not that "conspiracy" cop out crap again....Educate yourself a little and see who dictates what gets done where in the tech sector. In this case, google for Microsoft's netbook hardware specs for Windows. You probably also didn't know that Microsoft dictated much of the hardware spec for smartphones which run Windows Mobile. I forget which telecom it was but one of them went to much effort to be allowed to put their own UI on their phone. And given the threat coming up from the ARM chips, I would not be surprised to hear that Intel was pushing some of what it wants OEMs to do in the netbook segment just like Microsoft has been doing since 2008.
those backlights use a lot of power so there is probably something to power usage considerations for netbooks. Larger displays would also require larger batteries. But, as we've seen in the smart phone and desktop markets, Microsoft dictates many of the hardware specs, not the OEM's hardware design people.
This does lead into the question of how fearful of Microsoft are the hardware manufacturers who get hired to build ARM based netbooks with screens larger than 10.2"? I would not be surprised to see ARM products constantly bumped to the back of the production queue for 'mysterious' reasons this holiday manufacturing season. Remember, Microsoft once forced Intel to fold one of their software divisions in the 90s because it threatened Windows and promoted Java. More recently, the head of the Thai manufacturers association publicly said they fear Microsoft... So is it really Intel doing the strong arming here?
um, except they say they will be coming out with the Chrome OS which is Chrome on top of Linux. "That" is the incentive I was talking about and why it's strange they still are releasing beta's for Windows first.
Interesting that they do advertise Chrome to IE users though. Then again, it's their site and service and I really don't think people using Chrome or anything else other than IE is a bad thing.
come on you guys, does this mean anything new? Heck no, it's is the same old Microsoft doing the same old stuff. They don't support open standards and the only reason they have joined any standards group is to either mess it up, slow it down, or learn what is coming down the line so they can attack it.
You can go all they way back to the 80s and read about how they handled Go Inc to see how they work. They put people on committees or get their people involved to learn how to defeat them or at the very least to learn where they are going so they can devise a plan to defeat them. So the sooner these people are not allowed to join these groups the better off society will be. It's been over 20 years and they've not changed and keep doing the same stuff. Screw em and leave em behind so we can move forward is the way to address that company. IMO.
it does seem strange that all this talk of Chrome OS and yet they're still pushing Chrome to Windows users first. Either these are two very different projects or Google is going to have to do much work getting these two groups synced up for the Chrome OS release.
everything I saw showed Yahoo with 20% share and Microsoft with 9% share. Yes, the 3rd place company was getting the 2nd place company's search technology and database data and all for the price of taking on all data center and engineering efforts.
Yahoo's option was to continue with their 20% and use those profits to figure out how to make money off something else. They should have collected a half a billion at the very least for all of Yahoo's data. IMO, this was more of a plan by Icahn to increase his value by helping Microsoft and giving Yahoo a short term boost so he can dump their stock. Yahoo will get to show some good profit numbers for a few quarters as they move all datacenter costs and 400 employee salaries over to Microsofts books. The stock will rebound abit and Icahn will dump and Yahoo executives will exit. Just a theory.
I was wondering if Microsoft was going to just get all of Yahoo's search data and it was stated that Microsoft gets Yahoo's search technology along with 400 of their engineers. So just how useful is the opt-out feature when you've handed your competition all your data, technology, and engineers and you've not kept the technology up for 5 years? Answer: their opt-out clause is only good for fooling the investors and board into thinking there's a way out.
I've heard this but also seen that most of those comparisons were with 1G or more of RAM and none seem to get into what is so different between Vista and Windows7 to show such a change in resource requirements. Remember that the first EeePC had 256MB of RAM but once Windows XP got installed, 1G was the norm no matter what OS was installed. Just saying that 1G of RAM is plenty of space for a netbook and much more than Linux requires on the device.
I'm wondering if Windows 7 really isn't Windows XP SP3 with the Vista device driver system and some API's or is it really Vista with a bunch of stuff removed. And if so, what's changed? Windows XP SP3 was the first time Microsoft ever made an OS release or update which improved performance and I heard SP3 was around a 10% improvement over XP SP2. XP SP3 was tested to be 2X faster than Vista.
And FYI, Android is but one option for an OS for netbooks. It is not the only GNU/Linux netbook setup by far. Unlike the Microsoft world, there's alot of choice in OSS and you or your OEM can do far more than what limits Microsoft puts on you and them. But I do understand that some people are happy letting others decisions for them.
