Microsoft 'Confirms' Windows 7 New Monthly Charge

Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-02-13 10:11, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Wolf K wrote:
If it fixed some of the flaws of MS Word, such as the lack of
fine-grained control

Just curious, what do you mean by "fine-grained control"?

(BTW was a WP user back at the ol' 5.1 days but 6.0 killed it for me...)

trimmed the conspiracy, no string connected pin-ups on my wall


Show Codes level, which also makes it easy to move the Box anchor if
expedient.


Ah, you mean they still show the underlining formatting codes like the
old DOS days? Other than viewing field codes which you can in Word and
Writer seems an easy way to bugger a document. A kin to debug editing a
file, powerful but risky and not often needed.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

On 2/12/19 12:44 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:


I pay $40/month for unlimited data and text. But at a cost of
only 100 minutes a month. And they don't roll over. For me, this has
not been an issue.
Oh, after a set amount of data, it goes from 4G LTE to 3G. But
there is no additional cost for me. I've yet to reach the limit, so
this is also not an issue for me.

I'm on Verizon. They say they're going to eliminate 2G and 3G at the end
of the year (voice calls will use VOLTE). I wonder what they're going to
then.

volte has been in use for several years.

Yes. What does that have to do with "goes from 4G LTE to 3G" when there
is no 3G?

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"[Fundamentalists] never wonder why, if herpes is sent by 'god' to
scourge "adulterers," whooping cough and measles weren't purposely
created to lambaste children." [Fred Woodworth]

On 2/12/19 1:18 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 2/11/19 9:30 PM, Paul wrote:

[snip]

Since the executables don't have access to the
physical layer on disk drives, commercial software
attempting to write license patterns in places they
shouldn't, are blocked.

I think that's what happened when I had a dual boot (Win and Linux on
the same disk). Some Windows program messed up the bootloader.

[snip]

Are you sure it wasn't some Linux program? [stir, stir ... (-:]

The last thing I did before the failure to boot was to update a Windows
program.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"[Fundamentalists] never wonder why, if herpes is sent by 'god' to
scourge "adulterers," whooping cough and measles weren't purposely
created to lambaste children." [Fred Woodworth]

In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

I pay $40/month for unlimited data and text. But at a cost of
only 100 minutes a month. And they don't roll over. For me, this has
not been an issue.
Oh, after a set amount of data, it goes from 4G LTE to 3G. But
there is no additional cost for me. I've yet to reach the limit, so
this is also not an issue for me.

I'm on Verizon. They say they're going to eliminate 2G and 3G at the end
of the year (voice calls will use VOLTE). I wonder what they're going to
then.

volte has been in use for several years.

Yes. What does that have to do with "goes from 4G LTE to 3G" when there
is no 3G?

that only happens if you reach the data cap, which you said you have
never done, so as you also said, it's not an issue.

and what they'll do is simply throttle lte speeds. switching to cdma
just makes that easier.

In message , 123456789
writes:
[]
In my state (AZ/US) it is the same. Even though the car may have the
right of way, the driver must still *TRY* to avoid hitting any
pedestrian, even if the pedestrian is in the wrong (such as walking
against a red light). If the collision does occur, the offending
pedestrian would be listed as 'at fault' in the accident report and (if
he survives) issued a traffic citation.
[]
I'm pleased to hear the last line, at least.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Never be led astray onto the path of virtue.

On 2/12/19 7:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

[snip]

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"



Bang on, Char.

Dammit!

I at first wrote that but then thought it was unnecessarily
provocative and deleted it.

(-:

I have deleted a post, but not before someone replied so my words
weren't really deleted.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"[Fundamentalists] never wonder why, if herpes is sent by 'god' to
scourge "adulterers," whooping cough and measles weren't purposely
created to lambaste children." [Fred Woodworth]

In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 2/12/19 7:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

[snip]

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"



Bang on, Char.

Dammit!
I at first wrote that but then thought it was unnecessarily
provocative and deleted it.
(-:

I have deleted a post, but not before someone replied so my words
weren't really deleted.

Even if they hadn't, I doubt you have "deleted your post": unless the
server you are using honours delete requests _and_ processed it before
communicating with its peers, there is little you can do to delete a
post.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Never be led astray onto the path of virtue.

On 2/13/19 3:54 AM, KWills Shill #3 wrote:

[snip]

I'm on T-Mobile through Metro PCS. I admit I don't pay attention
to its plans for 2G and 3G termination. If it becomes an issue, I'll
face it then.

It might somewhere there aren't enough 4G towers. I have an older phone
(2G/3G only) that will need to be replaced, but I'll wait until later to
replace it because of that possibility.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"[Fundamentalists] never wonder why, if herpes is sent by 'god' to
scourge "adulterers," whooping cough and measles weren't purposely
created to lambaste children." [Fred Woodworth]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:21:22 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2019-02-13 10:11, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Wolf K wrote:
If it fixed some of the flaws of MS Word, such as the lack of
fine-grained control

Just curious, what do you mean by "fine-grained control"?

(BTW was a WP user back at the ol' 5.1 days but 6.0 killed it for me...)

trimmed the conspiracy, no string connected pin-ups on my wall


Show Codes level, which also makes it easy to move the Box anchor if
expedient.



I agree completely about Reveal Codes. It makes it easier to do many
things, and that's one of the main reasons I prefer it to Microsoft
Word.

But oddly enough, that's the thing about WordPerfect that many people
*don't * like, and has turned them away from it. That makes no sense
to me, for two reasons: first, it's a great feature, in my view;
second, if you don't like it, don't turn it on--it's optional.

And referring to Jonathan N. Little's comment, "6.0 killed it for me,"
I agree that it was a very poor release with lots of problems. But
that was just a single version that didn't last very long, and its
problems are long gone.

