WIN 7

[Mocassin Joe]

"Heywood Jablowme" <heywood@jablowme.gov> wrote in message
news:4bf1b248$1@news.x-privat.org...
>
>
> "Mocassin Joe" <joemocasanto@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:GNeIn.12010$Gx2.6820@newsfe20.iad...
>>
>> "Heywood Jablowme" <heywood@jablowme.gov> wrote in message
>> news:4beb0c74@news.x-privat.org...
>>>
>>>
>>> <no_one@no_where.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:hdkmu59pdkha3inpite9bgcsenrjtspvsu@4ax.com...
>>>> Well after working with Vista II, otherwise known as Windows 7, for
>>>> three months I can see that Microsoft is still incapable of producing
>>>> a quality OS. So I need to look at some other system to switch to,
>>>> likely one of the Linux distros.
>>>>
>>>> Bill - MN
>>>> --
>>>
>>> So you can't figure out Windows 7? Windows 7 is much better than Vista
>>> and is very stable. You are probably incompetent and therefore you
>>> should migrate to Ubuntu. Get with our resident Ubuntu idiot, Alias
>>> and he will help you out.
>>>
>>> Don't let the screen door hit your ass on the way out. LOL!
>>
>> Uncalled for. You sound like some of the MacFreaks on CSMA.
>>
>
> You don't like the message? Ignore it. Just FYI.

I didn't say that. You should buy a Mac.

 

[DanS]

"Death" <death@rottingcorpses.x-x> wrote in
news:4bf1a080@news.x-privat.org:

>
> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote
> in message
> news:Xns9D7B5405A85BAthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>> "Death" <death@rottingcorpses.x-x> wrote in
>> news:4befe126$1@news.x-privat.org:
>>
>>>
>>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m>
>>> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9D7A5133FC03Cthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131..
>>> .
>>>>>> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more
>>>>>> susceptible than Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> People with money are more likely to be robbed.
>>>>> No duh...moron.
>>>>> Were you born stupid, or did a brick land in your brain
>>>>> cavity?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And just so I'm completely clear, *you* have nothing
>>>> intelligent to say, so you just spit out insults and an
>>>> insinuation that Linux users are poor.
>>>>
>>>> ........you are a Linux user also.
>>>
>> <SNIPPED OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS>
>>
>
> Why snip it?
> It's exactly why Windows and Office are so popular, and
> linux is getting nowhere fast.
> Linux and it's apps suck.
> Deal with it.
>

Windows and Office are so popular because almost all expoits
ever created are for Windows, and that because of this, there
is an inherent susceptibilty?

Well, that was the topic of this sub-thread....not your
incessant whining about how nothing in Linux ever works for
you.

One specific discussion subject that you turn into crying
about your problems and how Linux sucks and will never go
anywhere, blah, blah, blah...........

They were OT as they did not have anything to do with the
subject at hand.

 

[Death]

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
news:Xns9D7BD946D35A8thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
> "Death" <death@rottingcorpses.x-x> wrote in
> news:4bf1a080@news.x-privat.org:
>
>>
>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote
>> in message
>> news:Xns9D7B5405A85BAthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>> "Death" <death@rottingcorpses.x-x> wrote in
>>> news:4befe126$1@news.x-privat.org:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m>
>>>> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9D7A5133FC03Cthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131..
>>>> .
>>>>>>> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more
>>>>>>> susceptible than Linux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> People with money are more likely to be robbed.
>>>>>> No duh...moron.
>>>>>> Were you born stupid, or did a brick land in your brain
>>>>>> cavity?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And just so I'm completely clear, *you* have nothing
>>>>> intelligent to say, so you just spit out insults and an
>>>>> insinuation that Linux users are poor.
>>>>>
>>>>> ........you are a Linux user also.
>>>>
>>> <SNIPPED OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS>
>>>
>>
>> Why snip it?
>> It's exactly why Windows and Office are so popular, and
>> linux is getting nowhere fast.
>> Linux and it's apps suck.
>> Deal with it.
>>
>
> Windows and Office are so popular because almost all expoits
> ever created are for Windows, and that because of this, there
> is an inherent susceptibilty?
>
> Well, that was the topic of this sub-thread....not your
> incessant whining about how nothing in Linux ever works for
> you.
>
> One specific discussion subject that you turn into crying
> about your problems and how Linux sucks and will never go
> anywhere, blah, blah, blah...........
>
> They were OT as they did not have anything to do with the
> subject at hand.

