world 
that does not exist.

:>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
:>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.

: So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
: Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
: in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
: come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.

I ment inciting flames.

:>But, most threads 
:>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
:>purpose is to talk about OS/2.

: So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

Again you are not writing about facts.  You are writing about some 
fantasy world in your head, in which I've become this character who 
chastises everyone for not following the newsgroup charter.  What you 
must realize is your world is not real.  

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 18:16:29
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Dimsdale Digest ]I[ - The Search for Spock

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384AD4BC.B2E66522@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > Chris Pott wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> > >
> > > > In article <20h24.754$RI5.17331@newsr1.san.rr.com>, Aaron Dimsdale
> > > > <postSPAMNOTmaster@bluestreak.SPAMMENOT.yiDONTSPAM.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:12:44 -0500, Marty wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Dimsdale continues to post content-free nonsense, chocked-full of
> > > > > >his
> > > > > >home-grown Balderdash.  Here's today's digest:
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you still haven't proven that I, as opposed to Pott, own the
> > > > > Balderdash garden which you claim I tend
> > > >
> > > > Typical illogic, laced with erroneously presumed invective.  How
> > > > typical.
> > >
> > > Argument by rednudancy again, Chris?
> >
> > What alleged "rednudancy" Eric?
> 
> Illogical.

What is allegedly illogical about pointing out your error?

> Jumping into discussions again, Marty?

Non sequitur.

> > > Illogical.  Of course, such behavior is to be expected of you.
> >
> > You're erroneously presupposing the presence of "rednudancy", Eric.
> 
> Incorrect.

If you have not presupposed such a thing then why would you make the above
statement?

> That I leave to you.

I see you've left all the logic to me, using none yourself.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 18:22:28
  To: All                                               06-Dec-99 21:20:29
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> 
> In article <384AD700.C095CA35@stny.rr.com>, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I see you've conveniently removed part of the article again.

Note: no response

> > > > > > Note:  no response
> > > >
> > > > Note: still no response
> > >
> > > Incorrect.
> >
> > Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in
> > addition to failing to provide evidence for my alleged "inconsistency".
> 
> What "question" have I "failed to answer"?

See above.

> > Balderdash, Eric.  You've still failed to answer the question, in
> > addition to failing to account for what you did to the rest of my 
> > posting.
> 
> See above.

There's no answer to my question above, nor is there an account for what you
did to the rest of my posting.

> > Apparently Eric's clipboard is prone to misquoting (either that or Eric
> > is dishonestly removing context when he quotes someone).  Here's the
actual
> > statement:
> > M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
> 
> It could be a bug in Eric's recently-upgraded newsreader,

To which Eric you we referring, Eric?

> since it usually displays no punctuation for the last sentence of any of 
> your posts.

Balderdash, Eric.

> > > > Note the dishonest removal of context from the above statement.
> > > > Here's how the above statement was actually written:
> > > > M] You've not earned such a title yet, Eric.
> > > >
> > > > > Evidence, please.
> > > >
> > > > You probably removed it yourself, given the trend you've just
> > > > demonstrated.
> > >
> > > Aren't you certain, Marty.
> >
> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> 
> Ask your grasshopper, Marty.

I have no grasshopper, grasshopper.  I see you've failed to answer the
question
again.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 19:32:15
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson rules Tholen Not Commecially Viable!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> 
> Karel Jansens writes:
> 
> > Why's Dave Tholen different?
> 
> Mine aren't.

Really?  Do other people go around making erroneous statements like:
DT] Yet, to look at the contents [of JAVAINUF.EXE- the OS/2 JDK], one 
DT] must have run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!

then attempt to defend them, then after realizing the fruitlessness of doing
so, go on to ignore these statements without retracting them after having it
pointed out repeatedly?

> Sutherland and Glatt are simply hypocrites who can't stand not having people 

> immediately jump to their side.  

How long did it take me to "jump to their side"?  Did they do anything to
attempt to convince me?  Absolutely not.  First hand experience with Tholen
has
convinced me.

> The fact that neither uses OS/2 should tell you something.

No it shouldn't.  The fact that you feel it should tells us something about
you.  Nothing we didn't already know unfortunately.  I'm the one smear in your
perfect little universe, Tholen.  I use OS/2.  I'm a real OS/2 advocate
(unlike
you, by your own admission, nay, insistence).  "Digest" that for a little
while.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         07-Dec-99 01:03:25
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Nope.

Typical Bass inconsistency.

> Here, you are implying that the grammatical constructs I chose are
> analogous to "avoid[ing] being killed in an airplane crash by committing
> suicide," which, quite simply, is an inappropriate analogy.

Yet another person who doesn't understand the difference between
implication and inference.  I didn't imply that at all, Curtis.  You
inferred that, erroneously.  My analogy was applied to the definition
of "successful", not airplane crashes.  I could have just as easily
used something other than airplane crashes.  That you failed to realize
that is ironic:  "inept".

> And, of course, you would normally now procede to deny that you were
> implying anything,

I was quite explicit, Curtis.  No implication was necessary.

> but that I was simply making yet another unwarranted inference.

Obviously you were.

> Since I beat you to the punch line, you will now have to change your
> strategy.

Illogical, given that my strategy doesn't depend on whether you think
you've beaten me to some "punch line" or not.

> What makes you think I "think that using 'measure up' would have ended
> the sentence with a preposition?"

Because that was your stated reason for not writing it that way.

Sheesh!

> We've seen the fruits of your "logic," Dave:

My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis.

> When confronted with this absolute error on your part,

On what basis do you call it an "absolute error", Curtis?  The statement
is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe file.

> you have *invariably* responded with the steps of "logic" that caused
> you to arrive at that blatant error,

On what basis do you call it a "blatant error", Curtis?  The statement
is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe file.

> and have never admitted to the error.

The statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis.

> That, in and of itself, is hardly "logical."

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> Yeah, anything "can be . . ." Dave.  In the here and now, your posts
> have been anything but explicit.

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

> Universally? No. You are correct.

Glad you agree.  So why did you make your erroneous statement?  "Inept."

> In the here and now?  That's another story.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> Nitpicking over grammar, without being explicit as to what my alleged
> "error" is, indicates yet another defeat for Tholen, which he will
> inevitably deny/question.

I was already explicit, Curtis.  I clearly asked what a "standard up"
is.  A claim of my defeat indicates yet another example of pontification
for Bass, which he will inevitably ignore.

> Which simply indicated your own reading comprehension, ironically enough

What is ironic about by reading comprehension, Curtis?

> . . .
>
> Oh, and a question is a far cry from a direct statement, lad.

It was quite explicit about what I found questionable, Curtis.

> There is nothing to explain.

Yes there is, Curtis.  You claimed to have made a sincere statement
about it being your last posting in this sub-thread, yet here you are
again.

> Anyone who understands what hypocrisy and sincerity are would realize
> that there is nothing to explain.

Illogical, given that someone who does understand what sincerity is
would realize that you weren't sincere.

> That you do not realize this indicates your own lack of understanding.

Why should I realize something illogical, Curtis?  I do realize that
your statement is illogical.

> You seem to think that being a university professor somehow makes you
> infallible.

What seems to you is irrelevant, Curtis, and quite illogical, given
that I have admitted to being fallible.

> That you never, ever admit to an error during an adversarial exchange
> supports such a belief.

What do you consider an "adversarial exchange", Curtis?  That you have
never, ever identified one of these allegedly unadmitted errors in an
adversarial exchange supports the belief that you're simply pontificating
again.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         07-Dec-99 01:10:24
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> *YOU* requested the evidence, Dave, and I provided it.

Pointing to an entire thread is only one step removed from pointing to
an entire newsgroup, Curtis.

> If there is something that you  don't *LIKE* about the presentation of
> the evidence, well, that, most emphatically, *IS*  your problem.

Illogical, given that you were talking about how remarq resets things.
I wasn't the one who performed the reset, therefore it is not my
problem.

> It sure as hell ain't mine . . .

Your lack of sincerity "sure as hell" is your problem, Curtis.  Here
you are again, posting in a sub-thread that supposedly saw your last
post weeks ago.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          06-Dec-99 18:16:03
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-8650C0.06461106121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> In article 
> <DA75E87B496E91B8.0BC9B0E0C552995E.403C2A34F3D07551@lp.airnews.net>, 
> "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would react to 
> > the information that you're posting forgery.
> 
> 
> I wonder how Louis Freeh would react to the information that you're 
> jumping into discussions again, Chris.

Irrelevant, given that the FBI does not investigate discussion 
in-jumping.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   07-Dec-99 02:20:02
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

Dave Tholen wrote:

>How ironic, coming from someone saying more.

After all these months, there is so much to be said, Dave.

>You're erroneously presupposing that I missed you.

I know, I know, "missing" must fail to express the agony of life without me.

>That's your response to my identification of your erroneous
>statement?

Whatever turns you on, Dave.

>What I like or dislike is irrelevant.

Not to me it isn't.

>Illogical.

Whatever turns you on.

>And you are not.

Yes ... I understand ...

Look, I abandoned you ... That's true ... But I'm still here ... And maybe
we could try again ... It could be just like the old days ... Remember how
we used to frolic about ... Thousands of lines of lovingly crafted debate
... I, the grasshopper ... You, my mentor ... It could be like that again,
Dave. Think about it.

>And you are not.

I promise I'll make it up to you.

>It's off limits to Starfleet.

Keep Starfleet out of this, Dave.

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          06-Dec-99 18:18:00
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-4BB27B.06435306121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> In article 
> <0C766450CD1F3ED8.7685DC9D6D115D1A.B7364C04109CE6C9@lp.airnews.net>, 
> TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > > Actually, I thought tholenbot was Chris Pott.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Typical invective.  
> > > > 
> > > > What alleged "invective", Eric?
> > > 
> > > How ironic.
> > 
> > What's "ironic" about it, Eric?
> 
> Ask your mentor, grasshopper.

Illogical, as I have no mentor, and if I did, it would not be a 
grasshopper.

> > > > > Pott is TholenBot Pro.
> > > > 
> > > > Common sense makes cameo appearance.
> > > 
> > > What is "common" is not relevant, Chris.  What you can prove is 
> > > relevant.
> > 
> > Evidence, please.
> 
> Don't you see the evidence, Chris?

No.  Meanwhile, you have predictably still failed to provide the 
evidence.

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 21:29:16
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<9F2BCC52139B4FA5.FFDE07B31D80E0CF.3A4EBD70B527FD33@lp.airnews.net>, 
TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:

> In article <tholenbot-8650C0.06461106121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
> > In article 
> > <DA75E87B496E91B8.0BC9B0E0C552995E.403C2A34F3D07551@lp.airnews.net>, 
> > "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would react 
> > > to 
> > > the information that you're posting forgery.
> > 
> > 
> > I wonder how Louis Freeh would react to the information that you're 
> > jumping into discussions again, Chris.
> 
> Irrelevant, 

Why?

> given that the FBI does not investigate discussion 
> in-jumping.

On what basis do you make this claim?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 21:43:22
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest 1-425-882-8080 -- Magnetic Boogaloo

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

Today Marty continued to post more invective-laced unsubstantiated 
claims about me.  That's his escalation.  It's too bad he still fails to 
recognize how this behavior is perceived.



Message ID 384C4551.16F234A9@stny.rr.com:

1> Note: no response

You deleted the response, Marty.

1> See above.

Non sequitur.

1> To which Eric you we referring, Eric?

Don't you know, Marty?

1> I have no grasshopper, grasshopper.  

More evidence of your grasshopper recognition problems.

1> I see you've failed to answer 
1> the question again.

What alleged "question"?



Message ID 384C43EA.B4B4515@stny.rr.com:

2> What is allegedly illogical about pointing out your error?

What alleged "error", Marty?

2> If you have not presupposed such a thing then why would you make the 
2> above
2> statement?

On what basis do you suggest that I did not suppose "such a thing"?



Message ID 384C49A2.DF8BAE29@stny.rr.com:

3> Typical unsupported and erroneous pontification.

What was typical about it was that I did not use any pontification.  
More evidence of your poor pontification recognition skills.

3> Typical pontification, the last line of defense for those who lack a 
3> logical
3> argument.

Your fascination with unsubstantiated pontification allegations is 
illogical, Marty.

3> I see you've still failed to justify your pontification, choosing 
3> instead to
3> further pontificate.  No surprises there.

See what I mean?

3> Perhaps your glasses are at fault yet again.

Illogical.

3> Ignorance of the truth doesn't not justify telling a lie, Eric.

Non sequitur.

3> Logic is to be expected of me.

Only by illogical persons, including those, such as yourself, who take 
logic lessons from Joseph Malloy.

3> The above does not justify your erroneous presupposition, Eric.

It was not supposed to justify an erroneous presupposition, because I 
have no erroneous presuppositions.

3> You are erroneously presupposing that I have demonstrated evidence of 
3> the fruits such a lesson.

Do these "fruits" come from your poppycock garden, Marty?

3> What alleged "invective"?

Illogical question, laced with invective.



Message ID 384C4B88.8958309A@stny.rr.com:

4> I was attempting to grant your intelligence the benefit of the doubt 
4> by  assuming you lied about your ignorance, but if you prefer that I 
4> think of you
4> as ignorant then that's fine by me.  The choice is yours.

Digging yourself deeper into your hole, Marty?  I asked the question 
because you labeling of my truthful statement as a "lie" clearly 
demonstrated that you do not know what a "lie" is.  That is why I asked 
you, "What is a lie?"  Your attempt to pin your own ignorance on me is 
more evidence of your hypocritical behavior.

4> Incorrect.

Non sequitur.

4> Then why would you ask:
4> EB] What is a lie, Marty?

See above.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                06-Dec-99 21:39:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84ormo.qq5.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:


> >That's your response to my identification of your erroneous
> >statement?
> 
> Whatever turns you on, Dave.

Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               06-Dec-99 22:12:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenbot wrote:
> 
> In article <slrn84ormo.qq5.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl
> wrote:
> 
> > >That's your response to my identification of your erroneous
> > >statement?
> >
> > Whatever turns you on, Dave.
> 
> Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?

Impossible, as an atomic wedgie from 1987 prevents Dave from ever getting "a
rise" again.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: hunters@sapphire.indstate.edu                     07-Dec-99 02:34:17
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: hunters@sapphire.indstate.edu

In article <1e2egoq.1x7pwdw185frukN@dialup-317.germany.ecore.net>,
  andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) wrote:

> Windows 2.0 (working GUI) was out in 1987 (?), and on the box it said
> "prepares you for the wonders of OS/2".

Windows 2.0 was a GUI, yes. But an operating system? Hardly.

--
-Steven Hunter                *OS/2 Warp 4 * |But on the other hand...|
hunters@sapphire.indstate.edu *AMD K6-2 400* |There's 5 more fingers. |


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                07-Dec-99 02:53:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:43:10 -0700, Steven C. Britton <sbritton@cadvision.com>
 wrote:
>Mike Trettel wrote:

>> That's nice, but which one actually applies to the situation at hand?  Do
>> you really think that Judge Jackson used the Random House definition, or
>> the well settled definition present in US law?
>
>On that point, I will not disagree.  However, I do disagree with the law as
>it is written -- which has been my point from day one.

Then you'd better start up a lobbying effort to petition the US Congress
to change the law.  Really, I don't see why your opinion on this matter is
of any relevance unless you couple it with some sort of concrete action.
Even wiht being a Canadian national it's not impossible for you to join in
a lobbying effort of some sort.  Otherwise all your doing is pissin' and
moanin'. 
 >
>> The RH definition is irrelevant.  It doesn't matter in the slightest.
>
>Sure it does: it is the _correct_ definition of monopoly.  Just because a
>bunch of political activists wrote a law to ensure that people get punished
>for being successful doesn't mean that they're correct.

US antitrust law was not written by political activists!  It was written
by a bunch of hard nosed politicians and lawyers beginning 100 years ago
and has been in a state of constant evolution ever since.  You can't
change this fact by using the well worn technique of name calling-sorry.
>
>> Here's a US judge with 30 years experience, offering an analysis based
>> upon 78 days of testimony from two opposing points of view, in an area of
>> US law with over 100 years of legal precedent.
>
>Here's a leftist US judge, who, like those who brought the "charges" against
>Microsoft to this kangaroo court, is jealous of people who do business well,
>and want a slice of the pie.  Yep, I can also see him deliberately choosing
>to use the flawed and incorrect definition of monopoly.

Sigh.... the last thing Jackson is is a "liberal" (more name calling,
btw).  Jackson is a fairly conservative judge who is a card
carrying member of the Republican party, appointed to the DC Circuit by
that well known radical communist pinko Ronald Reagan, the scourge of
American business nationwide.  Jackson bent over backwards to allow
Microsoft to present their case fairly in court, and has been giving every
indication that he wants this case to be settled out of court via
arbitration by appointing a fellow traveller in the person of Richard
Posner to act as a mediator.  Posner is best known as being a member of
the Chicago school of antitrust law, is openly skeptical of the effect of
antitrust law in general, and is viewed as being more sympathetic towards
MS than the DOJ.  In other words, your screed is a distortion of what's
happened in court and is without merit.  Please adjust your reality
distortion field, it's beginning to rival Steve Job's in effect.
 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>What have YOU done to bust a union today?
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Work better: Work union-free.
>
>Steven C. Britton
>Calgary
>
>www.cadvision.com/sbritton
>
>
>


-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               06-Dec-99 21:30:03
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: letoured@nospam.net

 jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:

Were you born an asshole or is it something you acquired?  

-- You said I could buy a tier-one PC without windows. 
** I asked where? 
-- You responded it was my fault.

Again, where do I find a tier-one (any brand) PC without windoze. Come on
big boy, you can tell us. We want the number to order one. You must have
it, you said we don't have to buy windoze so give me the number -- unless
of course your full of shit right up to your eyeballs. 



>>>>letoured@nospam.net
>>>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>>>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>>>>without paying for wincrap.

>>>This is, of course, not true.

>>>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
>>>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
>>>your incompetence and ignorance.

>>I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
>>give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
>>windows?

>If IBM won't sell you what you want, why are you foolishly buying IBM
>products???

>I see the problem now, and it's you.
_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: teadams@tea.mv.com                                06-Dec-99 22:09:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: teadams@tea.mv.com (Tim Adams)

In article <aple4ssifa1p8te1bekjat0k3otimt6feq@4ax.com>, Roger <roger@.>
wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Dec 1999 21:14:45 -0500, someone claiming to be Tim Adams
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <vqjb4skapcpj2k7f1jklna0paagvhu7ib7@4ax.com>, Roger
<roger@.> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 29 Nov 1999 22:07:02 -0500, someone claiming to be Tim Adams
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >It is my understanding that the copy they bought was a _pirated_ and
> >> >modified version of Seattle Computer's DOS. 
> >> 
> >> Your understanding is seriously flawed.
> >> 
> >> >Both versions were licensed by
> >> >IBM for release with the first PC. MS's version took control because IBM
> >> >priced them so differently - one for ~$50 and the other for ~$150. 
> >> >They licensed both because they (IBM) was concerned because of rumors
they
> >> >had heard of MS's version being stolen AND that Seattle Computer was
about
> >> >to sue MS for doing the stealing. In their licensing deal with Seattle
> >> >Computer, Gary Kildahl (bad spelling on the name) told IBM to go ahead,
he
> >> >wouldn't sue but beat them (MS) with a better product. IBM then screwed
> >> >him with the price.
> >> 
> >> You have mixed up CP/M, QDOS, Tim Patterson, Gary Kildall and more
> >> than a bit of whole cloth here.
> >> 
> >> Do try not to make yourself look so foolish next time?
> >
> >So why don't you enlighten the world with your understanding of the
> >beginnings of DOS for the IBM pc? Mine came from people at IBM, interviews
> >with people that talked with Gary Kildall, an historical run down on the
> >pbs show Computer chronicles, and a couple magazine articles.
> 
> Then why do you have it so seriously screwed up?  Gary Kildall wrote
> CP/M, which was one of the OSes offered for the original PC.  Tim
> Patterson wrote Q-DOS, which MS licensed and renamed MS_DOS.  Kildall
> is reported to have claimed that Q-DOS was an illegal copy of CP/M,
> but never made such a claim in a court of law, 

Because, as indicated above, he agreed not to with IBM.

> nor was such a claim
> reported until several years later.  Patterson wrote Q-DOS as a CP/M
> clone, to ease the porting of applications from that OS, and
> reportedly did so from documentation freely available from Digital
> Research, which was Kildall's company.  Kildall had nothing to do with
> Seattle Computer, other than the implications of the aforementioned
> claim.

Yes, I swapped Seattle Computing for Digital Research in my original
comment. MS bought the OS from Seattle. 

> 
> http://exo.com/~wts/mits0014.HTM
> 
> Your turn...

-- 
Tim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TEA Design (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: teadams@tea.mv.com                                06-Dec-99 22:24:20
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: teadams@tea.mv.com (Tim Adams)

In article <38463A0B.89624D39@frostbytes.com>, Jim Frost
<jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote:

> Tim Adams wrote:
> > 
> > In article <vqjb4skapcpj2k7f1jklna0paagvhu7ib7@4ax.com>, Roger
<roger@.> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, 29 Nov 1999 22:07:02 -0500, someone claiming to be Tim Adams
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >It is my understanding that the copy they bought was a _pirated_ and
> > > >modified version of Seattle Computer's DOS.
> > >
> > > Your understanding is seriously flawed.
> > >
> > > >Both versions were licensed by
> > > >IBM for release with the first PC. MS's version took control because
IBM
> > > >priced them so differently - one for ~$50 and the other for ~$150.
> > > >They licensed both because they (IBM) was concerned because of
rumors they
> > > >had heard of MS's version being stolen AND that Seattle Computer
was about
> > > >to sue MS for doing the stealing. In their licensing deal with Seattle
> > > >Computer, Gary Kildahl (bad spelling on the name) told IBM to go
ahead, he
> > > >wouldn't sue but beat them (MS) with a better product. IBM then screwed
> > > >him with the price.
> > >
> > > You have mixed up CP/M, QDOS, Tim Patterson, Gary Kildall and more
> > > than a bit of whole cloth here.
> > >
> > > Do try not to make yourself look so foolish next time?
> > 
> > So why don't you enlighten the world with your understanding of the
> > beginnings of DOS for the IBM pc? Mine came from people at IBM, interviews
> > with people that talked with Gary Kildall, an historical run down on the
> > pbs show Computer chronicles, and a couple magazine articles.
> 
> Well, for one thing the pricing figures you give are all way off.  MS-DOS
was
> I think $69 whereas the other two available OS's were both $299 (give or
take
> $10). The pricing was primarily determined by the vendors, not by IBM; Gates
> had such a lowball price because they offered it to IBM at rock-bottom
prices
> in exchage for nonexclusivity (arguably a deal that IBM should not have
> taken).


I'll take your word on the prices. I knew there was a big difference
between the two (forgetting UCSD Pascal) that people tended to buy the
cheaper one.

I will however suggest that you look (if possible) at copies of both of
these two OS as they were released back in 1981. MS-DOS was a modified
copy of CP/M which is why IBM got Gary to agree not to sue IF they
released it as an OS for the PC. Gary felt (according to an interview
aired on PBS several years ago) that his 'true' version would outsell the
other 'copied' version. IBM, with there pricing killed one version almost
from the start. To suggest that the vendors set the price is crazy - IBM
set the MSRP and vendors typically worked with that number.


> 
> The rumors of MS-DOS being stolen came a lot later, after CP/M had already
> lost to MS-DOS in the market.  IBM offered both MS-DOS and CP/M (and
> additionally UCSD Pascal) because they were hedging their bets: CP/M was the
> best bet because that's what everyone else was using, but Kildall was
> something of a flake and they didn't trust him.  And UCSD Pascal could have
> been interesting if it took off because it offered platform independence
(ala
> Java).  Their solution?  Offer all of these things and let the customer
> decide.
> 
> Assuming you don't have access to the actual people involved (most people
> don't) you can find a ton of detail on these things in Caroll's _Big Blues_
> and Cringely's _Accidental Empires_.  Both are interesting reading and are
> quite complementary in giving a more complete picture of what was going on. 
> Cringely is the guy who did those PBS specials so you can find in print all
> that stuff (and a lot more) that you saw on PBS.
> 
> jim

-- 
Tim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TEA Design (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             07-Dec-99 17:50:03
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991206114450.26967A-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> >
> > Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
>
> > > And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> > > heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have
to
> > > stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34
modems
> > > at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That
was
> > > good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.
> > >
> > We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.
>
> CD's are not late 90's technology.  Is this some kind of running gag?

No, that's the period we live in.  CD's are very popular - you may have seen
them.   Boob seems to be somewhere in the late eighties.
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             07-Dec-99 17:53:10
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384B2F58.6568AE7A@ibm.net...
>
>
> Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> > >
> > > Then why are there patches?
> >
> > To make them compliant.  If you say "not compliant out of the box" fine,
I
> > agree with you.  To me, saying Windows 95 is not compliant is a blanket
> > statement, which says that is isn't ever compliant.
>
> Do you know that OSR2 does not exist after you apply a patch to OSR2.  It
> changes and the OS version and OSR2 moniker is no longer valid.  The use
of the
> name OSR2 is therefore wrong and indicates a weak understanding of
software and
> the concept of versions.

OSR2 + Y2K Patch.

>
> You can only save yourself by telling me what your works mean and how you
use
> two names to refer to the same thing when in fact they are different
things
> within the EXACT CONTEXT of the discussion.

OSR2 + Y2k Patch.
>
>
> > >
> > > > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
> > guess
> > > > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
> > isn't.
> > >
> > > As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> > > The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches
to
> > Win95
> > > OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2
so
> > your
> > > word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
> > packs and
> > > the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with
MS's
> > Win95
> > > and the reason for my complaints.
> >
> > Funny, because that MS web page says quite clearly Windows 95 OSR2 is
> > Compliant (with customer action).
>
> It says in unambiguous terms that Win95 is not compliant.   I have such a
> system  and I know first hand.

What do you want - screen dumps of the page that says it's compliant?  I've
already posted the URL.  Compliant wirh customer action.

"The product is compliant with recommended customer action. This indicates a
prerequisite action is recommended which may include loading a software
update or reading a document"



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Dec-99 21:42:10
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Stuart Fox wrote:

> Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384B2F58.6568AE7A@ibm.net...
> >
> >
> > Stuart Fox wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
> news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> > > >
> > > > Then why are there patches?
> > >
> > > To make them compliant.  If you say "not compliant out of the box" fine,
> I
> > > agree with you.  To me, saying Windows 95 is not compliant is a blanket
> > > statement, which says that is isn't ever compliant.
> >
> > Do you know that OSR2 does not exist after you apply a patch to OSR2.  It
> > changes and the OS version and OSR2 moniker is no longer valid.  The use
> of the
> > name OSR2 is therefore wrong and indicates a weak understanding of
> software and
> > the concept of versions.
>
> OSR2 + Y2K Patch.

Win95 OSR2 needed two patches and a patch to the patch.

OSR2 + 2 xY2K Patchs + Patch to Y2K Patch


>

> > It says in unambiguous terms that Win95 is not compliant.   I have such a
> > system  and I know first hand.
>
> What do you want - screen dumps of the page that says it's compliant?  I've
> already posted the URL.  Compliant wirh customer action.

>
> "The product is compliant with recommended customer action. This indicates a
> prerequisite action is recommended which may include loading a software
> update or reading a document"

So WIN95 is NOT compliant.  It needs a software update.   Thanks.   I guess
I'll
need to take action and modify the OS with some patches.  Hey I did that.  No
wonder I have little patience for words games.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Dec-99 22:09:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"Steven C. Britton" wrote:

> josco wrote:
> > >
> > > Monopoly:
> > >
> > > 1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market,
> or
> > > a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
> > >
> > > Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.
> >
> > I would have thought the Judges' finding of fact would be sufficent but I
> > guess his legal conclusions are not as important as your opinion.
> > http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/finding.htm
>
> When the judge is fundamentally wrong in his definition, his report becomes
> "findings of fiction".

"When the Judge is wrong"    In this case he isn't going to be dethroned by a
pocket dictionary.


> The bottom line is that Microsoft's request to have the case dismissed out
> of hand was "laughed out of court" because the court had probably already
> decided on the outcome: that Microsoft was guilty of being successful and
> therefore must be punished.

We would call that reasoning "paranoia."


> I've posted the definition of monopoly.  It's nice to see that you choose to
> ignore it.
>
> So much for your grasp on reality.

Don't show too much frustration, it only encourages people.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Dec-99 22:14:18
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: OS/2 1.1

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


John Poltorak wrote:

> In <384C322F.AB9FA885@usa.net>, Nino <1979j@usa.net> writes:
> >Hello All,
> >
> >I would like to write an original article on it and take some
> >screenshots of OS/2 1.1 with my camera.
> >
> >If someone please can supply me that version (which is, I suppose, about
> >4 or 5 5.25 disks) I will be very grateful;
>
> OS/2 v1.1 Extended Edition was my my first copy of OS/2 - it came on around
> 15-20 3.25 ins disks AFAICR.

OS/2 EE was the higher end edition of OS/2 for database and server work (most
like Windows NT Advance Server was to the Windows NT Workstation) OS/2 EE
would
be many more disks.

I have long discarded my OS/2 1.0 and 1.1 disks.  I recall two sleeves to hold
them in the IBM manual.  I guess 1.1 would be under or near 8 disks

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     06-Dec-99 21:55:29
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Stuart Fox wrote:

> josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.SGI.3.93.991206114450.26967A-100000@sea.monterey.edu...
> > On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Stuart Fox wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> > > > heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have
> to
> > > > stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34
> modems
> > > > at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That
> was
> > > > good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.
> > > >
> > > We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.
> >
> > CD's are not late 90's technology.  Is this some kind of running gag?
>
> No, that's the period we live in.  CD's are very popular - you may have seen
> them.   Boob seems to be somewhere in the late eighties.

Why not floppies if you're going to use old technology to distribute software.
This is the internet age.   It began in the late 90's and cutting edge, low
cost, low labor distribution is networked based.  If you want to insult
someone
then tell them to upgrade their connectivity to say, DSL -- don't embarrass
yourself with a retort about pressing and shipping CD's as a modern solution.

As for the IE down load time -- IE is a fat pig of a program even on a CD.  MS
should be able to incrementally upgrade their OS (IE is called an OS upgrade)
MS is out of control with IE -- software designed by lawyers.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot_pro@excite.com                          06-Dec-99 22:48:03
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com>

In article <tholenbot-06F564.21293206121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:

> In article 
> <9F2BCC52139B4FA5.FFDE07B31D80E0CF.3A4EBD70B527FD33@lp.airnews.net>, 
> TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <tholenbot-8650C0.06461106121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> > tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article 
> > > <DA75E87B496E91B8.0BC9B0E0C552995E.403C2A34F3D07551@lp.airnews.net>, 
> > > "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would react 
> > > > to 
> > > > the information that you're posting forgery.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I wonder how Louis Freeh would react to the information that you're 
> > > jumping into discussions again, Chris.
> > 
> > Irrelevant, 
> 
> Why?

Comprehend context, Eric.

> > given that the FBI does not investigate discussion 
> > in-jumping.
> 
> On what basis do you make this claim?

Don't you know, Eric?

-- 
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
          -- Dave Tholen

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Loca
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 07:07:26
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu
>The fact that neither
>uses OS/2 should tell you something.

The fact that among the many, many comments (in my collection of
usenet quotes) about Tholen that portray him as a demented, dimwitted,
pointlessly argumentative, illogical, inconsistent, hypocritical
asshole, are a great many such comments by OS/2 users. That should
tell you something.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 07:23:17
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>Please 
>remember that it was Jeff Glatt who has "declared" me a Tholen 
>supporter (and he hasn't even made clear what that is exactly). I 
>*like* Dave Tholen, I am *not* his supporter; I know that that 
>distinction is a bit too difficult for Jeff Glatt to grasp, but I had 
>put you down for an intelligent (yet sadly misguided Windows-using 
><G>) person. Please don't disappoint me <G again>.

See? I told you that he'd answer your legitimate points about his
obvious basis by suggesting that I have somehow hypnotized you to
believe the things that you yourself have deduced from Karel's own,
numerous comments about Tholen in this newsgroup.

And that's just more evidence that Karel is a clueless kook.

P.S. I certainly didn't get Karel to willingly respond to someone
else's question about Tholen in this thread. You'll recall that it was
Karel himself who willingly jumped into this thread, devoid of any
prior involvement upon my part, to tell others what a great guy Tholen
is to talk to when someone asked what was the deal with Tholen.

And now he wants to blame me for the fact that others, who have seen
the dimwitted, pointless, hypocritical tripe that Tholen spews, find
Karel's various comments about Tholen to be utterly clueless.

>Actually, I think Bob makes quite a lot of sense

I'm not surprised. Germer uses OS/2 and is a lunatic. That appears to
be the sole criteria for Karel's "standards" for who does and doesn't
make sense.

Readers who have not yet seen Tholen's tripe in order to ascertain
just how poor Karel's judgments about people are, should certainly
take Karel's above comment about Bob Germer into consideration. You've
seen Germer in action in this very thread. Now you know the sort of
kooks of whom Karel is enamored. I have every confidence that,
assuming you're not a kook who is gungho about OS/2 (like Karel) such
that this is your sole criteria for gauging what does and doesn't make
sense, you'll do what so many others have done when you read Tholen's
tripe -- You'll realize exactly how stupid, pointless, hypocritical,
dishonest, etc, it is, and look back at Karel's comments about Tholen
and think "Man, this Karel Jensens guy *is* clueless".

And then, if you happen to tell Karel that, he'll blame me for somehow
brainwashing you into believing this.

Karel Jensens is a kook. That's why he likes fellow kooks like Tholen
and Germer. Just write him off as such.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 07:35:09
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>>David Sutherland
>>> Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.

>>Marty
>> Actually, I think Bob makes quite a lot of sense, in his own - heh -
>> unique way.

>Karel Jansens
>Did his racial slur against Arabs "make sense"?  How about his statement
>about the opinions of Canadians?

Marty, Marty, Marty... those sorts of criteria are irrelevant. You
have to think like Karel Jensens. Here is the acceptable criteria you
must use for whether someone "makes quite a lot of sense":

1) Is he rabidly gungho about OS/2?

2) Does he despise everything associated with Microsoft?

3) Can you have a conversation with him about Star Trek when he's not
otherwise spewing some pointless, hypocritical, illogical, dishonest,
literal-to-the-point-of-dense, foolishly misguided, counterproductive,
inconsistent tripe about OS/2 and Microsoft in an effort to harrass
people who are expressing opinions that he doesn't want to hear?

If you can answer "yes" to the above 3 questions, then the person
"makes quite a lot of sense" (according to Karel Jensens).

Incidentally, you should be aware that, now that you've identified
what seems to you to be a rather foolishly arbitrary, misguided
endorsement of the ravings of a lunatic on Karel's part, you have now
been somehow hypnotized by me via the internet to believe these things
about Karel Jensens. I mean, hasn't everyone who responds to him, and
points out how poor his judgment is, been brainwashed by me? Karel
couldn't possibly be... dare I say it... clueless in this regard? Nah!
It HAS to be mass hallucination. I mean, that would "make quite a lot
of sense", wouldn't it?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  07-Dec-99 17:59:12
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384B31EC.E5D8ACA@ibm.net...
>
>
> Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> > "Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > Stuart Fox wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
> > news:384999E4.ABDADFFB@ibm.net...
> > > > >   Win95 OSR2 is not
> > > > > compliant.  No debate.  You might accept that non compliance -
your
> > > > choice.
> > > >
> > > > Guess you can't read the web page either.  Win95 OSR2 is compliant.
It
> > > > needs some patches, but all OS'es need patches.
> > >
> > > You guessed wrong.
> > >
> > > >  You two decided to change the meaning of something because the OS
maker
> > > > you
> > > > > advocate has non compliance problems - no big deal since neither
of
> > you
> > > > are in
> > > > > the position of being responsible for these decisions.
> > > >
> > > > No they don't actually - their OS'es are compliant.
> > >
> > > Then why are there patches?
> > >
> > > > So your Win95 OSR2 system is compliant then?  You've patched it?  I
> > guess
> > > > that means it compliant.  So make up your mind - either it is or it
> > isn't.
> > >
> > > As I have said -- Win95 OSR2 is not complaint.
> > > The evidence for this non compliance is that I have had to add patches
to
> > Win95
> > > OSR2.  Adding Y2K patches changes the OS.  It is no longer Win95 OSR2
so
> > your
> > > word game isn't working.   I now run Win95 OSR2 with the 2 Y2K service
> > packs and
> > > the fix to that service pack.  Messy but then that's the PROBLEM with
MS's
> > Win95
> > > and the reason for my complaints.
> > >
> > > I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
> > word or
> > > term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then one
is
> > saying
> > > they their ideas are confused, their understanding of technology is
> > confused and
> > > one embraces confusion as a means to cope with problems .   If that
> > display is
> > > done in a public forum then all the worse -- why advertise ?
> >
> > Have you bothered to read about what the y2k "fixes" actually "fix" ?
If
> > you do, it's quite obvious the OS itself is y2k compliant, but some of
the
> > applets that ship with it are not.
> >
> > It would be like me saying Unix isn't y2k compliant if I could find a
couple
> > of apps that ran on it that weren't.
>
> Sorry but the OS is the software that is in addition to the kernel and
includes
> all that fun stuff integrated into the OS a la the Microsoft Internet
Explorer
> and all the baggage that goes with that kind of OS definition.
>
> So are we to now say Windows is a core OS with applets that are not part
of the
> OS?  You have to accept the OS definition MS uses in court and that's a
> definition that is also consistent with the way MS presents the fixes and
sells
> their OS.  Sorry, I do not accept a redefinition of the OS as an excuse.
Let MS
> innovate!!!
>
> IBM's OS/2 has a fix to the FILE.EXE, a Windows for OS/2, executable .  It
is
> part of the OS/2 OS.

So if I can find a single program, library or whatever shipping with any
Unix, Linux, FreeBSD or other Unix variant that deals incorrectly in the
slightest way with y2k you will support a claim that Unix isn't y2k
compliant ?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  07-Dec-99 18:02:20
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384ba6b4$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <384A970A.D28449B1@ibm.net>, on 12/05/99 at 11:47 AM,
>    Joseph <josco@ibm.net> said:
>
>
> > I'm not impressed with word games.  When one confuses the meaning of a
> > word or term such that it to refers to two or more DIFFERENT things then
> > one is saying they their ideas are confused, their understanding of
> > technology is confused and one embraces confusion as a means to cope
> > with problems .   If that display is done in a public forum then all the
> > worse -- why advertise ?
>
> And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have to
> stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34 modems
> at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day. That was
> good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.

There was a new invention in the mid-80s commonly referred to as the
<DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> - you may have heard of it.  Those of us "in the
know" provide a <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> to clients who want to install it.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: root@mauve.demon.co.uk                            06-Dec-99 18:25:01
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Ian Stirling <root@mauve.demon.co.uk>

Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
>people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
>software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
>developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
>paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
>IMHO, dooms Linux.

<snip quoted text improperly placed at bottom>

It's been going ten years now, and free software has been around
for even longer.

There are many arguments why this won't happen.
Amongst them.

Indirect profit motive: 
CV: "I wrote the xxx subsystem, and drivers for Y and Z, totalling X lines of
     code, used by x million people" 

    "I've written drivers for X,Y,Z, and if I write drivers for your 
     automated hampster cage, x million people will be able to use it"

Developing the system they use to develop.

If you need an OS for your spacecraft/router/CNC milling machine/...
then you can either spend man-months, or years writing one, or
use linux, possibly adding a little code that's usefull for your application
(and may even help the desktop user a little)

Or, if you are writing a webserver, and have thought of a feature that
would make writing webservers a lot easier, you can just go ahead and 
add it into linux, and maybe benefit other people who are writing
webservers, or newsservers, or other things.

Or, if you run linux, are a developer, and have hit a problem with 
an application that doesn't run as fast as it should. As you've got the
source, you can debug the application easier, and if it turns out to be
the kernel, you can fix it so that it works for your application, and
also it happens that it benefits all the other linux users.

-- 
http://inquisitor.i.am/    |  mailto:inquisitor@i.am |             Ian
Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------
-
'Where subtlety fails, we must simply make do with cream pies'   -- David Brin

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 08:21:10
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:18
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

Once again, Jason fails to address the legitimate points I raised
about his hypocrisy, and the examples of his hypocrisy which I cite.
He instead relies upon his tiresome vaudeville routine of simply
clinging to a claim that his own, illogical, hypocritical
misinterpretation of the newsgroup charter somehow excuses his
hypocrisy. It doesn't.

>:>Jason
>:>The discussion of other operating 
>:>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

>:Jeff Glatt
>: The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

>When have you ever discuss this.

Um, it was my post which "inspired" your foray into your own misguided
hypocrisy -- the one that began with the words "OS/2 Advocacy".

It's not my fault that you're illiterate. Blame your teachers if you
have to (although I have no doubt that the fault is mostly your own).

>:>By comparing other operating 
>:>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
>:>it.

>: By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
>: similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
>: marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

>So, you don't study this.

Nonsense. My post detailed some ways in which OS/2 Advocacy has
failed, and noted how that is similiar to what happened with the
Amiga.

You simply didn't like that opinion, and that's why you launched into
your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect foray into trying to
suggest that the discussion is not appropriate according to a
Tholen-like literal interpretation of the newsgroup charter -- an
interpretation that brands nearly all of your own posts as
"off-topic".

Quite simply, you're a fool and hypocrite by your own actions. That's
certainly not my fault.

>Talking 
>about what's wrong with OS/2 to prove why people shouldn't use it

My post said absolutely nothing about why people shouldn't use OS/2
(although even if it had, that still is part of the charter of this
newsgroup for a good reason -- one which your small mind fails to
understand). It was strictly concerned with detailing some failures of
OS/2 Advocacy, and noting how that has negatively affected OS/2, and
how this is similiar to what happened to the Amiga.

Again, you simply didn't like that opinion, and that's why you
launched into your misguided, foolishly incorrect attempt to promote
censorship of that opinion, and in the process, underscored how
ill-prepared you are to answer to your own hypocrisy and lack of
insight.

>: OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
>: failure.

>But this has nothing to do with you are your discussion

Nonsense. That was the very subject of my post, and that which the
entire contents of the post detailed.

It's not my fault if you're illiterate.

>: Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
>: OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
>: years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

>Again, this has nothing to do with your posts.

Again, you're wrong, and illiterate. The very subject of my post was
contained in the first two words of that post, and yet, you were too
illiterate to even grasp that.

>:>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
>:>: off-topic according to the charter

>:>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

>: It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
>: as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
>: "interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
>: newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
>: should add.

>How am I a hypocrite Jeff?

I've just noted above that "responding to FUD and lies" is no more
mentioned literally in the newsgroup charter than anything else that
you claim is literally not mentioned in the newsgroup charter and
therefore allegedly "off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts
which contain such "off-topic" content. Are your off-topic posts about
Microsoft meant strictly to "incite people"? Perhaps you should take
your own advice, and not be in this newsgroup then.

>don't contruct a 
>fantasy world like you usually have done.

It is your own, off-topic fantasy world that I'm addressing above.

>: Typical. OS/2 Advocates like to exclude themselves from blame, and
>: point fingers at everyone else for what went wrong, when the truth is,
>: OS/2 Advocate were (and still are) a very big part of the problem.

>Your statement here has nothing to do with discussion.

Yes it does. The discussion is about the hypocrisy and dumb statements
you've made in your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect
attempt to try to promote censorship of opinions that you just don't
like.

Fortunately, smarter people than you are aware of what a hypocrite you
are, and are capable of exposing your nonsense for what it is.

>: To quote one of your fellow lunatics: "What you think is irrelevant.
>: What you can prove is relevant".  You've not proven your own posts to
>: be any more on-topic, according to your own, hypocritically-applied
>: insistence upon a strict interpretation of the newsgroup charter, than
>: anyone else's. You're just being a hypocrite about it. That's all.
>: Typical.

>Again you have failed to show where I have chastised people for not 
>posting on topic.

Nonsense. I provided that proof at the start of my previous post.
You've simply deleted it after failing to understand it, which is yet
another ironic example of your hypocrisy.

>I have discussed the charter

Such a discussion is itself an off-topic violation. And it should be
noted that this was the response of OS/2 Advocates such as yourself to
an on-topic post of mine concerning OS/2 Advocacy and its effects upon
OS/2.

That's foolish hypocrisy from OS/2 Advocates.

>but I haven't told anyone to follow it.
>If I did, that would be quite odd, for I certainly 
>don't believe in following charters.

Then why jump into a discussion about the charter at all? Simply
because you're a foolish hypocrite?

>Have I commented on people who I 
>feel are a negative force on this newsgroup? yes.

I feel that your attempt to promote the censorship of opinions that
you don't like is a negative force on this newsgroup. In fact, the
charter expresses condones the inclusion of such opinions, but you're
not smart enough to understand it. You misinterpret it to defend your
own hypocrisy in posting off-topic messages that really have nothing
to do with OS/2, and likely are posted simply to "incite people".

>:>I still feel doing so is in spirit of this newsgroup.

>: But not in accordance with your own insistence upon a strict
>: interpretation of the newsgroup charter when you're attempting to
>: censor opinions you don't like to hear -- as versus your hypocritical
>: and illogical "reinterpretation" of the newsgroup charter to excuse
>: your own off-topic posts. Typical.

>Again Jeff, where have I done this?

In your post in which you argue that "criticizing OS/2 advocates is
not in the newsgroup charter". Are you simply trying to "incite
people" with off-topic posts?

>:>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
>:>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.

>: So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
>: Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
>: in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
>: come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.

>I ment inciting flames.

You probably "ment" to say a lot of things differently now that I've
been able to point out your own hypocrisy and illogical.

Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that you're a
none-too-bright hypocrite.

>:>But, most threads 
>:>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
>:>purpose is to talk about OS/2.

>: So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

>Again you are not writing about facts.

It's a fact that your posts have been predominantly off-topic, for
example, all of the messages you've been posting about the newsgroup
charter. Are you doing this merely to "incite people"? If so, you
should stop being a hypocrite, take your own advice, and leave this
newsgroup

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 08:38:28
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>letoured@nospam.net
>Again, where do I find a tier-one (any brand) PC without windoze. Come on
>big boy, you can tell us. We want the number to order one. You must have
>it, you said we don't have to buy windoze so give me the number -- unless
>of course your full of shit right up to your eyeballs. 

And you don't have to buy Windows. Here's your first clue: You don't
have to buy IBM either. IBM is just a Microsoft VAR when it comes to
PC's. IBM sells the computers that way because IBM truly believes that
this is the only thing that customers want, and which IBM wants to
sell. If that's not what you want, then don't buy from a company which
expects you to want that.

>>>>>letoured@nospam.net
>>>>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>>>>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>>>>>without paying for wincrap.
>
>>>>This is, of course, not true.
>
>>>>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
>>>>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
>>>>your incompetence and ignorance.
>
>>>I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
>>>give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
>>>windows?
>
>>If IBM won't sell you what you want, why are you foolishly buying IBM
>>products???
>
>>I see the problem now, and it's you.
>_____________
>Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 08:32:08
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason
>I'm complaining about people lower the quaility of this newsgroup by 
>inciting flamewars by insulting OS/2 advocates:

The charter of this newsgroup specifically mentions "flaming", not
"complaining about people who incite flamewars". You're apparently in
the wrong newsgroup. You don't belong here. Your posts are off-topic
and "lower the quality of this newsgroup" by being foolishly
hypocritical.

>I'm some guy who sits in the 
>newsgroup and talk about Microft trial verdicts all day long, and 
>complains that people violate the newsgroup charter.

I don't know that you spend all day posting these offtopic messages,
and I never made a claim otherwise. I simply note that you do post
these messages, and do so hypocritically.

>Lately, most of my posts 
>may involve argueing with you and countering FUD

How convenient -- "lately". So then, "lately" you're just a foolish
hypocrite who wants to censor on-topic opinions that he just doesn't
wish to hear so that he can have a "higher quality" newgroup where he
can post his own off-topic posts about Microsoft?

Typical.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         07-Dec-99 09:06:07
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Today's Haakmat digest:

1> After all these months, there is so much to be said, Dave.

Such as?

1> I know, I know, "missing" must fail to express the agony of life
1> without me.

What alleged "agony of life without you"?

1> Whatever turns you on, Dave.

Do you regard me as "off", Pascal?

1> Not to me it isn't.

Why?

1> Whatever turns you on.

Do you regard me as "off", Pascal?

1> Yes ... I understand ...

Then why don't you just ignore me?

1> Look, I abandoned you ... That's true ... But I'm still here ... And
1> maybe we could try again ... It could be just like the old days ...
1> Remember how we used to frolic about ... Thousands of lines of
1> lovingly crafted debate .... I, the grasshopper ... You, my mentor
1> ... It could be like that again, Dave. Think about it.

Why?

1> I promise I'll make it up to you.

By ignoring me?

1> Keep Starfleet out of this, Dave.

Who else knows about Talos IV?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         07-Dec-99 09:11:01
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Amazing how much history Marty chose to ignore with the latest
continuation of his "infantile game", for which the third item
is the latest piece of substantiation.  Here's today's digest:

1> Not true at all, Curtis.  When confronted with this absolute error
1> on his part, he invariably either:
1> a] deflects the comment away to an unrelated topic, removing the
1> evidence from his reply
1> b] removes the evidence from his reply and claims that it is
1> irrelevant
1> c] "digestifies" the posting, conveniently removing said evidence

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> He *never* explains any logic behind the statement, not that there
1> is any to explain.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Really?  Do other people go around making erroneous statements like:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> then attempt to defend them, then after realizing the fruitlessness
2> of doing so, go on to ignore these statements without retracting
2> them after having it pointed out repeatedly?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> How long did it take me to "jump to their side"?  Did they do
2> anything to attempt to convince me?  Absolutely not.  First hand
2> experience with Tholen has convinced me.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> No it shouldn't.  The fact that you feel it should tells us something
2> about you.  Nothing we didn't already know unfortunately.  I'm the
2> one smear in your perfect little universe, Tholen.  I use OS/2.  I'm
2> a real OS/2 advocate (unlike you, by your own admission, nay,
2> insistence).  "Digest" that for a little while.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Impossible, as an atomic wedgie from 1987 prevents Dave from ever
3> getting "a rise" again.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA B111 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 10:25:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:40:02, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 13:32:53, David Sutherland
> > <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > Bob Germer is wrong but uses OS/2, so you defend him.
> > >
> > Actually, I think Bob makes quite a lot of sense, in his own - heh -
> > unique way.
> 
> Did his racial slur against Arabs "make sense"?  How about his statement
> about the opinions of Canadians?


Is *that* what a "canuck" is? I was wondering...
No, it doesn't. What do you want me to do? (everyone seems to want me 
to say or do something these days...)

Bob, Are you a racist? Do you consider other ethnic 
groups/nationalities to be inferior to your own? If so, I won't talk 
to you anymore, as I consider racists to be a lower form of life.

Better, Marty? (of course, I haven't been talking to Bob to begin 
with; and I seriously doubt he would care if I stopped doing so)

As for the Canadians, I don't know any. Who knows, maybe he's right...
(OK, so this is a _joke_: I have observed that it is "usance" for 
United Statsians to give off an Canadians, so I thought I'd go with 
the flow. I suppose it's like Belgians and Dutch)

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 11:59:12
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:05:41, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
wrote:

> Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> 
> > Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples 
> > you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the 
> > case for Windows 9x).
> 
> But this is a circular argument.
> 
I hope not. I hate those buggers.

> Presentation Manager is as much an add-on to OS/2 as Windows (and GEM)
> was for DOS.
> 
Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out 
without graphical interface? If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2 
was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.

> If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> GUI.
> 
A good operating system should be able to mimick just about anything, 
so the mere fact that it also has a textual interface might be 
confusing. Wouldn't it be better to look at the intentions of the 
creators?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 11:59:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 23:22:45, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> Karel Jansens writes:
> 
> > Why's Dave Tholen different?
> 
> Mine aren't.  Sutherland and Glatt are simply hypocrites who can't stand
> not having people immediately jump to their side.  The fact that neither
> uses OS/2 should tell you something.
> 
Jeff Glatt is either terminally dyslexic or a malevolent paranoiac.

I have always considered David Sutherland as a pretty normal and 
intelligent (insofar as anyone posting in this group can be such) 
person.

The operating system they use I consider pretty irrelevant for 
personality evaluation (contrary to Glatt's rantings).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 11:59:24
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 00:02:57, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Brad BARCLAY wrote:
> > 
> > Marty wrote:
> > > That depends entirely on what you are talking about.  If you are talking 
about
> > > 3D graphics, then the up and coming Playstation II blows the doors off
of PCs.
> > > The latest Voodoo 3 cards can handle somewhere around 8 million polygons 
per
> > > second (with no lighting or fog effects).  The Playstation II's hardware 
can
> > > handle 53 million polys per second with no effects, and 22 million polys 
per
> > > second with lighting and fog effects.
> > 
> >         Yes, however these measurements really don't relect much of
anything
> > because they're taken at different resolutions.  You can calculate those
> > polygons a whole lot faster when you have fewer pixels for them to
> > intersect with, and the last I checked a standard PC 3D card can do
> > 1024*768 and higher, whereas a game console can do 576 x 430 max, which
> > has less than 1/3 the total number of pixels to render than a standard
> > PC display.  The refresh rate is also typically lower.
> > 
> >         I have anecdotal proof that the difference does have an effect: 
this
> > past weekend, I went out and bought myself a nice big Sony Trinitron
> > Wega TV with the S-Video input on board.  I attached my ATI XPert@Play
> > 8Mb AGP to it via the S-video feed, and fired up some games.  The
> > difference was immediately noticable, especially in any game which
> > required precision firing (like Rainbow 6).  You just don't get the same
> > shape definition due to the lower resolution.  As well, NTSC tends to
> > suffer from the fact that it's colour seperation is balanced towards
> > green and other skin tones, and that on lower quality sets and anything
> > using coaxial or RCA connectors for the video feed are going to suffer
> > from some colour bleed and chroma crawl, lessening the quality even
> > further.  Even 640*480 on a PC (where the NTSC:SVGA pixel ratio is
> > ~0.80) produces a better picture than even the best TV set.
> > 
> >         This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with game consoles
- it
> > really isn't their fault that the current TV resolutions are so low.
> > But they take advantage of this fact by coding their 3D rendering
> > firmware to this lower resolution - and with fewer pixels, they can do
> > it a whole lot faster.
> > 
> >         I'd rather have 8 million pps on a 1024*768 resolution display
than 53
> > million pps on a TV set :).
> 
> All in all, very good points.  However, let's look at some numbers, based on 
a
> typical case you've outlined above:
> 
> Category                   PC                Playstation II      Performance
> advantage
> --------                   ----------        --------------     
> ---------------------
> Color Depth                24/32 bit         32 bit (?)             1 : 1
> Screen Resolution          1024x768          576 x 430 (?)       3.17 : 1
> Mega Polys / s             8 (no effects)    53 (no effects)        1 : 6.62
> Cost                       >$1000            $400 (?)            (not
> evaluated)
> 
> That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise,
it
> blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface is
> less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is
far
> superior on the Playstation II.
> 
And how about frames-per-second ratios?
In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
resolutions. Any figures on that?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             07-Dec-99 13:33:14
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:05:41, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
> wrote:
> 
> > Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples
> > > you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the
> > > case for Windows 9x).
> > 
> > But this is a circular argument.
> > 
> I hope not. I hate those buggers.
> 
> > Presentation Manager is as much an add-on to OS/2 as Windows (and GEM)
> > was for DOS.
> > 
> Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out 
> without graphical interface? 

I believe OS/2 1.0 was out without a GUI. The Presentation Manager was
only added in OS/2 1.1, which is probably why our friend was asking for
that version (btw, if anyone has it, please contact that guy!).

> If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
> and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2 
> was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.

(TOS was an 68k derivative from DOS and had a GUI when it first came out
in 1985. Basically it was a DR-DOS clone.)

I don't know whether DR sold DR-DOS and GEM together. I believe some OEM
versions with both pieces bundled did exist.

> > If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> > first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> > combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> > apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> > combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> > GUI.
> > 
> A good operating system should be able to mimick just about anything,
> so the mere fact that it also has a textual interface might be 
> confusing. Wouldn't it be better to look at the intentions of the 
> creators?

Well, I guess the intentions of DR (GEM) and Microsoft (Windows, OS/2,
Presentation Manager) were the same, at about the same time.


-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jws@jws.ultranet.com                              07-Dec-99 07:19:16
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "John Saunders" <jws@jws.ultranet.com>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384C773F.B28CA181@ibm.net...
> As for the IE down load time -- IE is a fat pig of a program even on a CD.
MS
> should be able to incrementally upgrade their OS (IE is called an OS
upgrade)
> MS is out of control with IE -- software designed by lawyers.

So you haven't installed IE5 over the Internet, lately? Perhaps with a
Custom setup? You download IESETUP.EXE and it asks what components you want,
and only downloads and installs those components. Later, if you want to add
components, it will get them over the Internet.

Thanks,
John Saunders
jws@jws.ultranet.com <mailto:jws@jws.ultranet.com>
[ Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer ]



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             07-Dec-99 12:51:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 12:14:19
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82hj42$jqf$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to
you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question - looks
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lik we've hit another major soft
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to
answer
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ivaes@hr.nl                                       07-Dec-99 14:26:16
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Illya Vaes <ivaes@hr.nl>

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
>>>Unless government gives it a hand, a business cannot become a monopoly.
>>Again the question. The U.S. Government does not establish monopolies.
>Right now, there are 3 examples that come to mind of monopolies I live 
>under:
>- Cable television.  Under the CRTC, Edmonton has 2 cable companies. One is
>only allowed to sell on the east side of town, the other only on the west

In other words:
If you want to live in East Edmonton, you have to accept getting company A.
Hey, that's no monopoly, if you want company B, you can just go live in West
Edmonton.

If you change a few words, you've just given an excellent example of MS'
"monopoly" (quoted just for your sense of redefinition to suit the outcome),
especially in the period leading up to the DOJ suit:

If you want to get (name a brand) PC, you have to accept getting Windows (and
other MS stuff).
Hey, that's no monopoly, if you want Linux (or DR-DOS, or OS/2, or an Apple),
you can just go to El Sleazo Noname Computer and have one built to your specs.

There's always an alternative. Stop watching cable. Stop living. Whatever.
Extreme definitions (of monopoly or other things) never help a case.
Oh wait, I see this also runs in "politics" groups...

-- 
Illya Vaes   (ivaes@hr.nl)        "Do...or do not, there is no 'try'" - Yoda
Holland Railconsult BV, Integral Management of Railprocess Systems
Postbus 2855, 3500 GW Utrecht
Tel +31.30.2653273, Fax 2653385           Not speaking for anyone but myself

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Holland Railconsult BV (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ivaes@hr.nl                                       07-Dec-99 14:40:29
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Illya Vaes <ivaes@hr.nl>

"Steven C. Britton" wrote:
>Joseph wrote:
>>>When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
>>That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
>Monopoly:
>1. exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
>a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.

Windows is a commodity.
MS certainly has a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.
If you were interested in facts instead of void definition games, you'd know
that they used exactly that to force OEMs to only install Windows, and you'd
certainly have seen for yourself -before others pointed it out- that the price
of Windows etc. has stayed the same and even gone *up* while PC hardware
prices have only plummeted.

Ergo, MS satisfies the first condition of your completely random definition
(provided by linguists, notpeople knowledgabel in law).

>3.  the exclusive control of something.

The Windows API(s).
Which is rather important, seeing how they have a mono....eh.. "dominant"
position providing the basis for applications to run on. You don't behave
yourself the way they like (which may well include "staying alive" as a
company), your app will be made to not run or fail mysteriously.
"DOS ain't done till Lotus won't run".
 
>(Random House dictionary)

Well-named. Very random example. Take 10 dictionaries and get near 10
different explanations. Are you sure you didn't buy this just because it
features the definition of monopoly you wanted?

>What have YOU done to bust a union today?
>Work better: Work union-free.

Figures... completely ignores all good that unions have done in the past to
better the circumstances of good and hard-working people. Just wait till you
get bumped off because you used a definition of something to your boss he
didn't like (and no welfare either!). But you sound more like you *are* the
boss that would do exactly that with people whose families depend on that
meager income. "Hey, he can always move across Canada and get a job there;
we're the only company in this town but we don't have a monopoly in jobs".

And such "all for one and God for all" people dare to use the term
"society"...

-- 
Illya Vaes   (ivaes@hr.nl)        "Do...or do not, there is no 'try'" - Yoda
Holland Railconsult BV, Integral Management of Railprocess Systems
Postbus 2855, 3500 GW Utrecht
Tel +31.30.2653273, Fax 2653385           Not speaking for anyone but myself

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Holland Railconsult BV (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 08:45:04
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Dimsdale digest, volume 2451514

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article 
<CABEA840AC12DBA0.43AE1E9722902FBD.F2C306C752FDB5D3@lp.airnews.net>, 
TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:

> In article <tholenbot-06F564.21293206121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
> > In article 
> > <9F2BCC52139B4FA5.FFDE07B31D80E0CF.3A4EBD70B527FD33@lp.airnews.net>, 
> > TholenBotPro <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article 
> > > <tholenbot-8650C0.06461106121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, 
> > > tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article 
> > > > <DA75E87B496E91B8.0BC9B0E0C552995E.403C2A34F3D07551@lp.airnews.net>,
> > > >  
> > > > "TholenBotPro(TM)" <tholenbot_pro@excite.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Forging stdio again Aaron?  I wonder how Bluestreak.org would 
> > > > > react 
> > > > > to 
> > > > > the information that you're posting forgery.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder how Louis Freeh would react to the information that you're 
> > > > jumping into discussions again, Chris.
> > > 
> > > Irrelevant, 
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> Comprehend context, Eric.

I do, Chris.  I see you didn't answer the question.
 
> > > given that the FBI does not investigate discussion 
> > > in-jumping.
> > 
> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> 
> Don't you know, Eric?

Ask your tormentor, grasshopper.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 13:50:22
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>Jeff Glatt is ... paranoiac.

That's a laugh coming from someone who has the same paranoid response
every time someone says "You know, what you just said about
Tholen/Germer/whatever-OS/2-fanatic is either remarkably clueless, or
you're awfully eager to excuse all of this other stuff about him, but
not about other non-OS/2 users, for no apparent reason other than
operating system bias" -- You always imply that the person believes
this only because I have somehow hypnotized that person using evil
mind rays over the internet.

I suspect that Karel spends a great deal of time hiding under his bed
with a copper pot over his head to prevent me from directing my evil
mind rays at him

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          07-Dec-99 14:02:26
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out 
>without graphical interface?

My god, this OS/2 lunatic knows absolutely nothing about the history
of his own beloved pet product! Apparently, he doesn't realize that
one of the big gripes with the first release of OS/2 was that PM was
promised for it, but not delivered.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 09:21:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 00:02:57, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Brad BARCLAY wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty wrote:
> > > > That depends entirely on what you are talking about.  If you are
talking about
> > > > 3D graphics, then the up and coming Playstation II blows the doors off 
of PCs.
> > > > The latest Voodoo 3 cards can handle somewhere around 8 million
polygons per
> > > > second (with no lighting or fog effects).  The Playstation II's
hardware can
> > > > handle 53 million polys per second with no effects, and 22 million
polys per
> > > > second with lighting and fog effects.
> > >
> > >         Yes, however these measurements really don't relect much of
anything
> > > because they're taken at different resolutions.  You can calculate those
> > > polygons a whole lot faster when you have fewer pixels for them to
> > > intersect with, and the last I checked a standard PC 3D card can do
> > > 1024*768 and higher, whereas a game console can do 576 x 430 max, which
> > > has less than 1/3 the total number of pixels to render than a standard
> > > PC display.  The refresh rate is also typically lower.
> > >
> > >         I have anecdotal proof that the difference does have an effect:  
this
> > > past weekend, I went out and bought myself a nice big Sony Trinitron
> > > Wega TV with the S-Video input on board.  I attached my ATI XPert@Play
> > > 8Mb AGP to it via the S-video feed, and fired up some games.  The
> > > difference was immediately noticable, especially in any game which
> > > required precision firing (like Rainbow 6).  You just don't get the same
> > > shape definition due to the lower resolution.  As well, NTSC tends to
> > > suffer from the fact that it's colour seperation is balanced towards
> > > green and other skin tones, and that on lower quality sets and anything
> > > using coaxial or RCA connectors for the video feed are going to suffer
> > > from some colour bleed and chroma crawl, lessening the quality even
> > > further.  Even 640*480 on a PC (where the NTSC:SVGA pixel ratio is
> > > ~0.80) produces a better picture than even the best TV set.
> > >
> > >         This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with game
consoles - it
> > > really isn't their fault that the current TV resolutions are so low.
> > > But they take advantage of this fact by coding their 3D rendering
> > > firmware to this lower resolution - and with fewer pixels, they can do
> > > it a whole lot faster.
> > >
> > >         I'd rather have 8 million pps on a 1024*768 resolution display
than 53
> > > million pps on a TV set :).
> >
> > All in all, very good points.  However, let's look at some numbers, based
on a
> > typical case you've outlined above:
> >
> > Category                   PC                Playstation II     
Performance
> > advantage
> > --------                   ----------        --------------
> > ---------------------
> > Color Depth                24/32 bit         32 bit (?)             1 : 1
> > Screen Resolution          1024x768          576 x 430 (?)       3.17 : 1
> > Mega Polys / s             8 (no effects)    53 (no effects)        1 :
6.62
> > Cost                       >$1000            $400 (?)            (not
> > evaluated)
> >
> > That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise, 
it
> > blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface
is
> > less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is 
far
> > superior on the Playstation II.
> >
> And how about frames-per-second ratios?
> In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
> resolutions. Any figures on that?

60 on the Playstation II.  I doubt we'd be talking more than 60 on the PC at
1024x768, but I may be mistaken.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     07-Dec-99 06:26:20
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Christopher Smith wrote:

> "Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384B31EC.E5D8ACA@ibm.net...
>

>
> > IBM's OS/2 has a fix to the FILE.EXE, a Windows for OS/2, executable .  It
> is
> > part of the OS/2 OS.
>
> So if I can find a single program, library or whatever shipping with any
> Unix, Linux, FreeBSD or other Unix variant that deals incorrectly in the
> slightest way with y2k you will support a claim that Unix isn't y2k
> compliant ?

I don't make and sell OSs - neither do you.   If you can find sworn testimony
or
unambiguous position that these files comprise the operating system then I'll
agree since I really don't care to defend ANY company.  As you saw, I found an
example with OS/2.

MS's definition of operating system was designed by the CEO and lawyers to
justify their monopoly power abuse.  Personally I don't think a browser is
part
of the operating system.  MS does therefore IE is part of the OS and so are
all
the other INNOVATIONS MS distributes under the moniker of operating system. 
Hey
it is their product and if that's what they sell as an OS then that's what YOU
have to evaluate as their OS and for OS compliance.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  07-Dec-99 09:20:18
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451520,43554^-583760365038657034

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Today's Haakmat digest:

[nope, nothing here worth anything from Tholen]

Bye!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  07-Dec-99 09:20:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451520.0129684^-5978784543087

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Amazing how much history Tholen always chooses to ignore with the latest
continuation of his "infantile game", for which the third item is the latest
piece of substantiation.  Here's today's digest:

[Nothing of any value from Tholen yet!]

Bye!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     07-Dec-99 06:33:24
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Illya Vaes wrote:

> "Steven C. Britton" wrote:
> >Joseph wrote:
> >>>When competition exists, it isn't a monopoly.  Period.
> >>That definition of monopoly is incorrect.
> >Monopoly:
> >1. exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
> >a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
>
> Windows is a commodity.

[..]

> Ergo, MS satisfies the first condition of your completely random definition
> (provided by linguists, notpeople knowledgabel in law).

Never mind - he said it wasn't and that is that !

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"You too can be an anti-trust lawyer and rake in millions in your spare time.  
Ask
me how 1-800-555-1212."
or visit the web page @
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/034540095X/qid=944576950/sr=1-27/104-784
9356-7931655

Random House Webster's Dictionary
by Susan Randol (Editor), Carol G. Braham (Editor), Random House
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 09:28:02
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <dpfo4skmpjhqu6no0sbt6npr44snsdng67@4ax.com>, on 12/06/99 at 03:36 PM,
   Glenn Davies <glend@nospam.direct.ca> said:

> There are ten's of thousands (probably in the 100,000's) perfectly
> expectable English words and definitions not listed in your version of
> the Random House Dictionary. Maybe you can find a condensed, pocket
> version with fewer words so it will be easier for you to always be
> "correct".

Of course you are right and the two idiots from Alberta are either truly
dense or badly in need of medication. That is why there are legal
dictionaries because words in common usage have much different meanings in
law in many instances. I cited the definition from the most complete
dictionary of the English language published in England by Oxford. It
specifically includes the legal definition as part of the principal
definition of the word.

In case the idiots from Canada want to check, I included the page number
and column of the definition from my edition. The jacket, incidently,
claims that it includes usage definitions for the US, Canada, Australia,
India, the Caribbean, South Africa, and New Zealand.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     07-Dec-99 06:36:02
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Illya Vaes wrote:

> Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> > As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
> >>>Unless government gives it a hand, a business cannot become a monopoly.
> >>Again the question. The U.S. Government does not establish monopolies.
> >Right now, there are 3 examples that come to mind of monopolies I live
> >under:
> >- Cable television.  Under the CRTC, Edmonton has 2 cable companies. One is
> >only allowed to sell on the east side of town, the other only on the west
>
> In other words:
> If you want to live in East Edmonton, you have to accept getting company A.
> Hey, that's no monopoly, if you want company B, you can just go live in West
> Edmonton.

Why do I get the feeling this Lars guy has moved so that he could save $5.99
(Canadian) on a cable subscription.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 09:33:24
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384c2758_1@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/06/99 at 02:14 PM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> They certainly are two different worlds.  One is correct, the other
> isn't. I trust the Random House Dictionary far more than the US Justice
> Department.

Please read my message to the other idiot here from Calgary where I quote
the first definition of monopoly from the Oxford which specifically states
what monopoly means in law.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 09:53:28
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:18
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384bea91_2@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/06/99 at 09:55 AM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:


> Monopoly:

> 1.  exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market,
> or a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.

> Microsoft does not enjoy either of those two controls.

It most certainly can and has manipulated prices. It forced Netscape to
give away its browser, for example because it stopped selling IE as a
separate program and bundled it with Windows 9x.

It tried to force Intuit out of business by giving away MicroSoft Money
when Quicken killed sales of Money by its superior features.


> (Random House dictionary)

Now go read any Legal Dictionary. Or read the New Shorter Oxford which
specifically includes the legal definition of monopoly in the English
speaking world.




--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 10:00:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384c712e$1$yrgbherq$mr2ice@news.sover.net>, on 12/06/99 at 09:30 PM,
   letoured@nospam.net said:

>  jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:

> Were you born an asshole or is it something you acquired?  

> -- You said I could buy a tier-one PC without windows. 
> ** I asked where? 
> -- You responded it was my fault.

> Again, where do I find a tier-one (any brand) PC without windoze. Come
> on big boy, you can tell us. We want the number to order one. You must
> have it, you said we don't have to buy windoze so give me the number --
> unless of course your full of shit right up to your eyeballs. 

He will not answer the question for two reasons:

1. He is a born asshole

2. He cannot name a single brand or could not until yesterday when Compaq
announced they would offer Linux on SERVERS only in place of Windows NT.

Of course, he cannot buy even a Compaq workstation from Compaq without
Windows.

> >>>>letoured@nospam.net
> >>>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
> >>>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
> >>>>without paying for wincrap.

> >>>This is, of course, not true.

> >>>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
> >>>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
> >>>your incompetence and ignorance.

> >>I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
> >>give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
> >>windows?

> >If IBM won't sell you what you want, why are you foolishly buying IBM
> >products???

> >I see the problem now, and it's you.
> _____________
> Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 10:09:22
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384bed54_4@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/06/99 at 10:06 AM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> Bob Germer wrote:
> >
> > > Ever consider that the anti-trust laws are garbage?
> >
> > Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage.

> Hey Lars!  He's a bigot, too!

You and Lars are examples of why it is necessary to coin such terms.
Canuck to me means an asshole with Canadian citizenship.

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What have YOU done to bust a union today?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Work better: Work union-free.

I do not support the organization of professionals into collective
bargaining units to be sure. However, while I feel as do most Americans
that the union movement has been an anachronism for the past 40 years, I
would never support "busting" a union.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 10:22:09
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82ielt$m7n$1@news1.mpx.com.au>, on 12/07/99 at 06:02 PM,
   "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> said:


> There was a new invention in the mid-80s commonly referred to as the
> <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> - you may have heard of it.  Those of us "in the
> know" provide a <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> to clients who want to install
> it.

Oh, and how do workstations without CD drives manage to use a CD ROM disk?
For your information, in the real world where machines are used to make
money, many do not have such items.



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 10:24:25
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82i3on$d2s$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/07/99 at 05:50 PM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> No, that's the period we live in.  CD's are very popular - you may have
> seen them.   Boob seems to be somewhere in the late eighties.

It may come as a shock to you, but CD's in workstations were not common
until about 4 years or so ago. It may also come as a shock to you that
companies in business to make money don't buy new machines every year or
two. It may come as a shock to you that managers of companies don't want
their employees playing games on company machines. It may come a shock to
you that some companies require that floppy drives be disconnected on
workstations to avoid unauthorized or pirated software being installed by
employees. It may come as a shock to you that some companies won't permit
CD Rom drives in workstations for the same reason.

We offer our clients a choice when it comes to updates available via CD
Rom or modem only. We will install the updates for a fee or they can
download same via the internet. Either way, it is an expensive problem
with commercial telephone charges or our charges.

