I have returned
 

Maybe I got it right this time.

I have returned
 

On 5/10/2010 10:52 PM, Just Plan Burr wrote:
Maybe I got it right this time.


You're still running Windoze....

I guess you didn't..

Prepare for your next reinstall.

Krypsis

I have returned
 

On 10/6/10 5:54 PM, MNMikew wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
Wish I could afford Mac's

Macs suck

Says the man using Outlook Express as a Usenet client...

- J.

OE dosent run on a Mac.

Oh, but it does - there have been versions of it under both MacOS and OS
X. Thankfully, Entourage has replaced it these days, though some would
say that's not necessarily an improvement.

Anyway, your headers indicate that you're using Microsoft Outlook
Express 6.00.2900.3598; if I'm not mistaken, that's the version of
Outlook Express that shipped with Windows XP Service Pack 2. So we can
infer that you're a Service Pack and a crapload of patches and hotfixes
behind current - or maybe you just really like that specific release of
Outlook Express, and went to great lengths to make sure that it survived
subsequent updates.

Either way, either one of those things pretty much nullifies your
opinion regarding matters of a technical nature.

- J.

I have returned
 

"John Harbl" wrote in message
...
On 10/6/10 5:54 PM, MNMikew wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
Wish I could afford Mac's

Macs suck

Says the man using Outlook Express as a Usenet client...

- J.

OE dosent run on a Mac.

Oh, but it does - there have been versions of it under both MacOS and OS
X. Thankfully, Entourage has replaced it these days, though some would
say that's not necessarily an improvement.

Anyway, your headers indicate that you're using Microsoft Outlook Express
6.00.2900.3598; if I'm not mistaken, that's the version of Outlook Express
that shipped with Windows XP Service Pack 2. So we can infer that you're
a Service Pack and a crapload of patches and hotfixes behind current - or
maybe you just really like that specific release of Outlook Express, and
went to great lengths to make sure that it survived subsequent updates.

Either way, either one of those things pretty much nullifies your opinion
regarding matters of a technical nature.

- J.

I've seen a lot of MacBooks lately running dual boots (OS-X and XP, Vista
or Win7). Since they went to Intel processors, seems a lot of people run
Windows on them so they have more software choices.

I have returned
 

On 10/6/10 17:20 , John Harbl wrote:
On 10/6/10 5:54 PM, MNMikew wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
Wish I could afford Mac's

Macs suck

Says the man using Outlook Express as a Usenet client...

- J.

OE dosent run on a Mac.

Oh, but it does - there have been versions of it under both MacOS and OS
X. Thankfully, Entourage has replaced it these days, though some would
say that's not necessarily an improvement.

Anyway, your headers indicate that you're using Microsoft Outlook
Express 6.00.2900.3598; if I'm not mistaken, that's the version of
Outlook Express that shipped with Windows XP Service Pack 2. So we can
infer that you're a Service Pack and a crapload of patches and hotfixes
behind current - or maybe you just really like that specific release of
Outlook Express, and went to great lengths to make sure that it survived
subsequent updates.

Either way, either one of those things pretty much nullifies your
opinion regarding matters of a technical nature.



Nothing nullifies his opinion, either way. It's an OPINION. It
just doesn't happen to agree with your own.

If what he's using works for him, his opinion is as valid as your
own.

If he doesn't like Macs, his opinion is as valid as your own.
There are significant numbers of individuals here who agree with
him. Some, with more technical expertise than yours.



There was a member of this newsgroup, now passed on, who
preferred Win 98. It worked for him, got him where he needed to go.
That the rest of the world disowned Win 98 a decade ago was of no
consequence. As for his technical expertise...He could hold his own
in UNIX, OpenBSD, Windows (through 7), Mac and Linux. And was a
developer for a number of them.

He just happened to prefer Win 98. I have no idea why. Nor is it
relevant.

I have returned
 

On 10/6/10 7:30 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

I've seen a lot of MacBooks lately running dual boots (OS-X and XP,
Vista or Win7). Since they went to Intel processors, seems a lot of
people run Windows on them so they have more software choices.

Dual-boot or virtual machine; either one works. Most folks go the VM
route these days, though there are some cases where only a dual-boot
scenario works for certain things.

But for the absolute ne plus ultra in Outlook Express experiences,
nothin' beats running it under Windows. It's just so completely in its
element.

- J.

I have returned
 

On 7/10/2010 7:27 AM, MNMikew wrote:
"Just Plan wrote in message
.. .

wrote in message
u...
On 5/10/2010 10:52 PM, Just Plan Burr wrote:
Maybe I got it right this time.


You're still running Windoze....

I guess you didn't..

Prepare for your next reinstall.

Krypsis


Made four years between installs.

Wish I could afford Mac's

Macs suck


My iMac, that I bought in 2001, is still running without a reinstall due
to a corrupted operating system! All it has had are OS upgrades along
the way.

Windoze PCs need a reinstall as often as once a year.

Krypsis

I have returned
 

I'm running 7 on my laptop.

Just to lazy to set it up all the way.

I have returned
 

Either way, either one of those things pretty much nullifies your
opinion regarding matters of a technical nature.

Nothing nullifies his opinion, either way. It's an OPINION. It just
doesn't happen to agree with your own.

Do I need to explain sarcasm and hyperbole here, or is it now taken as read?

If he doesn't like Macs, his opinion is as valid as your own. There are
significant numbers of individuals here who agree with him.

Don't care. Really, I don't. Mac vs. PC is no more interesting than
Windows vs. Linux, Atari vs. Amiga, CP/M vs. DOS, or any other retarded
'my OS is better than yours' argument from either recent times or the
ages. I'd almost compare it to a Chevy vs. Ford argument, but it's far
less interesting than even that. Hell, I've read dosing instructions
for cat ear medicine that are more compelling.

Some, with more technical expertise than yours.

Are you sure about that statement? I mean, you don't know my technical
background, and I can assure you that my technical background is PRETTY
DAMN BADASS. It rides a motorcycle and rolls its cigarettes up in its
sleeve and everything - and watch what you say about it if it's in
earshot because I'm pretty sure it carries a switchblade. The pretty
girls seem to swoon over it, however.

He just happened to prefer Win 98. I have no idea why. Nor is it relevant.

My opinion is that it is *highly* relevant. And my opinion is right,
and nobody can take that away from me.

Unlike one's innocence. I lost that in a Sarajevo brothel back in '93,
but that's a whole other story.

- J.

I have returned
 

On 10/6/10 23:46 , John Harbl wrote:
Either way, either one of those things pretty much nullifies your
opinion regarding matters of a technical nature.

Nothing nullifies his opinion, either way. It's an OPINION. It just
doesn't happen to agree with your own.

Do I need to explain sarcasm and hyperbole here,


I'm sure it wouldn't stop you if someone said 'no.'