Microsoft wants the netbook segment gone so there's been pressure to move the spec up from where the segment started, in the $200-$300 range. It helped that Windows required more hardware than the original Linux installs did and now with Windows 7 on the way, there's a new push to boost the specs and the price.
We've already seen the manufacturers state that they were afraid of Microsoft so it'll be interesting to see who will, or can, produce the ARM based netbooks this fall. IIRC, ASUS had to spin off their ARM department of their manufacturing facility and they were also the ones to say they were sorry for showing and ARM netbook at a computer show. So far, the press is doing Micrsoft's bidding and confusing the segment by calling small notebooks netbooks.
There's one for the patent office, 5m jammer in cars which, when disabled manually or automatically on impact, call 911 via bluetooth. A bluetooth connection being required to allow manual disabling.
And as much as these phones are being used in school, I'm surprised this has not come up a few years ago. A big red Cell Phone Kill Disable button in every classroom should be enough to deal with emergency situations. Should have been done yesterday IMO.
but it really was $65 for the OEM, it's the $50 they got back for putting the "Designed for Windows" sticker on it that makes it financially look like it's $15.
I remember there being a nice Seiko label printer driver for OS/2 and there might have been other label printer drivers. I know they won't be current but it would be a good start where there is nothing today. I used to print to the Seiko from Star Office using that label printer driver.
as condescending as the post was, they are correct in that it's probably cheaper getting a Windows 98 install CD, put it in a virtual machine and do your label printing there.
I've got an old Seiko Label Printer II which I print over serial to it using SLAP. It does the trick by I have to use a script to take the text, setup the command, set the text to a file and then run the slap command on that text file and tty device.
the other option is 8.5x11 sheets of labels and using most word procs to print to it. It's a bummer that hardware vendors are still not supporting Linux for their label printers.
an Apple store is not and iPod store. But, given the iPod's fame and market penetration, it would be nuts for Walmart not to sell iPods also but I would doubt they sell as many of the $250+ models as an Apple store but probably sell much more of the ~$100 shuffle and lowend iPods.
My point was about the Apple "store" and in general Apple products tend to be high end and stylish at a higher price. Microsoft, in general is about low end, kinda works, products and so it goes with the Microsoft "store". Sure, Microsoft will show a MS Surface device in every store but come on, is that where you'd go to buy one? It's just a marketing gimmick and so will most of the expensive hardware there. Even the Microsoft ads sell them as the low price company.
They'll do better near Walmart and away from Apple stores. But, they've got the money to dump on yet another money losing venture.
reading that I still don't get what they did, "The driver had both open-source components which were under GPL, and statically linked to several binary parts".
It says it has "both" so then they had GPL'ed some of their code, but not all, and also statically linked it all to GPL'ed libraries is what I get from that. Are they really so care free with other peoples software that licenses don't matter? If it said they just linked to the GPL'ed libraries then I could see the error or ignorance of the LGPL and what all that fuss had been about. But it sounds like they used GPL'ed code or included it as source also linked to GPL'ed libraries and must have added some of their own code to connect to their proprietary VM's virtual hardware.
Sorry, you almost had me convinced of a mistake but it looks like they had to know they were dealing with the GPL. Ballmer and other MS execs yell about this stuff all the time so their developers are clueless? Nope, don't buy it. Good try though.
the part about generic copies of Linux not running on their VM has me wondering how come so many get this wrong. These drivers are about improving the performance via optimized drivers, not getting Linux to run in the virtual machine. If that was really the case, you would have to ask yourself, how good of a virtual computer is it really.
in a netbook, it comes down to the CPU, the display(LCD and GPU), and the disk system. So what exactly do they expect to see comparing Windows with Windows on a system with probably over 30% of the power sucked up by a spinning disk? They should have tested with an SSD for the HD and then you're really just talking the CPU and display sucking up most of the power. Still, it's Windows vs Windows so I would not expect too much of a difference if you throw enough RAM so neither version of Windows feels constrained.
