mailto:1@linux" target="_blank">1@linux, "DC" ><dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > >> >> Yeah, I know I am an optimist... >> >> Still, there is little reason for them any more. >> >> DC >> >> >> Kerry Galloway <kg@kerrygalloway.com> wrote: >>> The platform wars are over? Thank God, finally! I'm sure that's certainly >> an >>> enormous relief for all of us. >>> >>> - Kerry >>> >>> On 7/27/08 11:18 PM, in article 488d64cd$1@linux, "DC" >>> <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> In the early 1990's at the univ. I worked at, the IT guys tried to >>>> ban macs. If they found one in your dept. they would ridicule you >>>> and tried to enforce a "no mac" campus standard. They would talk about >>>> market share and comparisons to VHS vs. Betamax were tossed about >>>> freely. >>>> >>>> In the mid 1990's, my wife's dept head actually banned macs from the dept. >>>> >>>> Both the IT director and my wife's dept. head got canned, thankfully, >>>> but more importantly, let me be the first to declare the platform wars >>>> over. >>>&g
t; >>>> Apple is now #3 >>>> >>>> http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Claws+Its+Way+Closer+to+the+T op+in+Retail+PC+ >>>> Sa >>>> les/article12409.htm >>>> >>>> Who'da thunk? >>>> >>>> So, let me say to all the geek doomsayers and PC nazis >>>> >>>> Bite Me. You were wrong all along. Get a life. >>>> >>>> Apple has developed into the BMW of comp. companies. My new >>>> 8-core could not be more elegantly designed and built. Putting in >>>> more RAM was like working on a beautiful sports car and Leopard makes >>>> both Vista and XP look like bathroom grafitti in comparison. >>>> >>>> Cheap? No, but worth it, and there really is no competition if you care >>>> about the things it offers. >>>> >>>> Oh, and a guy from Apple spent hours with me sorting out my ethernet >>>> troubles. >>>> >>>> Nothing against PC's, but the platform wars are over. You pays yer >>>> nickel and takes yer choice. >>>> >>>> DC >>>> >>>> oh and with VM Fusion, I can put XP over here and Leopard over there >>>> on the same machine and the same monitor. Or on mon. 2 of an extended >>>> desktop. >>> >> >Yeah mebbe we could have a butthead curmudgeon group too.. snork... DC "John" <no@no.com> wrote: > >i thought this shit was going to go in another group. that didn't last longAnd I have to say... I got a free iPod touch (I gave it to my wife) engraved with her name on the back, with the Mac Pro. You pay up front and get a rebate. grrrrr... You KNOW how that goes, and it usually involves many nasty phone calls and the presentation of various documents to various idiots and 6 mos. later you may get your check. Nope. Just enter my Apple ID number on the website and they know what I bought and that I eligible. Punch a couple of buttons... Rebate comes in 3 DAYS.... Yea for Apple customer service! 10 out of 10. DCYeah, but why were you having ethernet trouble? ;-) DC wrote: > In the early 1990's at the univ. I worked at, the IT guys tried to > ban macs. If they found one in your dept. they would ridicule you > and tried to enforce a "no mac" campus standard. They would talk about > market share and comparisons to VHS vs. Betamax were tossed about > freely. > > In the mid 1990's, my wife's dept head actually banned macs from the dept. > > Both the IT director and my wife's dept. head got canned, thankfully, > but more importantly, let me be the first to declare the platform wars > over. > > Apple is
now #3 > > http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Claws+Its+Way+Closer+to+the+T op+in+Retail+PC+Sales/article12409.htm > > Who'da thunk? > > So, let me say to all the geek doomsayers and PC nazis > > Bite Me. You were wrong all along. Get a life. > > Apple has developed into the BMW of comp. companies. My new > 8-core could not be more elegantly designed and built. Putting in > more RAM was like working on a beautiful sports car and Leopard makes > both Vista and XP look like bathroom grafitti in comparison. > > Cheap? No, but worth it, and there really is no competition if you care > about the things it offers. > > Oh, and a guy from Apple spent hours with me sorting out my ethernet > troubles. > > Nothing against PC's, but the platform wars are over. You pays yer > nickel and takes yer choice. > > DC > > oh and with VM Fusion, I can put XP over here and Leopard over there > on the same machine and the same monitor. Or on mon. 2 of an extended > desktop.If that's the worst that happens, I am a happy guy. DC Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote: >Yeah, but why were you having ethernet trouble? ;-) > >DC wrote: >> In the early 1990's at the univ. I worked at, the IT guys tried to >> ban macs. If they found one in your dept. they would ridicule you >> and tried to enforce a "no mac" campus standard. They would talk about >> market share and comparisons to VHS vs. Betamax were tossed about >> freely. >> &gt