Well then Dumass Junior...keep you fuckin nose out of threads you don't
belong in.
You only cried that I claimed poor people only use Linux, when I did not.
Alias said that...you took my metaphor, and snipped it into an out of
context statement, like you always do, asshole.
So, all my replies to you in the future will be to STFU Loser.

--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Mon, 17 May 2010 173:19 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 13:47:05 +0700, John B. Slocomb
>> <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote:

>> Alias, I am feeling very left out here. I asked you a legitimate
>> technical question and you failed to answer me. Like to take a shot at
>> explaining why you say that it is terrible when a Windows user doesn't
>> de-frag his disk but a Linux user doesn't need to de-frag his?
>>
>> A little technical discussion to liven up the thread?
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_...operating_system_and_windows_operating_system
>
>http://polishlinux.org/linux/windows-vs-linux-architecture-part-i/
>
>http://www.astahost.com/info.php/What39s-Difference-Linux-Unix33_t2124.html#Latest_Entry
>
>http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/08/17/why_doesn_t_linux_need_defragmenting
>
>Need more?
>
>Try using this: http://www.google.com/ and stop being such a twit.

Ah... So as I suspected you didn't know enough about either Linux or
Windows to explain the difference.

However, your first reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.

In addition your second reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.

And, not only that, but your third reference doesn't discuss disk
defragging.

And finally, TA! DA!, your fourth reference discusses disk defraging.

I've had this feeling all along that you didn't really know very much
about computers and all this shouting and hand waving was really a
facade to disguise the fact. And you prove it.

You made the statement that de-fraging was necessary and I questioned
it, you, not knowing the answer ignored my question; I asked again,
with emphasis, and lo and behold, you went to google and discovered
some references but apparently, not only did you know anything about
the subject, but you didn't even read the references that you posted
as three of the four had no relationship to the subject.

You have certainly proved my original belief that you don't know what
you are talking about as even your final reference doesn't state that
defragging a Linux disk is never necessary.

So that you won't have to take the bother to actually read any of your
references I'll quote from your only valid reference:

NOTE: The "first filesystem" refers to Windows and the "second" refers
to Linux

--------------------------------------------------
The first filesystem tries to put all files as close to the start of
the hard drive as it can, thus it constantly fragments files when they
grow larger and there's no free space available.

The second scatters files all over the disk so there's plenty of free
space if the file's size changes. It can also re-arrange files
on-the-fly, since it has plenty of empty space to shuffle around.
Defragging the first type of filesystem is a more intensive process
and not really practical to run during normal use.

Fragmentation thus only becomes an issue on this latter type of system
when a disk is so full that there just aren't any gaps a large file
can be put into without splitting it up. So long as the disk is less
than about 80% full, this is unlikely to happen.
-----------------------------------------

If you had bothered to read what you referenced you would have seen
that the author states that a Linux disk will remain unfragmented
UNTIL ABOUT 80% OF THE DISK IS FILLED.

( although that is very dependant on the size of files being stored)

So, your assertion that Linux disks don't require defragging is
technically false although probably true, in practice, except in large
file servers.

However, that was not the point of the exercise. The point of the
exercise was to discover whether you really were as un-knowledgeable
about computers as had been suspected and you certainly removed any
doubt about the matter.

And you are lazy too. You didn't even read the references that you
provided.

You have the audacity to "help" people with their computers? Amazing!
It certainly says something about the gullibility of the people you
associate with, doesn't it?


John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[Alias]

