From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0122_01C2E495.285DA140
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   You are wrong about NT authentication, wrong about file serving, =
wrong about domain capabilities.  Now, do you want to take back that you =
made nothing up?

   It doesn't include CALs because it doesn't need any for what it does.

Rich

  "Robert Comer"  wrote in message =
news:3e68cd09{at}w3.nls.net...
  I made nothing up, notice the "no Cal's" part.  Of course you can add =
cal's and add all what I said, but it is extra cost.

  - Bob Comer


    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e68ca32{at}w3.nls.net...
       You did admit making stuff up.  You wrote in =
news://news.barkto.com/3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net

      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.

    I referred you to =
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/default.ms=
px so that you can stop making things up and use real info if you want = to
criticize.  You have multiple times expressed no interest in visiting =
this site to avoid your making false statements.

    Rich

      "Robert Comer"  wrote in message =
news:3e68aa51{at}w3.nls.net...
      >   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.ms=
px.
        <

        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.ms=
px.

           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.
                >
                >


------=_NextPart_000_0122_01C2E495.285DA140
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   You are
wrong about NT =
authentication,=20
wrong about file serving, wrong about domain capabilities.  Now, do = you=20
want to take back that you made nothing up?
 
   It
doesn't include CALs =
because it=20
doesn't need any for what it does.
 
Rich
 

  "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  message news:3e68cd09{at}w3.nls.net...
  I made nothing up, notice
the "no =
Cal's"=20
  part.  Of course you can add cal's and add all what I said, but =
it is=20
  extra cost.
   
  - Bob Comer
   
   
  

    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e68ca32{at}w3.nls.net...
       You
did admit making =
stuff=20
    up.  You wrote in news://news.barkto.com/3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net">news://news.barkto.=
com/3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net
    
       
      I'm not so sure that can be said any more, but no matter I =
wasn't=20
      justtalking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with =
that=20
      specificversion of Windows Server -- with no Cal's, that means =
no NT=20
      authentication,files serving, or print serving, and I assume =
no domain=20
      capabilities --that's 4 areas that Windows is strong on and =
Linux=20
      needs to catch up, yet Ican put together a Linux box that does =
all 5=20
      of these things for a LOT lessmoney.
     
    I referred you to http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/de=
fault.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overvie=
w/default.mspx=20
    so that you can stop making things up and use real info if you want =
to=20
    criticize.  You have multiple times expressed no interest in =
visiting=20
    this site to avoid your making false statements.
     
    Rich
     
    
      "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in message news:3e68aa51{at}w3.nls.net...&g=
t;  =20
      I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions.At least =
state=20
      them, if you can't even do that they don't
exist.>You =
already=20
      admited you made stuff up.I did
not.>You don't =
appear=20
      to have any interest in this.You're right, your argument =
style of=20
      late totally turns me off.  I am notnearly as much =
against you=20
      and Microsoft as you think I am...- Bob=20
      Comer"Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message news:3e684a50{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
      I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions.  You already =
admited=20
      youmade stuff up.  I referred you to a reliable source of =
factual=20
      information.You don't appear to have any interest in =
this.  Maybe=20
      you would prefer tomake false statements, which you now claim =
as an=20
      opinion only based on afiction of your own imagination.  =
Of=20
      course you still haven't acknowledgedthat when you make up =
facts on=20
      which you base your opinions you should behonest and =
acknowledge=20
      that.Rich"Robert
Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in messagenews:3e6835d9{at}w3.nls.net...>=
  =20
      It's not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was=20
      yourmajor deception.LOL!  An
opinion is not a=20
      deception.>  It was that your
opinion was based on =

