Microsoft updates Windows without users' consent

Without any evidence, it is a myth at best.

"But it doesn't turn into a myth because he denies..."
But it can when there is no evidence of it having been said other than
commonly misquoted.
Find something that gives a specific time place, verifiable source such as a
transcript etc.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
Windows Server System - Microsoft Update Services
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar


"ceed" wrote in message
...
It may be myth or it may not. The jury is still out on that one.
There's no written proof that he said it, you are right there. But it
doesn't turn into a myth because he denies having said it. I would have
wanted to deny that also..

Take a look he

http://tickletux.wordpress.com/2007/...the-640k-line/

--
//ceed

norm wrote:
Frank wrote:

norm wrote:

Frank wrote:

norm wrote:


You have no idea what I am, but you still remain a hypocrite.

---------------------------------------------------------



Well norm, I don't think so.
If you calling me a hypocrite is the best you can come with, and
that's your best shot, sorry, but it is not near good enough.


Good enough for what? You?


Not good enough to mean anything to anyone except you. It's only your
uneducated and unsubstantiated personal opinion. You speak only for
yourself, right?

"It's only your uneducated and unsubstantiated personal opinion". As
opposed to what from your quarter?

You're the one making the accusation, remember? Prove your
accusation...if you can. Otherwise, you're a liar.

You can attempt to walk this around
in circles all you want.

Nah, you're the one doing the wheel act, not me.

What is unsubstantiated? You stated (quite
strongly) that you believe in God.

So?

With that belief comes responsibility
for one's words and actions.

Oh, so now you're my confessor? I don't think so. You're trying to
assume a position of importance not granted to you. Now you're looking
the fool.

Your words and actions belie such a belief.

Ha! Who the hell do you think you are? I'll be the determiner of my
beliefs and my actions related to those beliefs, not you!

You are a hypocrite by definition.

Now you're statement are becoming hypocritical. You're one really
confused person!

The other possibility is that you do
not believe in God, even though you state that you do.

Now you wandering into make-it-up land!

In that case, you
are simply a liar.

You don't really have anything substantial to say do you other than
you're ****ed cause you can't win this argument cause you're wrong.
Live with it! You're wrong!



And only coming up with a cut/paste dictionary definition doesn't
make me one nor does you calling me one make me one cause I'm not a
hypocrite by your's or anyone else's definition.


Sure you are.

That statement's not working cause it's just not true. Nor can you make
it true.


hahaha...sorry norm, but that's just not true. Your opinion is owned
only by you and it's totally meaningless especially to me, the person
you're trying to hang it on.
Try again


And just because you want it to doesn't mean it does.
Too bad!
Try harder.


Don't need to.

Then you lose! Plain and simple.

Then you give up and concede that you're wrong, right?
Otherwise your argument just fell completely apart.

Frank

Oh, and one other thing.
You have no idea who I am either!


Sure I do. You are a hypocrite, by anyone's definition.


Wrong again. You're the only one pushing the definition...and without
any proof..other than you say so...so by "anyone's definition'...is
simply not true is it?
Try harder.
Frank

And you still have no idea who I am.

You are correct. I have no idea who you are. I know what you are. A
hypocrite, and if not that, a liar.

Purporting to prove I am something I'm not by simply saying it doesn't
make it true.
In fact, knowing the truth, that I'm not a hypocrite, now makes you both
a liar and a fool.
You need to try harder if you still want to dance with me cause so far
you're not keeping up!
Frank

ceed wrote:

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

|"Mr Gates was the one proclaiming that we would never need more than
|640kb memory" That is a well known myth with no basis in fact.

It may be myth or it may not. The jury is still out on that one.
There's no written proof that he said it, you are right there. But it
doesn't turn into a myth because he denies having said it. I would have
wanted to deny that also..

Take a look he

http://tickletux.wordpress.com/2007/...the-640k-line/



Well the way the quote is quoted on the referenced URL is:

“640K ought to be enough for anybody”.

Which is vastly different from saying:

"Mr Gates was the one proclaiming that we would never need more than
640kb memory".

Frank

On 17 Sep 2007 04:58:36 GMT, "ceed" wrote:

Adam Albright wrote:

|On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:42:21 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
wrote:
|
||Ford can't.
||There is NOTHING in any agreement that even vaguely gives Ford that
||right assuming I and not Ford own the vehicle.
||If Ford did, I would seek a competent attorney.
|
|Yet your being some unabashed fanboy and Microsoft apologist you
|willing give them rights to your first born or whatever else they
|want. If you only had the intelligence to understand how stupid that
|is, but we both know you don't.

