Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Re: MT-NewsWatcher and Intel iMac

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: MT-NewsWatcher and Intel iMac

 
 
Ruddell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
On Tue, 2 May 2006 13:28:13 -0600, Michelle Steiner wrote
(in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):

> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> Donald McDaniel <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>> Yes. I buy computers to run useful applications for me, not to
>>>> indulge in OS flamewars.

>>
>> In the first place, one does not have to "spend $200", since XP
>> Professional can be purchased for much less.

>
> Professional lists for $299; you can get more than a third off? Home
> edition lists for $199, and the lowest I've seen it for sale has been in
> the 190s.



Educational and corporate discount programs mean that some people can get the
software/OS for as little as twenty five dollars...



--
Cheers!

Dennis

Remove 'Elle-Kabong' to reply

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joel Shepherd
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
Michelle Steiner <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > You're certainly in "good company", aren't you?.

>
> Yup, I am in good company. So why don't you go back to
> <news:alt.i-am-better-than-you-because-i-am-a-eastern-orthodox-christian.
> org> and peddle your vitriol there?


I must say, this is injecting some much needed new life into the usual
alt.html liturgy of putdowns, brush offs and general insults.

Thanks!

--
Joel.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Urra Dipschit
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
On 2006-05-02 09:47:30 -0700, Enough <(E-Mail Removed)> said:

> Nah, Mike is just hungry for his long lost BALLS!


Lookit! Dickhead is back in school!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Michelle Steiner
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
Ruddell <ruddell'Elle-Kabong'@canada.com> wrote:

> >> In the first place, one does not have to "spend $200", since XP
> >> Professional can be purchased for much less.

> >
> > Professional lists for $299; you can get more than a third off?
> > Home edition lists for $199, and the lowest I've seen it for sale
> > has been in the 190s.

>
> Educational and corporate discount programs mean that some people can
> get the software/OS for as little as twenty five dollars...


If someone were eligible for any of those discounts, very good for them.
Many of us aren't.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michelle Steiner
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)5n.co.uk>,
Toby Inkster <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Getting back to the matter at hand, spending $200 [on an operating
> > system] in order to run a $29 piece of software does not make
> > financial sense to me.

>
> What if Forte Agent cost $200, and Windows only cost $29: would it
> then be financially justifiable?


If forte agent cost $200, I believe that very few people, if any, would
buy it, so it becomes a moot point.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Neredbojias
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
To further the education of mankind, dorayme
<(E-Mail Removed)> vouchsafed:

> This would have to be the silliest thread ever...


Not without Luigi!

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Rosenberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:

> You do have a tendency to repeat your opinion
> over and over and over again, though.


I think that's true of most people around these parts.

I think that's true of most people around these parts.

--
Mike Rosenberg
<http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida
<http://www.cafepress.com/macconsult,macconsult4> Mac-themed T-shirts
<http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart
 
Reply With Quote
 
Neredbojias
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2006
To further the education of mankind, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)lid (Mike
Rosenberg) vouchsafed:

> Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:
>
>> You do have a tendency to repeat your opinion
>> over and over and over again, though.

>
> I think that's true of most people around these parts.
>
> I think that's true of most people around these parts.


How come your x-face of a thumb is so warped?
How come your x-face of a thumb is so warped?

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Donald McDaniel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2006
On Tue, 2 May 2006 12:28:13 -0700, Michelle Steiner wrote
(in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):

> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> Donald McDaniel <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>> Yes. I buy computers to run useful applications for me, not to
>>>> indulge in OS flamewars.

>>
>> In the first place, one does not have to "spend $200", since XP
>> Professional can be purchased for much less.

>
> Professional lists for $299; you can get more than a third off? Home
> edition lists for $199, and the lowest I've seen it for sale has been in
> the 190s.


Michelle, since you've probably never purchased XP Pro, you wouldn't know,
being part of the "Mac Fanatics" club.

But a so-called "Full OEM" version of XP Pro can be purchased for the same
price as OS X (approx. $125). Unlike Apple, which will not allow its OS to
be distributed as an OEM, Microsoft DOES sell "third-party OEM" discs of XP
Pro. They are sold to system builders, who may distribute them with almost
any piece of necessary hardware (including a power cord).

The ONLY differences between a so-called "FULL RETAIL" disc and a "FULL OEM"
disc are :
1) A FULL RETAIL will do an IN-PLACE UPGRADE, and may be installed on any
Intel machine, at any time, as many times as are necessary (as long as it's
only "Activated" on one machine at once), while a "FULL OEM" may only be
installed on ONE machine, and only that one machine, as many times as are
necessary necessary, although it may be "Activated" as many times as
necessary.

2) To enforce the OEM license terms, the OEM disc will NOT perform an
IN-PLACE UPGRADE of an existing installation of a previous Windows 9x OS.
That is, it must be installed "clean" each time it is installed. It IS
possible to get around this IF an existing install of 9x is on the machine,
and the file system is at least FAT32 with a minimum of 3 GB (plus) free.
But it STILL must be installed "clean" each time it is installed, and ONLY on
the "original machine".

While the last version of the XP OEM EULA allowed ANY Hardware upgrades or
repairs necessary to keep the original machine in working order (including a
change of motherboards), and were very ambiguous about what constituted the
"original computer", or just what would make it a "new" one), the NEWEST
EULAS specifically state that a change of the original motherboard will make
the "original computer" a "new" one, and therefore, would not covered by the
original OEM License, thus necessitating a new license.