Our Warp clients, on the other hand, have only to reenable the floppy if
it is disconnected and install the fixpacks necessary for Y2K compliance
if they have not already done so. We provide a set of disks upon request
at no charge. It costs more than the $1.60 or so for the disks and 10
minutes or so it takes to load up the duplicator than the cost of billing
and accounting for a $10 or $15 dollar charge.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           07-Dec-99 10:33:06
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82gvpt$abd$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/07/99 at 07:36 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.

So a company with several hundred thousand dollars invested in
workstations which provide the productivity they desire and the protection
from abuse they require should chuck it all because they don't have the
latest technology?

When we add a workstation or upgrade one due to a hardware failure, most
of our clients do not want CD Rom drives unless the employee has a
specific need for one for something the COMPANY wants done.

Take a typical 50 workstation law firm on a Novell network. The server
will have one or more CD Drives to which an employee can map for
reference. The individual workstations do not have them nor do the
partners want them on those machines because when present employees tend
to install games, personal accounting software, net browsers, etc. the use
of which costs the firm money.

One firm we recently acquired as a client was running Windows 95 on
machines without CD-ROM drives. We attempted to use the quarterly update
to update those machines. It failed because upon the required reboots, the
CD Rom disk was not available until after the logon which could not come
up because Windoze couldn't find the CD-ROM drive.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  08-Dec-99 02:07:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384CEEF0.DD5A8C52@ibm.net...
>
>
> Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> > "Joseph" <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:384B31EC.E5D8ACA@ibm.net...
> >
>
> >
> > > IBM's OS/2 has a fix to the FILE.EXE, a Windows for OS/2, executable .
It
> > is
> > > part of the OS/2 OS.
> >
> > So if I can find a single program, library or whatever shipping with any
> > Unix, Linux, FreeBSD or other Unix variant that deals incorrectly in the
> > slightest way with y2k you will support a claim that Unix isn't y2k
> > compliant ?
>
> I don't make and sell OSs - neither do you.   If you can find sworn
testimony or
> unambiguous position that these files comprise the operating system then
I'll
> agree since I really don't care to defend ANY company.  As you saw, I
found an
> example with OS/2.
>
> MS's definition of operating system was designed by the CEO and lawyers to
> justify their monopoly power abuse.  Personally I don't think a browser is
part
> of the operating system.  MS does therefore IE is part of the OS and so
are all
> the other INNOVATIONS MS distributes under the moniker of operating
system.  Hey
> it is their product and if that's what they sell as an OS then that's what
YOU
> have to evaluate as their OS and for OS compliance.

What MS defines as the "OS" is what pretty much everyone outside of computer
science defines as the "OS".  I hope the reasons are obvious.....

How about you tell us what you consider to be the "OS" ?


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  08-Dec-99 02:12:16
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384d2673$8$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82ielt$m7n$1@news1.mpx.com.au>, on 12/07/99 at 06:02 PM,
>    "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> said:
>
>
> > There was a new invention in the mid-80s commonly referred to as the
> > <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> - you may have heard of it.  Those of us "in the
> > know" provide a <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> to clients who want to install
> > it.
>
> Oh, and how do workstations without CD drives manage to use a CD ROM disk?

Well, before the <DrEvil>CDROM</DrEvil> some other smart guys came up with
the idea of the <DrEvil>Network</DrEvil>.  Smart people use this
<DrEvil>Network</DrEvil> to distribute software amongst their clients.

> For your information, in the real world where machines are used to make
> money, many do not have such items.

Or networks ?  One wonders how your clients install those OS/2 fixpacks,
Bob.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: l_luciano@da.mob                                  07-Dec-99 16:12:06
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: l_luciano@da.mob (Stan Goodman)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 15:29:55, ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) 
wrote:

> In article <yHQxxE9f8dqd-pn2-ItYN5TbBNuyu@POBLANO>
> 	   l_luciano@da.mob "Stan Goodman" writes:
> 
> > [...]  What is less clear is how Microsoft, having fled to
> > Canada to avoid US antitrust action, would survive with the US
> > market denied to it. [...]
> 
> If M$ became Canadian, wouldn't their manners need to improve?
> Hey, that would _have_ to sting a bit.

They will have to improve in any case. That's what the DOJ and Sun suits 
are all about.

> More seriously, I long ago concluded -- so call me a Clever Clogs
> if history ever proves me right -- that, were M$ to leave the US,
> it would be go somewhere like India.  Distance is not the problem
> it used to be; and India, as (eg) IBM already demonstrates, has a
> strong intellectual infrastructure accustomed to handling complex
> software projects.  (Sorry, Canada.)

But it doesn't really matter. Even if he were doing business from an ice 
floe, that would not be a license to run an abusive monopoly in the US or 
anyplace else, or to contravene the law of any place he would do business.

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

E-mail sent to l_luciano@da.mob will, of course, not reach me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               07-Dec-99 11:33:15
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

"Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:
> If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> GUI.

	Really?  Then please tell me, what version of DOS shipped with GEM?  Or
PC-GEOS?  Or even Windows (pre 95)?

	The Presentation Manager has never been a secondary purchase option
which you could install on someone elses OS base.

	If we want to get this pedantic, let's do the same for DOS.  We'll
consider the shell, COMMAND.COM, seperate from the rest of the OS.  Why
not?  It's just a text-based shell atop the real OS (a very minimal
kernel and a set of patches to the BIOS table, with a simple device
driver model).

	Sillyness.  OS/2 v1.1 was the first mainstream IBM PC OS with an
integrated GUI.  Everything else before than was a secondary,
third-party add-on shell to DOS.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   07-Dec-99 17:31:26
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

tholenbot wrote:

>> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
>
>Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?

Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               07-Dec-99 11:42:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Jason wrote:
> I think the difference should be if the are sold together as a package.
> As an example, Windows 95 uses the DOS operating systen and the Windows
> GUI while OS/2 users the OS/2 operating system and the PM/WPS GUI.  It
> seems like pretty few operating systems don't have an underlying Text
> based OS level before the GUI level.

	OS/2 doesn't have a text based OS level under the Presentation Manager
GUI (at least, not through a normal install - it is possible to launch
the PM from a CLI under OS/2, but this is not the norm).  The CLI is a
seperate shell interface, which can run either on its own or from within
the PM/WPS.

	However, it is *not* launched as the parent of the PM shell.  The PM
shell does not rely on the command processor (CMD.EXE) - it loads and
communicates directly with the OS through the OS's APIs.  In a typical
boot, CMD.EXE isn't even loaded (although it might be loaded as a child
process of the loader when RUN= and CALL= statements are used in the
CONFIG.SYS).

	So no, you're quite incorrect:  there is no underlying CLI before the
GUI launches under OS/2.  OS/2 can launch any arbitrary user interface,
be it text or GUI based.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: l_luciano@da.mob                                  07-Dec-99 17:13:25
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: l_luciano@da.mob (Stan Goodman)

On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:32:19, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Stan Goodman write:
> > On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:26:20, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
> 
> > > Somebody's running an abusive monopoly?  Who?
> > 
> > When you threaten people with severe retribution (e.g. "We'll cut off
their
> > air") if they dare to patronize your competitors, that is an abusive 
> > monopoly.
> 
> But all companies do this!  It's called entering a partnership.

=;-/8

I don't think the judge sees it that way. A vendor-buyer relationship is 
not a partnership.

> If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> withhold things.  Like sales.
> 
> Microsoft is not required to sell their products at any price to any people.
> If Intel doesn't want to do what MS wants, MS doesn't have to support them.
> Microsoft isn't the babysitter of whining computer companies.



> Your problem is that when MS says "do this or you don't get to buy our
> product", it has success behind it.  You will in all seriousness reply to me
> that because MS is successful it has to play by a different set of rules.

You could make the same point about Standard Oil decades ago; I'm sure 
Rockefeller did.
 
> >          Don't you read the newspapers? The recent court finding is that 
> > there is a monopoly, and that Microsoft abused its monopoly position
> 
> But when the finding says "there is a monopoly", it means nothing.

What it means is that a monopoly does have to avoid restraining trade. 
Restraint of trade is a major no-no in the US; probably in Canada too. If 
you mean that the finding is not a verdict, you are correct; on the other 
hand, it has a lot to do with what the verdict will be. In all probability,
Microsoft understands that much better than you do, and will make an 
attempt to cut a deal with DOJ, which will probably be the best thing for 
everyone concerned. The deal, of course, will be heavily influenced by the 
(far from meaningless) finding.

> To say Microsoft "abused its position" is to say that, my God, Microsoft
> competed in the market (and didn't fail at it).

Locking up a market is, in general, not permitted, for more or less obvious
reasons, which appear to be unclear to you. Wait until the verdict.

Restraint of trade is not competition; it is in fact anti-competitive. I 
have not the foggiest notion what exercises you so. We all have to wait and
see how the case plays out.

I understand that it is your belief that a trader is permitted to do 
virtually anything that does not involve bloodshed. That has not been true 
for over a century.

I have to abandon this thread to others that have more patience with it 
than I. 

-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

E-mail sent to l_luciano@da.mob will, of course, not reach me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 17:50:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:33:28, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
wrote:

> Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:05:41, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples
> > > > you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the
> > > > case for Windows 9x).
> > > 
> > > But this is a circular argument.
> > > 
> > I hope not. I hate those buggers.
> > 
> > > Presentation Manager is as much an add-on to OS/2 as Windows (and GEM)
> > > was for DOS.
> > > 
> > Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out 
> > without graphical interface? 
> 
> I believe OS/2 1.0 was out without a GUI. The Presentation Manager was
> only added in OS/2 1.1, which is probably why our friend was asking for
> that version (btw, if anyone has it, please contact that guy!).
> 
I had the same idea in my head, but I can't confirm from own 
experience (2.11 being the 1st version of OS/2 I ever tried).

> > If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
> > and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2 
> > was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.
> 
> (TOS was an 68k derivative from DOS and had a GUI when it first came out
> in 1985. Basically it was a DR-DOS clone.)
> 
> I don't know whether DR sold DR-DOS and GEM together. I believe some OEM
> versions with both pieces bundled did exist.
> 
They have been bundling their own version of a GEM-based graphical 
file manager at least since version 5 (I have 5, 6  and 7.01 (the 
Caldera OpenDOS), and each and every one has this thingamajingy). To 
call that a GUI does stretch the definition a lot, IMHO.

> > > If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> > > first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> > > combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> > > apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> > > combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> > > GUI.
> > > 
> > A good operating system should be able to mimick just about anything,
> > so the mere fact that it also has a textual interface might be 
> > confusing. Wouldn't it be better to look at the intentions of the 
> > creators?
> 
> Well, I guess the intentions of DR (GEM) and Microsoft (Windows, OS/2,
> Presentation Manager) were the same, at about the same time.
> 
Both GEM and Windows were conceived as add-ons: the proof lies in the 
fact that they can/could run on other O/S's. Brad Barclay makes it 
much clearer in his answer. (even Windows 95 can run on top of DR-DOS,
or at least Caldera claims it does: I've never found a good reason to 
try it out for myself)

(I *wish* the WPS was an add-on; it would make it easier to port to 
linux <G>)

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 17:51:00
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:21:38, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > And how about frames-per-second ratios?
> > In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
> > resolutions. Any figures on that?
> 
> 60 on the Playstation II.  I doubt we'd be talking more than 60 on the PC at
> 1024x768, but I may be mistaken.
> 
Wow!

Err... Why?

IIRC (from a psychology class in university days long gone), the human
eye is pretty much incapable of seeing the difference between 25 and 
50 FPS, which is why TV and film have settled on the number 24/25 
(dunno about HDTV and digital, though). What justifies the extra 
trouble of displaying 60 frames per second?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            07-Dec-99 17:51:00
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

Resorting to your usual trick of forging posts again, I see?
I'm honoured; these days you tend to fall back to that only when 
you're getting really desperate.

And I wasn't even *trying* to argue with you...

"Two points to me", as they say in another, and happier newsgroup.


On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 13:50:44, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >Jeff Glatt is ... paranoiac.
> 
> That's a laugh coming from someone who has the same paranoid response
> every time someone says "You know, what you just said about
> Tholen/Germer/whatever-OS/2-fanatic is either remarkably clueless, or
> you're awfully eager to excuse all of this other stuff about him, but
> not about other non-OS/2 users, for no apparent reason other than
> operating system bias" -- You always imply that the person believes
> this only because I have somehow hypnotized that person using evil
> mind rays over the internet.
> 
> I suspect that Karel spends a great deal of time hiding under his bed
> with a copper pot over his head to prevent me from directing my evil
> mind rays at him

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 12:59:05
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84qh49.n2.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote:
> 
> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
> >
> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
> 
> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?

Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   07-Dec-99 18:58:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 16:53:19
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

tholenbot wrote:

>> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
>> >
>> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
>> 
>> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?
>
>Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?

Comprehend context, Eric.

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             07-Dec-99 22:18:28
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <384C773F.B28CA181@ibm.net>,
  Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:
>
>
> Stuart Fox wrote:

-- snip --

> >  CD's are very popular - you may have seen them.  Boob seems to be
> >  somewhere in the late eighties.
>
> Why not floppies if you're going to use old technology to distribute
> software. This is the internet age. It began in the late 90's and
> cutting edge, low cost, low labor distribution is networked based.
> If you want to insult someone then tell them to upgrade their
> connectivity to say, DSL -- don't embarrass yourself with a retort
> about pressing and shipping CD's as a modern solution.

Germer wasn't complaining about the technology, but the cost (19 cents
per minute over several hours, the equivalent to approx. 21 Warp
licenses.)  The cost of ordering a few CDs would be trivial.  DSL may
not be, especially for a business.  If this client was still using v.34
modems, there was probably a reason.

-- [slam of IE5, whether justified or not, snipped] --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             08-Dec-99 00:23:18
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> "Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:
> > If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> > first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> > combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> > apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> > combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> > GUI.
> 
> Really?  Then please tell me, what version of DOS shipped with GEM?

If you bought an Intel based Personal Computer from Schneider you got
OEM versions of both some version of DOS (possibly DR-DOS) and GEM.

>  Or
> PC-GEOS?  Or even Windows (pre 95)?

Windows and DOS were usually pre-installed together.

> The Presentation Manager has never been a secondary purchase option
> which you could install on someone elses OS base.

So what? OS/2 gave you less options?

>       If we want to get this pedantic, let's do the same for DOS.  We'll
> consider the shell, COMMAND.COM, seperate from the rest of the OS.  Why
> not? 

If you want to be this pedantic, let's do the same for OS/2. Not only do
we devide it in text mode and GUI, we will also take cmd.exe as a
different product.

> It's just a text-based shell atop the real OS (a very minimal
> kernel and a set of patches to the BIOS table, with a simple device
> driver model).

Same applies to cmd.exe (except that the OS/2 kernel was more
sophisticated).

>       Sillyness.  OS/2 v1.1 was the first mainstream IBM PC OS with an
> integrated GUI.  Everything else before than was a secondary,
> third-party add-on shell to DOS.

Packages of DR-DOS with GEM in it were available in europe. People even
bought them. The 68k version of DR-DOS (TOS) wasn't even available
_without_ GEM, so from some point on DR must have had this idea.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             08-Dec-99 00:23:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> Jason wrote:
> > I think the difference should be if the are sold together as a package.
> > As an example, Windows 95 uses the DOS operating systen and the Windows
> > GUI while OS/2 users the OS/2 operating system and the PM/WPS GUI.  It
> > seems like pretty few operating systems don't have an underlying Text
> > based OS level before the GUI level.
> 
>       OS/2 doesn't have a text based OS level under the Presentation Manager
> GUI (at least, not through a normal install - it is possible to launch
> the PM from a CLI under OS/2, but this is not the norm). 

But that's exactly what makes the text based OS level... You can see the
text based level under the PM when you boot the OS. You can use it if
you tell it to use a shell than can communicate with the OS (usually
cmd.exe or tshell.exe afaik).

> The CLI is a
> seperate shell interface, which can run either on its own or from within
> the PM/WPS.

The CLI is a program, a shell. It has not much to do with the text based
OS underneath the GUI. Windows 95 would still have its DOS without
command.com either.

>       However, it is *not* launched as the parent of the PM shell.  The PM
> shell does not rely on the command processor (CMD.EXE) - it loads and
> communicates directly with the OS through the OS's APIs. 

But Windows does that too, doesn't it?

> In a typical
> boot, CMD.EXE isn't even loaded (although it might be loaded as a child
> process of the loader when RUN= and CALL= statements are used in the
> CONFIG.SYS).

And?

>       So no, you're quite incorrect:  there is no underlying CLI before the
> GUI launches under OS/2.  OS/2 can launch any arbitrary user interface,
> be it text or GUI based.

He didn't claim it had an underlying CLI. He claimed it had an
underlying text based OS, and it has.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 18:26:04
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84qm76.n2.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote:
> 
> >> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
> >> >
> >> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
> >> 
> >> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?
> >
> >Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?
> 
> Comprehend context, Eric.

Illogical.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                07-Dec-99 23:51:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:29:41, White Thunder <larso@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>
wrote:

In article <JqnCCXS3fWdc-pn2-82xwNKfItcC9@jakesplace.dhs.org>,
  jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton) wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:54:31, "Steven C. Britton"
> <sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote:
>
> Look, this is becoming boring.  Microsoft has broken the law.

Yes...Microsoft dared to run a business.

That's not the law that they broke.  They broke restraint of trade 
laws.

Microsoft is a special case, because they are a legal monopoly under 
US laws.  That means the rules are different for them.  And make no 
mistake; they knew that.  This is not the first time they've been up 
before the courts for this sort of thing.  In fact, it's the third 
time.  The first two times they got away with saying they wouldn't do 
it again (consent decree re: per-processer pricing) and the second 
time with a slap on the wrist (consent decree re: integrating win95 
and IE; they got around it by releasing a new version of windows).  
This time, they're going to get hosed.  The courts do not take 
defiance of the law lightly.

IOW, the FoF is as harsh as it is because the court has lost patience 
with MS and its recidivist behaviour.

> The brass tacks of the matter is that Netscape basically created the
> internet as a mass market.  Before Andreeson started cranking the web,
> no-one was using the net except for geeks and scientists.  Now, it's
> all over the place.  Andreeson created that market, and has been
> muscled out of receiving his fair piece of the pie by Microsoft.

What do you mean, his "fair piece of the pie"?  Discounting the
assumption of a fixed-ratio economic theory (which isn't valid), why
does Andreeson have a "fair piece"?  Do you believe that he is entitled
to make money regardless of whether or not consumers support his
product?

Netscape used to make a substantial chunk of cash from its browser.  
When IE was released on a no-pay basis, that revenue stream dried 
up... including the money needed for further development.  It's clear 
from the evidence gathered from MS that this was done to harm 
Netscape, even to kill it if possible.  It's legal to do this in the 
US... unless you're a monopoly.

MS was put on notice that they are a monopoly under US law when they 
accepted the decree against per-processor licensing in 1995.  These 
guys are not dumb; they knew exactly what they were doing and they 
knew they were leveraging monopoly power to do it.

Whether you agree with the law or not does not exempt you from obeying
it.  Even in the realm of conscientious objection, you are expected to
take your lumps for disobeying an unjust law.

As for Andreeson's piece of the pie; he took a realm which had existed
for over twenty years and made it a place where you can do business.  
The monopolist in his field (PC computer systems and software) took it
away from him in clear violation of the law.

> First, they killed his main revenue stream

Every business aims to kill the main revenue stream of the competitor.
When it succeeds, you cry foul??

MS didn't even try to compete with Netscape at first.  Only when they 
realized how well Netscape was doing did they move into the market; 
and they did so by illegal means.  Point final.

> Sure, Andreeson is leaving the market with a big pile of cash thanks
> to AOL.  However, he's not a player anymore; he's out of the game.  To
> those guys, I suspect that's more important.
>
> Nor is this the first time Gates has done that to people.

Bill Gates isn't supposed to me some big protector of people's role in
the game.  He, like everybody else playing, is playing to win (though
its difficult when he accepts the DOJ actions as in some way shape or
form valid).

Monopolists are not held to the same standards as everyone else.  Go 
ask your local power monopoly if they are allowed to do whatever they 
want to.  They aren't.

> The aim of the law is to prevent companies from getting too big.

If you are worried about companies getting too big, don't support them.
 Microsoft and any other business is in a struggle every day to grow and
maintain their size.

Hmmm.... it seems to me that Microsoft hasn't had any problems 
whatsoever maintaining or even growing their size.  They seemed to 
have spent most of the last five years making sure that no-one else 
could actually do anything that might get in their way.

A humanistic analagous law would be to prevent individuals from becoming
too smart.

Bad analogy.  Businesses aren't people.  A better analogy might be a 
law preventing people from eating other people so that they can get 
larger.  But even that analogy isn't really good.

>                                                                  The
> idea is that a one-company town is no good for anyone.

So another company can move in.

You're not really making any sense here... I suppose you mean that 
another company can move in and try to break the monopoly?  Like I 
said, you should read your history; the railroad companies in the 
1800s used to use private armies to prevent people from competing with
them... usually by burning down businesses in competition with the 
company store.

It doesn't matter all that much what your theories tell you about 
monopoly; history is a truer guide.  And history has shown that one 
company towns are bad; bad for the community, bad for the society, bad
for the politics, and ultimately bad for the economy as well.

For example, the old Big Three oligopoly in car manufacturing in the 
US got smoked once the Japanese got their costs of production low 
enough to be able to out-compete them in both quality and price.  Not 
only did the Japanese take a big chunk of the American market away 
from them, they took an even bigger chunk of the international market 
away from them.  It took over ten years for the rust belt to recover.

> That means you (or perhaps more to the point, the client) is paying
> for Windows even if they don't really want it.

Hmmmm.  Well, they seemed to find the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.
Very rarely do I buy something for all its purposes.  I don't care if my
watch can survive 50 feet underwater...should I be able to force Timex
to make a watch that cannot survive 50 feet underwater and sell it to me
at a reduced rate?  Can I demand one less beverage holder in my Buick
and save $30?

Well, yes, you can.  You can choose not to have a radio, for example. 
After all, if you're going to truck down to Alpine and pick up a 
smoking system, why not shave fifty bucks off of the price of the car.
 After all, you can...

>                                                 There are a few OS/2
> offices that I know of; however, they bought windows, because when
> they were setting up, they bought Micron and that meant they got
> windows, even though they had no intention of using it.

That was their choice.

No it wasn't.  However, you conveniently snipped my explication of the
market realities of doing computer and network consulting... esp. as 
it relates to insurability and bonding issues.  Maintaining 
bondability is worth blowing the fifty bucks or so on the Windows 
license.  However, considering that you can exclude the radio from 
your car, it doesn't really seem all that unreasonable to expect to be
able to exclude the OS from the computer when you already own a 
perfectly good system that you are planning on using.  On a ten 
machine network, that's around 500 dollars spent needlessly; almost 
all business people that I know would much rather not spend it if they
don't have to. It is still largely impossible to not spend that money,
and two years ago was completely impossible to do so.

"Bottom lip quivers, rage is so apparent. Don't know whether to kill or
cry."

Whatever.

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                08-Dec-99 00:07:09
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Help! Netscape, soundcard

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 18:03:31, pvollan@norcov.com wrote:

If you guys are OS/2 advocates, perhaps you can help me before I toss it
all and install FreeBSD.

The number one problem I'm having now it that the current Netscape,
4.61, won't work. I've tried both the export and the not for export
versions. I've noticed these messages about a possible "error leak" so
maybe you folks can help me here. Whenever I run any of the parts of
Communicator 4.61 (Communicator, Composer, Messenger, Navigator), I get
a SYS3171 "Due to insufficient stack space, the exception was not
dispatched."  (I use 2.02 and it works fine, except for the occaisional
Javascript error.) 

11-30-1999  21:21:57  SYS3171  PID 0037  TID 0001  Slot 0069
C:\NETSCAPE\PROGRAM\NETSCAPE.EXE
c000009f
1f903ad0
EAX=00005756  EBX=00000094  ECX=00000008  EDX=00000008
ESI=1f902f1c  EDI=15417d71  
DS=0053  DSACC=d0f3  DSLIM=1fffffff  
ES=0053  ESACC=d0f3  ESLIM=1fffffff  
FS=150b  FSACC=00f2  FSLIM=00000030
GS=0000  GSACC=****  GSLIM=********
CS:EIP=005a:1f903ad0  CSACC=d0df  CSLIM=1fffffff
SS:ESP=004a:007feb98  SSACC=d0d3  SSLIM=1fffffff
EBP=007fecac  FLG=00002283

IBMDEV32.DLL 0006:00003ad0

What fixpack are you at?  Comm 4.61 needs to have a fixed system (at 
least fixpack 5 for warp 4, dunno the number for warp 3) in order to 
run properly.  You should consider looking at IBMDEV32.DLL, as it 
seems to be causing the crash... is it corrupted perhaps?

I also can't figure out why my sound card won't work. It's a Pro Audio
Spectrum 16. It looks to all the world like it's installed, and I've
certainly looked at the Hardware Manager and run rmview and su from a
command prompt, in fact the PAS 16 works in Windows, well most of the
time it does, it's just from in OS/2 that it doesn't work. Maybe it's
because of the oddball model number on my card: 650-0044-56B? This ought
to be real easy since support for the PAS16 is included in the
installation manager.

Check your interrupts?  Hard to say, I've got an old soundblaster 
here...

You'll probably get more help if you post to comp.os.os2.setup or 
comp.os.os2.misc.

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:19:05
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>>Ian "The Moron" Tholen
>> My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
>> file, Curtis.

>cbass2112@my-deja.com
>No, Dave.  It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract
>anything by running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.
>On the contrary, you would have gotten error messages similar to the
>ones you got from InfoZip.

>You have just posted more misinformation. You have just made another
>error.

>Remember, your statement is, "Yet to look at the contents, one must have
>run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Since your copy
>would not have extracted the archive when run, even on an OS/2 system,
>the statement is still incorrect.

>Now, if you tell us that you *DID* run your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE
>in OS/2 and extracted classes.zip successfully, then that would prove
>wrong another statement you made, namely, that all unzip tools should
>behave the same *ON YOUR COPY.*

HAHAHAHAH!!! Oh, what a humiliating, embarrassing comeuppance Tholen
has been delivered in this thread. Frankly, I've seen him get it time
and time again in other threads to the point that nearly everyone
except fellow OS/2 loonies like Tim Martin, Phil Cava, Bob Germer,
Karel Jensens, and Bennie Nelson, thinks that Tholen is truly a
dimwit. But this is bad even by those previous standards of ineptitide
that Tholen has demonstrated.

It's a sorry, sorry, sorry day for OS/2 Advocacy to have the likes of
a dimwit such as Tholen air such utter stupidity in "favor" of OS/2.

(It's just too bad that there are hardly any developers bothering with
OS/2 any more. I have no one to email copies of Tholen's tripe with an
attached "Here's another look at OS/2 Advocacy" note)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 19:32:26
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:
> 
> In article <82iiv7$fkh$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
>   tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> 
> -- snip --
> 
> > "Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of
> > this?"
> >
> > I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
> 
> Dave repeats this insipid response six times (!), indicating that he has no 
> real argument.

A paltry number, compared to his usual standard for excellence.  Yet he can't
seem to get through one of his infantile "digest" postings about me without
accusing me of playing an "infantile game".  I'm glad the hypocrisy of that
situation isn't lost on the readers of this thread, though I can't imagine how
it could be, given how clear Tholen has made it.

> Where is the logic?

Why, nowhere to be seen!
 
> It's like the exchange between Tholen and Lucien, which has degenerated
> into what appears to be an endless loop of:
> 
> Loop
> 
>    Lucien:  Dave refuses to answer the question again.
> 
>    Tholen:  Where is this alleged refusal, Lucien?
> 
> Until (Hell_Freezes_Over)

A little more like:

while ( INFANTILE_GAME )
{
	Lucien( SHOW_HYPOCRISY );
	Tholen( REITERATE_IRRELEVANCIES );
	Tholen( REMOVE_CONTEXT );
	Tholen_Play( &infantile_test_game );
	Tholen( Add_Hypocrisy( INVECTIVE ) );
}

> Of course, I expect Lucien to end this nonsense, after illustrating to
> everyone just how far Tholen will go to be contrary, because Lucien has
> far more sense than Dave, who, in all likelyhood, would never end the
> exchange because Dave just has to have the last word.

Hmm... that sounds like an infantile game to me, like I used to play when I
was
4.  It was called "Gotcha Last" IIRC.

> Lucien knows this, I presume, and is simply playing Dave like a puppet
> on strings.  I believe Lucien will feel his point is made after the
> quote chevrons themselves start wrapping.
> 
> (Sorry if I tipped your hand, Lucien!)

Don't worry.  The only person who didn't know what Lucien was holding was
Tholen and he is unlikely to be intelligent enough to make good use of the
information.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:30:26
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>cbass2112@my-deja.com

>In article <384275ec$7$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,
>  Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
>> On <cbb34ss69t988f43812q4bkc1nlrpet5eo@4ax.com>, on 11/28/99 at 10:52
>PM,
>>    David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> said:
>
>-- SNIP --

>>>First Bob, what kind of anal retentive would go to so much trouble
>>>with his .sig?   Or maybe you didn't, which leads to:

>>Trouble? I merely take a floppy with my setup for Ice with me when I
>>go to visit relatives.

>Are you saying that all of your relatives use OS/2?  None of them are
>the least bit interested in being able to run software they can buy at
>their local Wal-Mart or Best Buy or Circuit City?

And that's only *ONE* of the numerous inconsistencies and
implausibilities in Bob Germer's contrived "anecdotes". David and I
have been citing other such inconsistencies, such as the strangely
nebulous status of his supposed "business only -- anything else is
irresponsible and illegal" notebook computer which he has been using
to post personal messages to this newsgroup

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:26:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>Resorting to your usual trick of forging posts again, I see?

Resorting to your usual vaudeville routine of making unproven claims,
I see?

This reminds me of the time when you ineptly "lost" the digest that I
emailed to you, without even having really read it, and then made some
unproven claims that the quotes within were somehow "doctored" despite
being fully attributed quotes, complete with Dejanews headers.

Same old contrived lies from Karel.

>And I wasn't even *trying* to argue with you...

That's because your efforts are truly lame, much like this reply of
yours to my post.

>"Two points to me", as they say in another, and happier newsgroup.

I'm sure that you truly see this as a victory in your own naive mind
-- the same mind that thinks that Tholen is a swell guy and Bob Germer
"makes quite a bit of sense". But, you don't seem to be fooling all of
that many people. Of course, you no doubt continue to believe that
those other people who are calling you on your dubious "character
assessments" have somehow been hypnotized with evil mind control by
me.

>> >Karel Jansens
>> >Jeff Glatt is ... paranoiac.
>> 
>> That's a laugh coming from someone who has the same paranoid response
>> every time someone says "You know, what you just said about
>> Tholen/Germer/whatever-OS/2-fanatic is either remarkably clueless, or
>> you're awfully eager to excuse all of this other stuff about him, but
>> not about other non-OS/2 users, for no apparent reason other than
>> operating system bias" -- You always imply that the person believes
>> this only because I have somehow hypnotized that person using evil
>> mind rays over the internet.
>> 
>> I suspect that Karel spends a great deal of time hiding under his bed
>> with a copper pot over his head to prevent me from directing my evil
>> mind rays at him
>
>Karel Jansens
>jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
>=======================================================
>"The method employed I would gladly explain,
>While I have it so clear in my head,
>If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
>But much yet remains to be said."
>
>the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
>=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 18:51:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:21:38, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > >
> > > And how about frames-per-second ratios?
> > > In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
> > > resolutions. Any figures on that?
> >
> > 60 on the Playstation II.  I doubt we'd be talking more than 60 on the PC
at
> > 1024x768, but I may be mistaken.
> >
> Wow!
> 
> Err... Why?
> 
> IIRC (from a psychology class in university days long gone), the human
> eye is pretty much incapable of seeing the difference between 25 and
> 50 FPS, which is why TV and film have settled on the number 24/25
> (dunno about HDTV and digital, though). What justifies the extra
> trouble of displaying 60 frames per second?

TV video is updated at 30fps.  Movies run at 60fps.  (At least here in the US
they do.)  The justification is that most of the image is moving most of the
time, so it is difficult, but not impossible, to perceive changes in that
timespan (16.7 milliseconds for 60fps).  However, when playing a game, it can
be quite significant.  If you've ever played one of those 3D shoot-em-ups,
you'd notice that running at 60fps gives you a much better reaction time than
running at 30fps.  The difference is very perceivable.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 00:35:29
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 23:51:46, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:21:38, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > And how about frames-per-second ratios?
> > > > In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
> > > > resolutions. Any figures on that?
> > >
> > > 60 on the Playstation II.  I doubt we'd be talking more than 60 on the
PC at
> > > 1024x768, but I may be mistaken.
> > >
> > Wow!
> > 
> > Err... Why?
> > 
> > IIRC (from a psychology class in university days long gone), the human
> > eye is pretty much incapable of seeing the difference between 25 and
> > 50 FPS, which is why TV and film have settled on the number 24/25
> > (dunno about HDTV and digital, though). What justifies the extra
> > trouble of displaying 60 frames per second?
> 
> TV video is updated at 30fps.  Movies run at 60fps.  (At least here in the
US
> they do.)  The justification is that most of the image is moving most of the
> time, so it is difficult, but not impossible, to perceive changes in that
> timespan (16.7 milliseconds for 60fps).  However, when playing a game, it
can
> be quite significant.  If you've ever played one of those 3D shoot-em-ups,
> you'd notice that running at 60fps gives you a much better reaction time
than
> running at 30fps.  The difference is very perceivable.
> 
Heh.
With my hardware, I'm lucky if I can get 20 FPS. Still, I don't think 
Doom would ever do much more...

Well, we live and learn. I still think European TV is only 25FPS, but 
we have more lines than you guys do. Films at 60? Wow, those 
kinetoscopes sure came a long way, didn't they?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Dec-99 00:22:04
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dji62qcmRxTB@localhost>,
  jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:

-- snip --

> Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out
> without graphical interface? If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
> and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2
> was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.

IIRC, OS/2 v1.0 did not have a GUI, but was a commercially available
product.  In fact, I recall a magazine columnist (can't remember who, or
what magazine) who complained about the fact that 1.1 would have a GUI,
because, he argued, hardware in that day was too primative for a bloated
GUI shell.  As I recall, he likened putting a GUI on OS/2 to throwing a
wet blanket on a smouldering fire that was just getting ready to burst
into flame (i.e. putting OS/2's spark out before it had a chance to
kindle, as it were).

Remember, this was in the days of DOS' supremacy, Windows was at
version 2.x, and graphical shells, although available, were
definitely not popular.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 00:40:20
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:22:09, cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dji62qcmRxTB@localhost>,
>   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> 
> -- snip --
> 
> > Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out
> > without graphical interface? If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
> > and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2
> > was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.
> 
> IIRC, OS/2 v1.0 did not have a GUI, but was a commercially available
> product.  In fact, I recall a magazine columnist (can't remember who, or
> what magazine) who complained about the fact that 1.1 would have a GUI,
> because, he argued, hardware in that day was too primative for a bloated
> GUI shell.  As I recall, he likened putting a GUI on OS/2 to throwing a
> wet blanket on a smouldering fire that was just getting ready to burst
> into flame (i.e. putting OS/2's spark out before it had a chance to
> kindle, as it were).
> 
> Remember, this was in the days of DOS' supremacy, Windows was at
> version 2.x, and graphical shells, although available, were
> definitely not popular.
> 
Thanks.
I'm now wondering if OS/2 should be considered a CLI-O/S with a GUI 
bolted on, or a a CLI-O/S reworked to a multi-purpose thingy, as Brad 
Barclay seems to indicate.


Actually, wondering is maybe a bit too strong a word. "Somewhat mildly
interested" would cut it better. <G>

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Tim.Streater@dante.org.uk                         07-Dec-99 18:51:13
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 21:27:02
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: tim <Tim.Streater@dante.org.uk>

In article <1e2eh19.18eqkz8wgd3pcN@dialup-317.germany.ecore.net>, 
andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) wrote:

>Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>> File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
>> letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files 
>> of
>> the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
>> launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that 
>> all
>> apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.

This is incorrect. The 4-char filetype and 4-char creator are kept in 
the desktop database, which is managed by the Finder. They are certainly 
*not* kept in the resource fork, since many files don't have a resource 
fork. Try opening a Word file with ResEdit and it will say "This file 
does not have a resource fork, opening it with ResEdit will add one, 
continue or not?"

>However, the OS does seem to assume that all files with the type ????
>and the creator ???? simply _have_ to be opened by the Acrobat Reader
>(of course this does not apply to *.PDF files with said type and
>creator, as Murphy's law would also indicate).

You can change this behaviour with the File Exchange Control Panel.

>Also, it can be rather nasty to have to run resedit (an editor for the
>resource fork of files on Macintosh filesystems) every time you find a
>weird file (probably copied from another operating system) and want to
>open it in an editor (type TEXT creator ttxt) or Netscape (type TEXT
>creator udog).

Well, it would be if you had to, but you don't have to.

>I started using the extension .TTXT for Macintosh text files, which
>makes it much easier to identify them on Linux for one thing. Altaugh
>Emacs seems to be the only editor that will open them correctly.

I edit all text file on the Mac with BBedit, since It Doesn't Suck (TM), 
unlike Unix apps, which all suck, in my experience. In particular you 
can choose your line-endings with BBedit to keep Unix/Windows happy, and 
Bbedit deals with all 3 types with no trouble. It has a built in FTP 
client, too, so the Unix files look local.

Tim.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: DANTE (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: me@my.place                                       07-Dec-99 17:12:22
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: me@my.place (me)

bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com (Bob Germer) wrote in 
<384d23b7$7$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>:

>On <384bed54_4@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/06/99 at 10:06 AM,
>   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:
>
>> Bob Germer wrote:
>> >
>> > > Ever consider that the anti-trust laws are garbage?
>Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
>Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
>MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
>Aut Pax Aut Bellum
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
>
Some Canadians do not understand US law, however most Americans do not 
understand Canadian law.  Insulting all Canadians is a true showing of
your qualities or lack there of.  I have met rude Americans and this does
not mean all Americans are rude.  I judge an individual on there merits not
by their country.
Microsoft is a Monopoly and has used questionable business practices.
For those who disagree ...check out the stacker case for one...
Which country they operate in has no bearing any more today, since all 
countries are only a modem away.  This is why many countries now have human 
rights clauses in trade agreements.  Moving to another country would merely
mean that all Canadian companies would be impacted by the modified trade 
legislation implemented by the protecing government (in this case the US).
Microsoft moving to Canada would hurt Canadians more than it would benefit 
Canadians.  Microsoft STAY AWAY...
Me and My Opinion 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Your Company (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com                          07-Dec-99 17:13:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:15
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: donnelly@tampabay.rr.com (Buddy Donnelly)

On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:32:19, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) a crit 
dans un message:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Stan Goodman write:
> > On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:26:20, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
> 
> > > Somebody's running an abusive monopoly?  Who?
> > 
> > When you threaten people with severe retribution (e.g. "We'll cut off
their
> > air") if they dare to patronize your competitors, that is an abusive 
> > monopoly.
> 
> But all companies do this!  It's called entering a partnership.

No, no more than "going into business" is the same as operating a monopoly.


> 
> If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> withhold things.  Like sales.

No, you're legally required to treat all members of a class of customer the
same.


> 
> Microsoft is not required to sell their products at any price to any people.
> If Intel doesn't want to do what MS wants, MS doesn't have to support them.
> Microsoft isn't the babysitter of whining computer companies.

Not, not the babysitter. The bullwhipper. The point made in the court 
testimony is that M$ used illegal methods to prevent competing products 
from reaching the market. If M$ didn't have a good enough education to 
study business law to prevent their behaviour from crossing the line, 
that's their fault, not ours. (And if M$'s shareholders employ directors 
who cause the company to hire yes-folk for attorneys, then the shareholders
should suffer the cost of that stupidity.)



> 
> Your problem is that when MS says "do this or you don't get to buy our
> product", it has success behind it.  You will in all seriousness reply to me
> that because MS is successful it has to play by a different set of rules.

By longstanding law in the US, if *any* company (IBM? ATT? Standard Oil?) 
is successful at eliminating all competition, then yes, they have to play 
by a different set of rules. They have to take on a MORAL responsibility to
insure that the customer, the end user, us here, don't get screwed, as we 
have been in this case.


> 
> >          Don't you read the newspapers? The recent court finding is that 
> > there is a monopoly, and that Microsoft abused its monopoly position
> 
> But when the finding says "there is a monopoly", it means nothing.

Ask 100 corporate litigators if a Federal judge's finding of fact says 
"there is a monopoly" means anything, and you'll get 1 answer: it means 
almost everything. It's all over but the shouting, in other words. M$ and 
their high-paid sycophants, er, legal counsel, had their chance to present 
your view (the opposing view to that of the Federal and multiple State 
governments) during the trial and couldn't, evidently, come up with a 
single element of fact that supported your view.


> 
> To say Microsoft "abused its position" is to say that, my God, Microsoft
> competed in the market (and didn't fail at it).

To say, "While you were gone I drank one of your beers from the fridge" is 
not the same thing as "While you were gone I drank all your beers, opened 
your mail, and found the dirty pictures of your girlfriend in the shoebox 
in your clothes closet."


> -- 
> Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
> mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
> The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

Tell ya what, Lars: Don't leave school just yet? Or find somewhere you'll 
get a better business education while there, or just go straight into 
teaching and don't get out where making mistakes that constitute violations
of the law can cost you jail time or mucho dinero?


[You also might check your HTML on the index page, because whatever program
you used to create it has butchered some of your indexing codes, rendering 
them useless.]


--

Good luck,

Buddy

Buddy Donnelly
donnelly@tampabay.rr.com


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RoadRunner - TampaBay (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             07-Dec-99 18:19:23
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82hmdm$jqf$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
>
> > Nope.
>
> Typical Bass inconsistency.

There is no inconsistency, Dave. That you will insist otherwise is to be
expected.

> > Here, you are implying that the grammatical constructs I chose are
> > analogous to "avoid[ing] being killed in an airplane crash by
> > committing suicide," which, quite simply, is an inappropriate
> > analogy.
>
> Yet another person who doesn't understand the difference between
> implication and inference.

On the contrary, you simply hide behind this semantics argument rather
than admit what you implied.

> I didn't imply that at all, Curtis.

Typical Tholen denial.

-- [more Tholen denials snipped] --

> > What makes you think I "think that using 'measure up' would have
> > ended the sentence with a preposition?"
>
> Because that was your stated reason for not writing it that way.
>
> Sheesh!

Wrong. It was not my "stated reason for not writing it that way" at all.
It was my stated reason for using "up" at the begining of a phrase,
which is not the same as "not writing it that way." If you really value
logic, you would understand this.

You asked me what "up" was doing at the beginning of the phrase "up to
which you failed to measure."  My answer was that it was allowing me to
not end the phrase in a preposition.

*I* realized that there was at least one other correct way to do this. I
even said, "I suppose I could have used 'to which you failed to measure
up'" immediately after you asked what "up" was doing at the beginning of
the phrase.

Nevertheless, my original grammar is quite correct. The only problem is
that you don't *like* it for some reason. You have yet to indicate how
"up to which you failed to measure" is grammatically incorrect.

The bottom line is that you are making yet another erroneous assumption,
namely, that I believe "up to which you failed to measure" to be the
*only* correct  way to avoid ending the phrase in a preposition. No.
Like I said, I have already indicated at least one other correct
phrasing, and I realize that there may be others.  However, there is
nothing wrong with my original phrasing; it only so happens that you
don't *like* it because it begins with the word "up."

That's your problem, Dave.

And again, you have yet to address your hypocrisy to which I was
referring.  Yes, I failed to take into consideration that your copy of
JAVAINUF.EXE may be corrupt.

***BUT SO DID YOU, DAVE!!!!***  You posted "evidence" based on this
broken copy of yours, and you didn't even realize it was broken. Yet you
expected *me* to realize it was broken.

And you have yet to admit to this error, of which you are accusing me.

That, Dave, is blatant hypocrisy at its finest.

> > We've seen the fruits of your "logic," Dave:
>
> My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
> file, Curtis.

No, Dave.  It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract
anything by running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.
On the contrary, you would have gotten error messages similar to the
ones you got from InfoZip.

You have just posted more misinformation. You have just made another
error.

Remember, your statement is, "Yet to look at the contents, one must have
run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Since your copy
would not have extracted the archive when run, even on an OS/2 system,
the statement is still incorrect.

Now, if you tell us that you *DID* run your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE
in OS/2 and extracted classes.zip successfully, then that would prove
wrong another statement you made, namely, that all unzip tools should
behave the same *ON YOUR COPY.*

Including the self-extraction module contained in JAVAINUF.EXE.

Which would be another error on your part.

So, which is it, Dave?

I fully expect you to deny both errors, which, of course, would be a
self-contradicting paradox.

So much for Tholen Logic.

> > When confronted with this absolute error on your part,
>
> On what basis do you call it an "absolute error", Curtis?  The
> statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe file.

You have just repeated your error.

> > you have *invariably* responded with the steps of "logic" that
> > caused you to arrive at that blatant error,
>
> On what basis do you call it a "blatant error", Curtis?  The statement
> is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe file.

You have repeated it a second time.

> > and have never admitted to the error.
>
> The statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
> file, Curtis.

And a third. You have posted the same incorrect statement four times in
one post.

-- snip --

> > Nitpicking over grammar, without being explicit as to what my
> > alleged "error" is, indicates yet another defeat for Tholen, which
> > he will inevitably deny/question.
>
> I was already explicit, Curtis.  I clearly asked what a "standard up"
> is.  A claim of my defeat indicates yet another example of
> pontification for Bass, which he will inevitably ignore.
>
> > Which simply indicated your own reading comprehension, ironically
> > enough
>
> What is ironic about by reading comprehension, Curtis?

It is ironic that your reading comprehension is weak, yet you accuse
others of have "reading comprehension problems," which is further
illustration of your hypocrisy.

> > . . .
> >
> > Oh, and a question is a far cry from a direct statement, lad.
>
> It was quite explicit about what I found questionable, Curtis.

But you were not explicit about what is allegedly wrong with my grammar.
What you find "questionable" is irrelevant; anything that you don't
*like* or anything with which you do not *agree* is something that you
can easily find "questionable."

Big deal.  That you don't *like* what I say or the way I say it is
self-evident.  Unless you can find actual fault with what I say, or how
I say it, you have no argument.

> > There is nothing to explain.
>
> Yes there is, Curtis.  You claimed to have made a sincere statement
> about it being your last posting in this sub-thread, yet here you are
> again.

Dave fails to understand Time.  At the Time I made my statment that I
would make no further postings, I was sincere.  At that Time, I had no
intention of continuing.

That I changed my mind at a later Time does not invalidate my original
sincerity, Dave's inevitable claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

> > Anyone who understands what hypocrisy and sincerity are would
> > realize that there is nothing to explain.
>
> Illogical, given that someone who does understand what sincerity is
> would realize that you weren't sincere.

On what basis do you make that claim, Dave?

> > That you do not realize this indicates your own lack of
> > understanding.
>
> Why should I realize something illogical, Curtis?  I do realize that
> your statement is illogical.

That you consider it "illogical" is further illustration of your own
ignorance and lack of comprehension.

That you educate young adults is downright scary.

> > You seem to think that being a university professor somehow makes
> > you infallible.
>
> What seems to you is irrelevant, Curtis, and quite illogical, given
> that I have admitted to being fallible.

Not during an adversarial exchange, you haven't.

> > That you never, ever admit to an error during an adversarial
> > exchange supports such a belief.
>
> What do you consider an "adversarial exchange", Curtis?

As exchange between adversaries, as opposed to an exchange between
friends or buddies.

Did I really have to spell that out for you, a university professor?

> That you have never, ever identified one of these allegedly unadmitted
> errors in an adversarial exchange supports the belief that you're
> simply pontificating again.

I have identified this one several times now:

"Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Dave Tholen -- 10/29/1999

You will now procede to ignore it again, or perhaps claim again
(erroneously) that it's "correct when applied to [your] copy of the
javainuf.exe file," or again go through the "logical" steps you took to
arrive at this error.

If you choose to ignore it, you will procede to snip it based on your
lame justification you always use (the one that will be at the top of
your reply).


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bbarclay@ca.ibm.com                               07-Dec-99 13:36:00
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Brad BARCLAY <bbarclay@ca.ibm.com>

Marty wrote:
> That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise,
it
> blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface is
> less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is
far
> superior on the Playstation II.

	You're going to have to modify your grid.  See:


http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/computing/12/06/annihilator.review/index.html

	This new PC video card uses the new NVIDA GeForce 256 graphics chipset,
and does 15 million polygons per second at high resolution.  Sure, the
PlayStation II - a system wihch doesn't even exist on the market yet -
has a higher pps rating, but overall the video quality is still quite a
bit lower - as I mentioned, NTSC only has ~30% the resolution of a
standard PC monitor.

	Like I said, I'm not putting the game systems down.  They're being
hampered by the low quality of the TV's standard resolution.  But no
matter how many polygons you're doing per second in your rendering
engine, it's still not going to look as good.  I could claim that my CGA
card can do 100 million polygons per second in CGA medium res mode, but
do you really want to play games in 4 colours at a resolution of
300*160?

	Besides which, let's do some more math:

	Resolution * FrameRate = number of pixels per second

	(576*430)  * 30	       = 7 430 400

	So, even if you have a game which is configured to have one polygon per
pixel, you're still nowhere near your rendering capacity - and still
lower than what your standard SVGA 3D accelerator can pump out.  In
order to even come close to the 53 million pps figure you're quoting,
you'd have to have at least 7 polygon intersections inside each and
every pixel on your TV screen for every frame for every second in order
to use that capacity.  That sort of video use might be interesting for a
benchmark, but it's entirely unpractical for gameplay (as the result
will be a constant, solid-coloured screen :).

	Thus, your weighting of the actual pps rating is skewing your results
to what you want to prove, and doesn't reflect reality.  Besides wihch,
to re-inerate the above, rendering lots of polygons in a set period of
time is meaningless if your video quality is pathetic.  And NTSC is of
fairly low quality in comparison to today's PC's (and remember, I own
what is considered to be the best NTSC TV set available - the Sony
Trinitron Wega :).

	The *only* advantage that consoles have over the PC are price.  That's
it (I include the fact that it's cheaper to buy a big TV than it is to
buy a big monitor to be part of "price").

	If you like consoles, no problem.  They serve a purpose, and are
certainly better within the financial reach to your typical gamer.  But
they are certainly in no way superiour in terms of actual gaming
experience.  For that, you (currently) need a PC.

Brad BARCLAY

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v4.5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail:  bbarclay@ca.ibm.com		Location:  2G43D@Torolabs

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Toronto Labs, DB2 for OS/2 Install Developer (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   07-Dec-99 19:15:07
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451520

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

The formidable tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

>Such as?

What have you been up to all these months?

>What alleged "agony of life without you"?

No use denying it, Dave.

>Do you regard me as "off", Pascal?

If by off you mean, in absense from or suspension of regular work or
service, yes.

>Why?

Well, you're posting to Usenet, aren't you?

>Do you regard me as "off", Pascal?

How is your day job coming along anyway?

>Then why don't you just ignore me?

I knew it would be impossible to ignore you the first time I saw you.

>Why?

Your brilliance is just too attractive.

>By ignoring me?

A great mind, once exposed, cannot be ignored, Dave.

>Who else knows about Talos IV?

Is there anything you don't know about?

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 14:21:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Brad BARCLAY wrote:
> 
> Marty wrote:
> > That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise, 
it
> > blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface
is
> > less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is 
far
> > superior on the Playstation II.
> 
>         You're going to have to modify your grid.  See:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/computing/12/06/annihilator.review/index.html
> 
>         This new PC video card uses the new NVIDA GeForce 256 graphics
chipset,
> and does 15 million polygons per second at high resolution.  Sure, the
> PlayStation II - a system wihch doesn't even exist on the market yet -

I believe it is available in Japan or is very nearly so.

> has a higher pps rating, but overall the video quality is still quite a
> bit lower - as I mentioned, NTSC only has ~30% the resolution of a
> standard PC monitor.

No arguments there.

>         Like I said, I'm not putting the game systems down.  They're being
> hampered by the low quality of the TV's standard resolution.  But no
> matter how many polygons you're doing per second in your rendering
> engine, it's still not going to look as good.  I could claim that my CGA
> card can do 100 million polygons per second in CGA medium res mode, but
> do you really want to play games in 4 colours at a resolution of
> 300*160?
> 
>         Besides which, let's do some more math:
> 
>         Resolution * FrameRate = number of pixels per second
> 
>         (576*430)  * 30        = 7 430 400

The Playstation will be rendering 60 frames per second, although the TV
will only be displaying at 30, so the actual figure should be doubled.
 
>         So, even if you have a game which is configured to have one polygon
per
> pixel, you're still nowhere near your rendering capacity - and still
> lower than what your standard SVGA 3D accelerator can pump out.  In
> order to even come close to the 53 million pps figure you're quoting,
> you'd have to have at least 7 polygon intersections inside each and
> every pixel on your TV screen for every frame for every second in order
> to use that capacity.  That sort of video use might be interesting for a
> benchmark, but it's entirely unpractical for gameplay (as the result
> will be a constant, solid-coloured screen :).

The figures I quoted for both the PC and the Playstation are of
benchmark significance only.  Note how I originally noted that they were
with no lighting or fog effects.  This type of rendering is rarely, if
ever done in a game.  The numbers, however, extrapolate downward to more
reasonable levels when effects are added.  The Playstation 2 goes to 22
million p/s with lighting and fog.  It goes down to 13 million p/s
(IIRC) with bezier curves with lighting and fog.  Note how this lowest
figure still blows the doors off of the "no effects" Voodoo 3.  Your new
figure of 15 million p/s does not specify what kinds of effects are
enabled so we can't really compare apples and apples there.

>         Thus, your weighting of the actual pps rating is skewing your
results
> to what you want to prove, and doesn't reflect reality.  Besides wihch,
> to re-iterate the above, rendering lots of polygons in a set period of
> time is meaningless if your video quality is pathetic.  And NTSC is of
> fairly low quality in comparison to today's PC's (and remember, I own
> what is considered to be the best NTSC TV set available - the Sony
> Trinitron Wega :).
> 
>         The *only* advantage that consoles have over the PC are price. 
That's
> it (I include the fact that it's cheaper to buy a big TV than it is to
> buy a big monitor to be part of "price").
> 
>         If you like consoles, no problem.  They serve a purpose, and are
> certainly better within the financial reach to your typical gamer.  But
> they are certainly in no way superiour in terms of actual gaming
> experience.  For that, you (currently) need a PC.

In addition, not all of the Playstation 2's "horsepower" is devoted to
polygon rendering.  A goodly portion of it contributes to what Sony
calls the "emotion engine".  From what I have heard, this is some
specialized circuitry (which also borrows some real estate from the
polygon renderer) designed to solve differential equations and other
such specialized math to accurately simulate physics.  You just can't
get this kind of specialized acceleration for PCs.

- Marty

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: l_luciano@da.mob                                  07-Dec-99 20:11:27
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: l_luciano@da.mob (Stan Goodman)

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:15:56, "Erik" <Erik@elsewhere.ca> wrote:

> 
> Stan Goodman wrote:
> > ------------snip-----------


> > > >>If there is any kind of penalty imposed on Microsoft perhaps they
> could
> > > >>diversify to BC; where we are also tired of this bogus government
> > > >>intervention against success.  (After our present 'gov't' is gone, of
> > > >>course).
> 
> 
> > You mean you think that a company can sit in Canada and run a business in
> > restraint of trade in the US?
> 
> 1: You need to learn how those little >>> attribution thingies work.  I
> wrote the above; not 'The Doctor', or 'Barry Adams'.

Sorry. I knew who wrote it; you were the only one with a Canadian email 
address.
 
> 2: You need to recognize that Canada is not yet conjoined with the US.

No, that is clear to me: Canada can permit any sort of commercial abuse it 
wants to within its territory. What is less clear is how Microsoft, having 
fled to Canada to avoid US antitrust action, would survive with the US 
market denied to it. Any company doing business in the US is subject to US 
law. Maybe you need to understand that a company doing business outside its
home country is subject to the laws of the place in which it is doing 
business.

> 3: You might mail-order a dictionary and look up 'sarcasm'.

?
 
-------------
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel

Spammers are getting smarter; email sent to l_luciano@da.mob will not reach
me. Sorry.
Send E-mail to: domain: hashkedim dot com, username: stan.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Verio (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             08-Dec-99 09:20:19
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384d2887$9$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82i3on$d2s$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/07/99 at 05:50 PM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
> > No, that's the period we live in.  CD's are very popular - you may have
> > seen them.   Boob seems to be somewhere in the late eighties.
>
> It may come as a shock to you, but CD's in workstations were not common
> until about 4 years or so ago. It may also come as a shock to you that
> companies in business to make money don't buy new machines every year or
> two. It may come as a shock to you that managers of companies don't want
> their employees playing games on company machines. It may come a shock to
> you that some companies require that floppy drives be disconnected on
> workstations to avoid unauthorized or pirated software being installed by
> employees. It may come as a shock to you that some companies won't permit
> CD Rom drives in workstations for the same reason.
>
It may come as a shock to you that you can connect to a network CD-ROM.  You
only need one...


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             08-Dec-99 09:21:11
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384d2673$8$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82ielt$m7n$1@news1.mpx.com.au>, on 12/07/99 at 06:02 PM,
>    "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> said:
>
>
> > There was a new invention in the mid-80s commonly referred to as the
> > <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> - you may have heard of it.  Those of us "in the
> > know" provide a <DrEvil>CD-ROM</DrEvil> to clients who want to install
> > it.
>
> Oh, and how do workstations without CD drives manage to use a CD ROM disk?
> For your information, in the real world where machines are used to make
> money, many do not have such items.
>
In the real world where machines are used to make money, I have yet to see
an organisation that doesn't have at least one CD-ROM somewhere on the
network.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            07-Dec-99 11:58:16
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Brad BARCLAY wrote:

> Marty wrote:
> > That comes out to 2.08 : 1 in favor of the Playstation.  Performance-wise, 
it
> > blows the doors off of a PC with a Voodoo 3.  Perhaps the display surface
is
> > less than optimal, but there's no denying that the rendering technology is 
far
> > superior on the Playstation II.
> 
> 	You're going to have to modify your grid.  See:
> 
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/computing/12/06/annihilator.review/index.html
> 
> 	This new PC video card uses the new NVIDA GeForce 256 graphics chipset,
> and does 15 million polygons per second at high resolution.  Sure, the
> PlayStation II - a system wihch doesn't even exist on the market yet -
> has a higher pps rating, but overall the video quality is still quite a
> bit lower - as I mentioned, NTSC only has ~30% the resolution of a
> standard PC monitor.

With all due respect.  Gaming's future is NOT a polygon war.
Sony split with th eindustry and developed the Emotion Engine.  The goal
is to do more than simply render polygons.

http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980713S0005


                Sony Computer Entertainment and start-up
                VM Labs independently said the graphics
                technologies used in their next-generation
                video game platforms will go far beyond
                the polygon-based 3-D graphics
                technologies pursued by the PC industry
                today. 

                Sony's Kutaragi said a Sony Computer
                Entertainment engineering team based in
                Tokyo is working on a whole new
                generation of real-time image-rendering
                technologies, from silicon to platform
                algorithms to software titles, for the next
                PlayStation. "Today's video game
                computer graphics look like computer
                graphics," he said. "Our goal is a film-like
                graphics quality that won't make viewers
                conscious of or annoyed [by the fact] that
                they are indeed looking at computer
                graphics." 


> 	Like I said, I'm not putting the game systems down.  They're being
> hampered by the low quality of the TV's standard resolution.  

"Hampered" needs to be put into a context.  


> 	Besides which, let's do some more math:
> 
> 	Resolution * FrameRate = number of pixels per second
> 
> 	(576*430)  * 30	       = 7 430 400
> 
> 	So, even if you have a game which is configured to have one polygon per
> pixel, you're still nowhere near your rendering capacity - and still
> lower than what your standard SVGA 3D accelerator can pump out.  In
> order to even come close to the 53 million pps figure you're quoting,
> you'd have to have at least 7 polygon intersections inside each and
> every pixel on your TV screen for every frame for every second in order
> to use that capacity.  That sort of video use might be interesting for a
> benchmark, but it's entirely unpractical for gameplay (as the result
> will be a constant, solid-coloured screen :).

> 	The *only* advantage that consoles have over the PC are price.

Which PC?  A N64 beats the pants off of my 166 MHZ Pentium PC that runs
OS/2. It also beats my 200 mhx Pentium Pro PC.  The N64 is older
technology.  The PSX & N64 software makes better use of the hardware and
it runs all the software made for the PSX and N64.

Reliability. Simplicity/Ease of use.  The worlds most expensive PC cannot
match a console. Price is an area and the price of a Dreamcsst to PC is
1:10. 

Relevance? It seems to me that the console makers understand the field and
therefore are adding more relevant technology.  Specs are interesting but
don't even account for 50% of what's seen by the user. 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             07-Dec-99 19:42:00
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <384275ec$7$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,
  Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> On <cbb34ss69t988f43812q4bkc1nlrpet5eo@4ax.com>, on 11/28/99 at 10:52
PM,
>    David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk> said:

-- SNIP --

> >  First Bob, what kind of anal retentive would go to so much trouble
> >  with his .sig?   Or maybe you didn't, which leads to:
>
> Trouble? I merely take a floppy with my setup for Ice with me when I
> go to visit relatives.

Are you saying that all of your relatives use OS/2?  None of them are
the least bit interested in being able to run software they can buy at
their local Wal-Mart or Best Buy or Circuit City?

> For Windows users, that would be a very difficult task.
> For OS/2 users it is not.

Since Ice runs on OS/2 and not on Windows, I guess we would have to
agree . . .

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             07-Dec-99 20:44:15
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <384ba6b4$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,
  Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

-- snip --

> And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have
> to stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34
> modems at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day.
> That was good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.

"Approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales?" Are you serious?

Let's see, a new (i.e., non upgrade) Warp 4.0 client costs what, a
hundred and fifty bucks, mail order?  Multiply by 21 and we have, whoa!
US $3,150!!!

And you *LET* your clients do this????!!!?

You know, there are other ways to obtain software such as IE5. Hell, you
could have ordered it directly from MS for a nominal fee, substantially
less that the cost of "approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales" at any
rate.

Or you could have downloaded it yourself, at home, using a 56K modem and
a  flat-rate ISP.

Since IE5 is free, you could have deployed the one copy across the
client's entire enterprise.

And why did they feel compelled to upgrade, anyway?  Office 2000 comes
with IE5, so the upgrade would be automatic.  Current versions of the
freebie Y2K Resource CD also contain IE5.

Any consultant worth his salt should be aware of these things.

-- snip --


Curtis



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: pvollan@norcov.com                                07-Dec-99 13:03:15
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Help! Netscape, soundcard

From: pvollan@norcov.com

If you guys are OS/2 advocates, perhaps you can help me before I toss it
all and install FreeBSD.

The number one problem I'm having now it that the current Netscape,
4.61, won't work. I've tried both the export and the not for export
versions. I've noticed these messages about a possible "error leak" so
maybe you folks can help me here. Whenever I run any of the parts of
Communicator 4.61 (Communicator, Composer, Messenger, Navigator), I get
a SYS3171 "Due to insufficient stack space, the exception was not
dispatched."  (I use 2.02 and it works fine, except for the occaisional
Javascript error.) 

11-30-1999  21:21:57  SYS3171  PID 0037  TID 0001  Slot 0069
C:\NETSCAPE\PROGRAM\NETSCAPE.EXE
c000009f
1f903ad0
EAX=00005756  EBX=00000094  ECX=00000008  EDX=00000008
ESI=1f902f1c  EDI=15417d71  
DS=0053  DSACC=d0f3  DSLIM=1fffffff  
ES=0053  ESACC=d0f3  ESLIM=1fffffff  
FS=150b  FSACC=00f2  FSLIM=00000030
GS=0000  GSACC=****  GSLIM=********
CS:EIP=005a:1f903ad0  CSACC=d0df  CSLIM=1fffffff
SS:ESP=004a:007feb98  SSACC=d0d3  SSLIM=1fffffff
EBP=007fecac  FLG=00002283

IBMDEV32.DLL 0006:00003ad0

I also can't figure out why my sound card won't work. It's a Pro Audio
Spectrum 16. It looks to all the world like it's installed, and I've
certainly looked at the Hardware Manager and run rmview and su from a
command prompt, in fact the PAS 16 works in Windows, well most of the
time it does, it's just from in OS/2 that it doesn't work. Maybe it's
because of the oddball model number on my card: 650-0044-56B? This ought
to be real easy since support for the PAS16 is included in the
installation manager.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             08-Dec-99 09:19:24
  To: All                                               07-Dec-99 22:22:16
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384d2a1b$10$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82gvpt$abd$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/07/99 at 07:36 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
> > We got our clients CD's.  We live in the late 90's.
>
<Snip Boobs explaination of why he can't use a CD over the network, feeble
as it is>

I hate to think that even after all that, you can't map to a network CD.
Surely a man of your vast experience can do this?

>
> One firm we recently acquired as a client was running Windows 95 on
> machines without CD-ROM drives. We attempted to use the quarterly update
> to update those machines. It failed because upon the required reboots, the
> CD Rom disk was not available until after the logon which could not come
> up because Windoze couldn't find the CD-ROM drive.
>
Which update required the CD-ROM after reboot?  I can't actually think of
any for Win9x that do - IE included.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   08-Dec-99 02:13:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:25
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

tholenbot wrote:

>> >> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
>> >> >
>> >> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
>> >> 
>> >> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?
>> >
>> >Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?
>> 
>> Comprehend context, Eric.
>
>Illogical.

Why?

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   08-Dec-99 02:14:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:25
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451520

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

tholenbot wrote:

>> The formidable tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
>
>What is "formidable" about it, Pascal?

Don't you know, Eric?

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  08-Dec-99 12:32:16
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:25
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

<cbass2112@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:82jrje$r8p$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <384ba6b4$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,

[chomp]

> Any consultant worth his salt should be aware of these things.

I believe you may have identified the problem.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOE02ntIiOnIFzdsOEQKVogCfVrbi4M3PgZYm/gLhSpiQrSJsXHoAoJ7b
+YjP/Sa20XPI4aWhOT+oO8WG
=H6Oh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         08-Dec-99 01:07:14
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Dave repeats this insipid response six times (!),

What's allegedly "insipid" about it, Curtis?  I'm simply using the
same response that Marty used on me some time ago.  What do you think
the sentence that follows it means?  Still having reading comprehension
problems?  "Inept."

> indicating that he has no real argument.

On the contrary, it means that Marty has no real argument, given that
he used that line as a response to me, and given that he's been
playing his "infantile game".

> Where is the logic?

Marty doesn't have any, Curtis.  He's simply playing his "infantile
game".

> It's like the exchange between Tholen and Lucien, which has degenerated
> into what appears to be an endless loop of:
>
> Loop
>
>    Lucien:  Dave refuses to answer the question again.
>
>    Tholen:  Where is this alleged refusal, Lucien?
>
> Until (Hell_Freezes_Over)

It's not like that at all, Curtis.  Lucien hasn't resorted to Eliza
responses.  He's resorted to deletion, ignoring the two simple tests
that prove he's wrong.

> Of course, I expect Lucien to end this nonsense,

Because he has no logical response to my two simple tests that show
why he is wrong.

> after illustrating to everyone just how far Tholen will go to be
> contrary,

I'm not simply being "contrary", Curtis.  I'm countering Lucien's
misinformation.

> because Lucien has far more sense than Dave,

Yet another example of your pontification.  If he has far more sense
than I do, why hasn't he taken my two simple tests?  Indeed, why don't
you take those two simple tests yourself and see if you can support
your argument logically, Curtis?  Naturally, I don't expect you to
do so.

> who, in all likelyhood, would never end the exchange because Dave
> just has to have the last word.

The last word is irrelevant, Curtis.  To prove that you are wrong,
witness all the postings by Glatt, Sutherland, and Malloy to which I
have not responded.  Your inability to comprehend that evidence is,
to use your own description, "inept".

> Lucien knows this, I presume,

"My, aren't you the presumptuous one!"

> and is simply playing Dave like a puppet on strings.

What you think Lucien is doing is irrelevant, Curtis.  In reality,
Lucien is making himself look like a fool by continuing to take a
position that I've easily disproven with my two simple tests.

> I believe Lucien will feel his point is made after the
> quote chevrons themselves start wrapping.

What you believe is also irrelevant, Curtis.

> (Sorry if I tipped your hand, Lucien!)

You're presupposing that you know Lucien's "hand", Curtis.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:35:08
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Boob Germer
>It may also come as a shock to you that
>companies in business to make money don't buy new machines every year or
>two.

It may also come as a shock to you to hear Boob Germer claim that he
is constantly installing thousands of new OS/2 based computers in his
"clients'" businesses every year... until you encounter all of the
inconsistencies and implausibilities in his "anecdotes" and realize
that they're all contrived nonsense mutated from things that he has
read about in PC Magazine

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 00:41:26
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

Ooops!
Better make that three!


On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:26:54, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >Resorting to your usual trick of forging posts again, I see?
> 
> Resorting to your usual vaudeville routine of making unproven claims,
> I see?
> 
> This reminds me of the time when you ineptly "lost" the digest that I
> emailed to you, without even having really read it, and then made some
> unproven claims that the quotes within were somehow "doctored" despite
> being fully attributed quotes, complete with Dejanews headers.
> 
> Same old contrived lies from Karel.
> 
> >And I wasn't even *trying* to argue with you...
> 
> That's because your efforts are truly lame, much like this reply of
> yours to my post.
> 
> >"Two points to me", as they say in another, and happier newsgroup.
> 
> I'm sure that you truly see this as a victory in your own naive mind
> -- the same mind that thinks that Tholen is a swell guy and Bob Germer
> "makes quite a bit of sense". But, you don't seem to be fooling all of
> that many people. Of course, you no doubt continue to believe that
> those other people who are calling you on your dubious "character
> assessments" have somehow been hypnotized with evil mind control by
> me.
> 
> >> >Karel Jansens
> >> >Jeff Glatt is ... paranoiac.
> >> 
> >> That's a laugh coming from someone who has the same paranoid response
> >> every time someone says "You know, what you just said about
> >> Tholen/Germer/whatever-OS/2-fanatic is either remarkably clueless, or
> >> you're awfully eager to excuse all of this other stuff about him, but
> >> not about other non-OS/2 users, for no apparent reason other than
> >> operating system bias" -- You always imply that the person believes
> >> this only because I have somehow hypnotized that person using evil
> >> mind rays over the internet.
> >> 
> >> I suspect that Karel spends a great deal of time hiding under his bed
> >> with a copper pot over his head to prevent me from directing my evil
> >> mind rays at him
> >
> >Karel Jansens
> >jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
> >=======================================================
> >"The method employed I would gladly explain,
> >While I have it so clear in my head,
> >If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
> >But much yet remains to be said."
> >
> >the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
> >=======================================================
> 

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 01:13:02
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: I really need your help (Boy! has this title turned out to be proph

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

<sigh>
One more time then.

You are right in saying that there is a lot of things I don't know. 
I'm aware of that. If it weren't so, I would be God, and you'd long 
since have been staring (albeit very, very briefly) at the wrong end 
of a lightning bolt.

But opinions are *not* facts; one is allowed to have them, even 
without knowledge of the facts. People can adjust them when the facts 
change, or not. There really isn't much you can do about it, Jeff.

As for opinions of people: like I explained before, I prefer to base 
mine on personal experience. You have a problem with that. Fine. Eat 
it. There is nothing you can do about it.

I really, really don't understand this: I have an opinion of a person 
that differs from yours and you're going completely berzerk over this.
Why? "Is it because of your sexlife that you are going through this?"


On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:49:46, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >That's why I put a *question mark* at the end of the sentence, Jeff. 
> >It means I am asking a q-u-e-s-t-i-o-n. Because there is something I 
> >do not k-n-o-w.
> 
> There are a LOT of things that you don't seem to know in this
> newsgroup. It's unfortunate that this doesn't stop you from spewing
> your nonsense, such as your uninformed "opinions" about which
> operating systems are and aren't GUI based, given your obviously
> incomplete knowledge of the development of those operating systems
> you're discussing.
> 
> Anyway, you don't need to tell me that you don't know things. Remember
> -- I'm the guy who has been pointing out that you're clueless about a
> lot of things in this newsgroup.
> 
> >the lunacy is not in not knowing something, rather than in 
> >not trying to find the answer.
> 
> You don't seem very interested in answering others' legitimate points
> about your illogical, brand-name-inspired "criteria" for gauging who
> does and doesn't "make quite a bit of sense" and is a swell guy. You
> don't seem to want to "find" the answer as to why so many others think
> that your comments about Germer and Tholen are clueless, and instead
> have taken to suggesting that those others were somehow hypnotized
> with evil thought control by me via the internet

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:49:23
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>That's why I put a *question mark* at the end of the sentence, Jeff. 
>It means I am asking a q-u-e-s-t-i-o-n. Because there is something I 
>do not k-n-o-w.

There are a LOT of things that you don't seem to know in this
newsgroup. It's unfortunate that this doesn't stop you from spewing
your nonsense, such as your uninformed "opinions" about which
operating systems are and aren't GUI based, given your obviously
incomplete knowledge of the development of those operating systems
you're discussing.

Anyway, you don't need to tell me that you don't know things. Remember
-- I'm the guy who has been pointing out that you're clueless about a
lot of things in this newsgroup.

>the lunacy is not in not knowing something, rather than in 
>not trying to find the answer.