I still don't get this "fanboy" term. It doesn't really tell me
anything other than that you do not trust (and/or like) people who
likes Vista or MS for that matter. It seems very personal for some
reason. Why is it so bad that some people, like me, get Vista to work?
Is it because it's not fair since you don't?

In your world I guess I would be a fanboy, but I think it's a good
thing because it means I get return on my Vista investment. But you use
the term as an insult. I just do not get the logic behind that.

And now you will probably call me all kinds of nasty things again
including fanboy. It is kind of amusing that someone like you who
obviously knows a lot about computers and software wastes so much time
being mad.

You think fanboy is nasty? It's just a descriptive term they clearly
shows the unhealthy obsession some have with Microsoft often
illustrated by how they defend them blindly without thinking what
they're defending. I suggest you lighten up. If you can't have fun and
take the banter that's common in newsgroups maybe you shouldn't
participate.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:43:32 -0700, Frank wrote:

norm wrote:

"It's only your uneducated and unsubstantiated personal opinion". As
opposed to what from your quarter?

You're the one making the accusation, remember? Prove your
accusation...if you can. Otherwise, you're a liar.

Ok fool. You've called me a drunk countless times. PROVE IT right
here, right now, or you just admitted you are a liar.

Oh, so now you're my confessor? I don't think so. You're trying to
assume a position of importance not granted to you. Now you're looking
the fool.

You still are too stupid to understand nobody comes off as a bigger
fool than you do, Frankie numbnuts.

You don't really have anything substantial to say do you other than
you're ****ed cause you can't win this argument cause you're wrong.
Live with it! You're wrong!

Speaking of substance, it was YOU that needed to tell us you have
property in Southern Europe, you claim to run a business, have
multiple stockbrokers and you claim you are wealthy and recently
you've began to claim you are hansom. All shameless bragging and
surely signs of a nut case off his meds. That's all you are Frankie, a
certifiable nut case.

You need to try harder if you still want to dance with me cause so far
you're not keeping up!


You dance for us just fine Frankie, the fool that you are.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:54:56 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
wrote:

This clearly shows your need to bash while ignoring content that goes
against whatever you want.
Your need to insult while providing absolutely NOTHING of value to the
subject is noted yet again.

You're describing yourself if anyone wishing to invest a little time
using Google will confirm.

"constantly denying there's a problem"
Another statement made by you void of facts since it is simply FALSE.

You really, I mean REALLY are such a pompous ass. Really!

Unless of course there is an exception to the "loan sharking" law that
says if you have the document notarized then it is ok to charge rates
above 60%. Carefully read the exemptions, as it isn't black and white,
and the "illegal" part isn't necessarily there.

John John wrote:

I have not really followed the discussion and I am not commenting on the
EULA legalities. But...

An interesting fact in law is that you cannot have someone sign an
agreement to circumvent applicable laws and then claim indemnity. For
example, charging interest rates above a certain amount is illegal
(loansharking). Let's say the that rates above 60% P.A. are illegal. If
you loan me money and tell me outright upfront that you will charge me
120% interest, and if I sign the loan agreement and accept your terms,
you are still guilty of loansharking and if I were to take you to court
you would lose. Even if I signed and accepted your contract you would
still lose because the contract violates the law, it is an illegal
contract.

John

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

As has been pointed out, paragraph 7 in the agreement.
If you accepted the agreement which is necessary for use, you have
already agreed to and been notified even though notification may not
have been what customers want.

* Jupiter Jones [MVP]:
This clearly shows your need to bash while ignoring content that goes
against whatever you want.
Your need to insult while providing absolutely NOTHING of value to the
subject is noted yet again.

"constantly denying there's a problem"
Another statement made by you void of facts since it is simply FALSE.

After being involved in this group since June 2006 and reading many
of your posts, I also find you to be arrogant and just another Microsoft
hyper-shill. You may try to fool some of the newer visitors to this group, but
you certainly don't fool me. I've known Charlie for years, and he is a
supporter of Microsoft. However, unlike you, he is able to make an honest
assessment of the good, the bad, and the ugly that Microsoft has done.
You simply look away and/or make excuses for them.... constantly.

Charlie has you down pat, and there is no doubt about that.


-Michael

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:55:51 -0400, MICHAEL
wrote:

* Jupiter Jones [MVP]:
This clearly shows your need to bash while ignoring content that goes
against whatever you want.
Your need to insult while providing absolutely NOTHING of value to the
subject is noted yet again.

"constantly denying there's a problem"
Another statement made by you void of facts since it is simply FALSE.

After being involved in this group since June 2006 and reading many
of your posts, I also find you to be arrogant and just another Microsoft
hyper-shill. You may try to fool some of the newer visitors to this group, but
you certainly don't fool me. I've known Charlie for years, and he is a
supporter of Microsoft. However, unlike you, he is able to make an honest
assessment of the good, the bad, and the ugly that Microsoft has done.
You simply look away and/or make excuses for them.... constantly.

