On 12/19/2011 06:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company. As of
today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and most of those are in a
parent's basement.



....and it lacks the wide variety of anti-virus programs available on
windows.


--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill

In article ,
says...

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company. As of
today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and most of those are in a
parent's basement.

My local telephone company was Southern New England Telephone and had
nothing to do with the development of operating systems. However if
your view of Bell Labs is that it was "a money-losint division of your
local telephone company" then I don't care what the problem is, you are
part of it.

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:28:48 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

A REAL computer and DELL in the same sentance???

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company. As of
today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and most of those are in a
parent's basement.

Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 11:11 PM, Bill wrote:
Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 5:02 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, wrote:
wrote
om:









On 12/18/2011 10:41 AM, FrozenNorth wrote:
On 12/18/11 11:29 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 7:34 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Aren't Dells the Packard Hells of today?

Getting that way. I've been a big fan of Dell's XPS laptops
for years, but their XPS 15 I purchased two months ago is
extremely disappointing in fit and finish ... it is built like
it came from HF, not kidding!

I have the old one and the new on side by side in my office
... the difference in quality is glaring, and does not bode
well for the future of Dell.

Further proof that, with the rise of MBAthink, almost anything
you buy from an American corporation these days is, in a large
measure, total, unmitigated, ****.

It seems most brands are going that way, as a rule, I avoid all
the consumer grade computers, too much bloatware and horrible
components. A possible exception for machines aimed at gamers,
they tend to have much better hardware in them. Get machines
aimed for corporations if you can, they tend to be better all
around, as a general rule.

In the choir .. XPS has always been pushed by Dell as a quality,
_business class_ machine.

Had I been in the habit of buying their consumer Inspiron label,
I would likely have not been informed enough to even remark on
the experience.

So far I like my Asus X53E. It was not expensive. Core i3 2.1GHz,
8 MB RAM, Win7 Pro 64 bit.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Allow me to be the first to shockingly exclaim "8MB RAM?"

No wonder it wasn't expensive. ;-)


Kinda skinny, ain't it. Mine has 1,000 times more RAM. ;~)

sheepish grin

It's really 2^10 = 1024 times as much. Geeze... : )

No, a gig is 1000 times more than a meg. He probably should have said
8.192 meg. ;~)

Actually, the properties under mycomputer says: 8.00GB (7.79 GB usable)
/story


For those not in the know, when measuring memory, 1 KB=2^10 bytes, 1
MB=2^20 bytes, 1 GB=2^30 bytes. For measuring most everying else, like
network speed for instance, 1 Kb = 10^3 BITS, 1KB =10^BYTES, M =10^6,
G=10^6.

You can generally trust manufacturers to choose units which make their
product look it's best.

Bill wrote:
Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 11:11 PM, Bill wrote:
Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 5:02 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, wrote:
wrote
om:









On 12/18/2011 10:41 AM, FrozenNorth wrote:
On 12/18/11 11:29 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 7:34 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Aren't Dells the Packard Hells of today?

Getting that way. I've been a big fan of Dell's XPS laptops
for years, but their XPS 15 I purchased two months ago is
extremely disappointing in fit and finish ... it is built like
it came from HF, not kidding!

I have the old one and the new on side by side in my office
... the difference in quality is glaring, and does not bode
well for the future of Dell.

Further proof that, with the rise of MBAthink, almost anything
you buy from an American corporation these days is, in a large
measure, total, unmitigated, ****.

It seems most brands are going that way, as a rule, I avoid all
the consumer grade computers, too much bloatware and horrible
components. A possible exception for machines aimed at gamers,
they tend to have much better hardware in them. Get machines
aimed for corporations if you can, they tend to be better all
around, as a general rule.

In the choir .. XPS has always been pushed by Dell as a quality,
_business class_ machine.

Had I been in the habit of buying their consumer Inspiron label,
I would likely have not been informed enough to even remark on
the experience.

So far I like my Asus X53E. It was not expensive. Core i3 2.1GHz,
8 MB RAM, Win7 Pro 64 bit.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Allow me to be the first to shockingly exclaim "8MB RAM?"

No wonder it wasn't expensive. ;-)


Kinda skinny, ain't it. Mine has 1,000 times more RAM. ;~)

sheepish grin

It's really 2^10 = 1024 times as much. Geeze... : )

No, a gig is 1000 times more than a meg. He probably should have said
8.192 meg. ;~)

Actually, the properties under mycomputer says: 8.00GB (7.79 GB usable)
/story


For those not in the know, when measuring memory, 1 KB=2^10 bytes, 1
MB=2^20 bytes, 1 GB=2^30 bytes. For measuring most everying else, like
network speed for instance, 1 Kb = 10^3 BITS, 1KB =10^BYTES, M =10^6,
G=10^6.

Oops G = 10^9.


You can generally trust manufacturers to choose units which make their
product look it's best.

On 12/19/2011 8:58 AM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
On 12/19/2011 06:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company.
As of today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and most of those are
in a parent's basement.

...and it lacks the wide variety of anti-virus programs available on
windows.

It also lacks the urgent need for them.