John B. Slocomb wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 173:19 +0200, Alias
> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>
>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 13:47:05 +0700, John B. Slocomb
>>> <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>> Alias, I am feeling very left out here. I asked you a legitimate
>>> technical question and you failed to answer me. Like to take a shot at
>>> explaining why you say that it is terrible when a Windows user doesn't
>>> de-frag his disk but a Linux user doesn't need to de-frag his?
>>>
>>> A little technical discussion to liven up the thread?
>>>
>>> John B. Slocomb
>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>
>> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_...operating_system_and_windows_operating_system
>>
>> http://polishlinux.org/linux/windows-vs-linux-architecture-part-i/
>>
>> http://www.astahost.com/info.php/What39s-Difference-Linux-Unix33_t2124.html#Latest_Entry
>>
>> http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/08/17/why_doesn_t_linux_need_defragmenting
>>
>> Need more?
>>
>> Try using this: http://www.google.com/ and stop being such a twit.
>
> Ah... So as I suspected you didn't know enough about either Linux or
> Windows to explain the difference.
>
> However, your first reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.
>
> In addition your second reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.
>
> And, not only that, but your third reference doesn't discuss disk
> defragging.
>
> And finally, TA! DA!, your fourth reference discusses disk defraging.
>
> I've had this feeling all along that you didn't really know very much
> about computers and all this shouting and hand waving was really a
> facade to disguise the fact. And you prove it.
>
> You made the statement that de-fraging was necessary and I questioned
> it, you, not knowing the answer ignored my question; I asked again,
> with emphasis, and lo and behold, you went to google and discovered
> some references but apparently, not only did you know anything about
> the subject, but you didn't even read the references that you posted
> as three of the four had no relationship to the subject.
>
> You have certainly proved my original belief that you don't know what
> you are talking about as even your final reference doesn't state that
> defragging a Linux disk is never necessary.
>
> So that you won't have to take the bother to actually read any of your
> references I'll quote from your only valid reference:
>
> NOTE: The "first filesystem" refers to Windows and the "second" refers
> to Linux
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> The first filesystem tries to put all files as close to the start of
> the hard drive as it can, thus it constantly fragments files when they
> grow larger and there's no free space available.
>
> The second scatters files all over the disk so there's plenty of free
> space if the file's size changes. It can also re-arrange files
> on-the-fly, since it has plenty of empty space to shuffle around.
> Defragging the first type of filesystem is a more intensive process
> and not really practical to run during normal use.
>
> Fragmentation thus only becomes an issue on this latter type of system
> when a disk is so full that there just aren't any gaps a large file
> can be put into without splitting it up. So long as the disk is less
> than about 80% full, this is unlikely to happen.
> -----------------------------------------
>
> If you had bothered to read what you referenced you would have seen
> that the author states that a Linux disk will remain unfragmented
> UNTIL ABOUT 80% OF THE DISK IS FILLED.
>
> ( although that is very dependant on the size of files being stored)
>
> So, your assertion that Linux disks don't require defragging is
> technically false although probably true, in practice, except in large
> file servers.
>
> However, that was not the point of the exercise. The point of the
> exercise was to discover whether you really were as un-knowledgeable
> about computers as had been suspected and you certainly removed any
> doubt about the matter.
>
> And you are lazy too. You didn't even read the references that you
> provided.
>
> You have the audacity to "help" people with their computers? Amazing!
> It certainly says something about the gullibility of the people you
> associate with, doesn't it?
>
>
> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything about
computers. The fact that someone's lack of knowledge is a brownie point
for you says more about you than me, chum. That said, I provided you
with links that describe the differences between Linux and Windows and
why Linux doesn't need defragging. You could have done the same thing
with a cursory Google search AND YOU KNOW IT. You only purpose in asking
was to try and set me up to prove that I'm not as knowledgeable as you.
As you obviously don't know, every so often Ubuntu does a hard drive
check when booting and before loading the desktop. I'm not sure if
that's just a disk check or a defrag but I'm not a computer expert.

You diss me for helping people. That also says more about you than me. I
help where I can and don't post anything if I don't know the answer.

--
Alias

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Tue, 18 May 2010 12:40:12 +0200, Alias
<aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:

