And I must admit that your subtly ironic retort has forced me, in turn, to assess the strength of my own arguments.
I read this, and was pleased that you had agreed with me, until about 20 minutes later I had a revelation that you were being sarcastic. This successful reproach has forced me to reevaluate my point of view (and, dare I say, my sexual orientation).
It suffers from the same crappiness that some Simpsons episodes (esp. newer) suffer from - no subtlety. The best Simpsons episodes have witty humor that's not just plain old slapstick.
Obviously the implication in "timothy's" comment is that.NET is just a buzzword, with no real useful product. And if someone implies this, they don't understand.NET. A follows from B very nicely.
Microsoft is a commercial entity. I'd be surprised if Microsoft didn't overhype it. It's great technology.
A lot of stuff in computing is just a small step forward, or a joining of multiple different technologies.
I Don't see you nerds taking AMD to task for implying that home users need a 64-bit processor, or pointing out that AMD is doing nothing new and there have been 64-bit processors for years and years.
Wow, good non-point. I take it you're one of those annoying folks who thinks everyting is too mainstream? You seem to be assuming that people only use.NET technologies because of the fancy buzzwords.
Let me guess, you hate most popular music and instead tell everyone how much you love the "Screaming Frog Orgasms", "The Wicket Pence Dog Sperms", or some other fringe group that people bring up when they want to show how elevated their tastes are?
look like 3rd rate Ron Popille infomercials. It's pretty funny (and somehow, sad).
They make it look like some kind of "news" show, and make all kinds of ridiculous claims about hoe 64-bit CPU's are "forward compatible". Ahahaha. Like Joe Schmoe will see any benefit to a 64-bit CPU. Even super-geeks don't usually have more than a gig of two of memory in their home computers, and these assholes are trying to sell Joe Schmoe a 64-bit "forward compatible" processor? What a joke.
There is no reason (and there isn't some near term "future" you should buy for) to get a 64-bit processor over a 32-bit processor for almost any home computer user. I don't care if you're the geekiest power user out there running all kinds of fancy pants games, you don't need it - it won't help you.
64-bit CPU's won't be relevent until the average home PC has at least 2 gigs of memory. That's about 2-3 years off _at least_. Your fancy pants 64-bit processor you buy now "for the future" will be obsolete by then.
Blah blah blah.. falsehoods about Windows...blah blah blah...patehtic attempts at irony...blah blah blah...displays of obvious idiocy when it comes to knowledge of the Windows OS...blah blah blah.
There are countless substitutes for Windows. End of story. Thanks.
Now, I guess an idiot could make the argument that there is only one "Windows" OS. But that would be as retarded as saying Ford has a monopoly on Ford automobiles, or McDonald's has a monopoly on the Big Mac. So I'm sure you won't do that.
Uhh, yeah, because breaking up Microsoft would have helped so many people.
Monopoly and antitrust law are intended to protect against control of limited physical resources. Microsoft has a monopoly in something THEY FUCKING DEVELOPED. If they hadn't, it wouldn't exist. They can do whatever they want with it.
People _chose_ to make Microsoft a "monopoly" (and your definition is wrong - a monopoly is when people _must_ use a product _and_ it dominates).
Amen. But don't be surprised by the angry backlash of drooling nerds.
Let me give two quick analogies that summarize these nimwits.
"In breaking news, Burger King is suing McDonald's for abusing its BigMac monopoly to sell McDonald's brand french fries. The fast food chain claims that it has repeatedly tried to break into the McDonald's Brand french fries market but has failed due to McDonald's pricing."
Second, on how Unix people berate Microsoft for viruses, when the real issue is that no one uses Unix (comparatively) so virus writers don't care.
It's like a drunken, poor hillbilly sitting on his cobwebbed porch and snikering at his rich neighbor who just got robbed. "I done told ye that ye should have gotten one of dem der fake people carboard thingies to scare off them burglars. Then maybe them thieves would have robbed me instead!"
In short, Zealots, nobody wants to rob poor hillbillies and nobody wants to target an OS that nobody uses.
It's Microsoft's product, they put in it what they want to. It's called Value Add, nimwit. If you or anyone else things it is too expensive and the features aren't worth it, DON'T BUY IT.
