What inkjet printer prints the best text?

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 00:32:08 -0600, Tony
wrote:


Richard
I couldn't agree with you more. If there is no reason to upgrade to Vista then
why do so? That however doesn't mean that Vista is bad, merely a fledgling.
I wasn't suggesting that people upgrade without good reason, only trying to
bring a bit of balance to a completely unbalanced thread. Not sure I should
have bothered however, it seems to me that once some people have established a
view they are completely immovable; hardly a path to enlightenment!
Tony


First of all, if you can't respecty usenet conventions of
not top-posting, you shouldn't be allowed on usenet at all.

Seriously, your ISP TOS have been violated most likely, you
seem like the type of person who has no regard for anything
except what benefits himself.

Yes, Vista is fledgling. It may someday be an acceptible
alternative, but promoting it before that day has come is
deceiving at best, and senseless at worse.

Yes balance is a good idea, but balance does not include
promotion including an idea that we should "wait and see"
what might be better from the next generation of patches.

It is ridiculous that you pretend to claim a concept of
enlightenment. You hide behind bull**** deception.

Tony wrote:
Richard
I couldn't agree with you more. If there is no reason to upgrade to Vista then
why do so? That however doesn't mean that Vista is bad, merely a fledgling.
I wasn't suggesting that people upgrade without good reason, only trying to
bring a bit of balance to a completely unbalanced thread. Not sure I should
have bothered however, it seems to me that once some people have established a
view they are completely immovable; hardly a path to enlightenment!
Tony

I think Microsoft will settle the whole question in a few years, when
they withdraw support from XP. Consider for a moment that Microsoft
recently has not just withdrawn their support for Windows versions
earlier than 2000, they've forced other companies (like HP) to do so,
too. Now, remember that XP and other Microsoft products of the same and
later vintages have to phone home to Redmond for permission to be used
by the consumer. Is it too much to imagine that Microsoft has embedded
some code that will render those products inoperable after Microsoft
withdraws support?

Not to me, it isn't. One of the big reasons I will continue to use
Linux. *I'm* in charge of my computer, not Microsoft. (And if that
starts another flame war, so be it.)

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:

Not to me, it isn't. One of the big reasons I will continue to use
Linux. *I'm* in charge of my computer, not Microsoft. (And if that
starts another flame war, so be it.)

I've used Linux for years - since the Slackware 1.2 kernel version. It
would be the only OS I use, except that I need Photoshop. The Gimp's
pretty good, but still not up to PS - beside it doesn't do colour
management AFAIK.

Jim Ford

TJ wrote:
Burt wrote:
"kony" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:13:39 -0600, Tony
wrote:

I am not into "Marketing drivel" I am an engineer and am into first
hand
experience and my comments are based on exactly that, my own
experience.
Yes, that's why your comment was inaccurate, because it is
based on a subjective experience of whether Vista was
suiting YOUR needs.

(clipped a very long, cynical attack on Tony - an honest, valued
contributer to this NG)

C'mon, Kony - If you've been on this NG for more than ten minutes
you'd recognize Tony as a very straightforward guy who was very clear
that this was his experience. It was not a MS promotion. No need
to attack - why not contribute positively from YOUR own experience
instead of tearing down a participant's honest post. The world has
enough misanthropes. Lighten up.


Burt, take note - This thread is cross-posted to 3 newsgroups. Kony
could well be a regular of one other than comp.periphs.printers.

SIGH. I should learn not to post anything about Linux anywhere but a
Linux group if I don't want to start a flame war. Wasn't my intention.

TJ
If the other idiots do not like what is said thats TFB

TJ wrote:
Tony wrote:
Richard
I couldn't agree with you more. If there is no reason to upgrade to
Vista then why do so? That however doesn't mean that Vista is bad,
merely a fledgling.
I wasn't suggesting that people upgrade without good reason, only
trying to bring a bit of balance to a completely unbalanced thread.
Not sure I should have bothered however, it seems to me that once
some people have established a view they are completely immovable;
hardly a path to enlightenment!
Tony
I think Microsoft will settle the whole question in a few years, when
they withdraw support from XP. Consider for a moment that Microsoft
recently has not just withdrawn their support for Windows versions
earlier than 2000, they've forced other companies (like HP) to do so,
too. Now, remember that XP and other Microsoft products of the same
and later vintages have to phone home to Redmond for permission to be
used by the consumer. Is it too much to imagine that Microsoft has
embedded some code that will render those products inoperable after
Microsoft withdraws support?

