Ubuntu Linux has over 12 million users

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hqnabv$8to$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more

>>>>>>>>> PCs

>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which

>>>>>>>>> is at

>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>

>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug

>>> use.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried

>> to discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> Well then, I suggest that you do not post lies and do not copy the title

> of articles that post lies. That would resolve the issue now wouldn't it?

>

>



We don't know if it's a lie. It could be more than 12 million. What

difference does it make?



--

Alias

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hqnbv1$aeh$2@news.eternal-september.org...

>>> --

>>> Alias

>>

>> Well then, I suggest that you do not post lies and do not copy the title

>> of articles that post lies. That would resolve the issue now wouldn't it?

>>

>>

>

> We don't know if it's a lie. It could be more than 12 million. What

> difference does it make?

>

> --

> Alias



If you look at the title of the article, it does state that Ubuntu has more

than 12 million suckers (I mean users). If you look at the wording in the

article, is says that Canonical "claims" the number is 12 million but

further in the article, the VP states that they BELIEVE that number. It

isn't fact. There is no way to positively know the actual number. So the

number they "claim" is suspect because they really don't have a valid way of

knowing. You, like the parrot you are, take this information because you

like it and therefore you treat it as GOSPEL, report on it, jump up and

down, smiling from ear to ear.



It really makes no difference what number they "CLAIM". They can claim 54

Billion and that doesn't change the fact that most users use Windows and

reports continue to be published that Ubuntu is on less than one percent of

the desktops.



I will continue to use the world leader of desktop OS's and continue to make

a good living. Not like yourself who has to install Ubuntu for little old

ladies in your town where you sell a FREE OS and charge up the ass for it!

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hqnbv1$aeh$2@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> Well then, I suggest that you do not post lies and do not copy the title

>>> of articles that post lies. That would resolve the issue now wouldn't

>>> it?

>>>

>>>

>>

>> We don't know if it's a lie. It could be more than 12 million. What

>> difference does it make?

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> If you look at the title of the article, it does state that Ubuntu has

> more than 12 million suckers (I mean users). If you look at the wording

> in the article, is says that Canonical "claims" the number is 12 million

> but further in the article, the VP states that they BELIEVE that number.

> It isn't fact. There is no way to positively know the actual number. So

> the number they "claim" is suspect because they really don't have a

> valid way of knowing. You, like the parrot you are, take this

> information because you like it and therefore you treat it as GOSPEL,

> report on it, jump up and down, smiling from ear to ear.

>

> It really makes no difference what number they "CLAIM". They can claim

> 54 Billion and that doesn't change the fact that most users use Windows

> and reports continue to be published that Ubuntu is on less than one

> percent of the desktops.

>

> I will continue to use the world leader of desktop OS's and continue to

> make a good living. Not like yourself who has to install Ubuntu for

> little old ladies in your town where you sell a FREE OS and charge up

> the ass for it!

>

>

>



They know how many installs are updated and it gives them a very good

idea of how many are using Ubuntu. Who would continually update Ubuntu

if they weren't using it besides you, Kevin and Frank?



--

Alias

 

[Frank]

even linux advocates say ubuntu is a POS!...LOL!

On 4/21/2010 12:01 PM, Alias wrote:

> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hqnbv1$aeh$2@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>> --

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>> Well then, I suggest that you do not post lies and do not copy the

>>>> title

>>>> of articles that post lies. That would resolve the issue now wouldn't

>>>> it?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> We don't know if it's a lie. It could be more than 12 million. What

>>> difference does it make?

>>>

>>> --

>>> Alias

>>

>> If you look at the title of the article, it does state that Ubuntu has

>> more than 12 million suckers (I mean users). If you look at the wording

>> in the article, is says that Canonical "claims" the number is 12 million

>> but further in the article, the VP states that they BELIEVE that number.

>> It isn't fact. There is no way to positively know the actual number. So

>> the number they "claim" is suspect because they really don't have a

>> valid way of knowing. You, like the parrot you are, take this

>> information because you like it and therefore you treat it as GOSPEL,

>> report on it, jump up and down, smiling from ear to ear.

>>

>> It really makes no difference what number they "CLAIM". They can claim

>> 54 Billion and that doesn't change the fact that most users use Windows

>> and reports continue to be published that Ubuntu is on less than one

>> percent of the desktops.