You don't seem very interested in answering others' legitimate points
about your illogical, brand-name-inspired "criteria" for gauging who
does and doesn't "make quite a bit of sense" and is a swell guy. You
don't seem to want to "find" the answer as to why so many others think
that your comments about Germer and Tholen are clueless, and instead
have taken to suggesting that those others were somehow hypnotized
with evil thought control by me via the internet

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         08-Dec-99 00:48:22
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question - looks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lik we've hit another major soft
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 00:56:26
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>cbass2112@my-deja.com
>Of course, I expect Lucien to end this nonsense, after illustrating to
>everyone just how far Tholen will go to be contrary, because Lucien has
>far more sense than Dave, who, in all likelyhood, would never end the
>exchange because Dave just has to have the last word.

>Lucien knows this, I presume, and is simply playing Dave like a puppet
>on strings.

That's how it usually goes. Tholen is exactly like a horrible traffic
accident. He's so utterly grotesque that people just feel compelled to
slow down and divert attention toward him in utter disgust. Then,
after they've seen that he's just a meaningless, lifeless horror, they
speed away

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 20:53:06
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <82kb0h$obl$2@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

It is not relevant what you are deleting, Dave.

> Still having reading comprehension
> problems?  "Inept."

Ask your grasshopper.

> Marty doesn't have any, Curtis.

What doesn't Marty have?

> It's not like that at all, Curtis.  Lucien hasn't resorted to Eliza
> responses.  He's resorted to deletion, ignoring the two simple tests
> that prove he's wrong.

How ironic, given that you admitted above that you yourself use 
"deletion".

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 20:56:07
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84qn63.n2.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:

> The formidable tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:


What is "formidable" about it, Pascal?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         08-Dec-99 01:59:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> There is no inconsistency, Dave.

That you would pontificate as such is to be expected, Curtis.

> That you will insist otherwise is to be expected.

How ironic.

> On the contrary, you simply hide behind this semantics argument rather
> than admit what you implied.

I've already admitted that I didn't imply what you claimed I implied,
Curtis.

> Typical Tholen denial.

More like an typical indication of the truth by me, and your dislike
for it.

> Wrong. It was not my "stated reason for not writing it that way" at
> all.

Balderdash, Curtis:

CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

You wrote that on November 24.

> It was my stated reason for using "up" at the begining of a phrase,
> which is not the same as "not writing it that way."

I suggest you comprehend what you previously wrote, Curtis.

> If you really value logic, you would understand this.

How ironic, coming from someone who doesn't understand the value of
history, which shows the excuse:

CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

> You asked me what "up" was doing at the beginning of the phrase "up to
> which you failed to measure."

Reading comprehension makes cameo appearance.

> My answer was that it was allowing me to not end the phrase in a
> preposition.

And suddenly you've confirmed what I said, yet above you called it
"Wrong".

> *I* realized that there was at least one other correct way to do this.

One other?  Are you claiming that your chosen way is correct, Curtis?

> I even said, "I suppose I could have used 'to which you failed to
> measure up'" immediately after you asked what "up" was doing at the
> beginning of the phrase.

But you didn't choose that because:

CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

> Nevertheless, my original grammar is quite correct.

What's a "standard up", Curtis?

> The only problem is that you don't *like* it for some reason.

It's poorly written, Curtis.  "Inept."

> You have yet to indicate how "up to which you failed to measure" is
> grammatically incorrect.

Irrelevant, given that I wasn't commenting on that phrase, Curtis.  I
was commenting on your entire sentence.

> The bottom line is that you are making yet another erroneous assumption,
> namely, that I believe "up to which you failed to measure" to be the
> *only* correct  way to avoid ending the phrase in a preposition.

Where did I allegedly make that assumption, Curtis?

> No.

You're erroneously presupposing that I made that assumption, Curtis.
"Inept."

> Like I said, I have already indicated at least one other correct
> phrasing,

One other?  Are you claiming that your chosen way is correct, Curtis?

> and I realize that there may be others.

The others are irrelevant, Curtis.  The one you used is relevant.

> However, there is nothing wrong with my original phrasing;

What's a "standard up", Curtis?

> it only so happens that you don't *like* it because it begins with
> the word "up."

On the contrary, Curtis, it begins with the word "Holding".  The fact
that you don't realize that demonstrates that you are "inept".

> That's your problem, Dave.

How ironic, coming from the person who doesn't even remember the actual
sentence.

> And again, you have yet to address your hypocrisy to which I was
> referring.

What alleged hypocrisy, Curtis?

> Yes, I failed to take into consideration that your copy of
> JAVAINUF.EXE may be corrupt.

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
word "corrupt".  "Inept."

> ***BUT SO DID YOU, DAVE!!!!***  You posted "evidence" based on this
> broken copy of yours, and you didn't even realize it was broken.

There was no prior evidence of it being incomplete, Curtis.

> Yet you expected *me* to realize it was broken.

I certainly realized the possibility after evaluating the evidence.
Meanwhile, you jumped to an erroneous conclusion and didn't even
consider other possibilities.  "Inept."

> And you have yet to admit to this error,

What alleged error, Curtis?

> of which you are accusing me.

You certainly never indicated that you considered the possibility,
Curtis.

> That, Dave, is blatant hypocrisy at its finest.

You're erroneously presupposing that everything you wrote above is
true.  How ironic, coming from someone so hypocritical as to continue
posting in a sub-thread, even after claiming that a post made weeks
ago would be your last in this sub-thread.

> No, Dave.

Balderdash, Curtis.

> It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract anything by
> running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.

Doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2, Curtis.

> On the contrary, you would have gotten error messages similar to the
> ones you got from InfoZip.

Incorrect, Curtis.  The messages were not at all similar.

> You have just posted more misinformation.

Balderdash, Curtis.  You're the one posting the misinformation, by
claiming that the error messages would be similar.  How ironic.

> You have just made another error.

Incorrect, Curtis; you're the one who made another error, by claiming
that the error messages would be similar.  How ironic.

> Remember, your statement is, "Yet to look at the contents, one must have
> run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"

Remember, my copy of the javainuf.exe file was different, Curtis.

> Since your copy would not have extracted the archive when run, even
> on an OS/2 system, the statement is still incorrect.

My copy of the file does run on an OS/2 system, Curtis.

> Now, if you tell us that you *DID* run your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE
> in OS/2 and extracted classes.zip successfully, then that would prove
> wrong another statement you made, namely, that all unzip tools should
> behave the same *ON YOUR COPY.*

Irrelevant, given that I did not tell you that the extraction was
successful, Curtis.

> Including the self-extraction module contained in JAVAINUF.EXE.

Still irrelevant, Curtis, for the same reason.

> Which would be another error on your part.

Still irrelevant, Curtis, for the same reason.

> So, which is it, Dave?

You're erroneously presupposing that your choices are correct choices,
Curtis.

> I fully expect you to deny both errors, which, of course, would be a
> self-contradicting paradox.

What alleged "both errors", Curtis?

> So much for Tholen Logic.

How ironic, coming from the person whose logic didn't even come up
with the possibility that the files were different.

> You have just repeated your error.

What alleged error, Curtis?

> You have repeated it a second time.

What alleged error, Curtis?

> And a third. You have posted the same incorrect statement four times in
> one post.

What alleged error, Curtis?

> It is ironic that your reading comprehension is weak,

Yet another example of your pontification.

> yet you accuse others of have "reading comprehension problems,"

When justified, Curtis.

> which is further illustration of your hypocrisy.

You're presupposing that you have identified a problem with my
reading comprehension, Curtis.

> But you were not explicit about what is allegedly wrong with my grammar.

Incorrect, Curtis.  I asked you what a "standard up" is?

> What you find "questionable" is irrelevant;

On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

> anything that you don't *like* or anything with which you do not
> *agree* is something that you can easily find "questionable."

Does that some somehow justify calling it "irrelevant", erroneously?
"Inept."

> Big deal.  That you don't *like* what I say or the way I say it is
> self-evident.

Where did I say I didn't like it, Curtis?

> Unless you can find actual fault with what I say, or how
> I say it, you have no argument.

I have found fault with what you wrote, Curtis.  What is a
"standard up"?  I do have an argument, yet you keep ignoring it
by referring to a phrase that excludes the word "standard".  I
keep talking about your sentence, but you like to avoid that by
focusing attention on a phrase.

> Dave fails to understand Time.

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  I understand that
now follows before, chronologically.  You apparently think that all
your responses in this sub-thread predate your claim that a particular
post would be your last in this sub-thread.

> At the Time I made my statment that I would make no further postings,
> I was sincere.

You have a peculiar definition of "sincere", Curtis.  Witness your
continued postings in this sub-thread.

> At that Time, I had no intention of continuing.

Yet you have, numerous times.  So much for your alleged sincerity.

> That I changed my mind at a later Time does not invalidate my original
> sincerity,

Yes it does, Curtis.

> Dave's inevitable claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

How ironic, coming from someone who is making "inevitable claims" to the
contrary.

> On what basis do you make that claim, Dave?

On the basis that you're doing something that you claimed you wouldn't
do, Curtis.

> That you consider it "illogical" is further illustration of your own
> ignorance and lack of comprehension.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> That you educate young adults is downright scary.

Typical invective.  I happen to have above average evaluations in one of
the top programs in the country.  Do you think you can do better, Curtis?

> Not during an adversarial exchange, you haven't.

What do you consider an "adversarial exchange", Curtis?

That you have never, ever identified one of these allegedly unadmitted
errors in an adversarial exchange supports the belief that you're
simply pontificating again.

> As exchange between adversaries, as opposed to an exchange between
> friends or buddies.

None of my exchanges in this newsgroup have been with "friends" or
"buddies", Curtis.  Does that automatically make everyone an
adversary?  Or are there more possibilities than the ones you
provided?

> Did I really have to spell that out for you, a university professor?

What does being a university professor have to do with it, Curtis?
Does that somehow make us automatically able to read minds?

> I have identified this one several times now:
>
> "Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file and
> on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Dave Tholen -- 10/29/1999

Irrelevant, Curtis, given that you were making the claim before that
statement was even made.  Surely that means you have other evidence,
yet you've never provided any.

> You will now procede to ignore it again,

That's because it's irrelevant, Curtis, given that you were making the
claim before that statement was even made.

> or perhaps claim again (erroneously) that it's "correct when applied
> to [your] copy of the javainuf.exe file,"

On what basis do you call it erroneous, Curtis?

> or again go through the "logical" steps you took to arrive at this
> error.

On what basis do you call it an error, Curtis?

> If you choose to ignore it, you will procede to snip it based on your
> lame justification you always use (the one that will be at the top of
> your reply).

How ironic, coming from someone who has snipped freely and justified it
by writing:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

Hypocrite.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: see@my.sig.com                                    07-Dec-99 19:17:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Gordon Mulcaster <see@my.sig.com>

In article <Tim.Streater-58160A.18512707121999@news.ex.ac.uk>, tim 
<Tim.Streater@dante.org.uk> wrote:

> This is incorrect. The 4-char filetype and 4-char creator are kept in 
> the desktop database, which is managed by the Finder.

Just to pick a nit, they are not kept in the desktop database, the 
Finder uses the desktop database to keep track of which icon to display 
on which file and the file ID of the various applications are so it can 
locate the appropriate app when you double click a data file. The Finder 
_uses_ the Type and Creator codes (and other info) to build the desktop 
database, it doesn't store them.

Type and Creator codes are stored in the directory struction, along with 
the filename, file size, creation date, modification date, the label, 
etc.

-- 
no sig... gozer(at)pop2.intergate.bc.ca

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Megadodo Publishing, Megadodo House, Ursa Minor (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               07-Dec-99 22:20:06
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:43:10 -0700, Steven C. Britton wrote:

=>> The RH definition is irrelevant.  It doesn't matter in the slightest.
=>
=>Sure it does: it is the _correct_ definition of monopoly. 

Why? Just because it's in a dictionary?

Why do you give the dictionary such authority?





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 22:37:20
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> 
> > It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract anything by
> > running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.
> 
> Doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2, Curtis.

> Remember, my copy of the javainuf.exe file was different, Curtis.

> My copy of the file does run on an OS/2 system, Curtis.

> Irrelevant, given that I did not tell you that the extraction was
> successful, Curtis.

And now Dave has brought this argument full circle.  He was building a bridge
from both ends, but strangely, it didn't meet up in the middle.

For in his seemingly infinite hypocrisy, Dave is now playing an infantile
semantic game insisting that his incomplete copy of JAVAINUF.EXE "runs" in
OS/2
after insisting that the same executable does not "run" in DOS because it
doesn't extract the archive.  Too bad he just tripped up *again*.  <sigh> 
"Inept".

It's too easy sometimes.  Be sure to enter this into the digest, Dave, so all
of our Mac buddies can witness further evidence of your idiocy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               07-Dec-99 22:44:20
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451520

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> 
> Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:
> 
> CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
> CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.
> 
> I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.
> 
> Curtis Bass writes:
> 
> > Dave repeats this insipid response six times (!),
> 
> What's allegedly "insipid" about it, Curtis?  I'm simply using the
> same response that Marty used on me some time ago.

The hypocritical one now forgets that I was quoting him in saying his famous
"Eliza" phrase.  How convenient.  He also neglects to realize that I used the
quote in question as a response to his baseless accusations of playing an
infantile game, showing him the hypocrisy of such statements by quoting a
phrase from his own on-going infantile game.  How soon we forget.

> What do you think the sentence that follows it means?

It means that Dave is playing his own infantile "wrath" game, further
compounding the hypocrisy.

> > indicating that he has no real argument.
> 
> On the contrary, it means that Marty has no real argument,

My argument is stated above and Dave has obviously failed to grasp that. 
Reading comprehension problems?  "Inept."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              07-Dec-99 22:12:02
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Porting codecs...

From: "Trancser" <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

>
>XAnim has already been ported to XFree86/2.
>
>ftp://24.2.168.186/pub/os2/unix/xfree86/ports/multimedia/xanim.zip
>
>- Marty

Doesnt that require an X server to be present/loaded as well, since its not a
PM app though?

or do the Xlib/2 libraries that are being, or WERE ported (completely) to
OS/2, work?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 23:05:06
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84rfn7.n2.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote:
> 
> >> >> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
> >> >> 
> >> >> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?
> >> >
> >> >Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?
> >> 
> >> Comprehend context, Eric.
> >
> >Illogical.
> 
> Why?

Because I did comprehend the context, Pascal.  More evidence of your 
reading comprehension problems.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com                        07-Dec-99 21:11:19
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com (Paul Hsieh)

postmaster@bluestreak.yi.org says...
> On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 01:58:01 -0500, Ruel Smith wrote:
> >Simply put, a single manufacturer cannot compete against the multitudes of
> >PC manufacturers. It's David vs. Goliath.
> 
> Don't forget the fact that there are no convenient pebbles nearby.
> 
> >I'm not quoting any facts that I'm not sure of. I simply cannot ever recall
> >seeing an Amiga until 1986 or so (despite what Amiga fans are proclaiming).
> >It is a fact that Commodore was still selling the 64/128 model in 1984.
> >Judging from the screenshots from the web page, Windows 1.0 was DOS 2.0
with
> >mouse support - nothing more. All other info is not mine at all, but merely
> >a quote.
> 
> Last I checked, Windows 1.0 was a file manager for DOS, not a mouse 
> driver and GUI for DOS.

Now wait just one cotton picking minute!  The Windows 1.0 that *I* saw 
was a 640x200 CGA mouseless graphical interface that was a run time 
library bundled with some applications (a game called "Balance of Power" 
used it.)

--
Paul Hsieh
DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A Zillion Monkeys (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         08-Dec-99 02:33:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451521

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Today's Haakmat digest:

1> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?

2> tholenbot wrote:

3> What have you been up to all these months?

Irrelevant to this newsgroup, Pascal.

3> No use denying it, Dave.

Illogical, Pascal.

3> If by off you mean, in absense from or suspension of regular work
3> or service, yes.

I mean "off" as the opposite of the "on" you used.

3> Well, you're posting to Usenet, aren't you?

Irrelevant, Pascal; so are you.

3> How is your day job coming along anyway?

Non sequitur.

3> I knew it would be impossible to ignore you the first time I saw
3> you.

Illogical.

3> Your brilliance is just too attractive.

Illogical.

3> A great mind, once exposed, cannot be ignored, Dave.

Illogical.

3> Is there anything you don't know about?

Yes.

4> tholenbot wrote:

5> tholenbot wrote:

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com                        07-Dec-99 21:16:14
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com (Paul Hsieh)

In article <384849D5.657D@cc.usu.edu>, slurp@cc.usu.edu says...
> Steve wrote:
> > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that 
> > support your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac 
> > is so great, why does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> 
>   Probably because the people who run Apple were too stupid to do the 
> obvious thing and port their OS to PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of 
> the Mac (can't stand it's interface, actually); but if Apple would 
> have had the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93 time 
> period, the market would probably look quite a bit different right now.

You can pretty much thank John Sculley for that one.  From a 
technological point Apple was so far ahead.  Its just sad to see that 
they have fallen so far behind from sheer lack of business sense.

I mean if nothing else, they could have done what Microsoft does today, 
and just use a ported "MacOS on x86" as a leverage to move people over to 
their PPC platform by simply making sure that the technology was always 
better on the PPC.

--
Paul Hsieh
DONT.qed.SPAM.ME@pobox.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A Zillion Monkeys (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 23:03:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451520

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <slrn84rfnj.n2.p@awacs.dhs.org>, ahaakmat@cable.a2000.nl 
wrote:

> tholenbot wrote:
> 
> >> The formidable tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> >
> >What is "formidable" about it, Pascal?
> 
> Don't you know, Eric?

No.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         08-Dec-99 02:32:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451521

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

As expected, Marty ignores the fact that he went down the Eliza path.
He also ignores the fact that Lucien has failed to take the two simple
tests that prove him to be wrong.  He also makes it sound like the
"infantile games" were played when he was 4, yet he admitted earlier
this year to playing "infantile games".  Here's today's digest:

1> A paltry number, compared to his usual standard for excellence.  Yet
1> he can't seem to get through one of his infantile "digest" postings
1> about me without accusing me of playing an "infantile game".  I'm
1> glad the hypocrisy of that situation isn't lost on the readers of
1> this thread, though I can't imagine how it could be, given how clear
1> Tholen has made it.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Why, nowhere to be seen!

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
 
1> A little more like:
1>
1> while ( INFANTILE_GAME )
1> {
1> 	Lucien( SHOW_HYPOCRISY );
1> 	Tholen( REITERATE_IRRELEVANCIES );
1> 	Tholen( REMOVE_CONTEXT );
1> 	Tholen_Play( &infantile_test_game );
1> 	Tholen( Add_Hypocrisy( INVECTIVE ) );
1> }

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Hmm... that sounds like an infantile game to me, like I used to play
1> when I was 4.  It was called "Gotcha Last" IIRC.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> Don't worry.  The only person who didn't know what Lucien was holding
1> was Tholen and he is unlikely to be intelligent enough to make good
1> use of the information.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                07-Dec-99 23:08:23
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <82k9tc$obl$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

What allegedly alleged "refusal", Dave?

> Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
> applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

What Lucien would like to do is irrelevant.  What you can prove is 
relevant.

> > Here is Dave's statement again for reference:
> 
> Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
> however, given that you've never taken them.

Irrelevant.
 
> > "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> > 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> > information."
> 
> And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
> insisted?

Don't you know, Dave?
 

> Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
> mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
> of a word and not the structure. 

Aren't you certain?

> Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
> corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
> where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
> ambiguous.

Aren't you certain?

> Or are you really that idiotic?

Typical invective.  Of course, such behavior is to be expected of you.  
Too bad you still don't recognize how that behavior is perceived.

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 00:00:00
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Porting codecs...

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Trancser wrote:
> 
> >
> >XAnim has already been ported to XFree86/2.
> >
> >ftp://24.2.168.186/pub/os2/unix/xfree86/ports/multimedia/xanim.zip
> >
> >- Marty
> 
> Doesnt that require an X server to be present/loaded as well, since its not
a
> PM app though?

Yes.
 
> or do the Xlib/2 libraries that are being, or WERE ported (completely) to
> OS/2, work?

No idea.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   08-Dec-99 00:25:18
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

"tim" <Tim.Streater@dante.org.uk> wrote in message
news:Tim.Streater-58160A.18512707121999@news.ex.ac.uk...
> In article <1e2eh19.18eqkz8wgd3pcN@dialup-317.germany.ecore.net>,
> andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) wrote:
>
> >Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
> >
> >> File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
> >> letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files
> >> of
> >> the same type, since they were created by two different apps, would be
> >> launched by their respective apps correctly. The OS doesn't assume that
> >> all
> >> apps with the same filetype should be launched into the same program.
>
> This is incorrect. The 4-char filetype and 4-char creator are kept in
> the desktop database, which is managed by the Finder. They are certainly
> *not* kept in the resource fork, since many files don't have a resource
> fork. Try opening a Word file with ResEdit and it will say "This file
> does not have a resource fork, opening it with ResEdit will add one,
> continue or not?"

I'm not sure where it's kept, but I do know that opening ResEdit will allow
me to view the info, therefore, I assumed it to be in the resource fork.

> >However, the OS does seem to assume that all files with the type ????
> >and the creator ???? simply _have_ to be opened by the Acrobat Reader
> >(of course this does not apply to *.PDF files with said type and
> >creator, as Murphy's law would also indicate).
>
> You can change this behaviour with the File Exchange Control Panel.
>
> >Also, it can be rather nasty to have to run resedit (an editor for the
> >resource fork of files on Macintosh filesystems) every time you find a
> >weird file (probably copied from another operating system) and want to
> >open it in an editor (type TEXT creator ttxt) or Netscape (type TEXT
> >creator udog).
>
> Well, it would be if you had to, but you don't have to.
>
> >I started using the extension .TTXT for Macintosh text files, which
> >makes it much easier to identify them on Linux for one thing. Altaugh
> >Emacs seems to be the only editor that will open them correctly.
>
> I edit all text file on the Mac with BBedit, since It Doesn't Suck (TM),
> unlike Unix apps, which all suck, in my experience. In particular you
> can choose your line-endings with BBedit to keep Unix/Windows happy, and
> Bbedit deals with all 3 types with no trouble. It has a built in FTP
> client, too, so the Unix files look local.
>
> Tim.
>

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tzs@halcyon.com                                   08-Dec-99 06:18:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)

On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 01:24:10 GMT, Andrew Irvine <irvin@clara.co.uk> wrote:
>he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
>meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
>more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
>82) had that :)?

Well, if you consider 32 to be long, I suppose.  Mac 84 was amusing.  It
was using MFS, not HFS.  MFS didn't support folders.  Made it interesting
for the people with the early hard disks.

--Tim Smith

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tzs@halcyon.com                                   08-Dec-99 06:23:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)

On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 02:12:24 -0500, Ruel Smith <ruel24@fuse.net> wrote:
>File associations on a Mac are much more elaborate, btw. The type (4
>letters) and the creating app are kept in the resource fork. Two files of

No, they are not kept in the resource fork.  They are kept in the file's
catalog record in the volume's catalog file.

--Tim Smith

ps: if I really wanted to nitpick, I'd point out it is not the creating app
that is kept there, but rather the signature of the creating app! :-)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Institute of Lawsonomy, Department of Suction and
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ssivier@best.com                                  07-Dec-99 08:01:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 03:27:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Steve Sivier <ssivier@best.com>

In article <nomadic-E65278.19221705121999@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, 
Middle Brandon Era <nomadic@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> In article <82el70$c2r$1@sparky.wolfe.net>, 
> ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar) 
> wrote:
> 
> > Consider your favorite web browser..  How often has it crashed at an
> >inopportune time?  Wouldn't it be nice if you had the option of digging
> >in and eliminating the bug that made it crash, instead of just starting
> >the old binary back up and hoping it doesn't happen again for a while?
> 
> I'd rather just have it work properly from the get go, rather than have 
> go digging around. I'm bettting most computer users feel the same way.

That's a nice thought, but unfortunately there's a lot of poorly written 
software out there (including all the browsers I've seen). Without the 
source, you're pretty much stuck with the bad software, although I've 
got to admit the possibility of my fixing Netscape is pretty slim - I've 
got enough to do without trying to get involved with that.

Steve

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Epoch Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 08:12:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 05:09:28
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Mike Trettel write:
> On 6 Dec 1999 00:14:42 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:

> >Who do you know who was forced to buy a copy of Windows?
> 
> Plenty of people.

How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn around
and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS AWAY,
or force you to pay taxes.

> Let me put it to you this way.  Not everyone has the freedom to assemble
> their own PC for a given situation, and must purchase a name brand PC off
> the shelf for that situation.

Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
purchase anything.

> calls for a non Windows OS. But of course, you will reply that the buyer
> need not purchase from such OEMs, totally ignoring the first set of facts
> I set forth-that the buyer needs to use a PC from these particular OEMs.

Nobody has to buy anything from anything.  That is the fact that you have
yet to understand.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Dec-99 23:00:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 05:09:28
Subj: Re: Windows posting activitiy...

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Today Jeff Glatt slectively edits my posts to try and make his fantasy 
world stick.  Unfortunately no one buys it.

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jason
:>I'm complaining about people lower the quaility of this newsgroup by 
:>inciting flamewars by insulting OS/2 advocates:

: The charter of this newsgroup specifically mentions "flaming", not
: "complaining about people who incite flamewars". You're apparently in
: the wrong newsgroup. You don't belong here. Your posts are off-topic
: and "lower the quality of this newsgroup" by being foolishly
: hypocritical.

Again you have never even given any evidence about my alledged 
hypocracy.  This is because it only exists in your fantasy world.  But 
you have just accused me of being off topic and beratted me for it.  One 
might think that this makes you the hypocrite since you post off topic, 
as almost every does in this newsgroup, which is why I don't believe in 
sticking to charters.

Now lets see just how low you are willing to sink.  

Jeff Snipped>In your mind, 

:>I'm some guy who sits in the 
:>newsgroup and talk about Microft trial verdicts all day long, and 
:>complains that people violate the newsgroup charter.

: I don't know that you spend all day posting these offtopic messages,
: and I never made a claim otherwise. I simply note that you do post
: these messages, and do so hypocritically.

Thank you for selectively editing my post.  You know Jeff, that is pretty 
low to selectively edit out part of the sentence that changes the whole 
meaning.  The only thing of value this little flamewar has done is shown 
people that without a doubt, your posts are without the merit of fact.  I 
mean is your arguement really that weak that you have to stoop to that?  
You are pathetic.

:>Lately, most of my posts 
:>may involve argueing with you and countering FUD

: How convenient -- "lately". So then, "lately" you're just a foolish
: hypocrite who wants to censor on-topic opinions that he just doesn't
: wish to hear so that he can have a "higher quality" newgroup where he
: can post his own off-topic posts about Microsoft?

Again Jeff, these posts you claim I make are part of your fantasy world.  
If you edit around my words in your reply, it doesn't doesn't mean they 
move from your fantasy world to reality.  What you need to do is bring 
reality to your fantasy world, not the other way around.

: Typical.

Pathetic

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu                      07-Dec-99 23:59:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 05:09:28
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu>

Once again Jeff makes a fool out of himself in this newsgroup.  I guess 
this gives us something to do while IBM sits around

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
: Once again, Jason fails to address the legitimate points I raised
: about his hypocrisy, and the examples of his hypocrisy which I cite.
: He instead relies upon his tiresome vaudeville routine of simply
: clinging to a claim that his own, illogical, hypocritical
: misinterpretation of the newsgroup charter somehow excuses his
: hypocrisy. It doesn't.

How can I address your points if you fail to provide any evidence that 
I'm a hypocrite.  You see you can just make an arguement over and over 
without actually showing some real facts.  Things just don't work that way.

:>:>Jason
:>:>The discussion of other operating 
:>:>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

:>:Jeff Glatt
:>: The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

:>When have you ever discuss this.

: Um, it was my post which "inspired" your foray into your own misguided
: hypocrisy -- the one that began with the words "OS/2 Advocacy".

Um, Aaron Dimsdale repsonded to that, not me.  I only responded to your 
arrogant repsponse to him.  The one you wrote with the first two words "Mac 
users"  It was then you who started some sort of mission from god 
to call me a hypcite for some apparently secret reason, as you are unable 
to show me any evidence.  

: It's not my fault that you're illiterate. Blame your teachers if you
: have to (although I have no doubt that the fault is mostly your own).

Coming from someone who show such a poor skill for comprehension, this is 
mildly amusing.  

:>:>By comparing other operating 
:>:>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
:>:>it.

:>: By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
:>: similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
:>: marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

:>So, you don't study this.

: Nonsense. My post detailed some ways in which OS/2 Advocacy has
: failed, and noted how that is similiar to what happened with the
: Amiga.

: You simply didn't like that opinion, and that's why you launched into
: your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect foray into trying to
: suggest that the discussion is not appropriate according to a
: Tholen-like literal interpretation of the newsgroup charter -- an
: interpretation that brands nearly all of your own posts as
: "off-topic".

: Quite simply, you're a fool and hypocrite by your own actions. That's
: certainly not my fault.

Again Jeff, you are living in a fantasy world  You have yet to produce 
any evidence of your claims.  You have contructed this image of me which 
is entirely fictional.  It is quite amusing that someone could lack so 
little facts and argue so much.  It makes Tim Martin look like a logical 
debater.  

:>Talking 
:>about what's wrong with OS/2 to prove why people shouldn't use it

: My post said absolutely nothing about why people shouldn't use OS/2
: (although even if it had, that still is part of the charter of this
: newsgroup for a good reason -- one which your small mind fails to
: understand). It was strictly concerned with detailing some failures of
: OS/2 Advocacy, and noting how that has negatively affected OS/2, and
: how this is similiar to what happened to the Amiga.

: Again, you simply didn't like that opinion, and that's why you
: launched into your misguided, foolishly incorrect attempt to promote
: censorship of that opinion, and in the process, underscored how
: ill-prepared you are to answer to your own hypocrisy and lack of
: insight.

Again you posts have nothing to do about contructive conversation, every 
knows this.  Also, for the record, your original post that started this 
foray was a comment about the charter, trying to correct what I had said.  
Maybe you don't have the maturity to be corrected.

:>: OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
:>: failure.

:>But this has nothing to do with you are your discussion

: Nonsense. That was the very subject of my post, and that which the
: entire contents of the post detailed.

: It's not my fault if you're illiterate.

If you were literate you would have understood I was taking about the 
general content of your posts and not just the current post.  You are 
still wrong, even though you try to edit my posts to look more like your 
story.  It would be nice if you actually replied to my comments and 
didn't edit my comments, then replied to that.  You might us well just 
type anything up you want and reply to that, you posting would have just 
as much to do with reality as they do now.

:>: Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
:>: OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
:>: years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

:>Again, this has nothing to do with your posts.

: Again, you're wrong, and illiterate. The very subject of my post was
: contained in the first two words of that post, and yet, you were too
: illiterate to even grasp that.

Are you talking about the "OS/2 Advocacy" post again?  Aaron Dimsdale 
repsonded to that, not me.  I only responded to your arrogant repsponse to 
him.  The one with the first two words "Mac users" Then you started 
repsond to my posts all over the place while creating a fictional 
character you think I represent.  You will even go as far as to edit my 
posts in your replies. The only thing I'm uncertain of is if you are 
being devious or are you just plain insane?

:>:>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
:>:>: off-topic according to the charter

:>:>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

:>: It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
:>: as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
:>: "interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
:>: newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
:>: should add.

:>How am I a hypocrite Jeff?

: I've just noted above that "responding to FUD and lies" is no more
: mentioned literally in the newsgroup charter than anything else that
: you claim is literally not mentioned in the newsgroup charter and
: therefore allegedly "off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts
: which contain such "off-topic" content. Are your off-topic posts about
: Microsoft meant strictly to "incite people"? Perhaps you should take
: your own advice, and not be in this newsgroup then.

Jeff what are you talking about?  When have I told people to hold true to 
the charter?  Insulting Microsoft on this newsgroup does not incite 
people.  Insulting the people in this newsgroup, does incite them.  I 
would hope you could see the difference.

:>don't contruct a 
:>fantasy world like you usually have done.

: It is your own, off-topic fantasy world that I'm addressing above.

What exactly is an "off-topic fantasy world"?  Do you even know, or are 
you just really reaching here?

:>: Typical. OS/2 Advocates like to exclude themselves from blame, and
:>: point fingers at everyone else for what went wrong, when the truth is,
:>: OS/2 Advocate were (and still are) a very big part of the problem.

:>Your statement here has nothing to do with discussion.

: Yes it does. The discussion is about the hypocrisy and dumb statements
: you've made in your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect
: attempt to try to promote censorship of opinions that you just don't
: like.

No, if you were actually talking about this, you would have produced 
evidence of your statement and contructed a valid arguement with this 
evidence.  But instead you have chosen to insult.  That has nothing to do 
withg discussion.

: Fortunately, smarter people than you are aware of what a hypocrite you
: are, and are capable of exposing your nonsense for what it is.

Well, maybe you should ask them to do just this, because it is fairly 
obvious that you can't.  Heck you can't even start to do this.

:>: To quote one of your fellow lunatics: "What you think is irrelevant.
:>: What you can prove is relevant".  You've not proven your own posts to
:>: be any more on-topic, according to your own, hypocritically-applied
:>: insistence upon a strict interpretation of the newsgroup charter, than
:>: anyone else's. You're just being a hypocrite about it. That's all.
:>: Typical.

:>Again you have failed to show where I have chastised people for not 
:>posting on topic.

: Nonsense. I provided that proof at the start of my previous post.
: You've simply deleted it after failing to understand it, which is yet
: another ironic example of your hypocrisy.

So now I have deleted this alledge evidence of yours.  Well I must have 
did a good job and actually deleted parts of your message off of the news 
server itself, it's not there!  In fact, in my response, I have quoted 
your entire posts, without deleting a charater, a curtousy you have not 
shown me. Please show me which words I've actually deleted of your post.  
This is quite rich.

:>I have discussed the charter

: Such a discussion is itself an off-topic violation. And it should be
: noted that this was the response of OS/2 Advocates such as yourself to
: an on-topic post of mine concerning OS/2 Advocacy and its effects upon
: OS/2.

: That's foolish hypocrisy from OS/2 Advocates.

Again Jeff, you have contructed quite a little circle here.  I don't see 
who made you newsgroup police.  People who expect other to follow the 
charter exactly are fools in my opinion.

:>but I haven't told anyone to follow it.
:>If I did, that would be quite odd, for I certainly 
:>don't believe in following charters.

: Then why jump into a discussion about the charter at all? Simply
: because you're a foolish hypocrite?

Because we were discussing what the intent of the newsgroup was.  I'm 
sorry you found that so offensive.

Please Jeff, try and show how I'm a hypocrite.  All you have done is show 
your own hypocracy, while not touching me at all.

:>Have I commented on people who I 
:>feel are a negative force on this newsgroup? yes.

: I feel that your attempt to promote the censorship of opinions that
: you don't like is a negative force on this newsgroup. In fact, the
: charter expresses condones the inclusion of such opinions, but you're
: not smart enough to understand it. You misinterpret it to defend your
: own hypocrisy in posting off-topic messages that really have nothing
: to do with OS/2, and likely are posted simply to "incite people".

No, the charter is Supporting and Flaming OS/2, not flaming OS/2 
advocates, which is what you do.  You incite flame wars by insulting OS/2 
users and the illusion that you are talking about OS/2.  I personally feel 
the newsgroup would be better if you weren't here.  But I'm doing 
nothing to censor you.  You can feel free to say the newsgroup would be 
better without me.  But it would be nice if your posts had something to 
do with facts instead of fantasies.

:>:>I still feel doing so is in spirit of this newsgroup.

:>: But not in accordance with your own insistence upon a strict
:>: interpretation of the newsgroup charter when you're attempting to
:>: censor opinions you don't like to hear -- as versus your hypocritical
:>: and illogical "reinterpretation" of the newsgroup charter to excuse
:>: your own off-topic posts. Typical.

:>Again Jeff, where have I done this?

: In your post in which you argue that "criticizing OS/2 advocates is
: not in the newsgroup charter". Are you simply trying to "incite
: people" with off-topic posts?

No, I'm talking about the charter.  I'm also talking about how insult the 
people in this newsgroup by using the "flaming" part of the charter as 
protection.  Some people feel they can flame everything and everyone just 
because the charter says you can flame OS/2.  It's simply not true and 
you shouldn't use the charter to justify your actions.

:>:>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
:>:>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.

:>: So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
:>: Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
:>: in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
:>: come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.

:>I ment inciting flames.

: You probably "ment" to say a lot of things differently now that I've
: been able to point out your own hypocrisy and illogical.

: Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that you're a
: none-too-bright hypocrite.

And here we see Jeff being a class act he is.

:>:>But, most threads 
:>:>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
:>:>purpose is to talk about OS/2.

:>: So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

:>Again you are not writing about facts.

: It's a fact that your posts have been predominantly off-topic, for
: example, all of the messages you've been posting about the newsgroup
: charter. Are you doing this merely to "incite people"? If so, you
: should stop being a hypocrite, take your own advice, and leave this
: newsgroup

Again where am I being a hypcrite, besides your fantasy world?  I have 
complained that people who don't like OS/2 come in this newsgroup and 
insult OS/2 users, trying to use the charter to protect them.  And I have 
said that I wish they would leave the newsgroup since it would be a 
better place.  But I don't come into this newsgroup and insult the 
general OS/2 user population.  I have a great deal of respect the for people 
who use OS/2.   

Your replies fail to impress me.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 10:09:16
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.

Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client 
complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high 
maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were 
Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing 
it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on 
product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
the other half).

What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is 
what an idiot would do.

The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows 
removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be 
objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.


On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 20:44:31, cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <384ba6b4$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,
>   Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> 
> -- snip --
> 
> > And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> > heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have
> > to stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34
> > modems at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day.
> > That was good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.
> 
> "Approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales?" Are you serious?
> 
> Let's see, a new (i.e., non upgrade) Warp 4.0 client costs what, a
> hundred and fifty bucks, mail order?  Multiply by 21 and we have, whoa!
> US $3,150!!!
> 
> And you *LET* your clients do this????!!!?
> 
> You know, there are other ways to obtain software such as IE5. Hell, you
> could have ordered it directly from MS for a nominal fee, substantially
> less that the cost of "approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales" at any
> rate.
> 
> Or you could have downloaded it yourself, at home, using a 56K modem and
> a  flat-rate ISP.
> 
> Since IE5 is free, you could have deployed the one copy across the
> client's entire enterprise.
> 
> And why did they feel compelled to upgrade, anyway?  Office 2000 comes
> with IE5, so the upgrade would be automatic.  Current versions of the
> freebie Y2K Resource CD also contain IE5.
> 
> Any consultant worth his salt should be aware of these things.
> 
> -- snip --
> 
> 
> Curtis
> 
> 
> 
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 11:19:27
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: (1/2) Re: What the heck's going on?

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Jason
>How can I address your points if you fail to provide any evidence that 
>I'm a hypocrite.

How can you address points when you've failed to understand nor
acknowledge the evidence of your hypocrisy that was already presented?

>You see you can just make an arguement over and over 
>without actually showing some real facts.

I see that you are attempting to make the argument over and over that
you can ignore facts with impunity. You can't.

I've already shown your hypocrisy.

>:>:>Jason
>:>:>The discussion of other operating 
>:>:>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

>:>:Jeff Glatt
>:>: The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

>:>When have you ever discuss this.

>: Um, it was my post which "inspired" your foray into your own misguided
>: hypocrisy -- the one that began with the words "OS/2 Advocacy".

>Um, Aaron Dimsdale repsonded to that, not me.

To quote your fellow OS/2 lunatic: "Reading comprehension problems,
Jason?"

I never said that you responded to that post, and in fact, whether you
did is not even the focus of your own question. You simply asked when
have I ever discussed OS/2 Advocacy, and I noted that it was in that
very post I mention above -- a post which also inspired your foray
into your own misguided hypocrisy -- a post which expressed opinions
that you didn't happen to like and therefore which inspired you to
engage in subsequent, hypocritical statements which I've also shown to
be hypocritical.

>:>:>By comparing other operating 
>:>:>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
>:>:>it.

>:>: By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
>:>: similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
>:>: marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

>:>So, you don't study this.

>: Nonsense. My post detailed some ways in which OS/2 Advocacy has
>: failed, and noted how that is similiar to what happened with the
>: Amiga.

>You have yet to produce 
>any evidence of your claims.

On the contrary, I've even cited, here, specific phrases and words
from my post which contradict your erroneous claims above. I've also
shown how, in your misguided effort to condone censorship of opinions
that you don't happen to like, you've become a hypocrite who questions
whether others' posts are on-topic according to the charter when he
himself is posting off-topic and admits to not even following the
charter and regards it as "foolish" to do so.

You're a hypocrite, and a foolish one at that.

>You have contructed this image of me which is entirely fictional.

...based upon your own postings to this newsgroup, If you're
fictional, that would be likely because you're a nobody who has
nothing to offer, and that's why you're in this newsgroup attempting
to condone censorship of opinions that you just don't happen to like,
and doing so in a way that underscores your own hypocrisy and lack of
intelligence, in violation of, and total disregard for, the charter.

>It makes Tim Martin look like a logical debater.

Another one of your OS/2 buddies. Not surprisingly, he also likes to
censor opinions that he doesn't like in the name of the same supposed
goal of "removing people who aren't favorable to OS/2", even if that
also goes against the newsgroup charter (which not coincidentally, he
also violates routinely). Yes, you and he do have a lot in common.

>Again you posts have nothing to do about contructive conversation

Your posts about Microsoft trial verdicts and other such off-topic
nonsense have nothing to do with constructive conversation.
Furthermore, your posts about the newsgroup charter are misguided and
hypocritical, as well as not being constructive conversation.

But then, you're a none-too-bright hypocrite who admits to not
following the newsgroup charter.

>Also, for the record, your original post that started this 
>foray was a comment about the charter

Which was in response to one of your misguided OS/2 fanatic buddies
who erroneously misinterpreted the newsgroup charter, much like you
do.. hypocritically.

>:>: OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
>:>: failure.

>:>But this has nothing to do with you are your discussion

>: Nonsense. That was the very subject of my post, and that which the
>: entire contents of the post detailed.

>I was taking about the 
>general content of your posts and not just the current post.

It's too bad if you don't like the fact that I was able to cite
evidence from my own posts which contradicts your false, foolish
claims. You shouldn't have stupidly made such claims if you didn't
want me to point out how wrong you are.

>You are still wrong

You are still wrong about me being wrong, and the evidence is above
even though you ineptly attempt to deny its existence over and over.

>even though you try to edit my posts to look more like your 
>story.

I have replied to specific inaccuracies and hypocrisy in your posts,
and presented evidence that contradicts your false claims, and
underscores your foolish hypocrisy. That you look bad because of this
is not my fault.

>It would be nice if you actually replied to my comments and 
>didn't edit my comments

It would be nice if you stopped ignoring evidence, and abandoned your
foolish, hypocritical, misguided mission to promote censorship of
opinions that you just don't like to hear. That's against the charter
of the group. Perhaps you shouldn't be here.

>You might us well just type anything up you want and reply to that

Given that you've been ignoring presented evidence over and over while
insisting that it doesn't exist, you appear to be doing exactly what
you accuse me of doing.

>:>: Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
>:>: OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
>:>: years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

>:>Again, this has nothing to do with your posts.
>
>: Again, you're wrong, and illiterate. The very subject of my post was
>: contained in the first two words of that post, and yet, you were too
>: illiterate to even grasp that.

>Are you talking about the "OS/2 Advocacy" post again?

Of course. That is one which contradicts your false, foolish claim
above. The fact that you even know exactly which post it is based upon
the mere phrase "OS/2 Advocacy" underscores just how dishonest is your
depiction that the subject of OS/2 Advocacy is not discussed in my
posts.

You're now a deliberately dishonest hypocrite.

>Aaron Dimsdale 
>repsonded to that, not me.

That's irrelevant to your false, foolish claim above.

>The only thing I'm uncertain of is if you are 
>being devious or are you just plain insane?

I, on the other hand, am quite certain that you're a deliberately
dishonest hypocrite, as I've shown above.

>:>:>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
>:>:>: off-topic according to the charter

>:>:>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

>:>: It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
>:>: as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
>:>: "interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
>:>: newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
>:>: should add.

>:>How am I a hypocrite Jeff?

>: I've just noted above that "responding to FUD and lies" is no more
>: mentioned literally in the newsgroup charter than anything else that
>: you claim is literally not mentioned in the newsgroup charter and
>: therefore allegedly "off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts
>: which contain such "off-topic" content. Are your off-topic posts about
>: Microsoft meant strictly to "incite people"? Perhaps you should take
>: your own advice, and not be in this newsgroup then.

>When have I told people to hold true to the charter?

That's irrelevant to the fact that I've just noted above that
"responding to FUD and lies" is no more mentioned literally in the
newsgroup charter than anything else that you claim is literally not
mentioned in the newsgroup charter and therefore allegedly
"off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts which contain such
"off-topic" content. Perhaps you should take your own advice, and not
be in this newsgroup then.

>Insulting Microsoft on this newsgroup does not incite people.

Nonsense. If they weren't incited, there wouldn't be so many responses
to these threads, which comprise the bulk of the content to this
newsgroup, thanks to off-topic posts from hypocrites like you, who
really shouldn't be here because you don't understand, respect, nor
follow the newsgroup charter.

>Insulting the people in this newsgroup, does incite them. I
>would hope you could see the difference.

Some people do find "insulting Microsoft" to be insulting. I would
hope that you could see this, but being that you're obviously a
dishonest, hypocritical, OS/2 Fanatic, who does not understand nor
even follow the newsgroup charter and who should therefore not be
here, you don't see anything beyond your one tiny world.

>What exactly is an "off-topic fantasy world"? Do you even know, or are 
>you just really reaching here?

You're the one who used the phrase "fantasy world". If you don't know
what it means, then don't use it.


>: The discussion is about the hypocrisy and dumb statements
>: you've made in your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect
>: attempt to try to promote censorship of opinions that you just don't
>: like.

>No, if you were actually talking about this, you would have produced 
>evidence of your statement and contructed a valid arguement with this 
>evidence.

In fact, I have indeed presented evidence of your dishonesty and
hypocrisy. The fact that you continue to ignore the evidence and
insist that it doesn't exist isn't going to make that evidence go
away.

>: Fortunately, smarter people than you are aware of what a hypocrite you
>: are, and are capable of exposing your nonsense for what it is.

>Well, maybe you should ask them to do just this

I don't need to. I've been able to present the evidence of your
dishonesty and hypocrisy myself.

>because it is fairly 
>obvious that you can't.

The "obvious" thing is that you continue to ignore the evidence while
insisting that it doesn't exist.

>People who expect other to follow the 
>charter exactly are fools in my opinion.

Then you yourself are a fool, by your own admission, for even
"discussing the charter" and questioning others how their posts are
relevant to an exact, Tholen-like literal interpretation of the
charter.

>:>but I haven't told anyone to follow it.
>:>If I did, that would be quite odd, for I certainly 
>:>don't believe in following charters.

>: Then why jump into a discussion about the charter at all? Simply
>: because you're a foolish hypocrite?

>Because we were discussing what the intent of the newsgroup was.

Obviously, your "intent of the newsgroup" is to attempt to censor
opinions that you don't happen to like, in posts that conform to the
newsgroup charter, so that you can hypocritically and deliberately
ignore the charter to make off-topic posts to incite people.

Indeed, you *are* a foolish hypocrite, and the fact that you're
attempting to "discuss the intent of a newsgroup" when you don't even
believe in charters -- the actual assigned intent of a newsgroup --
underscores just what a fool you are.

>I'm sorry you found that so offensive.

I'm glad that you're sorry for offending people with your foolishness.
You *should* be sorry.

>Please Jeff, try and show how I'm a hypocrite.  All you have done is show 
>your own hypocracy, while not touching me at all.

Yet more of your denial of facts. Typical.

>:>Have I commented on people who I 
>:>feel are a negative force on this newsgroup? yes.
>
>: I feel that your attempt to promote the censorship of opinions that
>: you don't like is a negative force on this newsgroup. In fact, the
>: charter expresses condones the inclusion of such opinions, but you're
>: not smart enough to understand it. You misinterpret it to defend your
>: own hypocrisy in posting off-topic messages that really have nothing
>: to do with OS/2, and likely are posted simply to "incite people".

>No, the charter is Supporting and Flaming OS/2, not flaming OS/2 
>advocates

The charter is "Supporting and Flaming OS/2", not Microsoft trial
verdicts, "responding to FUD and lies", nor any of the other "intents"
that a foolish hypocrite (who supposedly doesn't even follow charters)
claims are allowable under his Tholen-like literal interpretation of
the newsgroup charter. The fact that you continue to cite this literal
interpretation over and over to promote censorship of on-topic posts
which you don't happen to like, but balk when such an "exact"
application of the charter's language is applied to your own posts,
and insist that it is foolish to follow a charter, underscores what a
none-too-bright hypocrite you are.

>I personally feel 
>the newsgroup would be better if you weren't here.

I personally feel that the newsgroup would be better if deliberately
dishonest, foolish hypocrites like yourself weren't here.

>But it would be nice if your posts had something to 
>do with facts instead of fantasies.

It would be nice if you stopped ignoring evidence, and abandoned your
foolish, hypocritical, misguided mission to promote censorship of
opinions that you just don't like to hear. That's against the charter
of the group. Perhaps you shouldn't be here.

>I'm talking about the charter.

And yet you claim not to even believe in them, nor even follow them.
What a foolish hypocrite you are!

>I'm also talking about how insult the 
>people in this newsgroup by using the "flaming" part of the charter as 
>protection.

It is not an "insult" to note the failures of OS/2 Advocacy to help
OS/2, and the dire consequences that this has had for OS/2. Indeed, it
*is* within the charter. The fact that you don't like such opinions is
irrelevant. Who cares what you think? The charter says otherwise, and
contrary to your own deluded self-importance, your opinion doesn't
supercede that charter.

>Some people feel they can flame everything and everyone

... like Microsoft and anything associated with the company. These
would be foolish hypocrites like yourself.

>just 
>because the charter says you can flame OS/2.  It's simply not true and 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 11:19:27
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: (2/2) Re: What the heck's going on?

>you shouldn't use the charter to justify your actions.

You shouldn't presume that your irrelevant, personal opinion
supercedes the charter. It doesn't. The sooner you learn this, the
better off you'll be.

>:>:>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
>:>:>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.
>
>:>: So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
>:>: Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
>:>: in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
>:>: come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.
>
>:>I ment inciting flames.
>
>: You probably "ment" to say a lot of things differently now that I've
>: been able to point out your own hypocrisy and illogical.

>: Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that you're a
>: none-too-bright hypocrite.

>And here we see Jeff being a class act he is.

And in this post, we see Jason being a deliberately dishonest
hypocrite.

>:>:>But, most threads 
>:>:>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
>:>:>purpose is to talk about OS/2.
>
>:>: So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

>:>Again you are not writing about facts.

>: It's a fact that your posts have been predominantly off-topic, for
>: example, all of the messages you've been posting about the newsgroup
>: charter. Are you doing this merely to "incite people"? If so, you
>: should stop being a hypocrite, take your own advice, and leave this
>: newsgroup

>Again where am I being a hypcrite, besides your fantasy world?

Perhaps if you actually stopped ignoring evidence and come out of your
assumptions about a fantasy world, you'd see what an idiot you appear
to be by writing long messages about what should be "the intent of the
newsgroup" when you claim that "people who follow charters are fools".

>I have a great deal of respect the for people 
>who use OS/2.   

OS/2 Fanatics like yourself, yes. But not for others obviously. You
don't even respect other users of the internet enough to follow
newgroup charters. You literally call them "fools" when they do.
You're an ass.

>Your replies fail to impress me.

On the other hand, your replies impress me as being deliberately
dishonest, hypocritical, and foolish. That's exactly what I've shown
to be the case although you continue to pretend that the evidence
doesn't exist.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cndbass@yahoo.com                                 07-Dec-99 20:11:04
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Curtis Bass <cndbass@yahoo.com>


tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:

-- snip --

> > Typical Tholen denial.
> 
> More like an typical indication of the truth by me, and your dislike
> for it.

"Typical indication of *the* truth by [Tholen]?"  Laughable.

> > Wrong. It was not my "stated reason for not writing it that way" at
> > all.
> 
> Balderdash, Curtis:
> 
> CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition
> 
> You wrote that on November 24.
> 
> > It was my stated reason for using "up" at the begining of a phrase,
> > which is not the same as "not writing it that way."
> 
> I suggest you comprehend what you previously wrote, Curtis.
> 
> > If you really value logic, you would understand this.
> 
> How ironic, coming from someone who doesn't understand the value of
> history, which shows the excuse:
> 
> CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition
> 
> > You asked me what "up" was doing at the beginning of the phrase "up to
> > which you failed to measure."
> 
> Reading comprehension makes cameo appearance.
> 
> > My answer was that it was allowing me to not end the phrase in a
> > preposition.
> 
> And suddenly you've confirmed what I said, yet above you called it
> "Wrong".

You are hopeless, Dave.

You did not ask, "why didn't you use the phrase, 'to which you failed to
measure up'?" You simply asked what "up" was doing at the beginning of
the phrase.

Ergo, my answer of "allowing me to not end the phrase with a
preposition" refers to my use of the word "up" at the beginning of the
phrase, *NOT* to my *NOT* choosing the other phrase.

The difference is admittedly subtle, which is why you don't (can't?) get
it.

> > *I* realized that there was at least one other correct way to do this.
> 
> One other?  Are you claiming that your chosen way is correct, Curtis?

Of course it's correct, your ineptness wrt comprehending it
notwithstanding.

> > I even said, "I suppose I could have used 'to which you failed to
> > measure up'" immediately after you asked what "up" was doing at the
> > beginning of the phrase.
> 
> But you didn't choose that because:
> 
> CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

This is the most absurd application of "logic" I can recall seeing in
quite some time. Like I said, you are hopeless.

> > Nevertheless, my original grammar is quite correct.
> 
> What's a "standard up", Curtis?

That you insist in your ineptness wrt comprehending what I wrote is
irrelevant.

> > The only problem is that you don't *like* it for some reason.
> 
> It's poorly written, Curtis.  "Inept."

Sorry. Wrong. What's "poor" is your reading comprehension. "Inept."

> > You have yet to indicate how "up to which you failed to measure" is
> > grammatically incorrect.
> 
> Irrelevant, given that I wasn't commenting on that phrase, Curtis.  I
> was commenting on your entire sentence.

"What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
11/24/1999

> > The bottom line is that you are making yet another erroneous assumption,
> > namely, that I believe "up to which you failed to measure" to be the
> > *only* correct  way to avoid ending the phrase in a preposition.
> 
> Where did I allegedly make that assumption, Curtis?

Here, Dave. In this thread.

-- [more of Dave's hopelessness snipped] --

> > it only so happens that you don't *like* it because it begins with
> > the word "up."
> 
> On the contrary, Curtis, it begins with the word "Holding".  The fact
> that you don't realize that demonstrates that you are "inept".

"What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
11/24/1999

> > That's your problem, Dave.
> 
> How ironic, coming from the person who doesn't even remember the actual
> sentence.

Dave shifts gears midstream. Again.

> > And again, you have yet to address your hypocrisy to which I was
> > referring.
> 
> What alleged hypocrisy, Curtis?

The hypocrisy to which I was referring, Dave.

> > Yes, I failed to take into consideration that your copy of
> > JAVAINUF.EXE may be corrupt.
> 
> I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
> to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
> I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
> word "corrupt".  "Inept."

And I have justified my choice of words at least twice.  It's just
another one of those things that you don't *like* but happens to be
*correct* anyway.

Too bad.

> > ***BUT SO DID YOU, DAVE!!!!***  You posted "evidence" based on this
> > broken copy of yours, and you didn't even realize it was broken.
> 
> There was no prior evidence of it being incomplete, Curtis.

So what? When I called you inept, "there was no prior evidence of it
being corrupt."

> > Yet you expected *me* to realize it was broken.
> 
> I certainly realized the possibility after evaluating the evidence.

"The evidence?"  You mean, different file sizes?  Evidence that only you
possessed?

> Meanwhile, you jumped to an erroneous conclusion and didn't even
> consider other possibilities.  "Inept."

Actually, that's what you did, Dave. The difference is that you
*published* evidence based on your broken copy. If what I did was inept,
then what you did was extremely inept.

> > And you have yet to admit to this error,
> 
> What alleged error, Curtis?
> 
> > of which you are accusing me.
> 
> You certainly never indicated that you considered the possibility,
> Curtis.
> 
> > That, Dave, is blatant hypocrisy at its finest.
> 
> You're erroneously presupposing that everything you wrote above is
> true.

It is true. You simply don't *like* it.

> How ironic, coming from someone so hypocritical as to continue
> posting in a sub-thread, even after claiming that a post made weeks
> ago would be your last in this sub-thread.

I made a mistake when I said that would be my last post. We all make
mistakes. Making a mistake is not hypocrisy.

> > No, Dave.
> 
> Balderdash, Curtis.
> 
> > It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract anything by
> > running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.
> 
> Doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2, Curtis.

Your copy, Dave?  Your *incomplete* copy?

If it "doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2,"
then it also "doesn't change the fact that the program does run under
DOS."

Earlier in this thread, you were arguing that "running JAVAINUF.EXE"
meant extracting the files, and therefore, saying that it "ran under
DOS" was wrong.  It's interesting that you are doing an about-face on
that argument.

So, were you wrong then, or are you wrong now?

> > On the contrary, you would have gotten error messages similar to the
> > ones you got from InfoZip.
> 
> Incorrect, Curtis.  The messages were not at all similar.

The level of similarity is irrelevant.  Nevertheless, you had to have
gotten messages indicating that the extract couldn't be performed,
otherwise, the extract would have been performed.

-- snip --

> You're erroneously presupposing that your choices are correct choices,
> Curtis.

Presupposing is not necessary.

> > I fully expect you to deny both errors, which, of course, would be a
> > self-contradicting paradox.
> 
> What alleged "both errors", Curtis?

You certainly are predictable.

> > So much for Tholen Logic.
> 
> How ironic, coming from the person whose logic didn't even come up
> with the possibility that the files were different.

Your logic also failed in this regard, Dave. This is known as being a
hypocrite.

-- [snip of Dave's denying his error several times] --

-- [snip of more Tholen nonsense] --

> > But you were not explicit about what is allegedly wrong with my grammar.
> 
> Incorrect, Curtis.  I asked you what a "standard up" is?

Is that a question or a statement?  Confused again?

> > What you find "questionable" is irrelevant;
> 
> On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

You were saying? About people who "pontificate?"

-- snip --

> > Unless you can find actual fault with what I say, or how
> > I say it, you have no argument.
> 
> I have found fault with what you wrote, Curtis.  What is a
> "standard up"?  I do have an argument, yet you keep ignoring it
> by referring to a phrase that excludes the word "standard".  I
> keep talking about your sentence, but you like to avoid that by
> focusing attention on a phrase.

You talk about the sentence when it's time top shift gears midstream:

"What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
11/24/1999

-- snip --

> On what basis do you call it an error, Curtis?

On the basis that it is wrong, incorrect, erroneous.

-- snip --

> Hypocrite.

Sorry, Dave. That would be you.


Curtis

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          08-Dec-99 11:39:22
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: I really need your help (Boy! has this title turned out to be proph

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>You are right in saying that there is a lot of things I don't know.

And yet you take umbrage at various people noting that you have
expressed some naive opinions here.

Frankly, the *real* problem is that you really *have* expressed some
naive "assessments", and a lot of long-standing posters to this
newsgroup pointed out how and why they find your assessments to be
naive. You just don't like this, so you keep implying that I've
somehow hypnotized them all into believing this about you. I therefore
continue to correct your "misinformation".

To quote your own words, "If you have a problem with that... [then]
eat it".

>But opinions are *not* facts

In your case, they're often not even insightful. In those cases, for
example, in your reply to the other guy who asked about Tholen, I
merely noted how and why I find your assessment to be naive, and
recommended that the person seek out many other opinions. Other
long-standing posters to this newsgroup who have seen Tholen in action
also added their "rebuttal" to your "opinion". I have little doubt
what the guy will discover when he looks over Tholen's tripe, and
frankly, most people aren't so naive that they'll come to the same
assessment that you have after seeing that tripe

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              08-Dec-99 05:45:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Porting codecs...

From: "Trancser" <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>

>> 
>> Doesnt that require an X server to be present/loaded as well, since its not 
a
>> PM app though?
>
>Yes.
>

Yea, thats what I thought. it'd be nice to see the Xlib/2 libraries finally
working. And see Xanim as a PM app. 
 
>> or do the Xlib/2 libraries that are being, or WERE ported (completely) to
>> OS/2, work?
>
>No idea.

Hmmm...I couldnt help but notice the date of this reply ...VERY recent, in
fact, within' the last couple of hours or so ...we up late?  I know I am.
Anyway, if one could take the codecs that are available for Xanim (to compile
in) perhaps they could be ported in way to work w/ OS/2's own multimedia
system?

Either that, or completely port Xanim to OS/2 PM ....or at least make it
possible to use it, w/o having to have an X server running ....either way'd
be fine with me.





--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jbergman@ixc.ixc.net                              08-Dec-99 05:52:28
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Odin handling 16-bit (win3.1) code as well?

From: "Trancser" <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net>


Just wondering if it'd be possible to give Odin the ability to handle Windows
3.1 16-bit code as well as Windows 95/98/NT's 32-bit code? Perhaps it wasnt
the best of choices , but I did happen to save both disk space, and a li'l
more ram's free upon booting up, by not installing Win3.1 support under OS/2
(warp server - aurora). I dont know if it'd mean a complete re-write of Odin
or not (which doesnt sound to good I guess) but ....be kinda nice to have
only to use up a losey 2 or so megs of disk space, in order to run BOTH
32-bit AND 16-bit windows code at the same time, rather than installing
9+megs of files for being able to boot win3.1 entirely ....to run 16-bit
windows programs (or installers for win95 progs that still have 16-bit
cpmpatable code in them :)


Anyway....just wondering.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           08-Dec-99 07:22:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82l3u2$gcg$2@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/08/99 at 08:12 AM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:


> Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
> purchase anything.

When a government agency or other bid specifies a specific brand of
computer and does not allow any substitution and the bid also specifies an
operating system other than Windoze or the current flavor of same and one
wants to stay in business, one must pay for the software.

If the choice is making a few thousand dollars or starving to death, then
that's force. You can bet I'll be joining one of the class actions against
MS.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           08-Dec-99 07:29:13
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384d400d_4@news1.prserv.net>, on 12/07/99 at 05:12 PM,
   me@my.place (me) said:

> Some Canadians do not understand US law, however most Americans do not 
> understand Canadian law.  Insulting all Canadians is a true showing of
> your qualities or lack there of.  I have met rude Americans and this
> does not mean all Americans are rude.  I judge an individual on there
> merits not by their country.

I never meant to insult anyone but the two assholes from Calgary, Britton
and Lars. If you read my thread, I clearly applied the term Canuck only to
those two.

> Microsoft is a Monopoly and has used questionable business practices.
> For those who disagree ...check out the stacker case for one... Which
> country they operate in has no bearing any more today, since all 
> countries are only a modem away.  This is why many countries now have
> human  rights clauses in trade agreements.  Moving to another country
> would merely mean that all Canadian companies would be impacted by the
> modified trade  legislation implemented by the protecing government (in
> this case the US). Microsoft moving to Canada would hurt Canadians more
> than it would benefit  Canadians.  Microsoft STAY AWAY...
> Me and My Opinion 

No, I don't know what Canada's law provides in such cases nor did I mean
to imply that Canada would permit M$ to there what it gets away with here.
Frankly, I would not wish M$ on Castro much less Canada. We (the US)
allowed the damn RICO to exist, it is up to us to exterminate it.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  08-Dec-99 08:06:20
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451521.45^-580696598965847899

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

The original tholenbot, pro or otherwise, <tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu>,
tholened:

> 3> What have you been up to all these months?
>
> Irrelevant to this newsgroup, Pascal.

Gee, Tholen, we're just asking because you claim you don't do this for
entertainment purposes and you're supposedly employed as an astrologer, but,
goshdarnit, you seem to take pontificating and your claptrapping ideas
*very* seriously.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  08-Dec-99 08:06:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 10:20:01
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451521.45459630^-5069890908077705

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

As expected, Tholen ignores the fact that he went down the Eliza path.  He
also ignores the fact that Lucien has consistently pointed out his refusal
to answer a direct question because it would prove him to be wrong.  He also
makes it sound like he played "infantile games" when he was 4 but that
explains only why he's so lonely today, for they didn't have a uselessnet
for him to post on then.  Here's today's digest:

[Sorry, Tholen baby, nothing of use uttered by you yet!]

Anytime.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                08-Dec-99 13:54:11
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On 8 Dec 1999 08:12:50 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:
>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Mike Trettel write:
>> On 6 Dec 1999 00:14:42 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:
>
>> >Who do you know who was forced to buy a copy of Windows?
>> 
>> Plenty of people.
>
>How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn around
>and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
>asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
>Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS AWAY,
>or force you to pay taxes.

Being forced to pay the price as a condition of performing or supporting a
contract.  Please note that the implicit "value" of Windows doesn't enter
into it in the slightest.  I suspect that you are defining "force" as
being physical in nature, and not economic.  If so, that's a selective
definition.
 >
>> Let me put it to you this way.  Not everyone has the freedom to assemble
>> their own PC for a given situation, and must purchase a name brand PC off
>> the shelf for that situation.
>
>Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
>purchase anything.

You're right!  My family really doesn't need to eat, therefore I
shouldn't buy any food this week! Of course, living in a strongly
capitalistic economy it isn't really neccesary to eat.

Your statement is so simple minded that I am staggered at the
implications.  Your zeolotry is showing.
>
>> calls for a non Windows OS. But of course, you will reply that the buyer
>> need not purchase from such OEMs, totally ignoring the first set of facts
>> I set forth-that the buyer needs to use a PC from these particular OEMs.
>
>Nobody has to buy anything from anything.  That is the fact that you have
>yet to understand.

Oh, I understand it fine.  What you blindly refuse to understand is that
the real world doesn't work that way.  You responded exactly as I 
predicted by stating that any purchase is strictly voluntary, which
totally ignores the very real economic interelationship between OEMS,
their suppliers, and the purchasers of the their products.

Ayn Rand was wrong.  Sorry.

-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           08-Dec-99 08:24:27
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82jrje$r8p$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, on 12/07/99 at 08:44 PM,
   cbass2112@my-deja.com said:


> > And neither are my clients who are running WIndows 98. You should have
> > heard the screams and bleats when the found out that they would have
> > to stay on line for hours to download the updated IE with their v.34
> > modems at a cost of nearly 19 cents a minute during the business day.
> > That was good for approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales.

> "Approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales?" Are you serious?

> Let's see, a new (i.e., non upgrade) Warp 4.0 client costs what, a
> hundred and fifty bucks, mail order?  Multiply by 21 and we have, whoa!
> US $3,150!!!

19 cents a minute is $11.40 per hour. Downloading the new IE and the other
fixes takes a minimum of 6 hours at 28800 which is the fastest modems they
have. Add to that the cost of lost productivity on the machine while the
download is being done and the cost of someone with sufficient knowledge
to monitor what is going on and the costs multiply significantly.

> And you *LET* your clients do this????!!!?

No, that's why they no longer use Windows 98.

> You know, there are other ways to obtain software such as IE5. Hell, you
> could have ordered it directly from MS for a nominal fee, substantially
> less that the cost of "approximately 21 new OS/2 Warp sales" at any
> rate.

> Or you could have downloaded it yourself, at home, using a 56K modem and
> a  flat-rate ISP.

No, it is interactive and you have to apply the right fixes in the right
order.

> Since IE5 is free, you could have deployed the one copy across the
> client's entire enterprise.

No, the updates are an interactive process which begins the moment you
access the update site. Even if one could download, one cannot put it on a
floppy and only 2 machines in the firm have CD-ROM drives. Both are on the
network, both are internals, and the upgrades require intermediate reboots
which look for the CD-ROM during the boot and one never gets to network
logon.

> And why did they feel compelled to upgrade, anyway?  Office 2000 comes
> with IE5, so the upgrade would be automatic.  Current versions of the
> freebie Y2K Resource CD also contain IE5.

Only if the firm was using Office. They were not. They do all
wordprocessing with WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. They own a DOS time
recording/billing system which fills all their needs. The tax department
folks use Lotus 1-2-3, not Excel. They have a custom written DOS based
time reporting/schedule keeping program which also generates the client
bills each month. They use the modems solely to access the courthouse's in
the area to look up deeds, mortgages, judgements, etc. where available
(all local courthouses are not on line) and for trial scheduling, etc.
where available.

Some time ago they installed their first two CD-ROM drives in the server
to access CD-based law library programs rather than continue to buy and
maintain a paper library. They had a full time librarian who was leaving
and I suggested that they look at the CD-ROM option. They agreed.

> Any consultant worth his salt should be aware of these things.

I believe that a consultant should work with what the client already has
and knows so long as it fits their needs. In the case of this firm, they
have many, many gigs of files in Wordperfect 5.1 (and earlier) format
which were all done using Bitstream Fontaware for WordPerfect. There is no
translation program out there, not even WP for Windows, which can import
those documents keeping the formatting and fonts since the Bitstream fonts
are unique to WP for DOS. Their secretaries and paralegals are all very
comfortable with WP and changing would seriously impact productivity as
they were forced to learn a new software product. Every one of those
(mostly) women has her own set of keystroke macros which perform
operations rather unique to her boss's area of the law.

The newest partner, a computer literate man in his early 30's, became
concerned about the security problems with IE. He ran an experiment. He
created a database with phony names but legitimate addresses (his home,
his vacation home, his parent's home, two post office boxes the firm owned
in adjacent county seats, etc.). He then browsed about the web a couple of
hours a week for a month or so and began receiving advertising addressed
to those completely fictional addressees. He read the articles about the
hook M$ and the government have in NT.

By switching to Warp, they eliminated IE as a security problem, they
gained a much easier to learn internal email setup, they eliminated the
probabililty that their DOS based billing/time recording/scheduling
program would not longer run once Windows 2000 replaces 98, they didn't
have to invest in new spreadsheets or wordprocessors, etc. For the
employees there is no new learning curve since we made the Presentation
Manager look almost exactly like Windows 98.

They did give up one item. Those needing to look up a decision, ruling,
etc. must now go to one of two centrally located workstations running 98
(neither of which has IE installed or any modem BTW) to use the CD-ROM
based library. A meeting of all the lawyers and paralegals showed that
only one attorney did not regularly continue to use the paper based
library which had a workstation for the CD-ROM which is not as extensive
as the library. The CD based law libraries are easier to maintain but not
as comprehensive as the older method nor do they offer everything that
paper based systems do. Some assume having access to decisions, etc.
before certain dates. All have their strengths ( easily maintained - just
replace the CD every month or less in some cases) and weaknesses ( not all
courts are available for instance). None have the currancy of daily legal
newspapers such as the Legal Intelligencer which covers all local courts
of record daily. By adding a second workstation running 98 there, we
addressed that problem to the satisfaction of the firm.

Can they produce whizbang web pages, Nope. Can they do high tech graphics?
Nope. Can they surf the web? Nope. Can the employees play the latest
games? Nope. Can they generate working blueprints for a high rise hotel?
Nope. Can they design a new rotor system for a helicopter? Nope.

But they can and do run a very successful practice which is what their
computers are for. They have a Y2K compliant operating system and the
tools they need to continue to run it for the foreseeable future. I am now
in the process of replacing 18 fax machines with FaxWorks and four
scanners. This will free up 14 dial-up phone lines saving the firm the
cost of the software and hardware in less than a year. In their area, a
dial up business line costs a monthly minimum of $52. That's $8,736 per
year they will no longer be spending! In fact, the only holdup in going
ahead with this is their deciding whether they really need four scanners
(HP SCSI with Doc Feeders) since more than 90% of what they fax out is
generated material which they now print out in paper and then take to one
of the fax machines. They really aren't convinced that they will save
secretarial time by scanning text into WordPerfect format. (They will,
BTW)






> -- snip --


> Curtis



> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           08-Dec-99 09:16:22
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82jnu8$oea$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, on 12/07/99 at 07:42 PM,
   cbass2112@my-deja.com said:


> > >  First Bob, what kind of anal retentive would go to so much trouble
> > >  with his .sig?   Or maybe you didn't, which leads to:
> >
> > Trouble? I merely take a floppy with my setup for Ice with me when I
> > go to visit relatives.

> Are you saying that all of your relatives use OS/2?  None of them are
> the least bit interested in being able to run software they can buy at
> their local Wal-Mart or Best Buy or Circuit City?

Since I provided every one of my 18 grandchildren but the three who are in
kindergarten or first grade with their computers you can bet they all have
OS/2 installed as the default operating system. Their parents, with one
exception, don't want them loading games onto the system. Their parents
want to be able to monitor what they are doing on the internet in every
case.

Several are now in high school and must use Windows 9x for certain things.
Three are in computer classes which require them to learn Word. Those
machines have Windows 9x as a boot option. However, they have no internet
access from those partitions.

The kids may (hell do) want to run Quake and games, etc. They can't for
the most part. This comes under the heading of "Tough Shit Sherlock".

> > For Windows users, that would be a very difficult task.
> > For OS/2 users it is not.

> Since Ice runs on OS/2 and not on Windows, I guess we would have to
> agree . . .

> -- snip --


> Curtis


> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dc@pdq.net                                        08-Dec-99 08:36:28
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: DC <dc@pdq.net>

On Wed, 08 Dec 1999 08:24:54 -0500, Bob Germer
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

>> Since IE5 is free, you could have deployed the one copy across the
>> client's entire enterprise.
>
>No, the updates are an interactive process which begins the moment you
>access the update site. Even if one could download, one cannot put it on a
>floppy and only 2 machines in the firm have CD-ROM drives. Both are on the
>network, both are internals, and the upgrades require intermediate reboots
>which look for the CD-ROM during the boot and one never gets to network
>logon.

This is dumb.

