As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in 
bussiness what do you think?

I think they're doing fine and is not the money exclusively, is about a 
philanthropy/philosophy for service for the humanity, or at least is 
hwat I think about it.

Microsoft should invest in making a version of Windows that doesn't need 
so many security patches, since people pays for software now! not for: 
most of the software now and the rest in little peaces called patches 
LATER, oh but you want it faster? they pay for extra speed of support.

I think Microsoft is as pathetic as gigantic they're.

Post a reply to this message

Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in
> bussiness what do you think?
>
> I think Microsoft is as pathetic as gigantic they're.

I think M$ is an evil monopoly which should be exterminated.  I'm doing my part
at least...

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:14:12 -0000, Saul Luizaga  

<sau### [at] netscapenet> did spake, saying:

> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions.

It had come to my attention  

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080203

-- 

Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in 
> bussiness what do you think?

  Who cares?

> I think they're doing fine and is not the money exclusively, is about a 
> philanthropy/philosophy for service for the humanity, or at least is 
> hwat I think about it.

  I would wholeheartedly agree if it was Google instead of Yahoo (and,
in fact, MS *has* tried buying Google, which refused).

  But Yahoo? To me it doesn't have such an image as eg. Google has.

  If MS tried to buy the Free Software Foundation, that would be interesting.

> Microsoft should invest in making a version of Windows that doesn't need 
> so many security patches

  I hate to defend Windows by principle, but I can't simply deny facts:
The need for security patches is not a flaw exclusive to Windows, nor one
can fairly expect an OS of that size to be completely flawless. The Linux
kernel receives regular security patches, and this is true for most other
OSes as well (such as Solaris and MacOS X).

  What MS should do is to make their OS more efficient, lighter and with
increased usability. They like to plagiate ideas from MacOS X, but they
fail to replicate its user-friendliness and robustness.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Yahoo is evil and pathetic.  The cultures suffer from the same flaws. A nice
fit.

I think Google should not fight it.


"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in
> > bussiness what do you think?
> >
> > I think Microsoft is as pathetic as gigantic they're.
>
> I think M$ is an evil monopoly which should be exterminated.  I'm doing my part
> at least...

Post a reply to this message

> Microsoft should

MS has lots of money to pay very clever people with lots of experience to 
help decide their strategy - you think you can make MS more profitable than 
they can?

> invest in making a version of Windows that doesn't need so many security 
> patches, since people pays for software now! not for: most of the software 
> now and the rest in little peaces called patches LATER,

So you mean that instead of everyone in the world using Vista and finding 
bugs within a year, MS employees should do this (it would probably take 5 or 
10 years) and only then release Vista?  MS would probably be bankrupt by 
then!

> oh but you want it faster? they pay for extra speed of support.

Are you suggesting support should be free?  But it's not free, someone needs 
to pay for it, so it would go on the price of Windows, which would mean a 
lot of people paying for it who never use it, and more importantly, a lot of 
people not buying it because it's too expensive.

> I think Microsoft is as pathetic as gigantic they're.

The company accounts say otherwise...

Post a reply to this message

Saul Luizaga wrote:
> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in 
> bussiness what do you think?

Yahoo is still going?

Oh well, no loss...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote

> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in
> bussiness what do you think?
>
> I think they're doing fine and is not the money exclusively, is about a
> philanthropy/philosophy for service for the humanity,

What are you smoking?

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>> As you maight know for $us. 44.6 Billions. I think Yahoo should stay in 
>> bussiness what do you think?
> 
>   Who cares?
> 

I'm still trying to figure out why ...

> 
>   If MS tried to buy the Free Software Foundation, that would be interesting.
> 

Don't give them any bright ideas ;)

Though, I seemed to have read somewhere that MS was considering 
releasing the source to the .NET framework ....

nevermind, they already have: http://tinyurl.com/2cfh5w

>   I hate to defend Windows by principle, but I can't simply deny facts:
> The need for security patches is not a flaw exclusive to Windows, nor one
> can fairly expect an OS of that size to be completely flawless. The Linux
> kernel receives regular security patches, and this is true for most other
> OSes as well (such as Solaris and MacOS X).
> 
>   What MS should do is to make their OS more efficient, lighter and with
> increased usability. They like to plagiate ideas from MacOS X, but they
> fail to replicate its user-friendliness and robustness.

Well said. Most vulnerabilities crop up because someone found a clever 
way to circumvent the normal operation of an application in ways the 
original creator of the application never considered.

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>   But Yahoo? To me it doesn't have such an image as eg. Google has.

speaking of image, Yahoo has Flickr, which in my book is one of the best online
apps ever.  It pleases the eyes very much and my daughter loves searching for
doll photos...

Post a reply to this message