Kadaitcha Man wrote:



Your entire post is mostly one long IKYABWAI lame. The bits that aren't
IKYABWAI lame are madly meandering babble. It was quaint of you to drool
and slobber on my feet, but I don't have room for another pet retard right
now. But please, do take some comfort. You're not alone.

That's Usenet for you, and the thanks I get. A white flag is customary. No
capitulation speech was required. Bye.

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 02:15:54 GMT, Truth wrote:

Why Automatic transmissions are easier than Manual transmissions for most
people. snip

Answer: Lack of talent.

dB

Henrietta wrote:

Kadaitcha Man wrote:



Your entire post is mostly one long IKYABWAI lame. The bits that aren't
IKYABWAI lame are madly meandering babble. It was quaint of you to drool
and slobber on my feet, but I don't have room for another pet retard
right now. But please, do take some comfort. You're not alone.

That's Usenet for you, and the thanks I get.

What do you feel you might have done that warranted any kind of thanks?

A white flag is customary. No
capitulation speech was required. Bye.

Haste will be your undoing.

Error log for Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:05:16 +0000: Kadaitcha Man caused a
Page Fault at address
, details...

Noted that you have no concern about your wetnurse's prudery.

Your entire post is mostly one long IKYABWAI lame. The bits that aren't
IKYABWAI lame are madly meandering babble. It was quaint of you to drool
and slobber on my feet, but I don't have room for another pet retard
right now. But please, do take some comfort. You're not alone.

Is this your sad way of admitting that you got spanked hard and served?
Methinks thou hast met thy match, how befitting that you be of the same
gender.

--
rapskat - 03:04:19 up 4:09, 4 users, load average: 1.10, 1.73, 1.74
You attempt things that you do not even plan because of your extreme stupidity.

rapskat wrote:

Error log for Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:05:16 +0000: Kadaitcha Man caused a
Page Fault at address
, details...

Noted that you have no concern about your wetnurse's prudery.

Your entire post is mostly one long IKYABWAI lame. The bits that aren't
IKYABWAI lame are madly meandering babble. It was quaint of you to drool
and slobber on my feet, but I don't have room for another pet retard
right now. But please, do take some comfort. You're not alone.

Is this your sad way of admitting that you got spanked hard and served?

snort

Methinks thou hast met thy match, how befitting that you be of the same
gender.

You've been looking at pictures of Shakespeare again, haven't you?

wrote:

Example: User wishes to play an audio CD with Windows. All he has to
do is put the CD in the tray and it works.

Oh really? That's funny, I put a CD into my kid's Win2k machine the
other day, and it did not play. I had to go to the M$ Web site to
download their latest spyware, and was immediately confronted with a
demand to enter all sorts of personal information, so that they could
verify that I was fully licensed. How "convenient".

Moderator wrote:

kier wrote:


Free clue: I'm not a zealot, a loonie, or anything

Ok! You got something right for once! You are nothing.

*plonk*

begin Kadaitcha Man piddled around and finally wrote:

rapskat wrote:

Error log for Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:05:16 +0000: Kadaitcha Man caused a
Page Fault at address
, details...

Noted that you have no concern about your wetnurse's prudery.

Your entire post is mostly one long IKYABWAI lame. The bits that aren't
IKYABWAI lame are madly meandering babble. It was quaint of you to drool
and slobber on my feet, but I don't have room for another pet retard
right now. But please, do take some comfort. You're not alone.

Is this your sad way of admitting that you got spanked hard and served?

snort

Methinks thou hast met thy match, how befitting that you be of the same
gender.

You've been looking at pictures of Shakespeare again, haven't you?

Those codpieces you know.

begin Talbot piddled around and finally wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:29:03 -0500, rapskat wrote:

Error log for Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:31:00 -0500: Talbot caused a Page Fault
at address , details...

And Linux doesn't have commercial applications?

Where did I say it didn't?

In case you missed it the first time...

Get a fscking clue, idiot.

I have one nut and I play with it always.

You didn't learn from playing too much with the other one?

In article chrisv says...

Oh really? That's funny, I put a CD into my kid's Win2k machine the
other day, and it did not play. I had to go to the M$ Web site to
download their latest spyware, and was immediately confronted with a
demand to enter all sorts of personal information, so that they could
verify that I was fully licensed.
Only because you manually uninstalled WMP or you manually disabled
autorun. There is no other reason that it wouldn't have worked.

Did you install WMP because you're a stupid Loonix user thus incapable
of finding one of the many free Windows apps available?