      assumptions you made and not fact.And again, assumptions =
you have=20
      not argued against.>You just admitted that
you made up =
what it=20
      was that you were comparing.I admitted no such=20
      thing.>Not that it wouldn't do you some
good to prefix =
your=20
      opinions, as opposedto statements of fact, with "I
believe" or =
"I=20
      feel".<I say it again, *ALL* I say here is =
opinion.  (It=20
      may be fact also, but itmay not be, just not intentionally=20
      wrong.)>   In regard you
your mention of =
propaganda,=20
      don't you think that this is abit ironic given that your post =
to which=20
      I replied was propaganda and as youadmitted based on a fiction =
of your=20
      own creation?<No, I don't as what I said wasn't =
propaganda --=20
      to be using propaganda I'dhave to have something to gain, I =
have=20
      nothing to gain by what I said.  Youyourself know I use =
more=20
      Microsoft products than Linux, and I like a thirdplatform (the =
AS/400)=20
      the best. As for the last part, I created no fiction,I STATED =
AN=20
      OPINION.- Bob
Comer"Rich"
<{at}> =
wrote in=20
      message news:3e682dfc{at}w3.nls.net...It's=
=20
      not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was your=20
      majordeception.  It was that your opinion was based on=20
      assumptions you made andnot fact. You just admitted that you =
made up=20
      what it was that you werecomparing.  Not that it wouldn't =
do you=20
      some good to prefix your opinions,as opposed to statements of =
fact,=20
      with "I believe" or "I
feel".   In regard you =
your=20
      mention of propaganda, don't you think that this is abit =
ironic given=20
      that your post to which I replied was propaganda and as =
youadmitted=20
      based on a fiction of your own
creation?Rich  =
"Robert=20
      Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in messagenews:3e6821ab$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
 =20
      > If you are just making assumptions you should state that you =
are=20
      givingan  opinion based on assumptions
and not making =
a=20
      statement based on facts.<  As I
have stated =
before, when=20
      I say something I am stating an opinion, no  more, no =
less, if=20
      you want to take everything I say as fact  (or =
false  fact,)=20
      that is your choice, but I have no energy to argue such.  =
This=20
      is,  after all, a discussion group, not a scientific =
journal of=20
      some kind.  >It will avoid having
your false =
statements=20
      pointed out.  You haven't pointed out =
any... =20
      >If you care about facts, and I'm not sure you do, =
seehttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/de=
fault.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overvie=
w/default.mspx. =20
      <  You're wrong, I'm tired of
reading Microsoft =
propaganda=20
      like that.  >  
As for your comments =
regarding=20
      the web edition's suitability for  something other than =
web=20
      server, maybe you should take a moment and
askwhat  =
the=20
      likely purpose is for something called the web =
edition.< =20
      Well duh -- I was comparing it to Linux and I can do cheaper and =
more=20
      with  Linux, that's all I
said.  =
>   In=20
      regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or=20
      some  infamous IRC channel?  Is this what
you use to =
support=20
      your critical 
systems?<  More than just=20
      newsgroups, but, that's how I support all our systems, =
even  the=20
      AS/400.  To phrase it another way, we have no software=20
      supportcontracts  on anything in my
department. (Not =
saying I=20
      wouldn't want themnecessarily,  but they
didn't have =
sw=20
      support contracts under the old
manager...)  No IRC =
or IM=20
      though, I loath that kind of thing...  - Bob=20
      Comer  "Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message news:3e681879{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;   =20
      If you are just making assumptions you should state that you are=20
      giving  an opinion based on assumptions and not making a=20
      statement based on facts.  It will avoid having your =
false=20
      statements pointed out.  If you care
about  facts, =
and I'm=20
      not sure you do, seehttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/de=
fault.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overvie=
w/default.mspx.    =20
      As for your comments regarding the web edition's suitability =
for =20
      something other than web server, maybe you should take a moment =
and=20
      askwhat  the likely purpose is for
something called =
the web=20
      edition.    
In regard to free =
support, do you=20
      mean posting to a newsgroup or some  infamous IRC =
channel? =20
      Is this what you use to support your critical =20
      systems? 
Rich    "Robert =
Comer"=20
      <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in message  news:3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
   =20
      >  Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand=20
      waving?    I just
stated my opinion, that's =
all.=20
      I'm not here to list
outeverything   =20
      possible.   
>   It's well =
known that=20
      Linux has less
functionality.    I'm not so
=
sure=20
      that can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't=20
      just    talking overall OS
functionality, but =
what you=20
      can do with that specific   
version of Windows =
Server=20
      -- with no Cal's, that means no NT =20
      authentication,    files
serving, or print =
serving, and=20
      I assume no domain capabilities
--    that's 4 =
areas=20
      that Windows is strong on and Linux needs to catch =
up,yet =20
      I    can put together a Linux
box that does all =
5 of=20
      these things for a LOT 
less   =20
      money.    >If
you want to roll your own =
it can=20
      cost less for Linux, assuming your  =
time    is=20
      worth
>nothing.    There's
actually a =
decent=20
      amount of free support out there, and =
youdon't   =20
      have to roll your own version, you can use someone's=20
      distribution.   
>If you want to use a =
supported=20
      version, like from RedHat, expect =
tospend    much=20
      more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you=20
      asubscription    to
red hat linux advanced =
server=20
      for $1499 per
year.<    I would
*never* =
pay Red=20
      Hat that much, they don't have enough to =
offer   =20
      support wise.  I have spent that much on Microsoft products=20
      severaltimes    over
up to now, but things =
are a=20
      changin.  I might add that Microsoft
is    =
quite=20
      costly for aftermarket support and I don't buy that=20
      either.    >If
you want their supported=20
      enterprise level web server you are =
goingto    pay=20
      another $395 to $895 annually.  That's more than four to six=20
      times 
more    expensive than the =
Windows=20
      Server 2003
solution.<    I got
it beat =
-- I=20
      have a server here at home (always learning) =
thatcost =20
      $0    for the Linux and about
$200 for the=20
      hardware.  (I also have a Linux =20
      client    PC here that I paid
$99 for and I'm =
not going=20
      to do that again, at least 
not    =
this=20
      distribution.)    - Bob=20
     