>John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 173:19 +0200, Alias
>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>
>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 13:47:05 +0700, John B. Slocomb
>>>> <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Alias, I am feeling very left out here. I asked you a legitimate
>>>> technical question and you failed to answer me. Like to take a shot at
>>>> explaining why you say that it is terrible when a Windows user doesn't
>>>> de-frag his disk but a Linux user doesn't need to de-frag his?
>>>>
>>>> A little technical discussion to liven up the thread?
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_...operating_system_and_windows_operating_system
>>>
>>> http://polishlinux.org/linux/windows-vs-linux-architecture-part-i/
>>>
>>> http://www.astahost.com/info.php/What39s-Difference-Linux-Unix33_t2124.html#Latest_Entry
>>>
>>> http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/08/17/why_doesn_t_linux_need_defragmenting
>>>
>>> Need more?
>>>
>>> Try using this: http://www.google.com/ and stop being such a twit.
>>
>> Ah... So as I suspected you didn't know enough about either Linux or
>> Windows to explain the difference.
>>
>> However, your first reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.
>>
>> In addition your second reference doesn't discuss disk defragging.
>>
>> And, not only that, but your third reference doesn't discuss disk
>> defragging.
>>
>> And finally, TA! DA!, your fourth reference discusses disk defraging.
>>
>> I've had this feeling all along that you didn't really know very much
>> about computers and all this shouting and hand waving was really a
>> facade to disguise the fact. And you prove it.
>>
>> You made the statement that de-fraging was necessary and I questioned
>> it, you, not knowing the answer ignored my question; I asked again,
>> with emphasis, and lo and behold, you went to google and discovered
>> some references but apparently, not only did you know anything about
>> the subject, but you didn't even read the references that you posted
>> as three of the four had no relationship to the subject.
>>
>> You have certainly proved my original belief that you don't know what
>> you are talking about as even your final reference doesn't state that
>> defragging a Linux disk is never necessary.
>>
>> So that you won't have to take the bother to actually read any of your
>> references I'll quote from your only valid reference:
>>
>> NOTE: The "first filesystem" refers to Windows and the "second" refers
>> to Linux
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> The first filesystem tries to put all files as close to the start of
>> the hard drive as it can, thus it constantly fragments files when they
>> grow larger and there's no free space available.
>>
>> The second scatters files all over the disk so there's plenty of free
>> space if the file's size changes. It can also re-arrange files
>> on-the-fly, since it has plenty of empty space to shuffle around.
>> Defragging the first type of filesystem is a more intensive process
>> and not really practical to run during normal use.
>>
>> Fragmentation thus only becomes an issue on this latter type of system
>> when a disk is so full that there just aren't any gaps a large file
>> can be put into without splitting it up. So long as the disk is less
>> than about 80% full, this is unlikely to happen.
>> -----------------------------------------
>>
>> If you had bothered to read what you referenced you would have seen
>> that the author states that a Linux disk will remain unfragmented
>> UNTIL ABOUT 80% OF THE DISK IS FILLED.
>>
>> ( although that is very dependant on the size of files being stored)
>>
>> So, your assertion that Linux disks don't require defragging is
>> technically false although probably true, in practice, except in large
>> file servers.
>>
>> However, that was not the point of the exercise. The point of the
>> exercise was to discover whether you really were as un-knowledgeable
>> about computers as had been suspected and you certainly removed any
>> doubt about the matter.
>>
>> And you are lazy too. You didn't even read the references that you
>> provided.
>>
>> You have the audacity to "help" people with their computers? Amazing!
>> It certainly says something about the gullibility of the people you
>> associate with, doesn't it?
>>
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
>You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
>am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything about
>computers.

O.K., I'll go along with you - you don't know anything about
computers.

Then why are you insistently making pronouncements about Windows and
Linux? Do you really feel that someone that has confessed to being
ignorant about the subject can have anything of value to contribute?

Or are you so arrogant that you feel that any pronouncement you make
is valid simply because you said it? Infallible, like the Pope?

>The fact that someone's lack of knowledge is a brownie point
>for you says more about you than me, chum. That said, I provided you
>with links that describe the differences between Linux and Windows and
>why Linux doesn't need defragging. You could have done the same thing
>with a cursory Google search AND YOU KNOW IT. You only purpose in asking
>was to try and set me up to prove that I'm not as knowledgeable as you.

No, not as knowledgeable as I am. Since I know that the Windows kernel
is not called the Registry and I know that neither Fedora nor Ubuntu
are based on gnome I am much more knowledgeable then you. The question
was how dumb you actually are.

And since 75% of your response had nothing to do with the subject
under discussion.....

>As you obviously don't know, every so often Ubuntu does a hard drive
>check when booting and before loading the desktop. I'm not sure if
>that's just a disk check or a defrag but I'm not a computer expert.

The fsck that Linux does isn't a disk defrag it is simply checking the
file structure and if necessary repairing it.

>You diss me for helping people. That also says more about you than me. I
>help where I can and don't post anything if I don't know the answer.

No, I don't diss you for helping people I diss you for talking about
subjects that you don't know anything about. "Waving your hands in the
air and shouting", "the sky is falling!"

John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[DanS]

> So, all my replies to you in the future
> will be to STFU Loser.

