From: "Robert Comer" 

>   I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions.

At least state them, if you can't even do that they don't exist.

>You already admited you made stuff up.

I did not.

>You don't appear to have any interest in this.

You're right, your argument style of late totally turns me off.  I am not
nearly as much against you and Microsoft as you think I am...

- Bob Comer



"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e684a50{at}w3.nls.net...
   I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions.  You already admited you
made stuff up.  I referred you to a reliable source of factual information.
You don't appear to have any interest in this.  Maybe you would prefer to
make false statements, which you now claim as an opinion only based on a
fiction of your own imagination.  Of course you still haven't acknowledged
that when you make up facts on which you base your opinions you should be
honest and acknowledge that.

Rich

"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:3e6835d9{at}w3.nls.net...
>   It's not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was your
major deception.

LOL!  An opinion is not a deception.

>  It was that your opinion was based on assumptions you made and not fact.

And again, assumptions you have not argued against.

>You just admitted that you made up what it was that you were comparing.

I admitted no such thing.

>Not that it wouldn't do you some good to prefix your opinions, as opposed
to statements of fact, with "I believe" or "I feel".<

I say it again, *ALL* I say here is opinion.  (It may be fact also, but it
may not be, just not intentionally wrong.)

>   In regard you your mention of propaganda, don't you think that this is a
bit ironic given that your post to which I replied was propaganda and as
you admitted based on a fiction of your own creation?<

No, I don't as what I said wasn't propaganda -- to be using propaganda I'd
have to have something to gain, I have nothing to gain by what I said.  You
yourself know I use more Microsoft products than Linux, and I like a third
platform (the AS/400) the best. As for the last part, I created no fiction,
I STATED AN OPINION.

- Bob Comer




"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e682dfc{at}w3.nls.net...
It's not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was your
major deception.  It was that your opinion was based on assumptions you
made and not fact. You just admitted that you made up what it was that you
were comparing.  Not that it wouldn't do you some good to prefix your
opinions, as opposed to statements of fact, with "I believe" or
"I feel".

   In regard you your mention of propaganda, don't you think that this is a
bit ironic given that your post to which I replied was propaganda and as
you admitted based on a fiction of your own creation?

Rich

  "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:3e6821ab$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  > If you are just making assumptions you should state that you are giving
an
  opinion based on assumptions and not making a statement based on facts.<

  As I have stated before, when I say something I am stating an opinion, no
  more, no less, if you want to take everything I say as fact  (or false
  fact,) that is your choice, but I have no energy to argue such.  This is,
  after all, a discussion group, not a scientific journal of some kind.

  >It will avoid having your false statements pointed out.

  You haven't pointed out any...

  >If you care about facts, and I'm not sure you do, see

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/default.mspx.
  <

  You're wrong, I'm tired of reading Microsoft propaganda like that.

  >   As for your comments regarding the web edition's suitability for
  something other than web server, maybe you should take a moment and ask
what
  the likely purpose is for something called the web edition.<

  Well duh -- I was comparing it to Linux and I can do cheaper and more with
  Linux, that's all I said.

  >   In regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or some
  infamous IRC channel?  Is this what you use to support your critical
  systems?<

  More than just newsgroups, but, that's how I support all our systems, even
  the AS/400.  To phrase it another way, we have no software support
contracts
  on anything in my department. (Not saying I wouldn't want them
necessarily,
  but they didn't have sw support contracts under the old manager...)

  No IRC or IM though, I loath that kind of thing...

  - Bob Comer


  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e681879{at}w3.nls.net...
     If you are just making assumptions you should state that you are giving
  an opinion based on assumptions and not making a statement based on facts.
  It will avoid having your false statements pointed out.  If you care about
  facts, and I'm not sure you do, see

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/default.mspx.

     As for your comments regarding the web edition's suitability for
  something other than web server, maybe you should take a moment and ask
what
  the likely purpose is for something called the web edition.

     In regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or some
  infamous IRC channel?  Is this what you use to support your critical
  systems?

  Rich

    "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
  news:3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    >  Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?

    I just stated my opinion, that's all. I'm not here to list out
everything
    possible.

    >   It's well known that Linux has less functionality.

    I'm not so sure that can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't just
    talking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with that specific
    version of Windows Server -- with no Cal's, that means no NT
  authentication,
    files serving, or print serving, and I assume no domain capabilities --
    that's 4 areas that Windows is strong on and Linux needs to catch up,
yet
  I
    can put together a Linux box that does all 5 of these things for a LOT
  less
    money.

    >If you want to roll your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your
  time
    is worth >nothing.

    There's actually a decent amount of free support out there, and you
don't
    have to roll your own version, you can use someone's distribution.

    >If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect to
spend
    much more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you a
subscription
    to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year.<

    I would *never* pay Red Hat that much, they don't have enough to offer
    support wise.  I have spent that much on Microsoft products several
times
    over up to now, but things are a changin.  I might add that Microsoft is
    quite costly for aftermarket support and I don't buy that either.

    >If you want their supported enterprise level web server you are going
to
    pay another $395 to $895 annually.  That's more than four to six times
  more
    expensive than the Windows Server 2003 solution.<

    I got it beat -- I have a server here at home (always learning) that
cost
  $0
    for the Linux and about $200 for the hardware.  (I also have a Linux
  client
    PC here that I paid $99 for and I'm not going to do that again, at least
  not
    this distribution.)

    - Bob Comer



    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e67d5e4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
       Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?

       It's well known that Linux has less functionality.  If you want to
roll
    your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your time is worth
nothing.
    If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect to
spend
    much more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you a
subscription
    to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year.  If you want their
    supported enterprise level web server you are going to pay another $395
to
    $895 annually.  That's more than four to six times more expensive than
the
    Windows Server 2003 solution.

    Rich

      "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
    news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...
      Less functionality, higher cost. Ease of use is a draw, but it would
  have
    to be even cheaper just for a web server.

      - Bob Comer


        "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net...
           By what criteria and how so?

        Rich

          "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
    news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...
          That's not good enough to compete with Linux.

          - Bob Comer


          "Geo."  wrote in message
    news:3e67a4e1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
          > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html
          >
          > There will be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft ships
  its
    next
          > server OS, Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there will be
a
    new
          > budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the web
    server
          > market. Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client access
    licences, with
          a
          > 2gig limit on memory, 2-way SMP, and is $399.
          >
          >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4