>>

>> I will continue to use the world leader of desktop OS's and continue to

>> make a good living. Not like yourself who has to install Ubuntu for

>> little old ladies in your town where you sell a FREE OS and charge up

>> the ass for it!

>>

>>

>>

>

> They know how many installs are updated and it gives them a very good

> idea of how many are using Ubuntu.



So it phones home huh?

I thought you were not in favor of any app that does that?

You lied huh?

Figures!



Who would continually update Ubuntu

> if they weren't using it besides you, Kevin and Frank?



You realize that even your fellow linux advocates are saying that

up-yr-fucking-butt-too is a real POS?

Oops!...LOL!

>

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:05:37 +0200, Alias

wrote:



>John B. Slocomb wrote:

>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:35:32 +0200, Alias

>> wrote:

>>

>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that for

>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>

>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the fact

>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>

>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>

>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>

>>

>> Apparently a short memory as you just got done telling me that you had

>> used Ubuntu for what? Two years and had no experience with other

>> operating systems.

>

>I didn't post that. That came from your desperate imagination. I did

>post that I've only used Ubuntu for three and a half years so you got

>that part right.



You didn't? I could have sworn that you replied that you had used

Ubuntu for three years and two or three lines later in the post you

replied to the question "What other operating systems have you used"

with the word "none".



Strange. Perhaps old age.



>

>>

>> Now you date way back to 1984.

>>

>> Obviously not an expert even in your own history.

>

>You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

>

>>>>

>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>

>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>

>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments which

>>> is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>> John B. Slocomb

>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)



In fact you effectively did make a comment. You entitled your post

with the head line and repeated the headline in the body of the

message.



Of course you can wiggle and squirm, and shout "Prove it! "Prove it!"

but that does not detract from the fact that what you intended was to

publicize your delusions that Ubuntu is making inroads into the

Windows market.







John B. Slocomb

(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:00:14 +0200, Alias

wrote:



>Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that for

>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>

>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the fact

>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>

>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>

>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>

>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>

>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>

>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>

>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>

>>

>>

>

>The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>stupidity on me.



I hate to have to explain it to you but you posted a message stating

that there were 12 million copies.... You didn't state that "I read

this here news article titled "12 million..."



It is not a matter of being stupid or not stupid. You wrote it and now

that your readers have discovered that you didn't even bother to read

the actual news release but simple seized on the title to shout to the

world, you are making weak excuses about how "I didn't do it."



Strange when I assert that your actions are reminiscent of the 3rd

grade school yard you scream personal attack all the while saying

"you.re too fucking stupid" to another reader.



A bit of ambiguity here, no?



John B. Slocomb

(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

wrote:



>Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>

>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>

>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>

>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>

>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>

>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>> stupidity on me.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Alias

>>

>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug use.

>>

>>

>>

>

>I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried to

>discredit me for what someone else wrote.



You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

may be repeating a lie.



And, you said it.



To emphasize:

alias wrote "12 million..."



The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"



Somewhat different "fact", eh?



John B. Slocomb

(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[John B. Slocomb]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:09:47 -0700, "Heywood Jablowme"

wrote:



>

>

>"Alias" wrote in message

>news:hqnabv$8to$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is

>>>>>>>>> at

>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>

>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug use.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried to

>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

>Well then, I suggest that you do not post lies and do not copy the title of

>articles that post lies. That would resolve the issue now wouldn't it?

>





But Damn man, the lies sound so much better



John B. Slocomb

(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

 

[Alias]

John B. Slocomb wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:05:37 +0200, Alias

> wrote:

>

>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:35:32 +0200, Alias

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that for

>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the fact

>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>

>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>

>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>

>>>

>>> Apparently a short memory as you just got done telling me that you had

>>> used Ubuntu for what? Two years and had no experience with other

>>> operating systems.

>>

>> I didn't post that. That came from your desperate imagination. I did

>> post that I've only used Ubuntu for three and a half years so you got

>> that part right.

>

> You didn't? I could have sworn that you replied that you had used

> Ubuntu for three years and two or three lines later in the post you

> replied to the question "What other operating systems have you used"

> with the word "none".

>

> Strange. Perhaps old age.

>

>>

>>>

>>> Now you date way back to 1984.

>>>

>>> Obviously not an expert even in your own history.

>>

>> You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>

>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments which

>>>> is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>> John B. Slocomb

>>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)

>

> In fact you effectively did make a comment. You entitled your post

> with the head line and repeated the headline in the body of the

> message.