So you are moving up to the intelligence level and discussion
content of Frank ?

Good move.

Next your be channeling Stan Starinski. At least *that* would be
a step up.

 

[Alias]

John B. Slocomb wrote:

>> You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
>> am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything about
>> computers.
>
> O.K., I'll go along with you - you don't know anything about
> computers.

> John B. Slocomb
> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)

Do you really think don't know anything?

--
Alias

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hsu2be$tiq$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>
>>> You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
>>> am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything about
>>> computers.
>>
>> O.K., I'll go along with you - you don't know anything about
>> computers.
>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)
>
> Do you really think don't know anything?
>
> --
> Alias

You really are clueless aren't you? You can answer any of his questions and
with good reason. You are a complete idiot.

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hsoipq$pog$3@news.eternal-september.org...
> Death wrote:
>>
>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9D79D2D15CF9Fthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>> Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:H6GHn.4871$yx.324@newsfe13.iad:
>>>
>>>> The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't
>>>> enough installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the
>>>> Mariposa botnet was counted as separate OS, it would have
>>>> more users than Linux!
>>>
>>> You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
>>> spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
>>> thread branch.)
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
>>> than Linux.
>>
>> People with money are more likely to be robbed.
>
> Are you saying that all Windows users are rich and all Linux users are
> poor or what?
>
> --
> Alias

No. He is saying that you are an idiot.

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hsr4c5$rto$2@news.eternal-september.org...
> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>
>> IT Facts
>> Alex Moskalyuk
>>
>> Home / News& Blogs / IT Facts
>> Linux servers hacked more frequently than Windows
>>
>> By ZDNet Research | February 19, 2004, 8:21am PST
>> Summary
>> A more specific analysis of government servers also found Linux more
>> susceptible, accounting for 57% of all breaches. The research did not
>> include other methods of intrusion such as viruses and worms.
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
> Six year old article that is obviously biased. You *really* are desperate.
> --
> Alias

Why don't you stick with being the Ubuntu Marketing Department, take 10,000
Ubuntu CDs to Nigeria and try to convince people to get on board with
Ubuntu. Just think, if you pass out all 10,000 CDs, you may get another 7
users!

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:hsm0am$lkp$5@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 05/15/2010 04:50 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:47:21 +0200, Alias
>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>
>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 124:58 +0200, Alias
>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:07:43 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/13/2010 14:48, Alias wrote:
>>>>>>>> Nor do I. I use both Windows and Linux.
>>>>>>> Do you have anything to say about the other things I said? You
>>>>>>> quoted
>>>>>>> everything in my post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah Jackie, you are learning about Alias. He posts some unsupported
>>>>>> slander about Windows and when someone rebuts his post complete with
>>>>>> quotes and references to demonstrate validity he replies with
>>>>>> irrelevancies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given that Alias seems to know very little about computers, witness
>>>>>> his assertion that the Windows kernel is the Registry and that a
>>>>>> certain compilation of Linux is a version based on the desktop
>>>>>> environment, it seems likely that he is one of these "instant
>>>>>> experts", that finally learned enough to turn the computer on and off
>>>>>> and now portrays himself as the all knowing pundit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong, I have *never* claimed to be a computer expert.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You really, really, need to take some remedial reading classes as you
>>>> are either unable to understand simple English, or perhaps you don't
>>>> want to believe that you are wrong, yet again..
>>>>
>>>> In any event, the term I used in reference to you was "instant
>>>> expert", used as a form of ridicule for those who, with little or no
>>>> knowledge, run about telling everyone how to do their job. Or in your
>>>> case what the best computer system is.
>>>>
>>>> The Indians had a folk story about a rat that found a lump of turmeric
>>>> and started a provisions shop.
>>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>
>>> Triple yawn.
>>
>> I didn't think that you'd "get it".
>>
>> John B. Slocomb
>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
> Oh, I got it. It's just boring to see you flailing around trying paint
> yourself as Mr Perfect Computer Expert and and hurling ad hominem attacks
> at me. Do you get that?
>
> --
> Alias

You don't get it and you never will. You get your ass kicked on a daily
basis and keep coming back for more. Why not go to the Ubuntu forum and
help out those sorry sacks who believe they have a decent OS when in reality
they have shit.