And do they even mention the amount of RAM in that? It comes stock with 1GB but 2GB is possible, maybe more. Too bad they didn't compare with what a Linux distro could do on some of those tests and with an SSD.
and using Linux instead of yet another attempt at a security system Microsoft patches on top of a poor base. I just love seeing how hardware vendors are also adding security elements in the CPU to block code from executing in data space. Just what the OS is supposed to do. Speaking of that, WTF is up with all the virtual machine stuff? Isn't the OS supposed to isolate application data and code from each other and provide a robust abstraction so applications run nicely with each other? Oh wait, Microsofts applications crash the OS so much and therefore crash other applications, you can't run a business system with more than one app running on one piece of hardware. So lets' virtualize them....
yes, Vista added some security to their broken system but it sucks deep down and Windows 7 just sucks less but it sucks far more than Linux or the other *nix based systems. Bunches of Windows users are becoming "switchers" even though there's a premium in price to be paid for the Mac. They're driven away because Windows sucks deeply no matter the version and marketing can't change that.
which was the point of the expensive payment deals it took to get XP installed and Linux kicked off of many of them. Windows 7 now puts Microsoft back in some control of bumping the cost up because it is a "new" product or so they say. What is more important to Microsoft though is eliminating this sector and degrading the impression of the netbook market being anything like the laptop market as far as usability goes.That's why they're trying to rename the device and sector.
I sure wish the ARM devices would hit the market ASAP though or Microsoft might have enough time to kill off the market much like they did the PDA market. FYI, over a year before Handspring leaked they were exiting the PDA market, Microsoft was already paying companies to sell Windows CE based devices and flooding the market with WinCE devices and it also bled into the accessories market too. Doesn't anyone think it funny that only now are phones usable as computing devices now that their displays are large enough to support those? It was a nice move by Microsoft to use its billions in cash to move the market toward its products, effectively gut the only competitors income and then back off on that market once the damage is done. Microsoft may have to play this same game with the ARM netbooks and we already know they are paying, via marketing programs, enough to netbook OEMs for them to publicly apologies for the OEM showing an ARM netbook and also installing Windows above and over the Linux versions. If not completely eliminating the Linux models all together.
I've not seen Windows 7 on a netbook but I don't doubt a 1+GHz, 2GB, and harddisk based netbook will run Windows 7 but it won't run or have the performance of a sub 1GHz, 1GB, SSD based Linux netbook nor the battery life. And definitely not after security software is installed to protect it. But I doubt many will get to have that option or choice unless ARM devices get on the market by late Oct 09. IMO.
that's where they belong for the customers they have. As I've said time and time again, Microsoft is the McDonalds of computer technology. It isn't the worst, it is far from the best, but it is what it is and the average Joe/Josey who either doesn't want to do any thinking or can't is fine taking what's shoveled onto their plate. Apple stores work because they are high end and stylish so their stores work fine in various mall's but would not do so well next to Walmart. The Microsoft store isn't going to do anything but weaken their already weakening brand because it doesn't make sense to have a Microsoft store other than another attempt at marketing the brand.
Should be fun to watch this unfold because unlike other Microsoft failures, this failure will not take out the innovator in the market.
the problem is that Microsoft does not act like a company under any kinds of anti-trust constraints. So when some project grabs some GPL'ed code and uses it in their project, it is very unlikely that their lawyers got involved at all. It was only after someone found something in the binary code which triggered the findings outside of Microsoft that GPL'ed code was inside their driver code.
What I would like to know is how exactly did this code get in the driver to begin with. What I'm talking about is the process the development of the driver went through where nobody else recognized the issue of embedding GPL'ed code within a software module without taking this up with someone who knows what it really means. Are their developers that clueless and/or do they really work individually in such a vacuum that they don't do peer reviews or use any kind of review process? It sure would explain how this happened and would probably explain why their software generally sucks until a half dozen iterations or so. It still tends to suck but it just sucks less and people I know expect things like crashes and reboots. I saw someone talking about a.NET project and a bug causing crashes in the application and then told the group that if it happens to them, reboot Windows and it'll go away.
their words are worthless and as soon as the press and public get this, the sooner we can all stop wasting our time discussing what those words mean or meant. It is not as if this is the first time they've done this kind of PR spin trick. Not even close.
Slashdot Mirror
not that "conspiracy" cop out crap again....Educate yourself a little and see who dictates what gets done where in the tech sector. In this case, google for Microsoft's netbook hardware specs for Windows. You probably also didn't know that Microsoft dictated much of the hardware spec for smartphones which run Windows Mobile. I forget which telecom it was but one of them went to much effort to be allowed to put their own UI on their phone. And given the threat coming up from the ARM chips, I would not be surprised to hear that Intel was pushing some of what it wants OEMs to do in the netbook segment just like Microsoft has been doing since 2008.