I run WordPerfect X7. It's hardly any different from the two or three
versions before it, and the two newer versions, X8 and X9, are also
almost the same as those. I've seen no reason to upgrade.

I think most of the people who use Microsoft Word these days use it in
preference to WordPerfect for two reasons: it has the name "Microsoft"
attached to it; many computer vendors include it as a trial version in
the computers they sell. Probably most Word users don't even know
WordPerfect exists, or if they do, know next to nothing about it and
how it compares to Word.

mechanic wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:21:53 +0000, Chris wrote:

In the UK, if you hit a pedestrian wiht your car you will be
charged with either "Dangerous driving" or "Driving without due
care and attention" and you have to make the case that it was
unavoidable.

Yes we have very much a blame culture in the UK, there's no such
thing as an 'accident'.

It's called protecting the vulnerable. A pedestrian is far more vulnerable
than a driver in a car.

I don't see any mention of vehicle emergency braking systems on here
but they are available in many new cars.

They're rare. Vast majority of cars on the road don't have them.

"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message news

On 2/11/19 8:00 AM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
In a new blog post entitled “Helping customers shift to a modern desktop�,
Microsoft has announced that it will indeed start charging Windows 7
customers a monthly fee from January 14th 2020, if they want to keep
their computers safe.

This SHOULD refer to security updates, not permission to use the OS.

The ESU offer has more limitation/constraints.
Note: the Volume Licensing and the discount applicable for Volume Licensing
subscriptions(Assurance, Enterprise and Education subscriptions)
qp
"With that in mind, today we are announcing that we will offer paid Windows
7 Extended Security Updates (ESU) through January 2023. The Windows 7 ESU
will be sold on a per-device basis and the price will increase each year.
Windows 7 ESUs will be available to all Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7
Enterprise customers ***in Volume Licensing***, with a discount to customers
with Windows software assurance, Windows 10 Enterprise or Windows 10
Education subscriptions. In addition, Office 365 ProPlus will be supported
on devices with active Windows 7 Extended Security Updates (ESU) through
January 2023. This means that customers who purchase the Windows 7 ESU will
be able to continue to run Office 365 ProPlus."
/qp

....i.e. only **Volume Licensing** customers, and if purchased also supports
Office 365 Plus on Windows 7 until Jan. 2023

- Non-volume licensing end-users(i.e. retail and OEM Windows 7 edition
consumers not paying/using/contracted for Volume Licensing) are not included
in the 'option to purchase ESU'. Support for non-volume licensing edition
security updates will cease, as previously announced/planned in Jan. 2020

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2018

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 18:35:22 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 2/12/19 7:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

[snip]

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"



Bang on, Char.

Dammit!
I at first wrote that but then thought it was unnecessarily
provocative and deleted it.
(-:

I have deleted a post, but not before someone replied so my words
weren't really deleted.

Even if they hadn't, I doubt you have "deleted your post": unless the
server you are using honours delete requests _and_ processed it before
communicating with its peers, there is little you can do to delete a
post.

I deleted it before I posted.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:01:42 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

ask yourself why cops are enforcing something you say doesn't exist:

http://richmondsfblog.com/2010/07/20...-or-it-could-c
ost-you-police-planning-stings/
SFAppeal reports that the SFPD will be kicking off targeted
pedestrian stings in and around the area of Golden Gate Park,
specifically the district patrolled by the Park Police.
...
The law states that if a pedestrian is waiting to cross at a
crosswalk, vehicles must yield. Drivers must yield even if the
pedestrian is in an unmarked crosswalk intersection. If the
pedestrian is in an unmarked crosswalk, they must look before
stepping off the curb but if it is a marked crosswalk they are free
to step into the intersection. Vehicles must yield in both situations.

But we should be discussing cross walks with signals. Your quote
doesn't cover that situation

yes it does.

Let me know when you argue that succesfully before a judge.

learn to read.

The law states that if a pedestrian is waiting to cross at a
crosswalk, vehicles must yield.

that refers to *any* crosswalk, with or without traffic control signals.

No it doesn't.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 14:16:38 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:46:17 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article ,
123456789 wrote:

Pedestrians do NOT have the right of way against a red light at a
traffic light controlled intersection!!! Where in hell did you
get that
idea.

the motor vehicle code.

Not in my state (AZ/US):

(d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as
provided in section 28-646, a pedestrian facing a steady red signal
alone shall not enter the roadway.

yes in your state:
https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00792.htm
28-792. Right-of-way at crosswalk
A. Except as provided in section 28-793, subsection B, if traffic
control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver
of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping
if need be in order to yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway
within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway
on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is
approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to
be in danger. A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave any curb or other
place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so
close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

"if traffic control signals are not in place or are not in operation".

See?

He is already determinedly trying to change the context of the
argument.

It's weird. nospam makes an argument and even provides multiple URLs
that he claims will support his argument. The weird thing is that none
of the URLs actually support his argument, so I think we're in for a
round of posts that redefine the initial claim so that the URLs can fit
the situation. AKA 'moving the goalposts'. I quickly lose interest,
which is what he hopes to achieve in the first place.

On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:45:42 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 18:35:22 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 2/12/19 7:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

[snip]

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"



Bang on, Char.

Dammit!
I at first wrote that but then thought it was unnecessarily
provocative and deleted it.
(-:

I have deleted a post, but not before someone replied so my words
weren't really deleted.

Even if they hadn't, I doubt you have "deleted your post": unless the
server you are using honours delete requests _and_ processed it before
communicating with its peers, there is little you can do to delete a
post.

I deleted it before I posted.


OK, but in that case, don't say "I have deleted a post." That only
confuses people. If you didn't post it, it wasn't a post.