--
Conor

An imperfect plan executed violently is far superior to a perfect plan.
-- George Patton

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
On 2004-12-27, wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 21:21:50 -0500, rapskat wrote:

Error log for Sun, 26 Dec 2004 19:16:25 -0500: slinky_silkworm caused a
Page Fault at address ,
details...

Is Linux a better operating system?

Yes, it is. Why you ask?

No it's not.
Linux is a real joke, at least amongst audio professionals. Sure we
[deletia]
"Why on earth would ANYONE spend a dime for
Pro-tools/Cubase/Sonar/Waves/Logic/etc" when Linux, which is
supposedly faster, on an Intel system is an option?

Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?

Use your head for a change!!!!!

The honest answer is that Linux is a joke.
It can't do what the above programs can do.

You are attempting to confuse the OS and apps.

Cubase is an ATARI application for crying out loud.

The OS has nothing to do with it.

In fact Linux can't even muster up enough ability to do what the crap
Voyetra software included with most **** soundcards can do.
[deletia]

--

|||
/ | \

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 31 Dec 2004 23:24:54 GMT
:
JEDIDIAH, , the dilated, bucked up flagellant, and
fortune teller, preached:


You are attempting to confuse the OS and apps.

You know, it's ****ing hilarious how you stupid ****s lump apps in with the
OS when claiming "Linux is better than windows. It supports more apps out of
the box.", then proceed to separate the two when you're on the back foot in
an argument.

Linux is the leveled and graded bit of the lot which eventually gets
the house built thereon. Windows, of course, is the entire house, but
there is a bit of Windows which also is the leveled and graded bit of
the lot which eventually gets the Windows house built thereon.

They're more similar than different, with that broad an analogy.

But Linux by itself supports absolutely nothing. The best it might
do is throw a kernel panic ("can't find init" or some such; I'd have
to look), and even that requires GRUB to load it properly (although
the floppy-loading code is still on there, if I'm not mistaken;

dd if=vmlinuz of=/dev/fd0

will create a bootable floppy as vmlinuz has a bit o' code near its top
to set things up in memory).

With Windows, one can at least do simple edits, browse the Internet,
listen to tasty music, and watch videos. (Not that a good Linux distro
can't, but that's what it *is*: a distro. Not Linux, but a distro
encompassing such. In my mind the distinction is crystal-clear.)

[rest snipped]

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.audio.pro.]
On 2004-12-27, ray wrote:


I don't agree with your premise. I maintain that a properly installed and
set up Linux system is no harder to use than a properly installed and
set up MS system - it is just a little different.


Any time I hear this kind of argument, all I have to do is think of my
mom, who was already in her 50s when she got hold of a Kaypro, and
without my help (or even my blessing, really), had become rather
proficient with CP/M and Wordstar, almost completely on her own.

Linux is a hell of a lot easier to get into than that stuff was.

One person I met over Christmas absolutely shocked me -- a hilbilly
redneck by anyone's standards, even other hillbilly rednecks' standards,
and I'm not joking at all here, showed me his Lindows PC, or Linspire,
as it is called now. He was *using* it, *proficiently*, to do
bookkeeping and correspondence for his trucking business.

After that experience, I'm not worried about Linux advocacy anymore,
because I believe the work is done.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 1 Jan 2005 03:16:58 GMT
:
The Ghost In The Machine, , the
windburnt, nefarious glans, and person who cuts and polishes coprolites for
jewellery, groused:

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 31 Dec 2004 23:24:54 GMT
:
JEDIDIAH, , the dilated, bucked up flagellant,
and fortune teller, preached:


You are attempting to confuse the OS and apps.

You know, it's ****ing hilarious how you stupid ****s lump apps in
with the OS when claiming "Linux is better than windows. It supports
more apps out of the box.", then proceed to separate the two when
you're on the back foot in an argument.

Linux is the leveled and graded bit of the lot which eventually gets
the house built thereon.

I know that so why are you telling me what I already know? The point is, the
morons I am referencing have no compunction about lumping everything
together when it suits them, and disecting it again into separate parts when
it suits them at some other time.

Now, is there anything there that you do not understand?

Yes. Why does Linux not support Windows apps out of the box?

One should be able to double-click on INSTALL.EXE in a Linux
X window and voila -- instant installation. It's just that
easy on Windows.

:-)

[rest snipped]

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

Yes. Why does Linux not support Windows apps out of the box?

