From: "Robert Comer" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_012A_01C2D0F8.E76D4500
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I see you don't want to discuss anything, no matter.....

- Bob Comer


  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e47cf97{at}w3.nls.net...
     As I said, hand waving and bullshitting.

  Rich

    "Robert Comer"  wrote in message =
news:3e47b034{at}w3.nls.net...
    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_012A_01C2D0F8.E76D4500
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








I see you don't want to discuss =
anything, no=20
matter.....
 
- Bob Comer
 
 

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e47cf97{at}w3.nls.net...
     As I
said, hand waving =
and=20
  bullshitting.
   
  Rich
   
  

    "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote=20
    in message news:3e47b034{at}w3.nls.net...
    I stated the main goal,
and that's=20
    enough.
     
    - Bob Comer ,You want a discussion =
you're going=20
    to 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=20
      you provided the goals without actually doing so all you =
want.  It's=20
      still hand waving and bullshitting.  Either put up or shut=20
      up.
       
      Rich
       
      
        "Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
        wrote in message news:3e473425{at}w3.nls.net...I
=

        most certainly did.>It all comes down to
XP being a =
consumer=20
        targeted OS and NT4 was mostcertainly
not.That's =
what I said=20
        and meant.>All you have to offer is that
Windows XP=20
        Professional has a superset of thecapabilities of Windows NT =

        Workstation 4.0.A superset that compromises its =
usability for my=20
        purposes.>   Are you
even going to try or =
shall we=20
        all accept that you were
justbullshitting?Nope, not =
going to=20
        try any more after this, arguing with you is like =
arguingwith a=20
        rabid pit bull. (all bite and no logic.)- Bob=20
        Comer"Rich"
<{at}> 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=20
        offer is that Windows XPProfessional has a superset of the=20
        capabilities of Windows NT =
Workstation4.0.   Are=20
        you even going to try or shall we all accept that you were=20
       
justbullshitting?Rich"Robert
Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>=20
        wrote in messagenews:3e471302{at}w3.nls.net...Nice=
=20
        dig, but Geo has it partly right, it's what XP is designed to do =

        thatNT4 wasn't -- Product activation, integrated Messenger =
and WMP=20
        (for themasses, it doesn't mean squat we don't need that at =
work as=20
        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=20
        taking up space on my hard drives.It all comes down to =
XP being=20
        a consumer 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=20
        this product butWindows XP Professional and Windows NT =
Workstation=20
        4.0.  I'm sure Robertwill clear this up when he tells =
us all=20
        the goals of these two products.I'm particularly interested =
in what=20
        goals Windows NT Workstation 4.0 hadthat Windows XP did=20
        not.Rich"Tony
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=20
        release speaksvolumes.W2K was/is perfectly =
acceptable for=20
        the vast majority of business uses, butdidn't have the Mr =
Rogers=20
        neighborhood ambiance of XP to appeal to thedrooling =
masses. =20
        With 9x hitting the showers, and apparently no plans for =
astrictly=20
        business oriented product, a unification product was mandatory=20
        [Idon't consider XP pro as being business oriented the way =
W2K=20
        is]"Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e46e3cf{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
        Facinating.  Can you spell out these goals=20
        =
clearly?Rich

------=_NextPart_000_012A_01C2D0F8.E76D4500--

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