Bill wrote in :



For those not in the know, when measuring memory, 1 KB=2^10 bytes, 1
MB=2^20 bytes, 1 GB=2^30 bytes. For measuring most everying else, like
network speed for instance, 1 Kb = 10^3 BITS, 1KB =10^BYTES, M =10^6,
G=10^6.

You can generally trust manufacturers to choose units which make their
product look it's best.



This explains the confusion pretty well:
http://xkcd.com/394/

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

And why not, they are made in China, just like most HF stuff.

Bob...

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
On 12/18/2011 7:34 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Aren't Dells the Packard Hells of today?

Getting that way. I've been a big fan of Dell's XPS laptops for years, but
their XPS 15 I purchased two months ago is extremely disappointing in fit
and finish ... it is built like it came from HF, not kidding!

I have the old one and the new on side by side in my office ... the
difference in quality is glaring, and does not bode well for the future of
Dell.

Further proof that, with the rise of MBAthink, almost anything you buy
from an American corporation these days is, in a large measure, total,
unmitigated, ****.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

Yeah, somewhere in the industry the computer people decided to redefine what
k,M and G mean based on powers of 2.

Typo correction: G=10^9 (US Billion, most other's 1000 Million)

------------
"Bill" wrote in message ...

For those not in the know, when measuring memory, 1 KB=2^10 bytes, 1
MB=2^20 bytes, 1 GB=2^30 bytes. For measuring most everying else, like
network speed for instance, 1 Kb = 10^3 BITS, 1KB =10^BYTES, M =10^6,
G=10^6.

You can generally trust manufacturers to choose units which make their
product look it's best.

On 12/19/2011 3:32 PM, Bob/Barb Alexander wrote:
And why not, they are made in China, just like most HF stuff.

So is the iPad, one of the best made electronic devices out there.

It's not always where it's made, it is always the attitude with which
it's made.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 12/19/2011 7:25 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 11:11 PM, Bill wrote:
Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 12/18/2011 5:02 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, wrote:
wrote
om:









On 12/18/2011 10:41 AM, FrozenNorth wrote:
On 12/18/11 11:29 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 7:34 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Aren't Dells the Packard Hells of today?

Getting that way. I've been a big fan of Dell's XPS laptops
for years, but their XPS 15 I purchased two months ago is
extremely disappointing in fit and finish ... it is built like
it came from HF, not kidding!

I have the old one and the new on side by side in my office
... the difference in quality is glaring, and does not bode
well for the future of Dell.

Further proof that, with the rise of MBAthink, almost anything
you buy from an American corporation these days is, in a large
measure, total, unmitigated, ****.

It seems most brands are going that way, as a rule, I avoid all
the consumer grade computers, too much bloatware and horrible
components. A possible exception for machines aimed at gamers,
they tend to have much better hardware in them. Get machines
aimed for corporations if you can, they tend to be better all
around, as a general rule.

In the choir .. XPS has always been pushed by Dell as a quality,
_business class_ machine.

Had I been in the habit of buying their consumer Inspiron label,
I would likely have not been informed enough to even remark on
the experience.

So far I like my Asus X53E. It was not expensive. Core i3 2.1GHz,
8 MB RAM, Win7 Pro 64 bit.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Allow me to be the first to shockingly exclaim "8MB RAM?"

No wonder it wasn't expensive. ;-)


Kinda skinny, ain't it. Mine has 1,000 times more RAM. ;~)

sheepish grin

It's really 2^10 = 1024 times as much. Geeze... : )

No, a gig is 1000 times more than a meg. He probably should have said
8.192 meg. ;~)

Actually, the properties under mycomputer says: 8.00GB (7.79 GB usable)
/story

File allocation tables need room, not sure what replace those but some
type of index is needed on the drive.

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Lq6dnYPkkd-
:

On 12/19/2011 7:25 AM, Han wrote:

Actually, the properties under mycomputer says: 8.00GB (7.79 GB usable)
/story

File allocation tables need room, not sure what replace those but some
type of index is needed on the drive.

More likely, the video chip is stealing system RAM for its own use. It's
extremely common in machines without a separate video card. (Even if you
have one, if the on-board video isn't disabled it will still steal the
RAM.)

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

On 12/20/2011 3:53 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Lq6dnYPkkd-
:

On 12/19/2011 7:25 AM, Han wrote:

Actually, the properties under mycomputer says: 8.00GB (7.79 GB usable)
/story

File allocation tables need room, not sure what replace those but some
type of index is needed on the drive.

More likely, the video chip is stealing system RAM for its own use. It's
extremely common in machines without a separate video card. (Even if you
have one, if the on-board video isn't disabled it will still steal the
RAM.)

Puckdropper

Doh! Most likely NOT what I said. I was suddenly thinking of a drive
being reported smaller in capacity than sold as.

J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating
system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
company. As of today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and
most of those are in a parent's basement.

My local telephone company was Southern New England Telephone and had
nothing to do with the development of operating systems. However if
your view of Bell Labs is that it was "a money-losint division of your
local telephone company" then I don't care what the problem is, you
are part of it.