>

> Of course you can wiggle and squirm, and shout "Prove it! "Prove it!"

> but that does not detract from the fact that what you intended was to

> publicize your delusions that Ubuntu is making inroads into the

> Windows market.

>

>

>

> John B. Slocomb

> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)



Grasping at straws again, eh?



--

Alias

 

[Alias]

John B. Slocomb wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

> wrote:

>

>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>

>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug use.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried to

>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>

> You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

> the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

> said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

> have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

> may be repeating a lie.

>

> And, you said it.

>

> To emphasize:

> alias wrote "12 million..."

>

> The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

> Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"

>

> Somewhat different "fact", eh?

>

> John B. Slocomb

> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)



So sue me.



--

Alias

 

[Alias]

John B. Slocomb wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:00:14 +0200, Alias

> wrote:

>

>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months will

>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that for

>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is at

>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the fact

>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>

>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to understand

>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>

>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>

>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>

>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>

>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>> stupidity on me.

>

> I hate to have to explain it to you but you posted a message stating

> that there were 12 million copies.... You didn't state that "I read

> this here news article titled "12 million..."

>

> It is not a matter of being stupid or not stupid. You wrote it and now

> that your readers have discovered that you didn't even bother to read

> the actual news release but simple seized on the title to shout to the

> world, you are making weak excuses about how "I didn't do it."

>

> Strange when I assert that your actions are reminiscent of the 3rd

> grade school yard you scream personal attack all the while saying

> "you.re too fucking stupid" to another reader.

>

> A bit of ambiguity here, no?

>

> John B. Slocomb

> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)



To use your picky guidelines, I didn't write anything. I typed it.



--

Alias

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hqp60b$m8b$4@news.eternal-september.org...

> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:05:37 +0200, Alias

>> wrote:

>>

>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:35:32 +0200, Alias

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that

>>>>>>>> for

>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is

>>>>>>>> at

>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>

>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>> understand

>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>

>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Apparently a short memory as you just got done telling me that you had

>>>> used Ubuntu for what? Two years and had no experience with other

>>>> operating systems.

>>>

>>> I didn't post that. That came from your desperate imagination. I did

>>> post that I've only used Ubuntu for three and a half years so you got

>>> that part right.

>>

>> You didn't? I could have sworn that you replied that you had used

>> Ubuntu for three years and two or three lines later in the post you

>> replied to the question "What other operating systems have you used"

>> with the word "none".

>>

>> Strange. Perhaps old age.

>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Now you date way back to 1984.

>>>>

>>>> Obviously not an expert even in your own history.

>>>

>>> You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>

>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>> which

>>>>> is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)

>>

>> In fact you effectively did make a comment. You entitled your post

>> with the head line and repeated the headline in the body of the

>> message.

>>

>> Of course you can wiggle and squirm, and shout "Prove it! "Prove it!"

>> but that does not detract from the fact that what you intended was to

>> publicize your delusions that Ubuntu is making inroads into the

>> Windows market.

>>

>>

>>

>> John B. Slocomb

>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>

> Grasping at straws again, eh?

>

> --

> Alias



No you fucking retard. He is telling the truth and you can't believe it.

Oops.

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hqp625$m8b$5@news.eternal-september.org...

> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

>> wrote:

>>

>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more

>>>>>>>>>> PCs

>>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is

>>>>>>>>>> at

>>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying

>>>>>> that

>>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so

>>>>>> you

>>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> Alias

>>>>

>>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug

>>>> use.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried to

>>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>

>> You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

>> the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

>> said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

>> have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

>> may be repeating a lie.

>>

>> And, you said it.

>>

>> To emphasize:

>> alias wrote "12 million..."

>>

>> The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

>> Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"

>>

>> Somewhat different "fact", eh?

>>

>> John B. Slocomb

>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>

> So sue me.

>

> --

> Alias



So that is your childish response? Typical. You really have no valid

response to the above statements. That proves you are a lying sack.

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hqp6iv$m8b$8@news.eternal-september.org...

> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:00:14 +0200, Alias

>> wrote:

>>

>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse that

>>>>>>>> for

>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more PCs

>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which is

>>>>>>>> at

>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>

>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>> understand

>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>

>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>

>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>

>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>

>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying that

>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so you

>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>> stupidity on me.

>>

>> I hate to have to explain it to you but you posted a message stating

>> that there were 12 million copies.... You didn't state that "I read

>> this here news article titled "12 million..."