3) A FULL RETAIL license may be transferred to ANYONE (once), WITHOUT also
transferring the machine along with it, as long as all copies of the OS are
deleted from the machine(s) it is currently installed on, including all
archival copies of the Installation disc (which must be transferred to the
new owner or physically destroyed), while a FULL OEM license may ONLY be
transferred to another user IF it is transferred WITH the original computer
it was purchased for and originally installed on, as well as all existing
installations and archival copies of the Install disc.

>
>> And do NOT believe the "theory" that only a "Full Retail XP Pro" will
>> install and run via BootCamp on an Intel Mac. This is just FUD
>> from ignorant people, or nay-sayers in the Apple camp.

>
> Do you know this for a fact, or is just more of you're blowing smoke?
>


Having installed XP MANY, MANY times using both Retail and OEM copies since
its Beta days, I know for a FACT that as LONG as the OEM is a so-called "FULL
OEM", it WILL install on ANY Intel-based machine quite easily, as long as
there is at least 64MB memory and a CD/DVD drive is on the machine and the
drive is accessible and available, and there is at least 3 GB of free
(unallocated) HD space available. A few users have even done the
installation with LESS memory and HD space available. I never would even
attempt it, however, since such a machine would run XP VERY SLUGGISHLY.

By the way, Michelle, it should be "your smoke-blowing" (a possessive
pronoun), not "you're blowing smoke" (a verb phrase, meaning "you are
blowing smoke").

>>> That second sentence is totally unresponsive and irrelevant to my
>>> question.

>>
>> And how was his answer "totally unresponsive and irrelevant"?

>
> Because my question had nothing to do with OS wars.


Nor did his response have anything to do with "OS wars". By the way, if you
REALLY think they are "wars", you should be bombing XP users, rather than
complaining about them in a newsgroup where you want only your "friends" to
post.

Stay in "church", and your words will only reach the choir, but stand on a
street corner and shout them, and they will reach thousands in a day.

>
>> From my way of thinking, it makes perfect sense.

>
> I'm not surprised.


>
>> Buy a knife to cut things with, buy a computer to run the software
>> you want to run.

>
> He was advocating buying a chain saw where a butter knife would do.
>
>> But from my perspective, buying an over-priced computer (great as it
>> is) just to run OS X is just as "financially wasteful".

>
> Well, fortunately, the Mac is not overpriced, and furthermore, people
> buy it to actually do things, not just to run the OS.
>


Such an idiotic response is not deserving of a response from any rational
person, Michelle. I thought you were "better" than that. But, I guess not.

>>> I just can't see any newsreader being worth $229.

>>
>> You're right about one thing, Michelle. You just can't see another
>> person's point of view.

>
> Wrong.
>
>> Which only means that you're completely without compassion,

>
> Wrong.
>
>> like the rest of the Mac fanatics.

>
> Wrong.
>
>> You're certainly in "good company", aren't you?.

>
> Yup, I am in good company. So why don't you go back to
> <news:alt.i-am-better-than-you-because-i-am-a-eastern-orthodox-christian.
> org> and peddle your vitriol there?
>
>


Michelle, if you think THAT was "vitriolic" (as you call it), why don't you
look again at YOUR response to my response to the OP?

Hypocrite!!!

At least I can recognize when I am being "vitriolic". Apparently, you and
other Mac fanatics can't (or don't want to).

However, I have YET to be intentionally vitriolic in ANY post of mine. Some
of them MIGHT "look vitriolic", but that is to be expected when I (or other)
Christians make statements contrary to what you want to hear.

Let's face it, Michelle: you and the rest of the Mac Fanatics are simply
anti-Christians, and anytime ANY of us make ANY statement about our faith (or
our personal likes or dislikes), YOU are going to call them "vitriolic", for
one reason or another, no matter WHAT we may say about ANYTHING.


I learned long ago that people are strange. They will love whom them will,
and they will hate whomever they choose to hate. So go right ahead and treat
me with hatred, my friend. If I can't endure your persecutions, I won't be
able to endure anyone else's. And if I can't love you as my sister, I won't
be able to love my Creator.

But I guarantee you, I will continue to speak the truth from my heart, as I
am commanded to by St. Paul, no matter what.

--

Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread,
so that the thread may be kept intact.
================================================== ======

 
Reply With Quote
 
Donald McDaniel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2006
On Tue, 2 May 2006 18:01:29 -0700, Toby Inkster wrote
(in article <(E-Mail Removed)5n.co.uk>):

> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>
>> Getting back to the matter at hand, spending $200 [on an operating
>> system] in order to run a $29 piece of software does not make financial
>> sense to me.

>
> What if Forte Agent cost $200, and Windows only cost $29: would it then be
> financially justifiable?
>
>


Toby, don't even try. Michelle is a rabid anti-XP Mac fanatic as well as a
rabid anti-Christian.

Michelle simply cannot see from another person's point of view, even if she
tries. Nothing you or anyone says will change her mind. Her fanaticism for
Macs has totally warped any human rationality or compassion she may possess.

--

Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread,
so that the thread may be kept intact.
================================================== ======

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel HD Graphics 3000 and Intel HD Graphics 2000 Review Ian Front Page News 0 02-24-2011 03:07 PM
Intel compiler, efficiency of various complex number types and FFTWvs. Intel's FFT. Kazik´┐Ż C++ 4 07-06-2009 05:09 PM
Nikon Scan 4 crashes on launch on new Intel iMac capn-shanghai@comcast.net Digital Photography 5 04-08-2006 12:15 PM
Fedora Core 3 on Intel 310 (and possibly Intel 315) Chipset Archiver NZ Computing 1 06-02-2005 12:46 PM



Advertisments