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:hsm0c8$lkp$6@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 05/15/2010 05:47 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 09:11:08 -0700, "Heywood Jablowme"
>> <heywood@jablowme.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias"<aka@masked&anonymous.com.¡nvalido> wrote in message
>>> news:hsjodi$p72$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On 05/14/2010 02:55 PM, Man-wai Chang to The Door (33600bps) wrote:
>>>>>>> And running softwares developped [sic] for Windows.
>>>>>> Yeah, like malware.
>>>>>
>>>>> No.. DirectX 3D games and HDTV viewer!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Shouldn't you go to the Ubuntu forums and help out those sorry sacks who
>>> believe they have a decent OS when in reality they have SHIT?
>>>
>>
>> No he shouldn't!
>
> I've been there since 2006. Oops.
>
And you still can't figure out how to post!

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hsu2be$tiq$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>
>>>> You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
>>>> am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything about
>>>> computers.
>>>
>>> O.K., I'll go along with you - you don't know anything about
>>> computers.
>>
>>> John B. Slocomb
>>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)
>>
>> Do you really think don't know anything?
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> You really are clueless aren't you?

No.

> You can answer any of his questions
> and with good reason.

Read what you wrote again, speaking of clueless.

> You are a complete idiot.
>
>
>

I know the answers to some and I don't know the answers to others just
like anyone else. Oh, and if I were "a complete idiot", I wouldn't be
able to use a computer, much less post here.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hsoipq$pog$3@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Death wrote:
>>>
>>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9D79D2D15CF9Fthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>>> Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>> news:H6GHn.4871$yx.324@newsfe13.iad:
>>>>
>>>>> The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't
>>>>> enough installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the
>>>>> Mariposa botnet was counted as separate OS, it would have
>>>>> more users than Linux!
>>>>
>>>> You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
>>>> spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
>>>> thread branch.)
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
>>>> than Linux.
>>>
>>> People with money are more likely to be robbed.
>>
>> Are you saying that all Windows users are rich and all Linux users are
>> poor or what?
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> No. He is saying that you are an idiot.
>
>

Actually, if you read what he wrote, he isn't.

--
Alias

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
> news:hsm0am$lkp$5@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 05/15/2010 04:50 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:47:21 +0200, Alias
>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 124:58 +0200, Alias
>>>>> <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:07:43 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2010 14:48, Alias wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Nor do I. I use both Windows and Linux.
>>>>>>>> Do you have anything to say about the other things I said? You
>>>>>>>> quoted
>>>>>>>> everything in my post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ah Jackie, you are learning about Alias. He posts some unsupported
>>>>>>> slander about Windows and when someone rebuts his post complete with
>>>>>>> quotes and references to demonstrate validity he replies with
>>>>>>> irrelevancies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Given that Alias seems to know very little about computers, witness
>>>>>>> his assertion that the Windows kernel is the Registry and that a
>>>>>>> certain compilation of Linux is a version based on the desktop
>>>>>>> environment, it seems likely that he is one of these "instant
>>>>>>> experts", that finally learned enough to turn the computer on and
>>>>>>> off
>>>>>>> and now portrays himself as the all knowing pundit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wrong, I have *never* claimed to be a computer expert.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You really, really, need to take some remedial reading classes as you
>>>>> are either unable to understand simple English, or perhaps you don't
>>>>> want to believe that you are wrong, yet again..
>>>>>
>>>>> In any event, the term I used in reference to you was "instant
>>>>> expert", used as a form of ridicule for those who, with little or no
>>>>> knowledge, run about telling everyone how to do their job. Or in your
>>>>> case what the best computer system is.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Indians had a folk story about a rat that found a lump of turmeric
>>>>> and started a provisions shop.
>>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>
>>>> Triple yawn.
>>>
>>> I didn't think that you'd "get it".
>>>
>>> John B. Slocomb
>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>
>> Oh, I got it. It's just boring to see you flailing around trying paint
>> yourself as Mr Perfect Computer Expert and and hurling ad hominem
>> attacks at me. Do you get that?
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> You don't get it and you never will. You get your ass kicked on a daily
> basis and keep coming back for more.

You wish.

> Why not go to the Ubuntu forum and
> help out those sorry sacks who believe they have a decent OS when in
> reality they have shit.
>
>

Why don't you? I'm sure your comments will go over really well there.