;> In the mid 1990's, my wife's dept head actually banned macs from the dept. >> >> Both the IT director and my wife's dept. head got canned, thankfully, >> but more importantly, let me be the first to declare the platform wars >> over. >> >> Apple is now #3 >> >> http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Claws+Its+Way+Closer+to+the+T op+in+Retail+PC+Sales/article12409.htm >> >> Who'da thunk? >> >> So, let me say to all the geek doomsayers and PC nazis >> >> Bite Me. You were wrong all along. Get a life. >> >> Apple has developed into the BMW of comp. companies. My new >> 8-core could not be more elegantly designed and built. Putting in >> more RAM was like working on a beautiful sports car and Leopard makes >> both Vista and XP look like bathroom grafitti in comparison. >> >> Cheap? No, but worth it, and there really is no competition if you care >> about the things it offers. >> >> Oh, and a guy from Apple spent hours with me sorting out my ethernet >> troubles. >> >> Nothing against PC's, but the platform wars are over. You pays yer >> nickel and takes yer choice. >> >> DC >> >> oh and with VM Fusion, I can put XP over here and Leopard over there >> on the same machine and the same monitor. Or on mon. 2 of an extended >> desktop.or just post this junk where KIM asked it to goThere was a war? Is it really a war if only one side is fighting? S PS: Does this mean those stupid Mac vs PC ads on TV will stop? "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:488d64cd$1@linux... > > In the early 1990's at the univ. I worked at, the IT guys tried to > ban macs. If they found one in your dept. they would ridicule you > and tried to enforce a "no mac" campus standard. They would talk about > market share and comparisons to VHS vs. Betamax were tossed about > freely. > > In the mid 1990's, my wife's dept head actually banned macs from the dept. > > Both the IT director and my wife's dept. head got canned, thankfully, > but more importantly, let me be the first to declare the platform wars > over. > > Apple is now #3 > > http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Claws+Its+Way+Closer+to+the+T op+in+Retail+PC+Sales/article12409.htm > > Who'da thunk? > > So, let me say to all the geek doomsayers and PC nazis > > Bite Me. You were wrong all along. Get a life. > > Apple has developed into the BMW of comp. companies. My new > 8-core could not be more elegantly designed and built. Putting in > more RAM was like working on a beautiful sports car and Leopard makes > both Vista and XP look like bathroom grafitti in comparison. > > Cheap? No, but worth it, and there really is no competition if you care > about the things it offers. > > Oh, and a guy from Apple spent hours with me sorting out my ethernet > troubles. > > Nothing against PC's, but the platform wars are over. You pays yer > nickel and takes yer choice. > > DC > > oh and with VM Fusion, I can put XP over here and Leopard over there > on the same machine and the same monitor. Or on mon. 2 of an extended > desktop.hahah, hilarious Sarah, you are right though. Mac users went on their crusade to convert all the pc users to their more expensive solution only for us pc users to not really give a shit. to be fair i wish i started on a mac and paid the higher price but now i'm married to microsoft apps and won't be changing over anytime soon. but it was always funny how they were/are so passionate about a stupid computer. I'm gonna convert you to my super zot 3 model toaster cuz all the other toasters suck and if you don't buy into my toaster you're an idiot Super Zot 3 rules !!!Actually it's better if everyone doesn't buy a single operating system. Competition is good, and there's not much left. Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com John wrote: > hahah, hilarious Sarah, you are right though. Mac users went on their > crusade to convert all the pc users to their more expensive solution only > for us pc users to not really give a shit. > > to be fair i wish i started on a mac and paid the higher price but now i'm > married to microsoft apps and won't be changing over anytime soon. but it > was always funny how they were/are so passionate about a stupid computer. > > I'm gonna convert you to my super zot 3 model toas
ter cuz all the other toasters > suck and if you don't buy into my toaster you're an idiot > > Super Zot 3 rules !!!Oh look he's posting about computers!! EEEK! ;-] DC "John" <no@no.com> wrote: > >hahah, hilarious Sarah, you are right though. Mac users went on their >crusade to convert all the pc users to their more expensive solution only >for us pc users to not really give a shit. > >to be fair i wish i started on a mac and paid the higher price but now i'm >married to microsoft apps and won't be changing over anytime soon. but it >was always funny how they were/are so passionate about a stupid computer. > >I'm gonna convert you to my super zot 3 model toaster cuz all the other toasters >suck and if you don't buy into my toaster you're an idiot > >Super Zot 3 rules !!!Oh, you nailed that one. If one or the other OS had "won" by eliminating the other, we'd be utterly hosed. The "other OS" is your best friend - or Macs would still have one button mice and menus that won't stay down, and PCs would still be copying and moving files from the command line. - K On 7/29/08 2:47 PM, in article 488f91f3$1@linux, "Jamie K" <JamieN0-SPAM@JamieKrutzN0-SPAM.com> wrote: > > Actually it's better if everyone doesn't buy a single