LoB
those backlights use a lot of power so there is probably something to power usage considerations for netbooks. Larger displays would also require larger batteries. But, as we've seen in the smart phone and desktop markets, Microsoft dictates many of the hardware specs, not the OEM's hardware design people.
LoB
hint: max spec for Windows XP Home on netbooks was 12.1", max spec for Windows 7 Starter on netbooks is 10.2"
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/22/microsoft-publishes-maximum-windows-7-netbooks-specs/
This does lead into the question of how fearful of Microsoft are the hardware manufacturers who get hired to build ARM based netbooks with screens larger than 10.2"? I would not be surprised to see ARM products constantly bumped to the back of the production queue for 'mysterious' reasons this holiday manufacturing season. Remember, Microsoft once forced Intel to fold one of their software divisions in the 90s because it threatened Windows and promoted Java. More recently, the head of the Thai manufacturers association publicly said they fear Microsoft... So is it really Intel doing the strong arming here?
LoB
um, except they say they will be coming out with the Chrome OS which is Chrome on top of Linux. "That" is the incentive I was talking about and why it's strange they still are releasing beta's for Windows first.
Interesting that they do advertise Chrome to IE users though. Then again, it's their site and service and I really don't think people using Chrome or anything else other than IE is a bad thing.
LoB
come on you guys, does this mean anything new? Heck no, it's is the same old Microsoft doing the same old stuff. They don't support open standards and the only reason they have joined any standards group is to either mess it up, slow it down, or learn what is coming down the line so they can attack it.
You can go all they way back to the 80s and read about how they handled Go Inc to see how they work. They put people on committees or get their people involved to learn how to defeat them or at the very least to learn where they are going so they can devise a plan to defeat them. So the sooner these people are not allowed to join these groups the better off society will be. It's been over 20 years and they've not changed and keep doing the same stuff. Screw em and leave em behind so we can move forward is the way to address that company. IMO.
LoB
it does seem strange that all this talk of Chrome OS and yet they're still pushing Chrome to Windows users first. Either these are two very different projects or Google is going to have to do much work getting these two groups synced up for the Chrome OS release.
LoB
everything I saw showed Yahoo with 20% share and Microsoft with 9% share. Yes, the 3rd place company was getting the 2nd place company's search technology and database data and all for the price of taking on all data center and engineering efforts.
Yahoo's option was to continue with their 20% and use those profits to figure out how to make money off something else. They should have collected a half a billion at the very least for all of Yahoo's data. IMO, this was more of a plan by Icahn to increase his value by helping Microsoft and giving Yahoo a short term boost so he can dump their stock. Yahoo will get to show some good profit numbers for a few quarters as they move all datacenter costs and 400 employee salaries over to Microsofts books. The stock will rebound abit and Icahn will dump and Yahoo executives will exit. Just a theory.
LoB
I was wondering if Microsoft was going to just get all of Yahoo's search data and it was stated that Microsoft gets Yahoo's search technology along with 400 of their engineers. So just how useful is the opt-out feature when you've handed your competition all your data, technology, and engineers and you've not kept the technology up for 5 years? Answer: their opt-out clause is only good for fooling the investors and board into thinking there's a way out.
LoB
QUIET! And pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
LoB
I've heard this but also seen that most of those comparisons were with 1G or more of RAM and none seem to get into what is so different between Vista and Windows7 to show such a change in resource requirements. Remember that the first EeePC had 256MB of RAM but once Windows XP got installed, 1G was the norm no matter what OS was installed. Just saying that 1G of RAM is plenty of space for a netbook and much more than Linux requires on the device.
I'm wondering if Windows 7 really isn't Windows XP SP3 with the Vista device driver system and some API's or is it really Vista with a bunch of stuff removed. And if so, what's changed? Windows XP SP3 was the first time Microsoft ever made an OS release or update which improved performance and I heard SP3 was around a 10% improvement over XP SP2. XP SP3 was tested to be 2X faster than Vista.
