Re: Installing Legal Copy of XP Pro

[GHalleck]

Wayne wrote:

<<snipped>>

> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred dollars
> I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4 machines?
>


Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.

[Lynne Nerbonne]

I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.


"GHalleck" > wrote in message
...
>
> Wayne wrote:
>
> <<snipped>>
>
>> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred
>> dollars I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4
>> machines?
>>
>
>
> Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
> thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
> OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
> sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
> The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
> computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
> policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
> then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
> the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.
>

[Wayne]

You guys/gals gotta be kidding me ....

Your right ... one license is sometimes more than I pay for an entire
machine.

OK .. I understand business, and that they want revenue from the operating
sytems tied to every unit, but were is the consideration for people in
situations like mine?

Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will run my
MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?






"GHalleck" > wrote in message
...
>
> Wayne wrote:
>
> <<snipped>>
>
>> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred
>> dollars I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4
>> machines?
>>
>
>
> Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
> thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
> OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
> sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
> The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
> computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
> policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
> then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
> the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.
>

[Kerry Brown]

Wayne wrote:
> You guys/gals gotta be kidding me ....
>
> Your right ... one license is sometimes more than I pay for an entire
> machine.
>
> OK .. I understand business, and that they want revenue from the
> operating sytems tied to every unit, but were is the consideration
> for people in situations like mine?
>
> Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will
> run my MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?
>
>

Hate to tell you but in most cases Publisher, Office, etc. etc. are also
licensed for only one machine. As it's only a hobby why not pucrchase
properly licensed software for one machine and the kid's machines then play
with Linux on the others. Who knows, once you've become proficient with
Linux you may decide that you like it better anyway.

Kerry

[Carl G]

$165. for an OEM is pretty expensive in my book.

--
Carl G
"Lynne Nerbonne" > wrote in message
...
>I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.
>
>
> "GHalleck" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Wayne wrote:
>>
>> <<snipped>>
>>
>>> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred
>>> dollars I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4
>>> machines?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
>> thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
>> OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
>> sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
>> The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
>> computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
>> policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
>> then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
>> the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.
>>
>
>

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Wayne

I sense that you are about to mutate into a troll.. :-)

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"Wayne" > wrote in message
...
> You guys/gals gotta be kidding me ....
>
> Your right ... one license is sometimes more than I pay for an entire
> machine.
>
> OK .. I understand business, and that they want revenue from the operating
> sytems tied to every unit, but were is the consideration for people in
> situations like mine?
>
> Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will run
> my MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "GHalleck" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Wayne wrote:
>>
>> <<snipped>>
>>
>>> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred
>>> dollars I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4
>>> machines?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
>> thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
>> OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
>> sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
>> The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
>> computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
>> policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
>> then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
>> the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.
>>
>
>

[Xeroid]

That's in CDN dollars...have you seen it for cheaper than that?


"Carl G" <cgerving@ecenetDOTcom> wrote in message
...
> $165. for an OEM is pretty expensive in my book.
>
> --
> Carl G
> "Lynne Nerbonne" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.
>>
>>
>> "GHalleck" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Wayne wrote:
>>>
>>> <<snipped>>
>>>
>>>> Does MS seriously think I should pay more $ than the several hundred
>>>> dollars I paid for my one copy to have the operating system on my 4
>>>> machines?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nothing's free. Of course, according to hindsight, the smartest
>>> thing to have had done was to buy the OS with each computer. The
>>> OS is heavily discounted. Microsoft's suggested retail price is
>>> sometimes even more than the selling price of a barebones computer.
>>> The other alternative is not to upgrade the OS for the remaining
>>> computers. In fact, one rationale for Microsoft to adopt this
>>> policy was to prevent owners from buying one computer with OS and
>>> then using the OS installation cdrom or diskettes to upgrade all
>>> the other computers in the household or small business or whatever.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Plato]

Wayne wrote:
>
> Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will run my
> MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?

If you want to run MS apps such as above, the use the OS that allows
them to run.




--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

[Wayne]

> If you want to run MS apps such as above, then use the OS that allows
> them to run.
>
You hit the nail on the head with what you just said ..... ALLOWS them to
run !!! And THE operating system implying that there is only one! In
essence what you just said was that you HAVE TO HAVE MS's operating system
to run these files. NO CHOICE

Isn't this interesting.

[ANONYMOUS]

Kerry Brown wrote:
>

> Hate to tell you but in most cases Publisher, Office, etc. etc. are also
> licensed for only one machine.
>
> Kerry


Not correct. Office retail edition is licensed to be installed on
desktop and any other portable device whatever this means. Laptop
perhaps.