operating system. > Competition is good, and there's not much left. > > Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > John wrote: >> hahah, hilarious Sarah, you are right though. Mac users went on their >> crusade to convert all the pc users to their more expensive solution only >> for us pc users to not really give a shit. >> >> to be fair i wish i started on a mac and paid the higher price but now i'm >> married to microsoft apps and won't be changing over anytime soon. but it >> was always funny how they were/are so passionate about a stupid computer. >> >> I'm gonna convert you to my super zot 3 model toaster cuz all the other >> toasters >> suck and if you don't buy into my toaster you're an idiot >> >> Super Zot 3 rules !!!John, now who's pouring gas on the fire? "John" <no@no.com> wrote: > >hahah, hilarious Sarah, you are right though. Mac users went on their >crusade to convert all the pc users to their more expensive solution only >for us pc users to not really give a shit. > >to be fair i wish i started on a mac and paid the higher price but now i'm >married to microsoft apps and won't be changing over anytime soon. but it >was always funny how they were/are so passionate about a stupid computer. > >I'm gonna convert you to my super zot 3 model toaster cuz all the other toasters >suck and if you don't buy into my toaster you're an idiot > >Super Zot 3 rules !!!It's the Super Zot 3 !!!You ?Do you not remember just recently Kim asking that we do NOT post this kind of stuff here? It seems silly now but you know how quickly this stuff degenerates into very heated arguments so why not lets take the high road and not post this stuff here as KIM requested and use the other groups as intended? John"John" <no@no.com> wrote: > >Do you not remember just recently Kim asking that we do NOT post this kind >of stuff here? It seems silly now but you know how quickly this stuff degenerates >into very heated arguments so why not lets take the high road and not post >this stuff here as KIM requested and use the other groups as intended? > >John If you will take notice, I didn't make the post, and I haven't started a thread on this subject in some time. If somebody else makes a post, then I think it's open to comment. I take issue with the re-accounting of Mac user history in this case. One of the reasons Mac users evangelized the Mac, is because there was so much FUD about the Mac back then, and apparently there still is today.so who's feed the fire? "If somebody else makes a post, then I think it's open to comment. " hilariousHey Mike, Any chance of getting Paris to run on a Sinclair Z80??? I'd pony up!! Kim "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >"John" <no@no.com> wrote: >> >>Do you not remember just recently Kim asking that we do NOT post this kind >>of stuff here? It seems silly now but you know how quickly this stuff degenerates >>into very heated arguments so why not lets take the high road and not post >>this stuff here as KIM requested and use the other groups as intended? >> >>John > >If you will take notice, I didn't make the post, and I haven't started a >thread on this subject in some time. If somebody else makes a post, then >I think it's open to comment. > >I take issue with the re-accounting of Mac user history in this case. One >of the reasons Mac users evangelized the Mac, is because there was so much >FUD about the Mac back then, and apparently there still is today. >/me waves his surrender flag a
nd runsit appears the only folks interested in this thread are Apple users/lovers... why not take it over to the general area and hack it out instead of cluttering us up with spew about junkie Apple. *duckin* "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > >"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: > >>we run a very safe, secure, high performance, >>low maintenance AD/XP network here. So far, my people seem to want me to >>leverage that and work on custom db/dev work instead of troubleshooting >Don's >>NIC that couldn't autonegotiate a 100 mb/s connection. > >Yeah, the Apple guy was pretty embarrassed about that. >But he did figure it out and stayed with me until it was >sorted. > >Gave me a good excuse to finally learn to terminate >Cat5/6 cables. Got myself a crimper and everything. >My cables rock!. I may stick a shield on the Cat6 >stuff and try it on the guitar... Damn stuff is incredibly >low-capacitance... > >heh heh > > >You guys should try to get along a bit more. Life is too >short to take a little net forum so seriously. > > >DCThat's always the case ;-) It never ends but usually coincides with apple conferences. "Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote: > >it appears the only folks interested in this thread are Apple users/lovers... >why not take it over to the general area and hack it out instead of cluttering >us up with spew about junkie Apple. > >*duckin* > > >"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >> >>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: >> >>>we run a very safe, secure, high performance, >>>low maintenance AD/XP network here. So far, my people seem to want me to >>>leverage that and work on custom db/dev work instead of