You need to download MSIE 5.0 (the whole thing) on YOUR computer, then
burn it to a CD, then supply it to your clients.  Anyone interested
will copy the contents of the CD to their hard drive via the network
(all 80M or so) and then run the IE5 setup.  5 minutes later, they'll
have MSIE5.0.  

DC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               07-Dec-99 04:44:03
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Why can't Germer compute?

From: letoured@nospam.net

jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) said:

Read my paragraph again and pay attention. -- I said a tier-one ANY BRAND
machine without windoze and you rant about IBM.

So what number do I call to order a tier-one PC without windoze? Or are
you ready to admit you're full of shit?


>>letoured@nospam.net
>>Again, where do I find a tier-one (any brand) PC without windoze. Come on
>>big boy, you can tell us. We want the number to order one. You must have
>>it, you said we don't have to buy windoze so give me the number -- unless
>>of course your full of shit right up to your eyeballs. 

>And you don't have to buy Windows. Here's your first clue: You don't have
>to buy IBM either. IBM is just a Microsoft VAR when it comes to PC's. IBM
>sells the computers that way because IBM truly believes that this is the
>only thing that customers want, and which IBM wants to sell. If that's
>not what you want, then don't buy from a company which expects you to
>want that.

>>>>>>letoured@nospam.net
>>>>>>Assembling a computer without buying wincrap is one thing. Buying a
>>>>>>teir-one machine -- which most business in the US buy is impossible
>>>>>>without paying for wincrap.
>>
>>>>>This is, of course, not true.
>>
>>>>>Obviously, you know nothing about the computer marketplace. The fact that
>>>>>you're unable to do something that many others routinely do demonstrates
>>>>>your incompetence and ignorance.
>>
>>>>I'll bite. Lets see if you're all bull shit or if you know something---
>>>>give us telephone numbers to order say a IBM TP 600E without paying for
>>>>windows?
>>
>>>If IBM won't sell you what you want, why are you foolishly buying IBM
>>>products???
>>
>>>I see the problem now, and it's you.

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               08-Dec-99 08:42:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

 larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

>How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn
>around and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
>asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
>Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS
>AWAY, or force you to pay taxes.

Lars, You've been over this and soundly corrected numerous times. You're
chasing your own asshole because its the only thing you can see -- which
means you are suffering from RCI. 

But I'll play along with you. Give me a number to call where I can order a
tier-one computer without paying for Windoze.


>Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
>purchase anything.
>Nobody has to buy anything from anything.  That is the fact that you have
>yet to understand.

So according to you, people are not permitted to live a modern society if
it would impinge on the profits of the MS Lord or any other -- is this
what you are telling us?  

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     08-Dec-99 06:45:14
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

Karel Jansens wrote:

> How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
>
> Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> the other half).
>
> What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> what an idiot would do.
>
> The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.

Another suggestion is for Bob to flame them - like the windows advocates do to
anyone who complains.  He can tell them they're stupid and maybe mock their
names and taunt them.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           08-Dec-99 09:28:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-tWdhfr3Pvp0z@localhost>, on 12/07/99 at 10:25 AM,
   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
> > 
> > Did his racial slur against Arabs "make sense"?  How about his statement
> > about the opinions of Canadians?


> Is *that* what a "canuck" is? I was wondering...
> No, it doesn't. What do you want me to do? (everyone seems to want me 
> to say or do something these days...)

Canuck is a term I reserve for ignorant Canadians only. However, it is a
frequently used term for Canadians in general in many parts of the world. 
It is in no way a racial slur. It is an ethnic slur if you want it to be.
But then so is Yank or Yankee. Only those with either a very bad
inferiority complex or some other serious mental deficiency would consider
any of those three terms truly offensive.

> Bob, Are you a racist? Do you consider other ethnic 
> groups/nationalities to be inferior to your own? If so, I won't talk  to
> you anymore, as I consider racists to be a lower form of life.

Racism is based upon race, not national origin. A Yank can be Black,
White, Oriental, Brown, Red, etc. racially. The term Arab properly applies
to that part of the world where Arabic is the predominate language. The
racial term for those from that region as well as from Israel is Semite, a
sub-group of the white race.

The same is true of the term Hispanic. Hispanics racially are
predominately caucausian. There is a mixture of Black and Red in the
racial background of many Hispanics from the Caribbean and Mexico to be
sure, but a visit to Mexico will demonstrate that most appear to be
largely if not entirely Caucausian. And don't forget that all the citizens
of Spain and Argentina and Chile, etc. are also Hispanics. Brazilians are
often accused of being Hispanic, but they are not. They speak Portugese.

Those of us old enough to remember Harry Truman as President will also
remember when Blacks were not permitted to play major league baseball.
Neither were dark skinned Hispanics. But if your skin was fair enough, you
could play in the majors and many did.

I have hired both Blacks and Orientals. I have a Black son-in-law with
whom I play golf every Sunday morning, who accompanies me and shares a
hotel room with me every year on our annual pilgrimage to Myrtle Beach in
March for a week of golf, who (with my daugher and their 3 kids) spends a
couple of weeks in our home every year, and who I dearly love as much as a
father in law can love a son in law, I doubt that I can be considered a
racist. I have banned one of my brothers in law from entering our house
because he said he wouldn't come to our house if our son in law or his
"nigger loving wife" was coming. He is Rachel's brother. He said that at
the burial of our oldest son who was killed in a car accident.

Our great grandson is of mixed race as well. Our oldest grandchild married
a Black man who fathered her child. My great grandson is obviously not
purely White. The dark skin, curly hair, etc. tell anyone that. But I love
the little bugger as much as any of my children or grandchildren. We
babysit him frequently, and I take him everywhere when he is here. He's
been to client's offices, church, shopping, neighbors, etc. since before
he could walk. He's been to Rotary with me three times, accompanies me to
Chamber of Commerce luncheons when he's here, etc.

Am I a racist? I don't think so. Neither to our non-white friends, our
non-white employees, etc. --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     08-Dec-99 06:56:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>

OS/2 was meant to have a GUI from the start.  OS/2 was LATE.  OS/2 was finally
shipped without the PM as v 1.0 so it could get to customers (who wouldn't
have GUI apps to run anyhow) but who needed the better OS stability and
multitasking so they wanted to try OS/2.  I got a copy of V 1.0 and began
using it due to the fact most MS compilers supported CLI OS/2 and generated
DOS/OS/2 apps.   The PM was separated and shipped in 1.1 and it was a flaky
release.

The fact OS/2 was shipped and usable  without the PM does not mean PM was an
addon.  By the time OS/2  shipped, late 1987, GUI's were common (Mac was out
for a while) and the 16MB virtual memory space, preemptive multitasking and
protected memory model of OS/2 1.x made it ideal for such an interface.

Karel Jansens wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:05:41, andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)
> wrote:
>
> > Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
> >
> > > Without delving too much into O/S history, technically the examples
> > > you state are add-ons to DOS (some would say that that is still the
> > > case for Windows 9x).
> >
> > But this is a circular argument.
> >
> I hope not. I hate those buggers.
>
> > Presentation Manager is as much an add-on to OS/2 as Windows (and GEM)
> > was for DOS.
> >
> Would you happen to know if commercial versions of OS/2 started out
> without graphical interface? If so, I'll gladly put on the camel shirt
> and throw ashes on my head. Otherwise, it could be debated that OS/2
> was meant to have a GUI from the start, contrary to DOS and TOS.
>
> > If it is argued that OS/2 (with Presentation Manager) qualifies as the
> > first (Intel platform) GUI operating system, and DOS/Windows or DOS/GEM
> > combinations do not, the question is whether the very argument that
> > apparently disqualifies said combinations (namely the fact that they are
> > combinations) but not OS/2, which is also a combination of an OS and a
> > GUI.
> >
> A good operating system should be able to mimick just about anything,
> so the mere fact that it also has a textual interface might be
> confusing. Wouldn't it be better to look at the intentions of the
> creators?
>
> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
> =======================================================
> "The method employed I would gladly explain,
> While I have it so clear in my head,
> If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
> But much yet remains to be said."
>
> the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
> =======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             08-Dec-99 14:52:22
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82k9tc$obl$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question -
looks
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lik we've hit another major
soft
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged
"refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 10:19:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Joseph wrote:
> 
> Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> > How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
> >
> > Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> > complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> > maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> > Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> > it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> > product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> > found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> > the other half).
> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.
> >
> > The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> > OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> > removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> > objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.
> 
> Another suggestion is for Bob to flame them - like the windows advocates do
to
> anyone who complains.  He can tell them they're stupid and maybe mock their
> names and taunt them.

Or he can just spout off racial slurs and insult their nationalities. 
Wait a minute... he's already done that!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tgalley@pironet.com                               08-Dec-99 16:46:26
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: Thomas Galley <tgalley@pironet.com>

Hey!

I would like to thank the aforementioned persons for their presence in
this NG, because each time I get tired from staring to intensely at the
computer screen trying to decipher the output of just another cryptic
PERL script, I just switch to my newsreader and start reading the latest
trollings there!

What would cooa be without these guys but a *v*e*r*y* calm place
(because of what problems would we have to complain as our OS of choice
runs smoothly all the time)?

So keep on the funny work, guys!

Greetings/2 from overseas

Thomas

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PIRONET AG News-System (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: doom127@earthlink.net                             08-Dec-99 16:22:28
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: doom127@earthlink.net

In article <Tim.Streater-58160A.18512707121999@news.ex.ac.uk>,
  tim <Tim.Streater@dante.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <1e2eh19.18eqkz8wgd3pcN@dialup-317.germany.ecore.net>,
> andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm) wrote:
>

> This is incorrect. The 4-char filetype and 4-char creator are kept in
> the desktop database, which is managed by the Finder. They are
certainly
> *not* kept in the resource fork, since many files don't have a
resource
> fork. Try opening a Word file with ResEdit and it will say "This file
> does not have a resource fork, opening it with ResEdit will add one,
> continue or not?"
>

This is SUCH a falsity I can't even believe that you'd post it. Type and
Creator codes are stored in the DIRECTORY STRUCTURE, along with the
 filename, file size, creation date, modification date, the label, etc.
That's why when you want to look at the type and creator, etc. you Get
Info with Resedit.
Learn a little bit more before you post.

--
____________ Daniel Davis ____________
Don't annoy the ruler of the universe.
Doing that may have bad consquences.
________http://www.darwinawards.com __


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             08-Dec-99 08:42:08
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 14:48:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Thomas Galley wrote:
> 
> Hey!
> 
> I would like to thank the aforementioned persons for their presence in
> this NG, because each time I get tired from staring to intensely at the
> computer screen trying to decipher the output of just another cryptic
> PERL script, I just switch to my newsreader and start reading the latest
> trollings there!

I thought I was the only one who found this newsgroup relaxing!




> 
> What would cooa be without these guys but a *v*e*r*y* calm place
> (because of what problems would we have to complain as our OS of choice
> runs smoothly all the time)?
> 
> So keep on the funny work, guys!
> 
> Greetings/2 from overseas
> 
> Thomas

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   08-Dec-99 17:14:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451521

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

>Irrelevant to this newsgroup, Pascal.

Regrettably my only contact with you is through this newsgroup. Do you
suggest we meet in person?

>Illogical, Pascal.

Love is illogical, Dave.

>I mean "off" as the opposite of the "on" you used.

Thank you Dave, for taking time off from your regular work or service, to
explain this to me.

>Irrelevant, Pascal; so are you.

No use denying that I'm very relevant to you, Dave.

>Non sequitur.

And you speak Latin too ... <sigh>

>Illogical.

Love is illogical, Dave.

>Illogical.

As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

>Illogical.

Won't you grant me the illusion?

>Yes.

I'd love to marry in church.

-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 17:59:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw letoured@nospam.net write:
>  larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> >How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn
> >around and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
> >asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
> >Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS
> >AWAY, or force you to pay taxes.
> 
> Lars, You've been over this and soundly corrected numerous times.

Hardly.  All anybody can do is demonstrate that a contract was signed.  Who
did Microsoft force to sell their product (as in, didn't have the company
sign an agreement?)?

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 17:57:03
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Mike Trettel write:
> On 8 Dec 1999 08:12:50 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:

> >How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn around
> >and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
> >asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
> >Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS
AWAY,
> >or force you to pay taxes.
> 
> Being forced to pay the price as a condition of performing or supporting a
> contract.

Yes.  That would be expressed in the contract.  As with all contracts, there
are clauses which must be upheld.  Are you telling me that all these
companies failed to read the fine print?  (Which doesn't matter, since when
you sign a contract you're responsible for all parts of it).

Any contract requires you to perform the actions specified.  It isn't being
"forced", because you chose to sign the contract.

>          Please note that the implicit "value" of Windows doesn't enter
> into it in the slightest.  I suspect that you are defining "force" as
> being physical in nature, and not economic.  If so, that's a selective
> definition.

Economic force has no power except from government.  Having to live up to
the terms of the contract is not force or coercion.

> >> Let me put it to you this way.  Not everyone has the freedom to assemble
> >> their own PC for a given situation, and must purchase a name brand PC off
> >> the shelf for that situation.
> >
> >Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
> >purchase anything.
> 
> You're right!  My family really doesn't need to eat

You don't _need_ to buy bread.  There's a difference.

> >> calls for a non Windows OS. But of course, you will reply that the buyer
> >> need not purchase from such OEMs, totally ignoring the first set of facts
> >> I set forth-that the buyer needs to use a PC from these particular OEMs.
> >
> >Nobody has to buy anything from anything.  That is the fact that you have
> >yet to understand.
> 
> Oh, I understand it fine.  What you blindly refuse to understand is that
> the real world doesn't work that way.

Nobody has yet shown a real world example where Microsoft "forced" somebody
to do something.  The _only_ demonstrations to date have been a company
signing a contract and having to live up to its terms.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 18:08:04
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> > Whether its a PC or a loaf of bread or a stack of paper, nobody MUST
> > purchase anything.
> 
> When a government agency or other bid specifies a specific brand of
> computer and does not allow any substitution and the bid also specifies an
> operating system other than Windoze or the current flavor of same and one
> wants to stay in business, one must pay for the software.

That's only if you make the CHOICE to go for the bid.  If an organization
puts out a bid request for a set of conditions, you either meet its
conditions or don't get the bid.  Any costs you incur by meeting the bid
should be included in the cost of your bid.  If you win, great.  If not,
somebody managed to find a way to do it cheaper than you did.

Again, you have not found a legitimate case of being forced to pay for
something.  All you've found is somebody who wants a special order, that is
going to cost extra money.  It's like somebody wanting an oak kitchen set
with arborite topping...it's gonna cost more, but if nobody wants to support
the evil aborite industry, they just don't agree to provide a kitchen set.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 18:16:10
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
> On <82euuu$fqg$3@dagger.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/06/99 at 12:11 AM,
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
> 
> > So in other words, a company isn't allowed to give a discount for
> > behaviour that they like?
> 
> In the United States, that is the case if the discount amounts to a
> restraint of trade

This is an extension of the belief that a business must constantly be
looking out for the interests of those who are not them...from competitors
to customers.  It is quite incompatible with a notion of freedom.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 18:22:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> > So you say that you have absolutely no right to speak out against, say,
> > China's one-child policy?  Or totalitarian regimes where thousands of
> > citizens are killed each year?
> 
> No, I do not have the right to tell China, Canada, or any other country or
> any state in the United States other than New Jersey how to run their
> country or state.

Okay, let me get this straight: you who believes that a business must ignore
its own interests to insure the betterment of those around it at all costs
doesn't think that a person has the moral duty to speak out against an
injustice, whether at home or abroad?

> 
> > >                      I do not presume to tell you what your laws should
> > > provide and you have no right to do so to the United States.
> 
> > An unjust law is an unjust law, whether it is in your country or not.
> 
> Only in your eyes if the law exists in a democracy or a representative
> democracy.

If you think that a democracy is an unwavering source of just and fair laws,
give your head a shake.

>              Our elected representatives and President or Governor in the
> case of a state pass laws the majority wants as evidenced by their votes
> in the elections.

And what about when the majority wants an injustice, like slavery or
antitrust?

>                   The courts make sure the majority does not infringe on
> the constitutional rights of the minority.

The court never protected Microsoft.  It doesn't protect the lives of a
million and a half babies a year.

> > > Our citizens decided that actions such as MicroSoft has been proven to
> > > engage in violate laws we found necessary for our society.
> 
> > That's when things get interesting.  For the sake of your society, a
> > person's property is not deemed to be of their own control.  How does
> > that jive with the right to own property?  Or the American slogan of
> > being for "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"?
> 
> One does not own any property.

What a quaint view.  Your abdication on property rights is the exact reason
you open yourself up to government persecution.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 18:30:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Stan Goodman write:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:32:19, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:

> > But all companies do this!  It's called entering a partnership.
> 
> I don't think the judge sees it that way. A vendor-buyer relationship is 
> not a partnership.

Why isn't it?  There's a voluntary agreement between two parties.

> > If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> > withhold things.  Like sales.
> > 
> > Microsoft is not required to sell their products at any price to any
people.
> > If Intel doesn't want to do what MS wants, MS doesn't have to support
them.
> > Microsoft isn't the babysitter of whining computer companies.
> 
> > Your problem is that when MS says "do this or you don't get to buy our
> > product", it has success behind it.  You will in all seriousness reply to
me
> > that because MS is successful it has to play by a different set of rules.
> 
> You could make the same point about Standard Oil decades ago

Yes, you could.  And it would remain correct.  The mythology of the
"Standard Oil Monster" isn't true, and as such doesn't frighten me.

> > >          Don't you read the newspapers? The recent court finding is that 

> > > there is a monopoly, and that Microsoft abused its monopoly position
> > 
> > But when the finding says "there is a monopoly", it means nothing.
> 
> What it means is that a monopoly does have to avoid restraining trade. 

It means a "monopoly" (which can apply to any business you choose) must
suddenly care more about others than itself.  Mandatory altruism, where a
company must suddenly give its competitors an advantage at every turn.

By that standard, if a hockey team is at the top of its standings, it must
regularly lose to teams in the divison to keep it "fair".

> Restraint of trade is a major no-no in the US; probably in Canada too.

True.  However, there is nothing morally wrong with a business conducting
what you call "restraint of trade".

> > To say Microsoft "abused its position" is to say that, my God, Microsoft
> > competed in the market (and didn't fail at it).
> 
> Locking up a market is, in general, not permitted, for more or less obvious
> reasons

The reasons are obvious...and WRONG.

> Restraint of trade is not competition; it is in fact anti-competitive.

"Restraint of trade" comes as a result of competition.  How you can call it
not competition is ludicrous.  The evidence of restraint of trade is the
winning of the competition!

> I understand that it is your belief that a trader is permitted to do 
> virtually anything that does not involve bloodshed. That has not been true 
> for over a century.

Then the U.S. has not been a free society for over a century.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 18:39:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Buddy Donnelly write:
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> > > When you threaten people with severe retribution (e.g. "We'll cut off
their
> > > air") if they dare to patronize your competitors, that is an abusive 
> > > monopoly.
> > 
> > But all companies do this!  It's called entering a partnership.
> 
> No, no more than "going into business" is the same as operating a monopoly.

Actually, going into business is the same as operating a monopoly.  Any
business can be ruled as a monopoly.

> > If another company doesn't enter into a partnership with you, you can
> > withhold things.  Like sales.
> 
> No, you're legally required to treat all members of a class of customer the
> same.

So much for freedom.

> > Microsoft is not required to sell their products at any price to any
people.
> > If Intel doesn't want to do what MS wants, MS doesn't have to support
them.
> > Microsoft isn't the babysitter of whining computer companies.
> 
> Not, not the babysitter. The bullwhipper.

Microsoft cannot cause harm to anybody.

>                                              The point made in the court 
> testimony is that M$ used illegal methods to prevent competing products 
> from reaching the market.

Methods which shouldn't be illegal by any stretch of the imagination.

> > Your problem is that when MS says "do this or you don't get to buy our
> > product", it has success behind it.  You will in all seriousness reply to
me
> > that because MS is successful it has to play by a different set of rules.
> 
> By longstanding law in the US, if *any* company (IBM? ATT? Standard Oil?) 
> is successful at eliminating all competition, then yes, they have to play 
> by a different set of rules.

By strange irony, not a single company you listed eliminated all
competition, nor could it if it tried.

>                            They have to take on a MORAL responsibility to
> insure that the customer, the end user, us here, don't get screwed, as we 
> have been in this case.

The customer is the one morally responsible for the state of the customer.
Microsoft is the one responsible for Microsoft.  It is MS that needs to
worry every day about the upstarts breathing down their neck.

> > >          Don't you read the newspapers? The recent court finding is that 

> > > there is a monopoly, and that Microsoft abused its monopoly position
> > 
> > But when the finding says "there is a monopoly", it means nothing.
> 
> Ask 100 corporate litigators if a Federal judge's finding of fact says 
> "there is a monopoly" means anything

It doesn't mean there's a monopoly.  So a finding saying so, even if a bunch
of morons assign it value, is meaningless...because it is TOTALLY WRONG.

> [You also might check your HTML on the index page, because whatever program
> you used to create it has butchered some of your indexing codes, rendering 
> them useless.]

Hey, don't blame Jed.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               08-Dec-99 13:48:15
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 16:40:13
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

 larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

>> >How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn
>> >around and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
>> >asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
>> >Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS
>> >AWAY, or force you to pay taxes.
>> 
>> Lars, You've been over this and soundly corrected numerous times.

>Hardly.  All anybody can do is demonstrate that a contract was signed. 
>Who did Microsoft force to sell their product (as in, didn't have the
>company sign an agreement?)?

Everything you say revolves around your use of the word FORCE in the
physical sense to define a monopoly. Besides making you a simpleton, it
also proves you have not read the findings of fact or you would understand
what MS has done --  and why they are now trying to make a deal instead of
trying to prove the asinine points you continue to make.

Does the university there accept just anyone?

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jecampbe@dexelec.com                              08-Dec-99 20:46:01
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:20
Subj: Arcserve Client ?

From: jecampbe@dexelec.com

Hello,

I have need of an OS/2 client agent for Cheyenne Arcserve for Windows
NT (v6.5).  I know that previous versions of Arcserve included OS/2
agents, but version 6.5 apparently doesn't.  Cheyenne (Computer
Associates) doesn't reply to my emails regarding this question.

Does anyone here know how I can get an OS/2 box to communicate with my
NT server so that I can run a backup?   (Only TCP/IP is initialized on
the OS/2 box, so I can't do any high level interaction with the NT
Server from OS/2.) Or does anyone have the appropriate client agent
that I can load on the OS/2 machine?

Thanks,
Jim


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 19:38:27
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:20
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw josco write:
> On 3 Dec 1999, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> > So you say that you have absolutely no right to speak out against, say,
> > China's one-child policy?  Or totalitarian regimes where thousands of
> > citizens are killed each year?
> 
> You have no sense of proportion.

If a small injustice is allowed to pass, it allows for a greater one.  And a
greater one.  And one greater still.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 19:32:02
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw letoured@nospam.net write:
>  larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> >> >How exactly were they forced?  I strongly suspect that you will turn
> >> >around and say that MS software was so valuable that they paid the price
> >> >asked...which is in no way force.  Microsoft cannot force you to buy
> >> >Windows.  The government, however, can force Microsoft to GIVE WINDOWS
> >> >AWAY, or force you to pay taxes.
> >> 
> >> Lars, You've been over this and soundly corrected numerous times.
> 
> >Hardly.  All anybody can do is demonstrate that a contract was signed. 
> >Who did Microsoft force to sell their product (as in, didn't have the
> >company sign an agreement?)?
> 
> Everything you say revolves around your use of the word FORCE in the
> physical sense to define a monopoly.

The alternate definition of force, the one you subscribe to, describes a
voluntary exchange!  How on earth can you say with a straight face that when
voluntarily signing a contract that it is force, but a definition of
force excluding voluntary actions are incorrect?

>                                           Besides making you a simpleton, it
> also proves you have not read the findings of fact or you would understand
> what MS has done

MS "has done" nothing wrong.  That they are illegal speaks to the flaw in
the law, not in the action.


Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 19:37:07
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
> "Steven C. Britton" wrote:

> >Monopoly:
> >1. exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market, or
> >a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
> 
> Windows is a commodity.

If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy breakfast
cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available at
fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's illegal
for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.

> MS certainly has a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.
> If you were interested in facts instead of void definition games, you'd know
> that they used exactly that to force OEMs to only install Windows

Microsoft can ask for any price they want for their property...that's how a
capitalist system works.  If an OEM doesn't do what MS wants, MS doesn't
have to sell them Windows at a price desirable to an OEM.  And the OEM
DOESN'T HAVE TO BUY.

> certainly have seen for yourself -before others pointed it out- that the
price
> of Windows etc. has stayed the same and even gone *up* while PC hardware
> prices have only plummeted.

Big deal.  If they had dropped, you'd use that as evidence of a monopoly.
If they hadn't moved, you'd use THAT as evidence of a monopoly.  Charging
ANY PRICE WHATSOEVER is legal "evidence" of a monopoly.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jfizer@klassy.com                                 08-Dec-99 11:27:16
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Josiah Fizer <jfizer@klassy.com>

Derek J Witt wrote:

> Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first place?
> It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not be
on
> Wall Street in the first place.
>
> Ruel Smith wrote:
>

Red Hat is making money by supporting Linux not from selling it. If people
stop
making Linux application Linux and Red Hat would go away. However I dont think
this is going to happen as Zelots on any platform tend to stick things out
till
the bitter end. Not that I'm not tired of being told I should be using Linux
even
though it has no applications I need and is a pain in the arse to use.


>
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
> > --
> > Ruel Smith
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
> > CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
> >
> > "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
> > news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> > > kiwi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Steve wrote:
> > > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
> > support
> > > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
> > great, why
> > > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> > > >
> > > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > > > bit different right now.
> > >
> > > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a win;
if
> > > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
> > difference
> > > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
> > >
> > > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
> > didn't
> > > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all
competed
> > on
> > > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> > > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because Apple
> > > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
> > >
> > > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after
Microsoft
> > > gave up on it.
> > >
> > > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels the
> > > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
> > stifled
> > > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
> > vendors
> > > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server
space
> > as
> > > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
> > >
> > > jim
> > >
>
> --
> **  Derek J Witt                                              **
> *   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
> *   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
> *** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Klassy Soft (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: madwen@mailbag.com                                08-Dec-99 14:05:07
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Madwen <madwen@mailbag.com>

In article <slrn84ru29.2vn.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith 
<tzs@halcyon.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 01:24:10 GMT, Andrew Irvine <irvin@clara.co.uk> wrote:
> >he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
> >meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
> >more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
> >82) had that :)?
> 
> Well, if you consider 32 to be long, I suppose.  Mac 84 was amusing.  It
> was using MFS, not HFS.  MFS didn't support folders.  Made it interesting
> for the people with the early hard disks.
> 
> --Tim Smith

The very first Mac had folders.  I'd love to hear you discuss file 
management intelligently.  NOT.  Folders  HFS or MFS.  Folders are part 
of the GUI to give the illusion of an office setting.  ::rolls her eyes::

All one got on a PC at the time (1984) and LONG after was a huge list of 
files (directory) with names so arcane that the users had to keep CODE 
books to decipher them.  I always had the utmost sympathy for the 
exec.bat crowd.  

The point never was what platform could have the _longest_ file name 
potential.  You guys really make me laugh my ass off.  You cite these 
file name length and MHz stats like you are measuring the length of 
your... well you get the message.  One can almost detect a hint of 
testosterone in the air reading over these kinds of posts. The point of 
it is and always was what is optimum for the user.  It's what you do 
with it.... NOT how big it is!  :)

Try discussing something you actually know something about.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Society for the Prevention of Acronymia Gravis (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  08-Dec-99 20:04:27
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jack Troughton write:
> On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:29:41, White Thunder <larso@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>
> wrote:

> > Look, this is becoming boring.  Microsoft has broken the law.
> 
> Yes...Microsoft dared to run a business.
> 
> That's not the law that they broke.  They broke restraint of trade 
> laws.

By operating their own business, they were able to do this.

It is illegal for a company to charge more than a competitor.
It is illegal for a company to charge less than a competitor.
It is illegal for a company to charge the same as a competitor.

So yes, by entering into business Microsoft was able to "restrain trade".
All they had to do was sell a product.  Things like writing a contract just
sealed the case against their "horrendous" practises.

> Microsoft is a special case, because they are a legal monopoly under 
> US laws.

Yes, but this US law isn't justified.

> IOW, the FoF is as harsh as it is because the court has lost patience 
> with MS and its recidivist behaviour.

That's no justification for the evil it represents.

> What do you mean, his "fair piece of the pie"?  Discounting the
> assumption of a fixed-ratio economic theory (which isn't valid), why
> does Andreeson have a "fair piece"?  Do you believe that he is entitled
> to make money regardless of whether or not consumers support his
> product?
> 
> Netscape used to make a substantial chunk of cash from its browser.  

Yes, and consumers paid for it.

> When IE was released on a no-pay basis, that revenue stream dried 
> up...

Yes.  Yes it did.  Consumers suddenly had an infinite drop in the price of
Netscape, and you rail as if this was a bad thing.

> including the money needed for further development.  It's clear 
> from the evidence gathered from MS that this was done to harm 
> Netscape, even to kill it if possible.  It's legal to do this in the 
> US... unless you're a monopoly.

Legal, yes.  Moral, no.  Fair, no.

> Whether you agree with the law or not does not exempt you from obeying
> it. 

Okay anti-Ghandi.

>       Even in the realm of conscientious objection, you are expected to
> take your lumps for disobeying an unjust law.

That doesn't mean for an instant one must justify and defend the unjust law,
as you have been doing.

> As for Andreeson's piece of the pie; he took a realm which had existed
> for over twenty years and made it a place where you can do business.  

Yes.  Then he showed he couldn't do business.  Tough for him.  Good for us.

> > First, they killed his main revenue stream
> 
> Every business aims to kill the main revenue stream of the competitor.
> When it succeeds, you cry foul??
> 
> MS didn't even try to compete with Netscape at first.

That doesn't make a lick of difference.  If Microsoft was the big dumb
company that didn't notice a great source of income, that was their fault.
They lost out as a result of that.

>                                                          Only when they 
> realized how well Netscape was doing did they move into the market; 
> and they did so by illegal means.  Point final.

These illegal means were perfectly justified, and therefore I will defend
them.  Point rational.

> Bill Gates isn't supposed to me some big protector of people's role in
> the game.  He, like everybody else playing, is playing to win (though
> its difficult when he accepts the DOJ actions as in some way shape or
> form valid).
> 
> Monopolists are not held to the same standards as everyone else.

No, they aren't.  They are persecuted, plain and simple.

>                                                                     Go 
> ask your local power monopoly if they are allowed to do whatever they 
> want to.

They're the government.  They get to do ANYTHING they want to, because they
define what is and isn't legal.

> If you are worried about companies getting too big, don't support them.
>  Microsoft and any other business is in a struggle every day to grow and
> maintain their size.
> 
> Hmmm.... it seems to me that Microsoft hasn't had any problems 
> whatsoever maintaining or even growing their size.

They're an innovative company.  All the power to them.  They haven't had
smooth sailing, though, and they've had a lot of cases where they struggled
to get an in.

> A humanistic analagous law would be to prevent individuals from becoming
> too smart.
> 
> Bad analogy.

A smart person is better equipped to be a person than a dumb one, same as a
big company is better equipped to compete (be a business) than a small one.

> >                                                                  The
> > idea is that a one-company town is no good for anyone.
> 
> So another company can move in.
> 
> You're not really making any sense here... I suppose you mean that 
> another company can move in and try to break the monopoly?

The only way a true monopoly can exist is if the government allows it.  In
which case, another company can't move in, but we're talking yet again about
an evil of government (just like antitrust laws).

If government isn't maintaining a monopoly, then it is not a monopoly.
There is nothing to break, and companies can move in and out as they please.

>                                                                 Like I 
> said, you should read your history; the railroad companies in the 
> 1800s used to use private armies to prevent people from competing with
> them... usually by burning down businesses in competition with the 
> company store.

That would be USING FORCE.

Give me ONE example of Microsoft doing this.  One computer store burned
down, one programmer beat to death.

All Microsoft did was compete.

> For example, the old Big Three oligopoly in car manufacturing in the 
> US got smoked once the Japanese got their costs of production low 
> enough to be able to out-compete them in both quality and price.

What do you mean, an example?  The three existing auto makers competed, and
another player was added to the mix.

While this compares greatly with the MS example, I thought you were going to
mention a monopoly.

> > That means you (or perhaps more to the point, the client) is paying
> > for Windows even if they don't really want it.
> 
> Hmmmm.  Well, they seemed to find the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.
> Very rarely do I buy something for all its purposes.  I don't care if my
> watch can survive 50 feet underwater...should I be able to force Timex
> to make a watch that cannot survive 50 feet underwater and sell it to me
> at a reduced rate?  Can I demand one less beverage holder in my Buick
> and save $30?
> 
> Well, yes, you can.  You can choose not to have a radio, for example. 

In other words, for some things you can get a change, for others you can
not.  Computers work the same way.

> >                                                 There are a few OS/2
> > offices that I know of; however, they bought windows, because when
> > they were setting up, they bought Micron and that meant they got
> > windows, even though they had no intention of using it.
> 
> That was their choice.
> 
> No it wasn't.

They chose to buy Micron, even though they weren't going to use all of its
features.  That was still their choice.

> don't have to. It is still largely impossible to not spend that money,
> and two years ago was completely impossible to do so.

Innovation could have done that.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jragosta@earthlink.net                            08-Dec-99 20:23:18
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Joe Ragosta <jragosta@earthlink.net>

In article <384EB50A.87AD0E32@flinthills.com>, Derek J Witt 
<djw@flinthills.com> wrote:

> Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first 
> place?
> It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not 
> be on
> Wall Street in the first place.

Amazing.

I'm just curious--what kind of work do you do that you could be so 
ignorant of financial matters and still survive? 7th grade student, 
maybe?

> 
> Ruel Smith wrote:
> 
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point 
> > because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, 
> > and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced 
> > developers are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit 
> > motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Phaedrus@NOSPAM.net.invalid                       08-Dec-99 20:15:11
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 (another moro

From: Phaedrus <Phaedrus@NOSPAM.net.invalid>

In article <384EB50A.87AD0E32@flinthills.com>, Derek J Witt 
<djw@flinthills.com> wrote:

> Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first 
> place?
> It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not 
> be on
> Wall Street in the first place.

ROTFLOL!!!

Making money a REQUIREMENT to be on Wall Street??? Only 1 in a 1000 
.coms has EVER made a dime!

"Earth to Jerk Witt. BUY A CLUE!"

-- 
Phaedrus <Phaedrus@NOSPAM.net.invalid>
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups."
n.b. e-mail is neither desired nor possible

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: EarthLink Network, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djw@flinthills.com                                08-Dec-99 19:36:10
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Derek J Witt <djw@flinthills.com>

Just a correction on the subject line. Macintosh (AKA System 1.0) has a
copyright of 1984.  Windows 1.0's copyright is 1985.

As for lack of commercial Linux applications,  software companies are slowly
coming out with Linux ports of their software.  Cases in points include Word
Perfect, Motif, and many 3DO games (Railroad Tycoon, Heroes of Might and Magic
III are being released by Loki Games http://www.lokigames.com). This list also
includes Oracle, Peachtree Accounting.

Linux is just not about open source.  It's freedom to write software when
deemed necessary.  This is brought mainly to lack of commercial software.

The good thing about this is that *individual* software authors can change
their own  licenses at will.   The types of licenses in reality depend on what
the software's purpose (among other factors).  Even though I mainly use Linux,
I do agree that there is a large lack of Linux commercial software, but Linux
is slowly catching up.  Linux won't die anytime soon.   As for other UNIX's,
Solaris is mostly commercial and for serious network environment, you do pay
for many OS's including Windows 9x, NT, and others. Thus, Windows for
businesses is NOT the only viable choice.

It is Linux and other alternative operating systems (such as MacOS, BeOS,
Solaris, BSD, and dare I say-DOS) that put Microsoft in its place. Also,
Microsoft did not invent DOS (Digital Research is the original designer of
DOS.
Anyone remember CP/M-86?).

Ruel Smith wrote:

> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>
> --
> Ruel Smith
> Cincinnati, OH
>
> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>
> "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
> news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> > kiwi wrote:
> > >
> > > Steve wrote:
> > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
> support
> > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
> great, why
> > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> > >
> > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > > bit different right now.
> >
> > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a win; if
> > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
> difference
> > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
> >
> > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
> didn't
> > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all competed
> on
> > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because Apple
> > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
> >
> > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after Microsoft
> > gave up on it.
> >
> > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels the
> > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
> stifled
> > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
> vendors
> > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server space
> as
> > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
> >
> > jim
> >

--
**  Derek J Witt                                              **
*   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
*   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
*** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djw@flinthills.com                                08-Dec-99 19:39:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Derek J Witt <djw@flinthills.com>

Middle Brandon Era wrote:

> In article <82el70$c2r$1@sparky.wolfe.net>,
> ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar)
> wrote:
>
> > Consider your favorite web browser..  How often has it crashed at an
> >inopportune time?  Wouldn't it be nice if you had the option of digging
> >in and eliminating the bug that made it crash, instead of just starting
> >the old binary back up and hoping it doesn't happen again for a while?
>
> I'd rather just have it work properly from the get go, rather than have
> go digging around. I'm bettting most computer users feel the same way.
>
> --
> -Brandon Blatcher
> ICQ#51619871

Then again, most average computer users do not write software.

--
**  Derek J Witt                                              **
*   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
*   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
*** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djw@flinthills.com                                08-Dec-99 19:44:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Derek J Witt <djw@flinthills.com>

Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first place?
It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not be on
Wall Street in the first place.

Ruel Smith wrote:

> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point because
> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, and
> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers are
> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit motive,
> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>
> --
> Ruel Smith
> Cincinnati, OH
>
> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>
> "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
> news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> > kiwi wrote:
> > >
> > > Steve wrote:
> > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones that
> support
> > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
> great, why
> > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> > >
> > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > > bit different right now.
> >
> > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a win; if
> > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
> difference
> > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
> >
> > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
> didn't
> > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all competed
> on
> > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because Apple
> > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
> >
> > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after Microsoft
> > gave up on it.
> >
> > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels the
> > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
> stifled
> > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
> vendors
> > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server space
> as
> > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
> >
> > jim
> >

--
**  Derek J Witt                                              **
*   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
*   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
*** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: edremy@chemserver.chem.vt.edu                     08-Dec-99 15:03:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Eric Remy <edremy@chemserver.chem.vt.edu>

In article <384EB50A.87AD0E32@flinthills.com>, Derek J Witt 
<djw@flinthills.com> wrote:

>Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first 
>place?
>It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not 
>be on
>Wall Street in the first place.

Welcome to the 90's.  Making money is no longer a requirement for having 
a stock cap in the $BIGNUM range.

Hell, having a coherent business plan isn't needed either, or a product, 
or...

A .com in the name: now *that's* the needed part.  Personally, I'm 
taking Remy.com public next week.  I plan on selling things on the net: 
I'll decide what from my private yacht off Bermuda once the stock goes 
public next week.  Hurry: I'm offering all c.s.m.a readers 10 shares at 
the initial offering price of $10/share.

That said, RH actually has a coherent business plan and is reasonably 
close to being profitable.  Not worth $200+ a share, no, but it's a damn 
sight better than most of the .coms.

-- 
Eric Remy.  Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"But simply by putting my hair into a  | How many errors can
ponytail I transform into the coolest  | you find in my X-Face?
guy in the office"- Wally, _Dilbert_   |

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Va Tech (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 20:44:08
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: I really need your help

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:56:58, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

> OS/2 was meant to have a GUI from the start.  OS/2 was LATE.  OS/2 was
finally
> shipped without the PM as v 1.0 so it could get to customers (who wouldn't
> have GUI apps to run anyhow) but who needed the better OS stability and
> multitasking so they wanted to try OS/2.  I got a copy of V 1.0 and began
> using it due to the fact most MS compilers supported CLI OS/2 and generated
> DOS/OS/2 apps.   The PM was separated and shipped in 1.1 and it was a flaky
> release.
> 
Speaking as Mr B. L. Zebub's advocate here: so Windows was DOS's GUI, 
only a bit late in shipping?

I'm curious how to make the distinction between an O/S with a 
graphical user interface and an O/S with a GUI strapped onto it? It 
seems to me the nomenclature is a bit flaky in this area.

> The fact OS/2 was shipped and usable  without the PM does not mean PM was an
> addon.  By the time OS/2  shipped, late 1987, GUI's were common (Mac was out
> for a while) and the 16MB virtual memory space, preemptive multitasking and
> protected memory model of OS/2 1.x made it ideal for such an interface.
> 
But it still came *after* the O/S. Macs have a graphical O/S, no 
debate about that. I don't even think you can get rid of the GUI, but 
how is OS/2 to be classified?

[snip]

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 20:44:10
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:45:29, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> > How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
> >
> > Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> > complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> > maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> > Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> > it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> > product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> > found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> > the other half).
> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.
> >
> > The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> > OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> > removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> > objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.
> 
> Another suggestion is for Bob to flame them - like the windows advocates do
to
> anyone who complains.  He can tell them they're stupid and maybe mock their
> names and taunt them.
> 
> 
Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

Isn't that against "the Charter"?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             09-Dec-99 09:53:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384E44D9.F14BC933@ibm.net...
>
> Another suggestion is for Bob to flame them - like the windows advocates
do to
> anyone who complains.  He can tell them they're stupid and maybe mock
their
> names and taunt them.
>
Any flames Boob gets are entirely of his own doing.  Read back a few months
in the NT Advocacy group, and check out some of Boobs old posts.  We're just
treating him as he would obviously like to be treated.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             09-Dec-99 10:01:06
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote in message news:384C773F.B28CA181@ibm.net...
>
> >
> > No, that's the period we live in.  CD's are very popular - you may have
seen
> > them.   Boob seems to be somewhere in the late eighties.
>
> Why not floppies if you're going to use old technology to distribute
software.

Doesn't fit on a floppy.  It's not QNX.

> This is the internet age.   It began in the late 90's and cutting edge,
low
> cost, low labor distribution is networked based.  If you want to insult
someone
> then tell them to upgrade their connectivity to say, DSL -- don't
embarrass
> yourself with a retort about pressing and shipping CD's as a modern
solution.

Boob was complaining about cost - I fail to see how DSL could make this
better, it will cost more.  As opposed to spending $20 to get the CD from
Microsoft.  I said nothing about pressing CD's either - Microsoft sells
them.

Don't embarrass yourself with a retort that is bound to cost the customer
far far more than a single CD.
 Live in the real world.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: da728@torfree.net                                 08-Dec-99 20:27:06
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451517

From: da728@torfree.net (Karl Knechtel)

Pascal Haakmat (p@awacs.dhs.org) wrote:
: tholenbot wrote:

: >> >> >> Whatever turns you on, Dave.
: >> >> >
: >> >> >Trying to get a "rise" out of him, Pascal?
: >> >> 
: >> >> Do you regard him as "fallen", Eric?
: >> >
: >> >Reading comprehension problems, Pascal?
: >> 
: >> Comprehend context, Eric.
: >
: >Illogical.

: Why?

Don't you know, Pascal?

Karl Knechtel
da728 at torfree dot net

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Toronto Free-Net (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ssivier@best.com                                  08-Dec-99 13:09:07
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: ssivier@best.com (Sivier, Steve)

In article <384EB3DD.F8F21EAD@flinthills.com>, Derek J Witt
<djw@flinthills.com> wrote:

> Middle Brandon Era wrote:
> 
> > In article <82el70$c2r$1@sparky.wolfe.net>,
> > ttk@for_mail_remove_this_and_fruit.larva.apple.shinma.org (TTK Ciar)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Consider your favorite web browser..  How often has it crashed at an
> > >inopportune time?  Wouldn't it be nice if you had the option of digging
> > >in and eliminating the bug that made it crash, instead of just starting
> > >the old binary back up and hoping it doesn't happen again for a while?
> >
> > I'd rather just have it work properly from the get go, rather than have
> > go digging around. I'm bettting most computer users feel the same way.
> >
> > --
> > -Brandon Blatcher
> > ICQ#51619871
> 
> Then again, most average computer users do not write software.

Thank god for that.

Steve

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Lockheed Martin Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            08-Dec-99 20:44:09
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:28:25, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
wrote:

> On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-tWdhfr3Pvp0z@localhost>, on 12/07/99 at 10:25 AM,
>    jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
> > > 
> > > Did his racial slur against Arabs "make sense"?  How about his statement
> > > about the opinions of Canadians?
> 
> 
> > Is *that* what a "canuck" is? I was wondering...
> > No, it doesn't. What do you want me to do? (everyone seems to want me 
> > to say or do something these days...)
> 
> Canuck is a term I reserve for ignorant Canadians only. However, it is a
> frequently used term for Canadians in general in many parts of the world. 
> It is in no way a racial slur. It is an ethnic slur if you want it to be.
> But then so is Yank or Yankee. Only those with either a very bad
> inferiority complex or some other serious mental deficiency would consider
> any of those three terms truly offensive.
> 
I must admit this is the first time I've seen the term. I hope it's 
not like "Polak", a term you would be well advised not to use it in a 
bar frequented by Polish people, not unless you actually like having 
your face re-done the hard way (I own a Polish bar in Brussels, so for
once I know what I'm talking about).

> > Bob, Are you a racist? Do you consider other ethnic 
> > groups/nationalities to be inferior to your own? If so, I won't talk  to
> > you anymore, as I consider racists to be a lower form of life.
> 
> Racism is based upon race, not national origin. A Yank can be Black,
> White, Oriental, Brown, Red, etc. racially. The term Arab properly applies
> to that part of the world where Arabic is the predominate language. The
> racial term for those from that region as well as from Israel is Semite, a
> sub-group of the white race.
> 
I'm aware that racism is usually reserved for ethnic-related stuff, 
but I have encountered enough prejudice against nationalities to see 
the relation.

BTW, I think the "PC" term is "caucasian" (people tend to have 
_really_ short fuses in these matters).

> The same is true of the term Hispanic. Hispanics racially are
> predominately caucausian. There is a mixture of Black and Red in the
> racial background of many Hispanics from the Caribbean and Mexico to be
> sure, but a visit to Mexico will demonstrate that most appear to be
> largely if not entirely Caucausian. And don't forget that all the citizens
> of Spain and Argentina and Chile, etc. are also Hispanics. Brazilians are
> often accused of being Hispanic, but they are not. They speak Portugese.
> 
> Those of us old enough to remember Harry Truman as President will also
> remember when Blacks were not permitted to play major league baseball.
> Neither were dark skinned Hispanics. But if your skin was fair enough, you
> could play in the majors and many did.
> 
I'm not a United Statesian, this is new for me. Did they use a colour 
card, like PanTone's?

> I have hired both Blacks and Orientals. I have a Black son-in-law with
> whom I play golf every Sunday morning, who accompanies me and shares a
> hotel room with me every year on our annual pilgrimage to Myrtle Beach in
> March for a week of golf, who (with my daugher and their 3 kids) spends a
> couple of weeks in our home every year, and who I dearly love as much as a
> father in law can love a son in law, I doubt that I can be considered a
> racist. I have banned one of my brothers in law from entering our house
> because he said he wouldn't come to our house if our son in law or his
> "nigger loving wife" was coming. He is Rachel's brother. He said that at
> the burial of our oldest son who was killed in a car accident.
> 
> Our great grandson is of mixed race as well. Our oldest grandchild married
> a Black man who fathered her child. My great grandson is obviously not
> purely White. The dark skin, curly hair, etc. tell anyone that. But I love
> the little bugger as much as any of my children or grandchildren. We
> babysit him frequently, and I take him everywhere when he is here. He's
> been to client's offices, church, shopping, neighbors, etc. since before
> he could walk. He's been to Rotary with me three times, accompanies me to
> Chamber of Commerce luncheons when he's here, etc.
> 
> Am I a racist? I don't think so. Neither to our non-white friends, our
> non-white employees, etc. --
> 

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             09-Dec-99 09:52:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384e67ae$6$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82jrje$r8p$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, on 12/07/99 at 08:44 PM,
>    cbass2112@my-deja.com said:
>
>
> > Or you could have downloaded it yourself, at home, using a 56K modem and
> > a  flat-rate ISP.
>
> No, it is interactive and you have to apply the right fixes in the right
> order.
>
> > Since IE5 is free, you could have deployed the one copy across the
> > client's entire enterprise.
>
> No, the updates are an interactive process which begins the moment you
> access the update site. Even if one could download, one cannot put it on a
> floppy and only 2 machines in the firm have CD-ROM drives. Both are on the
> network, both are internals, and the upgrades require intermediate reboots
> which look for the CD-ROM during the boot and one never gets to network
> logon.

No they don't.  I've never seen IE5 require an intermediate reboot.  It goes
through install, then reboots, configures itself as the machine comes up,
without requiring access to the CD/network.  For a consultant, you really
don't seem familiar with the products.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             09-Dec-99 09:58:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-618xBkFkOfIQ@localhost...
> How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
>
> Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> the other half).

But Boob should have known that you can install IE5 from a $20 CD.  his
entire downloading argument seems to be constructed for two purposes - one
so that he could sell OS/2, and two so that he could bash windows.


>
> What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> what an idiot would do.

The thing that worries me is that he could choose between one $20 CD (IE5) ,
or twenty odd OS/2 licenses (probably $100 each).  Doesn't seem like good
economics to me.
>
> The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.
>
The idea is to give your clients the best value for money - I fail to see
how making them spend $2000 vs $20 to solve one simple problem is good
value.  Of course Boob hasn't given us all the facts, so there may be other
issues that make OS/2 more viable (although considering the vendor of OS/2
barely acknowldges that it exists, it does seem a bad choice).  However, his
initial post showed a supreme misunderstanding of the technology.


Stu


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ispalten@us.ibm.com                               08-Dec-99 13:38:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: fix pack installaton

From: Irv Spalten <ispalten@us.ibm.com>

Ivan, not sure how you are installing the FP over the LAN, you were not
very specific.

The reason for the re-boot is to handle LOCKED FILES. No way around it.
FSERVICE should have terminated after it displayed the message and the
user responded. 

There is a README.CID with the FP, read that as it might help.

Irv

Ivan Tang wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> I am trying to install an OS2 fix pack in the computers in our LAN. In order
> to minimize the possible interpution to our users, I am using
> the unattended mode and a response file to install the fix pack.
> 
> My question is: At the end of the installation, it prompts the users
> to enter ctrl-alt-del to restart the computer. After rebooting
> the PC, the fix pack installation program, fservice.exe, is still running. I
> just wonder how to make this fservice.exe to terminated by
> itself?  I have read books about the CID installation, and found
> that there is a key word "RebootRequired" could make the PC to restart
> itself by adding it into the response file, but the
> response file comes with the fix pack  did not allow me to add such
> word, what have I done wrong?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Victor
> email: victor.hw.tang@hkjc.org.hk

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Corp. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               08-Dec-99 16:59:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 8 Dec 1999 18:30:43 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>
=>It means a "monopoly" (which can apply to any business you choose) must
=>suddenly care more about others than itself.  Mandatory altruism, where a
=>company must suddenly give its competitors an advantage at every turn.
=>
=>By that standard, if a hockey team is at the top of its standings, it must
=>regularly lose to teams in the divison to keep it "fair".

It has nothing to do with altruism, or with giving competitors an advantage.

THE PURPOSE OF A BUSINESS IS TO SATISFY THE CUSTOMERS.

That's all. That's its only justification for existence. (If you want to say
it's to make a profit, you are confusing incentive and purpose. Since so many
people make the same mistake, I guess you can be xcused from making it too
--once!)

Therefore, a business does not have the right to limit, constrain, or force
customers' choices.

If you disagree with this proposition, you are subscribing to the business
ethic of organised crime.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               08-Dec-99 16:47:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 8 Dec 1999 20:04:54 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>By operating their own business, they were able to do this.
=>
=>It is illegal for a company to charge more than a competitor.
=>It is illegal for a company to charge less than a competitor.
=>It is illegal for a company to charge the same as a competitor.
=>
=>So yes, by entering into business Microsoft was able to "restrain trade".
=>All they had to do was sell a product.  Things like writing a contract just
=>sealed the case against their "horrendous" practises.

Bullshit.

What's illeagl is to nobbnle the competition by making contracts with OEMs
and/or resellers that limit resellers' ability to offer the full range of
available product to their customers.

If Microsoft retailed their product directly to consumers rather than via
intermediaries, there would be no problem, ethical or legal. It's because
they interfered in the flow of competitors' product to potential buyers that
they are in shit. As they should be. What they did was immoral,
unethical,definitely not politically correct, and against even Libertarian
principles. (I refrain from characterising those principles.)






--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               08-Dec-99 17:01:09
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 8 Dec 1999 18:16:21 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>This is an extension of the belief that a business must constantly be
=>looking out for the interests of those who are not them...from competitors
=>to customers.  It is quite incompatible with a notion of freedom.

This is very interesting concept of freedom. Explain.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca                         08-Dec-99 22:09:11
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel)

Karel Jansens (jansens_at_ibm_dot_net) wrote:
: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:28:25, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
: wrote:

[ old stuff snipped..]

: > Canuck is a term I reserve for ignorant Canadians only. However, it is a
: > frequently used term for Canadians in general in many parts of the world. 
: > It is in no way a racial slur. It is an ethnic slur if you want it to be.
: > But then so is Yank or Yankee. Only those with either a very bad
: > inferiority complex or some other serious mental deficiency would consider
: > any of those three terms truly offensive.
: > 
: I must admit this is the first time I've seen the term. I hope it's 
: not like "Polak", a term you would be well advised not to use it in a 
: bar frequented by Polish people, not unless you actually like having 
: your face re-done the hard way (I own a Polish bar in Brussels, so for
: once I know what I'm talking about).

I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term Canuck.
In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the Vancouver
Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense to the name
"New York Yankies". 

--
Bill

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Victoria Telecommunity Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               08-Dec-99 17:20:08
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 8 Dec 1999 17:57:06 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>Nobody has yet shown a real world example where Microsoft "forced" somebody
=>to do something.

Well, here's one. Listen up. Lars, this really happened.

Prefatory remark: When the context in which you make a choice is such that
some choice you want  to make is simply not available, then someone or
something has exercised force by limiting your options.

I wanted to choose to buy a nifty computer at a nifty price, as advertised in
the local press. I called to determine whether I could get that nifty machine
without the bundled software. No problem, said the salesperson. Would I get a
discount for that? No problem, said the sales person. Could I get the machine
blank, ie, with NO operating system whatever on it? Problem, said the
salesperson. I had to take Win95 if I bought the machine. Well, would they
wipe the hard drive for me? Well, maybe, but couldn't I do it myself? I don't
want ot, I said; youi do it for me. Well, no they could not do that. Well,
waht if I came in, and reformatted the drive myself, right there in the shop,
and left the Win95 CD etx behind? Well, I guess that would be alright, said
the salesperson. In that case would I get a discount for the now non-existent
OS on that machine ? No, I would have to pay for it anyhow!

Now that little story means that someone or other was limiting my choices.

If that someone or other is the State of the Universe, you have to grin and
bear it.

If that someone or other is a human being (or an organisation of human
beings), then that someone oir something made a decision or choice which
resulted in harm to me -- the harm of limiting my options. That's wrong, even
by, no >>espcially by<< Ayn Rand's standards. And therefore I have a right to
try to make them pay.

Lars, if you are a follower of Ayn Rand (as your rhetoric suggests,) then you
had better figure out all the implications of her philosophy.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               08-Dec-99 17:33:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 19:54:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 8 Dec 1999 18:30:43 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>> Locking up a market is, in general, not permitted, for more or less
obvious
=>> reasons
=>
=>The reasons are obvious...and WRONG.

I presume you will list them, and explain why they are wrong.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: SkidMARX@att.net                                  08-Dec-99 22:32:05
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: SkidMARX@att.net

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 13:42:16, "David T. Johnson" 
<djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> Thomas Galley wrote:
> > 
> > Hey!
> > 
> > I would like to thank the aforementioned persons for their presence in
> > this NG, because each time I get tired from staring to intensely at the
> > computer screen trying to decipher the output of just another cryptic
> > PERL script, I just switch to my newsreader and start reading the latest
> > trollings there!
> 
> I thought I was the only one who found this newsgroup relaxing!
> 
> 
Thomas,

No No No !!!

By far you're not the only one ...

Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
response from Thoren and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...

:=)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Dec-99 22:14:14
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: (1/2) Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82ke2f$p6b$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Curtis Bass writes:
>
> > There is no inconsistency, Dave.
>
> That you would pontificate as such is to be expected, Curtis.

Stating a fact hardly qualifies as "pontificating."

> > That you will insist otherwise is to be expected.
>
> How ironic.

What is ironic, Dave? I expected you to insist otherwise, and you did.
That isn't "ironic," Dave. The word is "predictable."

> > On the contrary, you simply hide behind this semantics argument
> > rather than admit what you implied.
>
> I've already admitted that I didn't imply what you claimed I implied,
> Curtis.

Denial is not admission, Dave. You are really crumbling at this point
(which you will, of course, deny/question).

> > Typical Tholen denial.
>
> More like an typical indication of the truth by me, and your dislike
> for it.

A "typical indication of the truth" by Tholen?!?!  Laughable.

> > Wrong. It was not my "stated reason for not writing it that way" at
> > all.
>
> Balderdash, Curtis:
>
> CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

And "up" can be a preposition under certain circumstances.

-- snip --

> > *I* realized that there was at least one other correct way to do
> > this.
>
> One other?  Are you claiming that your chosen way is correct, Curtis?

Upon reflection, I am no longer convinced that "to which you failed to
measure up" is correct. Ergo, I used the *only* correct phrasing of
which I am aware.

> > I even said, "I suppose I could have used 'to which you failed to
> > measure up'" immediately after you asked what "up" was doing at the
> > beginning of the phrase.
>
> But you didn't choose that because:
>
> CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

Absolutely. "Up" can be considered a preposition in this case.

> > Nevertheless, my original grammar is quite correct.
>
> What's a "standard up", Curtis?

It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems, Dave.

> > The only problem is that you don't *like* it for some reason.
>
> It's poorly written, Curtis.  "Inept."

Actually, upon reflection, it's the only correct way to write it. My
only fault is that I didn't use commas to separate the phrases so that
even you could understand it.

> > You have yet to indicate how "up to which you failed to measure" is
> > grammatically incorrect.
>
> Irrelevant, given that I wasn't commenting on that phrase, Curtis.  I
> was commenting on your entire sentence.

Then you have yet to indicate how the entire sentence is grammatically
incorrect.  Lack of punctuation, to which I have already admitted,
doesn't qualify as "grammar."

-- snip --

> > Yes, I failed to take into consideration that your copy of
> > JAVAINUF.EXE may be corrupt.
>
> I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
> to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
> I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
> word "corrupt".  "Inept."

Because "corrupt" is a valid word to use. I have already gone over this,
Dave. That you continue to ignore it is not surprising.

One definition of "corrupt" is "to alter from the original or correct
form or version." Removing bytes from a file qualifies as "altering from
the corrent form" regardless of how the bytes are removed.

It's just another one of those things that happens to be correct, but
Dave Tholen doesn't *LIKE* it for some reason.

Too bad, Dave.  Deal with it.

> > ***BUT SO DID YOU, DAVE!!!!***  You posted "evidence" based on this
> > broken copy of yours, and you didn't even realize it was broken.
>
> There was no prior evidence of it being incomplete, Curtis.

And there was no such prior evidence when I called you inept.

> > Yet you expected *me* to realize it was broken.
>
> I certainly realized the possibility after evaluating the evidence.

Evidence that you alone possessed (file sizes).

> Meanwhile, you jumped to an erroneous conclusion and didn't even
> consider other possibilities.  "Inept."

But you published evidence based on your erroneous conclusion. If what I
did was "inept," then what you did was "extremely inept."

> > And you have yet to admit to this error,
>
> What alleged error, Curtis?

Failing to consider the possibility that your copy of JAVAINUF.EXE was
corrupt before posting your evidence to counter Mike Timbol's claim that
he could extract the contents of JAVAINUF.EXE using WinZip.

> > of which you are accusing me.
>
> You certainly never indicated that you considered the possibility,
> Curtis.

Neither did you, until well after you published your "evidence." By
then, it was too late. Your ineptness was already exposed.

> > That, Dave, is blatant hypocrisy at its finest.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that everything you wrote above is
> true.

I am not "presupposing" anything, Dave.  One of your problems is that,
anytime someone confronts you with a fact that you decide you don't
like, you try to dismiss the fact as a "presupposition."

That isn't logic at work, Dave.

> How ironic, coming from someone so hypocritical as to continue
> posting in a sub-thread, even after claiming that a post made weeks
> ago would be your last in this sub-thread.

I made a mistake when I claimed that posting to be my last. "Making a
mistake" is not "hypocrisy."

> > No, Dave.
>
> Balderdash, Curtis.
>
> > It cannot be, because you would not be able to extract anything by
> > running your broken copy of JAVAINUF.EXE in an OS/2 session.
>
> Doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2, Curtis.

Your broken, corrupt copy "does run under OS/2," Dave? Even though it
didn't extract any files?

Gee, weren't you claiming just a few weeks ago how the JAVAINUF.EXE file
didn't "run under DOS" because that didn't cause the files to be
extracted? Well, Dave, by the same token, if files weren't extracted,
then it most certainly did *NOT* run under OS/2.

> > On the contrary, you would have gotten error messages similar to the
> > ones you got from InfoZip.
>
> Incorrect, Curtis.  The messages were not at all similar.

They would have to be similar in intent (i.e. to indicate a failure in
performing the extraction).

> > You have just posted more misinformation.
>
> Balderdash, Curtis.  You're the one posting the misinformation, by
> claiming that the error messages would be similar.  How ironic.

So you admit that you got error messages. That is the only level of
similarity that matters.

-- snip --

> > Remember, your statement is, "Yet to look at the contents, one must
> > have run the executable file and on an OS/2 system to boot!"
>
> Remember, my copy of the javainuf.exe file was different, Curtis.

Yes, it was corrupt, so it could not perform any archive extraction, but
only display some kind of error messages, which you have already
admitted.

> > Since your copy would not have extracted the archive when run, even
> > on an OS/2 system, the statement is still incorrect.
>
> My copy of the file does run on an OS/2 system, Curtis.

Your corrupt copy?  All it does is produce error message, as you have
already admitted.

"It doesn't execute the program, Marty.  It displays a stub."
Tholen -- 10/31/1999

"The display of a stub doesn't represent the execution of the program,
Marty." Tholen -- 10/31/1999

"That's what you call 'running' the program, Marty?  You clearly said
that the self-extracting archive will run in a DOS session.  The display
of a stub doesn't extract any archive."  Tholen -- 10/31/1999

Using your own arguments as a basis, substituting "error messages" for
"stub," I refute your claim that "[your] copy of the file does run on an
OS/2 system."

You lose again.

> > Now, if you tell us that you *DID* run your broken copy of
> > JAVAINUF.EXE in OS/2 and extracted classes.zip successfully, then
> > that would prove wrong another statement you made, namely, that all
> > unzip tools should behave the same *ON YOUR COPY.*
>
> Irrelevant, given that I did not tell you that the extraction was
> successful, Curtis.

Then it didn't "run."

> > Including the self-extraction module contained in JAVAINUF.EXE.
>
> Still irrelevant, Curtis, for the same reason.
>
> > Which would be another error on your part.
>
> Still irrelevant, Curtis, for the same reason.
>
> > So, which is it, Dave?
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that your choices are correct choices,
> Curtis.

Did you or did you not extract classes.zip from your *BROKEN*
JAVAINUF.EXE, Dave?

Choice #1: If yes, then the self-contained self-extraction module
behaved differently than InfoZip on your corrupt file, in spite of the
following:

     "I fully expect other unzip tools to behave
     similarly with the same file as argument."  Tholen -- 11/02/1999

     "What's allegedly 'stupid' about expecting
     other unzip tools to behave similarly with
     the same file as argument?"  Tholen -- 11/02/1999

Are you admitting to stupidity, Dave?  That's worse than "inept" isn't
it?

Choice #2: If no, then the following statement is wrong:

     "My statement is correct when applied to my
     copy of the javainuf.exe file, Curtis."  Tholen -- 12/07/1999

"My statement" refers to the following:

     "Yet to look at the contents, one must have
     run the executable file and on an OS/2 system
     to boot!"  Tholen -- 10/29/1999

which is simply wrong, since running Dave's broken JAVAINUF.EXE in an
OS/2 session still doesn't allow one to look at the contents.

> > I fully expect you to deny both errors, which, of course, would be a
> > self-contradicting paradox.
>
> What alleged "both errors", Curtis?

The ones I reiterated above. Granted, only one is actually an error
(#2), but the issue is that you will admit to neither one. The issue is
the paradoxical, self-contradicting position into which you have put
yourself.

> > So much for Tholen Logic.
>
> How ironic, coming from the person whose logic didn't even come up
> with the possibility that the files were different.

Neither did your "logic," hypocrite, until after Marty busted a
four-by-four over your head, by stating that he *did* successfully use
infoZip to extract the contents of JAVAINUF.EXE. *THAT* is what it took
to clue you in, and you have the gall to chide me when I didn't have any
evidence, beyond your game-playing, from which to draw such a
conclusion.

> > You have just repeated your error.
>
> What alleged error, Curtis?

"My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis."  Tholen -- 12/07/1999

> > You have repeated it a second time.
>
> What alleged error, Curtis?

"My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis."  Tholen -- 12/07/1999

> > And a third. You have posted the same incorrect statement four times
> > in one post.
>
> What alleged error, Curtis?

"My statement is correct when applied to my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis."  Tholen -- 12/07/1999

-- snip --

> > Big deal.  That you don't *like* what I say or the way I say it is
> > self-evident.
>
> Where did I say I didn't like it, Curtis?

Where did I ever claim that you *said* you didn't like something, Dave?

> > Unless you can find actual fault with what I say, or how
> > I say it, you have no argument.
>
> I have found fault with what you wrote, Curtis.  What is a
> "standard up"?

It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems and general
ineptness, Dave.

> I do have an argument, yet you keep ignoring it
> by referring to a phrase that excludes the word "standard".

"What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?" Tholen --
11/24/1999

Seems like you referred "to a phrase that excludes the word 'standard'."

So why criticize me when I do it, hypocrite?

> I keep talking about your sentence

"What is a 'standard up'?" Tholen -- 11/08/1999

Looks to me like you are talking about a phrase, not a sentence.

> but you like to avoid that by focusing attention on a phrase.

"What is a 'standard up'?" Tholen -- 11/08/1999

Looks like you're "focusing attention on a phrase" as well, hypocrite.

> > Dave fails to understand Time.
>
> Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.  I understand that
> now follows before, chronologically.  You apparently think that all
> your responses in this sub-thread predate your claim that a particular
> post would be your last in this sub-thread.

"What appears to you is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant."

> > At the Time I made my statment that I would make no further
> > postings, I was sincere.
>
> You have a peculiar definition of "sincere", Curtis.  Witness your
> continued postings in this sub-thread.

Yeah, my "peculiar" definition comes from a standard dictionary. You
should consult one, sometime. That I made a mistake when I claimed "this
is my last post" is exactly that, a mistake. A mistake is not hypocrisy,
nor is it a lack of sincerity.

> > At that Time, I had no intention of continuing.
>
> Yet you have, numerous times.  So much for your alleged sincerity.

Yes, Dave, your accusations were stronger than my resolve.  That doesn't
disprove my sincerity, however.

> > That I changed my mind at a later Time does not invalidate my
> > original sincerity,
>
> Yes it does, Curtis.

Gee, and you have the gall to whine about "pontification."

Post a referenced definition of "sincerity" that substantiates your
insane claim, one that I can verify.

> > Dave's inevitable claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
> How ironic, coming from someone who is making "inevitable claims" to
> the contrary.

Tu quoque arguments are an indication that you have no argument at all.

-- snip --

> > That you educate young adults is downright scary.
>
> Typical invective.  I happen to have above average evaluations in one
> of the top programs in the country.  Do you think you can do better,
> Curtis?

Did I claim I could, Dave?

Based on your applications of logic, and resulting conclusions, I stand
by my observation, regardless of whether I could "do better" or not as
an astronomy teacher or astronomer.

And getting "above average evaluations" isn't really that impressive,
considering how much mediocrity there is out in the world.

Like I have said before, one can only *HOPE*  that you are better at
your trade than you are at doing whatever it is you do here.  Yeah, I

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             08-Dec-99 22:14:14
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: (2/2) Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

know. You claim to be "countering misinformation," which is laughable,
considering that you have posted misinformation, and have yet to
identify it as such, in order to "counter" it.

> > Not during an adversarial exchange, you haven't.
>
> What do you consider an "adversarial exchange", Curtis?
>
> That you have never, ever identified one of these allegedly unadmitted
> errors in an adversarial exchange supports the belief that you're
> simply pontificating again.
>
> > As exchange between adversaries, as opposed to an exchange between
> > friends or buddies.
>
> None of my exchanges in this newsgroup have been with "friends" or
> "buddies", Curtis.

Some have been on a friendly basis, which amounts to the same thing,

> Does that automatically make everyone an adversary?

Obviously not.

> Or are there more possibilities than the ones you provided?

Nope. It's dichotomous.  Either an exchange is friendly (regardless of
whether the parties are actually "friends") or it is adversarial.

> > Did I really have to spell that out for you, a university professor?
>
> What does being a university professor have to do with it, Curtis?
> Does that somehow make us automatically able to read minds?

"Read minds," Dave?  How about "understand English?" Something a
university professor should be able to do.

> > I have identified this one several times now:
> >
> > "Yet to look at the contents, one must have run the executable file
> > and on an OS/2 system to boot!"  Dave Tholen -- 10/29/1999
>
> Irrelevant, Curtis, given that you were making the claim before that
> statement was even made.  Surely that means you have other evidence,
> yet you've never provided any.

It's still an error, regardless of when I made the claim or when you
made the error.  Dismissing it as "irrelevant" is simply pontification
on your part.

> > You will now procede to ignore it again,
>
> That's because it's irrelevant, Curtis, given that you were making the
> claim before that statement was even made.

No, it's because you never admit to errors during adversarial exchanges.
When I first made the claim is irrelevant, as is when you made this
particular error.

> > or perhaps claim again (erroneously) that it's "correct when applied
> > to [your] copy of the javainuf.exe file,"
>
> On what basis do you call it erroneous, Curtis?

On the basis that it's incorrect, wrong, an error.

> > or again go through the "logical" steps you took to arrive at this
> > error.
>
> On what basis do you call it an error, Curtis?

On the basis that it's incorrect, wrong, erroneous.

> > If you choose to ignore it, you will procede to snip it based on
> > your lame justification you always use (the one that will be at the
> > top of your reply).
>
> How ironic, coming from someone who has snipped freely and justified
> it by writing:
>
> CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
> CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so
> CB] inclined.
>
> Hypocrite.

"Snipped freely?"  I restored context. The only thing I "snipped freely"
were your own worthless, misleading and downright incorrect statements.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   08-Dec-99 18:17:25
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

First of all, we're not talking about distributers of the OS. They just
package what's out there and publish it in a purchasable package. They do
some development, mostly in the form of installation programs and such, but
nowhere near what the OS actually is comprised of. That stuff is done be
people donating their time to the GNU project and Linus Torvalds to the
kernel as well as contributors to other projects often used by Linux users
like Apache. GNU has lasted awhile, but I still believe that it will be
difficult for the free software movement to go on forever...

Many companies are on the stock market and haven't produced a single dollar
of profit. Take a look at Metrowerks, before their buyout by Motorola, and
Amazon.com. Neither has made a profit to this date. Yet, they are alive and
well, Amazon.com is still purchasable on the exchange and it's price as
soared (contrary to to common investment intelligence). Yet, Amazon.com
continues to lose money quarter after quarter... I don't know the status of
Red Hat, as they are new to the market and I don't believe they've issued a
quarterly report, yet. Their financial matters when they were private are
unknown.  bool revenue != profit; (if you can read C++)

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Derek J Witt" <djw@flinthills.com> wrote in message
news:384EB50A.87AD0E32@flinthills.com...
> Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first
place?
> It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not
be on
> Wall Street in the first place.
>
> Ruel Smith wrote:
>
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit
motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
> > --
> > Ruel Smith
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
> > CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
> >
> > "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
> > news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> > > kiwi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Steve wrote:
> > > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones
that
> > support
> > > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
> > great, why
> > > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> > > >
> > > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > > > bit different right now.
> > >
> > > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a
win; if
> > > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
> > difference
> > > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
> > >
> > > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
> > didn't
> > > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all
competed
> > on
> > > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> > > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because
Apple
> > > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
> > >
> > > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after
Microsoft
> > > gave up on it.
> > >
> > > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels
the
> > > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
> > stifled
> > > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
> > vendors
> > > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server
space
> > as
> > > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
> > >
> > > jim
> > >
>
> --
> **  Derek J Witt                                              **
> *   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
> *   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
> *** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **
>
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lost@the.wood                                     08-Dec-99 16:44:15
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: I really need your help (Boy! has this title turned out to be 

From: Red Dog <lost@the.wood>

I truly enjoyed that Karel. Thanks.