Office Students & Teachers on 3 PCs/Laptops.

[ANONYMOUS]

Lynne Nerbonne wrote:
>
> I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.
>

You have been ripped off. Sorry to tell you that.

[Xeroid]

Ripped off at $165.00 CDN (approx. $132.00 U$. , no way.


"ANONYMOUS" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Lynne Nerbonne wrote:
>>
>> I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.
>>
>
> You have been ripped off. Sorry to tell you that.

[ANONYMOUS]

Wayne wrote:
>
> > If you want to run MS apps such as above, then use the OS that allows
> > them to run.
> >
> You hit the nail on the head with what you just said ..... ALLOWS them to
> run !!! And THE operating system implying that there is only one! In
> essence what you just said was that you HAVE TO HAVE MS's operating system
> to run these files. NO CHOICE
>
> Isn't this interesting.


That's logical don't you think so. MS apps can only run on MS OS unless
specifically made for other systems.

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Wayne

MS Office 2004 runs on Mac OS.. how unfair is that?.. we have to make do
with 2003 while Mac users get 2004.. like I said before, you are fast
mutating into a troll..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"Wayne" > wrote in message
...
>> If you want to run MS apps such as above, then use the OS that allows
>> them to run.
>>
> You hit the nail on the head with what you just said ..... ALLOWS them to
> run !!! And THE operating system implying that there is only one! In
> essence what you just said was that you HAVE TO HAVE MS's operating system
> to run these files. NO CHOICE
>
> Isn't this interesting.
>
>

[ANONYMOUS]

Newegg seems to sell for $88

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16837102151

hth


Xeroid wrote:
>
> Ripped off at $165.00 CDN (approx. $132.00 U$. , no way.
>
> "ANONYMOUS" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Lynne Nerbonne wrote:
> >>
> >> I bought an OEM last week for $165.00 CDN that't not expensive.
> >>
> >
> > You have been ripped off. Sorry to tell you that.

[Tony]

Wayne wrote:
> You guys/gals gotta be kidding me ....
>
> Your right ... one license is sometimes more than I pay for an entire
> machine.
>
> OK .. I understand business, and that they want revenue from the operating
> sytems tied to every unit, but were is the consideration for people in
> situations like mine?
>
> Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will run my
> MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?

Wayne,

Don't you know, XP stands for eXPensive!

Your alternatives are Linux, Open Office, and
any of the many GUI's written for it (the GUI is not part
of the OS, as it is with Windows):

http://www.centos.org
http://www.openoffice.org
http://www.xfce.org

You can download them for free. But they too come
with a "License." It essentially says that they
are free and meant to stay free. (No repackaging it
as your own and charging for it.)

Linux is a huge culture shock for Windows users,
so you may want to purchase less computer and pay for the
proper number of XP licenses.

HTH,
--Tony

[Kerry Brown]

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>
>
>> Hate to tell you but in most cases Publisher, Office, etc. etc. are
>> also licensed for only one machine.
>>
>> Kerry
>
>
> Not correct. Office retail edition is licensed to be installed on
> desktop and any other portable device whatever this means. Laptop
> perhaps.
>
> Office Students & Teachers on 3 PCs/Laptops.

I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".

Kerry

[ANONYMOUS]

Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>


I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are worst
then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre Budget Report)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm

Regards,

[Steve N.]

ANONYMOUS wrote:

> Newegg seems to sell for $88
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16837102151
>
> hth
>

That's Home Edition, not Pro.

Steve

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

One of the benefits of not seeing messages in html form is that all text
appears as the same size.. ie.. no small print.. you might want to read
every word in posts rather than 'read one, miss four'.. we all do it
sometimes..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"ANONYMOUS" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>
>> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>>
>
>
> I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are worst
> then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre Budget Report)
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
>
> Regards,

[Kerry Brown]

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>
>> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>>
>
>
> I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are worst
> then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre Budget Report)
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
>
> Regards,

Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have pointed out
some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet after all. If you want
to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be subtle. It's not working. Here's a
good starting point for learning how to flame.

Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever

Kerry

[ANONYMOUS]

Kerry,

I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my usual
high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am not short
of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence like other
working class people.

Have a nice time.


Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
> > Kerry Brown wrote:
> >>
> >> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
> >>
> >
> >
> > I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are worst
> > then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre Budget Report)
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
> >
> > Regards,
>
> Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have pointed out
> some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet after all. If you want
> to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be subtle. It's not working. Here's a
> good starting point for learning how to flame.
>
> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>
> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
>
> Kerry

[Alias]

ANONYMOUS wrote:

> Kerry,
>
> I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my usual
> high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am not short
> of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence like other
> working class people.
>
> Have a nice time.