Charlie has you down pat, and there is no doubt about that.

Charlie isn't the only one that knows Jupiter's type. His type infests
newsgroups all across Usenet. While the "cause" they so viciously try
to defend changes depending on the newsgroup, the defender always has
the same unmistakable traits. Characters like Frank and Jupiter are
easy to spot and suffer from the Don Quixote or tilting after
windmills syndrome.

Simply said they have a foolish need to confront and engage in
conflict with an imagined opponent or threat rather than engage in
meaningful discussion. This idiom alludes to Miguel de Cervantes's Don
Quixote, Spanish novel written in the seventeenth century. The title
character, Don Quixote, attacks a group of windmills with his lance at
full tilt when he mistakes them for a group of ferocious giants.

Here the cause is obviously to defend Microsoft's honor or practices
no matter how wrong or foolish they may be and to deny any problems
exist with Vista. Anyone exposing Microsoft failings is attacked,
often viciously and without cause by Don Quixote types.

For sure a silly and foolish exercise since anyone with any
intelligence at all knows Windows regardless of version is rift with
all kinds of bugs and performance issues. Don Quixote types simply
can't stand anybody factually pointing out flaws in their beloved
object of hero worship and thus act very foolishly trying to defend
what they think is being attacked. Of course they never know their
actions are seen as hilarious by nearly everyone else.

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
This clearly shows your need to bash while ignoring content that goes
against whatever you want.
Your need to insult while providing absolutely NOTHING of value to the
subject is noted yet again.

"constantly denying there's a problem"
Another statement made by you void of facts since it is simply FALSE.


JJ, why are you in such denial about coming across to other posters as
stuck up? Whether you see yourself that way or not, others, many others
here do see it that way and are voicing their opinions. You will
probably never be taken seriously here unless you change that perception.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett

Adam Albright wrote:

-----drunken diatribe deleted as a public service-----

Dance for us georgie-boy...lol!
Frank

Adam Albright wrote:


You think fanboy is nasty? It's just a descriptive term they clearly
shows the unhealthy obsession some have with Microsoft often
illustrated by how they defend them blindly without thinking what
they're defending. I suggest you lighten up. If you can't have fun and
take the banter that's common in newsgroups maybe you shouldn't
participate.

I suggest you lighten up and try and fix the one little install of Vista
business you badly screwed up.
Or else stop complaining and go back to XP, like the rest of the losers
have done.
Frank

Charlie and a few others also have shown they need to stoop to personal
attacks and name calling at times.
A very few other do little else.
Neither of which are necessary or appropriate.
But I guess you accept it and turn away since it suits you.

"...just another Microsoft hyper-shill."
"You may try to fool some of the newer..."
Since I am not attempting to fool you, it is good you are not fooled by
something you imagine.
Not at all trying to fool anyone, but name calling to avoid the issues seems
the thing for a few critics.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
Windows Server System - Microsoft Update Services
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar


"MICHAEL" wrote in message
...
After being involved in this group since June 2006 and reading many
of your posts, I also find you to be arrogant and just another Microsoft
hyper-shill. You may try to fool some of the newer visitors to this
group, but
you certainly don't fool me. I've known Charlie for years, and he is a
supporter of Microsoft. However, unlike you, he is able to make an honest
assessment of the good, the bad, and the ugly that Microsoft has done.
You simply look away and/or make excuses for them.... constantly.

Charlie has you down pat, and there is no doubt about that.


-Michael

Frank wrote:

|ceed wrote:
|
|| Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
||
| |"Mr Gates was the one proclaiming that we would never need more
|than |640kb memory" That is a well known myth with no basis in fact.
||
|| It may be myth or it may not. The jury is still out on that one.
|| There's no written proof that he said it, you are right there. But
||it doesn't turn into a myth because he denies having said it. I
||would have wanted to deny that also..
||
|| Take a look he
||
||
||http://tickletux.wordpress.com/2007/...the-640k-line/
||
|
|
|Well the way the quote is quoted on the referenced URL is:
|
|“640K ought to be enough for anybody”.
|
|Which is vastly different from saying:
|
|"Mr Gates was the one proclaiming that we would never need more than
|640kb memory".
|
|Frank

If you never need more then what you have ought to be enough, right?

--
//ceed

Adam Albright wrote:

|File copying/moving is one such area.

Now that is a real problem with Vista. You're absolutely right. I have
overcome it by using TeraCopy which basically takes over the whole
copy/move job in Vista (and XP for that matter).

--
//ceed