John Doe wrote:

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:


John Doe wrote:

snip

It should have been enough that I said I didn't intend to discuss it with
you but, upon your insistence, I've given enough of the reasons why I don't
intend to discuss it with you that even you should be able to grasp that I
don't intend to discuss it with you.


By the way, do you think Microsoft Office is one application?

That's so silly, just like your justification for dodging the
Microsoft Windows monopoly question.

Well, I agree it's silly of you to keep hounding me.

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:

John Doe wrote:

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:


John Doe wrote:

snip

It should have been enough that I said I didn't intend to discuss
it with you but, upon your insistence, I've given enough of the
reasons why I don't intend to discuss it with you that even you
should be able to grasp that I don't intend to discuss it with
you.


By the way, do you think Microsoft Office is one application?

That's so silly, just like your justification for dodging the
Microsoft Windows monopoly question.

Well, I agree it's silly of you to keep hounding me.

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?

That's funny too.

Do you think Microsoft Office is one application? I'm impressed that
anybody (who is supposed to be high technology oriented) can muster
the courage to say something like that in public. And I'm looking
forward to you all plainly stating your (comedic) belief that
Microsoft does not hold monopoly power. I don't mean BillW50, he is
way past comedy.

That baseball bat analogy (in a prior post) was posed by one of the
appeals court judges when Microsoft plainly argued that because
because it is the rightful owner of Windows, it has the right to do
anything with Windows.

Some Microsoft defender arguments are pretty funny, even arguments
put forth by extremely well-paid attorneys in federal court.

Microsoft is in court every day forcing its will upon smaller
software publishers. One year, Microsoft poured $650 million into
our justice system. Microsoft constantly employs our government to
physically force smaller software companies into compliance. If it
weren't for our intellectual property law and our government to
physically enforce that law at the point of a gun, Microsoft would
fall apart like a playing card house.







Path: newssvr11.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy. com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.pro digy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!pr odigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.gigan ews.com!postnews.google.com!news4.google.com!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: David Maynard nospam private.net
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.basics,sci.electronics.repair,alt. comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: The truth about OS/2!!! [ Why aren't computer clocks as accurate as cheap quartz watches?]
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:53:46 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: 11mlqar206uplc2 corp.supernews.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: v429f.441$p37.342 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com iM69f.33654$Bf7.13203 tornado.texas.rr.com fa99f.528$p37.148 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com dxb9f.36934$Bf7.35070 tornado.texas.rr.com lNd9f.552$p37.38 newssvr17.news.prodigy.com oWe9f.40054$Bf7.37679 tornado.texas.rr.com 360bm1li8v9spuh8uhv95dhi25qe0jad4v 4ax.com 11mbajursouao13 corp.supernews.com 26nbm159lankulsp18gidrvs0rg1vlmb9m 4ax.com 11mdkabmj4vef5f corp.supernews.com Xns97012E0521CE5follydom 207.115.17.102 11mfu9hnkt97qd3 corp.supernews.com Xns9701BC3134EBBfollydom 207.115.17.102 11mg4ua6p3i47ca corp.supernews.com Xns9701C6F44DDAfollydom 207.115.17.102 11mgg8hrge7dq4d corp.supernews.com Xns970282479AA5Cfollydom 207.115.17.102 11miobbo5ut4362 corp.supernews.com Xns9702E6342B453follydom 207.115.17.102 11mj8gprjccted2 corp.supernews.com Xns9703CCBDFF2follydom 207.115.17.102 11mjduenv5c4h42 corp.supernews.com Xns9703DB6DE5A37follydom 207.115.17.102
In-Reply-To: Xns9703DB6DE5A37follydom 207.115.17.102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse supernews.com
Lines: 22
Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com sci.electronics.basics:225976 sci.electronics.repair:427746 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:449038

John Doe wrote:

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:


John Doe wrote:


David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:



John Doe wrote:

snip

It should have been enough that I said I didn't intend to discuss
it with you but, upon your insistence, I've given enough of the
reasons why I don't intend to discuss it with you that even you
should be able to grasp that I don't intend to discuss it with
you.


By the way, do you think Microsoft Office is one application?

That's so silly, just like your justification for dodging the
Microsoft Windows monopoly question.

Well, I agree it's silly of you to keep hounding me.


I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?


That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've ever seen
come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I am under no
'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an opinion on ANYthing.

snip

David Maynard wrote:

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?


That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've ever
seen come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I am
under no 'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an opinion on
ANYthing.

You are too full of yourself to get my drift.

John Doe wrote:

David Maynard wrote:

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?


That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've ever
seen come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I am
under no 'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an opinion on
ANYthing.


You are too full of yourself to get my drift.

I got your drift just fine. Now lets see if you got mine.

David Maynard wrote:

John Doe wrote:

David Maynard wrote:

I'm hounding you? For an opinion? On USENET?


That's probably the closest thing to an accurate summary I've
ever seen come out of you and this may come as a real shock but I
am under no 'obligation' whatsoever to provide you with an
opinion on ANYthing.


You are too full of yourself to get my drift.

I got your drift just fine. Now lets see if you got mine.

I did, it's enough to knock a buzzard off a **** wagon at 50 yards.

John Doe writes:

Microsoft is in court every day forcing its will upon smaller
software publishers. One year, Microsoft poured $650 million into
our justice system. Microsoft constantly employs our government to
physically force smaller software companies into compliance.

It's the other way around. Thousands of smaller software companies
try to use the courts to compensate for their own inability to
compete, by accusing Microsoft of various misdeeds on a regular basis.

If it weren't for our intellectual property law and our government to
physically enforce that law at the point of a gun, Microsoft would
fall apart like a playing card house.

So would every other software company.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.