You wouldn't be a Christian that voted for Bush per chance?

Alias
>
>
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>
>>ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>
>>>Kerry Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>>I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are worst
>>>then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre Budget Report)
>>>
>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>
>>Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have pointed out
>>some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet after all. If you want
>>to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be subtle. It's not working. Here's a
>>good starting point for learning how to flame.
>>
>>Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>>
>>http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
>>
>>Kerry

[kurttrail]

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Kerry,
>
> I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my
> usual high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am
> not short of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence
> like other working class people.
>
> Have a nice time.

People that think they are better than other people just because they
don't curse, are just fooling themselves. Most of the "working class
people" I know that use the f-word are a hell of a lot more intelligent
than you.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[ANONYMOUS]

Most of the "working class
> people" I know that use the f-word are a hell of a lot more intelligent
> than you.

Intelligence is relative. Don't you agree? They will be intelligent to
to be able to use f-word. I don't disagree at all in that.




kurttrail wrote:
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
> > Kerry,
> >
> > I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my
> > usual high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am
> > not short of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence
> > like other working class people.
> >
> > Have a nice time.
>
> People that think they are better than other people just because they
> don't curse, are just fooling themselves. Most of the "working class
> people" I know that use the f-word are a hell of a lot more intelligent
> than you.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Kerry Brown]

Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is usually
a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it I have
temporarily switched while replying to you..

I really don't know what kind of language you are talking about. The link I
posted in an attempt to help you craft better flames does not contain any
profanity. My post I self censored so that Microsoft would not pull it.
Using the same word seven times in one sentence would indicate to me a lack
of imagination rather than a lack of vocabulary. That is one of the reasons
I posted the link. I sensed a lack of imagination in your attempts at
flames.

I didn't realise that the UK still had a class system. I haven't visited
there in quite a few years but it wasn't evident at that time. Maybe things
have changed under Tony Blair. I find it hard to believe that the labour
party would re-institute the class system but as you live there you would
know.

Kerry


ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Kerry,
>
> I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my
> usual high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am
> not short of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence
> like other working class people.
>
> Have a nice time.
>
>
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>
>> ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are
>>> worst then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre
>>> Budget Report)
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have
>> pointed out some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet
>> after all. If you want to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be
>> subtle. It's not working. Here's a good starting point for learning
>> how to flame.
>>
>> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>>
>> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
>>
>> Kerry

[kurttrail]

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Most of the "working class
>> people" I know that use the f-word are a hell of a lot more
>> intelligent than you.
>
> Intelligence is relative. Don't you agree? They will be intelligent
> to to be able to use f-word. I don't disagree at all in that.

LOL! I notice you took yourself out of the equation.

Blowing your own horn for not using the f-word is just as idiotic as
blowing your horn for using it.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[ANONYMOUS]

Just to deal with the class system.

Class system has been around for centuries and will remain so.
Although, this is being erroded slowly it is nertheless there. People
apply it subtly.

Under Tony Blair, the gap between those who have and those who don't
have widened. This is very good news as I always believe that economy
operates more efficiently this way. In Communism, class system was non
existent and look what a fine mess there were in!

Hot air flows towards cold air. Same process applies with wealth!

Top posting is better as it is easy to read the message. When you have
followed the thread from the outset, you don't want to waste any time
reading it all over again. You just want to read what is new and deal
with it. Do you bottom post in business as well? We don't!

Where exactly are you from? I haven't looked at the headers of your
messages yet. Perhaps I should. You are not from Ireland are you? The
name Kerry sounds Irish but then I may be wrong.

Time to go to bed. It is 01:16 here in London and Dublin!

Best regards,

Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is usually
> a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it I have
> temporarily switched while replying to you..
>
> I really don't know what kind of language you are talking about. The link I
> posted in an attempt to help you craft better flames does not contain any
> profanity. My post I self censored so that Microsoft would not pull it.
> Using the same word seven times in one sentence would indicate to me a lack
> of imagination rather than a lack of vocabulary. That is one of the reasons
> I posted the link. I sensed a lack of imagination in your attempts at
> flames.
>
> I didn't realise that the UK still had a class system. I haven't visited
> there in quite a few years but it wasn't evident at that time. Maybe things
> have changed under Tony Blair. I find it hard to believe that the labour
> party would re-institute the class system but as you live there you would
> know.
>
> Kerry
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
> > Kerry,
> >
> > I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my
> > usual high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am
> > not short of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence
> > like other working class people.
> >
> > Have a nice time.
> >
> >
> > Kerry Brown wrote:
> >>
> >> ANONYMOUS wrote:
> >>> Kerry Brown wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are
> >>> worst then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre
> >>> Budget Report)
> >>>
> >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>
> >> Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have
> >> pointed out some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet
> >> after all. If you want to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be
> >> subtle. It's not working. Here's a good starting point for learning
> >> how to flame.
> >>
> >> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
> >>
> >> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
> >>
> >> Kerry