troubleshooting >>Don's >>>NIC that couldn't autonegotiate a 100 mb/s connection. >> >>Yeah, the Apple guy was pretty embarrassed about that. >>But he did figure it out and stayed with me until it was >>sorted. >> >>Gave me a good excuse to finally learn to terminate >>Cat5/6 cables. Got myself a crimper and everything. >>My cables rock!. I may stick a shield on the Cat6 >>stuff and try it on the guitar... Damn stuff is incredibly >>low-capacitance... >> >>heh heh >> >> >>You guys should try to get along a bit more. Life is too >>short to take a little net forum so seriously. >> >> >>DC >"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote: > >it appears the only folks interested in this thread are Apple users/lovers... >why not take it over to the general area and hack it out instead of cluttering >us up with spew about junkie Apple. >
>*duckin* > Yeah, Macs suck! > >"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >> >>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: >> >>>we run a very safe, secure, high performance, >>>low maintenance AD/XP network here. So far, my people seem to want me to >>>leverage that and work on custom db/dev work instead of troubleshooting >>Don's >>>NIC that couldn't autonegotiate a 100 mb/s connection. >> >>Yeah, the Apple guy was pretty embarrassed about that. >>But he did figure it out and stayed with me until it was >>sorted. >> >>Gave me a good excuse to finally learn to terminate >>Cat5/6 cables. Got myself a crimper and everything. >>My cables rock!. I may stick a shield on the Cat6 >>stuff and try it on the guitar... Damn stuff is incredibly >>low-capacitance... >> >>heh heh >> >> >>You guys should try to get along a bit more. Life is too >>short to take a little net forum so seriously. >> >> >>DC >Macs do not suck, we just don't give a flying fuck about them.An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying fuck" about something, what might that look like? S "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4892ecf7$1@linux... > > Macs do not suck, we just don't give a flying fuck about them.This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---=_linux489321bf Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote: >An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying >fuck" about something, what might that look like? > ---=_linux489321bf Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="FF.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="FF.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEASABIAAD/4gxYSUNDX1BST0ZJTEUAAQEAAAxITGlu bwIQAABtbnRyUkdCIFhZWiAHzgACAAkABgAxAABhY3NwTVNGVAAAAABJRUMg c1JHQgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA9tYAAQAAAADTLUhQICAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA [binary] AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWFlaIAAA AAAAAPNRAAEAAAABFsxYWVogAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFhZWiAAAAAAAABv ogAAOPUAAAOQWFlaIAAAAAAAAGKZAAC3hQAAGNpYWVogAAAAAAAAJKAAAA+E AAC2z2Rlc2MAAAAAAAAAFklFQyBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmllYy5jaAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAFklFQyBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmllYy5jaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA [binary]
Q9eD3oPlg+zD88P7BAJECYQQxBh [binary] RNPG
hxbk9ztZTZe98FB15MTiaii [binary]
[binary] AQEBAQECAgMCAgICAgQDAwIDBQQFBQUEBAQFBgcGBQUHBgQEBgkGBwgICAgI [binary] AAwDAQACEQMRAD8A/fxgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABg AMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABg [binary]
veU [binary]
Zx51IvZkcaSAXzFMTRiR [binary]
AzWAt98Fo [binary] ABgEkniwwAZwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGA [binary]<br /
WMUpaPQtKlUfmkeqzSBghaRlHlL6B2hG9blh+gIt8H DJYzJzEuj/iK2oz2niWd2ewMrs
I7cOxAUKfvcDn/ACwunxdNdZIiGFktbkuX [binary]
lRYc8/fGf7rRvaRrVeFtiVHkxro [binary]
OEioaiYRKyop5kSshcqGYCwYW3AWBsD25 [binary]
5HbUupJjU1KRHK0 [binary]
t7/riuSaIStozDqscyxEkMSFYg m0fJt2/T/PFJy
Dq2iMyOkZFlcKJVYggDYLm979k42/2HviJO25k [binary]<br /
> [binary]<br /
TsNPcC5sB+ [binary]
qUI9W3 [binary]
qwCg3ZaGqyrmcdXR1mQSU 2nayGUVFPJRQxwinbeN7qVHpNmN7dxjrQx0fMevsMuLw7aeUsP8A4XaUziM6 j1NqrqXmuc1MfnzRx0hlaSFgvq+oc2Z9obk8/Pt
hmaUvN09f/scVNxkbTT9P [binary]
qvABKjjvvxpdKNurJ3OXV [binary]
[binary] lTl
zY4NOZMESP6CHaMQ5sPu8XqzMenckhjmjiyykRJG3OAv5j84U4p7lnRiY<br /
NaykyzN6ajpYsv [binary] [binary] WM4ADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYAD AAYADAAYAC44wEXDASGAAwAHbAAYCLBgJDAAYADAAYADAAYACwGAhRSDASGA AwAGAAwEN2DAFwwEhgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAM ABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAxbm/vgIyq9zOAkMABgAMABgAMABgBhgBBgAMABgAM ABgAMABgAMABgAMBDDACuGAkMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAM ABgAMABgAMABgIuGAkMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMABgAMA BgAMABgAMABgAMABgAxz7WwEO5nASGADHPFrWwEO/IzgJDAAYADAAYADAAYA DABg3txa+Ah35AN3vbEkK/Mz8c4gkMBIYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYAD AAYADAAYADAAYADAAYADAAYLgGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwAGAAwA [binary] ---=_linux489321bf--That would depend on the presence or absence of rolling donuts. - K On 8/1/08 5:01 AM, in article 4892fcd6@linux, "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote: > An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying > fuck" about something, what might that look like? > > S > > > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4892ecf7$1@linux... >> >> Macs do not suck, we just don't give a flying fuck about them. > >"John" <no@no.com> wrote: > Who's we? About 40% or more of the NG uses Macs.I got a flying handjob once, which is better than a poke in the eye with a pointed stick but I suspect not as good as a flying fuck. I use Windows, though, I'd bet Mac users get flying blowjobs, 'cause they're better. TCB "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote: >An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying >fuck" about something, what might that look like? > >S > > >"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4892ecf7$1@linux... >> >> Macs do not suck, we just don't give a flying fuck about them. > >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---=_linux4893affb Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote: >An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying >fuck" about something, what might that look like? Evidently, he has a website and everything... ---=_linux4893affb Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="realcover_526-777.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="realcover_526-777.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAAEASABIAAD//gAfTEVBRCBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgSW5j LiBWMS4wMQD/2wCEAAkGBwgHBgkICAgLCgkLDhgQDg0NDh4VFhEYIx8lJSMf IiInLDkwJyo1KiIiMUMyNTo8P0A/Ji9GS0U+Sjk+Pz0BCgsLDg0OHRAQHT0o [binary] AwEAAhEDEQA/APaK8k0CgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAK ACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgA oAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgANMApAFABQAU AFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFAB QAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUA FABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFAAaYBSAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAQkA ZJAHvQBiXviS1ieaK2xcSQcPtbgN6e9Vy23Omjh3U1bsjn7nxJqdo0Zt080z urM8oONvTaqjoP1rWKT3NKmHUfkd1GSY0YjDFQSB2OKx2OIdSAKACgAoAKAC gAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoA KACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgANMApAFABQAUAFABQAUAF [binary]
briJT/tOePyzRYTaRGug6lr7pP4muk+zD [binary]
29K2yDPTOSW/Sk5JBYg8/xPqXm/aNc 07S4Y13OtjC0zhfdm4B+gqHUXQdhlz4GtLhY72ae61eYAMV1CUuGHqF4Cn2x ikqmuomtNCzaonkhIEWOMcbFXbtI6jHY11Rs1dGDunZnUR8RoPRR/KvHl8TO
aV [binary] UAKKAQUDCgAoAKAA0wCkAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFA BQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAGKACgAxigAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAK ACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgAoAKACgANMApAFA BQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAU AFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFABQAUAFAB [binary] ---=_linux4893affb--Hahaha. Very good, boys. Thanks for giving enough of an F'ing F to actually answer my question. :) And special thanks to KimW for giving us all a fucking fly. S "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:4892fcd6@linux... > An interesting phrase . . . if someone did, hypothetically, give a "flying > fuck" about something, what might that look like? > > S > > > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4892ecf7$1@linux... >> >> Macs do not suck, we just don't give a flying fuck about them. > >You had a question ? :-)I did? S "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4894543d$1@linux... > > You had a question ? :-)"John" <no@no.com> wrote: > Apparently Micro$oft gives a flying fuck. Hey, maybe Micro$oft will come up with a new business model where you have to rent not only the software, but the hardware too. More MS control! http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/03/microsoft_10k_ warns_of_iphone_mac_threats_as_iphone_nears_1_1_share.htmlGuys, my point was simply that we now know that Apple is not going away and that they continue to innovate, but mostly to tell a little story about my rockin' new overpriced Mac Pro. NOT to start more of this... Good grief... DC "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >"John" <no@no.com> wrote: >> > > >Apparently Micro$oft gives a flying fuck. Hey, maybe Micro$oft will come >up with a new business model where you have to rent not only the software, >but the hardware too. More MS control! > > http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/03/microsoft_10k_ warns_of_iphone_mac_threats_as_iphone_nears_1_1_share.htmlAnyone? It will be my first attempt with XP/paris. I have a Athlon( 3 years old ) with 2GB RAM. just remove the REMOVE when answering the mail Thanks! JensHere's a good laugh for everyone. http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/40464Damn, just set up this computer and posted to the wrong group. I'll repost this on the general group. Rich "Very Deep Productions" <richlamanna@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:498399de@linux... > Here's a good laugh for everyone. > > http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/40464 > >There, fixed that for you. ;^) When both the Democrat and Republican presidential candidates recognize the science behind our current climate change event, it means the denial industry has to really crank up the volume in order to try to drown out the facts. Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com PS. Shouldn't this thread be in General? Very Deep Productions wrote: > Here's a good laugh for everyone. > > http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/40464 > >That was your second mistake. ;^) See you there... Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com Very Deep Productions wrote: > Damn, just set up this computer and posted to the wrong group. I'll repost > this on the general group. > > Rich > > "Very Deep Productions" <richlamanna@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:498399de@linux... >> Here's a good laugh for everyone. >> >> http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/40464 >> >> > >Jamie K <JamieN0-SPAM@JamieKrutzN0-SPAM.com> wrote: > >There, fixed that for you. ;^) > >When both the Democrat and Republican presidential candidates recognize >the science behind our current climate change event, it means the denial >industry has to really crank up the volume in order to try to drown out >the facts. > >Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com And both are trilateralist in the pockets of the world bankers, and yes, lets take it to the general NG. > >PS. Shouldn't this thread be in General? > > >Very Deep Productions wrote: >> Here's a good laugh for everyone. >> >> http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/40464 >> >>I think you're missing my point though. The Paris implementation of OMF was floored. Believe me, I tried, and tried, and tried, and ..... And even when you could get another program to read Paris OMF, it still didn't provide track names etc... Martin H Lend An Ear Sound On 16/03/09 1:34 PM, in article 49bdbf6f@linux, "Administrator" <kg@kerrygalloway.com> wrote: > Martin Harrington wrote on Sun, 15 March 2009 20:50 >> The problem with that theory is the Paris never actually created OMF's very >> well. >> They never really stuck to the specs although, in their defence, the specs >> were constantly changing, (thanks Avid / Digi). >> >> Martin H >> Lend An Ear Sound > > > That's entirely the point though - right now, for the first time, you have a > chance to work with a developer to *assure* that PARIS-generated OMFs *will > beyond any shadow of a doubt* work flawlessly with Reaper - if we give him > files to work with, it will be designed from beta to do exactly that :d. > > > -------------------------- > :: [ posted via the PARISForums ] :: > :: kerrygalloway.com/ParisForums/ :: > --------------------------My point exactly, see my previous post. Martin H Lend An Ear Sound On 17/03/09 12:08 AM, in article 49be4156$1@linux, "chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote: > > Just playing devils advocate... > > If the omf files paris generates are flawed in some basic way, you can't > assure that they will work flawlessly with reaper, no matter how much cutting > you do on reaper.Isn't the OMF code generated from a separate file, not embedded in the main Paris app istelf (like a .dll, ISTR???), if so, wouldn't it be possible for that file extension to be re-written so that it WOULD, in fact export properly? Neil Martin Harrington <martin@lendanear-sound.com> wrote: >I think you're missing my point though. >The Paris implementation of OMF was floored. >Believe me, I tried, and tried, and tried, and ..... >And even when you could get another program to read Paris OMF, it still >didn't provide track names etc... > >Martin H >Lend An Ear SoundIn two words, probably not :-) If you have the .dlls, but don't have the header files with the definition of the interfaces it's possible to dig in and reverse engineer the headers. Work but doable. If you have the headers, but the interfaces provided don't allow for the passing of the required information (for example track names, you are sol as they say. The app was built against those interfaces, and that's not going to change. If the interfaces that you manage to reverse engineer *do* allow for the passing of the required information, you are left to your own devices to provide a complete implementation of the interface. Some would suggest that a reverse engineering of the *code* of the .dll, combined with the reverse engineered interfaces would give you a good start at the implementation of the interface. I would not agree, as the code ends up being too obtuse (or opaque if you will) and of course, as we know the implementation is flawed. Then of course, you could do all this provided the interfaces *do* allow for the passing of the track name, and you reverse engineered and provided an implementation of the interfaces according to the header specification - you find out in a final moment of terror that the application proper is passing a null reference for the track name, and so on and so forth. There is only one reason open source really works, there is source :-) If we had the source for the paris application a few years back (say 2003), we would be freaking light years ahead of reaper or any other open