And FYI, Android is but one option for an OS for netbooks. It is not the only GNU/Linux netbook setup by far. Unlike the Microsoft world, there's alot of choice in OSS and you or your OEM can do far more than what limits Microsoft puts on you and them. But I do understand that some people are happy letting others decisions for them.
LoB
Microsoft wants the netbook segment gone so there's been pressure to move the spec up from where the segment started, in the $200-$300 range. It helped that Windows required more hardware than the original Linux installs did and now with Windows 7 on the way, there's a new push to boost the specs and the price.
We've already seen the manufacturers state that they were afraid of Microsoft so it'll be interesting to see who will, or can, produce the ARM based netbooks this fall. IIRC, ASUS had to spin off their ARM department of their manufacturing facility and they were also the ones to say they were sorry for showing and ARM netbook at a computer show. So far, the press is doing Micrsoft's bidding and confusing the segment by calling small notebooks netbooks.
LoB
There's one for the patent office, 5m jammer in cars which, when disabled manually or automatically on impact, call 911 via bluetooth. A bluetooth connection being required to allow manual disabling.
And as much as these phones are being used in school, I'm surprised this has not come up a few years ago. A big red Cell Phone Kill Disable button in every classroom should be enough to deal with emergency situations. Should have been done yesterday IMO.
LoB
but it really was $65 for the OEM, it's the $50 they got back for putting the "Designed for Windows" sticker on it that makes it financially look like it's $15.
LoB
I remember there being a nice Seiko label printer driver for OS/2 and there might have been other label printer drivers. I know they won't be current but it would be a good start where there is nothing today. I used to print to the Seiko from Star Office using that label printer driver.
LoB
as condescending as the post was, they are correct in that it's probably cheaper getting a Windows 98 install CD, put it in a virtual machine and do your label printing there.
I've got an old Seiko Label Printer II which I print over serial to it using SLAP. It does the trick by I have to use a script to take the text, setup the command, set the text to a file and then run the slap command on that text file and tty device.
the other option is 8.5x11 sheets of labels and using most word procs to print to it. It's a bummer that hardware vendors are still not supporting Linux for their label printers.
LoB
very promising but with 4-8 weeks shipping(boat), that's only 1-2 months at most to finalize production. Sure hope they hit production soon.
LoB
an Apple store is not and iPod store. But, given the iPod's fame and market penetration, it would be nuts for Walmart not to sell iPods also but I would doubt they sell as many of the $250+ models as an Apple store but probably sell much more of the ~$100 shuffle and lowend iPods.
My point was about the Apple "store" and in general Apple products tend to be high end and stylish at a higher price. Microsoft, in general is about low end, kinda works, products and so it goes with the Microsoft "store". Sure, Microsoft will show a MS Surface device in every store but come on, is that where you'd go to buy one? It's just a marketing gimmick and so will most of the expensive hardware there. Even the Microsoft ads sell them as the low price company.
They'll do better near Walmart and away from Apple stores. But, they've got the money to dump on yet another money losing venture.
LoB
reading that I still don't get what they did, "The driver had both open-source components which were under GPL, and statically linked to several binary parts".
It says it has "both" so then they had GPL'ed some of their code, but not all, and also statically linked it all to GPL'ed libraries is what I get from that. Are they really so care free with other peoples software that licenses don't matter? If it said they just linked to the GPL'ed libraries then I could see the error or ignorance of the LGPL and what all that fuss had been about. But it sounds like they used GPL'ed code or included it as source also linked to GPL'ed libraries and must have added some of their own code to connect to their proprietary VM's virtual hardware.
Sorry, you almost had me convinced of a mistake but it looks like they had to know they were dealing with the GPL. Ballmer and other MS execs yell about this stuff all the time so their developers are clueless? Nope, don't buy it. Good try though.
LoB
the part about generic copies of Linux not running on their VM has me wondering how come so many get this wrong. These drivers are about improving the performance via optimized drivers, not getting Linux to run in the virtual machine. If that was really the case, you would have to ask yourself, how good of a virtual computer is it really.
LoB
in a netbook, it comes down to the CPU, the display(LCD and GPU), and the disk system. So what exactly do they expect to see comparing Windows with Windows on a system with probably over 30% of the power sucked up by a spinning disk? They should have tested with an SSD for the HD and then you're really just talking the CPU and display sucking up most of the power. Still, it's Windows vs Windows so I would not expect too much of a difference if you throw enough RAM so neither version of Windows feels constrained.