[ANONYMOUS]

you are right again. Congratulation!



kurttrail wrote:
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
> > Most of the "working class
> >> people" I know that use the f-word are a hell of a lot more
> >> intelligent than you.
> >
> > Intelligence is relative. Don't you agree? They will be intelligent
> > to to be able to use f-word. I don't disagree at all in that.
>
> LOL! I notice you took yourself out of the equation.
>
> Blowing your own horn for not using the f-word is just as idiotic as
> blowing your horn for using it.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
...
> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it I
> have temporarily switched while replying to you..
>
> I really don't know what kind of language you are talking about. The link
> I posted in an attempt to help you craft better flames does not contain
> any profanity. My post I self censored so that Microsoft would not pull
> it. Using the same word seven times in one sentence would indicate to me a
> lack of imagination rather than a lack of vocabulary. That is one of the
> reasons I posted the link. I sensed a lack of imagination in your attempts
> at flames.
>
> I didn't realise that the UK still had a class system. I haven't visited
> there in quite a few years but it wasn't evident at that time. Maybe
> things have changed under Tony Blair. I find it hard to believe that the
> labour party would re-institute the class system but as you live there you
> would know.
>
> Kerry
>
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
>> Kerry,
>>
>> I will not resort to that sort of language as it is well below my
>> usual high standards! I shall leave that to you. In any case I am
>> not short of vocabularly to resort to f* words 7 times in a sentence
>> like other working class people.
>>
>> Have a nice time.
>>
>>
>> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>>
>>> ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>>> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess you didn't notice the qualifier "in most cases".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess there is always a small print in your messages. You are
>>>> worst then our Chancellor who has just delivered his PBR (Pre
>>>> Budget Report)
>>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4500054.stm
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Don't know why you have a bug up your a#* regarding me. I have
>>> pointed out some inconsistancies in your posts but this is usenet
>>> after all. If you want to flame me go ahead, but don't try to be
>>> subtle. It's not working. Here's a good starting point for learning
>>> how to flame.
>>>
>>> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>>>
>>> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
>>>
>>> Kerry
>
>
>

[Bruce Chambers]

Wayne wrote:

>
> Is there any other operating system I should be looking at that will run my
> MS Publisher, MS Office etc etc, or does Bill have us good?
>

Well, Microsoft sell versions of those applications for the MacOS. You
could always go Apple.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:

> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..


Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it easy to
top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really that difficult.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup



> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
> ...
>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it
>> I have temporarily switched while replying to you..

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Ken

Agreed that one can place the cursor elsewhere, but accepting the default
position of the cursor as it appears in OE when opened is what many would
do, especially if they are not aware of the Usenet protocols..

I do it by choice..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>
>> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..
>
>
> Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
> Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it easy to
> top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really that
> difficult.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
>
>> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it
>>> I have temporarily switched while replying to you..
>
>

[Kerry Brown]

Answered in line just for fun

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> Just to deal with the class system.
>
> Class system has been around for centuries and will remain so.
> Although, this is being erroded slowly it is nertheless there. People
> apply it subtly.
>
> Under Tony Blair, the gap between those who have and those who don't
> have widened. This is very good news as I always believe that economy
> operates more efficiently this way. In Communism, class system was
> non existent and look what a fine mess there were in!

In socialism as described by Karl Marx there is no distinction in value for
different professions. The closest communist regime to this is Cuba.
Although some communists profess to follow Marx's teachings in reality they
vary widely in implementing them. All communist countries to date have a
class system whereby some are more privileged than others. If anything
western capitalist countries have less of a class system than most communist
countries. Where I live the class system is non existent. People with more
money certainly can do things that others can't. This has nothing to do with
a class system but is simply purchasing power. A class system shouldn't be
confused with wealth. In the old English class system there existed upper
class families which had little or no wealth and lower class families with a
lot of wealth. I guess I mistakenly thought this outmoded way of thinking
disappeared in England after the industrial revolution.