See how simple that is? Use Apple, Linux, FreeBSD, or any of countless other alternatives and quit player hating, as the kids say.
Yeah, it's not like there haven't been a lot of security flaws recently for Unix operating systems or Unix apps.
Oh, wait, there have been - nobody cares enough to exploit them.
You Unix people are like some poor bastard sitting on his rickety porch, with cockroaches crawling all over him, who laughs at his rich neighbour who just got robbed. "Teehee - I just got me one of them thar new signs that says 'Guarded by GuardTech', I bet you wish you'd 'a thought of that, eh? Then maybe it'd be me who got robbed!"
I don't know why I still hang out here, I must seriously be a glutton for repetitiveness and a fan of broken records.
Are you _seriously_ complaining that you won't be able to watch your old VHS tapes? What idiocy. I can't listen to my old 8-track tapes on my CD player, what kind of an idiot would I be to complain about it? Oh, the precious memories I recorded on an 8-track, the industry owes it to me to maintain compatibility!
This isn't a big deal, you're all just bored because there hasn't been any SCO news for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Pointless blather. Strange how Microsoft is dominating PDA sales, if they're so horribly idiotic when it comes to "embedded" applications, isn't it?
who also refuses to accept the fact that a "hacker" really does mean (as one of its meanings) a malicious hacker?
A word is defined by how most people use it, and like it or not - a hacker, to most people, is someone who does bad things with computers. Done.
Same with this - they lost the battle. It's X Windows whether they like it or not.
And I must admit that your subtly ironic retort has forced me, in turn, to assess the strength of my own arguments.
I read this, and was pleased that you had agreed with me, until about 20 minutes later I had a revelation that you were being sarcastic. This successful reproach has forced me to reevaluate my point of view (and, dare I say, my sexual orientation).
as a 3 stooges bit.
It suffers from the same crappiness that some Simpsons episodes (esp. newer) suffer from - no subtlety. The best Simpsons episodes have witty humor that's not just plain old slapstick.
Don't play dumb (or are you playing?).
.NET is just a buzzword, with no real useful product. And if someone implies this, they don't understand .NET. A follows from B very nicely.
Obviously the implication in "timothy's" comment is that
Microsoft is a commercial entity. I'd be surprised if Microsoft didn't overhype it. It's great technology.
A lot of stuff in computing is just a small step forward, or a joining of multiple different technologies.
I Don't see you nerds taking AMD to task for implying that home users need a 64-bit processor, or pointing out that AMD is doing nothing new and there have been 64-bit processors for years and years.
Wow, good non-point. I take it you're one of those annoying folks who thinks everyting is too mainstream? You seem to be assuming that people only use .NET technologies because of the fancy buzzwords.
Let me guess, you hate most popular music and instead tell everyone how much you love the "Screaming Frog Orgasms", "The Wicket Pence Dog Sperms", or some other fringe group that people bring up when they want to show how elevated their tastes are?
Amen, my brotha.
Don't bother, most of these drooling nerds don't know anything about _anything_ dealing with Microsoft, and refuse to learn based on "principal".
look like 3rd rate Ron Popille infomercials. It's pretty funny (and somehow, sad).
They make it look like some kind of "news" show, and make all kinds of ridiculous claims about hoe 64-bit CPU's are "forward compatible". Ahahaha. Like Joe Schmoe will see any benefit to a 64-bit CPU. Even super-geeks don't usually have more than a gig of two of memory in their home computers, and these assholes are trying to sell Joe Schmoe a 64-bit "forward compatible" processor? What a joke.
Now that makes sense. If it's faster and cheaper than a 32-bit processor then fine - it's a good buy.
But the fact that it's 64-bit shouldn't enter into a (rational) buying decision.
It's just something to rally the AMD fanboys.
There is no reason (and there isn't some near term "future" you should buy for) to get a 64-bit processor over a 32-bit processor for almost any home computer user. I don't care if you're the geekiest power user out there running all kinds of fancy pants games, you don't need it - it won't help you.
64-bit CPU's won't be relevent until the average home PC has at least 2 gigs of memory. That's about 2-3 years off _at least_. Your fancy pants 64-bit processor you buy now "for the future" will be obsolete by then.
Well, first you can of course perform most configuration changes in Windows without popups now.
Second, the registry editor is a utility and is by far not the only way to change registry settings.