Karel Jansens wrote:

> <sigh>
> One more time then.
>
> You are right in saying that there is a lot of things I don't know.
> I'm aware of that. If it weren't so, I would be God, and you'd long
> since have been staring (albeit very, very briefly) at the wrong end
> of a lightning bolt.
>
> But opinions are *not* facts; one is allowed to have them, even
> without knowledge of the facts. People can adjust them when the facts
> change, or not. There really isn't much you can do about it, Jeff.
>
> As for opinions of people: like I explained before, I prefer to base
> mine on personal experience. You have a problem with that. Fine. Eat
> it. There is nothing you can do about it.
>
> I really, really don't understand this: I have an opinion of a person
> that differs from yours and you're going completely berzerk over this.
> Why? "Is it because of your sexlife that you are going through this?"
>
> On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:49:46, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)
> wrote:
>
> > >Karel Jansens
> > >That's why I put a *question mark* at the end of the sentence, Jeff.
> > >It means I am asking a q-u-e-s-t-i-o-n. Because there is something I
> > >do not k-n-o-w.
> >
> > There are a LOT of things that you don't seem to know in this
> > newsgroup. It's unfortunate that this doesn't stop you from spewing
> > your nonsense, such as your uninformed "opinions" about which
> > operating systems are and aren't GUI based, given your obviously
> > incomplete knowledge of the development of those operating systems
> > you're discussing.
> >
> > Anyway, you don't need to tell me that you don't know things. Remember
> > -- I'm the guy who has been pointing out that you're clueless about a
> > lot of things in this newsgroup.
> >
> > >the lunacy is not in not knowing something, rather than in
> > >not trying to find the answer.
> >
> > You don't seem very interested in answering others' legitimate points
> > about your illogical, brand-name-inspired "criteria" for gauging who
> > does and doesn't "make quite a bit of sense" and is a swell guy. You
> > don't seem to want to "find" the answer as to why so many others think
> > that your comments about Germer and Tholen are clueless, and instead
> > have taken to suggesting that those others were somehow hypnotized
> > with evil thought control by me via the internet
>
> Karel Jansens
> jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
> =======================================================
> "The method employed I would gladly explain,
> While I have it so clear in my head,
> If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
> But much yet remains to be said."
>
> the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
> =======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 19:20:24
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Bill Riel wrote:
> 
> Karel Jansens (jansens_at_ibm_dot_net) wrote:
> : On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:28:25, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>
> : wrote:
> 
> [ old stuff snipped..]
> 
> : > Canuck is a term I reserve for ignorant Canadians only. However, it is a
> : > frequently used term for Canadians in general in many parts of the
world.
> : > It is in no way a racial slur. It is an ethnic slur if you want it to
be.
> : > But then so is Yank or Yankee. Only those with either a very bad
> : > inferiority complex or some other serious mental deficiency would
consider
> : > any of those three terms truly offensive.
> : >
> : I must admit this is the first time I've seen the term. I hope it's
> : not like "Polak", a term you would be well advised not to use it in a
> : bar frequented by Polish people, not unless you actually like having
> : your face re-done the hard way (I own a Polish bar in Brussels, so for
> : once I know what I'm talking about).
> 
> I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term Canuck.
> In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the Vancouver
> Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense to the name
> "New York Yankies".

Do you take offense to the following?
"Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin [sic] is worth less than garbage."
- Bob Germer

Did this sound like it was reserved "for ignorant Canadians only"?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ruel24@fuse.net                                   08-Dec-99 18:20:29
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Ruel Smith" <ruel24@fuse.net>

I remember hearing of CP/M in the early 80's. I didn't know who the original
designers of DOS were, but I do know that Microsoft did port the OS to the
8088 under contract with IBM. I believe Microsoft paid something like
$50,000 for the OS.

--
Ruel Smith
Cincinnati, OH

CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?

"Derek J Witt" <djw@flinthills.com> wrote in message
news:384EB332.4F024D27@flinthills.com...
> Just a correction on the subject line. Macintosh (AKA System 1.0) has a
> copyright of 1984.  Windows 1.0's copyright is 1985.
>
> As for lack of commercial Linux applications,  software companies are
slowly
> coming out with Linux ports of their software.  Cases in points include
Word
> Perfect, Motif, and many 3DO games (Railroad Tycoon, Heroes of Might and
Magic
> III are being released by Loki Games http://www.lokigames.com). This list
also
> includes Oracle, Peachtree Accounting.
>
> Linux is just not about open source.  It's freedom to write software when
> deemed necessary.  This is brought mainly to lack of commercial software.
>
> The good thing about this is that *individual* software authors can change
> their own  licenses at will.   The types of licenses in reality depend on
what
> the software's purpose (among other factors).  Even though I mainly use
Linux,
> I do agree that there is a large lack of Linux commercial software, but
Linux
> is slowly catching up.  Linux won't die anytime soon.   As for other
UNIX's,
> Solaris is mostly commercial and for serious network environment, you do
pay
> for many OS's including Windows 9x, NT, and others. Thus, Windows for
> businesses is NOT the only viable choice.
>
> It is Linux and other alternative operating systems (such as MacOS, BeOS,
> Solaris, BSD, and dare I say-DOS) that put Microsoft in its place. Also,
> Microsoft did not invent DOS (Digital Research is the original designer of
DOS.
> Anyone remember CP/M-86?).
>
> Ruel Smith wrote:
>
> > For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point
because
> > people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
> > software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many,
and
> > developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers
are
> > paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit
motive,
> > IMHO, dooms Linux.
> >
> > --
> > Ruel Smith
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
> > CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
> >
> > "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
> > news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
> > > kiwi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Steve wrote:
> > > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones
that
> > support
> > > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
> > great, why
> > > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
> > > >
> > > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
> > > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
> > > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
> > > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
> > > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
> > > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
> > > > bit different right now.
> > >
> > > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a
win; if
> > > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
> > difference
> > > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
> > >
> > > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
> > didn't
> > > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all
competed
> > on
> > > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
> > > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because
Apple
> > > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
> > >
> > > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after
Microsoft
> > > gave up on it.
> > >
> > > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels
the
> > > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
> > stifled
> > > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
> > vendors
> > > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server
space
> > as
> > > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
> > >
> > > jim
> > >
>
> --
> **  Derek J Witt                                              **
> *   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
> *   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
> *** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **
>
>
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            08-Dec-99 17:48:09
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>
> What's illeagl is to nobbnle the competition by making contracts with OEMs
> and/or resellers that limit resellers' ability to offer the full range of
> available product to their customers.

That's garbage.

Allen-Bradley makes contracts with its resellers that they can only sell
Allen-Bradley equipment all the time.  In return, Allen-Bradley agrees to
enter into a contract with only one reseller; but there's no legal
requirement for them to do that; other than the fact that it's a win-win for
them if they do.

Exactly the same principle applied to Microsoft.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: possum@tree.branch                                09-Dec-99 01:05:21
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: possum@tree.branch (Mike Trettel)

On 8 Dec 1999 17:57:06 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:
>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Mike Trettel write:
>> On 8 Dec 1999 08:12:50 GMT, Lars P Ormberg <larso@commodore.> wrote:

>> Being forced to pay the price as a condition of performing or supporting a
>> contract.
>
>Yes.  That would be expressed in the contract.  As with all contracts, there
>are clauses which must be upheld.  Are you telling me that all these
>companies failed to read the fine print?  (Which doesn't matter, since when
>you sign a contract you're responsible for all parts of it).

Actually, that's incorrect under US law.  Under US law a contract is null
and void if it is entered to under duress (one example), or if it states
that the contractee must do something illegal (such as paying a kickback,
however disguised).  There's plenty of exceptions to your blanket
statement above, enough that your statement doesn't make any real sense.
Contract law is *not* the simple thing that you've made it out to be.  The
classic example of the first condition is Microsoft pressuring IBM to
drop OS/2 alltogether in order to get the same OEM price as Dell and
Compaq.  IBM balked at this, so MS basically told IBM they can pay the
full over the counter price.  IBM didn't get a contract until 15 minutes
before the official Win95 release date, and signed because they knew that
the IBM PC Co. would be dead in the water without Win95.  I know you will
state that IBM did this "voluntarily", but the Norris testimony in the
antitrust trial shows pretty clearly that IBM did it to keep the PcCo
alive.

You'll just hand wave this away though.  It must be nice to be always
right.

 >
>Any contract requires you to perform the actions specified.  It isn't being
>"forced", because you chose to sign the contract.

And if the contract states you must break the law in some fashion?  Is
that a legal contract?

>Economic force has no power except from government.  Having to live up to
>the terms of the contract is not force or coercion.

100 years of antitrust law in the US disagrees with this proposition.  If
you feel you can do better, please inform all of us.  Otherwise, you're
just hand waving.

>
>You don't _need_ to buy bread.  There's a difference.

I suppose I don't need to breath, either.  This statement is so far from
reality that it's nonsense.

>Nobody has yet shown a real world example where Microsoft "forced" somebody
>to do something.  The _only_ demonstrations to date have been a company
>signing a contract and having to live up to its terms.

The only way you can accept this is to totally ignore the testimony
offered in the antitrust trial and the findings of fact.  All you've done
when addressing that issue is to vehemently disagree with it, without
giving any real reason why.  You're coming across as a idealogue, and a
narrow minded one at that.

-- 
===========
Mike Trettel    trettel (Shift 2) fred (dinky little round thing) net

I don't buy from spammers.  No exceptions.  Fix the reply line to mail me.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Twinco, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 01:10:13
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:58:24, "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> 
wrote:

> 
> <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
> news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-618xBkFkOfIQ@localhost...
> > How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
> >
> > Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> > complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> > maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> > Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> > it to them). Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> > product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> > found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> > the other half).
> 
> But Boob should have known that you can install IE5 from a $20 CD.  his
> entire downloading argument seems to be constructed for two purposes - one
> so that he could sell OS/2, and two so that he could bash windows.
> 
Bingo!
It may not be very objective, but it's good business. The first part, 
that is. The latter just works well in this group.
> 
> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.
> 
> The thing that worries me is that he could choose between one $20 CD (IE5) ,
> or twenty odd OS/2 licenses (probably $100 each).  Doesn't seem like good
> economics to me.

You still don't get it. He could choose between nothing ($ 0.00) and a
substantial OS/2 sale. I know what I would have picked.
> >
> > The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> > OS/2, not Windows. It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> > removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> > objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.
> >
> The idea is to give your clients the best value for money - I fail to see
> how making them spend $2000 vs $20 to solve one simple problem is good
> value.  Of course Boob hasn't given us all the facts, so there may be other
> issues that make OS/2 more viable (although considering the vendor of OS/2
> barely acknowldges that it exists, it does seem a bad choice).  However, his
> initial post showed a supreme misunderstanding of the technology.
> 
Ah. Here we have to look at later posts. The client (as it turned out)
is a DOS-based law firm. IE wouldn't really add much value (and a lot 
of hassle) to such a package. OS/2 on the other hand, which has 
superior DOS management, does (Bob had actually mentioned this client 
before, but I forgot).

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 01:10:12
  To: All                                               08-Dec-99 21:21:26
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:09:22, up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel) 
wrote:

[snipped even more stuff, just to show I can do it too <G>]
> 
> I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term Canuck.
> In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the Vancouver
> Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense to the name
> "New York Yankies". 
> 
Uh-oh. Sports!
Now it's gonna get *nasty*.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             09-Dec-99 00:40:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-618xBkFkOfIQ@localhost>,
  jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
>
> Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> it to them).

Product A does not have "high maintenance costs," Karel, any more than
product B does.  How much would it have cost the client to download
FixPack Whatever in order to get their OS/2 --  er -- "product B" Y2K
compliant?

No, the issue has nothing to do with "maintenance costs." The issue is,
what are consultants good for?

A consultant who punishes his client because he doesn't like his
client's choice in software is unprofessional to extremes.  And, yes,
withholding advise and allowing your client to make a foolish decision
when more cost-effective choices are available is punishing your client.

> Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> the other half).
>
> What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> what an idiot would do.

There are indeed two choices:

#1) Milk your client for short-term gain

#2) Build a long-term client/consultant relationship based on mutual
    trust and respect

Did keeping his "gob" shut earn Germer any money? That he stated, "my
clients who *are* [not "were"] running Windows 98" suggests not. OTOH,
it cetainly *DID* cost his client money . . .

Let's go back to the real issue (what are consultants good for?) . . .

Like I said before, a client worth his salt should be aware of
alternatives to spending US $3,000+ for an IE upgrade, and should be
advising his client of such. That's what consultants are for, to advise
clients.

A consultant is supposed to provide service to his client, and he
*should* respect his client's choices even if he doesn't agree with
them. He is not supposed to be a salesman, and he is not suppose to
force his will onto the client. Selling "product B" to the client may
indeed "make [you] some money" but what is the real cost to the client?

> The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> OS/2, not Windows.

What he *should* be "into" is providing the best possible service to his
clients, which seems not to be the case.

> It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.

So, what it sounds like is that he *should* be self-serving to his own
interests, at the possible detriment of his client's best interests.

Look, I like OS/2 as much as anyone, but I realize that it is not
necessarily a good choice for a given client.  This is a lesson that too
many "OS/2 Advocates" seem unwilling to learn.

Come January 1, 2000, all OS/2 users will have to pay US $100.00/year
for Java and Netscape, while the rest of the world get both for free.
Yes, there are open source Mozilla projects for OS/2 in the works, but
for now they're both pretty much pie-in-the-sky, and nothing for OS/2
compares to Netscape 4.7 for Windows, which happens to include RealMedia
and Flash/ShockWave support. Forcing OS/2 onto your client locks them
out of having Flash content on their intranet, for example.  And it
precludes them from having any real choice in browser software (yup,
some people actually prefer IE over Netscape, and others prefer having
4.7 on up available, rather than being held back to 4.61).

Forcing OS/2 onto your client precludes them from using MS-Office. Now,
to OS/2 users who use StarOffice or Lotus SmartSuite, that may not seem
like a big deal, and to *THEM* it isn't. It may *BE* a big deal to the
client, however, and it *SHOULD* be the client's decision which office
suite to use. And, like it or lump it, "because it's the standard" *IS*
a viable business-based reason for making a given choice, no matter how
distasteful it may seem.

A client worth his salt would take such things into consideration,
rather than letting his personal biases dictate the quality of his
service.

Yes, MS are monopolists, and yes, the way they obtained and maintain
their monopoly is questionable, perhaps illegal.  But the bottom line is
that your client probably couldn't care less.  It's your fight, not your
client's fight, and putting your client in the middle of the fight is,
again, unprofessional to extremes.

-- snip --


Curtis



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 01:10:10
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: I really need your help (Boy! has this title turned out to be proph

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

Um. You're welcome -- I think.

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:44:31, Red Dog <lost@the.wood> wrote:

> I truly enjoyed that Karel. Thanks.
> 
[snip]

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 01:10:11
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: I really need your help (Boy! has this title turned out to be proph

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:39:45, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >You are right in saying that there is a lot of things I don't know.
> 
> And yet you take umbrage at various people noting that you have
> expressed some naive opinions here.
> 
Actually, no.
You for one have been calling me "naive" now for - oh, quite some 
time. I don't object to that. I have a problem with the fact that you 
don't want me to have another opinion.

I have differed with many people on many subjects, some of them even 
on UseNet, but I don't call them names because they don't see things 
my way. That appears to be a "Jeff Glatt Exclusive" (TM).

> Frankly, the *real* problem is that you really *have* expressed some
> naive "assessments", and a lot of long-standing posters to this
> newsgroup pointed out how and why they find your assessments to be
> naive. You just don't like this, so you keep implying that I've
> somehow hypnotized them all into believing this about you. I therefore
> continue to correct your "misinformation".
> 
Yes, I've noticed your latest hypnotising hypothesis. Jeff, do you 
actually _believe_ all the things you write down for this group? If 
you do, I sincerely recommend that you seek professional guidance. 
Honestly. It does look like you are suffering from schizophrenic 
delusions with strong paranoide overtones. The creation of fantasy 
realities is usually the give-away.

> To quote your own words, "If you have a problem with that... [then]
> eat it".
> 
That's freedom for you. At least you've learned something.

> >But opinions are *not* facts
> 
> In your case, they're often not even insightful. In those cases, for
> example, in your reply to the other guy who asked about Tholen, I
> merely noted how and why I find your assessment to be naive, and
> recommended that the person seek out many other opinions. Other
> long-standing posters to this newsgroup who have seen Tholen in action
> also added their "rebuttal" to your "opinion". I have little doubt
> what the guy will discover when he looks over Tholen's tripe, and
> frankly, most people aren't so naive that they'll come to the same
> assessment that you have after seeing that tripe

Where do you get that funny idea that I'm trying to convince people to
share my opinions? Don't confuse "me" with "you", Jeff. Solipsism is 
even worse than paranoia: a solipsist is being threatened by himself.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: christian.g@ibm.net                               08-Dec-99 19:51:03
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: "Christian Gustafson" <christian.g@ibm.net>

In case you were wondering about where Tim Martin (aka "the OS/2 Guy") has
been lately, I received this tip over the transom today:
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464

Check it out.

--
:::::=====  Christian Gustafson
:::::=====  Marina City, Chicago, Illinois
==========
==========  http://pws.prserv.net/christian


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 21:13:07
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't). On 
> what basis do you doubt him?

How's this for starters:
"Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
"Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational argument so
you
attempt to blow others up."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 21:16:07
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento [and so 

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Christian Gustafson wrote:
> 
> In case you were wondering about where Tim Martin (aka "the OS/2 Guy") has 
> been lately, I received this tip over the transom today:
> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
> 
> Check it out.

"What does this have to do with OS/2?"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               08-Dec-99 18:22:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento [and so 

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

Marty wrote:

> Christian Gustafson wrote:
> >
> > In case you were wondering about where Tim Martin (aka "the OS/2 Guy") has
> > been lately, I received this tip over the transom today:
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
> >
> > Check it out.
>
> "What does this have to do with OS/2?"

Absolutely nothing.  It is simply Christian Gustafson's
(AKA Goofy's) fanatical obsession with Tim Martin, OS/2
and Warp City.  The guy needs to get a real life and to
quite stalking OS/2 users around the 'Net.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Discounts Now Available For 1999 Members!"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               08-Dec-99 18:19:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

Christian Gustafson wrote:

> In case you were wondering about where Tim Martin (aka "the OS/2 Guy") has
been lately, I received this tip over the transom today:
> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
>
> Check it out.
>
> --
> :::::=====  Christian Gustafson
> :::::=====  Marina City, Chicago, Illinois
> ==========
> ==========  http://pws.prserv.net/christian

You'll note the name of the individual is not listed.  He wanted
to remain anonymous so that he wouldn't be harassed by asses
such as yourself.  You know, like Stalker Stuky, you OS/2 haters
stalk OS/2 users and go nuts when you find them outside the
OS/2 newsgroups.  But believe it or not we are allowed to participate
in other newsgroups outside of OS/2.

I'm not a fundraiser, not a grant writer and I've never worked for
any of his listed positions - which, if you'll note, are quite substantial.

But since you brought it up (and it is completely off topic) if there
is anyone reading these newsgroups who may live within the
Sacramento, California, area or who might know of a job opening
for a qualified and successful grant writer and fundraiser (he will
freelance from his home in Pacifica, California, please contact me.
I'll put you in contact with the guy.

Tim Martin helps OS/2 users.  That's what makes Warp City
so successful.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Special Discounts for 1999 Members!"

P.S.  It must drive you nuts that I am willing to put myself
'out there'.  I do so gladly so my OS/2 friends can dodge
fanatics such as yourself.  Your "Oh look! I've found Tim
Martin in another newsgroup' fanatical post is a perfect
example of why I do it.

Get a life freak.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          09-Dec-99 02:30:27
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Thomas Galley
>I would like to thank the aforementioned persons for their presence in
>this NG

You're welcome. I'm happy to provide a service of keeping fanatical,
unproductive OS/2 zealots occupied so that, when their idle minds are
otherwise not engaged, they don't get the idea and they want to go out
into the real world and "reform" it into their own bizarre image of
"the way that things should be" by harrassing developers, journalists,
and other people who are on the clock and have no time to be wasting
with such folly from hobbyists with a boner for some irrelevant niche
product.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 01:54:14
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 00:40:43, cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-618xBkFkOfIQ@localhost>,
>   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
> >
> > Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> > complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> > maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> > Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> > it to them).
> 
> Product A does not have "high maintenance costs," Karel, any more than
> product B does.  How much would it have cost the client to download
> FixPack Whatever in order to get their OS/2 --  er -- "product B" Y2K
> compliant?
> 
For all I know you may be right. IE doesn't run too well on OS/2, so I
can't (and haven't) comment on that. The point is that the client 
complained about high maintainance costs, and that the consultant 
offered a solution which was good for his wallet and, in the end (see 
the client's setup), good for the client also.

> No, the issue has nothing to do with "maintenance costs." The issue is,
> what are consultants good for?
> 
I think you've nailed the core of the confusion in this thread. 
Consultants are there to assist the ignorant. If you don't trust them,
I suggest you stop being ignorant by learning stuff (obviously not 
talking to you specificly here, Curtis <G>). Otherwise, accept that 
the consultant will sometimes make choices that favour him as much as 
they do you.

> A consultant who punishes his client because he doesn't like his
> client's choice in software is unprofessional to extremes.  And, yes,
> withholding advise and allowing your client to make a foolish decision
> when more cost-effective choices are available is punishing your client.
> 
Well... yes. Waddaya gonna do? See above remark.

> > Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> > product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> > found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> > the other half).
> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.
> 
> There are indeed two choices:
> 
> #1) Milk your client for short-term gain
> 
> #2) Build a long-term client/consultant relationship based on mutual
>     trust and respect
> 
> Did keeping his "gob" shut earn Germer any money? That he stated, "my
> clients who *are* [not "were"] running Windows 98" suggests not. OTOH,
> it cetainly *DID* cost his client money . . .
> 
All things concerned, I don't know if his choice was all that bad. If 
law firms in the US are anything like the notary offices here in 
Belgium, they will *really* like good old WP5.1 (and why not? It 
surely does anything a so-called modern wordprocessor will do, and 
often a lot faster too). Bob gave his client a rock-solid base for 
their trusted apps. That he used his client's ignorance to push him 
over the edge might be something you don't like, the result IMHO is 
favourable to the client.

> Let's go back to the real issue (what are consultants good for?) . . .
> 
> Like I said before, a client worth his salt should be aware of
> alternatives to spending US $3,000+ for an IE upgrade, and should be
> advising his client of such. That's what consultants are for, to advise
> clients.
> 
> A consultant is supposed to provide service to his client, and he
> *should* respect his client's choices even if he doesn't agree with
> them. He is not supposed to be a salesman, and he is not suppose to
> force his will onto the client. Selling "product B" to the client may
> indeed "make [you] some money" but what is the real cost to the client?
> 
Have you ever done any consulting, no matter in what field? I used to 
work for a managment consultancy, many moons ago (I was only head of 
the telemarketing projects, not the gee-wizz consulting, but you tend 
to pick up stuff). Most of the work is - surprisingly - _not_ in 
giving your clients solutions, but in actually finding out what the 
hell it is they want (or need - or should have).

> > The fact that IE is free doesn't change the matter: Bob Germer is into
> > OS/2, not Windows.
> 
> What he *should* be "into" is providing the best possible service to his
> clients, which seems not to be the case.
> 
Again, from the data provided, I beg to differ.

> > It is in his best interest to have as much Windows
> > removed from his clients's machines as possible. It may not be
> > objective and fair to poor Windows, but it makes money for him.
> 
> So, what it sounds like is that he *should* be self-serving to his own
> interests, at the possible detriment of his client's best interests.
> 
> Look, I like OS/2 as much as anyone, but I realize that it is not
> necessarily a good choice for a given client.  This is a lesson that too
> many "OS/2 Advocates" seem unwilling to learn.
> 
> Come January 1, 2000, all OS/2 users will have to pay US $100.00/year
> for Java and Netscape, while the rest of the world get both for free.
> Yes, there are open source Mozilla projects for OS/2 in the works, but
> for now they're both pretty much pie-in-the-sky, and nothing for OS/2
> compares to Netscape 4.7 for Windows, which happens to include RealMedia
> and Flash/ShockWave support. Forcing OS/2 onto your client locks them
> out of having Flash content on their intranet, for example.  And it
> precludes them from having any real choice in browser software (yup,
> some people actually prefer IE over Netscape, and others prefer having
> 4.7 on up available, rather than being held back to 4.61).
> 
> Forcing OS/2 onto your client precludes them from using MS-Office. Now,
> to OS/2 users who use StarOffice or Lotus SmartSuite, that may not seem
> like a big deal, and to *THEM* it isn't. It may *BE* a big deal to the
> client, however, and it *SHOULD* be the client's decision which office
> suite to use. And, like it or lump it, "because it's the standard" *IS*
> a viable business-based reason for making a given choice, no matter how
> distasteful it may seem.
> 
> A client worth his salt would take such things into consideration,
> rather than letting his personal biases dictate the quality of his
> service.
> 
> Yes, MS are monopolists, and yes, the way they obtained and maintain
> their monopoly is questionable, perhaps illegal.  But the bottom line is
> that your client probably couldn't care less.  It's your fight, not your
> client's fight, and putting your client in the middle of the fight is,
> again, unprofessional to extremes.
> 
All the above arguments are valid, provided the client actually 
_needs_ all that stuff. Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms 
who indeed don't). On what basis do you doubt him?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             09-Dec-99 03:40:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Christian Gustafson <christian.g@ibm.net> wrote:

> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464

I miss him....


I do. He had this wonderful "energy" that would unite almost everybody
in this group (against him...).

Apparently The "well known non-profit organization" was WarpCity?

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             09-Dec-99 03:41:00
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento [and so  d

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Christian Gustafson wrote:
> > 
> > In case you were wondering about where Tim Martin (aka "the OS/2 Guy") has
> > been lately, I received this tip over the transom today:
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
> > 
> > Check it out.
> 
> "What does this have to do with OS/2?"

Don't you know?

WarpCity is _the_ news and information source for OS/2! Everything that
happens to its associates matters to OS/2.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               08-Dec-99 21:44:03
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

>> Everything you say revolves around your use of the word FORCE in the
>> physical sense to define a monopoly.

>The alternate definition of force, the one you subscribe to, describes a
>voluntary exchange!  How on earth can you say with a straight face that
>when voluntarily signing a contract that it is force, but a definition of
>force excluding voluntary actions are incorrect?

If the alternative to signing is to go out of business then there is
force.


>>                                Besides making you a simpleton, it
>> also proves you have not read the findings of fact or you would understand
>> what MS has done

>MS "has done" nothing wrong.  That they are illegal speaks to the flaw in
>the law, not in the action.

If this is correct, then you should be capable of identifying and
explaining how the findings of fact are wrong, and how the law itself
would be unconstitutional.  -- And if so, then according to you we have
the richest man in the world being railroaded into agreeing with an
illegal law instead of defending himself. 

Since this is completely absurd, I have to state again that all we've
gotten from you is bullshit -- where is you're real, reasoned stuff? Or do
you just argue for the sake of it, since you don't make sense in the real
world.

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bowenjm@rintintin.colorado.edu                    09-Dec-99 02:56:26
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: bowenjm@rintintin.colorado.edu (Jason Bowen)

Apparently the impact wasn't hard enough in the accident.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               08-Dec-99 19:07:20
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

Jason Bowen wrote:

> Apparently the impact wasn't hard enough in the accident.

Still wearing a cast but I can swing it quite nicely.  Thank you.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Discount Memberships for 1999 Members!"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bowenjm@rintintin.colorado.edu                    09-Dec-99 03:07:06
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: bowenjm@rintintin.colorado.edu (Jason Bowen)

Like I said, it wasn't hard enough.

In article <384F1CFB.CC84A9D7@WarpCity.com>,
Tim Martin  <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com> wrote:
>Jason Bowen wrote:
>
>> Apparently the impact wasn't hard enough in the accident.
>
>Still wearing a cast but I can swing it quite nicely.  Thank you.
>
>Tim Martin
>The OS/2 Guy
>Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
>"Y2K Discount Memberships for 1999 Members!"
>
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Colorado, Boulder (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               08-Dec-99 19:15:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:03
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

"Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:

> Christian Gustafson <christian.g@ibm.net> wrote:
>
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
>
> I miss him....
>
> I do. He had this wonderful "energy" that would unite almost everybody
> in this group (against him...).

You poor Mac-sell-out-to-MS user.  As a non-OS/2 user living in the OS/2
newsgroups it is understandable that you would miss me.  Thanks for
the sentiment.

> Apparently The "well known non-profit organization" was WarpCity?

Do you poor fMac Zealots  ever read anything?  Warp City is very
much alive, is currently offering year-2000 discount memberships
to all 1999 members (you missed the 'Early Bird Special' just
after Thanksgiving!) and we're looking forward to another
smash year of new subscribers expected at the Warp City
door on January 1, 2000.

And we're a commercial enterprise - not a non-profit.

> --
> Fan of Woody Allen
> User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
> Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

Why are you here?  You don't use OS/2!

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Discounts Re-Up Subscriptions for 1999 Members!"

P.S.  You WISH you had a resume that good!

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             09-Dec-99 16:41:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-h8VlMsYyoKuh@localhost...
> >
> Ah. Here we have to look at later posts. The client (as it turned out)
> is a DOS-based law firm. IE wouldn't really add much value (and a lot
> of hassle) to such a package.

Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value, why
did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
himself demonstrated).


> OS/2 on the other hand, which has
> superior DOS management, does (Bob had actually mentioned this client
> before, but I forgot).

If that's what you have to go through to get a client to install OS/2, then
I'll stick with NT thanks.  For my money, people like Boob are as effective
an advocate *not* to install OS/2 as anything else.


Stu


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             09-Dec-99 04:56:13
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:

> >Thomas Galley
> >I would like to thank the aforementioned persons for their presence in
> >this NG
> 
> You're welcome. I'm happy to provide a service of keeping fanatical,
> unproductive OS/2 zealots occupied so that, when their idle minds are
> otherwise not engaged, they don't get the idea and they want to go out
> into the real world and "reform" it into their own bizarre image of
> "the way that things should be" by harrassing developers, journalists,
> and other people who are on the clock and have no time to be wasting
> with such folly from hobbyists with a boner for some irrelevant niche
> product.

I think this reply of yours was a brilliant example of what this guy was
talking about. :-)

P.S.: I am reading cooa for the very same reasons. :-)

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               08-Dec-99 23:08:13
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Marty wrote:
> 
> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:21:38, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > And how about frames-per-second ratios?
> > > > In my - limited - experience a higher FPS makes more than up for lower
> > > > resolutions. Any figures on that?
> > >
> > > 60 on the Playstation II.  I doubt we'd be talking more than 60 on the
PC at
> > > 1024x768, but I may be mistaken.
> > >
> > Wow!
> >
> > Err... Why?
> >
> > IIRC (from a psychology class in university days long gone), the human
> > eye is pretty much incapable of seeing the difference between 25 and
> > 50 FPS, which is why TV and film have settled on the number 24/25
> > (dunno about HDTV and digital, though). What justifies the extra
> > trouble of displaying 60 frames per second?
> 
> TV video is updated at 30fps.  Movies run at 60fps.  (At least here in the
US
> they do.)  The justification is that most of the image is moving most of the
> time, so it is difficult, but not impossible, to perceive changes in that
> timespan (16.7 milliseconds for 60fps).  However, when playing a game, it
can
> be quite significant.  If you've ever played one of those 3D shoot-em-ups,
> you'd notice that running at 60fps gives you a much better reaction time
than
> running at 30fps.  The difference is very perceivable.

I recently received some clarification and correction from someone I consider
to be a reliable source.  He writes:

"TV video runs at 30 frames per second, interlaced, which means 60 'fields'
per
second.

The reason for that is that the human eye can detect 30 flickers per second
but
can't detect 60 flickers per second.
 
Standard movie frame rate is 24 frames per second. This would cause
intolerable
flicker, so the projectors are designed so that they flash each frame twice,
which puts the flicker above the detectable rate.

By the way, 30/60 is NTSC speeds. PAL (European TV) runs at 25 frames/50
fields
per second. However, they also have more rasters (625) than NTSC (525) and the
result is about the same number of pixels per second and hence about the same
FM bandwidth."

Perhaps not particularly relevant to the group in general, but I wanted to own
up to my mistakes.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     08-Dec-99 20:10:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"Steven C. Britton" wrote:

> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
> >
> > What's illeagl is to nobbnle the competition by making contracts with OEMs
> > and/or resellers that limit resellers' ability to offer the full range of
> > available product to their customers.
>
> That's garbage.
>
> Allen-Bradley makes contracts with its resellers that they can only sell
> Allen-Bradley equipment all the time.  In return, Allen-Bradley agrees to
> enter into a contract with only one reseller; but there's no legal
> requirement for them to do that; other than the fact that it's a win-win for
> them if they do.
>
> Exactly the same principle applied to Microsoft.

Allen-Bradley defines a company.   Monopoly applies to a market.   The market
is
Intel based PC computers.  In that market MS has abused monopoly power.








--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               08-Dec-99 20:23:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

"Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:

> P.S.: I am reading cooa for the very same reasons. :-)

No you're not.  You live in cooa because you failed at
using OS/2.  You've never gotten over the fact that
others can do it and you can't.  So instead of living
in your own chosen operating system newsgroup,
you live in the OS/2 newsgroups hoping some of all
our 'OS/2 smarts' will rub off on you.  It won't.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Discount Re-Up Memberships for 1999 Members!"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca                        08-Dec-99 20:22:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Alan Baker <Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca>

In article <384EB50A.87AD0E32@flinthills.com>, Derek J Witt 
<djw@flinthills.com> wrote:

>Curious...Then how did RedHat get onto the stock market in the first 
>place?
>It's obvious it's making money.  If it wasn't making money, it would not 
>be on
>Wall Street in the first place.

This shows a complete lack of understanding of the stock market.

Anybody can offer stock in a company and people are free to invest or 
not based on whether or not they think they will make sufficient return 
on their investments. Even if a company has no immediate prospects of 
returning a profit -- such as a startup company which might be raising 
capital to develop technology that they own but which is not yet ready 
to bring to market, investors may feel that eventually the company may 
eventually make them rich. 

And for your information Red Hat -- trading on NASDAQ -- has yet to make 
any money.

>
>Ruel Smith wrote:
>
>> For awhile anyway. Linux is bound to run out of steam at some point 
>> because
>> people will grow tired of dedicating their precious free time to write
>> software they give away. Right now it's a technical exercise for many, 
>> and
>> developers have been lured in. But, be aware that experienced developers 
>> are
>> paid well and won't donate their time forever. The lack of profit 
>> motive,
>> IMHO, dooms Linux.
>>
>> --
>> Ruel Smith
>> Cincinnati, OH
>>
>> CodeWarrior forever...Where's my war paint?
>>
>> "Jim Frost" <jimf@frostbytes.com> wrote in message
>> news:38492721.81F0A354@frostbytes.com...
>> > kiwi wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Steve wrote:
>> > > > Funny how the only pertinent facts you are sure of are the ones 
>> > > > that
>> support
>> > > > your "opinion." Everything else, you are "not sure." If Mac is so
>> great, why
>> > > > does it hold such a miniscule market share vs. PC?
>> > >
>> > >   Probably because the people who run Apple were too
>> > > stupid to do the obvious thing and port their OS to
>> > > PC hardware.  I'm not a big fan of the Mac (can't stand
>> > > it's interface, actually); but if Apple would have had
>> > > the brains to port their OS to the PC in the 89-93
>> > > time period, the market would probably look quite a
>> > > bit different right now.
>> >
>> > There wasn't anything special about the PC hardware that made it a 
>> > win; if
>> > anything it was primitive enough to be a detriment.  What made the
>> difference
>> > was that there were so many vendors producing it.
>> >
>> > The critical difference between the PC and the Mac was that Microsoft
>> didn't
>> > make their money from hardware.  As such the hardware vendors all 
>> > competed
>> on
>> > an even keel.  Even when the Mac hardware platform was "open" all the
>> > non-Apple companies were going to be second-class citizens because 
>> > Apple
>> > clearly made sure that Apple came first.
>> >
>> > This was the same problem OS/2 suffered from, particularly after 
>> > Microsoft
>> > gave up on it.
>> >
>> > One of the things that makes Linux so interesting is that it levels 
>> > the
>> > playing field -- permanently.  A monopoly can't starve it, it can't be
>> stifled
>> > by management or even seriously damaged by marketing, and all hardware
>> vendors
>> > have equal access.  Things will get really interesting in the server 
>> > space
>> as
>> > a result of Linux, and quite likely in a lot of other areas too.
>> >
>> > jim
>> >
>
>--
>**  Derek J Witt                                              **
>*   Email: mailto:djw@flinthills.com                           *
>*   Home Page: http://www.flinthills.com/~djw/                 *
>*** "...and on the eighth day, God met Bill Gates." - Unknown **
>
>
>

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the 
bottom of that cupboard."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bakerMEDIA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     08-Dec-99 20:53:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

> In article <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-618xBkFkOfIQ@localhost>,
>   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) wrote:
> > How about this scenario, based on Germer's original post.
> >
> > Say I'm a consultant who is also selling product B. I have a client
> > complaining to me about competing product A, because it has high
> > maintainance costs (that's the IE download issue. Remember, it were
> > Bob's clients complaining about the download issue, not Bob proposing
> > it to them).
>
> Product A does not have "high maintenance costs," Karel, any more than
> product B does.  How much would it have cost the client to download
> FixPack Whatever in order to get their OS/2 --  er -- "product B" Y2K
> compliant?

FP 4 or any FP after 4.
And you *can't* assert that all OSs have the same maintenance costs.  It is
an absurd assertion.

> No, the issue has nothing to do with "maintenance costs." The issue is,
> what are consultants good for?
>
> A consultant who punishes his client because he doesn't like his
> client's choice in software is unprofessional to extremes.  And, yes,
> withholding advise and allowing your client to make a foolish decision
> when more cost-effective choices are available is punishing your client.

Consultants are not charities.  Why bitch at someone for deciding that the
higher costs associated with windows are cost that should come out of his or
her pocket?


> > Suppose I would know a way to cut the download costs on
> > product A (a really simple method, something that my client could have
> > found out, if he had half a brain, or if his supplier of product A had
> > the other half).
> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.
>
> There are indeed two choices:
>
> #1) Milk your client for short-term gain
>
> #2) Build a long-term client/consultant relationship based on mutual
>     trust and respect

Who are you to say anything bad about a man's business relationships?  A lot
of people get upset at MS's crummy technology and want service people to fix
the problems and often fixing the problems can mean dumping the product.

It isn't an act of heresy to use a lower cost, higher quality alternative -
god knows they exist.  A lot of resellers are now doing LINUX since it is
FREE and they can pocket the software fee's once sent to MS.  Nick Peterely
estimated that a 100 client Windows 2000 network would cost ~$45,000 in
software.  Is someone unethical for moving a customers off Windows and onto
LINUX while pocketing the money -- Hell no!


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:18:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82m84j$m61$8@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/08/99 at 06:30 PM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

> > I understand that it is your belief that a trader is permitted to do 
> > virtually anything that does not involve bloodshed. That has not been true 

> > for over a century.

> Then the U.S. has not been a free society for over a century.

Neither, then, has Canada, Great Britain, or any other country in the
western world which regulates businesses for the good of the common
citizen.

Of course that is absurd. By your infantile, distorted reasoning not
worthy of a kindergarten dropout, only anarchy would be acceptable.

I have decided that I will never interview a graduate of the University of
Alberta if they confer any degree upon you. If you are an example of the
university, the university is a disgrace to the name, the province, the
country, and the world.

A copy of this message is being sent to the university.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:05:09
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <r3rs4s8rk8u5pjohc1p8hd19re8ohr2dh6@4ax.com>, on 12/08/99 at 08:36 AM,
   DC <dc@pdq.net> said:


> This is dumb.

> You need to download MSIE 5.0 (the whole thing) on YOUR computer, then
> burn it to a CD, then supply it to your clients.  Anyone interested will
> copy the contents of the CD to their hard drive via the network (all 80M
> or so) and then run the IE5 setup.  5 minutes later, they'll have
> MSIE5.0.  

> DC

What's dumb is your inability to read. Many machines in the workplace are
not equipped with a CD Rom drive. Many employers do not want their
employees to have even a floppy much less a CD Rom drive. They want the
employees to use the software they need for their jobs and nothing else.

So, unless you can tell my clients that they don't know what they are
talking about despite making mid to high 6 figure salaries each year,
admit that you are nothing but an ignorant asshole.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dc@pdq.net                                        08-Dec-99 23:24:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: DC <dc@pdq.net>

In article <384f3921$1$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer 
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

> On <r3rs4s8rk8u5pjohc1p8hd19re8ohr2dh6@4ax.com>, on 12/08/99 at 08:36 AM,
>    DC <dc@pdq.net> said:
> 
> 
> > This is dumb.
> 
> > You need to download MSIE 5.0 (the whole thing) on YOUR computer, then
> > burn it to a CD, then supply it to your clients.  Anyone interested 
> > will
> > copy the contents of the CD to their hard drive via the network (all 
> > 80M
> > or so) and then run the IE5 setup.  5 minutes later, they'll have
> > MSIE5.0.  
> 
> > DC
> 
> What's dumb is your inability to read. Many machines in the workplace are
> not equipped with a CD Rom drive. Many employers do not want their
> employees to have even a floppy much less a CD Rom drive. They want the
> employees to use the software they need for their jobs and nothing else.
> 
> So, unless you can tell my clients that they don't know what they are
> talking about despite making mid to high 6 figure salaries each year,
> admit that you are nothing but an ignorant asshole.

I see.  So they have no network?  Of couse they do.  So don't you think 
you can figure out how to copy from the CD, over the network, to each 
machine that wants MSIE5.0?

As I said, this entire argument is dumb - REALLY dumb.  The 'work' to 
bring MSIE5 to an office without an internet connection is trivial at 
worst, especially for a 'consultant'.

I think it's you that's being ignorant here.

-- 
DC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:29:17
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384ea7fe$1$yrgbherq$mr2ice@news.sover.net>, on 12/08/99 at 01:48 PM,
   letoured@nospam.net said:

> Does the university there accept just anyone?

Evidently.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                09-Dec-99 05:49:05
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:44:19, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) 
wrote:

> Racism is based upon race, not national origin. A Yank can be Black,
> White, Oriental, Brown, Red, etc. racially. The term Arab properly applies
> to that part of the world where Arabic is the predominate language. The
> racial term for those from that region as well as from Israel is Semite, a
> sub-group of the white race.
> 
I'm aware that racism is usually reserved for ethnic-related stuff, 
but I have encountered enough prejudice against nationalities to see 
the relation.
 
BTW, I think the "PC" term is "caucasian" (people tend to have 
_really_ short fuses in these matters).

The Mohawks that live in this part of the world call us roundeyes. I 
used to do a bunch of drinking with some Mohawks down near Deseronto, 
Ontario when I was playing in country bands.

The Chinese call us a name that translates to "angry ghost".  I picked
that one up working in a computer shop owned by an immigrant from Hong
Kong.

"Stanee, lay yow mow tau fat!"

"Stanley, you've got a bad haircut!"

I got put up for that one over the intercom by one of the chinese 
techies in the place. Apparently Catherine, who worked the cash up 
front, just lost it when she heard me say that... I was told she 
almost fell over, she was laughing so hard. It was a really fun place 
to work in some ways... did you know you can frisbee a 1 meg cirrus 
video card over fifty feet with no problem? You don't even have to 
throw very hard. The card will work fine afterwards too:). Of course, 
if it's not in the box, well, that a little different.  Floppy disks 
will just go forever, though... we used to frisbee them over the 
hardware stacks to the office staff.

Those were the good old days, I guess:)

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca                09-Dec-99 05:51:19
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca (Jack Troughton)

On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 04:59:24, Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu> 
wrote:

Again Jeff, you are living in a fantasy world  You have yet to produce 
any evidence of your claims.  You have contructed this image of me which 
is entirely fictional.  It is quite amusing that someone could lack so 
little facts and argue so much.  It makes Tim Martin look like a logical 
debater.  

See! Timmy's not so bad! I wonder when he'll come back from his 
accident...

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://jakesplace.dhs.org
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jake at jakesplace.dhs.org
Montral PQ Canada

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:49:02
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384efc7f_3@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/08/99 at 05:48 PM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
> >
> > What's illeagl is to nobbnle the competition by making contracts with OEMs
> > and/or resellers that limit resellers' ability to offer the full range of
> > available product to their customers.

> That's garbage.

> Allen-Bradley makes contracts with its resellers that they can only sell
> Allen-Bradley equipment all the time.  In return, Allen-Bradley agrees
> to enter into a contract with only one reseller; but there's no legal
> requirement for them to do that; other than the fact that it's a win-win
> for them if they do.

No what is garbage is your inane, assinine attempt to paint feces white.
Allen-Bradley is one of more than a dozen companies making similar or
identical products. It has no more than 10 - 20% of the market for any of
its products.

> Exactly the same principle applied to Microsoft.

No, Microsoft has more than 90% of the market. That more than exceeds the
trigger level for classification as a monopoly. Were Allen-Bradley to
garner even 80% of its market, then it too would be subject to the same
restrictions and scrutiny as Microsoft. --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:52:28
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82n8gm$or1$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 04:41 PM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value,
> why did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
> actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
> misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
> himself demonstrated).

Because, asshole, they had Windows 98, Release 1 which puts IE on the
machine automatically. The update CD will not run properly unless one
first updates IE. If one logs into a MS website with IE, it automatically
tries to update and woe to the poor sucker who interrupts it!

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:54:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82mh1m$enb$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 10:01 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> Boob was complaining about cost - I fail to see how DSL could make this
> better, it will cost more.  As opposed to spending $20 to get the CD
> from Microsoft.  I said nothing about pressing CD's either - Microsoft
> sells them.

You continue to ignore that most of the machines in question do not have a
CD Rom drive and the firm doesn't want them to have same.

And your total ignorance of what you are typing is shown by the lie in the
second sentence repeated in the third sentence of your post, Microsoft
DOES NOT SELL the CD's. You are a complete liar. They GIVE THEM AWAY FOR
THE ASKING.

> Don't embarrass yourself with a retort that is bound to cost the
> customer far far more than a single CD.
>  Live in the real world.

I do live in the real world and rather well. The next idiotic lie I see
from you, you join Glatt in the killfile.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     08-Dec-99 22:05:13
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Bob Germer wrote:

> On <82m84j$m61$8@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/08/99 at 06:30 PM,
>    larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:
>

> > Then the U.S. has not been a free society for over a century.
>

> I have decided that I will never interview a graduate of the University of
> Alberta if they confer any degree upon you. If you are an example of the
> university, the university is a disgrace to the name, the province, the
> country, and the world.
>
> A copy of this message is being sent to the university.

"Answer the fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own conceit."

Hey, Kids will be Kids.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 00:57:11
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82mgse$e5i$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:58 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:


>
> But Boob should have known that you can install IE5 from a $20 CD.  his
> entire downloading argument seems to be constructed for two purposes -
> one so that he could sell OS/2, and two so that he could bash windows.

Dear Mr. Stupid Fox:

For the last time PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PARTICULAR CLIENT IN QUESTION
HAS ONLY TWO MACHINES WITH CD ROM DRIVES. BOTH ARE ON SERVERS. THE FIRM
DOES NOT WANT CD ROM DRIVES IN WORKSTATIONS.

> >
> > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > what an idiot would do.

> The thing that worries me is that he could choose between one $20 CD
> (IE5) , or twenty odd OS/2 licenses (probably $100 each).  Doesn't seem
> like good economics to me.

What a total asshole you are. Despite the fact that I have stated in at
least 20 messages here that the firm does not have CD Rom drives in its
workstations, you continue to insist that they use a CD to do the update.
I charge $140 to provide and install a 48x IDE CD drive. I charge $290 for
a SCSI CDROM drive including labor.

I can and did install Warp over the network. I cannot do that with the
update CD because the drive isn't available after the intermediate reboots
until the entire update is completed which it cannot be since the CD is
not available.

> The idea is to give your clients the best value for money - I fail to
> see how making them spend $2000 vs $20 to solve one simple problem is
> good value.  Of course Boob hasn't given us all the facts, so there may
> be other issues that make OS/2 more viable (although considering the
> vendor of OS/2 barely acknowldges that it exists, it does seem a bad
> choice).  However, his initial post showed a supreme misunderstanding of
> the technology.

The vendor barely acknowledges it exists? Have you visited the IBM website
recently? Have you seen the 20  or so different ads running several times
a night in prime time on every broadcast channel and the major cable
channels advertising WarpServer for eBusiness?

> Stu

no, Stupid is your real name.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:05:19
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82mgk1$drn$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:53 AM,
   "Stupid Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> Any flames Boob gets are entirely of his own doing.  Read back a few
> months in the NT Advocacy group, and check out some of Boobs old posts. 
> We're just treating him as he would obviously like to be treated.

I never posted in the NT advocacy group. I never had it on my any of my
systems. Unless I responded to someone who stupidly crossposted, you are
total liar.

Now you have hit my killfile.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:07:10
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82mgh7$doe$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:52 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:


> No they don't.  I've never seen IE5 require an intermediate reboot.  It
> goes through install, then reboots, configures itself as the machine
> comes up, without requiring access to the CD/network.  For a consultant,
> you really don't seem familiar with the products.

Then you haven't experienced the October 1999 CD. 

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:11:26
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82mtqa$2qf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, on 12/09/99 at 12:40 AM,
   cbass2112@my-deja.com said:

> What he *should* be "into" is providing the best possible service to his
> clients, which seems not to be the case.

Read the whole thread. The client in question is a DOS based law firm
which desires to continue to run WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS with Bitstream
Fontware. Since they are well into the high two figures of gigs of
documents which frequently are retrieved and edited for one reason or
another and NO program for ANY version of Windows can properly import
these documents due to the proprietary fonts, no solution other than
continuation of WP is viable.

They have used for over 13 years a DOS based time
recording/billing/scheduling program for which they paid over $50,000.
Their previous consultant who had moved them from Windows for Workgroups
to 98 and was trying to sell them NT 4.0 couldn't get that program to run
under NT, not surprising given the custom file system in the program which
was designed in the days of Novell 1.x.

The client in question does not want its employees to have CD Rom drives
in their workstations. Company workrules for all non-lawyer employees is
very specific about the penalties an employee will incur if they use their
machines for other than company assigned tasks. Introducing a virus via
the floppy drive is cause for dismissal, BTW.

The client in question does not want its employees to have internet
access. It wants the modems to be used ONLY to access certain courthouse
dial up systems.

The company in question would have to have spent far more for NT and NT
Server than they did for OS/2 Warp. There was no earthly reason for them
to replace Novell 4.11 with NT Server. They have one person there who can
handle most Novell problems and those she cannot directly, we can usually
walk her through on the phone.

The partners had determined that Windows 98 had to go because they were
well aware of the potential for virus infection via IE, the ability of
employees to waste time surfing the net, sending and reading email and
newsgroups, etc. I had talked to them early last summer but got no
positive results. I had written them off as potential clients. Then this
Fall, I got a call from the senior partner asking if I had heard about the
CIA having a hook and MS having two hooks in the Windows 2000 beta. I had
and gave him the name of the very respected firm who found and documented
those hooks. Then I got a call a couple of days later to re-present my
solution to their Y2K problem.

In four hours of discussion which led to our contract, the ONLY even
slightly negative reference to MS I made was to ask them if they had heard
about or read Gates' testimony at the trial which was a few days earlier
and if they believed anything he or MS said. Since the parties to the
presentation were all attornies but one, that clinched the sale. When
working with law firms, negative selling is not well received.

BTW, our total cost is less than a third of what the MS proponent was
suggesting.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:28:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <dc-17D223.23245808121999@news.pdq.net>, on 12/08/99 at 11:24 PM,
   DC <dc@pdq.net> said:

> I see.  So they have no network?  Of couse they do.  So don't you think 
> you can figure out how to copy from the CD, over the network, to each 
> machine that wants MSIE5.0?

If each machine had roughly a gigabyte of free disk space, sure. However,
most workstations have 1 gig or even smaller drives. A few have large
drives, but less than 10% of the workstations do. About 20% were 750 Meg
drives. But since only the OS and WP need reside on those drives they are
totally adequate. Documents are stored on the Novell file server.

> As I said, this entire argument is dumb - REALLY dumb.  The 'work' to 
> bring MSIE5 to an office without an internet connection is trivial at 
> worst, especially for a 'consultant'.

It is not hard, just very expensive.

> I think it's you that's being ignorant here.

No, you are being totally obtuse.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: noyb@noyb.no                                      09-Dec-99 06:33:22
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: noyb@noyb.no (None Of Your Business)

Were you always a tattle-tale?

Maybe you should call his mom and let him know you don't agree with him.

One more question:  Do you buy, or make your own pencil cozy's?

bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com (Bob Germer) wrote in <384f3c56$1$obot
$mr2ice@news.pics.com>:
>A copy of this message is being sent to the university.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: None Dammit (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:34:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384ed712.0@news.victoria.tc.ca>, on 12/08/99 at 10:09 PM,
   up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel) said:

> I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term
> Canuck. In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the
> Vancouver Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense
> to the name "New York Yankies". 

Well were I a fan of the despicable, monopolistic, abominable New York
Yankees, I might take exception to your spelling of the team name. <GRIN>

Actually, no sensible American takes offense at being called a Yankee or
Yank with one exception. In the states of the old confederacy of
1861-1865, a Canadian or Brit, etc. can call someone a Yankee. However,
someone with a Philadelphia, New York, Boston, etc. accent better not try
it! Of course, the good old boys down there generally refer to the Civil
War as the "Late Unpleasantness". I am not sure it still is happening, but
about 15 years ago McGraw Hill had two separate editions of some of their
history textbooks. Those sold in the north called it the Civil War. In the
South, the term was War Between the States.

Thanks for reminding me about the Canucks. Seeing as how our Flyers are in
the other conference, we don't see them but once a year at the most here
in Philadelphia. By the time the game is over out west, I am asleep and
the next day forget who they played on the left coast.

By the way, the description of the Yankees (which is my team in the AL)
was coined by a writer describing them and their long time announcer Mel
Allen. The last verse of the poem he wrote as a column in the now defunct
Philadelphia Evening Bulletin went:

Here's to the Yankees, may they always be plastered.
The same to Mel Allen, the Ballentine bastard.

(Ballentine was the name of a then very popular beer in the northeast
which was the primary sponsor of Yankee broadcasts)

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           09-Dec-99 01:43:23
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 03:31:04
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-JDXFOgd0MhoN@localhost>, on 12/08/99 at 08:44 PM,
   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

> > Those of us old enough to remember Harry Truman as President will also
> > remember when Blacks were not permitted to play major league baseball.
> > Neither were dark skinned Hispanics. But if your skin was fair enough, you
> > could play in the majors and many did.
> > 
> I'm not a United Statesian, this is new for me. Did they use a colour 
> card, like PanTone's?

It was a matter of serious discussion with, amazingly to some, the Negro
League trying to classify anyone from Cuba (most Hispanic players were
from there prior to the 1950's) as Negro. They feared, not without reason,
that the obvious talents of men like Satchel Paige, Jackie Robinson,
Minnie Minoso, etc. would eventually destroy their league. When Branch
Rickey of the Brooklyn Dodgers signed Jackie Robinson to a Class AAA
contract in 1947, they saw that the end was near. Indeed, the league
folded in less than a decade.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca                        09-Dec-99 00:49:08
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 05:20:03
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Alan Baker <Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca>

In article <384ed712.0@news.victoria.tc.ca>, up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca 
(Bill Riel) wrote:

>Karel Jansens (jansens_at_ibm_dot_net) wrote:
>: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:28:25, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
>: wrote:
>
>[ old stuff snipped..]
>
>: > Canuck is a term I reserve for ignorant Canadians only. However, it is 
>: > a
>: > frequently used term for Canadians in general in many parts of the 
>: > world. 
>: > It is in no way a racial slur. It is an ethnic slur if you want it to 
>: > be.
>: > But then so is Yank or Yankee. Only those with either a very bad
>: > inferiority complex or some other serious mental deficiency would 
>: > consider
>: > any of those three terms truly offensive.
>: > 
>: I must admit this is the first time I've seen the term. I hope it's 
>: not like "Polak", a term you would be well advised not to use it in a 
>: bar frequented by Polish people, not unless you actually like having 
>: your face re-done the hard way (I own a Polish bar in Brussels, so for
>: once I know what I'm talking about).
>
>I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term Canuck.
>In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the Vancouver
>Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense to the name
>"New York Yankies". 


I have to agree.

I'm proud to be a Canuck. You can call me "Canuck" until you're blue.

As for using it for ignorant Canadians: compared to ignorant Americans 
there aren't any ignorant Canucks. <G> As a nation, you should be 
ashamed of how little you know about your nearest neighbour and the rest 
of the world for that matter.

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the 
bottom of that cupboard."

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bakerMEDIA (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ivaes@hr.nl                                       09-Dec-99 10:28:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Illya Vaes <ivaes@hr.nl>

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
>>"Steven C. Britton" wrote:
>>>Monopoly:
>>>1. exclusive control of a commodity or servicce in a particular market,
>>>or a control that mkaes possible the manipulation of prices.
>>Windows is a commodity.
>If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy breakfast
>cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available at
>fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's illegal
>for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.

If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes) and near
90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their control of
prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly makes for
a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
 
>>MS certainly has a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.
>>If you were interested in facts instead of void definition games, you'd 
>>know that they used exactly that to force OEMs to only install Windows
>Microsoft can ask for any price they want for their property...that's how a
>capitalist system works.  If an OEM doesn't do what MS wants, MS doesn't
>have to sell them Windows at a price desirable to an OEM.  And the OEM
>DOESN'T HAVE TO BUY.

As OEMs have little real choice, because of the mono..."dominant position" of
MS, they certainly cannot do whatever they want. That's the law.
Regardless of whether or not you think they can or should be free the ask any
price they want, their control of the market certainly allows them to
manipulate prices of all related software and their own, which satisfies one
of the (non-legal) definitions for a monopoly of your tag-team partner Steven
C. den B... Britton. Too bad he tried to be smart-ass about what constitues a
monopoly; tell him he approached it the wrong way.
 
>>certainly have seen for yourself -before others pointed it out- that the 
>>price of Windows etc. has stayed the same and even gone *up* while PC 
>>hardware prices have only plummeted.
>Big deal.  If they had dropped, you'd use that as evidence of a monopoly.

Yeah right. A monopoly that lowers prices... What planet are you from?
The only times MS ever lowered their prices are to "steal" market share from
then-competition. Nobody went from WP to Word by themselves, so we sell it for
NLG 99 together with WfW 3.11 (that's near $50). Nobody wanted to leave dBASE
and FoxPro by themselves, so we price that at $99 too (and by FoxPro)...
until, that is, people have switched, and then you have to pay mucho dinero to
get it.

>If they hadn't moved, you'd use THAT as evidence of a monopoly.

Staying the same while everything else lowers is certainly suspect.

>Charging ANY PRICE WHATSOEVER is legal "evidence" of a monopoly.

You're foaming at the mouth.
And learn netiquette; you signature is much too long.

-- 
Illya Vaes   (ivaes@hr.nl)        "Do...or do not, there is no 'try'" - Yoda
Holland Railconsult BV, Integral Management of Railprocess Systems
Postbus 2855, 3500 GW Utrecht
Tel +31.30.2653273, Fax 2653385           Not speaking for anyone but myself

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Holland Railconsult BV (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mirage@iae.nl                                     09-Dec-99 12:32:01
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Windows95-sucks.mp3?

From: Mirage Media <mirage@iae.nl>

I just downloaded the mp3 and it's pretty funny (sounds like the Rolling
Stones doing "Start Me Up"). Anyone know where I can find the
lyrics....I've always had a problem understanding Jagger's "posh"
accent.

Corey
Mirage Media
Nuenen, The Netherlands

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Internet Access Eindhoven, the Netherlands (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 11:37:06
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 03:41:42, "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> 
wrote:

> 
> <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
> news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-h8VlMsYyoKuh@localhost...
> > >
> > Ah. Here we have to look at later posts. The client (as it turned out)
> > is a DOS-based law firm. IE wouldn't really add much value (and a lot
> > of hassle) to such a package.
> 
> Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value, why
> did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
> actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
> misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
> himself demonstrated).
> 
IIRC, it had something to do with Windows 98's - err - 
"peculiarities". They didn't *want* to upgrade IE, they probably 
didn't even use it, but Windows nevertheless insisted that they 
should.

BTW, I never bothered to speculate about Bob's client's motivations, I
merely gave a possible interpretation of Bob's actions. You all jumped
on him, telling everyone it was a bad thing not to install IE and opt 
for the OS/2 installation. I want to point out that it might not have 
been the case, that from his point it might have been a sound and 
profitable decision, which made things better for both him and his 
client.
> 
> > OS/2 on the other hand, which has
> > superior DOS management, does (Bob had actually mentioned this client
> > before, but I forgot).
> 
> If that's what you have to go through to get a client to install OS/2, then
> I'll stick with NT thanks.  For my money, people like Boob are as effective
> an advocate *not* to install OS/2 as anything else.
> 
Well, you would, wouldn't you? You're not an OS/2 consultant. In your 
eyes and to your wallet, the NT solution might have looked better. And
who knows, maybe you could even convince your hypothetical client that
he had done the better deal...

As long as they didn't have OS/2 to compare it with, that is.


Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 11:33:10
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

SkidMARX@att.net writes:

> Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
> response from Thoren and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...

Who is that?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 11:39:26
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Lucien writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> major soft spot.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "refusal", Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer the question.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>>>> ....and again.

>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>>>> ....and again.

>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

>>> ....and again.

>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> ....and again.

Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

> The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

The same response again for the reader's reference:

> According to your statement, under what conditions
> does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
> functionality..."?

Perhaps you'd like to tell me how the statement you keep pointing to
applies to the JDK sentence, Lucien.

> Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

Unnecessary, Lucien, again.  I will restore my two simple tests,
however, given that you've never taken them.

> "The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
> 'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
> information."

And how does that concern the JDK sentence, Lucien, as you've repeatedly
insisted?

Note again the pat "refusal" to take the two simple tests:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, I noticed that you failed to answer my little test,
Lucien:

] #1:  It rained today.                                              
]                                                                    
] #2:  It rained today until sunset.                                 
]                                                                    
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day? 
]                                                                    
] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore 
] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the  
] absence of other information.  Yet I will claim that the answer to 
] the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.   
]                                                                    
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.                                    

Test grade:  F.

Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
] 
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
] 
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
] 
] Structurally, the two statements are identical, yet there is nothing
] in statement #3 that allows the question to be answered unambiguously,
] while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
] to be answered unambigiously.
] 
] Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

Test grade:  F.

Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the definition
of a word and not the structure.  Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2
corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2 functionality" thread,
where the additional information resolves what would otherwise be
ambiguous.

Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".   
Or are you really that idiotic?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 12:41:01
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> "Typical indication of *the* truth by [Tholen]?"

What is a question mark doing inside the quotation marks, Curtis?

> Laughable.

What's laughable about the truth, Curtis?

> You are hopeless, Dave.

Typical invective.  I'm not surprised, given your lack of a logical
argument, as usual.

> You did not ask, "why didn't you use the phrase, 'to which you failed
> to measure up'?"

Of course not, given that there are more alternatives than just that
one.

> You simply asked what "up" was doing at the beginning of the phrase.

On the contrary, I asked you what a "standard up" is.  Get your
chronology straight, Curtis.

> Ergo, my answer of "allowing me to not end the phrase with a
> preposition" refers to my use of the word "up" at the beginning of the
> phrase,

And yet when I recalled that excuse of yours, you called me "wrong".
Yet here you are, admitting it.  "Inept", to use your description.

> *NOT* to my *NOT* choosing the other phrase.

Your remark:

CB] It's allowing me to not end the phrase with a preposition

does refer to a phrase that would end with a preposition.

> The difference is admittedly subtle, which is why you don't (can't?)
> get it.

What makes you think that I haven't gotten your subtle differences?
How ironic, coming from the person who hasn't gotten the subtle
differences in my responses.

> Of course it's correct,

Then what is a "standard up", Curtis?

> your ineptness wrt comprehending it notwithstanding.

What alleged "ineptness wrt comprehending it", Curtis?  Typical
pontification.

> This is the most absurd application of "logic" I can recall seeing in
> quite some time.

That is the usual application of pontification that I've been noting
in many of your responses for quite some time.

> Like I said, you are hopeless.

Like I said, typical invective.  I'm not surprised, given your lack
of a logical argument.

> That you insist in your ineptness wrt comprehending what I wrote is
> irrelevant.

What alleged "ineptness wrt comprehending" what you wrote, Curtis?
Typical pontification.

> Sorry.

Apologizing for your poor writing, Curtis?

> Wrong.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> What's "poor" is your reading comprehension.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> "Inept."

How ironic.

> "What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
> 11/24/1999

I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
question came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

> Here, Dave. In this thread.

Where in this thread, allegedly, Curtis?

> -- [more of Dave's hopelessness snipped] --

Even more invective.  Goes with the continued lack of a logical argument.

> "What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
> 11/24/1999

I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
question came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

> Dave shifts gears midstream.

Where have I allegedly done that, Curtis?  Yet another example of
your pontification.

> Again.

Your pontification again.

> The hypocrisy to which I was referring, Dave.

That's a circular response, Curtis.  Sort of like your reasoning.

> And I have justified my choice of words at least twice.

Where is the alleged justification, Curtis?

> It's just another one of those things that you don't *like* but
> happens to be *correct* anyway.

It's not a matter of like or dislike, Curtis, but rather a matter
of accuracy.

> Too bad.

Too bad that you are unwilling to be more accurate in your choice
of words.

> So what?

Why should I suspect a problem with a file when none of the others
had any problems?

> When I called you inept, "there was no prior evidence of it being
> corrupt."

You hadn't even considered the possibility, Curtis.  "Inept".

> "The evidence?"

Still having reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> You mean, different file sizes?

No.

> Evidence that only you possessed?

No.

> Actually, that's what you did, Dave.

On the contrary, I'm the one who came to the correct conclusion.  You
are the one who did not.

> The difference is that you *published* evidence based on your broken
> copy.

There was no evidence of it being "broken" at that time, Curtis.  I
see you're still trying to confuse the chronology for effect.

> If what I did was inept,

Your failure to consider other possibilities is indeed "inept", to
use your own description.

> then what you did was extremely inept.

Illogical, Curtis.  I considered other possibilities and ran experiments
to test them.  You did not.

> It is true.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> You simply don't *like* it.

Like or dislike is irrelevant, Curtis.  The truth is relevant.  What
you wrote is not the truth.

> I made a mistake when I said that would be my last post.

"Inept".

> We all make mistakes.

I've never made one like yours, Curtis.  Mistakes are usually
unintentional.

> Making a mistake is not hypocrisy.

You're erroneously presupposing that your action represents a mistake,
Curtis.  What you wrote was quite deliberate and not unintentional.

> Your copy, Dave?

Still having reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> Your *incomplete* copy?

Still having reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> If it "doesn't change the fact that the program does run under OS/2,"
> then it also "doesn't change the fact that the program does run under
> DOS."

Incorrect, Curtis.  DOS doesn't run any of the unzip code.  OS/2 does.

> Earlier in this thread, you were arguing that "running JAVAINUF.EXE"
> meant extracting the files, and therefore, saying that it "ran under
> DOS" was wrong.

Reading comprehension makes cameo appearance.  Of course, I wrote more
than just that.  Are you ignoring the rest of it intentionally?

> It's interesting that you are doing an about-face on that argument.

Where is the alleged about-face, Curtis?

> So, were you wrong then, or are you wrong now?

You're erroneously presupposing the existence of some about-face,
Curtis.

> The level of similarity is irrelevant.

Then why did you bring up the matter of similar error messages, Curtis?
How ironic that you brought up "about-face" and then engage in one!

> Nevertheless, you had to have gotten messages indicating that the
> extract couldn't be performed,

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> otherwise, the extract would have been performed.

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> Presupposing is not necessary.

Then why did you do so, Curtis?

> You certainly are predictable.

How ironic, coming from someone whose pontification is predictable.

> Your logic also failed in this regard, Dave.

Incorrect, given that I considered the possibility and did the
experiments to determine whether it was, in fact, the case.  You're
the one whose logic failed to consider the possibility, Curtis.

> This is known as being a hypocrite.

Illogical, Curtis, given that I'm the one who considered the
possibility and you're the one who did not.

> -- [snip of more Tholen nonsense] --

What alleged "nonsense", Curtis?  Once again, lacking a logical argument,
you turn to invective.  "You certainly are predictable."

> Is that a question or a statement?

It was a question the first time I asked it, Curtis.

> Confused again?

Not at all, Curtis.

> You were saying?

Still having reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> About people who "pontificate?"

Such as you.

> You talk about the sentence when it's time top shift gears midstream:

I've been talking about the sentence since you wrote it, Curtis.  I
haven't shifted any gears.  You're the one who broke it into pieces,
separating "standard" from "up".

> "What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?"  Tholen --
> 11/24/1999

I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
question came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

> On the basis that it is wrong, incorrect, erroneous.

Pontification is not a basis, Curtis.

> Sorry, Dave. That would be you.

Yet another example of your pontification.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: SkidMARX@att.net                                  09-Dec-99 13:10:15
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: SkidMARX@att.net

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 11:33:21, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

> SkidMARX@att.net writes:
> 
> > Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
> > response from Thoren and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...
> 
> Who is that?
> 

Let's fix the improperly spelled name ...

Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
response from Tholen and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...

There we go ...
All better now ...

NOW do you see whom it is David ???

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: AT&T WorldNet Services (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: prather@infi.net                                  09-Dec-99 13:07:04
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 10:23:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: prather@infi.net (Jerry Prather)

In message <82mc4f$lpn$3@burn.ab.videon.ca> - larso@commodore.
(Lars P Ormberg) writes:
:>:>If a small injustice is allowed to pass, it allows for a greater one.  And 
a
:>greater one.  And one greater still.

Oooh, Lars, now that's an interesting concept.  Well, how about
the injustice of M$ not refunding the price of WinXX licenses in
accordance with _their_ license?  Hmm, now they're not only
illegal in the view of the U.S. Government, but unjust as well!

Jerry Prather                    prather@infi.net

"Many religions are worth dying for; no religion is worth killing
for."
					- Me (circa 1998)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: infi.net (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  09-Dec-99 19:06:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Jerry Prather write:
> In message <82mc4f$lpn$3@burn.ab.videon.ca> - larso@commodore.
> (Lars P Ormberg) writes:
> :>:>If a small injustice is allowed to pass, it allows for a greater one. 
And a
> :>greater one.  And one greater still.
> 
> Oooh, Lars, now that's an interesting concept.  Well, how about
> the injustice of M$ not refunding the price of WinXX licenses in
> accordance with _their_ license?  Hmm, now they're not only
> illegal in the view of the U.S. Government, but unjust as well!

Than why haven't they been taken to court for THAT?  Why the big
anti-monopoly farce?

If this was such a quick and clear cut case as you imply, surely it would
have been handled, instead of wasting millions trying Microsoft for doing a
moral business action.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            09-Dec-99 10:34:22
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Allen-Bradley makes contracts with its resellers that they can only sell
> > Allen-Bradley equipment all the time.  In return, Allen-Bradley agrees
to
> > enter into a contract with only one reseller; but there's no legal
> > requirement for them to do that; other than the fact that it's a win-win
for
> > them if they do.
> >
> > Exactly the same principle applied to Microsoft.
>
> Allen-Bradley defines a company.

Allen-Bradley defines a market: factory automation.

They also control the vast majority of that market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             09-Dec-99 18:50:17
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com> wrote:

> "Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:
> 
> > P.S.: I am reading cooa for the very same reasons. :-)
> 
> No you're not.  You live in cooa because you failed at
> using OS/2.  You've never gotten over the fact that
> others can do it and you can't.  So instead of living
> in your own chosen operating system newsgroup,
> you live in the OS/2 newsgroups hoping some of all
> our 'OS/2 smarts' will rub off on you.  It won't.

Excellent!

See what I mean?

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             09-Dec-99 18:01:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <384f4be2$12$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>,
  Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:
> On <82mtqa$2qf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, on 12/09/99 at 12:40 AM,
>    cbass2112@my-deja.com said:
>
> > What he *should* be "into" is providing the best possible service to
> > his clients, which seems not to be the case.
>
> Read the whole thread. The client in question is a DOS based law firm
> which desires to continue to run WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS with
> Bitstream Fontware.

I stand corrected -- my initial impression that your client was still
using Win98 is incorrect, and that was the basis for my rant.  And for
the record, I agree that OS/2 is the strongest choice for anyone who has
a large investment in 16-bit legacy software, be it DOS or Windows
based.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             09-Dec-99 18:08:01
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <384F0BAB.3C2AD715@ibm.net>,
  Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:
>
>
> cbass2112@my-deja.com wrote:

-- snip --

> > Product A does not have "high maintenance costs," Karel, any more
> > than product B does.  How much would it have cost the client to
> > download FixPack Whatever in order to get their OS/2 --  er --
> > "product B" Y2K compliant?
>
> FP 4 or any FP after 4.
> And you *can't* assert that all OSs have the same maintenance costs.
> It is an absurd assertion.

Yes it is. Kindly point out in the double-chevroned quote above where I
made such an assertion.

-- snip --

> Consultants are not charities.  Why bitch at someone for deciding that
> the higher costs associated with windows are cost that should come out
> of his or her pocket?

For the record, there was a communications glitch. I was under the
impression that Mr. Germer *allowed* his client to spend US $3,000 to do
the IE upgrades.  *THAT* is what I was bitching about.

That he, in fact did not do so obviously invalidates my original
position.

Yes, I was in error. See my response to Mr. Germer.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  09-Dec-99 13:44:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Some blathering blithering idiot calling itself <tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu>
tholened the following straight line:

> What allegedly "insane response" have you ever read from me?

This is *so* tempting that I'm going to refrain.  I'll let the reader insert
his own favorite "insane response from Tholen" instead!



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  09-Dec-99 13:39:27
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451522^-9999

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Today's Tholen digest:

[nada thing to report!]

You're welcome!



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  09-Dec-99 13:42:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451522.35357456^-.00000000000000000000000000

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Now Tholen is trying to deny that Eliza taught him everything -- yes,
everything! -- he "knows."  Not only is that incorrect, it's also
irrelevant.  The fact is that Tholen used that phrase as a response to me,
thereby initiating the direction down that path.  It's rather ironic that he
should comment about being soon to forget.  Here's today's digest:

[Nada thing here either]

Bye!