source project. Chuck "Neil" <OUIOIU@OI.com> wrote: > >Isn't the OMF code generated from a separate file, not embedded >in the main Paris app istelf (like a .dll, ISTR???), if so, >wouldn't it be possible for that file extension to be re-written >so that it WOULD, in fact export properly? > >NeilIf > we had the source for the paris application a few years back (say 2003), > we would be freaking light years ahead of reaper or any other open source > project. That sickens me. Tom"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote: >If we had the source for the paris application a few years >back (say 2003), we would be freaking light years ahead of >reaper or any other open source project. > >That sickens me. > >Tom 1.) It shouldn't... it's ID's intellectual property & they (meaning Edmund himself & SSC's estate, in whatever capacity they each own those rights) can elect to do with it whatever they wish, even if that includes burying it forever. 2.) On the other hand, why wouldn't they sell it if they don't plan on doing anything with it? 3.) If they WOULD consider selling it, what would they charge? 4.) Considering whatever amount they would want to charge, could there be any profit to be made from it? 5.) Hardware-related issues abound... what would it be worth at this point, if the code is only a small part of the sonic equation? OR... is the code a bigger part of the equation? Thing is, nobody really knows. Neil........if the code is only a small part of the sonic > equation? OR... is the code a bigger part of the equation? > Thing is, nobody really knows. ID knows, but they aren't talking about it. We have our educated guesses about that. The Native part of Ver 3 doesn't sound the same, sorry guys - and I know some ppl that would argue it.. but it just doesn't handle audio the same way... Unless they've found a way to faithfully mimic the hardware buses (ala mackie cut/gain structures, for one) it's probably nothin special - assuming they've kept coding the application. Knowing some things EP has done/talked about in the past and his love of it, I expect something has been kept in motio. Sonar, cubase, etc... will give it all a run and probably kill it these days, if it's even the same app. By now it should be fully native, and probably mac-centric though that means less and less as time marches since everyone moved to Intel based hardware. The magic of paris lived too much in the hardware DSP (summing, latency, real time live plugs) IMHO. As much as I love my UAD the facts are that hardware just acts different. They have it REAL close though, and the gains are pretty incrementally small at this point, as well as the cost to amount of usable inserts is insanely in favor of software. It looks like they're abusing the word "soon" again. http://www.intelligentdevices.com/index1.shtml http://www.intelligentdevices.com/pro_audio.shtml How long's that been up there to check back often? Neil: You're right, it is their intellectual property to do with as they please. I'm more saddened that they've stagnated the product than mad about it. Without taking out a mortgage on my home I was able to afford a stellar sounding audio DAW with a lot of tracks and use it for years. I can't be angry about that, really. And, to the inside of things let's be honest about it - they probably released ver 3 knowing the product was already dead in retrospect of events. So far ahead of it's time, but that time has passed them by for a variety of reasons. What Kerry and crew are doing is great and really appreciated. It's extending our useful life from Paris, and that's pretty sweet. The thought of actually being able to put it in a quad core box in the future has me pretty giddy. My thoughts are, personally.... I prefer putting my energies there. It made sense to quit thinking about ID some time ago due to lack of relevance to my needs. AA "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:49bf123c@linux... > > "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote: >>If we had the source for the paris application a few years >>back (say 2003), we would be freaking light years ahead of >>reaper or any other open source project. >> >>That sickens me. >> >>Tom > > 1.) It shouldn't... it's ID's intellectual property & they (meaning Edmund > himself & SSC's estate, in whatever capacity > they each own those rights) can elect to do with it > whatever they wish, even if that includes burying it forever. > > 2.) On the other hand, why wouldn't they sell it if they don't > plan on doing anything with it? > > 3.) If they WOULD consider selling it, what would they charge? > > 4.) Considering whatever amount they would want to charge, could > there be any profit to be made from it? > > 5.) Hardware-related issues abound... what would it be worth > at this point, if the code is only a small part of the sonic > equation? OR... is the code a bigger part of the equation? > Thing is, nobody really knows. > > NeilThis is what I've always wondered. Aaron, are you referring to the native version of Paris that they had at NAAM or AES that one year? I'm using paris with Paris hardware as a glorified summing/mixing box, and my guess is that the EDS cards always have had much to