--
Alias

 

[Frank]

On 5/18/2010 8:56 AM, Alias wrote:
> Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hsu2be$tiq$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You are putting words in my mouth again. Not only have I posted that I
>>>>> am not a computer expert, I have never claimed to know everything
>>>>> about
>>>>> computers.
>>>>
>>>> O.K., I'll go along with you - you don't know anything about
>>>> computers.
>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)
>>>
>>> Do you really think don't know anything?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> You really are clueless aren't you?
>
> No.
>
>> You can answer any of his questions
>> and with good reason.
>
> Read what you wrote again, speaking of clueless.
>
>> You are a complete idiot.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I know the answers to some and I don't know the answers to others just
> like anyone else. Oh, and if I were "a complete idiot", I wouldn't be
> able to use a computer, much less post here.
>
Haven't you made a big enough fool out of yourself in here already? Do
you enjoy getting your ass kicked all the time? Are you really that
stupid and arrogant?
Clue...those are rhetorical questions. Rhetorical means everyone (except
you) already knows the answers.

 

[Frank]

On 5/18/2010 8:57 AM, Alias wrote:
> Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hsoipq$pog$3@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Death wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9D79D2D15CF9Fthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>>>> Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:H6GHn.4871$yx.324@newsfe13.iad:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason that "Linux" isn't targeted is that there aren't
>>>>>> enough installations to bother with. Lets face it, if the
>>>>>> Mariposa botnet was counted as separate OS, it would have
>>>>>> more users than Linux!
>>>>>
>>>>> You are confirming is that Windows is the imminent target of
>>>>> spyware/malware writers ? (Which was the original point of this
>>>>> thread branch.)
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't matter why. At this time, Windows is more susceptible
>>>>> than Linux.
>>>>
>>>> People with money are more likely to be robbed.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that all Windows users are rich and all Linux users are
>>> poor or what?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> No. He is saying that you are an idiot.
>>
>>
>
> Actually, if you read what he wrote, he isn't.
>

You really are the idiot aren't you.

 

[Frank]

On 5/18/2010 5:03 AM, DanS wrote:
>> So, all my replies to you in the future
>> will be to STFU Loser.
>
> So you are moving up to the intelligence level and discussion
> content of Frank ?

That would be an upgrade for an asshole like you.
>
> Good move.

For you, it just might be.
>
> Next your be channeling Stan Starinski. At least *that* would be
> a step up.

There is a Greek word that apply describes you, phonetically it is "tralos".

 

[Alias]