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu                09-Dec-99 13:57:20
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu>

In article <82oflp$2ip$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu 
wrote:

> SkidMARX@att.net writes:
> 
> >>> Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
> >>> response from Thoren and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...
>  
> >> Who is that?
> 
> > Let's fix the improperly spelled name ...
> >
> > Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
> > response from Tholen and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...
> 
> What allegedly "insane response" have you ever read from me?

Don't you know, Dave?

-- 
""I do not 'approve' phrases.-Dave Tholen"
- Eric Bennett"
-Marty Amodeo

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IFA BS-1 (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             09-Dec-99 11:07:12
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 15:31:04
Subj: OS/2 and MP3s...

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>

I play MP3s on my system using WarpAMP b4.  I have an Aureal Vortex 1
PCI sound card.  When I play the same MP3s on the same hardware using
Windows and WinAMP, there are tiny changes in pitch that seem to be
caused by the WinAmp and Windows system timing.  I would have never
noticed this if I hadn't first listened to the same MP3s on OS/2 which
seems to have 'perfect pitch' relatively speaking anyway.  After
listening to these MP3s on OS/2, it is irritating to listen to them on
WinAMP.  Maybe my ear has become too sensitive.  Has anyone else noticed
this?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  09-Dec-99 19:04:14
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Csaba Raduly write:
> larso@ualberta.ca (Lars P Ormberg) wrote in

> >> The problem with M$ is that they are not living by those laws. 
> >> M$ _is_ forcing me to "eat at their restaurant". 
> >
> >How?  Does MS send people to your home, tie up your family, hold a match
> >over a gas canister, and force you to sign on the dotted line for
> >Windows 2000?
> 
> No, but they say to the PC vendors: preload WinWhatever on EVERY machine 
> you sell, OR ELSE we won't give you WinWhatever OEM licenses

Windows licences are possessed by Microsoft.  They are something that they
have every rational right to use as they see fit (providing they aren't
using them to actually use force which they aren't because it can't happen
unless maybe they give free licences to Rocco and Vinnie), and the notion of
taking it away from them is evil incarnate.

>                                                              and you'll be 
> out of business in no time.

Even if Microsoft, upset about a company not supporting them, says this does
not make it something which is true.

> If that isn't An Offer They Can't Refuse in the Don Vito Corleone style, 
> then I don't know what is.

Then you don't know what is.

Corleone A: "Cut us a third of your profits, and we won't rough you up and
burn your place down."

Corleone B: "Cut us a third of your profits, or we won't sell you bulk napkins
at a quarter the regular rate."

Sorry, Corleone B (Microsoft) doesn't just have the same viciousness in his
threats.

> And of course PC bendors preload WinWhatever on every PC they sell

That's what their agreement says.  If they do otherwise, they should be
hauled in court on contract violation.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             10-Dec-99 08:15:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384f46f8$10$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82mgk1$drn$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:53 AM,
>    "Stupid Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
> > Any flames Boob gets are entirely of his own doing.  Read back a few
> > months in the NT Advocacy group, and check out some of Boobs old posts.
> > We're just treating him as he would obviously like to be treated.
>
> I never posted in the NT advocacy group. I never had it on my any of my
> systems. Unless I responded to someone who stupidly crossposted, you are
> total liar.
>
You have cross-posted many times in reply to the NT advocacy group, in your
usual manner of calling people assholes the instant they hold a differing
opinion.  I couldn't be happier to see the inside of your killfile.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             10-Dec-99 08:19:05
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-diOMCwdcDGdI@localhost...
> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 03:41:42, "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
> > news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-h8VlMsYyoKuh@localhost...
> > > >
> > > Ah. Here we have to look at later posts. The client (as it turned out)
> > > is a DOS-based law firm. IE wouldn't really add much value (and a lot
> > > of hassle) to such a package.
> >
> > Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value,
why
> > did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
> > actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
> > misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
> > himself demonstrated).
> >
> IIRC, it had something to do with Windows 98's - err -
> "peculiarities". They didn't *want* to upgrade IE, they probably
> didn't even use it, but Windows nevertheless insisted that they
> should.
>
> BTW, I never bothered to speculate about Bob's client's motivations, I
> merely gave a possible interpretation of Bob's actions. You all jumped
> on him, telling everyone it was a bad thing not to install IE and opt
> for the OS/2 installation. I want to point out that it might not have
> been the case, that from his point it might have been a sound and
> profitable decision, which made things better for both him and his
> client.

No, I jumped over him for perpetuating a stupid lie.  He claimed there was
no other option but to have his clients dial-up to update IE5, which is an
absolute nonsense.  He already said there were CD's available on the
network, and his assertation that IE5 requires an intermediate reboot is
absolutely false.  I don't give a rat's ass whether they install OS/2 or
Win98, just that Boob is using silly lies.

> >
> > > OS/2 on the other hand, which has
> > > superior DOS management, does (Bob had actually mentioned this client

> > > before, but I forgot).
> >
> > If that's what you have to go through to get a client to install OS/2,
then
> > I'll stick with NT thanks.  For my money, people like Boob are as
effective
> > an advocate *not* to install OS/2 as anything else.
> >
> Well, you would, wouldn't you? You're not an OS/2 consultant. In your
> eyes and to your wallet, the NT solution might have looked better. And
> who knows, maybe you could even convince your hypothetical client that
> he had done the better deal...
>
I don't really care that Boob sold them OS/2, I just think the dishonest way
he did it sucks.


> As long as they didn't have OS/2 to compare it with, that is.
>
>



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: ktaggart@easystreet.com                           09-Dec-99 11:11:03
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Kevin M. Taggart" <ktaggart@easystreet.com>

in article jimglidewell-0912990821500001@green.sdc.cs.boeing.com, Jim
Glidewell at jimglidewell@home.com wrote on 12/9/99 8:21 AM:

> In article <slrn84ru29.2vn.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith <tzs@halcyon.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 01:24:10 GMT, Andrew Irvine <irvin@clara.co.uk> wrote:
>>> he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
>>> meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
>>> more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
>>> 82) had that :)?
>> 
>> Well, if you consider 32 to be long, I suppose.
> 
> Compared to 8.3 - Hell, yes!
> 
> "Jim's Weekly Status 09/19/85" vs "JWS91985.TXT"
> 
> Heck, I've got files that I created over 12 years ago which I can
> still identify and/or search for by their _filenames_.
> 
> Keep in mind also that many/all Unix variants of that era had more
> restrictive limits on filenames. Quoting from "The Unix System" (1983)
> by S. R. Bourne (yes, _that_ Bourne):
> 
> "A complete filename or pathname is written as a sequence of component
> names separated by /. <snip> Each / separated component of a
> name is limited to _14_ characters." (emphasis mine)
> 
> So 32 characters, with no restrictions (except for ":"), was excellent
> for it's time, and is still adequate for most purposes today. Not that
> I want to discourage Apple from supporting 128 or 256 though - I still
> occasionally need to trim my filenames to fit the 32 character limit.
> 
>> Mac 84 was amusing.  It
>> was using MFS, not HFS.  MFS didn't support folders.  Made it interesting
>> for the people with the early hard disks.
> 
> MFS presented itself to the user as a hierarchical file system - you could
> have folders and folders within folders... BUT this was smoke and mirrors,
> and the performance took a serious hit as the number of files and folders
> grew. But HFS came out pretty darned early - not long after the Plus added
> a SCSI port to the Mac and made HD's a practical (though pricey) option.
> 
> MFS was designed for floppies, and was more than adequate for that media.
> Considering the alternatives in 1984-5 (and I did), MFS was not "amusing" -
> it was "amazing"... As was the Mac in general, compared to the utterly
> dismal PC OS alternatives of the time.
> 
> But I'll admit that I didn't use MFS for all that long before HFS came out.

DOS did not support subdirectories until version 2.0 (specifically, PC-DOS
2.0, March 1983). It did not support hard disks until even later than that,
until version 3.0 (16-bit FAT) was released to support the PC-AT towards the
end of '84. Up until (and including) DOS 3.3, the maximum partition size was
limited to 32MB! This was finally removed with DOS version 4.0 in 1988.

> I still believe that the 8.3 filename convention that M$ saddled it's users
> with for more than *ten* years is the single biggest cause of PC user
> rework and data loss that the world has ever known...
> 
> I saw my first Mac a few days before the original 1984 Superbowl
announcement,
> and was utterly amazed at what I saw. Here was a box that for $2495 was
doing
> a lot of stuff that had previously only been possible on our $30,000+ Xerox
> Star. (I had no experience with the Lisa) I was hooked... and still am,
> 15 years later.
> 
> Quite an achievement for an "amusing" box...

I saw my first Mac the same day I saw my first Pontiac Fiero in early '84. I
was sure someone had switched the price tags between the two...

--KT

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             10-Dec-99 08:11:29
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384f44b2$8$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82mh1m$enb$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 10:01 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
> > Boob was complaining about cost - I fail to see how DSL could make this
> > better, it will cost more.  As opposed to spending $20 to get the CD
> > from Microsoft.  I said nothing about pressing CD's either - Microsoft
> > sells them.
>
> You continue to ignore that most of the machines in question do not have a
> CD Rom drive and the firm doesn't want them to have same.

You continue to perpetuate the lie that you can't do a Win98/IE update over
the network.

>
> And your total ignorance of what you are typing is shown by the lie in the
> second sentence repeated in the third sentence of your post, Microsoft
> DOES NOT SELL the CD's. You are a complete liar. They GIVE THEM AWAY FOR
> THE ASKING.

They charge you for postage, which is close enough to selling them.  And in
New Zealand, it's $20.

>
> > Don't embarrass yourself with a retort that is bound to cost the
> > customer far far more than a single CD.
> >  Live in the real world.
>
> I do live in the real world and rather well. The next idiotic lie I see
> from you, you join Glatt in the killfile.
>
Which you seem to have huge trouble figuring out.  Gosh OS/2 must be hard to
use, if a Boob like you can't work it.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             10-Dec-99 08:13:10
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384f4cc4$13$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <dc-17D223.23245808121999@news.pdq.net>, on 12/08/99 at 11:24 PM,
>    DC <dc@pdq.net> said:
>
> > I see.  So they have no network?  Of couse they do.  So don't you think
> > you can figure out how to copy from the CD, over the network, to each
> > machine that wants MSIE5.0?
>
> If each machine had roughly a gigabyte of free disk space, sure.

And now you are the liar.  The IE5 update is roughly 100MB - not a gig.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             10-Dec-99 08:14:18
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384f4728$11$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82mgh7$doe$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:52 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
>
> > No they don't.  I've never seen IE5 require an intermediate reboot.  It
> > goes through install, then reboots, configures itself as the machine
> > comes up, without requiring access to the CD/network.  For a consultant,
> > you really don't seem familiar with the products.
>
> Then you haven't experienced the October 1999 CD.
>
Actually I have, and guess what?  No intermediate reboots.

I thought I was in your killfile - or did you make an exception - or are you
really such a Boob that you can't work it properly.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             09-Dec-99 19:37:24
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82o4e9$nva$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Answer the question put to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the two simple tests,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note the refusal to answer a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic, central question -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like we've hit another
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> major soft spot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "refusal", Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note again the pat refusal to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer the question.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged
"refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and we see the refusal again
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .....and again...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal",
Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien,
again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>>>> ....and again.
>
> >>>> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> >>> ....and again.
>
> >> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?
>
> > ....and again.
>
> Where is this alleged "refusal", Lucien, again?

...and again.

The (unanswered) question again for the reader's reference:

According to your statement, under what conditions
does "implements" "....allow for either 'some' or 'all'
functionality..."?

Here is Dave's statement again for reference:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             09-Dec-99 20:53:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Development Professional Seeks To Relocate To Sacramento

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com> wrote:

> "Andrew J. Brehm" wrote:
> 
> > Christian Gustafson <christian.g@ibm.net> wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=556690464
> >
> > I miss him....
> >
> > I do. He had this wonderful "energy" that would unite almost everybody
> > in this group (against him...).
> 
> You poor Mac-sell-out-to-MS user. 

Your operating system contains Microsoft code. Mine doesn't. If you want
to play it this way: here we go. You are a Microsoft customer, my
friend.

> As a non-OS/2 user living in the OS/2
> newsgroups it is understandable that you would miss me.  Thanks for
> the sentiment.

You're welcome.

> > Apparently The "well known non-profit organization" was WarpCity?
> 
> Do you poor fMac Zealots  ever read anything?  Warp City is very
> much alive, is currently offering year-2000 discount memberships
> to all 1999 members (you missed the 'Early Bird Special' just
> after Thanksgiving!) and we're looking forward to another
> smash year of new subscribers expected at the Warp City
> door on January 1, 2000.
> 
> And we're a commercial enterprise - not a non-profit.

I see.

> > --
> > Fan of Woody Allen
> > User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
> > Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
> 
> Why are you here?  You don't use OS/2!

I didn't know I was not allowed to read usenet without OS/2.

(BTW, my Intel machine does run OS/2, but who cares...).

> P.S.  You WISH you had a resume that good!

You'd be surprised.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             09-Dec-99 19:57:28
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <tholenbot-672E5B.23084707121999@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
  tholenbot <tholenbot@x3066.resnet.cornell.edu> wrote:
> In article <82k9tc$obl$1@news.hawaii.edu>, tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu
> wrote:
> > Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent
costly
> > mistakes" thread, where the quantification is provided by the
definition
> > of a word and not the structure.
>
> Aren't you certain?

Just FYI, his 2 "tests" fail in a manner similar to the failure
exhibited by his "costly mistakes" argument (and the JDK sentence
argument), so if you're interested in the background on this, the
"costly mistakes" thread is archived on USENET. I believe a search on
"Fat Lady Sings" will bring up the relevant posts (dating back to '95).

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 19:59:00
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: OS/2 and MP3s...

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 16:07:25, "David T. Johnson" 
<djohnson@isomedia.com> wrote:

> I play MP3s on my system using WarpAMP b4.  I have an Aureal Vortex 1
> PCI sound card.  When I play the same MP3s on the same hardware using
> Windows and WinAMP, there are tiny changes in pitch that seem to be
> caused by the WinAmp and Windows system timing.  I would have never
> noticed this if I hadn't first listened to the same MP3s on OS/2 which
> seems to have 'perfect pitch' relatively speaking anyway.  After
> listening to these MP3s on OS/2, it is irritating to listen to them on
> WinAMP.  Maybe my ear has become too sensitive.  Has anyone else noticed
> this?

I checked it. Get this: substract the WarpAMP output from the one 
produced by WinAMP; then store the soundfile you've obtained. If you 
now play this new soundfile _backwards_, you hear the text: "Bill 
Gates is God. I shall never buy anything but Microsoft again", spoken 
by Jay Leno. Mind you, don't try to play this soundfile on a 
Windows-PC, or it will self-combust, as my friend found out.

If you use WinAMP more than 10 times, you're hooked for life.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

PS: Anyone wanna buy a slightly charred PC? Knock-off price? Anyone?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com                          09-Dec-99 20:13:03
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)

>Karel Jansens
>I merely gave a possible interpretation of Bob's actions. You all jumped
>on him, telling everyone it was a bad thing not to install IE and opt 
>for the OS/2 installation. I want to point out that it might not have 
>been the case, that from his point it might have been a sound and 
>profitable decision, which made things better for both him and his 
>client.

Still running interference for OS/2-loving kooks, I see.

None of your "possible interpretations" are any more plausible and
business-savvy than Boob's original tall tales about his alleged
clients and supposed experience as a consultant. (Boob is a complete
fake. His anecdotes are rife with the usual inconsistencies one would
expect from someone making everything up as he goes along). It's too
bad that there aren't many businesses considering using OS/2 so I can
fire off a copy your "possible interpretation" of Boob's desire to
make more money off of a client rather than inform him of a free
solution to his needs. It would be great to show such clients that
"OS/2 Consultants" are unprofessional, and first and foremost put
their own personal holy mission/war against MS before any client's
needs, even at that client's expense. OS/2 Fanatics should be seen for
what they truly are -- unprofessional malcontents whose love-affair
with a pet, niche product means trouble/expense for anyone who has the
misfortune of having to deal with those fanatics.

But since he's an OS/2-loving kook, you'll gladly run interference for
him and tell us how he "makes quite a lot of sense" when he's telling
Canadians that their opinions are worthless. Typical.

I guess it's sort of fortunate that people like yourself already
destroyed OS/2 and its market, so it's not really possible for your
own fanaticism to be used to cause much more damage. You can write as
many posts as you want justifying some alleged OS/2 Consultant bilking
a client out of money, and it won't really make any difference to OS/2

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: telam@iquest.net                                  09-Dec-99 14:57:05
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Tom Elam <telam@iquest.net>

On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:11:06 -0800, Tom Elam wrote this reply to "Kevin M.
Taggart" <ktaggart@easystreet.com>:

>DOS did not support subdirectories until version 2.0 (specifically, PC-DOS
>2.0, March 1983). It did not support hard disks until even later than that,
>until version 3.0 (16-bit FAT) was released to support the PC-AT towards the
>end of '84. Up until (and including) DOS 3.3, the maximum partition size was
>limited to 32MB! This was finally removed with DOS version 4.0 in 1988.


IIRC, wrong.  DOS 2.1 supported hard drives.  I had a 20 meg MFM drive on an
XT
in about 1983.


--------------------------------
Me to Joe:

What product do you regard as a close substitute for the Macintosh computer
......and would buy for yourself all else being equal?
 
Joe Ragosta's reply:

A Windows PC, obviously. In fact, I just bought 3 of them for the
engineers in my company.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: None now, never had any (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: MauriceV@bellsouth.net                            09-Dec-99 20:51:14
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:10
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: MauriceV@bellsouth.net (Maurice Valmont)

On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:11:06 -0800, "Kevin M. Taggart"
<ktaggart@easystreet.com> wrote:

>DOS did not support subdirectories until version 2.0 (specifically, PC-DOS
>2.0, March 1983). It did not support hard disks until even later than that,
>until version 3.0 (16-bit FAT) was released to support the PC-AT towards the
>end of '84. Up until (and including) DOS 3.3, the maximum partition size was
>limited to 32MB! This was finally removed with DOS version 4.0 in 1988.

While it is true that we had to wait for DOS 2.0 before we could use
folders, it is not true that we had to wait for DOS 3.0 to support
hard drives. I used to have a Victor Sirius (8086, 256K RAM, 800x600
mono graphics and a 5MB hard drive) that ran DOS 1.25.

>> I still believe that the 8.3 filename convention that M$ saddled it's users
>> with for more than *ten* years is the single biggest cause of PC user
>> rework and data loss that the world has ever known...

In a sense, the 8.3 filename is still with us. Just try to run
ScanDisk (from within Win95) on a machine that has a lot of nested
folders: Even though it's part and parcel of the OS, the program can't
handle a filespec longer than 66 characters. Cute.


--
"Generation 80s"
24hr music broadcast at 56Kbps
<http://www.fundi.com/gen80s>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 21:27:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:19:11, "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> 
wrote:

> 
> <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
> news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-diOMCwdcDGdI@localhost...
> > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 03:41:42, "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
> > > news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-h8VlMsYyoKuh@localhost...
> > > > >
> > > > Ah. Here we have to look at later posts. The client (as it turned out)
> > > > is a DOS-based law firm. IE wouldn't really add much value (and a lot
> > > > of hassle) to such a package.
> > >
> > > Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value,
> why
> > > did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
> > > actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
> > > misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
> > > himself demonstrated).
> > >
> > IIRC, it had something to do with Windows 98's - err -
> > "peculiarities". They didn't *want* to upgrade IE, they probably
> > didn't even use it, but Windows nevertheless insisted that they
> > should.
> >
> > BTW, I never bothered to speculate about Bob's client's motivations, I
> > merely gave a possible interpretation of Bob's actions. You all jumped
> > on him, telling everyone it was a bad thing not to install IE and opt
> > for the OS/2 installation. I want to point out that it might not have
> > been the case, that from his point it might have been a sound and
> > profitable decision, which made things better for both him and his
> > client.
> 
> No, I jumped over him for perpetuating a stupid lie.  He claimed there was
> no other option but to have his clients dial-up to update IE5, which is an
> absolute nonsense.  He already said there were CD's available on the
> network, and his assertation that IE5 requires an intermediate reboot is
> absolutely false.  I don't give a rat's ass whether they install OS/2 or
> Win98, just that Boob is using silly lies.
> 
It was his client who complained about IE5 wanting itself to update 
every time they went on the Net (okay, maybe not every time). Bob 
chose not to go down that lane with his client. And BTW, don't forget 
that Bob's client only came back to him *after* seeing a 
"Microsoftophile" consultant, which would lead to the conclusion that 
either the Windows consultant was the real ignorant idiot, or that 
Bob's client had his full of Windows and the "Never Ending Upgrade 
Path".


> > >
> > > > OS/2 on the other hand, which has
> > > > superior DOS management, does (Bob had actually mentioned this client
> 
> > > > before, but I forgot).
> > >
> > > If that's what you have to go through to get a client to install OS/2,
> then
> > > I'll stick with NT thanks.  For my money, people like Boob are as
> effective
> > > an advocate *not* to install OS/2 as anything else.
> > >
> > Well, you would, wouldn't you? You're not an OS/2 consultant. In your
> > eyes and to your wallet, the NT solution might have looked better. And
> > who knows, maybe you could even convince your hypothetical client that
> > he had done the better deal...
> >
> I don't really care that Boob sold them OS/2, I just think the dishonest way
> he did it sucks.
> 
Like I said: save your wrath for the guy who advised the firm on 
Microsoft products. He's the real joke.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: telam@iquest.net                                  09-Dec-99 15:19:18
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Tom Elam <telam@iquest.net>

On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 11:11:06 -0800, Tom Elam wrote this reply to "Kevin M.
Taggart" <ktaggart@easystreet.com>:

>DOS did not support subdirectories until version 2.0 (specifically, PC-DOS
>2.0, March 1983). It did not support hard disks until even later than that,
>until version 3.0 (16-bit FAT) was released to support the PC-AT towards the
>end of '84. Up until (and including) DOS 3.3, the maximum partition size was
>limited to 32MB! This was finally removed with DOS version 4.0 in 1988.

Follow up - 

See the 1981-83 sections of

http://members.iquest.net/~telam/pc.htm

Cheers,
--------------------------------
Me to Joe:

What product do you regard as a close substitute for the Macintosh computer
......and would buy for yourself all else being equal?
 
Joe Ragosta's reply:

A Windows PC, obviously. In fact, I just bought 3 of them for the
engineers in my company.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: None now, never had any (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca                         09-Dec-99 21:29:17
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel)

Bob Germer (bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com) wrote:
: On <384ed712.0@news.victoria.tc.ca>, on 12/08/99 at 10:09 PM,
:    up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel) said:

: > I am a Canadian, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with the term
: > Canuck. In fact, the professional hockey team closest to me is the
: > Vancouver Canucks. To take offense at this would be like taking offense
: > to the name "New York Yankies". 

: Well were I a fan of the despicable, monopolistic, abominable New York
: Yankees, I might take exception to your spelling of the team name. <GRIN>

Oops! Sorry about that! I have to confess that here in the frozen north I
don't follow baseball very closely.


: Actually, no sensible American takes offense at being called a Yankee or
: Yank with one exception. In the states of the old confederacy of
: 1861-1865, a Canadian or Brit, etc. can call someone a Yankee. However,
: someone with a Philadelphia, New York, Boston, etc. accent better not try
: it! Of course, the good old boys down there generally refer to the Civil
: War as the "Late Unpleasantness". I am not sure it still is happening, but
: about 15 years ago McGraw Hill had two separate editions of some of their
: history textbooks. Those sold in the north called it the Civil War. In the
: South, the term was War Between the States.

: Thanks for reminding me about the Canucks. Seeing as how our Flyers are in
: the other conference, we don't see them but once a year at the most here
: in Philadelphia. By the time the game is over out west, I am asleep and
: the next day forget who they played on the left coast.

I'm not sure if it's on this year, but in the past there's been a
traditional New Year's Eve visit by the Flyers. I've been out to that game
a couple of times (and the 'nucks have consitently lost!)

: By the way, the description of the Yankees (which is my team in the AL)
: was coined by a writer describing them and their long time announcer Mel
: Allen. The last verse of the poem he wrote as a column in the now defunct
: Philadelphia Evening Bulletin went:

: Here's to the Yankees, may they always be plastered.
: The same to Mel Allen, the Ballentine bastard.

: (Ballentine was the name of a then very popular beer in the northeast
: which was the primary sponsor of Yankee broadcasts)

Thanks for the bit of info. For the record, I have absolutely no idea
where the term Canuck originated.

--
Bill

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Victoria Telecommunity Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             09-Dec-99 13:54:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Help! Netscape, soundcard

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


Marty wrote:
> 
> pvollan@norcov.com wrote:
> >
> > If you guys are OS/2 advocates, perhaps you can help me before I toss it
> > all and install FreeBSD.
> >
> > The number one problem I'm having now it that the current Netscape,
> > 4.61, won't work. I've tried both the export and the not for export
> > versions. I've noticed these messages about a possible "error leak" so
> > maybe you folks can help me here. Whenever I run any of the parts of
> > Communicator 4.61 (Communicator, Composer, Messenger, Navigator), I get
> > a SYS3171 "Due to insufficient stack space, the exception was not
> > dispatched."  (I use 2.02 and it works fine, except for the occaisional
> > Javascript error.)
> >
> > 11-30-1999  21:21:57  SYS3171  PID 0037  TID 0001  Slot 0069
> > C:\NETSCAPE\PROGRAM\NETSCAPE.EXE
> > c000009f
> > 1f903ad0
> > EAX=00005756  EBX=00000094  ECX=00000008  EDX=00000008
> > ESI=1f902f1c  EDI=15417d71
> > DS=0053  DSACC=d0f3  DSLIM=1fffffff
> > ES=0053  ESACC=d0f3  ESLIM=1fffffff
> > FS=150b  FSACC=00f2  FSLIM=00000030
> > GS=0000  GSACC=****  GSLIM=********
> > CS:EIP=005a:1f903ad0  CSACC=d0df  CSLIM=1fffffff
> > SS:ESP=004a:007feb98  SSACC=d0d3  SSLIM=1fffffff
> > EBP=007fecac  FLG=00002283
> >
> > IBMDEV32.DLL 0006:00003ad0
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Can you find out where this DLL came from?  It doesn't ring a bell with
> me as being part of Communicator itself.

It's part of OS/2 v4 GA.  The Communicator problem might be due to not
having a fixpack installed.  Communicator 4.61 needs something like
fixpack 8 or greater, I think.  If the fixpack is applied and it still
won't work, then something pretty significant is broken in the OS/2
install.  The easiest thing to do to fix it would probably be a
reinstall of OS/2.    

> 
> You can try uninstalling all of Communicator, updating to a recent
> FixPack (if you haven't already, I think it requires 5 or higher), and
> then reinstalling it clean.
> 
> > I also can't figure out why my sound card won't work. It's a Pro Audio
> > Spectrum 16. It looks to all the world like it's installed, and I've
> > certainly looked at the Hardware Manager and run rmview and su from a
> > command prompt, in fact the PAS 16 works in Windows, well most of the
> > time it does, it's just from in OS/2 that it doesn't work. Maybe it's
> > because of the oddball model number on my card: 650-0044-56B? This ought
> > to be real easy since support for the PAS16 is included in the
> > installation manager.
> 
> Make sure you don't have FastLoad running, otherwise Win3.1 will grab
> the sound card and probably not let OS/2 use it.  Also make sure you
> Win3.1 (working) settings match those in your OS/2 config.sys.
> 
> - Marty
> 
> PS:  A better place to get help like this would probably be
> comp.os.os2.bugs or coo.multimedia or coo.apps, all of which have a much
> better signal to noise ratio.  Good luck.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca                         09-Dec-99 21:54:11
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: up883@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Bill Riel)

Marty (mamodeo@stny.rr.com) wrote:

: Do you take offense to the following?
: "Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin [sic] is worth less than garbage."
: - Bob Germer

I don't like that. otoh, I do feel that the person Bob was arguing with
was taking an incredibly narrow-minded and ignorant position.

: Did this sound like it was reserved "for ignorant Canadians only"?

Well, I'm not particularly interested in analyzing whether Bob
meant to make a generalization, or to take a dig at the person he
was responding to. I'm merely pointing out to Karel that the term Canuck
is not generally taken in offence, since he inquired about that.

And that is about as far as I want to take this.

--
Bill

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Victoria Telecommunity Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               09-Dec-99 16:59:11
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:13:15, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't). On
> > > what basis do you doubt him?
> >
> > How's this for starters:
> > "Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
> > "Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational argument
so you
> > attempt to blow others up."
> 
> Oookayyy...
> 
> Actually, I was referring to the data of the case provided, so I could
> have a chance to reply.

That didn't stop you from replying, Karel.
 
> Now, all I can say is: "Indeed. Well... yes".

Glad you agree that those statements are indeed a basis on which he may
be doubted.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont,
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cdelanoy@ualberta.ca                              09-Dec-99 22:00:10
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Chris J Delanoy <cdelanoy@ualberta.ca>

 "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> wrote:

> Now that little story means that someone or other was limiting
> my choices.

Yes: yourself.

> If that someone or other is a human being (or an organisation of
> human beings), then that someone oir something made a decision or
> choice which resulted in harm to me -- the harm of limiting my
> options. That's wrong, even by, no >>espcially by<< Ayn Rand's
> standards. And therefore I have a right to try to make them pay.

> Lars, if you are a follower of Ayn Rand (as your rhetoric
> suggests,) then you had better figure out all the implications
> of her philosophy.

Lars is not an objectivist and has never read a word of Rand,
so I'll have to be the one to tell you quite plainly that you
don't have a fucking clue about Ayn Rand's philosophy if you
think it includes some sort of "right not to have my choices
limited".  Such a non-existent "right" runs completely contrary
to her philosophy, and in fact would be an outright contradiction
of the objectivist epistemology in that it completely disregards
the role of the individual, rational mind in CREATING such choices
in the first place.

The website http://www.moraldefense.com , which is a subset of the
Ayn Rand Institute, states the implications of objectivism with
respect to Microsoft's so-called "monopoly" crystal clear - and
rejects your woeful tale of imaginary "force" by Microsoft.

Chris J Delanoy


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             09-Dec-99 22:19:05
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82o80u$o9r$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> What is a question mark doing inside the quotation marks, Curtis?

Tholen nit-picks over punctuation. I win again.

-- snip --

> Then what is a "standard up", Curtis?

It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems, Dave.

-- snip --

> I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
> question came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
> particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

Dave erroneously presupposes that "standard up" is an atomic phrase that
can be "broken up."  In reality, it is simply two separate words, in two
separate phrases, that Dave insists on treating as a single, atomic
phrase, which indicates ineptness on his part.

-- [remainder of Tholen's attempts to redefine English snipped] --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 22:57:04
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:59:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:13:15, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't). On
> > > > what basis do you doubt him?
> > >
> > > How's this for starters:
> > > "Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
> > > "Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational argument 
so you
> > > attempt to blow others up."
> > 
> > Oookayyy...
> > 
> > Actually, I was referring to the data of the case provided, so I could
> > have a chance to reply.
> 
> That didn't stop you from replying, Karel.
>  
????

> > Now, all I can say is: "Indeed. Well... yes".
> 
> Glad you agree that those statements are indeed a basis on which he may
> be doubted.

Just as long as you add: "... for me" to that sentence.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 22:57:04
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:00:20, Chris J Delanoy <cdelanoy@ualberta.ca> 
wrote:

>  "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > Now that little story means that someone or other was limiting
> > my choices.
> 
> Yes: yourself.
> 
> > If that someone or other is a human being (or an organisation of
> > human beings), then that someone oir something made a decision or
> > choice which resulted in harm to me -- the harm of limiting my
> > options. That's wrong, even by, no >>espcially by<< Ayn Rand's
> > standards. And therefore I have a right to try to make them pay.
> 
> > Lars, if you are a follower of Ayn Rand (as your rhetoric
> > suggests,) then you had better figure out all the implications
> > of her philosophy.
> 
> Lars is not an objectivist and has never read a word of Rand,
> so I'll have to be the one to tell you quite plainly that you
> don't have a fucking clue about Ayn Rand's philosophy if you
> think it includes some sort of "right not to have my choices
> limited".  Such a non-existent "right" runs completely contrary
> to her philosophy, and in fact would be an outright contradiction
> of the objectivist epistemology in that it completely disregards
> the role of the individual, rational mind in CREATING such choices
> in the first place.
> 
> The website http://www.moraldefense.com , which is a subset of the
> Ayn Rand Institute, states the implications of objectivism with
> respect to Microsoft's so-called "monopoly" crystal clear - and
> rejects your woeful tale of imaginary "force" by Microsoft.
> 
> Chris J Delanoy

A possible Giwer-sighting?
I should report this to s.h.w-i. Ther might be points in it.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            09-Dec-99 22:31:15
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:13:06, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
wrote:

> >Karel Jansens
> >I merely gave a possible interpretation of Bob's actions. You all jumped
> >on him, telling everyone it was a bad thing not to install IE and opt 
> >for the OS/2 installation. I want to point out that it might not have 
> >been the case, that from his point it might have been a sound and 
> >profitable decision, which made things better for both him and his 
> >client.
> 
> Still running interference for OS/2-loving kooks, I see.
> 
> None of your "possible interpretations" are any more plausible and
> business-savvy than Boob's original tall tales about his alleged
> clients and supposed experience as a consultant. (Boob is a complete
> fake. His anecdotes are rife with the usual inconsistencies one would
> expect from someone making everything up as he goes along). It's too
> bad that there aren't many businesses considering using OS/2 so I can
> fire off a copy your "possible interpretation" of Boob's desire to
> make more money off of a client rather than inform him of a free
> solution to his needs. It would be great to show such clients that
> "OS/2 Consultants" are unprofessional, and first and foremost put
> their own personal holy mission/war against MS before any client's
> needs, even at that client's expense. OS/2 Fanatics should be seen for
> what they truly are -- unprofessional malcontents whose love-affair
> with a pet, niche product means trouble/expense for anyone who has the
> misfortune of having to deal with those fanatics.
> 
> But since he's an OS/2-loving kook, you'll gladly run interference for
> him and tell us how he "makes quite a lot of sense" when he's telling
> Canadians that their opinions are worthless. Typical.
> 
> I guess it's sort of fortunate that people like yourself already
> destroyed OS/2 and its market, so it's not really possible for your
> own fanaticism to be used to cause much more damage. You can write as
> many posts as you want justifying some alleged OS/2 Consultant bilking
> a client out of money, and it won't really make any difference to OS/2


That's good, Jeff. That's progress. Let all the anger out. Let it go. 
You'll feel better afterwards.

Now onto the more unpleasant task of separating the facts from your 
fiction:

1. You talk about Bob as if he somehow has to defend his actions, 
prove to you that he is telling the truth. Why would he have to do 
that? He gave us a case where a client chose OS/2 over Windows, for 
specific reasons. Apparently, you cannot live with the fact that you 
can't find anything to attack his actions on merits, so you have 
chosen to accuse Bob of being a liar.

Indeed, if one looks at all the facts presented, Bob's actions are not
only profitable to him, but will also present to his client an optimal
solution.

2. Your "threat" of mailing copies of the posts to companies using 
OS/2 is not only completely wasted on me (I don't make money off OS/2 
or other software products), but given the relationship Bob apparently
has with his clients, would only provoke a mild form of hilarity on 
them. But you're free to brighten up their lives of course.

3. I distinctly haven't written that Bob made a lot of sense when he 
told *two* Canadians that their opinion was worthless (I would have 
thought you would relate better to Bob. After all, he *is* trying to 
use your kind of vocabulary). I said that his proposal to his client 
made a lot of sense, because I know a couple of Belgian notary firms 
and Bob's description of his client was eerily familiar. Please flame 
me for the right reasons.

4. If what I am doing is indeed so futile, and doesn't make the 
slightest difference for the market, why do you bother? Couldn't you 
spend your time more fruitfully by bashing Tim Martin (he's better, 
you know) or by playing tholenbot with the Gang? Some people here are 
actually trying to have a normal advocacy flame-fest and frankly, 
having to play shrink for you every so often is becoming tiresome.

Don't forget to take your prozac now!

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               09-Dec-99 19:34:17
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 10 Dec 1999 00:10:14 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>They did no such thing.  You are not harmed by being offered products you do
=>not want.

Sure I am. If the only way to get X is to take Y as well, then either I do
without X, or I pay for Y, too. In the first instance, I cannot get what I
want -- that is the harm of deprivation. In the second, I have to pay more
than X is worth because Y is part of the package -- that is the harm of
wasted money, which I'd rather spend on something else.

If you think that does you no harm, I'd love to do business with you!




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               09-Dec-99 19:38:20
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 22:00:20 GMT, Chris J Delanoy wrote:

=>Such a non-existent "right" runs completely contrary
=>to her philosophy, and in fact would be an outright contradiction
=>of the objectivist epistemology in that it completely disregards
=>the role of the individual, rational mind in CREATING such choices
=>in the first place.

Hah, gotcha!

I wondered if anyone would provide a demonstration of the asininity of Rand's
philosphy. The notion of the rational mind creating choices has to be one of
the funniest ideas ever invented.






--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: djohnson@isomedia.com                             09-Dec-99 17:11:21
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:11
Subj: Re: linux IPO

From: "David T. Johnson" <djohnson@isomedia.com>


pleasenospam@net.net wrote:
> 
> with what the LINUX IPO did today in the stock market. MAYBE the IBM
> DUMBOS will see that there is a pent up market for other products !


I don't understand why IBM shareholders and analysts do not ask Mr.
Gerstner questions like:


1) What are your plans for increasing revenues from OS/2?

2) What are your plans for increasing IBM's share of server and desktop
OS installs?

3) Why isn't OS/2 making a substantial contribution to IBM revenues and
profits?

The general spin from IBM top management on OS/2 seems to be:  
- OS/2 is an aging product
- Upgrading OS/2 would be very expensive and cannot be justified by
revenues
- IBM's strategic initiatives are in other directions than OS/2
- The 'OS/2 market' (whatever that is) is too small to be significant

These people seem determined to put a pillow over OS/2 and sit on it
until it stops squirming.  But even today, the product is still arguably
better than competing products in a number of areas including TCP/IP,
HPFS file system, WPS design and flexibility (I have recently seen
several amazing network applications at a Fortune 500 bank that take
advantage of this), printer subsystem, support for OS/2, java, DOS,
Win-OS2, and X86 apps, and multitasking.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               09-Dec-99 08:28:01
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Ruel Smith wrote:
> I don't know the status of
> Red Hat, as they are new to the market and I don't believe they've issued a
> quarterly report, yet. Their financial matters when they were private are
> unknown.

Their S-1 filing contains a ton of financial information.

jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               09-Dec-99 08:36:17
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Tim Adams wrote:
> > Well, for one thing the pricing figures you give are all way off.  MS-DOS
was
> > I think $69 whereas the other two available OS's were both $299 (give or
take
> > $10). The pricing was primarily determined by the vendors, not by IBM;
Gates
> > had such a lowball price because they offered it to IBM at rock-bottom
prices
> > in exchage for nonexclusivity (arguably a deal that IBM should not have
> > taken).
> 
> I will however suggest that you look (if possible) at copies of both of
> these two OS as they were released back in 1981. MS-DOS was a modified
> copy of CP/M which is why IBM got Gary to agree not to sue IF they
> released it as an OS for the PC.

This is simply not correct.  Charges of copying came about way later than the
release of CP/M on the PC.  IBM did a separate deal for CP/M before the
release of the PC.

> Gary felt (according to an interview
> aired on PBS several years ago) that his 'true' version would outsell the
> other 'copied' version.

This, at least, is correct.

> IBM, with there pricing killed one version almost
> from the start. To suggest that the vendors set the price is crazy - IBM
> set the MSRP and vendors typically worked with that number.

IBM's price had a lot to do with the price that the vendors sold the products
to them for.  Gates lowballed it in exchange for nonexclusivity -- assuming
he'd make it up in volume and believing that IBM wouldn't be the only
manufacturer.

jim

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimf@frostbytes.com                               09-Dec-99 08:41:11
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Jim Frost <jimf@frostbytes.com>

Joseph wrote:
> > > January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the top
> > > 100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the Dreamcast
> > > surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
> > > current PC state-of-the-art."
[...]
> > It is about as
> > good as you could get a year ago in terms of gaming systems -- but we've
gone
> > two generations beyond that at this point, not even counting the really
> > high-end cards (the ones that cost more than the PC and are bought by
people
> > who traditionally bought high-end workstations).
> 
> There's no way I can defend the game console hardware against a device that
> allows someone to plug in a new card  every day and claim it's better.

Indeed, and it also has an advantage in that they have a lot more production
dollars to play with when building it.  But the claim was that its visual
quality exceeds that of current PC state-of-the-art.  If this is a Jan2K issue
then they would have written that in the September/October timeframe, and it
was not true then.  It didn't even exceed that of the current PC
state-of-the-art well before the Dreamcast was shipped.

Their claim is false.

jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Road Runner (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dc@pdq.net                                        09-Dec-99 08:32:15
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: DC <dc@pdq.net>

In article <384f4cc4$13$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com>, Bob Germer 
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

> On <dc-17D223.23245808121999@news.pdq.net>, on 12/08/99 at 11:24 PM,
>    DC <dc@pdq.net> said:
> 
> > I see.  So they have no network?  Of couse they do.  So don't you think 
> > you can figure out how to copy from the CD, over the network, to each 
> > machine that wants MSIE5.0?
> 
> If each machine had roughly a gigabyte of free disk space, sure. However,
> most workstations have 1 gig or even smaller drives. A few have large
> drives, but less than 10% of the workstations do. About 20% were 750 Meg
> drives. But since only the OS and WP need reside on those drives they are
> totally adequate. Documents are stored on the Novell file server.

You need about 150 MB, if you simply copy over the *ENTIRE* MSIE5 
download folder.  If you only copy/install what you NEED, it's around 30 
MB.  In other words, you're flat wrong on this one, too.  

You could easily put these on a Novell file server and install from 
there.  I've done this with 5.0, and it works great. 

> > As I said, this entire argument is dumb - REALLY dumb.  The 'work' to 
> > bring MSIE5 to an office without an internet connection is trivial at 
> > worst, especially for a 'consultant'.
> 
> It is not hard, just very expensive.

Yes - you must download it, then burn it to a CD.  Tough stuff, Bob.  
Total time with DSL - maybe 20-30 minutes.  Total cost - $1 for the CD, 
plus whatever your time costs you.

> > I think it's you that's being ignorant here.
> 
> No, you are being totally obtuse.

I think your knowledge of the install process is highly suspect - or you 
just don't _want_ MSIE 5.0 and so you've come up with a few bogus 
reasons to disallow it.

-- 
DC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 14:49:19
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: (1/2) Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Stating a fact hardly qualifies as "pontificating."

You're erroneously presupposing that your statement constitutes a
fact, Curtis.

> What is ironic, Dave?

The fact that you keep insisting that I'm wrong, Curtis.

> I expected you to insist otherwise, and you did.

I expected you to insist otherwise, and you did.  How ironic.

> That isn't "ironic," Dave.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word, Curtis.

> The word is "predictable."

How ironic, coming from someone whose pontification is "predictable".

> Denial is not admission, Dave.

On the contrary, I'm admitting that what you claimed I implied is not
at all what I implied, Curtis.

> You are really crumbling at this point

Illogical, Curtis.  You're the one "crumbling", given your failure to
distinguish between inference and implication.

> (which you will, of course, deny/question).

With good reason, Curtis.

> A "typical indication of the truth" by Tholen?!?! Laughable.

What's laughable about the truth, Curtis?

> And "up" can be a preposition under certain circumstances.

Irrelevant, unless you want to claim that "measure up" is an instance
of "up" being used as a preposition.  Are you making that claim, Curtis?

> Upon reflection, I am no longer convinced that "to which you failed to
> measure up" is correct.

Why, Curtis?

> Ergo, I used the *only* correct phrasing of which I am aware.

Your awareness is lacking, Curtis.

> Absolutely. "Up" can be considered a preposition in this case.

I once gave you a sampling of "up" at the end of phrases and asked
you if any of them were prepositions.  Do you remember your response,
Curtis?

> It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems, Dave.

Non sequitur, laced with invective, the usual tactic of someone who
lacks a logical argument.

> Actually, upon reflection, it's the only correct way to write it.

Incorrect, Curtis.  Your means of expressing yourself are shockingly
limited.

> My only fault is that I didn't use commas to separate the phrases
> so that even you could understand it.

You just claimed it was correct, Curtis; now you're saying it has a
fault.  Do make up your mind, Curtis.  I noted the absence of a comma
a long time ago.

> Then you have yet to indicate how the entire sentence is grammatically
> incorrect.

I simply asked what a "standard up" is, Curtis.  Did you jump to the
conclusion that I was calling it grammatically incorrect?

> Lack of punctuation, to which I have already admitted,

Only in the most recent article of yours to which I'm responding,
Curtis.  Amazing how long it took you before realizing the error.

> doesn't qualify as "grammar."

I simply asked what a "standard up" is, Curtis.  Did you jump to the
conclusion that I was calling it grammatically incorrect?

> Because "corrupt" is a valid word to use.

Are any of the bytes incorrect, Curtis?

> I have already gone over this, Dave.

Trying to prop up your inaccurate description.

> That you continue to ignore it is not surprising.

That you continue to use inaccurate wording is not surprising.

> One definition of "corrupt" is "to alter from the original or correct
> form or version."

Were any of the bytes altered, Curtis?

> Removing bytes from a file qualifies as "altering from
> the corrent form" regardless of how the bytes are removed.

No bytes were removed, Curtis.  Or did you accuse your mother, after
she poured milk into your glass, of removing some milk from that glass,
because it wasn't full?

> It's just another one of those things that happens to be correct, but
> Dave Tholen doesn't *LIKE* it for some reason.

Like or dislike is irrelevant, Curtis.  Accuracy is relevant.

> Too bad, Dave.  Deal with it.

I am dealing with it, Curtis, by using the accurate description.

> And there was no such prior evidence when I called you inept.

So, you admit to jumping to an erroneous conclusion?

> Evidence that you alone possessed (file sizes).

Incorrect, Curtis.  I considered the possibility before I had any
file sizes to compare.  The possibility was tested and confirmed
by comparing file sizes.

> But you published evidence based on your erroneous conclusion.

There was no evidence of any erroneous conclusion at that time,
Curtis.

> If what I did was "inept,"

Your failure to consider other possibilities is indeed "inept", to
use your own description.

> then what you did was "extremely inept."

Illogical, Curtis.  I considered other possibilities and ran experiments
to test them.  You did not.

I see you've added redundancy to your tactics.

> Failing to consider the possibility that your copy of JAVAINUF.EXE was
> corrupt

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
word "corrupt".  "Inept."

> before posting your evidence to counter Mike Timbol's claim that
> he could extract the contents of JAVAINUF.EXE using WinZip.

How is that an error, Curtis?  Recall the example I gave of a student
using a malfunctioning voltmeter.  Is it an error to expect a piece of
equipment to work?

> Neither did you, until well after you published your "evidence."

Only after I was given a reason to suspect a problem, Curtis.  Once
you were given a reason, you *still* jumped to an erroneous conclusion,
Curtis.  "Inept", to use your description.

> By then, it was too late.

Just like the student whose lab results were turned in before the
voltmeter was determined to be malfunctioning, Curtis.

> Your ineptness was already exposed.

Illogical, Curtis.  The student whose results were affected by the
malfunctioning voltmeter is not "inept".  You're the one who is
"inept" because you did the equivalent of concluding that the student
is "inept", without considering other possibilities.

> I am not "presupposing" anything, Dave.

Yes you are, Curtis, and I identified what you are presupposing.

> One of your problems is that, anytime someone confronts you with a
> fact that you decide you don't like, you try to dismiss the fact as
> a "presupposition."

You're erroneously presupposing that what you've presented represents
a "fact", Curtis.  Like or dislike has nothing to do with it.  Reality
has everything to do with it.

> That isn't logic at work, Dave.

On the contrary, it is "logic at work" to note that what you claim
as "fact" is not fact at all.

> I made a mistake when I claimed that posting to be my last. "Making a
> mistake" is not "hypocrisy."

You're erroneously presupposing that your action represents a mistake,
Curtis.  What you wrote was quite deliberate and not unintentional.

> Your broken, corrupt copy

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
word "corrupt".  "Inept."

> "does run under OS/2," Dave?

Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> Even though it didn't extract any files?

How do you know what it did, Curtis?

> Gee, weren't you claiming just a few weeks ago how the JAVAINUF.EXE file
> didn't "run under DOS" because that didn't cause the files to be
> extracted?

None of the unzip code was executed under DOS, Curtis.  Meanwhile,
OS/2 did run some of the unzip code.

> Well, Dave, by the same token, if files weren't extracted,
> then it most certainly did *NOT* run under OS/2.

Illogical, Curtis.  I see that you've ignored a significant portion of
what I wrote about javainuf.exe not running under DOS, so that you
could arrive at that "same token".

> They would have to be similar in intent (i.e. to indicate a failure in
> performing the extraction).

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> So you admit that you got error messages.

Where is that alleged admission, Curtis?

> That is the only level of similarity that matters.

Tell me, Curtis, do you regard the following messages as "similar":

   "Abort, retry, fail"

   "Please insert disk #3"

> Yes, it was corrupt,

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
word "corrupt".  "Inept."

> so it could not perform any archive extraction,

Any?  On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> but only display some kind of error messages, which you have already
> admitted.

On the contrary, I only indicated that InfoZip displayed an error
message, Curtis.  Where did I say that running my copy of javainuf.exe
on OS/2 generated error messages?

> Your corrupt copy?

I said it was incomplete, Curtis, not corrupt.  I have no evidence
to support a claim that any of the bytes are incorrect.  Of course,
I've told you this several times now, but you continue to use the
word "corrupt".  "Inept."

> All it does is produce error message, as you have already admitted.

Where is that alleged admission, Curtis?

> Using your own arguments as a basis, substituting "error messages" for
> "stub,"

You can't make such a substitution and then claim that they're my
arguments, Curtis.  That's "inept", to use your description.

> I refute your claim that "[your] copy of the file does run on an
> OS/2 system."

Using an invalid argument?  That's "inept", Curtis.

> You lose again.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> Then it didn't "run."

Incorrect, Curtis.  The unzip code did run.

> Did you or did you not extract classes.zip from your *BROKEN*
> JAVAINUF.EXE, Dave?

Irrelevant, Curtis.  What is relevant is the fact that OS/2 did run
the unzip code.

> Choice #1: If yes, then the self-contained self-extraction module
> behaved differently than InfoZip on your corrupt file, in spite of the
> following:

Irrelevant, Curtis.  What is relevant is the fact that OS/2 did run
the unzip code.

> Are you admitting to stupidity, Dave?

Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Curtis?  I made
no such admission.

> That's worse than "inept" isn't it?

You're erroneously presupposing some stupidity on my part, Curtis.

> Choice #2: If no, then the following statement is wrong:

Irrelevant, Curtis.  What is relevant is the fact that OS/2 did run
the unzip code.

> which is simply wrong, since running Dave's broken JAVAINUF.EXE in an
> OS/2 session still doesn't allow one to look at the contents.

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?

> The ones I reiterated above.

You're erroneously presupposing that what you reiterated above represents
errors, Curtis.

> Granted, only one is actually an error (#2),

How can you call your irrelevant #2 an error, Curtis?  You're still
erroneously presupposing that OS/2 did not run the unzip code.

> but the issue is that you will admit to neither one.

Why should I, given that you've picked out only a piece of my overall
argument and set up a straw man?

> The issue is the paradoxical, self-contradicting position into which
> you have put yourself.

You're erroneously presupposing that I've put myself into a "paradoxical,
self-contradicting position", Curtis.  I have not.  DOS does not run
the unzip code.  OS/2 does, regardless of the fact that the file was
incomplete.  There is no contradiction on my part.  There is a failure
on your part to comprehend my argument, which is "inept".  How ironic.

> Neither did your "logic,"

Incorrect, as I obviously did come up with it, Curtis, otherwise we
wouldn't be talking about it.

> hypocrite,

You're erroneously presupposing that I didn't come up with it, Curtis.

> until after Marty busted a four-by-four over your head,

He did no such thing, Curtis.

> by stating that he *did* successfully use infoZip to extract the
> contents of JAVAINUF.EXE.

Since when is that "busted a four-by-four over your head", Curtis?

> *THAT* is what it took to clue you in,

I noted the claim and considered several possibilities, Curtis, which
is more than you can claim.

> and you have the gall to chide me when I didn't have any evidence,
> beyond your game-playing, from which to draw such a conclusion.

You had the same evidence from Marty that I did, Curtis.  Yet I
considered several possibilities, while you jumped to an erroneous
conclusion.  "Inept", to use your description.

> Where did I ever claim that you *said* you didn't like something, Dave?

CB] That you don't *like* what I say or the way I say it is self-evident.

> It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems and general
> ineptness, Dave.

Illogical, Curtis.  I see you're now changing your argument.
Previously you admitted that a comma was needed.

> "What is 'up' doing at the beginning of that phrase, Curtis?" Tholen --
> 11/24/1999

I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
question came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

> Seems like you referred "to a phrase that excludes the word 'standard'."

I see you still can't get the chronology straight, Curtis.  That
reference came *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, in
particular, breaking "standard up" over two pieces.

> So why criticize me when I do it,

Because you're ignoring the problem with what you wrote, Curtis.

> hypocrite?

You're erroneously presupposing some hypocritical action on my part,
Curtis.

> "What is a 'standard up'?" Tholen -- 11/08/1999

As I said, you tried to avoid facing that issue by turning attention
to a phrase that omits "standard".

> Looks to me like you are talking about a phrase, not a sentence.

What it looks like to you is irrelevant, Curtis; "standard up" is
not a phrase.

> "What is a 'standard up'?" Tholen -- 11/08/1999

As I said, you tried to avoid facing that issue by trying to turn
attention to a phrase that omits "standard".

> Looks like you're "focusing attention on a phrase" as well,
> hypocrite.

What it looks like to you is irrelevant, Curtis; "standard up" is
not a phrase.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 14:49:19
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: (2/2) Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

> "What appears to you is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant."

I can prove that you've continued to post in this sub-thread after
claiming that you wouldn't.  Witness the article of yours to which I
am responding.

> Yeah, my "peculiar" definition comes from a standard dictionary.

What "standard dictionary" are you referring to, Curtis?

> You should consult one, sometime.

I already have, Curtis.

> That I made a mistake when I claimed "this is my last post" is exactly
> that, a mistake.

To use your own description, it is an "inept" statement on your part.

> A mistake is not hypocrisy,

You're erroneously presupposing that your action represents a mistake,
Curtis.  What you wrote was quite deliberate and not unintentional.

> nor is it a lack of sincerity.

You still don't understand what it means to be sincere.

> Yes, Dave, your accusations were stronger than my resolve.

On what basis do you make that claim, Curtis?  You claim that I am
predictable.  So why didn't you predict my so-called "accusations"
and take that into account before making your resolution?

> That doesn't disprove my sincerity, however.

Yes it does, Curtis.

> Gee, and you have the gall to whine about "pontification."

Irrelevant, given that my statement does not represent pontification.
Witness your continued postings, Curtis.  They represent evidence,
which disallows your identification of my statement as pontification.

> Post a referenced definition of "sincerity" that substantiates your
> insane claim,

What is allegedly "insane" about my claim, Curtis?

> one that I can verify.

With how much effort, Curtis?  If I refer to a dictionary that isn't
on your own bookshelf, will you discard it as "unverifiable" by you?

> Tu quoque arguments are an indication that you have no argument at all.

Illogical, Curtis, given the existence of my argument.  Still having
reading comprehension problems?

> Did I claim I could, Dave?

I see you're ignoring the evidence that contradicts your "downright
scary" conclusion.

> Based on your applications of logic, and resulting conclusions, I stand
> by my observation,

But the way you stand is based on your own "inept" reasoning, Curtis.

> regardless of whether I could "do better" or not as an astronomy
> teacher or astronomer.

I see you're still ignoring the evidence that contradicts your
"downright scary" conclusion.

> And getting "above average evaluations" isn't really that impressive,
> considering how much mediocrity there is out in the world.

I see you've ignored the part about us having one of the top programs
in the country.  Yes, there is a lot of mediocrity out in the world;
you're a wonderful example of that, Curtis.

> Like I have said before, one can only *HOPE*  that you are better at
> your trade than you are at doing whatever it is you do here.

Yet you find it "downright scary".

> Yeah, I know. You claim to be "countering misinformation," which is
> laughable, considering that you have posted misinformation,

On the contrary, OS/2 Java 1.1.8 does implement Java 1.2 functionality,
Curtis.

> and have yet to identify it as such, in order to "counter" it.

Why should I identify "OS/2 Java 1.1.8 implements Java 1.2
functionality" as misinformation, Curtis?  Want an example of
real misinformation?  Consider Timbol's reference to classes.zip,
when the functionality of Java 1.2 security classes was contained
in secma.zip, which is contained in a completely different file from
javainuf.exe.

> Some have been on a friendly basis, which amounts to the same thing,

What is "a friendly basis", Curtis?

> Obviously not.

Then what does make someone an adversary, Curtis?

> Nope. It's dichotomous.  Either an exchange is friendly (regardless of
> whether the parties are actually "friends") or it is adversarial.

Yet another example of circular definitions.  What is a "friendly"
exchange", Curtis?

> "Read minds," Dave?

Still having reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> How about "understand English?"

Irrelevant, given that your thoughts weren't expressed in English.

> Something a university professor should be able to do.

Irrelevant, given that your thoughts weren't expressed in English.

> It's still an error, regardless of when I made the claim or when you
> made the error.  Dismissing it as "irrelevant" is simply pontification
> on your part.

On the contrary, it is quite relevant.  The alleged unadmitted errors
had to have existed at the time you made the claim in order to justify
making the claim.  You can't make a claim that something has happened,
then wait around and use something that occurs later as justification
for your claim.  That's illogical and "inept", to use your own
description.

> No, it's because you never admit to errors during adversarial
> exchanges.

Prove it, if you think you can, Curtis.  Do note how you've used the
plural here.

> When I first made the claim is irrelevant, as is when you made this
> particular error.

On the contrary, it is quite relevant.  The alleged unadmitted errors
had to have existed at the time you made the claim in order to justify
making the claim.  You can't make a claim that something has happened,
then wait around and use something that occurs later as justification
for your claim.  That's illogical and "inept", to use your own
description.

> On the basis that it's incorrect, wrong, an error.

Another circular basis.  Just like your reasoning.

> On the basis that it's incorrect, wrong, erroneous.

Another circular basis.  Just like your reasoning.

> "Snipped freely?"

Do you deny it, Curtis?

> I restored context.

By snipping???

> The only thing I "snipped freely" were your own worthless, misleading
> and downright incorrect statements.

Liar.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     09-Dec-99 07:03:12
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Jim Frost wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> > > > January 2000 Computer Gaming World (#1 PC game magazine)  rates the
top
> > > > 100 games and as #11 lists the Dreamcast saying "Visually the
Dreamcast
> > > > surpasses anything you've ever seen on the PSX, N64, or - get this -
> > > > current PC state-of-the-art."
> [...]
> > > It is about as
> > > good as you could get a year ago in terms of gaming systems -- but we've 
gone
> > > two generations beyond that at this point, not even counting the really
> > > high-end cards (the ones that cost more than the PC and are bought by
people
> > > who traditionally bought high-end workstations).
> >
> > There's no way I can defend the game console hardware against a device
that
> > allows someone to plug in a new card  every day and claim it's better.
>
> Indeed, and it also has an advantage in that they have a lot more production
> dollars to play with when building it.  But the claim was that its visual
> quality exceeds that of current PC state-of-the-art.  If this is a Jan2K
issue
> then they would have written that in the September/October timeframe, and it
> was not true then.  It didn't even exceed that of the current PC
> state-of-the-art well before the Dreamcast was shipped.

They looked at the games, not at hardware specifications.  This comment was
NOT in
the context of doing a engineering benchmark about what is possible with PCs
and
consoles.  It was the opinion of the mag editors who were rating games and
evaluating
the Dreamcast titles.

> Their claim is false.

Now I know why they hire dedicated game players for editors and writers.

How many "pixels" per inch did Monet use for his Water Lilly series?  I mean
if I can
find a denser painting then I've found better art.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 14:51:18
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Thanks to Jeff, Kelly and all the others

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

SkidMARX@att.net writes:

>>> Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
>>> response from Thoren and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...
 
>> Who is that?

> Let's fix the improperly spelled name ...
>
> Any time I think I have problems all I have to do is read some insane 
> response from Tholen and I realize my life isn't so bad after all ...

What allegedly "insane response" have you ever read from me?

> There we go ...
> All better now ...

Not really.

> NOW do you see whom it is David ???

He shouldn't.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 15:05:27
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451522

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Now Marty is trying to attribute the Eliza phrase to me.  Not only is
that incorrect, it's also irrelevant.  The fact is that Marty used
that phrase as a response to me, thereby initiating the direction
down that path.  It's rather ironic that he should comment about
being soon to forget.  Here's today's digest:

1> The hypocritical one now forgets that I was quoting him in saying
1> his famous "Eliza" phrase.  How convenient.  He also neglects to
1> realize that I used the quote in question as a response to his
1> baseless accusations of playing an infantile game, showing him the
1> hypocrisy of such statements by quoting a phrase from his own
1> on-going infantile game.  How soon we forget.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> It means that Dave is playing his own infantile "wrath" game,
1> further compounding the hypocrisy.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

1> My argument is stated above and Dave has obviously failed to grasp
1> that.  Reading comprehension problems?  "Inept."

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         09-Dec-99 15:06:16
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451522

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Today's Haakmat digest:

1> Regrettably my only contact with you is through this newsgroup.

Are you unfamiliar with email?

1> Do you suggest we meet in person?

No.

1> Love is illogical, Dave.

Non sequitur.

1> Thank you Dave, for taking time off from your regular work or
1> service, to explain this to me.

You're welcome.  But that still doesn't answer my question.

1> No use denying that I'm very relevant to you, Dave.

In what way, Pascal?

1> And you speak Latin too ... <sigh>

And even some contemporary Latin translations:

veni, vidi, velcro:  I came, I saw, I stuck around
domino vobiscum:  the pizza guy is here
e pluribus septum:  multiple nose piercings
sic transit gloria mundi:  Gloria got sick on the bus Monday

1> Love is illogical, Dave.

Non sequitur.

1> As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Non sequitur.

1> Won't you grant me the illusion?

Why should I?

> I'd love to marry in church.

Non sequitur.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jimglidewell@home.com                             09-Dec-99 16:21:25
  To: All                                               09-Dec-99 22:41:12
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: jimglidewell@home.com (Jim Glidewell)

In article <slrn84ru29.2vn.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith <tzs@halcyon.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Dec 1999 01:24:10 GMT, Andrew Irvine <irvin@clara.co.uk> wrote:
> >he he he, now that i think about it, mac os was never that bad. What i
> >meant was when m$ got the finger out and tried to copy the mac os some
> >more. Wasn't it 95 when windows got long filename support (mac 84 (or
> >82) had that :)?
> 
> Well, if you consider 32 to be long, I suppose.

Compared to 8.3 - Hell, yes!

"Jim's Weekly Status 09/19/85" vs "JWS91985.TXT"

Heck, I've got files that I created over 12 years ago which I can
still identify and/or search for by their _filenames_.

Keep in mind also that many/all Unix variants of that era had more 
restrictive limits on filenames. Quoting from "The Unix System" (1983)
by S. R. Bourne (yes, _that_ Bourne):

"A complete filename or pathname is written as a sequence of component 
names separated by /. <snip> Each / separated component of a
name is limited to _14_ characters." (emphasis mine)

So 32 characters, with no restrictions (except for ":"), was excellent
for it's time, and is still adequate for most purposes today. Not that
I want to discourage Apple from supporting 128 or 256 though - I still
occasionally need to trim my filenames to fit the 32 character limit.

> Mac 84 was amusing.  It
> was using MFS, not HFS.  MFS didn't support folders.  Made it interesting
> for the people with the early hard disks.

MFS presented itself to the user as a hierarchical file system - you could
have folders and folders within folders... BUT this was smoke and mirrors,
and the performance took a serious hit as the number of files and folders
grew. But HFS came out pretty darned early - not long after the Plus added
a SCSI port to the Mac and made HD's a practical (though pricey) option.

MFS was designed for floppies, and was more than adequate for that media.
Considering the alternatives in 1984-5 (and I did), MFS was not "amusing" -
it was "amazing"... As was the Mac in general, compared to the utterly
dismal PC OS alternatives of the time.

But I'll admit that I didn't use MFS for all that long before HFS came out.

I still believe that the 8.3 filename convention that M$ saddled it's users
with for more than *ten* years is the single biggest cause of PC user
rework and data loss that the world has ever known...

I saw my first Mac a few days before the original 1984 Superbowl announcement,
and was utterly amazed at what I saw. Here was a box that for $2495 was doing
a lot of stuff that had previously only been possible on our $30,000+ Xerox
Star. (I had no experience with the Lisa) I was hooked... and still am,
15 years later.

Quite an achievement for an "amusing" box...

Jim "My other PC is a Cray" Glidewell

-- 
Jim Glidewell
My opinions only

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Just Me, Ltd. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         10-Dec-99 07:14:27
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:20
Subj: Re: Amodeo digest, volume 2451523

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Once again, Marty demonstrates how he can ignore part of an argument
so that he can extract portions and try to create the illusion of a
contradiction.  The fact that he lacks a logical argument is supported
by the fact that he once again resorted to a personal attack.  Here's
today's digest:

1> "'Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?'
1>
1> I warned you about going down that path, Marty."

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> In Dave's example, said student didn't use someone else's battery
2> tester and claim that he got his results using the voltmeter,
2> whereas Dave unzipped a different file and tried to claim his
2> results were those from JAVAINUF.EXE.  Therein lies the mistake,
2> dishonesty, and ineptitude.  Everything which followed was an
2> embarassing attempt to cover up said mistake, dishonesty, and
2> ineptitude.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Dave's new definition of "running" doesn't accomplish much either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Then Dave's executable didn't "run" either in OS/2.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Then the display of an error message doesn't represent the execution
2> of the program either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Then displaying the error message and exiting is not "executing the
2> program" either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Why would Dave's incomplete executable issue the messages it does?
2> It obviously doesn't think it can extract the contents of the archive.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> The archive is not extracted when Dave "runs" it in OS/2 either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> Indeed Dave's executable isn't very useful.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> The code in Dave's incomplete executable didn't extract the archive either.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> And a world of difference between extracting an archive and displaying
2> an error message as well it would seem.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> My claim was that the executable runs in DOS.  Dave's definition of
2> "runs" was "extracts the archive in its entirety" (which disagreed
2> with mine, incidentally).  Common sense makes a cameo appearance, but
2> inconsistency is the star of the show!  Consistent with Dave's
2> definitions, his incomplete executable does not "run" in OS/2.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> How ironic, coming from the twit who writes:

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

2> at the beginning of every one of his responses to Curtis Bass.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

3> Substitute "Dave" for "Marty" in the above paragraph and you have
3> the truth.

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.
 
3> Note: no response

3> Note: no response

3> Note: no response

4> Are you sure you're talking about the right Dave Tholen?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

4> (Use this URL with caution.  It may induce an extreme desire to
4> administer a wedgie.)

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

5> Why are you posting multiple articles in response to nothing, Tholen?

"Is it because of your sex life that you are going through all of this?"

I warned you about going down that path, Marty.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         10-Dec-99 07:14:01
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:20
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Dave is reduced to nit-picking over punctuation.

Incorrect, Curtis.  I'm noting your misquotation.  Why did you extract
that one statement and post a separate reply, Curtis?  Wasn't your
response above sufficient?

> Tholen displays more reading comprehension problems.

Non sequitur.  I see you didn't answer my question about what you find
laughable about the truth.

> Dave erroneously presupposes that he's receptive to logical arguments.

Non sequitur.  I was commenting on your lack of a logical argument.

> It refers to the phrase, "up to which you failed to measure."

Incorrect, given that you didn't avoid using that phrase.

> Are you saying that "measure" is a preposition, Dave?

Not at all, Curtis.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> Under certain circumstances, "up" *IS* a preposition.

Irrelevant, Curtis, unless you're claiming that "measure up" is such
a circumstance.  Are you making that claim?

> Your continued, half-baked responses.

What alleged "half-baked" responses, Curtis?

> It's an indication of your reading comprehension problems, Dave.

Non sequitur, Curtis.  The meaning of "standard up" is independent of
anyone's reading comprehension.

> Again, Dave erroneously presupposes that he's receptive to logical
> arguments.

Non sequitur.  I was commenting on your lack of a logical argument.

> Yes it is a circular response. It's all you deserve at this point.

What a weak excuse for you circular reasoning, Curtis.

> It's a copout to keep asking the same mindlessly inane questions over
> and over.

What allegedly "mindlessly inane" questions, Curtis?  How ironic, coming
from someone who keeps making the same mindlessly inane pontifications.

> Your questions represent your running away from the issues,

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, Curtis.  Yet another
example of your pontification.

> and my answers represent grabbing you by the scruff of the neck and
> dragging your sorry ass back to the issues at hand.

Is that how you perceive your own circular responses?  No wonder we're
not getting anywhere.

> There is no "logic" behind constantly asking "what alleged [whatever],
> opponent?"

Incorrect, Curtis.  It calls attention to your repeated pontification.

> It's simply a cowardly dodge, a refusal to deal with the issues.

Incorrect, Curtis.  It calls attention to your repeated pontification.

> It's insulting, rude, the equivalent to invective.

Incorrect, Curtis.  How ironic, coming from someone whose continued
pontification is "insulting, rude, the equivalent to invective".

> From here on out, that will be my strategy.

Unable to substantiate your claims, you're now trying to justify your
future "cowardly dodge".  I'm not surprised.

> What alleged "accuracy," Tholen?

The accuracy of the description of my copy of the javainuf.exe file,
Curtis, as I already told you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension
problems?

> What alleged "choice," Tholen?

The choice of words to accurately describe my copy of the javainuf.exe
file, Curtis, as I already told you.  Still suffering from reading
comprehension problems?

> What alleged "possibility," Dave?

The possibility that the file was incomplete, Curtis, as I already told
you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "reading comprehension problems," Dave?

The ones that cause you to ask questions for which you already have
answers, Curtis.

> What alleged "correct conclusion," Dave?

That my copy of the javainuf.exe file was incomplete, Curtis, as I've
already told you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "chronology," Dave?

The chronology of events that have transpired in this thread, Curtis.
What else do you think it could refer to?

> What alleged "failure," Dave?

Your failure to consider other possible reasons for InfoZip failing to
unzip my copy of the javainuf.exe file, Curtis, as I've already told
you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "other possibilities," Dave?

The other possibilities for InfoZip failing to unzip my copy of the
javainuf.exe file, Curtis, as I've already told you.  Still suffering
from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "experiments," Dave?

The experiments that allowed me to determine that my copy of the
javainuf.exe file was incomplete, Curtis, as I've already told you.
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "pontification," Dave?

The unsubstantiated claim of yours that you snipped, Curtis.  Still
suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "truth," Dave?

The truth I wrote that you snipped, Curtis.  Still suffering from
reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "action," Dave?

The action of claiming that a certain article would be your last
posting in this sub-thread, Curtis, as I've already told you.  Still
suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "unzip code," Dave?

The unzip code contained in javainuf.exe, Curtis, as I already told
you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> Where is this alleged "more than just that," Dave?

"In this thread", Curtis.

> Where is this alleged "erroneous presupposition," Dave?

Your erroneous presupposition of an about-face on my part, Curtis,
as I already told you.  Still suffering from reading comprehension
problems, Curtis?

> What alleged "error messages," Dave?

The ones issued by unzip programs, Curtis, as I already told you.
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?

> What alleged "about-face," Dave?

The one you had just engaged in, as I already told you, Curtis.
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Curtis?

> What alleged "claim," Dave?

The claim of yours that you snipped, Curtis.

> What alleged "claim," Dave?

The claim of yours that you snipped, Curtis.

> Why did I do what, Dave?

What you referred to in the text that you snipped, Curtis.  Remember,
you're the one who justified snippage because:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I see you're not availing yourself of that option.  How ironic.

> What alleged "pontification," Dave?

Here's one example, Curtis:

CB] Your questions represent your running away from the issues,

> This is the earlier reason you gave to justify your failure to consider
> the possibility, Dave.

What alleged failure, Curtis?  After all, I did consider the possibility,
thus there was no failure to consider that possibility on my part.

> Now you claim that you "considered the possibility?"

Obviously, given that I noted it here.

> You are contradicting yourself again.

Incorrect, Curtis.  You simply have no sense of what a contradiction is.
You'd rather pontificate.

> -- [Dave's continued hypocrisy snipped] --

What alleged hypocrisy, Curtis?  In fact, what you snipped is the
evidence for your own "inept" conclusions.

The fact that you've now started responding to the same article multiple
times, repeating your "mindlessly inane" pontifications, wasting bandwidth
in the process, coupled with your "cowardly dodging" of the issues with
your "mindlessly inane" questions, demonstrates that you are no longer
interested in a serious discussion of the issues.  It's now time to resume
the Bass digest.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu                         10-Dec-99 07:12:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:20
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu

Consistent with Curtis Bass' recent justification for his snippage:

CB] They would have encountered them in previous posts of the thread,
CB] and could have gone back to said previous posts were they so inclined.

I am deleting almost all but the most recent new text.

Curtis Bass writes:

> Grammatically, it is correct, Dave.

So what, Curtis?  The spelling is correct.  Does that automatically
make the sentence correct overall?

> No, I said *I* had a fault.

Which was manifested in what you wrote, Curtis.

> I never said the sentence did.

Illogical, Curtis.  Where else was the fault manifested?

> Do try to keep up, Dave.

You're erroneously presupposing that I haven't kept up, Curtis.

> Of course you did. You literally stumbled over its absence.