Lastly, I've read more biting sarcasm on the back of a Little Debby snack-cake.
Huh? What kind of jibber-jabber is this? I thought you filthy geeks liked 'hackers'?
Apparently not when it's your 'enemy', eh? Stupid nerds.
Cough..bullshit.cough.
Let me paraphrase.
Blah blah blah.. falsehoods about Windows...blah blah blah...patehtic attempts at irony...blah blah blah...displays of obvious idiocy when it comes to knowledge of the Windows OS...blah blah blah.
Oh, and so is execution, right? Fuck them, bunch of primitive screwheads.
By your first definition MS is not a monopoly.
There are countless substitutes for Windows. End of story. Thanks.
Now, I guess an idiot could make the argument that there is only one "Windows" OS. But that would be as retarded as saying Ford has a monopoly on Ford automobiles, or McDonald's has a monopoly on the Big Mac. So I'm sure you won't do that.
Uhh, yeah, because breaking up Microsoft would have helped so many people.
Monopoly and antitrust law are intended to protect against control of limited physical resources. Microsoft has a monopoly in something THEY FUCKING DEVELOPED. If they hadn't, it wouldn't exist. They can do whatever they want with it.
People _chose_ to make Microsoft a "monopoly" (and your definition is wrong - a monopoly is when people _must_ use a product _and_ it dominates).
Hey, nimwit, it would seem that choice has to be somehow nonexistent for a monopoly. There are countless alternatives to Microsoft.
Antitrust based on intellectual property is a fucking joke.
Amen. But don't be surprised by the angry backlash of drooling nerds.
Let me give two quick analogies that summarize these nimwits.
"In breaking news, Burger King is suing McDonald's for abusing its BigMac monopoly to sell McDonald's brand french fries. The fast food chain claims that it has repeatedly tried to break into the McDonald's Brand french fries market but has failed due to McDonald's pricing."
Second, on how Unix people berate Microsoft for viruses, when the real issue is that no one uses Unix (comparatively) so virus writers don't care.
It's like a drunken, poor hillbilly sitting on his cobwebbed porch and snikering at his rich neighbor who just got robbed. "I done told ye that ye should have gotten one of dem der fake people carboard thingies to scare off them burglars. Then maybe them thieves would have robbed me instead!"
In short, Zealots, nobody wants to rob poor hillbillies and nobody wants to target an OS that nobody uses.
Umm, exactly rocket surgeon.
It's Microsoft's product, they put in it what they want to. It's called Value Add, nimwit. If you or anyone else things it is too expensive and the features aren't worth it, DON'T BUY IT.
See how simple that is? Use Apple, Linux, FreeBSD, or any of countless other alternatives and quit player hating, as the kids say.
Umm, who the hell are they pushing around?! They developed this software, they decide what goes in it.
What's wrong with you people, are you that deluded?
Yeah, I mean it's completely reasonable for a government to tell a company not to include features in its own product.
I hope Microsoft sticks this out, and pulls a whole bunch of money out of Europe in retaliation.
Yeah, it's not like there haven't been a lot of security flaws recently for Unix operating systems or Unix apps.
Oh, wait, there have been - nobody cares enough to exploit them.
You Unix people are like some poor bastard sitting on his rickety porch, with cockroaches crawling all over him, who laughs at his rich neighbour who just got robbed. "Teehee - I just got me one of them thar new signs that says 'Guarded by GuardTech', I bet you wish you'd 'a thought of that, eh? Then maybe it'd be me who got robbed!"
Yeah, that's a trenchent insight.
A better question: Which OS do most people use? With this answer, ask yourself why virus writers _might_ target this OS. You have your answer.
Nobody gives a flying fuck about Linux because, relatively speaking, there are about 12 people using it, and 9 of them use it for backroom servers.
I don't know why I still hang out here, I must seriously be a glutton for repetitiveness and a fan of broken records.
Are you _seriously_ complaining that you won't be able to watch your old VHS tapes? What idiocy. I can't listen to my old 8-track tapes on my CD player, what kind of an idiot would I be to complain about it? Oh, the precious memories I recorded on an 8-track, the industry owes it to me to maintain compatibility!
This isn't a big deal, you're all just bored because there hasn't been any SCO news for a while.