And do they even mention the amount of RAM in that? It comes stock with 1GB but 2GB is possible, maybe more. Too bad they didn't compare with what a Linux distro could do on some of those tests and with an SSD.
LoB
and using Linux instead of yet another attempt at a security system Microsoft patches on top of a poor base. I just love seeing how hardware vendors are also adding security elements in the CPU to block code from executing in data space. Just what the OS is supposed to do. Speaking of that, WTF is up with all the virtual machine stuff? Isn't the OS supposed to isolate application data and code from each other and provide a robust abstraction so applications run nicely with each other? Oh wait, Microsofts applications crash the OS so much and therefore crash other applications, you can't run a business system with more than one app running on one piece of hardware. So lets' virtualize them....
yes, Vista added some security to their broken system but it sucks deep down and Windows 7 just sucks less but it sucks far more than Linux or the other *nix based systems. Bunches of Windows users are becoming "switchers" even though there's a premium in price to be paid for the Mac. They're driven away because Windows sucks deeply no matter the version and marketing can't change that.
LoB
which was the point of the expensive payment deals it took to get XP installed and Linux kicked off of many of them. Windows 7 now puts Microsoft back in some control of bumping the cost up because it is a "new" product or so they say. What is more important to Microsoft though is eliminating this sector and degrading the impression of the netbook market being anything like the laptop market as far as usability goes.That's why they're trying to rename the device and sector.
I sure wish the ARM devices would hit the market ASAP though or Microsoft might have enough time to kill off the market much like they did the PDA market. FYI, over a year before Handspring leaked they were exiting the PDA market, Microsoft was already paying companies to sell Windows CE based devices and flooding the market with WinCE devices and it also bled into the accessories market too. Doesn't anyone think it funny that only now are phones usable as computing devices now that their displays are large enough to support those? It was a nice move by Microsoft to use its billions in cash to move the market toward its products, effectively gut the only competitors income and then back off on that market once the damage is done. Microsoft may have to play this same game with the ARM netbooks and we already know they are paying, via marketing programs, enough to netbook OEMs for them to publicly apologies for the OEM showing an ARM netbook and also installing Windows above and over the Linux versions. If not completely eliminating the Linux models all together.
I've not seen Windows 7 on a netbook but I don't doubt a 1+GHz, 2GB, and harddisk based netbook will run Windows 7 but it won't run or have the performance of a sub 1GHz, 1GB, SSD based Linux netbook nor the battery life. And definitely not after security software is installed to protect it. But I doubt many will get to have that option or choice unless ARM devices get on the market by late Oct 09. IMO.
LoB
that's where they belong for the customers they have. As I've said time and time again, Microsoft is the McDonalds of computer technology. It isn't the worst, it is far from the best, but it is what it is and the average Joe/Josey who either doesn't want to do any thinking or can't is fine taking what's shoveled onto their plate. Apple stores work because they are high end and stylish so their stores work fine in various mall's but would not do so well next to Walmart. The Microsoft store isn't going to do anything but weaken their already weakening brand because it doesn't make sense to have a Microsoft store other than another attempt at marketing the brand.
Should be fun to watch this unfold because unlike other Microsoft failures, this failure will not take out the innovator in the market.
LoB
the problem is that Microsoft does not act like a company under any kinds of anti-trust constraints. So when some project grabs some GPL'ed code and uses it in their project, it is very unlikely that their lawyers got involved at all. It was only after someone found something in the binary code which triggered the findings outside of Microsoft that GPL'ed code was inside their driver code.
.NET project and a bug causing crashes in the application and then told the group that if it happens to them, reboot Windows and it'll go away.
What I would like to know is how exactly did this code get in the driver to begin with. What I'm talking about is the process the development of the driver went through where nobody else recognized the issue of embedding GPL'ed code within a software module without taking this up with someone who knows what it really means. Are their developers that clueless and/or do they really work individually in such a vacuum that they don't do peer reviews or use any kind of review process? It sure would explain how this happened and would probably explain why their software generally sucks until a half dozen iterations or so. It still tends to suck but it just sucks less and people I know expect things like crashes and reboots. I saw someone talking about a
LoB
their words are worthless and as soon as the press and public get this, the sooner we can all stop wasting our time discussing what those words mean or meant. It is not as if this is the first time they've done this kind of PR spin trick. Not even close.
LoB