Incorrect, Curtis.  I asked you what a "standard up" is right after you
wrote that sentence.  Hardly a case of stumbling over it.

> "Inept."

Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective.

> And you also asked what "up" was doing at the beginning of the phrase.

That was *after* you broke your sentence into pieces, Curtis, in
response to my question about what a "standard up" is.

> Nope.

Then why did you accuse me of calling it grammatically incorrect?

> I simply stated that it was.

Then why did you accuse me of calling it grammatically incorrect?

> It isn't an error with the sentence.

Illogical, Curtis, given that that sentence is the one with the
missing comma.

> It is a fault of mine that I failed to take your obtuseness into
> account.

What alleged "obtuseness", Curtis?

> There is nothing wrong with the sentence as it is written.

On the contrary, it is missing a comma as written, Curtis.

> Adding commas would have made it easier for ***YOU*** to understand
> (MAYBE),

It should have made it easier for anyone to read, Curtis.

> but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the sentence as is.

On the contrary, it is missing a comma as is, Curtis.

> Not that it matters. This is typical Tholen: Nit-pick over grammar and
> punctuation when he has nothing of substance to say,

On the contrary, I've had plenty to say, Curtis.  Do try to keep up.

> but wants to avoid admitting his errors by focusing on the alleged
> errors of his opponent.

What alleged errors of mine are you referring to, Curtis?

> Whether you like my sentence or not doesn't interest me.

Like or dislike is irrelevant, Curtis.  Correctness is relevant.

> That you are stupid/inept enough to ask what a "standard up" is is
> your problem.

Typical invective.  That you wrote "standard up" is is [sic] your
problem.  How ironic.

> The whole file is "incorrect" because it's missing bytes.

Incorrect, Curtis.  Missing bytes don't make the rest of them incorrect.
A certain television program featured a book titled "The Rooster Crowed
at Midnight", but it was missing the last page.  Did that somehow make
the rest of the book "incorrect"?  Illogical and "inept".

> There is nothing "inaccurate" about the word "corrupt."

I have no evidence that any of the bytes were wrong, Curtis.

> You just have a personal problem with it, that's all.

On what basis do you call it a "personal problem", Curtis?  Does anyone
who strives for accuracy suffer from a "personal problem" in your book?

> Typical inappropriate Tholen Analogy.

Typical Bass pontification.  Notice how you didn't even attempt to
explain why the analogy is allegedly inappropriate.

> And whining about my accurate description,

Incorrect, given that your description isn't accurate, Curtis.

> which is an inept way to "deal with" anything.

You're erroneously presupposing that your description is accurate,
Curtis.

> The bottom line is that we *both* failed.

Incorrect, Curtis.  I considered the possibility.  You did not.  I did
not fail.  You did.

> I have admitted it.

Erroneously, for the reason given above.

> You have not.

Of course not, given that I didn't fail.  This is why you keep claiming
that I've never admitted to errors in so-called "adversarial exchanges";
you pompously presuppose that what you perceive as an error is in fact
an error.  The problem is that you can't prove it, which explains why
you have yet to reproduce an example of an unadmitted error on my part
in an "adversarial exchange".

> But you just said, "There was no evidence of any erroneous conclusion
> at that time, Curtis," a few lines up.

That's because there was no evidence at that time, Curtis.  Are you
still having trouble following the chronology?

> We were both referring to your publishing evidence.

And there was no evidence of any problem with that evidence at that
time, Curtis.

> That you allegedly "considered other possibilities and ran experiments
> to test them" came *AFTER THE FACT* Dave.

Of course, Curtis.  What motivation would I have had to consider other
possibilities until after there was evidence of a problem?

But why do you call my considerations "alleged"?  That I considered
other possibilities is an established fact.

> The issue is that you **PUBLISHED EVIDENCE** after you failed to
> "consider other possibilities."

There is no failure to consider other possibilities on my part, Curtis,
thus there cannot be anything that came after the alleged failure.

> I did not.

You never consider the possibility of an incomplete file, Curtis.

> Ergo, If I am "inept," then you are "extremely inept."

You're erroneously presupposing that your summary above is correct,
Curtis.  It is not.  Here's a correct summary:

   o  InfoZip fails to unzip my copy of the javainuf.exe file
   o  I note this failure in this newsgroup
   o  someone else reports that InfoZip was able to unzip the
      javainuf.exe file
   o  you conclude that I am "inept" as a result
   o  I consider other possibilities and test them
   o  I discover that Netscape does not reliably download the
      javainuf.exe file (it took five downloads before two had
      the same file size), even though it reliably downloaded
      the other (all smaller) files in the JDK

> What a hypocrite.

I see you still don't understand what a hypocrite is.  Maybe that's
why you don't recognize yourself as one.

> AD NAUSEUM

I warned Marty about going down that path, Curtis.

> Wrong.

Yet another example of your pontification.

> What you gave me were games and riddles,

What alleged "games and riddles", Curtis?

> not "reasons to suspect a problem."

On the contrary, you had as many reasons as I did, Curtis.  I considered
the possibilities, while you stuck to your "inept" claim.

> Were *any* files successfully extracted, Dave?

I see you didn't answer the question, Curtis.

> If "yes" then my answer is no.

Why should your answer depend on whether any files were extracted,
Curtis?  I picked two messages to gauge your personal definition
of similarity, independently of the unzip process.  Thus your answer
should be similarly independent of the unzip process.

> These expectations would be wrong,

The key word here is "would".  You're erroneously presupposing that
your answer is dependent on whether any files were extracted.

> which would be an error on your part.

The key word here is again "would".  You're erroneously presupposing
that your answer is dependent on whether any files were extracted.

> If "no" then my answer is "yes" in that they were presented instead
> of the extraction taking place.

Why should your answer depend on whether any files were extracted,
Curtis?  I picked two messages to gauge your personal definition
of similarity, independently of the unzip process.  Thus your answer
should be similarly independent of the unzip process.

> Typical invective.  I'm not surprised, given your lack of a logical
> argument, as usual.

What alleged lack of a logical argument, Curtis?

> Which is why I *HOPE* Dave.

Yet you find it "downright scary", Curtis.

> Typical irrelevant reference . . .

What's allegedly irrelevant about it, Curtis?  That is the misinformation
that got me into this thread.

> That *IS* misinformation, regardless of your copy of JAVAINUF.EXE.

InfoZip did not work on my copy of the file, Curtis, yet OS/2 did
run the file.

> Typical irrelevant reference . . .

What's allegedly irrelevant about it, Curtis?  That is the misinformation
that got me into this thread.

> That *IS* misinformation, regardless of your copy of JAVAINUF.EXE.

InfoZip did not work on my copy of the file, Curtis, yet OS/2 did
run the file.

> I already have one:

Yeah, your claim that I am "inept", for one example.

> That *IS* misinformation, regardless of your copy of JAVAINUF.EXE.

InfoZip did not work on my copy of the file, Curtis, yet OS/2 did
run the file.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: University of Hawaii (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               10-Dec-99 02:42:18
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:20
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> 
> The fact that you've now started responding to the same article multiple
> times, repeating your "mindlessly inane" pontifications, wasting bandwidth
> in the process, coupled with your "cowardly dodging" of the issues with
> your "mindlessly inane" questions, demonstrates that you are no longer
> interested in a serious discussion of the issues.  It's now time to resume
> the Bass digest.

It's now time for Dave to give up because he lost another argument.  Too bad. 
I was kinda pulling for him on this one.  I like rooting for the underdog.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 07:38:09
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:20
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> 
> 
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> > As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
> > > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> >
> > > >If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy
breakfast
> > > >cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available 
at
> > > >fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's
illegal
> > > >for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.
> > >
> > > If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes) and 
near
> > > 90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their
control of
> > > prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly
makes for
> > > a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
> >
> > But all they CAN control is their own price.  They can keep the price of
> > their cereal constant all they want, but if those other 5% of the market
> > boys drop their cost in half and Sunny Boy is suddenly twice that of any
> > other cereal, they kiss their 95% goodbye.  They are then "forced" to
reduce
> > their own prices to compensate...in this case, 5% of the market can, under
> > your definition, "manipulate the price of the breakfast arena".  This
makes
> > these 5% of the market a monopoly that needs to be shut down by the
> > government!  All because you don't know what control really is.
> 
> Sunny Boy hasn't manipulated cereal prices in your example.  You lied.

They used the exact same mechanism, the only mechanism available to any
private enterprise company, that Microsoft used.  Microsoft managed to
manipulate prices, but Sunny Boy didn't....BY DOING THE SAME EXACT THING!

> You are also bizarre,  It's irrational to say the 5% of the market remaining
> can cut prices 50% without you first establishing how the prices got so
> high.

Companies cut prices all the time.  The prices didn't need to be "high" to
start with.  You aren't understanding how competition works...which makes it
all the more reprehensible that you try to speak of "allowing for
competition" by the government cracking down on evil profitable companies.

>                                                                1) The prices
> in your example were inflated by monopoly power

Just because prices can come down, doesn't mean they were "inflated".

> We all know what control means and our understanding explains why MS is in
> anti-trust, not Sunny Boy cereal.

The problem is that you don't like the notion of MS controlling its
property.  Everything else is fallout from that poisonous view.


-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Dec-99 11:06:00
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:07:42, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:

> Karel Jansens wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:59:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:13:15, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't).
On
> > > > > > what basis do you doubt him?
> > > > >
> > > > > How's this for starters:
> > > > > "Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
> > > > > "Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational
argument so you
> > > > > attempt to blow others up."
> > > >
> > > > Oookayyy...
> > > >
> > > > Actually, I was referring to the data of the case provided, so I could
> > > > have a chance to reply.
> > >
> > > That didn't stop you from replying, Karel.
> > >
> > ????
> 
> You still replied, in spite of your alleged lack of "a chance".  Reading
> comprehension problems?
>  
Ah. I see now. Semantics.

> > > > Now, all I can say is: "Indeed. Well... yes".
> > >
> > > Glad you agree that those statements are indeed a basis on which he may
> > > be doubted.
> > 
> > Just as long as you add: "... for me" to that sentence.
> 
> On the contrary, the above quoted statements are indeed a valid basis on
which
> *anyone* may doubt Bob, especially in light of his lack of retraction.  Your
> lack of courage to take such a stand is typical, however.

He didn't retract, he explained. And no matter how one interprets 
those remarks, they have absolutely no relevance to his credibility re
the facts of the case presented. They could make him despicable, yes, 
but not incredible. If you'd like to start a new thread, "Bob Germer 
is a redneck racist" or suchlike, I'd gladly give my opinions and 
contribute to it. However, to the issues I have been reacting to, this
is of no significance.

So what courage would I need then? To you I would have to say: "Okay, 
Bob Germer did present a credible explanation for his installation of 
Warp on his client's pc's, but because he said this and that I choose 
not to believe him." That's consequent behaviour then?

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Dec-99 11:06:00
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: When will it be 100% done?

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

StarOffice is a _Java_ application???

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 04:13:42, flmighe@attglobal.net wrote:

> 
> Seriously, you have to download StarOffice to understand the fundamental
> change going on with OS/2 browsers. While Microsoft was distracting us all
> with browser/OS integration The Star Division engaged the Warp drive.
> 
> On OS/2 Warp the StarOffice "URL" becomes a command prompt for 
> anything - HTML document, spread sheet, program, anything! 
> On OS/2 Java applications run off the desktop. StarOffice
> (a Java Application) runs shamelessly on Warp 4. 
> 
> Opera, Netscape, Lotus and any other browser replacement have 
> a high standard to beat given StarOffice on OS/2 since StarOffice
> is written in OS/2's native language. (Java)
> 
> It is the small stuff that is especially impressive. For example when
> an HTML page comes up you can use the page up and down keys the
> way they were meant to be used. Opera may have that kind of
> functionally but Netscape 4.6 on OS/2 does not.
> 
> 
[snip]

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lwriemen@wcic.cioe.com                            10-Dec-99 11:34:02
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: OS/2 stable and faster [was Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarkably 

From: lwriemen@wcic.cioe.com (Lee Riemenschneider)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:17:02, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) wrote:
> [SNIP] It's
> just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.

You must not be doing something right, because my experience has shown 
OS/2 to be just as fast or faster than Win95.  When you start talking 
about Win98 or NT 4(better comparison), then OS/2 has a staggering lead 
in speed.

Lee W. Riemenschneider 
Die Hard Purdue Fan!
OS/2 User and Supporter 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: WinStar GoodNet, Inc. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: tgalley@pironet.com                               10-Dec-99 12:33:00
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Thomas Galley <tgalley@pironet.com>

Sure, you can have some cake, too... You do know what happened to the
woman who is famous for having said that in a very inappropriate
situation?

Greetings

Thomas

Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> 
> You don't _need_ to buy bread.  There's a difference.
> 
> Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066

-- 
PIRONET INTRANET AG
Thomas Paul Galley, MA (CCNA) - Internet/Intranet Trainee
Im Mediapark 5 - 50670 Kln
Tel.: +49 (0)221 454 3833 - FAX: +49 (0)221 454 3810
mailto:tgalley@pironet.com - http://www.pironet.com
certified professional Java Programmer (see link below)
http://www.tekmetrics.com/transcript.shtml?pid=57102

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PIRONET AG News-System (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jmalloy@borg.com                                  10-Dec-99 06:54:02
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451523.436045^-.685874373657787274876

From: "Joe Malloy" <jmalloy@borg.com>

Once again, Tholen demonstrates how he can ignore a part of an argument he
doesn't like so that he can pretend to extract portions and try to create
the illusion of a contradiction.  The fact that he lacks a logical argument
is supported by the fact that he once again resorted to a personal attack.
Here's today's digest:

[Zip.]

That's that!



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 07:22:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <jbysxvebayvaxarg.fmi1lm0.pminews@news.onlink.net>, on 12/09/99 at
07:34 PM,
   "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> said:

> On 10 Dec 1999 00:10:14 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> =>They did no such thing.  You are not harmed by being offered products
> you do =>not want.

> Sure I am. If the only way to get X is to take Y as well, then either I
> do without X, or I pay for Y, too. In the first instance, I cannot get
> what I want -- that is the harm of deprivation. In the second, I have to
> pay more than X is worth because Y is part of the package -- that is the
> harm of wasted money, which I'd rather spend on something else.

> If you think that does you no harm, I'd love to do business with you!

I wonder what Lars, assuming he is single, would think if he needed a 
drug to control his male pattern baldness problem. When he went to get the
product he found that the company making it had signed a per bottle
license with a much bigger company which required that the maker of the
baldness cure package it with a PMS remedy which was not suitable for men
and which raised the price of his male pattern baldness drug by $50 or so.

I bet he would agree that he was harmed.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      10-Dec-99 12:34:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On 10 Dec 1999 00:24:32 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:

>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
>> Lars P Ormberg wrote:
>
>> >If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy breakfast
>> >cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available at
>> >fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's illegal
>> >for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.
>> 
>> If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes) and
near
>> 90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their control 
of
>> prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly makes
for
>> a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
>
>But all they CAN control is their own price.  They can keep the price of
>their cereal constant all they want, but if those other 5% of the market
>boys drop their cost in half and Sunny Boy is suddenly twice that of any
>other cereal, they kiss their 95% goodbye.  They are then "forced" to reduce
>their own prices to compensate...in this case, 5% of the market can, under
>your definition, "manipulate the price of the breakfast arena".  This makes
>these 5% of the market a monopoly that needs to be shut down by the
>government!  All because you don't know what control really is.
>
>> >>MS certainly has a control that makes possible the manipulation of
prices.
>> >>If you were interested in facts instead of void definition games, you'd 
>> >>know that they used exactly that to force OEMs to only install Windows
>> >Microsoft can ask for any price they want for their property...that's how
a
>> >capitalist system works.  If an OEM doesn't do what MS wants, MS doesn't
>> >have to sell them Windows at a price desirable to an OEM.  And the OEM
>> >DOESN'T HAVE TO BUY.
>> 
>> As OEMs have little real choice
>
>They have all the real choice that they choose to have.  If one of the
>choices is very attractive, why criticize their making of that choice?  Why
>criticize Microsoft for making its choice so attractive?
>
>>                               because of the mono..."dominant position" of
>> MS, they certainly cannot do whatever they want. That's the law.
>
>It's also immoral.  If you want to defend immoral laws, then know your role
>and shut your mouth.
>
>> Regardless of whether or not you think they can or should be free the ask
any
>> price they want, their control of the market certainly allows them to
>> manipulate prices of all related software and their own
>
>Microsoft doesn't set the price that Corel sells Suite packages for.  Corel
>does that.  Of course, Corel will hardly set a price higher than their
>popular competition.  Of course, Microsoft will hardly let a competitor be
>cheaper than it, so MS sets its prices lower too.  What does this equal?  A
>battle for the money of the consumer, where prices drop and product quality
>soars, all because the companies existed in a free market and competed.
>
>
>> >>certainly have seen for yourself -before others pointed it out- that the 
>> >>price of Windows etc. has stayed the same and even gone *up* while PC 
>> >>hardware prices have only plummeted.
>>
>> >Big deal.  If they had dropped, you'd use that as evidence of a monopoly.
>> 
>> Yeah right. A monopoly that lowers prices... What planet are you from?
>
>Standard Oil, one of your supposed monopolies, dropped prices.
>
>> The only times MS ever lowered their prices are to "steal" market share
from
>> then-competition.

And what did you call it when Corel introduced their first Wordperfect
Suite?  They priced it half of Ms Office and to boot, said you only
needed one licence per office.  Was that not predatory pricing?  And
did the big bad wolf, MS meet the pricing level?  Like hell they did.
They sat back and watched Corel lose their ass for the simple reason
Office was a better product.




EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: p@awacs.dhs.org                                   10-Dec-99 12:38:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451521

From: p@awacs.dhs.org (Pascal Haakmat)

Marty wrote:

>Are you sure you're talking about the right Dave Tholen?
>
>http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/faculty/tholen/tholen.gif

Yeah. Isn't he cute? <sigh>

>(Use this URL with caution.  It may induce an extreme desire to administer a
>wedgie.)


-- 
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 07:35:24
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82pgd6$it$1@burn.ab.videon.ca>, on 12/10/99 at 12:10 AM,
   larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:


> The prefatory remark is totally incorrect.  If the choice you are making
> is a choice that nobody has provided for, no exercised force came along. 
> Your options could easily have been limited by...say...your limits.

Let us suppose for a minute there were no anti-trust laws and Michelin
became the tire manufacturer who produced 95% of the world's tires.
Michelin then went to GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, and
Mercedes and said to them you must install our tires on every car you sell
for $30 per tire. If you do not agree, then we will charge you $90 per
tire.

Now no automobile manufacturer who wanted to stay competitive could do
anything else but sign the agreement since $300 extra would make their
vehicles much less competitive.

And let us further suppose that Michelin went to the major aftermarket
retailers of accessories for your vehicle and said to them we will give
you a discount on our accessories such as our custom inflation valves,
blow out guards, sidewall cleaner, etc. if you only carry ours and not
those of our competitors.

Now also let us suppose that you wanted to buy a Jeep for a trek through
the Sahara Desert and needed specialized low pressure tires which Michelin
did not make. You would have two choices, pay $300 for tires for which you
had no possible use or buy a Range Rover for about $5,000 more than the
comparable Jeep since Range Rover didn't have such an agreement. Moreover,
when you needed to install blow-out guards, you had to pay 3 times what
Michelin guards cost.

I'll bet you would believe yourself to be harmed by the monopolistic
practices of Michelin. I am willing to wager you would find Michelin to be
an anti-competitive monopoly.

Now just substitute MicroSoft for Michelin and Toshiba, Dell, Gateway,
etc. for the auto makers. Substitute CompUSA, Sears, Computer City, CDW,
etc. for the accessory dealers. Substitute Lotus SmartSuite for blow out
guards or DB2 for custom inflation valves.

If I am willing to pay several hundred dollars more for a Compaq server
than a workstation which is all I really need, I can get a Compaq with a
different operating system. I can buy SmartSuite to run on it but I will
pay considerably more than the $95 Compaq charges for Office in their
software bundle. Or I can buy a Compaq workstation and throw out the
windows and pay $300 for SmartSuite.



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk                     10-Dec-99 12:59:04
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 10:35:21
Subj: Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarkably stable

From: glen@rockyhorror.Zkaroo.co.uk (Glen D)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:17:02, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 	I support a small office without about 50-60 users, about half
> of which are slow-s/2, but 99% of system trouble is from the windows
> 95 machines.  I also want to mention that slow-s/2's proprietary
> solutions are really good too.  The slow-s/2 boxes have full page
> monitors (in addition to standard monitors)  which work with a product
> called IWPM (an image software) and high speed (but old) scanners to
> scan in documents (to the MF) and the system works really well.  It's
> just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.  It takes over
> 5x longer for the computers to boot, and to switch from the slow-s/2
> desktop to the win-os2 session takes minutes. with nothing but Comm
> manager(with 3 sessions), IWPM and win-os2 with word 6 open.  Had IBM
> done slow-s/2 right, we would all be complaining about Big Blue and
> their market dominance.
> 
> 
> Chris 

My Sinclair Spectrum boots up almost instantaneously.  Or should I 
call it a Fast-trum?  Hoho.

Glen D
-<remove Z from my e-mail Address>-

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: RemarQ http://www.remarQ.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: letoured@nospam.net                               10-Dec-99 05:19:12
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:22
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: letoured@nospam.net

larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) said:

>> Oooh, Lars, now that's an interesting concept.  Well, how about
>> the injustice of M$ not refunding the price of WinXX licenses in
>> accordance with _their_ license?  Hmm, now they're not only
>> illegal in the view of the U.S. Government, but unjust as well!

>Than why haven't they been taken to court for THAT?  Why the big
>anti-monopoly farce?

You are showing what you don't know here. You don't go after the thief for
shoplifting when he already promised to stop and didn't, and when you know
he is also guilty of murder.

>If this was such a quick and clear cut case as you imply, surely it would
>have been handled, instead of wasting millions trying Microsoft for doing
>a moral business action.

This comes from more of what you don't know and don't want to learn.

_____________
Ed Letourneau <letoured@sover.net>

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mcphee@spamkilller.ibm.net                        10-Dec-99 13:47:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarkably stable

From: mcphee@spamkilller.ibm.net (J. Scott McPhee)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:17:02, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) wrote:
Your big performance dog is Comm's Manager. Which IBM Hosts are you 
connecting to ?

> Hi,
> 
> 	I support a small office without about 50-60 users, about half
> of which are slow-s/2, but 99% of system trouble is from the windows
> 95 machines.  I also want to mention that slow-s/2's proprietary
> solutions are really good too.  The slow-s/2 boxes have full page
> monitors (in addition to standard monitors)  which work with a product
> called IWPM (an image software) and high speed (but old) scanners to
> scan in documents (to the MF) and the system works really well.  It's
> just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.  It takes over
> 5x longer for the computers to boot, and to switch from the slow-s/2
> desktop to the win-os2 session takes minutes. with nothing but Comm
> manager(with 3 sessions), IWPM and win-os2 with word 6 open.  Had IBM
> done slow-s/2 right, we would all be complaining about Big Blue and
> their market dominance.
> 
> 
> Chris 

Regards
J. Scott McPhee

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 08:54:04
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <teadams-0912992132130001@bnh-aa1-81.mv.com>, on 12/09/99 at 09:32 PM,
   teadams@tea.mv.com (Tim Adams) said:


> Reading all the 'on-line history' is fun BUT what I would really like to
> see is the is an interview (TV / Written and published in a reputable
> rag) with those people from Seattle Computing answering questions as to
> whether or not the DOS they sold MS was OR was not a 'rip-off' of
> Digital researches OS. 
> Of course it (IMO) will never happen.

It did indeed happen. It is summarized in Hard Drive. It was originally
published in one of the Seattle newspapers.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 08:58:07
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <384fe85c_4@news.cadvision.com>, on 12/09/99 at 10:34 AM,
   "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com> said:

> Allen-Bradley defines a market: factory automation.

> They also control the vast majority of that market.

Huh? We have several industrial clients who have highly automated
factories. I am throughly familiar with the production equipment. Other
than a few manual switched, Allen Bradley is no where to be found.

My daughter is sales manager for a manufacturing firm in Pennsylvania. The
plant is also highly automated. Allen-Bradley is nowhere to be found
therein.

But when I go to my local electrical supply dealer client, I find hundreds
of A-B products for which there are several competitors.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:04:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: When will it be 100% done?

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <38507df6_4@news1.prserv.net>, on 12/10/99 at 04:13 AM,
   flmighe@attglobal.net said:

> t is the small stuff that is especially impressive. For example when an
> HTML page comes up you can use the page up and down keys the way they
> were meant to be used. Opera may have that kind of functionally but
> Netscape 4.6 on OS/2 does not.

Since that is pure bullshit, nothing you say has any validity here. I use
the P-Up and P-Dn keys on HTML pages all the time. So long as the cursor
is on the page, it does what it is supposed to do, move up or down the
requisite lines so that I can read an the entire thing one screenful at a
time. In fact, in 4.61, it shows the last line of the previous page at the
top of the next page and vice versa using P-Up.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:07:01
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82pb80$jma$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/10/99 at 11:40 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:


> On another matter, does a dial-up connection seriously cost 19cents a
> minute in the States?  We have flat rate ISP's in NZ that supply
> unlimited connection time for $39.95NZ a month (approximately $20US),
> which would buy about an hour and a half at that rate.

Yes it does for commercial lines. It is not the ISP charges, it is what
the local phone company charges for connection to the ISP. Every call made
within the local LATA (a phone company term for your Local calling area)
is charged from one to five message units per minute. Message units cost
just under 5 cents a minute and the basic line charge of approximately $50
per month gives you 50 message units. If you call a number in your own
exchange or one from your local Central Office the call costs one message
unit per minute. If you call one in an adjoining CO, it cost 2 per minute,
etc. up to a maximum of 5. Even if you call another number within your own
company, you pay in message units.

That is why I have my main office attached to my home. By doing so, I have
only ONE commercial line and God help anyone who makes an outgoing call on
it. I have six "residential" lines which all, of course, are entended into
the offices. Those are the lines we use.

This has been an ongoing battle betwixt me and Bell Atlantic. When I first
built the office about 40 feet from my home, I ran the lines to the office
and had Ma Bell install the new office line. When the installer reported
that there were residential lines already there, BA tried to convert same
to commercial lines. I stopped that with a complaint to the Board of
Public Utilities. BA's position was that the office was not part of the
house. (A previous BPU ruling stated that someone working from home did
not have to install a commercial line).

When I built the office, I had installed a concrete walkway between the
house and the office. Since that walkway was utilized five or six days a
week by a disabled employee in a motorized wheel chair and we get a lot of
rain and a fair amount of snow, I had the walkway covered with a simple
wood truss roof on 4 inch square posts set 8 feet apart since 40 feet at
his speed took a long time in rain and became dangerous in snow.

I maintained that rendered the two sections connected and  thus a single
structure. The BPU said that only if it were enclosed would that be the
case. So, I enclosed it with (at the time) visqueen- a sheet plastic
material.

BA objected and dragged us back to the BPU for a ruling. But by the time
the case came up, a subsequent ruling allowing alternate companies to
provide local commercial service was issued. I told BA that they could
either withdraw or I would give my commercial business to the new company.
They did. They still get their damn $50 per month which has not incurred a
single message unit charge in 3 years.

The disabled employee unfortunately succumbed to his disease and the
walkway is again an open walk with a roof. After shovelling that damn
walkway twice after ice storms last winter, I am seriously considering
Visqueen again. <GRIN>


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:31:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82oveg$480$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/10/99 at 08:19 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:


> No, I jumped over him for perpetuating a stupid lie.  He claimed there
> was no other option but to have his clients dial-up to update IE5, which
> is an absolute nonsense.  He already said there were CD's available on
> the network, and his assertation that IE5 requires an intermediate
> reboot is absolutely false.  I don't give a rat's ass whether they
> install OS/2 or Win98, just that Boob is using silly lies.

I didn't tell them that, the MS salesman did. I happen to agree after
trying to install the October 1999 CD via the network. I tried it in two
different networks, both Novell. In every instance, after the IE files are
copied, it reoboots, updates files, brings up a blank screen (color
depending on desktop settings) says it is updating the desktop and
shortcuts, sits there for 55 seconds, and reboots. Then it comes back up
brings up the desktop and immediately a error screen that it cannot find
drive Y (the volume for the CD) which is absolutely true. It cannot. Nor
does another reboot after closing that error window change anything. The
same error is repeated time after time.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     10-Dec-99 06:48:00
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


"E. Barry Bruyea" wrote:

> On 10 Dec 1999 00:24:32 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
> >> The only times MS ever lowered their prices are to "steal" market share
from
> >> then-competition.
>
> And what did you call it when Corel introduced their first Wordperfect
> Suite?  They priced it half of Ms Office and to boot, said you only
> needed one licence per office.  Was that not predatory pricing?  And
> did the big bad wolf, MS meet the pricing level?  Like hell they did.
> They sat back and watched Corel lose their ass for the simple reason
> Office was a better product.

MS Office has been identified as another product in another market where MS
has
monopoly power.   The DOJ choose to challenge MS on OSs instead of both
markets.
When a company cuts prices in half and still cannot win marketshare you have a
serious problem in a market.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: florin@anguish.org                                10-Dec-99 15:48:03
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: "Michiel Denie" <florin@anguish.org>

Brandon Blatcher <nomadic@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:nomadic-BA6AE1.01060310121999@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
> In article <82pque$ide$1@weber.a2000.nl>, "Michiel Denie"
> <florin@anguish.org> wrote:
>
> > Madwen <madwen@mailbag.com> wrote in message
> > news:madwen-70CD17.14051508121999@news.binc.net...
> > > In article <slrn84ru29.2vn.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith
> > > <tzs@halcyon.com> wrote:
> > >
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > The point never was what platform could have the _longest_ file name
> > > potential.  You guys really make me laugh my ass off.  You cite these
> > > file name length and MHz stats like you are measuring the length of
> > > your... well you get the message.  One can almost detect a hint of
> > > testosterone in the air reading over these kinds of posts. The point
of
> > > it is and always was what is optimum for the user.  It's what you do
> > > with it.... NOT how big it is!  :)
> > >
> >
> > You started, so I can finish it.. this proves my
> > long time suspicion. There's nothing wrong with the
> > Mac by itself. It's just that it's a computer for
> > girls! Using a Mac is like carrying a handbag. It's
> > really quite practical, but a real man wouldn't be
> > caught dead with one.
>
> We don't have any proof of this.

Uhh okay, MOST real men, with the exception of
Brandon, don't carry handbags. Better?

>
> Perhaps you like to be the first dead man to test this?:)
>
> --
> -Brandon Blatcher

Michiel


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: A2000 Kabeltelevisie en Telecommunicatie (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  11-Dec-99 00:55:10
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:38510fc9$9$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82oveg$480$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/10/99 at 08:19 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
>
> > No, I jumped over him for perpetuating a stupid lie.  He claimed
> > there was no other option but to have his clients dial-up to
> > update IE5, which is an absolute nonsense.  He already said there
> > were CD's available on the network, and his assertation that IE5
> > requires an intermediate reboot is absolutely false.  I don't
> > give a rat's ass whether they install OS/2 or Win98, just that
> > Boob is using silly lies.
>
> I didn't tell them that, the MS salesman did. I happen to agree
> after trying to install the October 1999 CD via the network. I
> tried it in two different networks, both Novell. In every instance,
> after the IE files are copied, it reoboots, updates files, brings
> up a blank screen (color depending on desktop settings) says it is
> updating the desktop and shortcuts, sits there for 55 seconds, and
> reboots. Then it comes back up brings up the desktop and
> immediately a error screen that it cannot find drive Y (the volume
> for the CD) which is absolutely true. It cannot. Nor does another
> reboot after closing that error window change anything. The same
> error is repeated time after time.

1.  Is there any special reason why you're using network shares
mounted to drives ?

2.  IE's post installation configuration only happens *after* the
user logs in, which means the drive should be remounted
automatically, unless a) your logon scripts don't automatically mount
drives or b) when you originally mounted the drive you told it not to
remount after rebooting.  Both are your fault.

In any case, I don't believe a word of it.  I've *never* seen IE use
the procedure you describe.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOFCHudIiOnIFzdsOEQLNiwCfU18FlmylF6ZkvneI0/3qhXokFE0An0iC
a63MMYakLk/iqL29GMEIdYBT
=Ri42
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:39:07
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-2WTnhbRUH0Uh@localhost>, on 12/10/99 at 12:19 AM,
   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

> > There are also ways to stop IE trying to update itself, so both Boob and
the
> > Windows consultant are guilty here.
> > 
> I'm strange that way, but in my view the guy who got them the 
> "operating system" in the first place looks like the only one with the
> egg on his face. I consider Bob's move a nice pick-up and a sound win 
> for OS/2 (don't forget: this is - also - COOA <G>).

Not to mention saving the client well over $30,000 over the MS proposal
not considering the cost of downtime, employee training time, loss of
productivity, etc.

> (there were other factors at play: apparently IE5 has some serious 
> security problems, a thing which might not be taken lightly in a law 
> firm).

Just this morning I received a warning about several virii. Here is what
was sent to me via a trusted friend:

 WARNING!! WARNING !! WARNING !!

Just received. For your attention:


Warning No. 1
If you receive any CELCOM Screen Saver Pls. do not install it!!!!!! This
screensaver is very cool. It shows a NOKIA handphone,with time messages.
After it is activated, the PC cannot boot up at all. It goes very slow. It
destroys your hard disk. The filename is CELLSAVER.EXE

Warning No. 2
Beware! if someone named SandMan asks you to  checkout his page. DO  NOT! 
It is at www.geocities.com/vienna/6318.  This page hacks into your 
C:\drive. DO NOT GO THERE ... FORWARD THIS  MAIL TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW.

Warning No. 3
WARNING: If you get an E-mail titled : "Win A  Holiday", DO not open  it.
Delete it immediately. Microsoft just  announced yesterday. It is a 
malicious virus that WILL ERASE YOUR HARD  DRIVE . At this time,  there is
no remedy .Forward this to everyone  IMMEDIATELY!!

Warning # 4
DO NOT OPEN ANY EMAIL FROM  Sassyced@aol.com!!!!!!!!!!
IT LOOKS LIKE A REAL EMAIL! She? ALSO HAS A  PROFILE!! But it crashes all
your system and will not open AOL unless u type your address and credit
card information!!!!! and u cannot even delete this virus! The name off
the virus is SASSY.SHS

PLEASE PASS THIS ALONG TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS AND PEOPLE IN YOUR MAILBOXES.
AOL HAS SAID THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS VIRUS AND THERE IS NO  REMEDY FOR
THIS YET. FORWARD IT TO ALL YOUR  ON-LINE FRIENDS ASAP!

If any of that is valid, and a MS guru here verifies the one about the Win
a Holiday, that is reason enough not to use any OS which can be infected
with virii such as this. While OS/2 is not totally immune from virii, it
is much less likely to be infected with any which assume Windows to be the
OS.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:49:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <82ov0v$2rd$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/10/99 at 08:11 AM,
   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:

> > And your total ignorance of what you are typing is shown by the lie in the
> > second sentence repeated in the third sentence of your post, Microsoft
> > DOES NOT SELL the CD's. You are a complete liar. They GIVE THEM AWAY FOR
> > THE ASKING.

> They charge you for postage, which is close enough to selling them.  And
> in New Zealand, it's $20.

They do not here. It is free.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     10-Dec-99 07:05:05
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> >
> >
> > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> >
> > > As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
> > > > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> > >
> > > > >If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy
breakfast
> > > > >cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta,
available at
> > > > >fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's
illegal
> > > > >for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.
> > > >
> > > > If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes)
and near
> > > > 90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their
control of
> > > > prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly
makes for
> > > > a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
> > >
> > > But all they CAN control is their own price.  They can keep the price of
> > > their cereal constant all they want, but if those other 5% of the market
> > > boys drop their cost in half and Sunny Boy is suddenly twice that of any
> > > other cereal, they kiss their 95% goodbye.  They are then "forced" to
reduce
> > > their own prices to compensate...in this case, 5% of the market can,
under
> > > your definition, "manipulate the price of the breakfast arena".  This
makes
> > > these 5% of the market a monopoly that needs to be shut down by the
> > > government!  All because you don't know what control really is.
> >
> > Sunny Boy hasn't manipulated cereal prices in your example.  You lied.
>
> They used the exact same mechanism, the only mechanism available to any
> private enterprise company, that Microsoft used.  Microsoft managed to
> manipulate prices, but Sunny Boy didn't....BY DOING THE SAME EXACT THING!

Sunny Boy didn't manipulate prices.  You lied.   Price manipulation is only
possible
with monopoly power - by a single company with monopoly power or by a trust. 
Cutting
prices is not price manipulation.  Competition over price is not price
manipulation.

This thread comes down to someone lying and shouting.


> > You are also bizarre,  It's irrational to say the 5% of the market
remaining
> > can cut prices 50% without you first establishing how the prices got so
> > high.
>
> Companies cut prices all the time.  The prices didn't need to be "high" to
> start with.  You aren't understanding how competition works...which makes it
> all the more reprehensible that you try to speak of "allowing for
> competition" by the government cracking down on evil profitable companies.

Companies cut prices all the time?  No.  Companies raise prices more than cut
them
unless Canada has deflation.
But you were telling me about cutting prices by 50% !!!    Speak to your
example.   You
see 50% price cuts all the time ?!?   No way.  You see price competition, not
price
manipulation.  You see changes measured in pennies, not dollars.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: green01@attglobal.net                             10-Dec-99 07:32:22
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: OS/2 and MP3s...

From: Gordon Green <green01@attglobal.net>


"David T. Johnson" wrote:

> I play MP3s on my system using WarpAMP b4.  I have an Aureal Vortex 1
> PCI sound card.  When I play the same MP3s on the same hardware using
> Windows and WinAMP, there are tiny changes in pitch that seem to be
> caused by the WinAmp and Windows system timing.  I would have never
> noticed this if I hadn't first listened to the same MP3s on OS/2 which
> seems to have 'perfect pitch' relatively speaking anyway.  After
> listening to these MP3s on OS/2, it is irritating to listen to them on
> WinAMP.  Maybe my ear has become too sensitive.  Has anyone else noticed
> this?

I've noticed this, but always assumed it was a sound card/driver issue.

I have an HP Pavillion with Rockwell chip sound support unders Windows.
Under OS/2 I use USB Audio to drive Labtec speakers with the IBM provided
drivers.
So in my case, it could be a driver issue.

Using WarpAMP b4, the sound is much better to my ears than WinAMP under
Windows.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: lucien@metrowerks.com                             10-Dec-99 15:44:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: lucien@metrowerks.com

In article <82pmbd$43$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:
> Lucien writes:
>
> > Just FYI, his 2 "tests" fail in a manner similar to the failure
> > exhibited by his "costly mistakes" argument (and the JDK sentence
> > argument),
>
> Given that my "costly mistakes" and JDK sentence arguments haven't
> failed at all, then the manner of my two tests' non-failure could be
> called "similar".

Interesting that you feel the need to follow me into a separate
exchange. Did we strike a raw nerve, Dave?

Regardless, the "tests" do fail. Let's examine the failure in detail:

]#1:  It rained today.
]
]#2:  It rained today until sunset.
] The question:  did it rain all of the day or only some of the day?

] The word "rained", by itself, doesn't indicate duration, therefore

It is more precise to state that duration is not indicated in this
sentence.

] one cannot determine an unambiguous answer to the question in the
] absence of other information.

Absolutely correct. The reader will note here that Dave has presented
yet another argument completely congruent with his and my statements
concerning the "costly mistakes" and JDK sentence data.

Let's review them here as a reminder:

My thesis:
The "costly mistakes" and "implements functionality" situations are
ambiguous WRT quantification in the absence of peri-verbal information.

Dave's statement:

"The word 'implements' does allow for either 'some' or
'all' functionality, in the absence of any other
information."

The reader will note that the rained case is congruent with the "costly
mistakes" and "implements" cases WRT quantification (of duration in
this case): the "rained" sentence #1 is indeed unclear about whether it
rained an entire day or for only a part of a day.

Dave also correctly points out that this ambiguity is a side effect of
the *absence* of other indicative information.

Therefore, the ambiguity WRT quantification *in the absence of other
information* is firmly established by Dave's example and remarks (just
as he and I agree is the case for the "implements" situation) such that
he places himself in complete agreement with me yet again. Very good,
Dave.

>Yet I will claim that the answer to
>the question is in fact unambiguous in the case of statement #2.

Irrelevant, given that any disambiguation of (the magnitude of)
duration in the presence of other information would merely demonstrate
the effect of the *presence* of the information. It would not affect
the (central to this thread) issue of the underlying ambiguity (which
Dave unwittingly outlines accurately and clearly above) occurring in
the information's *absence*. Same mistake you made in the other two
cases, Dave.

> Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

That would be illogical, since this "test" reinforces, rather than
contradicts, my thesis.

>Test grade:  F.

No, my test grade here is A. OTOH, the "test" writer (Dave) gets an F.

>Here's another little test for you, Lucien:

] #3:  It did rain today.
]
] #4:  It didn't rain today.
]
] The question:  what fraction of the day did it rain?
]
] Structurally, the two statements are identical,

No, they're different semantically. Elementary predicate logic
(specifically, the logic of negation) renders the difference with
precision.

Consult "Mathematical Methods in Linguistics" by Barbara Partee, Alice
ter Meulen and Robert Wall, chapters 7 and 14 for more information on
the semantics of quantifiers and negation.

>yet there is nothing in statement #3 that allows the question to be
answered unambiguously,

Absolutely correct assessment of #3. It is ambiguous WRT quantification
(in the sense of magnitude of duration) due to the lack of other
information. The reader will note that Dave and I are in complete
agreement once again.

>while there is something in statement #4 that does allow the question
>to be answered unambigiously.

Yes, precisely - negation. The reader will note that this amounts to
"other information" such that disambiguation WRT quantification is
possible. This follows from Dave's and my statements - Dave's analysis
here only reinforces my argument (exemplified in our statements above),
yet again.

> Try to prove otherwise, Lucien.

That would be illogical, since this "test" reinforces, rather than
contradicts, my thesis.

>Test grade:  F.

No, my test grade here is A. OTOH, the "test" writer (Dave) gets an F.

>Perhaps readers will notice how 3-4 corresponds to the "prevent costly
mistakes" thread,

On the contrary, the reader will immediately understand that these
"tests" only demonstrate more unwitting agreement on Dave's part with
my thesis both here and in the "costly mistakes" thread.

>where the quantification is provided by the definition of a word and
not the structure.

Uninformed response. As shown exhaustively in the "costly mistakes"
thread, the semantics of quantification have both semantic and
syntactic consequences. The placement, scope and meaning of quantifiers
in English are heavily regulated by both syntax and semantics. The
contribution of the "definition of a word" to the syntactic/semantic
composition of the sentence is similarly regulated by both syntactic
and semantic factors.

Alice, ter Meulen and Wall, as well as the references cited in the
"costly mistakes" thread, contain detailed accounts of this.

>Perhaps readers will notice how 1-2 corresponds to the "Java 1.1.8
>implements Java 1.2
>functionality" thread, where the additional information resolves what
>would otherwise be
>ambiguous.

The reader will note the irrelevancy of this assertion, given the issue
of the presence of other information. That any quantification (in any
of the 3 cases) has been disambiguated in the presence of other
information does not affect the issue of the underlying ambiguity in
any of the 3 cases (which Dave has unwittingly outlined accurately and
clearly above and elsewhere) in the information's absence.

>Yet more evidence that you're playing your own "infantile game".  Or
are you really that >idiotic?

The reader will note here the continued reliance upon invective -
Dave's typical response when the logic and evidence have run out.

Lucien S.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 09:52:11
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dzI2bDuZwY1c@localhost>, on 12/09/99 at 10:31 PM,
   jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:

> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:13:06, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
> wrote:


> 1. You talk about Bob as if he somehow has to defend his actions,  prove
> to you that he is telling the truth. Why would he have to do  that? He
> gave us a case where a client chose OS/2 over Windows, for  specific
> reasons. Apparently, you cannot live with the fact that you  can't find
> anything to attack his actions on merits, so you have  chosen to accuse
> Bob of being a liar.

He is a typical Lemming. Even M$ stopping paying him hasn't changed his
tune.

> Indeed, if one looks at all the facts presented, Bob's actions are not
> only profitable to him, but will also present to his client an optimal
> solution.

One which saved the firm thousands and thousands of dollars.


> 3. I distinctly haven't written that Bob made a lot of sense when he 
> told *two* Canadians that their opinion was worthless (I would have 
> thought you would relate better to Bob. After all, he *is* trying to 
> use your kind of vocabulary). I said that his proposal to his client 
> made a lot of sense, because I know a couple of Belgian notary firms 
> and Bob's description of his client was eerily familiar. Please flame 
> me for the right reasons.

You take the statement out of context, not surprising considering you
apparently use English as a second language coming from Belgium. You
handle it much better than most people born and raised and educated(?)
here, BTW.

The statement in context meant that their opinion has no relevance in the
Court's or the DOJ's consideration. The entire statement which clearly set
the context said that were the Canadian Government unhappy with the DOJ it
would go via the State Department in an attempt to influence the course of
action. Thus his, Britton's, or any other Canadian's opinion is worthless
in this matter.

I was always of the opinion that Canuck was a term applied only to doltish
types who hailed from Canada. I forgot that they have a professional
hockey team that uses the name. I suppose that it would have been more
politically correct to say Doltish Canadian or Doltish Albertan, but I
don't propose to let others tell me what my Constitution gives me the
right to say.

As to the Arab terrorist remark, it made no reference to all Arabs. We
have just gone through several trials of Arabs who were convicted of,
inter alia, setting off a truck bomb in the World Trade Center, plotting
to set off bombs in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels, in the United Nations
Building, etc. These were not deranged fools like Ted Kazinski (the
Unabomber).

Rather, the New York bunch were political fanatics bent on the destruction
of what they believed to be evil incarnate because they were reared that
way. Life in much of the Arab world is apparently much less valuable than
in Western Europe, America, etc. For example, I doubt that many
Occidentals outside the Middle East would find it an honor to die for the
Emperor as did the Japanese in 1940. Even under Hitler, Germans were
willing (sometimes eager) to surrender rather than "fall on thier sword"
as Hitler demanded. Yes, I know Rommel swallowed his Luger, but only to
protect his wife and children from reprisal if he forced a trial which
would have ended in his death in a matter of weeks if not days.

Here in the US, we consider men like Kazinski to be mentally ill. We do
not consider the terrorists convicted in New York to be sick. We consider
them to be misguided, murderous fools, but rational and in full possession
of their faculties. Of all the acts which some classify as domestic
terrorism such as the school shootings perpetuated by children, bombing of
abortion clinics, killing of physicians and other medical personnel who
perform abortions or work in clinics providing that service, we generally
find, through our courts, that these people are not mentally sound
although legally responsible for their actions since the actions have no
basis in reality to our thinking. They don't hear voices, for example,
which would absolve them of guilt in our system. Rather we think of them
as mentally ill but still able to distinguish right from wrong. They don't
advertise the reasons for what they do ala the Arab terrorists who loudly
proclaim their "victories". They are not participants in an international
organization dedicated to carrying out such tragedies.

The Arab terrorist, for the most part, is a true believer as was the
Japanese soldier in World War II. They are a product of a society and an
education which teaches that such actions are not only good but demanded
by God.

I never meant to imply that all Arabs were terrorists. As a point of fact,
when I submitted my suggestions for a list of the greatest heros of the
20th Century, I listed as Number 1 Anwar El Sadat, as Number 2 Menacim
Begin, and as Number 3 King Heussin of Jordan. All three made politically
hazardous, life threatening, unpopular at home decisions because they
believed they were doing the right thing. Two paid with their lives for
their decision and the third risked his life and throne. All are Arabs as
you, I am sure, are well aware.

If anyone is interested, here is the rest of my top 10.

 4. Nelson Mandella of South Africa
 5. The German officers who tried unsuccessfully to assinate Hitler
 6. George Catlett Marshall, Chief of Staff of the US Army 1940-1945 whom
the British 
      High Command called the Architect of Victory.
 7. Winston Churchill who took a nation under seige like never before in
History and 
      rallied it to victory.
 8. Ghandi who needs no description.
 9. Mikhail Gorbachev
10. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of the top 10 (taking the German officers collectively), only 5 are
Caucausian. Two are Arabs, one is a Jew, two are  Black. Others on the
list included the Chinese student who threw himself in front of a tank,
the Japanese population as a whole after World War II which accepted
military humiliation, massive destruction, and atomic bombing to become
one of the most civilized nations in the world, Thurgood Marshall who took
what was basically a charity (the NAACP)  and turned it into the driving
force for racial equality and who became a Supreme Court Justice, the
members of the Undergrounds in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc.
while under Nazi occupation, the families which risked everything to
shelter Jews in Nazi controlled territory, the Washington, DC policeman
and the Secret Service men who were killed protecting Truman who by then
was the only counterforce of meaning to Stalin, Mother Theresa, Rachel
Carson, Sir Alexander Fleming, Jonas Salk, the thousands of policemen
around the world killed or maimed in the line of duty, Albert Schwitzer
the doctor in Africa who gave his life treating the poor Black natives,
Jerry Lewis, Danny Thomas, Mrs. Parks who wouldn't move to the back of the
bus, and Patch Adams.

It doesn't take getting killed to be a hero. Sacrificing one's comfort
and/or wealth for the good of mankind is what it takes in many cases for
the good of mankind and not for personal glory or profit. Jerry Lewis
never took a cent and gave millions in cash as well as his name and time
for medical research. Ditto for Danny Thomas.

It doesn't take being successful to be a hero. That poor Chinese student
didn't achieve very much, at least not yet. The German officers failed,
but they tried.

One doesn't have to be famous to be a great person. How many non-whites
can name Louisa Parks? How many would recognize her name?

One doesn't have to be rich in worldly wealth to be a hero. Look at
Schweitzer, Mother Theresa, Patch Adams.

One only needs moral fiber, true courage, and commitment. Heroism knows no
nationality, no race, no religion, no social stratus.

Some list for a racist, no?



--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nenad@my-deja.com                                 10-Dec-99 15:47:07
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Odin handling 16-bit (win3.1) code as well?

From: Nenad Milenkovic <nenad@my-deja.com>

In article <woretznavkpvkparg.fmf4w98.pminews@news.eoni.com>,
  "Trancser" <jbergman@ixc.ixc.net> wrote:

> Just wondering if it'd be possible to give Odin the ability to handle
> Windows 3.1 16-bit code as well as Windows 95/98/NT's 32-bit code?
> (...)
> .to run 16-bit windows programs (or installers for win95 progs that
> still have 16-bit cpmpatable code in them :)

Everything is possible, but Odin team lacks manpower for this. The
focus is on 32-bit applications. I agree it would be nice to have
at least Win32s compatibility (and some Win32s applications can
be loaded and do run as they use the same EXE format as Win32c or
Win32 apps), if only for making installation programs happy.

In any case, if someone is willing to try to hack this in (either
by porting Win16 from Wine or using Win-OS/2 DLLs included in OS/2)
I'm sure he (or she) would be welcomed in the team. Right now, current
team members don't have enough time for this (there are even some parts
of Odin32 API that have no active developers, that this is surely
more important and urgent than Win16 compatibility).

Nenad


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Project Odin (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        10-Dec-99 16:42:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Christopher Smith <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote in message
news:82r3ur$b0e$1@news1.mpx.com.au...
[snip]
|
| 1.  Is there any special reason why you're using network shares
| mounted to drives ?
|
| 2.  IE's post installation configuration only happens *after* the
| user logs in, which means the drive should be remounted
| automatically, unless a) your logon scripts don't automatically mount
| drives or b) when you originally mounted the drive you told it not to
| remount after rebooting.  Both are your fault.
|
| In any case, I don't believe a word of it.  I've *never* seen IE use
| the procedure you describe.

I second that.  I've installed IE5 on every system in my network using
"Client Software" CD from TechNet.  I launch setup and let it copy
files.  When it wants a reboot, I say yes, then take the CD out of the
drive and go to the next system.  There most definitely is some post-
reboot configuration running in the background, but it does NOT
require the installation path to be present.  I know this because I am
off at another workstation with my CD running setup while the post-
reboot config is taking place on the last workstation, without the CD
in the drive.  It never asks for the CD again.

As far as the OS is concerned, there's not difference between a
network mounted Y drive and a local D or E drive (CD-ROM).
That's what the network redirector (ie: Client for Microsoft
Networks or Client for Netware Networks) is for.  The
redirection of requests over the network is completely transparent
to the OS.

Since my installs of IE5 don't need to CD in the post-reboot
process, I can't believe that Bob's installs DO need it.  I also
refute the claim that IE5 requires 2 reboots.  It NEVER has
for me.

-B


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: @Home Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com                        10-Dec-99 16:46:16
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Brent Davies" <brentdaviesNOSPAM@home.com>

Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:38512369$12$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
| On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dzI2bDuZwY1c@localhost>, on 12/09/99 at 10:31 PM,
|    jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
|
| > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:13:06, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt)
| > wrote:
|
|
| > 1. You talk about Bob as if he somehow has to defend his actions,  prove
| > to you that he is telling the truth. Why would he have to do  that? He
| > gave us a case where a client chose OS/2 over Windows, for  specific
| > reasons. Apparently, you cannot live with the fact that you  can't find
| > anything to attack his actions on merits, so you have  chosen to accuse
| > Bob of being a liar.
|
| He is a typical Lemming. Even M$ stopping paying him hasn't changed his
| tune.
|

Typical of you to accuse someone of astroturfing just because they
disagree with your or dislike you.

[snip]

-B


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: @Home Network (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com                           10-Dec-99 11:08:11
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com>

On <Alan_Baker-38FC8C.00491609121999@news.telus.net>, on 12/09/99 at 12:49
AM,
   Alan Baker <Alan_Baker@bc.sympatico.ca> said:

> As for using it for ignorant Canadians: compared to ignorant Americans 
> there aren't any ignorant Canucks. <G> As a nation, you should be 
> ashamed of how little you know about your nearest neighbour and the rest
>  of the world for that matter.

Unfortunately, my experience with Canada is mostly limited to Montreal and
Nova Scotia. The former is a place I detest because of the actions of some
of the air traffic controllers and customs officials. The latter is my
third favorite place on earth after the United States and Scotland.
Actually, it's more like 2 and 2a really.

Virtually every trip I took into Dorval or Quebec City was made miserable
in one way or another by the attitude of Francophones toward Anglophones.
Other than the shopkeepers in the vast underground mall in Montreal, I
find it a very difficult city to find things, get help, etc. It is even
worse than in France which I have been heard to mutter we should have left
the Germans keep.

I have travelled throughout Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal,
Greece, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, and Great Britain. Anywhere but
France, people either speak English or will grab someone who does to help
out a tourist. In general, other than in France, I feel I am treated as a
guest who should be made welcome. In France as in Quebec Province, I feel
I am treated as an unwelcome invader.

Nova Scotia is so like Scotland, that I forget I am in Canada when I am
there. They are the most gracious, open, helpful, honest people I have met
anywhere. If anything, they are more friendly than the Scots themselves.
The Francophones in Nova Scotia who do not speak English (very few) act
like the Dutch or Flemish when confronted with an Anglophone who doesn't
speak French.

I haven't been in Alberta or Sask. (I'm not about to attempt to spell it
out) since I was a lad of 10 back in 1950. I've only made one trip to BC
in the last 30 years. That was a 5 hour visit. I was very favorably
impressed with the cleanliness of the city, the racial diversity (every
third store seemed to be run by Orientals who, unlike those here, spoke
passable English), and the apparent honesty of a population which trusts
people to pay the fare for riding the commuter trains. If they tried that
in New York or Philadelphia, the transit authrority would take in less
revenue than a part time burger flipper at McDonalds.

One of the problems with vacationing in Canada is that you are too close
to justify airfare and too far away to see very much in our typical five
or six day vacation. It is a very long day's drive to Ottowa, about 14
hours on the road. Toronto is more than 10 hours, more than my wife likes
to spend. To fly to either costs about twice what it costs to fly to
England or Germany. We generally never make reservations, just rent a car
at Heathrow or Gatwick, and have a list of B&B's or find one. We do this
in Europe as well and just "follow our noses" as my dad used to say when
we took trips. Also, car rentals in Europe are much lower than we found
when we went to Ottowa several years ago.

I can (and do) get round trip fares from New York to London for under $300
for travel on a Saturday eastbound, returning no later than midnight
Tuesday. Frankfort is around $329. I get a list of super savers (what they
are called) every Wednesday morning around 2 AM. Periodically, they also
offer fares to Europe the same way in a separate message.

The lowest fare I ever saw was one to Ottowa for $279 for the same short
trip to which I had to add Philadelphia's local airport tax of $12 per
ticket which is not charged flying from Newark which is equidistant in
time from our home with Phila.

Unfortunately, in Ottowa, they roll up the sidewalks before dusk (at least
in late June they did). Coming from the southeast, we weren't prepared for
daylight at  9 PM. As the light began to fade, we went looking for a
restaurant. Even McDonalds was closed at 9:45! We went up on June 29 and
had to return on an early flight July 1. We went specifically to see the
changing of the guard ceremony. Well, it poured rain on June 30 and they
cancelled the changing of the guard. We toured the capitol, a magnificent
building, truly fascinating, and went to the Governor General's residence.
Oops, sorry, not open until tomorrow. We went shopping and Rachel did get
a dress. We had to leave for the airport before the ceremonies for Canada
Day, the changing of the guard, etc. began. We took off on an 8:15
departure.

To spend a week in Toronto or Ottowa or Calgary, etc. will cost us a
minimum of $450 per person for the airfare. Just too much compared to
Europe.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
Aut Pax Aut Bellum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jws@jws.ultranet.com                              10-Dec-99 12:19:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "John Saunders" <jws@jws.ultranet.com>

Christopher Smith <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote in message
news:82r3ur$b0e$1@news1.mpx.com.au...
...
> In any case, I don't believe a word of it.  I've *never* seen IE use
> the procedure you describe.

Christopher, I happened to notice he said this was on Novell. Perhaps this
is a Novell-specific problem?

Thanks,
John Saunders
jws@jws.ultranet.com <mailto:jws@jws.ultranet.com>
[ Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer ]



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca                      10-Dec-99 17:27:17
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E. Barry Bruyea)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:48:01 -0500, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> wrote:

>
>
>"E. Barry Bruyea" wrote:
>
>> On 10 Dec 1999 00:24:32 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
>> >> The only times MS ever lowered their prices are to "steal" market share
from
>> >> then-competition.
>>
>> And what did you call it when Corel introduced their first Wordperfect
>> Suite?  They priced it half of Ms Office and to boot, said you only
>> needed one licence per office.  Was that not predatory pricing?  And
>> did the big bad wolf, MS meet the pricing level?  Like hell they did.
>> They sat back and watched Corel lose their ass for the simple reason
>> Office was a better product.
>
>MS Office has been identified as another product in another market where MS
has
>monopoly power.   The DOJ choose to challenge MS on OSs instead of both
markets.
>When a company cuts prices in half and still cannot win marketshare you have
a
>serious problem in a market.

Gee, you think?  There was a question in my para, want to answer it?
>

EBB

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Sympatico (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: drsmithy@usa.net                                  11-Dec-99 03:33:12
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"John Saunders" <jws@jws.ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:82rcje$144$1@autumn.news.rcn.net...
> Christopher Smith <drsmithy@usa.net> wrote in message
> news:82r3ur$b0e$1@news1.mpx.com.au...
> ...
> > In any case, I don't believe a word of it.  I've *never* seen IE
> > use the procedure you describe.
>
> Christopher, I happened to notice he said this was on Novell.
> Perhaps this is a Novell-specific problem?

Shouldn't matter to what's being done.....

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOFCsxNIiOnIFzdsOEQK0JACgxi4VSz+9h7U9d+Q3IxKihUXP0+cAoN2d
yDiBsqjR9GurevuJ0tKLsHTq
=R93U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Optus Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 17:52:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> > They used the exact same mechanism, the only mechanism available to any
> > private enterprise company, that Microsoft used.  Microsoft managed to
> > manipulate prices, but Sunny Boy didn't....BY DOING THE SAME EXACT THING!
> 
> Sunny Boy didn't manipulate prices.  You lied.   Price manipulation is only
> possible with monopoly power

This is your claim.  I am debunking it.  Stand back.

> by a single company with monopoly power or by a trust.  Cutting  prices is
> not price manipulation.  Competition over price is not price manipulation.

Then Microsoft cannot manipulate prices EITHER.  Microsoft's only power is
in the price it charges for its software...a price which can be less than or
equal to but never greater than the price consumers are willing to pay.

> > Companies cut prices all the time.  The prices didn't need to be "high" to
> > start with.  You aren't understanding how competition works...which makes
it
> > all the more reprehensible that you try to speak of "allowing for
> > competition" by the government cracking down on evil profitable companies.
> 
> Companies cut prices all the time?  No.

Yes.

>                                              Companies raise prices more
than
> cut them unless Canada has deflation.

You're speaking on an inflationary force, which forces a company to keep the
product's dollar figure increasing alongside.  The margin, however, can be
greatly reduced, as a company lowers the price (in a real sense) to attract
customers.

> But you were telling me about cutting prices by 50% !!!

Or 30%.  Or 20%.  Or 10%.  Or 5%.  Or 1%.  Cutting prices is cutting prices.

>                                                 Speak to your example.   You
> see 50% price cuts all the time ?!?   No way.

Not until some new upstart little guy barged in with a new and cheaper way
of doing things, that forced all the old dogs in the pound to sit up and
take notice that somebody knew how to kick their ass.

>                                          You see price competition, not
price
> manipulation.  You see changes measured in pennies, not dollars.

So its "manipulation" if we the consumer are getting too good of a deal?


-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: glend@nospam.direct.ca                            10-Dec-99 10:08:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Glenn Davies <glend@nospam.direct.ca>

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:34:30 GMT, siberREMOVETHIS@sympatico.ca (E.
Barry Bruyea) wrote:

>On 10 Dec 1999 00:24:32 GMT, larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg) wrote:
>
>>As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
>>> Lars P Ormberg wrote:
>>
>>> >If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy
breakfast
>>> >cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available
at
>>> >fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's
illegal
>>> >for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.
>>> 
>>> If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes) and
near
>>> 90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their
control of
>>> prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly makes 
for
>>> a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
>>
>>But all they CAN control is their own price.  They can keep the price of
>>their cereal constant all they want, but if those other 5% of the market
>>boys drop their cost in half and Sunny Boy is suddenly twice that of any
>>other cereal, they kiss their 95% goodbye.  They are then "forced" to reduce
>>their own prices to compensate...in this case, 5% of the market can, under
>>your definition, "manipulate the price of the breakfast arena".  This makes
>>these 5% of the market a monopoly that needs to be shut down by the
>>government!  All because you don't know what control really is.
>>
>>> >>MS certainly has a control that makes possible the manipulation of
prices.
>>> >>If you were interested in facts instead of void definition games, you'd 
>>> >>know that they used exactly that to force OEMs to only install Windows
>>> >Microsoft can ask for any price they want for their property...that's how 
a
>>> >capitalist system works.  If an OEM doesn't do what MS wants, MS doesn't
>>> >have to sell them Windows at a price desirable to an OEM.  And the OEM
>>> >DOESN'T HAVE TO BUY.
>>> 
>>> As OEMs have little real choice
>>
>>They have all the real choice that they choose to have.  If one of the
>>choices is very attractive, why criticize their making of that choice?  Why
>>criticize Microsoft for making its choice so attractive?
>>
>>>                               because of the mono..."dominant position" of
>>> MS, they certainly cannot do whatever they want. That's the law.
>>
>>It's also immoral.  If you want to defend immoral laws, then know your role
>>and shut your mouth.
>>
>>> Regardless of whether or not you think they can or should be free the ask
any
>>> price they want, their control of the market certainly allows them to
>>> manipulate prices of all related software and their own
>>
>>Microsoft doesn't set the price that Corel sells Suite packages for.  Corel
>>does that.  Of course, Corel will hardly set a price higher than their
>>popular competition.  Of course, Microsoft will hardly let a competitor be
>>cheaper than it, so MS sets its prices lower too.  What does this equal?  A
>>battle for the money of the consumer, where prices drop and product quality
>>soars, all because the companies existed in a free market and competed.
>>
>>
>>> >>certainly have seen for yourself -before others pointed it out- that the 

>>> >>price of Windows etc. has stayed the same and even gone *up* while PC 
>>> >>hardware prices have only plummeted.
>>>
>>> >Big deal.  If they had dropped, you'd use that as evidence of a monopoly.
>>> 
>>> Yeah right. A monopoly that lowers prices... What planet are you from?
>>
>>Standard Oil, one of your supposed monopolies, dropped prices.
>>
>>> The only times MS ever lowered their prices are to "steal" market share
from
>>> then-competition.
>
>And what did you call it when Corel introduced their first Wordperfect
>Suite?  They priced it half of Ms Office and to boot, said you only
>needed one licence per office.  Was that not predatory pricing?  And
>did the big bad wolf, MS meet the pricing level?  Like hell they did.
>They sat back and watched Corel lose their ass for the simple reason
>Office was a better product.
>

I've bought licenses of Wordperfect suite for clients, pre and post
Corel ownership, and can't ever remember when buying one allowed you
to install it on unlimited machines within an organization. Any
details?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Internet Direct - http://www.mydirect.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 17:57:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Wolf Kirchmeir write:
> On 10 Dec 1999 00:10:14 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> =>They did no such thing.  You are not harmed by being offered products you
do
> =>not want.
> 
> Sure I am. If the only way to get X is to take Y as well, then either I do
> without X, or I pay for Y, too. In the first instance, I cannot get what I
> want -- that is the harm of deprivation.

By you're nonsensical definition of harm, you are harmed by the makers of
LearJets for the high price.  You want something, but the company isn't just
letting you have it.

You want to take away the rights of the people who would sell you things.
They have the right to use their property as they see fit.  If your
neighbour wants to sell his car, and decides he's going to charge a million
dollars when you wouldn't pay more than ten thousand, you cannot force him
to sell it to you, no matter how much you want it.

>                                        In the second, I have to pay more
> than X is worth

If you bought X, then the price was exactly what X was "worth".  You
apparently don't understand how prices are set in a free economy.

>                      because Y is part of the package -- that is the harm of
> wasted money, which I'd rather spend on something else.

Then save your money.  A company can mark up the price of something for ANY
REASON THEY CHOOSE.  It is their right.  It is their property.

> If you think that does you no harm, I'd love to do business with you!

You wouldn't.  Because if you decided to "do business" with me under your
mistaken beliefs, and decide to "get me back" by "harming me with your
offer", I would REFUSE THE OFFER.  And why?  Because any purchase is a
voluntary transaction.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             10-Dec-99 17:51:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82pn0d$43$4@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Your quotation is inaccurate.  I'm correcting your misinformation.

There is no "misinformation" on my part to correct. You are just being
arrogant.  You should work on correcting your own misinformation. You
have said "poeple who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"
yourself.

> Incorrect, Curtis.  You did break "standard up" over two pieces when
> you tried to change the meaning of what you originally wrote

Classic Tholen: Insisting that his misinterpretation is the only
possible correct interpretation.

-- snip --

> You didn't originally write them in two separate phrases, Curtis.

Irrelevant.  One never writes "separate phrases" when writing a
sentence.  One writes a sentence when writing a sentence.

Even if there were commas, that would still not qualify as writing
"separate phrases."

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 18:07:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> > > Obviously you North Americans have managed to build a veritable
> > > paradise-on-earth.  Here in the backward old UK, AFAIK a trader
> > > can refuse to sell to a person, at whim.
> > 
> > It's called property rights.
> > 
> > Your "paradise-on-earth" is only from the point of view of the person
> > getting the product.  The person with the product isn't in paradise if his
> > property can be taken when he doesn't want it to be.
> 
> Hey, I can make that same nutty argument about my property rights. I
> think it can be fun.  Let me try.....

Let's see if you, too, can show freedom being limited only by causing harm
(not, of course, for the 'harm' of being sold something) by initiating force
or
fraud.

> I just bought a baseball bat.  I have the right to swing my baseball bat
> anywhere I want

You are not allowed to destroy other people's property with your property.

>                    so if your pumpkin head is in its way tough

My person is my property.  Now you can ask if you can hit me in the head
with a baseball bat, and I can say yes...in which case, you CAN hit me
because we've had a voluntary agreement.  Of course, you may want to read
carefully the terms of the agreement before you sign it.  Because if I'm
taking the risk of head trauma, clearly I've got something big to gain from
the agreement.

> I have the right to own and drive my car to Canada and to own and carry
> my gun

Yes, you do have that right, even though the Canadian government
(government...the usurper of freedom...remember that) has taken it away.
You are morally justified, though you'll get thrown in jail for it (the
same as Microsoft will be punished by the state for doing morally justified
but illegal actions).

> I have rights and there is no way in hell they can take my car and gun
> at the border.  I have a right to own that gun and what the hell does
> taking my car have to do with a gun any how? Huh Lars?  What the
> hell!?!  I want my gun in Canada and I have ever right to drive to
> Canada and carry my personal property, my gun.  Yes sir!  
> 
> I know so much about property rights - just like you.

You apparently are a little fuzzy about them, Weibo.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             10-Dec-99 17:17:27
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82q97r$cbd$2@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> The fact that you've now started responding to the same article
> multiple times, repeating your "mindlessly inane" pontifications,
> wasting bandwidth in the process,

Dave, this whole thread has beem a waste of bandwidth, thanks to your
stubborn refusal to admit error.

> coupled with your "cowardly dodging" of the issues with your
> "mindlessly inane" questions,

Obviously, Dave cannot stand the taste of his own bitter medicine.

Damned hypocrite.

> demonstrates that you are no longer interested in a serious
> discussion of the issues.

Dave, you **never** were "interested in a serious discussion of the
issues." You are only interested in dodging your errors.

Claim otherwise and you are a liar as well as a hypocrite.

> It's now time to resume the Bass digest.

Which is another admission of defeat on Dave's part.


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             10-Dec-99 18:05:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82pnks$43$5@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> Illogical, Curtis.  You obviously don't understand the process of
> file transfer.  At the beginning there are zero bytes.  Are you
> claiming that at that point in the transfer, all bytes have been
> removed, and that as the transfer progresses, fewer bytes get removed?

I am saying that a copy of a file that is missing bytes, regardless of
how or why, is a corrupt file.

Your haggling over this is just another attempt to avoid your errors.

> > And "corrupt" is an accurate term, whether you like it or not.
>
> Incorrect, Curtis, given that I have no evidence for any alteration of
> the bytes.

"Alteration of the bytes" is not a prerequisite.  Missing bytes is
sufficient.

-- snip --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 18:17:10
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Wolf Kirchmeir write:
> On 8 Dec 1999 18:30:43 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> =>It means a "monopoly" (which can apply to any business you choose) must
> =>suddenly care more about others than itself.  Mandatory altruism, where a
> =>company must suddenly give its competitors an advantage at every turn.
> =>
> =>By that standard, if a hockey team is at the top of its standings, it must
> =>regularly lose to teams in the divison to keep it "fair".
> 
> It has nothing to do with altruism, or with giving competitors an advantage.
> 
> THE PURPOSE OF A BUSINESS IS TO SATISFY THE CUSTOMERS.

No, the purpose of a business is to promote its own interests.

Now true, they will have to receive money from customers to do this.  But
pleasing customers isn't something they necessarily have to do (and no law
should force them).  In fact, many a company shouldn't be out in a blanket
mission to satisfy consumers (you said customers, but that really isn't what
you mean).  Microsoft cannot and should not be out trying to satisfy OS/2
cheerleaders.  They should work on satisfying those who bought their product
(and will do so again), and attract those who aren't using their product.
But if they run into a brick wall of irrationality about it, they'd be
insane to pursue it.

> That's all. That's its only justification for existence. (If you want to say
> it's to make a profit, you are confusing incentive and purpose.

The purpose is to make a profit, which is the incentive to get customers.
If a business could make a profit without getting customers, they'd probably
sign on.  But they wouldn't sign on to get customers with no profit.

> Therefore, a business does not have the right to limit, constrain, or force
> customers' choices.

A business has the right use their property.  I happen to be in possession
of the entire world collection of original prints from an artist I know (11
works).  I have the right to limit the choice of a customer in selecting
works from this artist.  I can "force" them to pay a huge sum for obtaining
one such work.  And do you know what?  I am morally justified in doing so,
for those works belong to me, and I get to decide what is done with them.

If you don't want to pay my price for art, buy it somewhere else.

> If you disagree with this proposition, you are subscribing to the business
> ethic of organised crime.

When was the last time Microsoft sent boys to a programmers house to tell
him to either stop programming, cut MS in for a share of the profits, or
suffer the pain of having three fingerrs removed?

Motorcycle gangs do this to competing drug houses.  Microsoft does no such
thing.  They make and sell products.  To compare them is lunacy to the
untold degree.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com                             10-Dec-99 17:28:02
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 14:58:23
Subj: Re: Navigator 4.7 is available!! OS/2 is behind again!!

From: cbass2112@my-deja.com

In article <82q94u$cbd$1@news.hawaii.edu>,
  tholenAntiSpam@hawaii.edu wrote:

-- snip --

> > That you are stupid/inept enough to ask what a "standard up" is is
> > your problem.
>
> Typical invective.  That you wrote "standard up" is is [sic] your
> problem.  How ironic.

In my sentence, two consecutive "is"s is correct. In Dave's sentence, it
is an error.

> > The whole file is "incorrect" because it's missing bytes.
>
> Incorrect, Curtis.  Missing bytes don't make the rest of them
> incorrect.

Which isn't what I said. The file as a whole *is* incorrect, which is
what I've been saying. That it doesn't successfully extract the archive
proves that it's incorrect.

> A certain television program featured a book titled "The
> Rooster Crowed at Midnight", but it was missing the last page.  Did
> that somehow make the rest of the book "incorrect"?

