Win XP and repartitioning

[zscoundrel]

The answer to your question, "Who could ask for anything more???", would 
be ME asking for Open Source!!!  That's what I want.

<misty-eyed rant delivered by wistful old fogey>
I am an anachronism.  I still remember the days before Microsoft tried 
to take over the world when EVERYONE shared their best ideas.  After 
all, where do you think DOS came from???  A band of scruffy losers 
working out of someones garage sure didn't.  They just swiped the best 
parts of two other popular OS'es and sold it to IBM who was so wrapped 
up in internal politics that they couldn't tell the difference between 
microchips and poptato chips, but know they wanted to get a small piece 
of the micro-computer business.  (They succeeded - they now have a very 
small piece of the PC market!)

Perhaps open source software is not as flashy.  It surely doesn't have 
the PR budget that 'doze enjoys, but it is less buggy because the person 
who discovers the bug can actually FIX it.  With the 'doze software, the 
only thing you can do is exploit the bug.  Used to be, if you publicized 
the bug, you would get a vaguely worded nasty letter from the 
manufacture politely telling you to cease and desist and they would 
publicly deny the bug as long as they could.  Then they would 'claim' to 
work on a fix, but of course there would be no notice when the bug-fix 
was released.  It didn't really matter though, because by that time, the 
next over-hyped release would hit the shelves with a hand full of 
semi-new features and a basket-full of brand new bugs for people to run 
out and pay too much for. . .
</misty-eyed rant delivered by wistful old fogey>

I want a level playing field where we can all get the software we need 
to do our work and play our games without someone telling me, "you can't 
do that unless you pay me money".  I don't mind paying for value 
received, but I will give up computers completely when it gets so bad 
that every time I hit <enter> it costs me money!  (BTW- That is EXACTLY 
what the .NET initiate is designed for. . . )

Jonathan Hutchins wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian Densmore [mailto:DensmoreB at ctbsonline.com]
> 
>> I would recommend ME over any other version of Win9x (it has all the
>> patches, and is the most stable of the breed). Win2000 is the most
>> stable Winblows version available. 
> 
> 
> To be marginally polite, balderdash.
> 
> All of the bloat and none of the stability is what I read in every review
> that isn't a glossed Press Release.  Absolute crap according to every
> reliable reviewer out there.  Reeking horsedung according to every tech
> who's had to install it.
> 
> What's wrong with 95 anyway?  It's stable, it works, you can patch it to run
> most hardware.  Any of the "features" that the later versions offer can be
> had with third-party freeware.  As modern GUIs go, it's light weight and
> efficient.  Who could ask for anything more?
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
At 20, I was liberal, because I had nothing to lose and so much to gain.
by 40, I was conservative, because I had so much to lose and so little to gain.
Isn't it amazing what 20 years of hard work and experience will do for ones' point of view?