Not to me, it isn't. One of the big reasons I will continue to use
Linux. *I'm* in charge of my computer, not Microsoft. (And if that
starts another flame war, so be it.)

TJ

Oh Yeah Who Cares

I do not think there are enough idiots out there who are in love with
Microsoft Windows even though they need to use it for various reasons.

Jim Ford wrote:
TJ wrote:

Not to me, it isn't. One of the big reasons I will continue to use
Linux. *I'm* in charge of my computer, not Microsoft. (And if that
starts another flame war, so be it.)

I've used Linux for years - since the Slackware 1.2 kernel version. It
would be the only OS I use, except that I need Photoshop. The Gimp's
pretty good, but still not up to PS - beside it doesn't do colour
management AFAIK.

Jim Ford

Now I understand. He sez colour when it is really color. He probably
also sez favourites too. Constipation know no boundary.

I do not think there are enough idiots out there who are in love with
Microsoft Windows even though they need to use it for various reasons.

Yeah, like only 92 percent of the market is totally sold with
Microsoft. And the number is growing daily.

Duff wrote:


I do not think there are enough idiots out there who are in love with
Microsoft Windows even though they need to use it for various reasons.

Yeah, like only 92 percent of the market is totally sold with
Microsoft. And the number is growing daily.






You want to use Microsoft products because they're the best for you?
Fine, go ahead. But don't do it because everybody else is doing it. That
argument didn't work when you were a kid, did it?

If 92% of all lemmings follow others over a cliff, it is the 8% that
don't that survive to continue the species.

"Market share" is a function of marketing prowess, and not necessarily
the quality of the product.

Sometimes, breaking away from the masses is the best thing to do.

TJ

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

TJ wrote:
Tony wrote:
Richard
I couldn't agree with you more. If there is no reason to upgrade to Vista
then
why do so? That however doesn't mean that Vista is bad, merely a fledgling.
I wasn't suggesting that people upgrade without good reason, only trying to
bring a bit of balance to a completely unbalanced thread. Not sure I should
have bothered however, it seems to me that once some people have established
a
view they are completely immovable; hardly a path to enlightenment!
Tony

I think Microsoft will settle the whole question in a few years, when
they withdraw support from XP. Consider for a moment that Microsoft
recently has not just withdrawn their support for Windows versions
earlier than 2000, they've forced other companies (like HP) to do so,
too. Now, remember that XP and other Microsoft products of the same and
later vintages have to phone home to Redmond for permission to be used
by the consumer. Is it too much to imagine that Microsoft has embedded
some code that will render those products inoperable after Microsoft
withdraws support?

Not to me, it isn't. One of the big reasons I will continue to use
Linux. *I'm* in charge of my computer, not Microsoft. (And if that
starts another flame war, so be it.)

TJ

TJ
I have no in depth experience of Linux but have a few small customers and one
acquaintance who use it and who are very content. The only complaint I have
heard from them is the limited availability of some applications. If Linux
suits your needs then that is better than good since you are saving money and
as you say you are in charge.
I am not a MS bigot, the nature of my business demands that I deal mainly with
MS OS' and there is nothing I can do about that. Enjoy the holidays.
Bottom posted because it's a weekend ;-)
Tony

TJ wrote:
I think Microsoft will settle the whole question in a few years, when
they withdraw support from XP. Consider for a moment that Microsoft
recently has not just withdrawn their support for Windows versions
earlier than 2000, they've forced other companies (like HP) to do so,
too. Now, remember that XP and other Microsoft products of the same and
later vintages have to phone home to Redmond for permission to be used
by the consumer. Is it too much to imagine that Microsoft has embedded
some code that will render those products inoperable after Microsoft
withdraws support?

Thanks for the memory jog, TJ. Your point has been nagging in the back
of my mind ever since I switched to XP -- the knowledge that at any
point, Microsoft can destroy my operating system. They have the ability
to hold all their customers for ransome: let's say, take us up on our
special upgrade deal by November 27th, or you're dead in the water.

MS appears to play an arrogant, but delicate game; how much can they
abuse their customers before they'll walk? So, let's say that they go to
far (they have a habit of doing this) -- well, they'll kiss and make up
by extending support for a couple more years. Big deal. We know the MO.
But what's notable is that at no time before XP has the company embedded
a poison pill in their own software. What comes buried in those patches
that we don't know about?

Am I paranoid? Yes. Do I have reason to be paranoid? Yes.
Back in the days of DOS, I controlled my own computer. I could write
batchfiles for myself. I could change settings. That was then: yore.
Linux offers hope. Microsoft does not. But for the time being, I've got
to continue to play the game.

Richard