Nope, but it does mean that the *BOOK* is corrupt.

>  Illogical and "inept".

You certainly are, Dave.

-- snip --

> > Typical inappropriate Tholen Analogy.
>
> Typical Bass pontification.  Notice how you didn't even attempt to
> explain why the analogy is allegedly inappropriate.

I don't waste my time "explaining" that which is self-evident.

-- snip --

>    o  InfoZip fails to unzip my copy of the javainuf.exe file
>    o  I note this failure in this newsgroup
>    o  someone else reports that InfoZip was able to unzip the
>       javainuf.exe file
>    o  you conclude that I am "inept" as a result
>    o  I consider other possibilities and test them
>    o  I discover that Netscape does not reliably download the
>       javainuf.exe file (it took five downloads before two had
>       the same file size), even though it reliably downloaded
>       the other (all smaller) files in the JDK

This chronology is wrong.

-- [remainder of Dave's whining denials snipped] --


Curtis


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: larso@commodore.                                  10-Dec-99 19:08:22
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: larso@commodore. (Lars P Ormberg)

As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Bob Germer write:
>    me@my.place (me) said:
> 
> > Some Canadians do not understand US law, however most Americans do not 
> > understand Canadian law.  Insulting all Canadians is a true showing of
> > your qualities or lack there of.  I have met rude Americans and this
> > does not mean all Americans are rude.  I judge an individual on there
> > merits not by their country.
> 
> I never meant to insult anyone but the two assholes from Calgary, Britton
> and Lars.

I'm not _from_ Calgary!

How can you claim to send a "snail mail" to my University, when you don't
know where it is?  When you get your mail back Return to Sender, don't blame
me.

-- 
Lars P. Ormberg     ICQ#:8827066
mailto:larso@ualberta.ca
The University of Lars:   http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/

"The way you're bathed in light, reminds me of that night
God laid me down into your rose garden of trust and I was
swept away with nothin' left to say some helpless fool
yeah I was lost in a swoon of peace you're all I need to
find so when the time is right come to me sweetly, come
to me come to me..love will lead us, alright.  love will
lead us, she will lead us.  can you hear the dolphin's
cry?  see the road rise up to meet us its in the air we
breathe tonight love will lead us, she will lead us"
                            -Live, "The Dolphin's Cry"

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: PowerSurfr - High Speed Internet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: svetter@ameritech.net                             10-Dec-99 13:38:14
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Purchasing OS/2

From: Scott Vetter <svetter@ameritech.net>

    I've been using OS/2 since 2.1 and love the OS.  I'm now running
OS/2 V4 and wanted to buy a copy of OS/2 again for another machine.  In
contacting Indelible Blue they want something like $240 for the full
version, $235 just for an additional license and $180 for an upgrade.
Seems like IBM doesn't want to sell OS/2 anymore...  It also seems like
when I purcased my upgrade to V4 ist was something like $120.   IBM
bumping up prices or what?  That's not the way for IBM to promote people
switching to an upgraded version or even selling OS/2 for new
customers...

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Ameritech.Net www.ameritech.net  Complaints: abus
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      10-Dec-99 14:44:19
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jack Troughton <jack.troughton@nospam.videotron.ca> wrote:
: On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 04:59:24, Jason <malstrom@yolen.oit.umass.edu> 
: wrote:

: Again Jeff, you are living in a fantasy world  You have yet to produce 
: any evidence of your claims.  You have contructed this image of me which 
: is entirely fictional.  It is quite amusing that someone could lack so 
: little facts and argue so much.  It makes Tim Martin look like a logical 
: debater.  

: See! Timmy's not so bad! I wonder when he'll come back from his 
: accident...

Well he's been back at Warpcity for a long time.  Maybe he's decided to 
stay away from the newsgroups for a while.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             10-Dec-99 19:56:21
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: OS/2 stable and faster [was Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarka

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Lee Riemenschneider <lwriemen@wcic.cioe.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:17:02, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) wrote:
> > [SNIP] It's
> > just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.
> 
> You must not be doing something right, because my experience has shown
> OS/2 to be just as fast or faster than Win95. 

Can you give an example?

> When you start talking 
> about Win98 or NT 4(better comparison), then OS/2 has a staggering lead
> in speed.

In what subjects?

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: moschleg@erols.com                                10-Dec-99 14:38:28
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: "Mark O. Schlegel" <moschleg@erols.com>

Scott Vetter wrote:
> 
>     I've been using OS/2 since 2.1 and love the OS.  I'm now running
> OS/2 V4 and wanted to buy a copy of OS/2 again for another machine.  In
> contacting Indelible Blue they want something like $240 for the full
> version, $235 just for an additional license and $180 for an upgrade.
> Seems like IBM doesn't want to sell OS/2 anymore...  It also seems like
> when I purcased my upgrade to V4 ist was something like $120.   IBM
> bumping up prices or what?  That's not the way for IBM to promote people
> switching to an upgraded version or even selling OS/2 for new
> customers...

Doesn't the license allow you to use your existing copy on
both machines?  The key is that if you only use one machine
at a time (like a home machine and a work machine) then it's
ok to use the same copy.  If you are using both at one time
it's not (like a wife and husband sharing one copy of os/2
on two machines at one time).

Mark

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab, Lau
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cdelanoy@ualberta.ca                              10-Dec-99 19:52:25
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Chris J Delanoy <cdelanoy@ualberta.ca>

 "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> wrote:

> I wondered if anyone would provide a demonstration of the asininity
> of Rand's philosphy.

Then keep wondering, because neither you nor anybody else has or
can provide such a demonstration.

Although from your irrational statements here, the statement you've
made with respect to the completely invalidity of -your- mind is
quite plausible.

Chris J Delanoy


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cdelanoy@ualberta.ca                              10-Dec-99 20:05:20
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Chris J Delanoy <cdelanoy@ualberta.ca>

 Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

> Let us suppose for a minute there were no anti-trust laws and
> Michelin became the tire manufacturer who produced 95% of the
> world's tires. Michelin then went to GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota,
> Honda, Volkswagen, and Mercedes and said to them you must install
> our tires on every car you sell for $30 per tire. If you do not
> agree, then we will charge you $90 per tire.

You've defeated your supposed argument in your own statement.
If the company does not agree to Michelin's deal, then Michelin
can't charge them $90 per tire because THE COMPANY ISN'T BUYING
ANY MICHELIN TIRES!  Listen to your argument in it's essential
terms:  "Companies will gouge me with high prices when I don't
buy their products."  This is patently absurd and completely
contradictory.  If you aren't buying their products, then the
price you're not paying is ZERO!

> And let us further suppose that Michelin went to the major
> aftermarket retailers of accessories for your vehicle and said
> to them we will give you a discount on our accessories such as our
> custom inflation valves, blow out guards, sidewall cleaner, etc.
> if you only carry ours and not those of our competitors.

The only loser in this situation is Michelin.  Everybody else
benefits.

> Now also let us suppose that you wanted to buy a Jeep for a trek
> through the Sahara Desert and needed specialized low pressure tires
> which Michelin did not make. You would have two choices, pay $300
> for tires for which you had no possible use or buy a Range Rover for
> about $5,000 more than the comparable Jeep since Range Rover didn't
> have such an agreement.

But if Range Rover didn't have the agreement with Michelin, then they
aren't using Michelin tires at all.  Again you're trying to use
fantasies to justify your economic hocus-pocus nonsense here.

> Moreover, when you needed to install blow-out guards, you had to
> pay 3 times what Michelin guards cost.

But you just said that Michelin was giving a discount (ie - charging
below market price) on blow-out guards.  Meaning that the price
is lower and that you're better off by purchasing that product.

> I'll bet you would believe yourself to be harmed by the
> monopolistic practices of Michelin. I am willing to wager you would
> find Michelin to be an anti-competitive monopoly.

I'll take that wager.

All of your arguments are based on the premise that human beings
are irrational automotons incapable of thinking.  Although you
don't even know it, your arguments represent a full assault on
the validity of the human mind (and thus on humanity itself) -
and that is why, in addition to being laughably wrong, your
arguments are also morally reprehensible.

Chris J Delanoy


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Deja.com - Before you buy. (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Dec-99 20:45:25
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Judge Jackson Rules MacOS, Linux Not Commecially Viable!

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:08:22, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
wrote:

[snip]
> Virtually every trip I took into Dorval or Quebec City was made miserable
> in one way or another by the attitude of Francophones toward Anglophones.
> Other than the shopkeepers in the vast underground mall in Montreal, I
> find it a very difficult city to find things, get help, etc. It is even
> worse than in France which I have been heard to mutter we should have left
> the Germans keep.
> 
I hear you. Try to come to Brussels and speak Flemish. You'd think you
were right back in Montreal.

[snip] 
> Nova Scotia is so like Scotland, that I forget I am in Canada when I am
> there. They are the most gracious, open, helpful, honest people I have met
> anywhere. If anything, they are more friendly than the Scots themselves.
> The Francophones in Nova Scotia who do not speak English (very few) act
> like the Dutch or Flemish when confronted with an Anglophone who doesn't
> speak French.
> 
I don't know what the Dutch do, but we generally push large quantities
of beer into the direction of the stranger. It doesn't help, but after
a while it doesn't bother him anymore that nobody understands him.

Then again, most of us speak English, so an Anglophone who doesn't 
speak French isn't that much of a problem... <G>

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Dec-99 20:45:26
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:39:15, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
wrote:

> On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-2WTnhbRUH0Uh@localhost>, on 12/10/99 at 12:19 AM,
>    jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
> 
> > > There are also ways to stop IE trying to update itself, so both Boob and 
the
> > > Windows consultant are guilty here.
> > > 
> > I'm strange that way, but in my view the guy who got them the 
> > "operating system" in the first place looks like the only one with the
> > egg on his face. I consider Bob's move a nice pick-up and a sound win 
> > for OS/2 (don't forget: this is - also - COOA <G>).
> 
> Not to mention saving the client well over $30,000 over the MS proposal
> not considering the cost of downtime, employee training time, loss of
> productivity, etc.
> 
I don't even _dare_ mentioning that again. Their feelings are so 
easily hurt <G>.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net                            10-Dec-99 20:45:28
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:00
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:52:23, Bob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> 
wrote:

> On <L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-dzI2bDuZwY1c@localhost>, on 12/09/99 at 10:31 PM,
>    jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens) said:
> 
> > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:13:06, jglatt@spamgone-borg.com (Jeff Glatt) 
> > wrote:
> 
> 
> > 1. You talk about Bob as if he somehow has to defend his actions,  prove
> > to you that he is telling the truth. Why would he have to do  that? He
> > gave us a case where a client chose OS/2 over Windows, for  specific
> > reasons. Apparently, you cannot live with the fact that you  can't find
> > anything to attack his actions on merits, so you have  chosen to accuse
> > Bob of being a liar.
> 
> He is a typical Lemming. Even M$ stopping paying him hasn't changed his
> tune.
> 
The MVP program got reinstated, I heard.
As I stated elsewhere, I don't think Jeff is on MS's paylist. I heard 
people are actually giving him up as their reason for *leaving* 
Windows.

> > Indeed, if one looks at all the facts presented, Bob's actions are not
> > only profitable to him, but will also present to his client an optimal
> > solution.
> 
> One which saved the firm thousands and thousands of dollars.
> 
> 
> > 3. I distinctly haven't written that Bob made a lot of sense when he 
> > told *two* Canadians that their opinion was worthless (I would have 
> > thought you would relate better to Bob. After all, he *is* trying to 
> > use your kind of vocabulary). I said that his proposal to his client 
> > made a lot of sense, because I know a couple of Belgian notary firms 
> > and Bob's description of his client was eerily familiar. Please flame 
> > me for the right reasons.
> 
> You take the statement out of context, not surprising considering you
> apparently use English as a second language coming from Belgium. You
> handle it much better than most people born and raised and educated(?)
> here, BTW.
> 
I was trying to stay true to the meaning of Jeff's words (in itself an
heroic feat, even if I say so myself). He wrote:

JG> But since he's an OS/2-loving kook, you'll gladly run interference
for
JG> him and tell us how he "makes quite a lot of sense" when he's 
telling
JG> Canadians that their opinions are worthless. Typical.

The taking out of context was done by Jeff himself, in his usual 
brilliant yet sadly misguided way.

[snipped the rest, but read it, rest assured]
> 
> Some list for a racist, no?
> 
I'm not in the habit of accusing people of racism because of two 
remarks. We're all gung-ho on the subject in these PC-times anyway, so
practically anything anyone says could be interpreted as a racist 
remark.

But even if you were the crimsomest redneck on the planet, it would 
have made no difference for the facts of the case.

Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."

the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: wontwork@dont.even.try                            10-Dec-99 21:44:11
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:01
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Loomis Farkle <wontwork@dont.even.try>

In article <82pque$ide$1@weber.a2000.nl> Michiel Denie,
florin@anguish.org writes:
>You started, so I can finish it.. this proves my
>long time suspicion. There's nothing wrong with the
>Mac by itself. It's just that it's a computer for
>girls! Using a Mac is like carrying a handbag. It's
>really quite practical, but a real man wouldn't be
>caught dead with one.
>
>Michiel
>
>P.S. :)
>
A real man wouldn't be named "Michelle" and he'd know how to spell it,
too.

P.S. See Michiel's P.S.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Fred's Fill Dirt & Croissants (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               10-Dec-99 18:10:16
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:01
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> But even if you were the crimsomest redneck on the planet, it would
> have made no difference for the facts of the case.

Unless he was a Windows advocate, right Karel?

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      10-Dec-99 15:16:17
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:01
Subj: (1/2) Re: What the heck's going on?

From: Jason <malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu>

Jeff Glatt <jglatt@spamgone-borg.com> wrote:
:>Jason
:>How can I address your points if you fail to provide any evidence that 
:>I'm a hypocrite.

: How can you address points when you've failed to understand nor
: acknowledge the evidence of your hypocrisy that was already presented?

Jeff Please use logic.  You have accused me of a lot of stuff without 
ever giving evidence.

:>You see you can just make an arguement over and over 
:>without actually showing some real facts.

: I see that you are attempting to make the argument over and over that
: you can ignore facts with impunity. You can't.

: I've already shown your hypocrisy.

No you haven't

:>:>:>Jason
:>:>:>The discussion of other operating 
:>:>:>systems is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

:>:>:Jeff Glatt
:>:>: The discussion of OS/2 Advocacy is a vital part of looking at OS/2.

:>:>When have you ever discuss this.

:>: Um, it was my post which "inspired" your foray into your own misguided
:>: hypocrisy -- the one that began with the words "OS/2 Advocacy".

:>Um, Aaron Dimsdale repsonded to that, not me.

: To quote your fellow OS/2 lunatic: "Reading comprehension problems,
: Jason?"

: I never said that you responded to that post, and in fact, whether you
: did is not even the focus of your own question. You simply asked when
: have I ever discussed OS/2 Advocacy, and I noted that it was in that
: very post I mention above -- a post which also inspired your foray
: into your own misguided hypocrisy -- a post which expressed opinions
: that you didn't happen to like and therefore which inspired you to
: engage in subsequent, hypocritical statements which I've also shown to
: be hypocritical.

No I ignored the post which you alledged stated my "foray".  Your quess 
is wrong on that account.

:>:>:>By comparing other operating 
:>:>:>systems to OS/2 we know why is OS/2 is great, and what need to improve 
:>:>:>it.

:>:>: By studying the failures of OS/2 Advocacy, and noting its
:>:>: similiarities to Amiga Advocacy, we know why OS/2 failed in the
:>:>: marketplace, and why IBM is phasing it out.

:>:>So, you don't study this.

:>: Nonsense. My post detailed some ways in which OS/2 Advocacy has
:>: failed, and noted how that is similiar to what happened with the
:>: Amiga.

:>You have yet to produce 
:>any evidence of your claims.

: On the contrary, I've even cited, here, specific phrases and words
: from my post which contradict your erroneous claims above. I've also
: shown how, in your misguided effort to condone censorship of opinions
: that you don't happen to like, you've become a hypocrite who questions
: whether others' posts are on-topic according to the charter when he
: himself is posting off-topic and admits to not even following the
: charter and regards it as "foolish" to do so.

: You're a hypocrite, and a foolish one at that.

No you have produced no evidence what so ever.  If you believe you have 
then you are simply dellusional, and there is nothing I can do about that.

:>You have contructed this image of me which is entirely fictional.

: ...based upon your own postings to this newsgroup, If you're
: fictional, that would be likely because you're a nobody who has
: nothing to offer, and that's why you're in this newsgroup attempting
: to condone censorship of opinions that you just don't happen to like,
: and doing so in a way that underscores your own hypocrisy and lack of
: intelligence, in violation of, and total disregard for, the charter.

READ JEFF, READ.  Your image of me is fictional, not me.  It is a fairly 
simple sentence that I have written.  You shouldn't be having so much 
trouble reading it.

:>It makes Tim Martin look like a logical debater.

: Another one of your OS/2 buddies. Not surprisingly, he also likes to
: censor opinions that he doesn't like in the name of the same supposed
: goal of "removing people who aren't favorable to OS/2", even if that
: also goes against the newsgroup charter (which not coincidentally, he
: also violates routinely). Yes, you and he do have a lot in common.

Wrong, Tim Martin is not my buddy.  We are enimies.  But he left the 
newsgroups before I could tell him that I have access to warpcity to 
really piss him off.  He doesn't think it would be possible.

:>Again you posts have nothing to do about contructive conversation

: Your posts about Microsoft trial verdicts and other such off-topic
: nonsense have nothing to do with constructive conversation.
: Furthermore, your posts about the newsgroup charter are misguided and
: hypocritical, as well as not being constructive conversation.

Again, baseless claims by someone who doesn't deserve any respect in this 
newsgroup.

: But then, you're a none-too-bright hypocrite who admits to not
: following the newsgroup charter.

Yes, following the newsgroup charter to the letter is a very foolish 
practice in my opinion.  I wouldn't talk about not being to bright Jeff 
with all the reading problems you have demonstrated lately.

:>Also, for the record, your original post that started this 
:>foray was a comment about the charter

: Which was in response to one of your misguided OS/2 fanatic buddies
: who erroneously misinterpreted the newsgroup charter, much like you
: do.. hypocritically.

Jeff, calling me a hypcorite over and over again doesn't amke it any more 
true, it just makes you look more and more stupid.

:>:>: OS/2 Advocacy is very much a part of OS/2, it's success and (mostly)
:>:>: failure.

:>:>But this has nothing to do with you are your discussion

:>: Nonsense. That was the very subject of my post, and that which the
:>: entire contents of the post detailed.

:>I was taking about the 
:>general content of your posts and not just the current post.

: It's too bad if you don't like the fact that I was able to cite
: evidence from my own posts which contradicts your false, foolish
: claims. You shouldn't have stupidly made such claims if you didn't
: want me to point out how wrong you are.

Jeff, what are you babbling about?  You have not cited any evidence for 
the claims you are making.  

:>You are still wrong

: You are still wrong about me being wrong, and the evidence is above
: even though you ineptly attempt to deny its existence over and over.

You have never shown any evidence.  What is the evidence that I'm a 
hypcrite?  You can't show me any because there is none.

:>even though you try to edit my posts to look more like your 
:>story.

: I have replied to specific inaccuracies and hypocrisy in your posts,
: and presented evidence that contradicts your false claims, and
: underscores your foolish hypocrisy. That you look bad because of this
: is not my fault.

No you haven't.  

:>It would be nice if you actually replied to my comments and 
:>didn't edit my comments

: It would be nice if you stopped ignoring evidence, and abandoned your
: foolish, hypocritical, misguided mission to promote censorship of
: opinions that you just don't like to hear. That's against the charter
: of the group. Perhaps you shouldn't be here.

how can I ignore evidence that you never presented Jeff?  All you do is 
edit my previous post and refer to evidence that never existed.

:>You might us well just type anything up you want and reply to that

: Given that you've been ignoring presented evidence over and over while
: insisting that it doesn't exist, you appear to be doing exactly what
: you accuse me of doing.

Jeff, I have never edited anything you've said.  You on the other hand 
will edit my post.  You are worthless.

:>:>: Talking about OS/2 Advocacy is very on topic since it is the story of
:>:>: OS/2, much moreso than MS who has had nothing to do with OS/2 for many
:>:>: years (whereas presumably OS/2 Advocates are still advocating OS/2).

:>:>Again, this has nothing to do with your posts.
:>
:>: Again, you're wrong, and illiterate. The very subject of my post was
:>: contained in the first two words of that post, and yet, you were too
:>: illiterate to even grasp that.

:>Are you talking about the "OS/2 Advocacy" post again?

: Of course. That is one which contradicts your false, foolish claim
: above. The fact that you even know exactly which post it is based upon
: the mere phrase "OS/2 Advocacy" underscores just how dishonest is your
: depiction that the subject of OS/2 Advocacy is not discussed in my
: posts.

: You're now a deliberately dishonest hypocrite.

You are outright lying again Jeff.  Why do you feel the need to 
constantly lie to this newsgroup?

:>Aaron Dimsdale 
:>repsonded to that, not me.

: That's irrelevant to your false, foolish claim above.

It's relavent proof that you are living in a fantasy world and have no 
clue what's going on.

:>The only thing I'm uncertain of is if you are 
:>being devious or are you just plain insane?

: I, on the other hand, am quite certain that you're a deliberately
: dishonest hypocrite, as I've shown above.

You have not shown this, you are a liar.

:>:>:>: In fact, the vast majority of your own posts to this newsgroup are
:>:>:>: off-topic according to the charter

:>:>:>Is responding to FUD and lies not part of this group?

:>:>: It's not specifically mentioned in the newsgroup charter. Obviously,
:>:>: as a hypocrite, you want to randomly pick and choose what you'll
:>:>: "interpret" as supposedly "allowable" or "not allowable" in this
:>:>: newsgroup -- and are doing so based upon some rather poor criteria, I
:>:>: should add.

:>:>How am I a hypocrite Jeff?

:>: I've just noted above that "responding to FUD and lies" is no more
:>: mentioned literally in the newsgroup charter than anything else that
:>: you claim is literally not mentioned in the newsgroup charter and
:>: therefore allegedly "off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts
:>: which contain such "off-topic" content. Are your off-topic posts about
:>: Microsoft meant strictly to "incite people"? Perhaps you should take
:>: your own advice, and not be in this newsgroup then.

:>When have I told people to hold true to the charter?

: That's irrelevant to the fact that I've just noted above that
: "responding to FUD and lies" is no more mentioned literally in the
: newsgroup charter than anything else that you claim is literally not
: mentioned in the newsgroup charter and therefore allegedly
: "off-topic". And yet, you admit to writing posts which contain such
: "off-topic" content. Perhaps you should take your own advice, and not
: be in this newsgroup then.

I have not told people not to be in this newsgroup because they are off 
charter.  I have repeatedly told you this Jeff.  I don't believe people 
should follow the charter.

:>Insulting Microsoft on this newsgroup does not incite people.

: Nonsense. If they weren't incited, there wouldn't be so many responses
: to these threads, which comprise the bulk of the content to this
: newsgroup, thanks to off-topic posts from hypocrites like you, who
: really shouldn't be here because you don't understand, respect, nor
: follow the newsgroup charter.

Where have my insults to Microsoft resulting in long threads?  

:>Insulting the people in this newsgroup, does incite them. I
:>would hope you could see the difference.

: Some people do find "insulting Microsoft" to be insulting. I would
: hope that you could see this, but being that you're obviously a
: dishonest, hypocritical, OS/2 Fanatic, who does not understand nor
: even follow the newsgroup charter and who should therefore not be
: here, you don't see anything beyond your one tiny world.

Maybe if people find insults to Microsoft insulting, they should not be 
in the OS/2 newsgroup, hmm?

:>What exactly is an "off-topic fantasy world"? Do you even know, or are 
:>you just really reaching here?

: You're the one who used the phrase "fantasy world". If you don't know
: what it means, then don't use it.

Yes, but you used the phrase, "off-topic fantasy world"  So you should 
know what it means.

:>: The discussion is about the hypocrisy and dumb statements
:>: you've made in your misguided, hypocritical, foolishly incorrect
:>: attempt to try to promote censorship of opinions that you just don't
:>: like.

:>No, if you were actually talking about this, you would have produced 
:>evidence of your statement and contructed a valid arguement with this 
:>evidence.

: In fact, I have indeed presented evidence of your dishonesty and
: hypocrisy. The fact that you continue to ignore the evidence and
: insist that it doesn't exist isn't going to make that evidence go
: away.

No Jeff, you are lying when you said you have presented evidence about this.

:>: Fortunately, smarter people than you are aware of what a hypocrite you
:>: are, and are capable of exposing your nonsense for what it is.

:>Well, maybe you should ask them to do just this

: I don't need to. I've been able to present the evidence of your
: dishonesty and hypocrisy myself.

No Jeff, you are lying.

:>because it is fairly 
:>obvious that you can't.

: The "obvious" thing is that you continue to ignore the evidence while
: insisting that it doesn't exist.

No Jeff, you have not producted any evidence of your claims.

:>People who expect other to follow the 
:>charter exactly are fools in my opinion.

: Then you yourself are a fool, by your own admission, for even
: "discussing the charter" and questioning others how their posts are
: relevant to an exact, Tholen-like literal interpretation of the
: charter.

No Jeff, you are lying.  I have never done this.

:>:>but I haven't told anyone to follow it.
:>:>If I did, that would be quite odd, for I certainly 
:>:>don't believe in following charters.

:>: Then why jump into a discussion about the charter at all? Simply
:>: because you're a foolish hypocrite?

:>Because we were discussing what the intent of the newsgroup was.

: Obviously, your "intent of the newsgroup" is to attempt to censor
: opinions that you don't happen to like, in posts that conform to the
: newsgroup charter, so that you can hypocritically and deliberately
: ignore the charter to make off-topic posts to incite people.

No Jeff, you are lying.

: Indeed, you *are* a foolish hypocrite, and the fact that you're
: attempting to "discuss the intent of a newsgroup" when you don't even
: believe in charters -- the actual assigned intent of a newsgroup --
: underscores just what a fool you are.

In usenet law, the charter does not define what on or off topic for the 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: malstrom@wilde.oit.umass.edu                      10-Dec-99 15:16:17
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:01
Subj: (2/2) Re: What the heck's going on?

rest of time.  This is decided by the people using the newsgroup.

:>I'm sorry you found that so offensive.

: I'm glad that you're sorry for offending people with your foolishness.
: You *should* be sorry.

Jeff, that's no way I said I was sorry again.  You are using editing to 
lie again.

:>Please Jeff, try and show how I'm a hypocrite.  All you have done is show 
:>your own hypocracy, while not touching me at all.

: Yet more of your denial of facts. Typical.

How can a deny facts that don't exist?

:>:>Have I commented on people who I 
:>:>feel are a negative force on this newsgroup? yes.
:>
:>: I feel that your attempt to promote the censorship of opinions that
:>: you don't like is a negative force on this newsgroup. In fact, the
:>: charter expresses condones the inclusion of such opinions, but you're
:>: not smart enough to understand it. You misinterpret it to defend your
:>: own hypocrisy in posting off-topic messages that really have nothing
:>: to do with OS/2, and likely are posted simply to "incite people".

:>No, the charter is Supporting and Flaming OS/2, not flaming OS/2 
:>advocates

: The charter is "Supporting and Flaming OS/2", not Microsoft trial
: verdicts, "responding to FUD and lies", nor any of the other "intents"
: that a foolish hypocrite (who supposedly doesn't even follow charters)
: claims are allowable under his Tholen-like literal interpretation of
: the newsgroup charter. The fact that you continue to cite this literal
: interpretation over and over to promote censorship of on-topic posts
: which you don't happen to like, but balk when such an "exact"
: application of the charter's language is applied to your own posts,
: and insist that it is foolish to follow a charter, underscores what a
: none-too-bright hypocrite you are.

You just contradicted yourself in your own statement.  You're pretty 
said.  You are also lying once again.

:>I personally feel 
:>the newsgroup would be better if you weren't here.

: I personally feel that the newsgroup would be better if deliberately
: dishonest, foolish hypocrites like yourself weren't here.

That statement makes very little sense, since I'm not a hypcrite.

:>But it would be nice if your posts had something to 
:>do with facts instead of fantasies.

: It would be nice if you stopped ignoring evidence, and abandoned your
: foolish, hypocritical, misguided mission to promote censorship of
: opinions that you just don't like to hear. That's against the charter
: of the group. Perhaps you shouldn't be here.

You are lying again Jeff.  You have not produced the evidence.

:>I'm talking about the charter.

: And yet you claim not to even believe in them, nor even follow them.
: What a foolish hypocrite you are!

How does that make me a foolish hypocrite Jeff, please use evidence this 
time.

:>I'm also talking about how insult the 
:>people in this newsgroup by using the "flaming" part of the charter as 
:>protection.

: It is not an "insult" to note the failures of OS/2 Advocacy to help
: OS/2, and the dire consequences that this has had for OS/2. Indeed, it
: *is* within the charter. The fact that you don't like such opinions is
: irrelevant. Who cares what you think? The charter says otherwise, and
: contrary to your own deluded self-importance, your opinion doesn't
: supercede that charter.

But you do is not not failures, you contantly rub it in the face of 
people, in a better then you attitude.  You have not done this for 
contructive conversation.

:>Some people feel they can flame everything and everyone

: ... like Microsoft and anything associated with the company. These
: would be foolish hypocrites like yourself.

You just lumped yourself in with me.

:>just 
:>because the charter says you can flame OS/2.  It's simply not true and 
:>you shouldn't use the charter to justify your actions.

: You shouldn't presume that your irrelevant, personal opinion
: supercedes the charter. It doesn't. The sooner you learn this, the
: better off you'll be.

Again, you are editing my posts for content.  You are a liar Jeff.

:>:>:>What is not in spirit is getting your jollies by 
:>:>:>inciting facts with the members of this newsgroup.
:>
:>:>: So now "inciting facts" is supposedly against the newsgroup charter?
:>:>: Apparently, you've been responding to "FUD and lies" with "non-facts"
:>:>: in order to remain "on-topic". I'm not surprised. That's what I've
:>:>: come to expect from OS/2 "advocates" like you.
:>
:>:>I ment inciting flames.
:>
:>: You probably "ment" to say a lot of things differently now that I've
:>: been able to point out your own hypocrisy and illogical.

:>: Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that you're a
:>: none-too-bright hypocrite.

:>And here we see Jeff being a class act he is.

: And in this post, we see Jason being a deliberately dishonest
: hypocrite.

And in this post we see Jeff being a liar.

:>:>:>But, most threads 
:>:>:>that I do begin are on topic with this newsgroup, because my primary 
:>:>:>purpose is to talk about OS/2.
:>
:>:>: So you erroneously presume. Your hypocrisy shows otherwise.

:>:>Again you are not writing about facts.

:>: It's a fact that your posts have been predominantly off-topic, for
:>: example, all of the messages you've been posting about the newsgroup
:>: charter. Are you doing this merely to "incite people"? If so, you
:>: should stop being a hypocrite, take your own advice, and leave this
:>: newsgroup

:>Again where am I being a hypcrite, besides your fantasy world?

: Perhaps if you actually stopped ignoring evidence and come out of your
: assumptions about a fantasy world, you'd see what an idiot you appear
: to be by writing long messages about what should be "the intent of the
: newsgroup" when you claim that "people who follow charters are fools".

Jeff, once again you are lying.  I haven't ignored evidence.  The intent 
of the newsgroup doesn't have to do with following the chater to the letter. 

:>I have a great deal of respect the for people 
:>who use OS/2.   

: OS/2 Fanatics like yourself, yes. But not for others obviously. You
: don't even respect other users of the internet enough to follow
: newgroup charters. You literally call them "fools" when they do.
: You're an ass.

No, I have not done this Jeff, you are either mistaken or lying once 
again.  

:>Your replies fail to impress me.

: On the other hand, your replies impress me as being deliberately
: dishonest, hypocritical, and foolish. That's exactly what I've shown
: to be the case although you continue to pretend that the evidence
: doesn't exist.

Stop lying Jeff.

-Jason

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: sbritton@cadvision.com                            10-Dec-99 14:19:16
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 20:37:01
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Steven C. Britton" <sbritton@cadvision.com>

Bob Germer wrote:
>
> Huh? We have several industrial clients who have highly automated
> factories. I am throughly familiar with the production equipment. Other
> than a few manual switched, Allen Bradley is no where to be found.

Since I distribute Siemens products here in Alberta, we run into A-B all the
time.  Some factories might standardize on other manufacturers, but it
doesn't mean that they don't have majority market share.

> My daughter is sales manager for a manufacturing firm in Pennsylvania. The
> plant is also highly automated. Allen-Bradley is nowhere to be found
> therein.
>
> But when I go to my local electrical supply dealer client, I find hundreds
> of A-B products for which there are several competitors.

There are several competitors for Windows as well.

The point I was making was that A-B does exactly the same thing with their
distributor that Microsoft does with theirs.  The only difference is that MS
signs contracts with as many distributors as possible, A-B signs with one.

Both are perfectly ethical practices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What have YOU done to bust a union today?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work better: Work union-free.

Steven C. Britton
Calgary

www.cadvision.com/sbritton



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CADVision Development Corporation (http://www.cad
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             10-Dec-99 03:33:28
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: MS drops J++

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <384A6A7A.51B3E278@ibm.net>, Joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/991203-000009.html
>
>  Microsoft has finally dropped its Visual J++ Java development system.
>However, it
>  appears to be focusing instead on XML and not the Cool tool it had
>originally
>  envisaged as the successor to J++.

Microsoft purchased all of the Borland/Inprise technology. I assume that
would include the Borland/Inprise Java tool technology. But no matter.
SUN's Java contracts have made its Java a defacto standard. On Intel
platforms the only tool worth working in now is VisualAge for Java which
of course runs great on OS/2.

The other thing that runs great on OS/2 is StarOffice. It makes use of OS/2
in ways that obsolete both the Netscape browser and Lotus SmartSuite.
I have been investigating StarOffice on OS/2 for a couple of weeks now.
It is really awsome and appears to make use of the OS/2 operating system in
the way OS/2 was intended to be used.

The best part about it is that all the work in Staroffice should also work 
on the Linux Win95 NT and whatever other platforms StarOffice runs on. 

While Microsoft was integrating the browser into its operating
systems, The Star Division (now Sun) was integrating the browser into its
Office Suite. This approach is clearly superior. So J++, Basic, and Microsoft
Office
all suffer. OS/2 (where Java is the native language) wins big. 

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/client.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             10-Dec-99 03:54:29
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: WARP, James Bond and the Invisible WinCE Promotion

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <Pine.SGI.3.93.991201134458.23776B-100000@sea.monterey.edu>, josco
<josco@sea.monterey.edu> writes:
>On 1 Dec 1999, Glen D wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 1 Dec 1999 00:32:57, josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> > For those windows lovers who laughed at the OS/2 WARP promotion in a
James
>> > Bond Movie. See if you can find the WinCE logo in the newest moive.
>> > 
>> > http://www.news.com/Rumors/0,29,,00.html?st.ne.rum.idx.gif.a
>> 
>> I saw the film last night and don't recall seeing Win CE at all.  What
>> a waste of $300,000 :-)
>
>"Yeah Baby!"  
>MS is dropping the WinCE name ... maybe they'll call it "Mini-Windows."
>
>And pssoibly they'll innovate some more and sponsor a bowl game....
>http://www.accessarizona.com/partners/fiestabowl/news/99_news.html
>:)

I seriously looked at the gadget because unlike the palmpilots it has
a color screen so it can be used for photo viewing and, unlike the
palm pilots, it can run a DOS emulator program. But by the time I
added up the costs for the compactDisk memory and XT-CE emulator
I was up to $800. I might pay half of that. But $800 will buy a nice
ThinkPad from Egghead. Just not cost effective. I am a James
Bond Fan and the promo was of interest to me. 

Microsoft is apparently replacing the term WinCE with 
the term Windows Powered.

Warp Powered sounds and is a lot better.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/client.htm

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             10-Dec-99 04:13:21
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: When will it be 100% done?

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <3844B817.87E50C62@groovyshow.com>, Kelly Robinson <ispy@groovyshow.com>
writes:

Seriously, you have to download StarOffice to understand the fundamental
change going on with OS/2 browsers. While Microsoft was distracting us all
with browser/OS integration The Star Division engaged the Warp drive.

On OS/2 Warp the StarOffice "URL" becomes a command prompt for 
anything - HTML document, spread sheet, program, anything! 
On OS/2 Java applications run off the desktop. StarOffice
(a Java Application) runs shamelessly on Warp 4. 

Opera, Netscape, Lotus and any other browser replacement have 
a high standard to beat given StarOffice on OS/2 since StarOffice
is written in OS/2's native language. (Java)

It is the small stuff that is especially impressive. For example when
an HTML page comes up you can use the page up and down keys the
way they were meant to be used. Opera may have that kind of
functionally but Netscape 4.6 on OS/2 does not.


>After all, the Opera people DEMANDED that OS/2 users pay the $35 fee UP
>FRONT as a 'sign of loyalty'.  OS/2 users paid and are still waiting for
>a return on their little investment since they had to prove to Opera
>that they were worth it.
>
>Um, selling goods which do not exist is illegal the last time I heard.
>
>Or have they changed their tune since the beginning and (hopefully)
>refunded money to the people they embezzled until they actually and
>finally delivered the goods they promised 2 generations of CPU ago!
>
>Oh, your tone implies you are Opera.  I should have noticed earlier...
>
>Splendid!  So much the better, it's about time I get a chance to say
>this directly...
>
>How dare you say "Soon after the windows version" under the
>circumstances?
>
>Hurry your pathetic [censored] up before people really do get annoyed at
>your inability to program for non-Windows platforms.  [okay, I'm
>impressed that you've hurried up on BeOS considering it's the newest
>platform out there and that people who've paid you a line time ago are
>still nowehere near a beta version!]  It's been HOW MANY YEARS since
>you've peddled for money under the pretense of "You the consumer have to
>prove to us that you are worthy", and I was still an OS/2 fanatic at the
>time.  To this day none of the non-Windows versions is nowhere near
>complete yet!   I don't know what stopped me from shelling out the
>money, but I was tempted to send you the $35 at the time.  Maybe you
>made it sound that if you had the sufficient amount of 'votes' that
>you'd hurry up and prove your worth.  But then I quickly remmebered that
>we live in a capitalistic society and thus conform to a certain set of
>rules.  You've bent them and I'm being polite in the accusation.
>
>I am a consumer advocate in general and if I were told that I had to pay
>up front, for whatever reason, and never got anything by now I would be
>VERY angry and on the verge of slapping a lawsuit against you.
>Especially in a market which evolves unusually quickly and renders
>hardware and software obsolete.
>
>Of course, I wouldn't be stupid enough to pay for anything in advance.
>Unlike the Emperor, I want to *see* my new clothes before wearing them
>in public.  :-)
>
>Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves and not saying "golly gee whiz, we
>finally got half of it done and it's only been over 2 years!!!"
>
>Also, as a sidenote, it's amusing to point out that you must have put
>higher priority to Linux and MacOS than to OS/2.  Or is OS/2 so
>difficult to program for that you're having great difficulties in
>acheiving your task, pardon me for being shallow?  I've always wanted to
>know why that OS/2 consistently lagged behind when it was the OS/2
>community who you begged for help (and money) in the first place!  You
>people are truly low!
>
>But someday you'll realize that businesses are here for the consumer and
>not the other way around.  That's one of the reasons why America is a
>proverbial toilet whose flushing mechanism has failed.  Businesses are
>so arrogant that they can push and manipulate consumers all they want
>with little fear of retaliation.
>
>Now, where's Stardock with their little Object Desktop Network
>Nonsensical program?  They decided to cut my subscription by 8 months
>and I've complained to them THREE TIMES, with the third finally getting
>a reply "We'll look into it and get back to you" - oh, I'm still waiting
>for a reply and it's been months.  I signed up when they were peddling
>the program for $50/2 years.  Then they cut a few months out of mine for
>no reason so I have to dig up documentation because even though law
>requires the business to keep records, it is universally the consumer's
>responsibility (don't consumers have rights any more?) to prove they are
>right - when most of the problems are always on the company's side!  And
>when you do get to talk to them, depending on the company and/or the
>people you talk to, you get pushed aside or threatened and here you are
>trying to be civil when dealing with them - forgive me for no longer
>being civil when pointing out despicable *little* companies who seem to
>forget about who they need in order to survive.  I'm tired of playing by
>the rules only to have rules broken against me in return.  Anyway, I
>don't care any more since I uninstalled the product and have no
>intention of using it.
>
>josco wrote:
>
>> http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html#os2
>> OS/2 Current status: +10 out of 20
>> Linux:  +11 out of 20
>> MacOS:  +12 out of 20
>>
>> We hope to release the OS/2 version of V4.0 soon after the Windows
>> version.
>>
>> -- joseph

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: flmighe@attglobal.net                             10-Dec-99 04:43:03
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarkably stable

From: flmighe@attglobal.net

In <C7QD1hxY9UYt-pn2-tSQP8JtWPeCv@slip-32-101-104-233.in.us.prserv.net>,
pleasenospam@net.net writes:

OS/2, in my experience, has always been snappier than Windows. I tend
to get preinstalled Intel computers (Preinstalled with Windows 95/98). I
play with that for a while and then reformat the hard drive and load
Warp. I use to think that HPFS formating resulted in slower operation in
comparison to FAT formated systems but my most recent experience 
shows otherwise.

Before you think OS/2 slow check your client workstation facts.

OS/2 will run on older Intel hardware like 486 processors where
Win95/98 NT will have trouble and OS/2 will run with 32, 16 and 
even 8 megs of RAM where Win95/98 NT will require 32, 64 or 128 megs.

Likely the half of the office runing OS/2 is also running on less
cabable computers. That is part of the value of OS/2 it leverages
your existing equipment, rather than requiring replacement. You
can also leave your computers on, rather that turning them off
at night to save boot up time. On Win95/98 you are best off instructing
users to shutdown workstations because the rebooting in the morning
is benficial for that OS. I recomend Win95/98 users shut down at lunch
as well.


>On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:17:02, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 	I support a small office without about 50-60 users, about half
>> of which are slow-s/2, but 99% of system trouble is from the windows
>> 95 machines.  I also want to mention that slow-s/2's proprietary
>> solutions are really good too.  The slow-s/2 boxes have full page
>> monitors (in addition to standard monitors)  which work with a product
>> called IWPM (an image software) and high speed (but old) scanners to
>> scan in documents (to the MF) and the system works really well.  It's
>> just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.  It takes over
>> 5x longer for the computers to boot, and to switch from the slow-s/2
>> desktop to the win-os2 session takes minutes. with nothing but Comm
>> manager(with 3 sessions), IWPM and win-os2 with word 6 open.  Had IBM
>> done slow-s/2 right, we would all be complaining about Big Blue and
>> their market dominance.
>> 
>> 
>> Chris 
>
>
>do you still run windoze sessions ? duh
>
>the reason os/2 boots up longer is it rebuilds certain components each
>time, get a little
>handheld PIM it has an incredibly fast boot up speed

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: jws@jws.ultranet.com                              09-Dec-99 23:43:05
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "John Saunders" <jws@jws.ultranet.com>

<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-Og1gmEbCcPzX@localhost...
> It was his client who complained about IE5 wanting itself to update
> every time they went on the Net (okay, maybe not every time).

I remember there was a bug like this in the last beta of IE. I don't
remember if it was in the final release. I remember I only suffered from it
for about a week before the fix was made available.


John Saunders
jws@jws.ultranet.com <mailto:jws@jws.ultranet.com>
[ Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer ]



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     09-Dec-99 21:19:06
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Illya Vaes write:
> > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
>
> > >If you want to define any product as a commodity, then Sunny Boy
breakfast
> > >cereal (lovingly manufactured right here in Camrose, Alberta, available
at
> > >fine grocery stores everywhere) is a commodity, and therefore it's
illegal
> > >for the producers to manipulate (change) the price.
> >
> > If Sunny Boy breakfast cereal had 95% of the cereal market (PC OSes) and
near
> > 90% or so of *all* breakfast stuff (personal computers), then their
control of
> > prices in the breakfast arena (*not* only their own price) certainly makes 
for
> > a monopoly in even this (non-legal) definition.
>
> But all they CAN control is their own price.  They can keep the price of
> their cereal constant all they want, but if those other 5% of the market
> boys drop their cost in half and Sunny Boy is suddenly twice that of any
> other cereal, they kiss their 95% goodbye.  They are then "forced" to reduce
> their own prices to compensate...in this case, 5% of the market can, under
> your definition, "manipulate the price of the breakfast arena".  This makes
> these 5% of the market a monopoly that needs to be shut down by the
> government!  All because you don't know what control really is.

Sunny Boy hasn't manipulated cereal prices in your example.  You lied.

You are also bizarre,  It's irrational to say the 5% of the market remaining
can cut
prices 50% without you first establishing how the prices got so high.  1) The
prices
in your example were inflated by monopoly power or 2) the 5% competitors were
in an
illegal trust and then broke ranks to cut prices and loss a ton of money -- a
stupid. suggestion.

We all know what control means and our understanding explains why MS is in
anti-trust, not Sunny Boy cereal.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@ibm.net                                     09-Dec-99 21:23:17
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: OS2 garners 'OTHER' status in operating system use

From: Joseph <josco@ibm.net>


Jim Frost wrote:

> Joseph wrote:
> > > But the claim was that its visual
> > > quality exceeds that of current PC state-of-the-art.  If this is a Jan2K 
issue
> > > then they would have written that in the September/October timeframe,
and it
> > > was not true then.  It didn't even exceed that of the current PC
> > > state-of-the-art well before the Dreamcast was shipped.
> >
> > They looked at the games, not at hardware specifications.
>
> Then it's still wrong.  Unreal on my relatively mediocre for Voodoo Banshee
> last January blew the doors off of anything I've seen yet on the Dreamcast
in
> terms of graphic realism -- and the Banshee was only a midrange card at the
> time.

I think they know what they are doing.  I don't think the ranking or
commentary is
incorrect.  You're talking about graphic realism -- they didn't.


> State of the art *today* is hell and gone beyond that point -- just check
out
> the GeForce and Quake III.

There's better PC games that those in the PC Game issue that ranking the
Dreamcast.


> By any measure you care to name the state-of-the-art PC outperformed the
> Dreamcast well before it shipped.  Raw performance, resolution, sound
quality,
> game sophistication, whatever.
>
> What the Dreamcast did was come *close* ... and do it at a $200 price-point.
> No PC has yet come close to that.

Yes.  Still the PC game community sees something in the Dreamcast they don't
see in PC
games.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & Ne
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: nomadic@worldnet.att.net                          10-Dec-99 01:06:01
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:22
Subj: Re: Windows 1.0 was running in 1983, Mac appeared in 1984 

From: Brandon Blatcher <nomadic@worldnet.att.net>

In article <82pque$ide$1@weber.a2000.nl>, "Michiel Denie" 
<florin@anguish.org> wrote:

> Madwen <madwen@mailbag.com> wrote in message
> news:madwen-70CD17.14051508121999@news.binc.net...
> > In article <slrn84ru29.2vn.tzs@www.tzs.net>, Tim Smith
> > <tzs@halcyon.com> wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > The point never was what platform could have the _longest_ file name
> > potential.  You guys really make me laugh my ass off.  You cite these
> > file name length and MHz stats like you are measuring the length of
> > your... well you get the message.  One can almost detect a hint of
> > testosterone in the air reading over these kinds of posts. The point of
> > it is and always was what is optimum for the user.  It's what you do
> > with it.... NOT how big it is!  :)
> >
> 
> You started, so I can finish it.. this proves my
> long time suspicion. There's nothing wrong with the
> Mac by itself. It's just that it's a computer for
> girls! Using a Mac is like carrying a handbag. It's
> really quite practical, but a real man wouldn't be
> caught dead with one.

We don't have any proof of this.

Perhaps you like to be the first dead man to test this?:)

-- 
-Brandon Blatcher

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Nomadic Ink (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: dc@pdq.net                                        10-Dec-99 17:20:11
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: DC <dc@pdq.net>

On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 00:52:57 -0500, Bob Germer
<bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote:

>On <82n8gm$or1$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 04:41 PM,
>   "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
>> Which still leaves me with a problem.  If IE wouldn't add much value,
>> why did his clients need to download it?  Seems to me that if you didn't
>> actually need IE, why bother downloading it, never mind Boob's
>> misunderstanding of the technology to install it (which he has already
>> himself demonstrated).
>
>Because, asshole, they had Windows 98, Release 1 which puts IE on the
>machine automatically. The update CD will not run properly unless one
>first updates IE. If one logs into a MS website with IE, it automatically
>tries to update and woe to the poor sucker who interrupts it!

Win98 can cleanly be upgraded to MSIE5.0 without an intermediate
'update' (via the WWW?) required.  You're talking nonsense, Bob.

DC

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               10-Dec-99 18:44:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451521

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Pascal Haakmat wrote:
> 
> Marty wrote:
> 
> >http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/faculty/tholen/tholen.gif
> 
> Yeah.

Agreeing with the URL?  Illogical.

> Isn't he cute?

Don't you know, Pascal?

> <sigh>

More illogic from Pascal.  "<sigh>"
 
> >(Use this URL with caution.  It may induce an extreme desire to administer
a
> >wedgie.)

Note: no response

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com               10-Dec-99 15:32:02
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: "Kim Cheung" <kimwaicSpamGoToGarbage@deltanet.com>

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:38:29 -0500, Scott Vetter wrote:

>    I've been using OS/2 since 2.1 and love the OS.  I'm now running
>OS/2 V4 and wanted to buy a copy of OS/2 again for another machine.  In
>contacting Indelible Blue they want something like $240 for the full
>version, $235 just for an additional license and $180 for an upgrade.
>Seems like IBM doesn't want to sell OS/2 anymore...  It also seems like
>when I purcased my upgrade to V4 ist was something like $120.   IBM
>bumping up prices or what?  That's not the way for IBM to promote people
>switching to an upgraded version or even selling OS/2 for new
>customers...
>

I don't think that changed.   It has always been like that.    They count
just about anything an "upgrade", however - including W95.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: TouchVoice Corporation (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: DLaRue@NetSRQ.Com                                 10-Dec-99 23:50:22
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: While (slow)s/2 sucks, it's remarkably stable

From: DLaRue@NetSRQ.Com (David LaRue)

  Hi Chris,
 
1. Why reboot?  Just initiate the screen saver.
2. Using full screen WinOS2 sessions along with WPS and even X-Windows
keeps everything on the same screen.  Using several shells like this does
require more RAM though.  The swapper is a good indication of when you
need to add RAM.
3. CommMgr, TCP, WPS (on any OS) cut the available OS work power in half.
4. Use some of the non-WinOS2 (OS/2 native) Word 6.0 readers/editors.
5. Replace the 99% of the trouble making machines with the OS that gives
the least trouble.  Speed will come from the free hardware upgrades.

  David

In <3851603f.6474123@news.supernews.com>, chrisr@nni.com (Chris) writes:
>Hi,
>
>	I support a small office without about 50-60 users, about half
>of which are slow-s/2, but 99% of system trouble is from the windows
>95 machines.  I also want to mention that slow-s/2's proprietary
>solutions are really good too.  The slow-s/2 boxes have full page
>monitors (in addition to standard monitors)  which work with a product
>called IWPM (an image software) and high speed (but old) scanners to
>scan in documents (to the MF) and the system works really well.  It's
>just a shame that IBM didn't make the slow-s/2 faster.  It takes over
>5x longer for the computers to boot, and to switch from the slow-s/2
>desktop to the win-os2 session takes minutes. with nothing but Comm
>manager(with 3 sessions), IWPM and win-os2 with word 6 open.  Had IBM
>done slow-s/2 right, we would all be complaining about Big Blue and
>their market dominance.
>
>
>Chris 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http
(1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            10-Dec-99 16:22:08
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On 10 Dec 1999, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> 
> > > They used the exact same mechanism, the only mechanism available to any
> > > private enterprise company, that Microsoft used.  Microsoft managed to
> > > manipulate prices, but Sunny Boy didn't....BY DOING THE SAME EXACT
THING!
> > 
> > Sunny Boy didn't manipulate prices.  You lied.   Price manipulation is
only
> > possible with monopoly power
> 
> This is your claim.  I am debunking it.  Stand back.

It was your claim and your attempt to redefine price manipulation to mean
any change in price including those that the competitive market induces. 
By definition price manipulation is understood with respect to price
changes made in a competitive market.
 
> > by a single company with monopoly power or by a trust.  Cutting  prices is
> > not price manipulation.  Competition over price is not price manipulation.
> 
> Then Microsoft cannot manipulate prices EITHER.  Microsoft's only power is
> in the price it charges for its software...a price which can be less than or
> equal to but never greater than the price consumers are willing to pay.

A monopoly can, by definition, change increase prices and consumers still
pay for the product.  The fact a person buys the product from an OEM or MS
does not invalidate the existance of monopoly power abuse.  If it did then
monopoly power would be a contradiction.  It would have no logical basis
and nonexistant. It would only apply to products NO ONE buys.  (And
screaming about the word FORCE simple shows a weak understanding of the
topic.)  

Price manipulation and monopoly power are well understood words with
consistent definitions.  


> You're speaking on an inflationary force, which forces a company to keep the
> product's dollar figure increasing alongside.  The margin, however, can be
> greatly reduced, as a company lowers the price (in a real sense) to attract
> customers.

The cost of living has increased so your assertion that prices go down is
on the average FALSE.  You also have no examples of 50% price cuts and
cannot tell us all that the profit margins of cereal are tied to volume
with a small company taking on a larger company --- a some nonsensical
example. 

> 
> > But you were telling me about cutting prices by 50% !!!
> 
> Or 30%.  Or 20%.  Or 10%.  Or 5%.  Or 1%.  Cutting prices is cutting prices.

No.  50% price cuts do not happen in cereal but your example required that
extreme exmaple to justify a nonsense argument about price manipulation
-- a company doing 50% price cuts is committing sucide and noone will
follw the company into bankrupcy. That does not happen and the rpice cuts
that do happen are not manipulations but normal business.

Replace 50% with 1% and your example is invalid since the discount is
tricial and of no consequence - no price change.

> Not until some new upstart little guy barged in with a new and cheaper way
> of doing things, that forced all the old dogs in the pound to sit up and
> take notice that somebody knew how to kick their ass.

Kick ass?  Yes, in a fantasy land where there is some fantistic way where
a SMALL company discounts cereal by 50% to take the market share of a
larger company.  They achieve this cost savings due to increased VOLUME -
but this is a small company and they cannot match the volume of a large
company. Fantasy land.  Hey -- we just learned about BARRIERS to
competition.


> So its "manipulation" if we the consumer are getting too good of a deal? 

Predatory pricing is illegal -- the economics of dumping and undercutting
by leveraging a monopoly in a different market are well recognized as bad.
Not by you but until you become Iluvatar, the Creator, what you choose to
discount still exists.

Any half-witted Albertan should recognize the argument since it's commonly
applied to trade between Alberta and US (Montana) over food prodcuts.
Price dumping on wheat and canola oil are common themes.

MS was shown to have spend hundreds of millions and forgo revenue by
DUMPING IE for free and then tying IE to the OS so they could own the
browser market that would protect their 94% market share of the PC OS
market. There are some arguments that dumping IE could be profitable and
arguemtns about innovation that need to be resolved but the nature of the
case is far from what you demand we have to argue. 


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               10-Dec-99 19:11:24
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 10 Dec 1999 17:57:30 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>By you're nonsensical definition of harm, you are harmed by the makers of
=>LearJets for the high price.  You want something, but the company isn't just
=>letting you have it.

I just love the way you misread my posts. You didn't have me for a HS
teacher, that's for sure! I wouldn't let yopu get away with such silliness.

IF I wanted to buy a Learjet, and IF Learjet said I could buy it only with a
helicopter that I didn't want, yes, they would be harming me. To make the
purchase of item A (which I want/need, and am willing to pay for) conditional
on also purchasing item B (which I don't want) is a harm to me because it
means that to get item A I have to waste some money, or esle do without item
A. I think you would agree that wasting money is harmful to me, and that
going without something I want or need is also harmful. (The degree of harm
is irrelevant to this conclusion.)

By the way, selling stuff is not a >>use<< of property. You call it that
becasue you must find some argument to support your silly notion that a
seller can do me no harm by setting conditons on the sale.



--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            10-Dec-99 16:37:16
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

On 10 Dec 1999, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

> As I stepped out onto the Stoop, I saw Joseph write:
> > Lars P Ormberg wrote:
> > Hey, I can make that same nutty argument about my property rights. I
> > think it can be fun.  Let me try.....
> 
> Let's see if you, too, can show freedom being limited only by causing harm
> (not, of course, for the 'harm' of being sold something) by initiating force 
or
> fraud.

A business is a property.  
 
> > I have the right to own and drive my car to Canada and to own and carry
> > my gun
> 
> Yes, you do have that right, even though the Canadian government
> (government...the usurper of freedom...remember that) has taken it away.
> You are morally justified, though you'll get thrown in jail for it (the
> same as Microsoft will be punished by the state for doing morally justified
> but illegal actions).

Well now we have some progress -- you now recognize the LAW and therefore
you can begin to recognize that the acts are measureable and definable.

A gun is measureable.  Monopoly power is measurable.  It does exist,
illegal or not. It does exist and can be used to drive companies out of
business.  Guns can shoot and monopoly power exists.  It can be argued
using monopoly power is legal but the power has to be recognized.  If you
deny it does exist then things that can be measured in the market are
inconsistent with your advocacy and your arguments are based on
falsehoods. I cannot deny that my gun exists or that it does shoot as a
way to defend my right to own a gun.

You have refused to recognize the phenomena of a monoipoly and monopoly
power. You cannot deny the gun in my car and you cannot deny monopoly
power. 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               10-Dec-99 18:39:01
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Karel Jansens wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:07:42, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:59:22, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 02:13:15, Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't). 
On
> > > > > > > what basis do you doubt him?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How's this for starters:
> > > > > > "Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
> > > > > > "Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational
argument so
> > > > > >  you attempt to blow others up."
> > > > >
> > > > > Oookayyy...
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, I was referring to the data of the case provided, so I
could
> > > > > have a chance to reply.
> > > >
> > > > That didn't stop you from replying, Karel.
> > > >
> > > ????
> >
> > You still replied, in spite of your alleged lack of "a chance".  Reading
> > comprehension problems?
> >
> Ah. I see now. Semantics.

Yours perhaps, if you are attempting to pursue this.  The point of fact is
that
you replied in spite of the alleged lack of "referring to the data of the
case".

> > > > > Now, all I can say is: "Indeed. Well... yes".
> > > >
> > > > Glad you agree that those statements are indeed a basis on which he
may
> > > > be doubted.
> > >
> > > Just as long as you add: "... for me" to that sentence.
> >
> > On the contrary, the above quoted statements are indeed a valid basis on
which
> > *anyone* may doubt Bob, especially in light of his lack of retraction. 
Your
> > lack of courage to take such a stand is typical, however.
> 
> He didn't retract, he explained.

I can give someone a black-eye and then explain that I thought there was a
gnat
on their eyelid.  Is this an acceptable thing to do?

> And no matter how one interprets those remarks, they have absolutely no
> relevance to his credibility re the facts of the case presented.

They have relevance to his credibility as a whole, which casts doubt on his
credibility on specific issues.

> They could make him despicable, yes, but not incredible.

There's nothing incredible about Bob.  He's quite ordinary, unfortunately.

> If you'd like to start a new thread, "Bob Germer is a redneck racist" or
> suchlike, I'd gladly give my opinions and contribute to it.

Dubious.

> However, to the issues I have been reacting to, this is of no significance.

Incorrect.

> So what courage would I need then?

The courage to be objective and not accept someone's word on blind faith,
especially someone who has shown that their own objectivity and grasp of truth
and reality is highly questionable.  Perhaps you can redirect the courage you
summoned to defend Bob over to this new area.

> To you I would have to say:

So why not just say it?

> "Okay, Bob Germer did present a credible explanation for his installation 
> of Warp on his client's pc's, but because he said this and that I choose
> not to believe him." That's consequent behaviour then?

You're presupposing that Bob did present a credible explanation for his
installation of Warp on his client's PCs.

"Bob says he doesn't (and I know similar firms who indeed don't). On what
basis
do you doubt him?"

Sorry, but we don't all share your blind faith in Bob, especially after
reading
his postings.

Due to lack of hard facts at my disposal regarding Bob's clients, and due to
the presence of such negative, biased commentary from Bob himself I am left to
take Bob's statements with a pillar of salt at best.  He has done nothing to
convince me of his credibility (which is not particularly his fault) and quite
a bit to refute it (which most certainly is his fault).

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: andrew@netneurotic.de                             11-Dec-99 00:57:24
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: andrew@netneurotic.de (Andrew J. Brehm)

Scott Vetter <svetter@ameritech.net> wrote:

>     I've been using OS/2 since 2.1 and love the OS.  I'm now running
> OS/2 V4 and wanted to buy a copy of OS/2 again for another machine.  In
> contacting Indelible Blue they want something like $240 for the full
> version, $235 just for an additional license and $180 for an upgrade.
> Seems like IBM doesn't want to sell OS/2 anymore...  It also seems like
> when I purcased my upgrade to V4 ist was something like $120.   IBM
> bumping up prices or what?  That's not the way for IBM to promote people
> switching to an upgraded version or even selling OS/2 for new
> customers...

I bought an academic license recently...

If I remember correctly, it cost me _13_ Irish Pounds (which is approx.
US$ 15).

If you have any connections to an academic institution, I'd recomment
that.

-- 
Fan of Woody Allen
User of MacOS, BeOS, LinuxPPC
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: mamodeo@stny.rr.com                               10-Dec-99 18:46:21
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: When will it be 100% done?

From: Marty <mamodeo@stny.rr.com>

Bob Germer wrote:
>
> Since that is pure bullshit, nothing you say has any validity here.

"Since you are a Canuck, your opinoin is worth less than garbage."
"Typical conduct of an Arab terrorist. You can't win a rational argument so
you
attempt to blow others up."

Since that is pure bullshit, nothing you say has any validity here.

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Time Warner Road Runner - Binghamton NY (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               10-Dec-99 19:40:25
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On 10 Dec 1999 00:26:43 GMT, Lars P Ormberg wrote:

=>The freedom to act based on your own interests.
=>
=>Not hard to grasp.

Ah, I thought you would say something like that.

Of course if you cannot grasp your own interest, you're in deep shit. And
will cause a lof shit, too. So we, who will be harmed by your blinkered
notion of what your interests are, will have tp punish you -- entirely to
advance our own interest, of course! Our freedom allows us to curtail yours.

If you see a contradiction here, you're roight. Your definition is a dressed
up version of, Freedom means I can do what I want.




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: josco@sea.monterey.edu                            10-Dec-99 16:56:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: josco <josco@sea.monterey.edu>

Windows2000 is:
$149 for NT 4.0 owners upgrading.
$199 for Win9x owners upgrading.
$299+ for the rest of us.

-- joseph
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Kim Cheung wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:38:29 -0500, Scott Vetter wrote:
> 
> >    I've been using OS/2 since 2.1 and love the OS.  I'm now running
> >OS/2 V4 and wanted to buy a copy of OS/2 again for another machine.  In
> >contacting Indelible Blue they want something like $240 for the full
> >version, $235 just for an additional license and $180 for an upgrade.
> >Seems like IBM doesn't want to sell OS/2 anymore...  It also seems like
> >when I purcased my upgrade to V4 ist was something like $120.   IBM
> >bumping up prices or what?  That's not the way for IBM to promote people
> >switching to an upgraded version or even selling OS/2 for new
> >customers...
> >
> 
> I don't think that changed.   It has always been like that.    They count
> just about anything an "upgrade", however - including W95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: CSUnet (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: donw@bc.sympatico.com                             10-Dec-99 17:00:13
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Don Wagner" <donw@bc.sympatico.com>

Steven C. Britton <sbritton@cadvision.com> wrote in message
news:38516e90_4@news.cadvision.com...
> Bob Germer wrote:
> >
> > Huh? We have several industrial clients who have highly automated
> > factories. I am throughly familiar with the production equipment. Other
> > than a few manual switched, Allen Bradley is no where to be found.
>
> Since I distribute Siemens products here in Alberta, we run into A-B all
the
> time.  Some factories might standardize on other manufacturers, but it
> doesn't mean that they don't have majority market share.

Cutler Hammer RULES!!!!!! :)
Don Wagner


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Origin Line 1 Goes Here (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: greywolf@onlink.net                               10-Dec-99 19:48:27
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 21:22:23
Subj: Re: Who runs this country?

From: "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net>

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:52:51 GMT, Chris J Delanoy wrote:

=> "Wolf Kirchmeir" <greywolf@onlink.net> wrote:
=>
=>> I wondered if anyone would provide a demonstration of the asininity
=>> of Rand's philosphy.
=>
=>Then keep wondering, because neither you nor anybody else has or
=>can provide such a demonstration.
=>
=>Although from your irrational statements here, the statement you've
=>made with respect to the completely invalidity of -your- mind is
=>quite plausible.
=>
=>Chris J Delanoy
=>
=>
=>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
=>Before you buy.


Speak to the question, Chris!

Demonstrate to me that a rational mind CREATES choices!




--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: NSMS (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               10-Dec-99 17:19:27
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 23:09:10
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

josco wrote:

> Windows2000 is:
> $149 for NT 4.0 owners upgrading.
> $199 for Win9x owners upgrading.
> $299+ for the rest of us.
>
> -- joseph

So right joseph and Windows2000 still does not
equal OS/2 Warp 4 in power and stability and more
frightening: it requires more hardware.

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Special Discount Membership Offer Closes 12/15"


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: OS2Guy@WarpCity.com                               10-Dec-99 17:32:00
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 23:09:10
Subj: InnoVal To Offer Low-Cost OS/2 ISP Service!

From: Tim Martin <OS2Guy@WarpCity.com>

Here's some hot news for all you NON-Warp City Members:

FST Inc, has joined in a business partnership arrangement
with National DialUp Services and InnoVal Systems Solutions,
to provide a low-cost nationwide ISP service for OS/2 users.
ISP800, a private brand ISP for corporate customers, is
inaugurating service for consumers on January 3,  2000.

Extra special prices are available for any OS/2 user who
pre-registers for  the service by December 30, 1999. In
addition, three subscribers will be selected, at random,
from the first 100 OS/2 users who signup. These three
subscribers will receive free ISP service for one year until
December 31, 2000.

Highlights of ISP800 service include:

Your choice of:

Unlimited 56K access through an 800 dialup number or unlimited service
using a local dialup number.

A high performance and high capacity POP3 email mailbox

SMTP outbound email

Toll free 24/7 technical support

Very low cost for OS/2 users. ISP800 may also be used with Linux,
Mac, and  Windows95/98 client platforms.

No signup fees. You may cancel the service at the end of any month.

Anyone who travels, uses the Internet from more than one permanent
location, or lives in an area not supported by a local access number,
is encouraged to use the 800 number. Performance on the 800 number
is equal to that of local access numbers since all connections are
automatically and instantly re-directed through a close-proximity
modem. Access with the 800 number is available anywhere in the
United States where a dial tone is available. THERE IS NEVER AN
ADDITIONAL FEE FOR USING THE 800 NUMBER TO ACCESS ISP800.
Airfone (in plane service) and some hotels do charge access
fees when you dial an 800 number.

ISP800 Prices:

    Regular service:   $19.95
    For all OS/2 Users:   $15.95 ***

*** Anyone who pre-registers for the service by December 30, 1999, will
receive the first year of service for only $11.95 per month. You must be
an
OS/2 user to pre-register at this price. Your pre-registration must be
received by 5:00pm on 12/30/99.

Additional email accounts are $3.95 per month. Limit is four additional
email accounts.

Please note: There is no direct USENET newsgroup access at this time. If

enough OS/2 users subscribe and there is sufficient interest, ISP800
will
add newsgroup access for OS/2 users. Deja (dejanews) and other web-based

newsgroup services may be used in lieu of standard USENET.

For additional information, and to signup for ISP800, please visit
http://isp800.com/os2. In particular, see the price page and the FAQ
page.
For additional information send an email to os2isp@innoval.com.

---------------------

The OS/2 Community should sit up and take notice and support
this new enterprise!

Tim Martin
The OS/2 Guy
Warp City (http://warpcity.com)
"Y2K Special Discount Memberships Close 12/15!)

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Warp City (http://warpcity.com) (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org                      10-Dec-99 17:44:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 23:09:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Chad Mulligan" <cmulligan@hipcrime.vocab.org>


"Bob Germer" <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:384f469e$9$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82mgse$e5i$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/09/99 at 09:58 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
>
> >
> > But Boob should have known that you can install IE5 from a $20 CD.  his
> > entire downloading argument seems to be constructed for two purposes -
> > one so that he could sell OS/2, and two so that he could bash windows.
>
> Dear Mr. Stupid Fox:
>
> For the last time PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PARTICULAR CLIENT IN QUESTION
> HAS ONLY TWO MACHINES WITH CD ROM DRIVES. BOTH ARE ON SERVERS. THE FIRM
> DOES NOT WANT CD ROM DRIVES IN WORKSTATIONS.
>

So, Download the bloody thing once, to a network drive, get the IEAK, setup
an automated install in the login script for the next time the users login.

> > >
> > > What should I do? Advise him on product A and make no sale, or keep my
> > > gob shut and make some money? You all hark on Germer, for choosing the
> > > latter, which keeps him in business, instead of the former, which is
> > > what an idiot would do.
>
> > The thing that worries me is that he could choose between one $20 CD
> > (IE5) , or twenty odd OS/2 licenses (probably $100 each).  Doesn't seem
> > like good economics to me.
>
> What a total asshole you are. Despite the fact that I have stated in at
> least 20 messages here that the firm does not have CD Rom drives in its
> workstations, you continue to insist that they use a CD to do the update.
> I charge $140 to provide and install a 48x IDE CD drive. I charge $290 for
> a SCSI CDROM drive including labor.
>

ie5setup also allows for an admimistrative download that will download the
files without installing them, then that directory can be used for multiple
installations.  The download page will tell you that should you deign to
read it.

> I can and did install Warp over the network. I cannot do that with the
> update CD because the drive isn't available after the intermediate reboots
> until the entire update is completed which it cannot be since the CD is
> not available.
>
> > The idea is to give your clients the best value for money - I fail to
> > see how making them spend $2000 vs $20 to solve one simple problem is
> > good value.  Of course Boob hasn't given us all the facts, so there may
> > be other issues that make OS/2 more viable (although considering the
> > vendor of OS/2 barely acknowldges that it exists, it does seem a bad
> > choice).  However, his initial post showed a supreme misunderstanding of
> > the technology.
>
> The vendor barely acknowledges it exists? Have you visited the IBM website
> recently? Have you seen the 20  or so different ads running several times
> a night in prime time on every broadcast channel and the major cable
> channels advertising WarpServer for eBusiness?
>

Are you referring to Domino Server?  That runs on NT, Linux and a couple
other OS's besides WarpServer.

> > Stu
>
> no, Stupid is your real name.
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: bobg@Pics.com
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
> MR/2 Ice 2.01 Registration Number 67
> Aut Pax Aut Bellum
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------


--
Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry.
>


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Hipcrime Vocabulary Organization (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: kwilas@stardock.com                               11-Dec-99 02:02:25
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 23:09:10
Subj: Re: Purchasing OS/2

From: kwilas@stardock.com (Kris Kwilas)

In article <3851A6B9.5B6A614B@WarpCity.com>, OS2Guy@WarpCity.com wrote:
>josco wrote:
>> Windows2000 is:
>> $149 for NT 4.0 owners upgrading.  $199 for Win9x owners upgrading. $299+
for the rest of us.
>So right joseph and Windows2000 still does not
>equal OS/2 Warp 4 in power and stability and more

Evidence? Be specific and current. 

I'm looking for _your_ empirical evidence as to this and others. Let alone
generic comments in online media. 

>frightening: it requires more hardware.

Yes. No arguments on this one. :) (more "modern hardware" too, rc3
crapped out on my p180 overdrive from 1995 on install)

Kris

--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: Stardock Systems - http://www.stardock.com (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

From: stuartf@datacom.co.nz                             11-Dec-99 15:12:15
  To: All                                               10-Dec-99 23:09:10
Subj: Re: Jury scheduled to hear Caldera vs. Microsoft next January

From: "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz>

Proof that you are really a Boob - you can't even add someone to a
killfile - or was I just sinbinned?

Boob Germer <bobg.REMOVEME.@pics.com> wrote in message
news:38510fc9$9$obot$mr2ice@news.pics.com...
> On <82oveg$480$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, on 12/10/99 at 08:19 AM,
>    "Stuart Fox" <stuartf@datacom.co.nz> said:
>
>
> > No, I jumped over him for perpetuating a stupid lie.  He claimed there
> > was no other option but to have his clients dial-up to update IE5, which
> > is an absolute nonsense.  He already said there were CD's available on
> > the network, and his assertation that IE5 requires an intermediate
> > reboot is absolutely false.  I don't give a rat's ass whether they
> > install OS/2 or Win98, just that Boob is using silly lies.
>
> I didn't tell them that, the MS salesman did. I happen to agree after
> trying to install the October 1999 CD via the network. I tried it in two
> different networks, both Novell. In every instance, after the IE files are
> copied, it reoboots, updates files, brings up a blank screen (color
> depending on desktop settings) says it is updating the desktop and
> shortcuts, sits there for 55 seconds, and reboots. Then it comes back up
> brings up the desktop and immediately a error screen that it cannot find
> drive Y (the volume for the CD) which is absolutely true. It cannot. Nor
> does another reboot after closing that error window change anything. The
> same error is repeated time after time.

Never, ever have I seen IE do this.  And my experience is reflected in the
comments of others - I don't know what the hell you were doing.


--- WtrGate+ v0.93.p7 sn 165
 * Origin: Usenet: The Internet Group Ltd (1:109/42)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+============================================================================+