Comer   
"Rich" <{at}> wrote in =
message=20
      news:3e67d5e4$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
      =20
      Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand=20
     
waving?      
It's well =
known that=20
      Linux has less functionality.  If you want=20
      toroll    your own it
can cost less for =
Linux,=20
      assuming your time is
worthnothing.    If =
you want=20
      to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect=20
      tospend    much more
for your annual=20
      subscription.  They will sell you=20
      asubscription    to
red hat linux advanced =
server=20
      for $1499 per year.  If you want
their   =20
      supported enterprise level web server you are going to pay another =

      $395to    $895
annually.  That's more =
than=20
      four to six times more expensive
thanthe    =
Windows=20
      Server 2003 solution.   =20
     
Rich     
"Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in message    news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;    =20
      Less functionality, higher cost. Ease of use is a draw, but it=20
      would 
have    to be even cheaper just =
for a=20
      web
server.     
- Bob=20
     
Comer       
"Rich" =

      <{at}> wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;         =20
      By what criteria and how=20
     
so?       =20
     
Rich         
=
"Robert=20
      Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
      wrote in message    news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
         =20
      That's not good enough to compete with=20
      =
Linux.         
- = Bob=20
      =
Comer         =20
      "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote=20
      in message    news:3e67a4e1$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
         =20
      > http://www.th" target="new">http://www.th=">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html">http://www.th=
eregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html    &nbs=
p;    =20
     
>         
=
> There=20
      will be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft =
ships =20
      its   =20
     
next         
=
> server=20
      OS, Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there will=20
      bea   =20
     
new         
> =

      budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the=20
      web   =20
     
server         
=
>=20
      market. Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client=20
      access    licences,=20
     
with         =20
     
a         
> =
2gig=20
      limit on memory, 2-way SMP, and is=20
     
$399.         =20
     
>         =20
   
>

------=_NextPart_000_0122_01C2E495.285DA140--

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