One should be able to double-click on INSTALL.EXE in a Linux
X window and voila -- instant installation. It's just that
easy on Windows.

Just like one can double-click on EMAIL-ATTACHMENT.EXE and voila -- instant
virus. It's just that easy on winblows.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:


Yes. Why does Linux not support Windows apps out of the box?

One should be able to double-click on INSTALL.EXE in a Linux
X window and voila -- instant installation. It's just that
easy on Windows.

Ever tried this under WINE? You'll be surprised ...

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
On 2005-01-05, Philip N. Daly wrote:
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:


Yes. Why does Linux not support Windows apps out of the box?

One should be able to double-click on INSTALL.EXE in a Linux
X window and voila -- instant installation. It's just that
easy on Windows.

Yes, it's just that easy to muck about with your
system files. "Easy" doesn't necessarily mean good. It
can also mean pointing a double action shotgun with a
hair trigger at your foot.

Although, I prefer the pre-windows method of
installation so much better:

unpack it
run it

(nevermind any of this "intall" BS)


Ever tried this under WINE? You'll be surprised ...


--

|||
/ | \

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 5 Jan 2005 02:25:38 GMT
:
The Ghost In The Machine, , the chinless,
torn-up fustilarian, and employee of the local clergy who goes from house to
house reading parts of the bible to try and encourage people to attend
church, flared:

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 1 Jan 2005 03:16:58 GMT
:
The Ghost In The Machine, , the
windburnt, nefarious glans, and person who cuts and polishes
coprolites for jewellery, groused:

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 31 Dec 2004 23:24:54 GMT
:
JEDIDIAH, , the dilated, bucked up flagellant,
and fortune teller, preached:


You are attempting to confuse the OS and apps.

You know, it's ****ing hilarious how you stupid ****s lump apps in
with the OS when claiming "Linux is better than windows. It
supports more apps out of the box.", then proceed to separate the
two when you're on the back foot in an argument.

Linux is the leveled and graded bit of the lot which eventually gets
the house built thereon.

I know that so why are you telling me what I already know? The point
is, the morons I am referencing have no compunction about lumping
everything together when it suits them, and disecting it again into
separate parts when it suits them at some other time.

Now, is there anything there that you do not understand?

Yes. Why does Linux not support Windows apps out of the box?

Please indicate where in the following statement the matter of Linux
supporting Windows apps out of the box jumped out of your insane
imagination:

"The point is, the morons I am referencing have no compunction
about lumping everything together when it suits them, and
disecting it again into separate parts when it suits them at
some other time."

[X]


Mark the spot with an x if words give you trouble.

Very true. The solution should not be considered as an OS; it
should be considered as the entire whole. One should also throw
in other stuff as well, such as the actual hardware -- a driver
for SB won't work very well for a Turtle card, for example.
Or ATI drivers on nVidia cards (or vice versa).

Also, Windows is the best example of an integrated whole I
can think of, except for the actual hardware. It consists
of many parts: kernel, ADO, Win32GUI, COMMDLG, etc., all of
them functioning harmoniously (hopefully) with installable
applications.

Linux, by contrast, is a very fractured beast -- but somehow
holds together as well. It must be considered as a unit,
though here one has a choice of more than 100 subassemblies,
some of which work well, some of which work less well. There
are also homebrew integration issues and issues regarding
"non-standard" (i.e, non-x86) hardware, and such things as
piping, shared memory, and sockets.

One cannot *con*fuse the OS and the apps -- they're already fused.
The hardware and the software are still disparate, but
at some point we may see fusion there as well; the Amiga
in particular had quite a bit of firmware, and even contemporary
PCs have the BIOS, which Linux bypasses for the most part
after bootup. (I don't know regarding Windows but suspect
parts of it bypass the BIOS as well, where suited.)

I should also note here that many DOS-era apps bypassed what
passed for an operating system entirely, talking directly
to the hardware as it suited them. Linux may go that route,
if necessary. Older versions of Windows allowed it, although
XP may remove that capability entirely (I don't know offhand).

Distros for Linux are accelerating a trend which Microsoft
started long ago. The fact that the distros are "free" does
not change this.


[rest snipped]

How convenient for you.


My post, my convenience. :-P Snip where you will, as you
will anyway.

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man

wrote
on 5 Jan 2005 21:34:06 GMT
:
The Ghost In The Machine, , the loutish,
french-speaking mankhead, and person who puts up notices, signs and
advertisements, alluded:

[snip]

[X]


Mark the spot with an x if words give you trouble.

