From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2E485.B87342E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   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_00EC_01C2E485.B87342E0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   You did
admit making stuff =
up. =20
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 =

  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 =
needs to=20
  catch up, yet Ican put together a Linux box that does all 5 of =
these=20
  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 this=20
site to avoid your making false statements.
 
Rich
 

  "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  message news:3e68aa51{at}w3.nls.net...&g=
t;  =20
  I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions.At
least state =
them,=20
  if you can't even do that they don't
exist.>You already =
admited you=20
  made stuff up.I did
not.>You don't appear to have =
any=20
  interest in this.You're right, your argument style of late =
totally=20
  turns me off.  I am notnearly as much against you and =
Microsoft as=20
  you think I am...- Bob
Comer"Rich"
<{at}> =
wrote in=20
  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 you=20
  would prefer tomake false statements, which you now claim as an =
opinion=20
  only based on afiction of your own imagination.  Of course =
you still=20
  haven't acknowledgedthat when you make up facts on which you base =
your=20
  opinions you should behonest and acknowledge=20
  that.Rich"Robert Comer"
<bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  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=20
  you made and not fact.And again, assumptions you have not =
argued=20
  against.>You just admitted that you made up
what it was =
that you=20
  were comparing.I admitted no such
thing.>Not that =
it=20
  wouldn't do you some good to prefix your opinions, as opposedto =
statements=20
  of fact, with "I believe" or "I
feel".<I say it again, =
*ALL* I say=20
  here is opinion.  (It may be fact also, but itmay not be, =
just not=20
  intentionally wrong.)>   In
regard you your =
mention of=20
  propaganda, don't you think that this is abit ironic given that =
your post=20
  to which I replied was propaganda and as youadmitted based on a =
fiction of=20
  your 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 =
nothing=20
  to gain by what I said.  Youyourself know I use more =
Microsoft=20
  products than Linux, and I like a thirdplatform (the AS/400) the =
best. As=20
  for the last part, I created no fiction,I STATED AN =
OPINION.- Bob=20
  Comer"Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message news:3e682dfc{at}w3.nls.net...It's=
 not=20
  whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was your=20
  majordeception.  It was that your opinion was based on =
assumptions=20
  you made andnot fact. You just admitted that you made up what it =
was that=20
  you werecomparing.  Not that it wouldn't do you some good to =
prefix=20
  your opinions,as opposed to statements of fact, with "I
believe" =
or "I=20
  feel".   In regard you your
mention of propaganda, =
don't you=20
  think that this is abit ironic given that your post to which I =
replied was=20
  propaganda and as youadmitted based on a fiction of your own=20
  creation?Rich 
"Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  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 =
statement=20
  based on facts.<  As I have stated
before, when I say=20
  something I am stating an opinion, no  more, no less, if you =
want to=20
  take everything I say as fact  (or false 
fact,) that is =
your=20
  choice, but I have no energy to argue such.  This
is,  =
after=20
  all, a discussion group, not a scientific journal of some =
kind. =20
  >It will avoid having your false statements pointed =
out.  You=20
  haven't pointed out any...  >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
  <  You're wrong, I'm tired of reading
Microsoft =
propaganda=20
  like that.  >   As
for your comments =
regarding the=20
  web edition's suitability for  something other than web =
server, maybe=20
  you should take a moment and askwhat  the
likely purpose =
is for=20
  something called the web edition.< 
Well duh -- I was=20
  comparing it to Linux and I can do cheaper and more with  =
Linux,=20
  that's all I said. 
>   In regard to free =
support,=20
  do you mean posting to a newsgroup or some  infamous IRC=20
  channel?  Is this what you use to support your
critical  =

  systems?<  More than just newsgroups,
but, that's how =
I=20
  support all our systems, even  the AS/400. 
To phrase it =
another=20
  way, we have no software supportcontracts 
on anything in =
my=20
  department. (Not saying I wouldn't want
themnecessarily,  =
but=20
  they didn't have sw support contracts under the old =
manager...) =20
  No IRC or IM though, I loath that kind of
thing...  - Bob =

  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 =
statement=20
  based on facts.  It will avoid having your false statements =
pointed=20
  out.  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
  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?  Is=20
  this what you use to support your critical  =
systems? =20
  Rich    "Robert
Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  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. I'm=20
  not here to list outeverything   =20
  possible.   
>   It's well known =
that=20
  Linux has less
functionality.    I'm not so
=
sure that=20
  can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't =
just   =20
  talking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with that=20
  specific    version of Windows
Server -- with no =
Cal's,=20
  that means no NT 
authentication,    files =

  serving, or print serving, and I assume no domain capabilities=20
  --    that's 4 areas that Windows is
strong on and =
Linux=20
  needs to catch up,yet 
I    can put =
together a=20
  Linux box that does all 5 of these things for a LOT =20
  less   
money.    >If you =
want to=20
  roll your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your =20
  time    is worth =
>nothing.   =20
  There's actually a decent amount of free support out there, and=20
  youdon't    have to roll
your own version, you =
can use=20
  someone's distribution.   
>If you want to =
use a=20
  supported version, like from RedHat, expect =
tospend   =20
  much more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you=20
  asubscription    to red
hat linux advanced =
server for=20
  $1499 per year.<   
I would *never* pay Red =
Hat that=20
  much, they don't have enough to
offer    support=20
  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 =
enterprise=20
  level web server you are
goingto    pay another =
$395 to=20
  $895 annually.  That's more than four to six times =20
  more    expensive than the Windows
Server 2003=20
  solution.<    I got
it beat -- I have a =
server here=20
  at home (always learning) thatcost  =
$0    for=20
  the Linux and about $200 for the hardware.  (I also have a=20
  Linux  client   
PC here that I paid $99 =
for and=20
  I'm not going to do that again, at least  =
not   =20
  this distribution.)    - Bob=20
 
Comer   
"Rich" <{at}> wrote in =
message 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 Linux=20
  has less functionality.  If you want =
toroll   =20
  your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your time is=20
  worthnothing.    If you
want to use a supported =

  version, like from RedHat, expect
tospend    =
much more=20
  for your annual subscription.  They will sell you=20
  asubscription    to red
hat linux advanced =
server for=20
  $1499 per year.  If you want
their    =
supported=20
  enterprise level web server you are going to pay another=20
  $395to    $895
annually.  That's more than =
four to=20
  six times more expensive
thanthe    Windows =
Server 2003=20
  solution.    =
Rich     =20
  "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  message    news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;    =20
  Less functionality, higher cost. Ease of use is a draw, but it =
would =20
  have    to be even cheaper just for a web=20
 
server.     
- Bob=20
 
Comer       
"Rich" =
<{at}>=20
  wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;         =20
  By what criteria and how =
so?       =20
 
Rich         
=
"Robert=20
  Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
  message    news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
         =20
  That's not good enough to compete with=20
 
Linux.         
- =
Bob=20
  =
Comer         
= "Geo."=20
  <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote =
in=20
  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 will=20
  be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft ships =20
  its   =20
 
next         
> =
server OS,=20
  Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there will=20
  bea   =20
 
new         
>=20
  budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the=20
  web   =20
 
server         
> =
market.=20
  Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client =
access   =20
  licences, =
with         =20
 
a         
> 2gig =
limit on=20
  memory, 2-way SMP, and is=20
 
$399.         =20
 
>         =20
>

------=_NextPart_000_00EC_01C2E485.B87342E0--

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