>
> Hot air flows towards cold air. Same process applies with wealth!
>
> Top posting is better as it is easy to read the message. When you
> have followed the thread from the outset, you don't want to waste any
> time reading it all over again. You just want to read what is new
> and deal with it. Do you bottom post in business as well? We don't!
>

The top posting vs. bottom posting argument is almost as old as Usenet. As
Mike Hall has pointed out it is easier to top post when using OE. I and most
long time Usenet users prefer bottom posting with judicious snipping for
context. With add-ons like OE Quotefix, OE can be a very good newsreader for
text groups.

In business email I bottom post unless I know the recipient has a preference
for top posting.

> Where exactly are you from? I haven't looked at the headers of your
> messages yet. Perhaps I should. You are not from Ireland are you?
> The name Kerry sounds Irish but then I may be wrong.
>

I'm not from Ireland. I have always wanted to visit Kerry county but so far
haven't. Closest I've been to Ireland is Bristol.

> Time to go to bed. It is 01:16 here in London and Dublin!
>
> Best regards,

It's been fun.

Kerry

>
<snipped>

[Kerry Brown]

Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
> Ken
>
> Agreed that one can place the cursor elsewhere, but accepting the
> default position of the cursor as it appears in OE when opened is
> what many would do, especially if they are not aware of the Usenet
> protocols..
> I do it by choice..
>

Isn't that what Usenet's all about - unrestricted choice? I prefer to think
of posting style as just that, style. It's up to the individual. I'm
comfortable with any style as long as it's easy to follow the thread.

Kerry

>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>>
>>> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..
>>
>>
>> Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
>> Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it
>> easy to top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really
>> that difficult.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>>>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer
>>>> it I have temporarily switched while replying to you..

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Agreed.. :-)

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
...
> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>> Ken
>>
>> Agreed that one can place the cursor elsewhere, but accepting the
>> default position of the cursor as it appears in OE when opened is
>> what many would do, especially if they are not aware of the Usenet
>> protocols..
>> I do it by choice..
>>
>
> Isn't that what Usenet's all about - unrestricted choice? I prefer to
> think of posting style as just that, style. It's up to the individual. I'm
> comfortable with any style as long as it's easy to follow the thread.
>
> Kerry
>
>>
>> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..
>>>
>>>
>>> Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
>>> Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it
>>> easy to top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really
>>> that difficult.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>>>>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer
>>>>> it I have temporarily switched while replying to you..
>
>
>

[David Candy]

That's a bloody stupid comment. If you can't use a mouse perhaps you should post about GUI OSs. How is 17 x Mouse wheels 500 times a day easy.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read David defending the concept of violence.
http://margokingston.typepad.com/harry_version_2/2005/10/entering_the_ga.html#more
=================================================
"Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message ...
> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>
>> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..
>
>
> Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
> Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it easy to
> top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really that difficult.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
>
>> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer it
>>> I have temporarily switched while replying to you..
>
>

[kurttrail]

ANONYMOUS wrote:
> you are right again. Congratulation!

ROFL! Of course you are too insecure to admit what it is means about
you.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:

> Agreed that one can place the cursor elsewhere, but accepting the
> default position of the cursor as it appears in OE when opened is
> what many would do, especially if they are not aware of the Usenet
> protocols..


Yes, certainly.


> I do it by choice..


Understood. You are one of many who do so. My only point wa that not all OE
users do.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup



> "Ken Blake, MVP" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>>
>>> It is a sign of somebody who uses OE as their newsreader.. as I do..
>>
>>
>> Many of us who use Outlook Express as our newsreader don't top post.
>> Although Outlook Express may put the cursor at the top to make it
>> easy to top post, moving the cursor to where we want it isn't really
>> that difficult.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Note: I have changed to top posting as you seem to prefer it. It is
>>>> usually a sign of someone new to Usenet but as you seem to prefer
>>>> it I have temporarily switched while replying to you..

[David R. Norton MVP]

"Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in
:

> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>
> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever

I am offended. Saying "I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with
you." is going WAY too far! <G>

[Kerry Brown]

David R. Norton MVP wrote:
> "Kerry Brown" *a*m> wrote in
> :
>
>> Warning: some may be offended by the contents at this link.
>>
>> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fool/Humor/Geek/best.flame.ever
>
> I am offended. Saying "I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with
> you." is going WAY too far! <G>

I wish I had written it. I wouldn't have included that line. I have seen
some very attractive lawyers who I wouldn't mind kissing at all despite
their profession. Change lawyer to CIO and it would make sense. :-)

Kerry