Very true.

Does it hurt?


Only when I laugh. :-)

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

Truth wrote:
Why Automatic transmissions are easier than Manual transmissions for most
people.

Automatic transmisions like having two plastic glasses with a cord?

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC

bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:22 +0100, Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
wrote:

Why Automatic transmissions are easier than Manual transmissions for most
people.

Automatic transmisions like having two plastic glasses with a cord?

Linux provides excellent glasses, in any material, size and colour you
like. But you have to provide your own string.


CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

Laurence Payne wrote:
Linux provides excellent glasses, in any material, size and colour you
like. But you have to provide your own string.

There is the fun of using Linux. You can make your own string, something
you can't do in other Operating Systems, but it has the same or more
glasses than Windows or MacOSX.

(this seems like an encrypted conversation from a submarine)

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC

bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez

wrote
on Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:58:27 +0100
:
Laurence Payne wrote:
Linux provides excellent glasses, in any material, size and colour you
like. But you have to provide your own string.

There is the fun of using Linux. You can make your own string, something
you can't do in other Operating Systems, but it has the same or more
glasses than Windows or MacOSX.

(this seems like an encrypted conversation from a submarine)


Aren't analogies fun? :-)

Windows: One (1) size fits all Microsoft Plastic Tumbler, with hole.
One (1) Microsoft String(tm).

Note that one needs Microsoft Pitcher to make maximum use
of the Microsoft Plastic Tumbler, as well as a third-party
HolePlugger if one wants to actually use it for drinking.
Communications are effected by attaching the String to
the Microsoft Plastic Tumbler using a Microsoft String
To Plastic Tumbler Attachment Device (patent pending).
While the Microsoft String To Plastic Tumbler Attachment
Device can be used for drinking, a slow leak may require
one to clean up afterwards using Microsoft Pre-Moistened
Towelette Units. (Microsoft String will swell up, plugging
the leak, if one uses Microsoft Powdered Drink Solution
in Microsoft Water.)

Linux: See below.

Depending on what one actually wants to do, one can:

[1] Take sand and fabricate one's own glass, and make one's
own twine. This is probably the toughest.

[2] Take glass chips and fabricate one's own glass.

[3] Take glass or plastic pieces and put together a good, solid
drinking utensil, serving utensil, jug, drum, or tank.

[4] Take a plastic cone and some Standard String and assemble
a multiway "phone" network (with a knot in the middle
of the string that other strings can attach to).

[5] Squeeze oranges to make a refreshing drink.

:-)

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez

wrote
on Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:58:27 +0100
:

Laurence Payne wrote:

Linux provides excellent glasses, in any material, size and colour you
like. But you have to provide your own string.

There is the fun of using Linux. You can make your own string, something
you can't do in other Operating Systems, but it has the same or more
glasses than Windows or MacOSX.

(this seems like an encrypted conversation from a submarine)



Aren't analogies fun? :-)

Windows: One (1) size fits all Microsoft Plastic Tumbler, with hole.
One (1) Microsoft String(tm).

Note that one needs Microsoft Pitcher to make maximum use
of the Microsoft Plastic Tumbler, as well as a third-party
HolePlugger if one wants to actually use it for drinking.
Communications are effected by attaching the String to
the Microsoft Plastic Tumbler using a Microsoft String
To Plastic Tumbler Attachment Device (patent pending).
While the Microsoft String To Plastic Tumbler Attachment
Device can be used for drinking, a slow leak may require
one to clean up afterwards using Microsoft Pre-Moistened
Towelette Units. (Microsoft String will swell up, plugging
the leak, if one uses Microsoft Powdered Drink Solution
in Microsoft Water.)

Linux: See below.

Depending on what one actually wants to do, one can:

[1] Take sand and fabricate one's own glass, and make one's
own twine. This is probably the toughest.

[2] Take glass chips and fabricate one's own glass.

[3] Take glass or plastic pieces and put together a good, solid
drinking utensil, serving utensil, jug, drum, or tank.

[4] Take a plastic cone and some Standard String and assemble
a multiway "phone" network (with a knot in the middle
of the string that other strings can attach to).

[5] Squeeze oranges to make a refreshing drink.

:-)

Very fun and imaginative analogies. I enjoyed them :-)

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC

bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

don't believe a word this guy says, he's BOB SCARBOROUGH from Arizona,
a senile old man who is deaf, unemployed, and sucking off the
government cash cow in the form of welfare and disability checks