>>

>> It is not a matter of being stupid or not stupid. You wrote it and now

>> that your readers have discovered that you didn't even bother to read

>> the actual news release but simple seized on the title to shout to the

>> world, you are making weak excuses about how "I didn't do it."

>>

>> Strange when I assert that your actions are reminiscent of the 3rd

>> grade school yard you scream personal attack all the while saying

>> "you.re too fucking stupid" to another reader.

>>

>> A bit of ambiguity here, no?

>>

>> John B. Slocomb

>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>

> To use your picky guidelines, I didn't write anything. I typed it.

>

> --

> Alias



Typical response from a 3rd grade doper.

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hqp60b$m8b$4@news.eternal-september.org...

>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:05:37 +0200, Alias

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:35:32 +0200, Alias

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more

>>>>>>>>> PCs

>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which

>>>>>>>>> is at

>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers,

>>>>>>>> the fact

>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Apparently a short memory as you just got done telling me that you had

>>>>> used Ubuntu for what? Two years and had no experience with other

>>>>> operating systems.

>>>>

>>>> I didn't post that. That came from your desperate imagination. I did

>>>> post that I've only used Ubuntu for three and a half years so you got

>>>> that part right.

>>>

>>> You didn't? I could have sworn that you replied that you had used

>>> Ubuntu for three years and two or three lines later in the post you

>>> replied to the question "What other operating systems have you used"

>>> with the word "none".

>>>

>>> Strange. Perhaps old age.

>>>

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Now you date way back to 1984.

>>>>>

>>>>> Obviously not an expert even in your own history.

>>>>

>>>> You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>> which

>>>>>> is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>> (johnbslocomb@gmail.com)

>>>

>>> In fact you effectively did make a comment. You entitled your post

>>> with the head line and repeated the headline in the body of the

>>> message.

>>>

>>> Of course you can wiggle and squirm, and shout "Prove it! "Prove it!"

>>> but that does not detract from the fact that what you intended was to

>>> publicize your delusions that Ubuntu is making inroads into the

>>> Windows market.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> John B. Slocomb

>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>

>> Grasping at straws again, eh?

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> No you fucking retard. He is telling the truth and you can't believe

> it. Oops.

>

>



You and the truth have been divorced for years if not all your pathetic

life.



--

Alias

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hqp625$m8b$5@news.eternal-september.org...

>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12

>>>>>>>>>>> months will

>>>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be

>>>>>>>>>>> more PCs

>>>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles,

>>>>>>>>>>> which is at

>>>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers, the

>>>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I remember

>>>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it all.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying

>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu

>>>>>>> so you

>>>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --

>>>>>> Alias

>>>>>

>>>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it. Damn

>>>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the

>>>>> drug use.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>>>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely

>>>> tried to

>>>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>>

>>> You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

>>> the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

>>> said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

>>> have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

>>> may be repeating a lie.

>>>

>>> And, you said it.

>>>

>>> To emphasize:

>>> alias wrote "12 million..."

>>>

>>> The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

>>> Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"

>>>

>>> Somewhat different "fact", eh?

>>>

>>> John B. Slocomb

>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>

>> So sue me.

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> So that is your childish response? Typical. You really have no valid

> response to the above statements. That proves you are a lying sack.

>

>



It's been explained now a number of times. You, of course, can't

understand it.



--

Alias

 

[Heywood Jablowme]

"Alias" wrote in message

news:hqpq7n$p35$6@news.eternal-september.org...

> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Alias" wrote in message

>> news:hqp625$m8b$5@news.eternal-september.org...

>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12 months

>>>>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be more

>>>>>>>>>>>> PCs

>>>>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles, which

>>>>>>>>>>>> is at

>>>>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those numbers,

>>>>>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I

>>>>>>>>>> remember

>>>>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it

>>>>>>>>>> all.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my comments

>>>>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you saying

>>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu so

>>>>>>>> you

>>>>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> --

>>>>>>> Alias

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it.

>>>>>> Damn

>>>>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the drug

>>>>>> use.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>>>>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely tried

>>>>> to

>>>>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>>>

>>>> You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

>>>> the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

>>>> said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

>>>> have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

>>>> may be repeating a lie.

>>>>

>>>> And, you said it.

>>>>

>>>> To emphasize:

>>>> alias wrote "12 million..."

>>>>

>>>> The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

>>>> Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"

>>>>

>>>> Somewhat different "fact", eh?

