From: Miles Bader on
"Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Popeye(a)>
> Neither does the media, or world opinion.

Not sure what you actually mean by that. It _is_ pretty clear that both
the media and world opinion consider Obama a _vast_ improvement over
Bush (as in "reasonable guy" vs. "intellectually lightweight nutcase"),
and that his election has stopped the U.S.'s reputation's slide into the


Congratulation, n. The civility of envy.
From: hancock4 on
On Oct 23, 12:49 pm, N8N <njna...(a)> wrote:
> > People, especially those upgrading to a new computer, do not have a
> > high speed connector nor a CD burner.
> Most people know someone who does, however.  I think it's just the
> having to actively do something (and taking the risk that you have an
> unsupported card/whatever) that stops people.  

I gave the above some thought and don't quite agree. From time to
time I do ask my "better connected" friends for favors but I really
dislike imposing on them and it is also cumbersome to do so. When
conditions permit I'd like to have my own setup instead of the
library. But a heck of a lot of people use the library machines and
they had to install more to accomodate the demand.

> I am surprised that you
> can't walk into a store and buy a new home PC loaded with Linux,
> OpenOffice, GIMP, etc. - but they're not as common as you'd think.

Mass production and distribution doesn't accomodate non standard
arrangements very well. My supermarket dropped a soda brand I liked
simply because not enough people bought it. That is, people did buy
it, just not enough of them to make it worthwhile for the store to
carry the brand.

> Every new version of Windows that comes out more bloated than the last
> I think "well, here comes the backlash, we're going to see more OS's
> on the shelf" but for whatever reason it doesn't happen.

I suspect much of the bloat actually includes some useful features
people want. XP has some very useful stuff Win95 did not.

From: hancock4 on
On Oct 23, 5:46 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)> wrote:

> IBM was the biggest software company in the world. Had they treated the
> PC seriously, they wouldn't have been whipped by everyone else.

In my humble opinion, IBM was generally making good decisions about
the PC. One smart decision that came back to bite them was their wide
open arrangements. They sought out others to development hardware and
software for their PC--instead of making it all proprietary--so that
the usefulness of the machine was be much greater and they'd sell

Well, as a result the machine was very useful and they did indeed sell
many more. But at the same time their open approach allowed clones to
get in.

Where IBM failed was in competing against the clones, though that's a
hard thing to do.
From: hancock4 on
On Oct 24, 12:04 am, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
<dwrous...(a)nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote:
> Umm, I run my old DOS stuff all the time under Windows.  They call it
> "command mode" now, but it works fine.
> * XP 64-bit, Vista 64-bit (Windows 7 is still too new for me to claim any
> experience with it) do not support 16-bit applications at all.

What was QuickBasic 4.5 compiler and its resultant executables? I
think they were all 16 bit, not 32 bit. Both the QB editor and
compiler and old executables run fine.

What was QBASIC interpreter that came out with DOS 5.0? That too runs

From: Otto Yamamoto on
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:31:56 -0400, Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick wrote:

> These numbers simply reflect my point- that the Democratic party has
> destroyed the prestige of our Presidency, so that -anyone- replacing
> Bush, no matter how little, if anything at all, they've accomplished,
> will recieve rave international reviews and a Nobel Peace Prize.

Oh, I get it, the *democrats* made the world not like Bush. There was
nothing he might have done, personally that made people dislike him.

'Smoking is Healthier than Fascism'