Southern New England Telephone was, and is, an operating division of AT&T.
The company now does business as AT&T Connecticut.

Bell Labs never made a proft; it was an expense division.

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating
system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
company. As of today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and
most of those are in a parent's basement.

My local telephone company was Southern New England Telephone and had
nothing to do with the development of operating systems. However if
your view of Bell Labs is that it was "a money-losint division of your
local telephone company" then I don't care what the problem is, you
are part of it.

Southern New England Telephone was, and is, an operating division of AT&T.
The company now does business as AT&T Connecticut.

Check again, moron.

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:21:44 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating
system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
company. As of today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and
most of those are in a parent's basement.

My local telephone company was Southern New England Telephone and had
nothing to do with the development of operating systems. However if
your view of Bell Labs is that it was "a money-losint division of your
local telephone company" then I don't care what the problem is, you
are part of it.

Southern New England Telephone was, and is, an operating division of AT&T.
The company now does business as AT&T Connecticut.

Check again, moron.


Check YOUR facts.
Prior to 1986, The Southern New England Telephone Company had been a
minority holding of AT&T until February 1986, when AT&T withdrew its
23% holding. SNET then became its own company, operating a
telecommunications sales division, Sonecor Systems Division, which
began operations on January 1, 1983 and sold equipment in competition
with AT&T before the Bell System divestiture. SNET also operated SNET
America, which sold long distance services within Connecticut.

Under threats of a hostile takeover, Southern New England Telephone
underwent a restructuring in 1986, creating Southern New England
Telecommunications as the holding company of SNET and its related
businesses.

Southern New England Telecommunications was acquired by SBC
Communications in 1998.

SNET Corporation was merged into AT&T Teleholdings, formerly
Ameritech, in 2006 and ceased to exist.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:21:44 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...

Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:25:23 -0800, Steve Barker wrote:

Where do I go from here?

Lew

to dell dot com and buy a real computer. With something besides
vista.

Linux perhaps? Certainly not NT :-).

Not Linux either. Linux is a knock-off of a 50-year old operating
system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
company. As of today, it runs about 2% of the world's computers and
most of those are in a parent's basement.

My local telephone company was Southern New England Telephone and had
nothing to do with the development of operating systems. However if
your view of Bell Labs is that it was "a money-losint division of your
local telephone company" then I don't care what the problem is, you
are part of it.

Southern New England Telephone was, and is, an operating division of AT&T.
The company now does business as AT&T Connecticut.

Check again, moron.


Check YOUR facts.
Prior to 1986, The Southern New England Telephone Company had been a
minority holding of AT&T until February 1986, when AT&T withdrew its
23% holding. SNET then became its own company, operating a
telecommunications sales division, Sonecor Systems Division, which
began operations on January 1, 1983 and sold equipment in competition
with AT&T before the Bell System divestiture. SNET also operated SNET
America, which sold long distance services within Connecticut.

Under threats of a hostile takeover, Southern New England Telephone
underwent a restructuring in 1986, creating Southern New England
Telecommunications as the holding company of SNET and its related
businesses.

Southern New England Telecommunications was acquired by SBC
Communications in 1998.

SNET Corporation was merged into AT&T Teleholdings, formerly
Ameritech, in 2006 and ceased to exist.

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division of
AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company means
that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent of the
stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

From the 20% owner of the newsgroup...


"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means
that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent of the
stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

HeyBub wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Ugh-oh HeyBub - that would not necessarily make you a very good CEO...

--

-Mike-

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

So how many "owners" would it take before you obeyed the 20% instead of
the 80%?

wrote:
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating
division of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

Really???

--

-Mike-

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 07:56:37 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

So how many "owners" would it take before you obeyed the 20% instead of
the 80%?
If none of the others owned more than 10% I'd "consider" listening to
the one that owned 20, but it would depend on how well the 80 agreed.

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 07:56:37 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

So how many "owners" would it take before you obeyed the 20% instead of
the 80%?
It would also depend on which "owners" had the most influence
otherwhise. Like technology ownership, or important connections, etc.

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 11:10:48 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 07:56:37 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:27:38 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:

I see no "facts" there that show that SNET was "an operating division
of AT&T" prior to 2006.

Perhaps you think that having 20 percent of the stock of a company
means that you own the company. If so I suggest you buy 20 percent
of the stock in a company and then try to fire the CEO.

If AT&T owned 20% of MY company, you bet I do what they said.

Even if whoever owned the other 80 percent told you not to?

Depends how many "owners" the other 80% was spread over.

So how many "owners" would it take before you obeyed the 20% instead of
the 80%?
If none of the others owned more than 10% I'd "consider" listening to
the one that owned 20, but it would depend on how well the 80 agreed.

Well deflected, sir! Now, why are you talkin' to trolls?
Time to add a twit filter, clare.

--
Truth loves to go naked.
--Dr. Thomas Fuller, Gnomologia, 1732

Subject

Right click on blank screen gets the problem solved.

Many thanks to all that replied.

BTW, same trick also works on XP.

Lew