>>>>

>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>

>>> So sue me.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Alias

>>

>> So that is your childish response? Typical. You really have no valid

>> response to the above statements. That proves you are a lying sack.

>>

>>

>

> It's been explained now a number of times. You, of course, can't

> understand it.

>

> --

> Alias



I understand it perfectly. You have the problem with it. You won't admit

you made the statement and it's there in black and white. No need to beat a

dead horse on this one.

 

[Alias]

Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>

>

> "Alias" wrote in message

> news:hqpq7n$p35$6@news.eternal-september.org...

>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>> news:hqp625$m8b$5@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:50:07 +0200, Alias

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:hqn7ef$62k$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>>> Heywood Jablowme wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "Alias" wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> news:hqmnu5$upn$3@news.eternal-september.org...

>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:27:54 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:52:08 +0200, Alias

>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600299/ubuntu-linux-million-users

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> The following was reported some two years ago:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> "...the install base of windows computers this coming 12

>>>>>>>>>>>>> months will

>>>>>>>>>>>>> reach 1 billion. If you stop and just think about that, parse

>>>>>>>>>>>>> that for

>>>>>>>>>>>>> a second, by the end of our fiscal year '08, there will be

>>>>>>>>>>>>> more PCs

>>>>>>>>>>>>> running windows in the world than there are automobiles,

>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is at

>>>>>>>>>>>>> least to me kind of a mind-numbing concept. "

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes your figures a bit pathetic, doesn't it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> When you consider the sleazy way Microsoft got those

>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, the

>>>>>>>>>>>> fact

>>>>>>>>>>>> that you support them is a bit pathetic, isn't it?

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> What "sleazy" way was that? Ah, the big, bad Microsoft. I

>>>>>>>>>>> remember

>>>>>>>>>>> them when they were a little one horse outfit in New Mexico.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> How clueless can you get?

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Given your very limited exposure to computers it is hard to

>>>>>>>>>>> understand

>>>>>>>>>>> how you could know much about them.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> I've been using computers since 1984. Oops.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> That long? You still don't have any clue do you? Oops.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, your "news", right? Read the headline and you know it

>>>>>>>>>>> all.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>>>>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> I made no comment when I posted that. You are assuming my

>>>>>>>>>> comments

>>>>>>>>>> which is pretty pathetic and a very amateurish way of debating.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> You did make a comment when you posted you RETARD. Are you

>>>>>>>>> saying that

>>>>>>>>> the subject line is not part of your comment? Oh you use Ubuntu

>>>>>>>>> so you

>>>>>>>>> are 100% clueless! LOL!

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The Subject line was the title of the Article. Too bad you're too

>>>>>>>> fucking stupid and couldn't figure that out but don't blame your

>>>>>>>> stupidity on me.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> --

>>>>>>>> Alias

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> You wrote the subject as if it were gospel even if you copied it.

>>>>>>> Damn

>>>>>>> you are extra stupid today. I suggest that you slow down on the

>>>>>>> drug use.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I put the title of the article on ALL the articles I posted. Too bad

>>>>>> you're too stupid to have figured that out and, instead, lamely

>>>>>> tried to

>>>>>> discredit me for what someone else wrote.

>>>>>

>>>>> You seem to be rather defensive, but to make a legal case out of it,

>>>>> the U.S. courts have ruled that publicizing a statement, even should

>>>>> said statement be a lie, constitutes libel, so in effect the courts

>>>>> have ruled that you are responsible for what you say even though you

>>>>> may be repeating a lie.

>>>>>

>>>>> And, you said it.

>>>>>

>>>>> To emphasize:

>>>>> alias wrote "12 million..."

>>>>>

>>>>> The Wiki wrote " Chris Kenyon, vice president for OEM at Canonical

>>>>> Ltd. estimated that there were 12 million Ubuntu users"

>>>>>

>>>>> Somewhat different "fact", eh?

>>>>>

>>>>> John B. Slocomb

>>>>> (johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)

>>>>

>>>> So sue me.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> So that is your childish response? Typical. You really have no valid

>>> response to the above statements. That proves you are a lying sack.

>>>

>>>

>>

>> It's been explained now a number of times. You, of course, can't

>> understand it.

>>

>> --

>> Alias

>

> I understand it perfectly. You have the problem with it. You won't admit

> you made the statement and it's there in black and white. No need to

> beat a dead horse on this one.



Which is what you and John are doing.



--

Alias