From: "Robert Comer" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0086_01C2D0E3.DF973EE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I stated the main goal, and that's enough.

- Bob Comer ,You want a discussion you're going to have to do better.>


  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e47597f{at}w3.nls.net...
     I still have not seen from you a list of all the goals of either of =
these two products.  You can say you provided the goals without actually =
doing so all you want.  It's still hand waving and bullshitting.  Either =
put up or shut up.

  Rich

    "Robert Comer"  wrote in message =
news:3e473425{at}w3.nls.net...
    I most certainly did.

    >It all comes down to XP being a consumer targeted OS and NT4 was =
most
    certainly not.

    That's what I said and meant.

    >All you have to offer is that Windows XP Professional has a =
superset of the
    capabilities of Windows NT Workstation 4.0.

    A superset that compromises its usability for my purposes.

    >   Are you even going to try or shall we all accept that you were =
just
    bullshitting?

    Nope, not going to try any more after this, arguing with you is like =
arguing
    with a rabid pit bull. (all bite and no logic.)

    - Bob Comer



    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e472168{at}w3.nls.net...
       You still have failed to state the goal of either Windows XP =
Professional
    or Windows NT Workstation 4.0.  All you have to offer is that =
Windows XP
    Professional has a superset of the capabilities of Windows NT =
Workstation
    4.0.

       Are you even going to try or shall we all accept that you were =
just
    bullshitting?

    Rich

    "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
    news:3e471302{at}w3.nls.net...
    Nice dig, but Geo has it partly right, it's what XP is designed to =
do that
    NT4 wasn't -- Product activation, integrated Messenger and WMP (for =
the
    masses, it doesn't mean squat we don't need that at work as a =
vulnerability
    point)  Also XP is somewhat more designed to run games, well, I =
don't need
    that at work and don't need that ability taking up space on my hard =
drives.

    It all comes down to XP being a consumer targeted OS and NT4 was =
most
    certainly not.

    - Bob Comer


    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e46fccf{at}w3.nls.net...
       I have no doubt that one (only one) goal of Windows XP Home =
Edition was
    to supercede Windows Me on consumer desktops.  Robert though made a =
quite
    broader claim regarding the overall goals and not of this product =
but
    Windows XP Professional and Windows NT Workstation 4.0.  I'm sure =
Robert
    will clear this up when he tells us all the goals of these two =
products.
    I'm particularly interested in what goals Windows NT Workstation 4.0 =
had
    that Windows XP did not.

    Rich

    "Tony Ingenoso"  wrote in message
    news:3e46ed08{at}w3.nls.net...
    Easy - produce a consumer market acceptable OS so the 9x code base =
could be
    retired.  That there was no corresponding touchy-feely 9x release =
speaks
    volumes.

    W2K was/is perfectly acceptable for the vast majority of business =
uses, but
    didn't have the Mr Rogers neighborhood ambiance of XP to appeal to =
the
    drooling masses.  With 9x hitting the showers, and apparently no =
plans for a
    strictly business oriented product, a unification product was =
mandatory [I
    don't consider XP pro as being business oriented the way W2K is]
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e46e3cf{at}w3.nls.net...
       Facinating.  Can you spell out these goals clearly?

    Rich


------=_NextPart_000_0086_01C2D0E3.DF973EE0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








I stated the main goal, and that's=20
enough.
 
- Bob Comer ,You want a discussion =
you're going to=20
have to do better.>
 
 

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e47597f{at}w3.nls.net...
     I still
have not seen =
from you a=20
  list of all the goals of either of these two products.  You can =
say you=20
  provided the goals without actually doing so all you want.  It's =
still=20
  hand waving and bullshitting.  Either put up or shut =
up.
   
  Rich
   
  
    "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote=20
    in message news:3e473425{at}w3.nls.net...I
= most=20
    certainly did.>It all comes down to XP being
a consumer =
targeted=20
    OS and NT4 was mostcertainly not.That's
what I said and=20
    meant.>All you have to offer is that Windows XP =
Professional has=20
    a superset of thecapabilities of Windows NT Workstation =
4.0.A=20
    superset that compromises its usability for my=20
    purposes.>   Are you even
going to try or shall =
we all=20
    accept that you were
justbullshitting?Nope, not going to =
try any=20
    more after this, arguing with you is like arguingwith a rabid =
pit bull.=20
    (all bite and no logic.)- Bob
Comer"Rich" =
<{at}>=20
    wrote in message news:3e472168{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
    You still have failed to state the goal of either Windows XP=20
    Professionalor Windows NT Workstation 4.0.  All you have to =
offer=20
    is that Windows XPProfessional has a superset of the =
capabilities of=20
    Windows NT
Workstation4.0.   Are you
even =
going to try=20
    or shall we all accept that you were=20
   
justbullshitting?Rich"Robert
Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote=20
    in messagenews:3e471302{at}w3.nls.net...Nice=
 dig,=20
    but Geo has it partly right, it's what XP is designed to do =
thatNT4=20
    wasn't -- Product activation, integrated Messenger and WMP (for=20
    themasses, it doesn't mean squat we don't need that at work as a =

    vulnerabilitypoint)  Also XP is somewhat more designed to =
run=20
    games, well, I don't needthat at work and don't need that =
ability taking=20
    up space on my hard drives.It all comes down to XP being a =
consumer=20
    targeted OS and NT4 was mostcertainly not.- Bob=20
    Comer"Rich" <{at}>
wrote in message news:3e46fccf{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
    I have no doubt that one (only one) goal of Windows XP Home Edition=20
    wasto supercede Windows Me on consumer desktops.  Robert =
though=20
    made a quitebroader claim regarding the overall goals and not of =
this=20
    product butWindows XP Professional and Windows NT Workstation =
4.0. =20
    I'm sure Robertwill clear this up when he tells us all the goals =
of=20
    these two products.I'm particularly interested in what goals =
Windows NT=20
    Workstation 4.0 hadthat Windows XP did =
not.Rich"Tony=20
    Ingenoso" <tonyiNOSPAM{at}attglobal.net&g=">mailto:tonyiNOSPAM{at}attglobal.net">tonyiNOSPAM{at}attglobal.net&g=
t;=20
    wrote in messagenews:3e46ed08{at}w3.nls.net...Easy=
 -=20
    produce a consumer market acceptable OS so the 9x code base could=20
    beretired.  That there was no corresponding touchy-feely 9x =
release=20
    speaksvolumes.W2K was/is perfectly
acceptable for the =
vast=20
    majority of business uses, butdidn't have the Mr Rogers =
neighborhood=20
    ambiance of XP to appeal to thedrooling masses.  With 9x =
hitting=20
    the showers, and apparently no plans for astrictly business =
oriented=20
    product, a unification product was mandatory [Idon't consider XP =
pro as=20
    being business oriented the way W2K is]"Rich"
<{at}> wrote in =
message=20
    news:3e46e3cf{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
    Facinating.  Can you spell out these goals=20
 
clearly?Rich

------=_NextPart_000_0086_01C2D0E3.DF973EE0--

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