On 05/18/2010 12:03 AM, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hsmacj$cb7$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Death wrote:
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>
>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:18:44 +0200, Alias
>>>>> <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 05/15/2010 05:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 14 May 2010 18:53:28 +0200, Jackie<Jackie@an.on> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2010 18:10, Heywood Jablowme wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who the hell wants to run Windows applications in Ubuntu and
>>>>>>>>> who the
>>>>>>>>> hell would want to run them under WHINE? If you need Microsoft
>>>>>>>>> applications, and most people want MS apps, then use Windows.
>>>>>>>>> No need to
>>>>>>>>> use that INFERIOR Ubuntu that nobody wants.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ubuntu was written by geeks for geeks who can't get laid.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having *options* is a very good thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It can be nice if you want to use Ubuntu and you actually have that
>>>>>>>> option to use them via an emulator (Wine, CXGames, Cedega).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having used Windows since Windows 95 up until present version
>>>>>>>> and not
>>>>>>>> much Linux, I wouldn't exactly say that Ubuntu is bad. Overall, I
>>>>>>>> personally feel that Windows is more complete. But... Windows still
>>>>>>>> lacks essential features that Ubuntu has pre-installed. I, for one,
>>>>>>>> think that finding and installing applications and the best drivers
>>>>>>>> could (and should) be easier in Windows. There's a potential
>>>>>>>> solution
>>>>>>>> for this if you could gather developers and their products into one
>>>>>>>> place. There were no good solution in Windows as early as in
>>>>>>>> (most?)
>>>>>>>> Linux distros (and still not now). I believe that is why
>>>>>>>> applications
>>>>>>>> for Windows are so spread without a good, easy, built-in way to
>>>>>>>> find,
>>>>>>>> browse and install them from one single place.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that one of the reasons for the "Oh! Linux can do anything
>>>>>>> that Windows can" fiction is that most of the people using either
>>>>>>> system aren't using it professionally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the major reasons is that the vast majority of the business
>>>>>>> world uses Windows and the associated applications. If you do a job
>>>>>>> for most companies you will run head on into the fact that your
>>>>>>> Linux
>>>>>>> system doesn't match their Windows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Almost every project I have been on used Auto-Cad and during
>>>>>>> construction of a project there are innumerable changes in the
>>>>>>> drawings. The normal practice is to e-mail complete drawings back
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> forth between the Engineering Office and the Field. Up-dated drawing
>>>>>>> going out to the Field and marked up drawings showing the
>>>>>>> "As-builts"
>>>>>>> sent back.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frequently if one writes a report the company will request that
>>>>>>> both a
>>>>>>> printed report and a disk copy be furnished, particularly if any
>>>>>>> form
>>>>>>> of legal problems are anticipated. And, with extremely rare
>>>>>>> exceptions
>>>>>>> they want the disks in "Word format".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is all well and good to say "Well, Open Office can do the
>>>>>>> job", but
>>>>>>> if you deliver a Linux formatted disk with a OO document on it you
>>>>>>> will probably be told in no uncertain terms that it is not what you
>>>>>>> contracted to do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course Auto-Cad will run on Linux using Wine but how big a data
>>>>>>> file can it handle? Are you sure that it can edit the largest
>>>>>>> drawing
>>>>>>> that the Engineers want to send? If you are out in the middle of
>>>>>>> a 100
>>>>>>> Sq. Km. sugar cane plantation in the middle of Java building a gas
>>>>>>> plant for the National Oil Company it is not really a good time to
>>>>>>> discover that you can't do your job because Linux won't do it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, as long as windows is the dominant computer operating system
>>>>>>> Linux
>>>>>>> is never going to be a wholly acceptable system..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're right. Some things can only be done with Windows, at least for
>>>>>> now. My point is that most HOME USERS can do everything they do with
>>>>>> Windows but more securely if they use Ubuntu or another Linux distro.
>>>>>
>>>>> I just installed Fedora 13 (beta) on my Granddaughter's game computer
>>>>> - dual boot, Win 7 and Fedora - and set up Clamav to do periodic virus
>>>>> scans on the Linux partition. Thought I'd give the kid a fighting
>>>>> chance so changed things around a bit so that Linux could see the
>>>>> windows directory and set up Clamav to scan that partition too.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a machine that a 7 year old girl uses and has the installed
>>>>> Win 7 firewall and whatever they call it that won't let you run a
>>>>> program without clicking on yet another permission box. Probably not
>>>>> earth shaking protection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Results - no virus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I have had one serious virus in something like 20 years and
>>>>> I got that one from a bootleg copied disk. I use a firewall and do
>>>>> periodic virus scans but frankly I have never had a problem with
>>>>> mal-ware or virus that effected the operations of the computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> My own suspicions are that these people who have massive problems with
>>>>> mal-ware or virus are very likely not using a decent firewall or are
>>>>> downloading a lot of porn and warz.
>>>>>
>>>>> John B. Slocomb
>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>>>>
>>>> You're forgetting about not updating Windows, Java, Flash, etc. as
>>>> causes. That's the beautiful thing about Linux: the updates update
>>>> everything you have installed if you configure it properly.
>>>
>>> Windows,java,Flash,whatever-your-heart-desires gets updated in Windows
>>> automatically,dummy.
>>> Do you actual run Windows, or do you just despise it?
>>
>> You're wrong on all counts.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Once I had
>>>> to clean up an XP machine that had never been defragged (customer:
>>>> what's that?) or updated (customer: what's that?). It took over ten
>>>> minutes to boot up and once it booted, pop up Windows had a fucking
>>>> field day. I ended up reinstalling XP because there was just too much
>>>> malware to deal with and there was no guarantee that the AV and other
>>>> anti malware programs would completely remove all malware.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You re-installed XP cause that is your skill level...stick a DVD/live-CD
>>> in a tray, call it "support".
>>
>> You obviously know nothing about cleaning up Windows machines.
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> So you are a PC tech in Spain.

Not exactly. It's a very small part of our business. I don't do much of
the work. We leave that for grunts like you who will work for minimum wage.

> I guess that $14k a week you claim to get
> just doesn't go very far! LOL!

I make Euros and lately the Euro has been taking a beating so, in
dollars, I am making less but more than enough to meet my needs.

--
Alias