do with the "Paris sound". I think it's awesome that things are moving forward to be able to use paris hardware with native apps, but apart from session mobility and convenience, is their any sonic benefit to this? Cheers, TC Aaron Allen wrote: The Native part of Ver 3 doesn't sound the same, sorry guys - > and I know some ppl that would argue it.. but it just doesn't handle audio > the same way...Actually, I was referring to the 'native' submixing in ver 3 - which is to be avoided if you can IMHO. Likely it's the same engine if you saw it around the same time but I have no factual basis for that other than common sense puzzle assembling. I don't know, but my thinking is that since they'll be tapping the Paris DSP/EDS cards that there probably is an advantage. I'm not sure of any of it obviously since Mike hasn't created (to my knowledge, though I'm not in the center of the data loop) any ASIO drivers yet. What I do understand is that they will connect into the new Paris EDS drivers layer and that's a big one for me...... onboard DSP has always been and still is IMO the way to low latency w/o wierdo ghosts in the machine. Tapping the EDS is still very much a smart thing to do even this far into the native years. I have dual and quad core machines..... Paris is still so much more solid feeling and constant in how it acts on a lowly AMD 1900+. If I can have that tied up through ASIO to a native app, man o man are we headed for fun times with very (if any) minimal hassles on our machines. Kinda like the old tape days when you just slapped it on the real and started dialing the mixer, it all just worked like it was supposed to. What will, to me, be VERY interesting is to see if we can still have 24 and 16 bit files in the same project and how it sounds/ties into the EDS DSP:) The guys at Reaper (Justin F in particular I am familiar with - no slights meant to anyone else there) have a lot of smarts, so it'll be pretty interesting times if we can get the open developers and the Reaper club into the paris thing. I think they'll pick up a lot of business if they pull it out with PAF and PPJ support and the ASIO driver does what I believe it will do. One of the nicer things would be that you could now take a project portable for edits and show'n'tell type projects, or field work, using native Reaper to track/edit and when you cut the real deal to mixdown use the EDS DSP for the sonic improvement it imparts. The other part of the equation, for me at least, is something Paris never could offer with it's application software. Midi that doesn't suck, and native borne instruments (DXi/VSTi). AA "TC" <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote in message news:49bf261d@linux... > > This is what I've always wondered. Aaron, are you referring to the native > version of Paris that they had at NAAM or AES that one year? > > I'm using paris with Paris hardware as a glorified summing/mixing box, and > my guess is that the EDS cards always have had much to do with the "Paris > sound". I think it's awesome that things are moving forward to be able to > use paris hardware with native apps, but apart from session mobility and > convenience, is their any sonic benefit to this? > > Cheers, > > TC > > Aaron Allen wrote: > > The Native part of Ver 3 doesn't sound the same, sorry guys - >> and I know some ppl that would argue it.. but it just doesn't handle >> audio the same way... > >Ah, right. I'm running 4 cards/mecs, so I always forget about the native submix feature :) I didn't realize that this would mean that apps like Reaper would be "tapping in" to the EDS cards. I've obviously been out of the loop with what this means.. I guess I'm wondering to what degree this could be possible, and if this would make it (Reaper/w Paris hw) fall somewhere between a dedicated dsp system (Paris/PT), and a fully Native system? I always thought it would just mean you'd be using your paris i/o as you would any other native interface (m-audio etc). Part of this comes from memories of the old ASIO driver we had for Paris back in the day.. Cheers, TC Aaron Allen wrote: > Actually, I was referring to the 'native' submixing in ver 3 - which is to > be avoided if you can IMHO. Likely it's the same engine if you saw it around > the same time but I have no factual basis for that other than common sense > puzzle assembling. > > I don't know, but my thinking is that since they'll be tapping the Paris > DSP/EDS cards that there probably is an advantage. I'm not sure of any of it > obviously since Mike hasn't created (to my knowledge, though I'm not in the > center of the data loop) any ASIO drivers yet. What I do understand is that > they will connect into the new Paris EDS drivers layer and that's a big one > for me...... onboard DSP has always been and still is IMO the way to low > latency w/o wierdo ghosts in the machine. Tapping the EDS is still very much > a smart thing to do even this far into the native years. I have dual and > quad core machines.....Well TC, my understanding is that Mike rewrote enough of the EDS driver to insert a layer connection and tap the EDS card on a much better level. Details, I'm not sure on and I'd wait for him to elaborate on that anyway..... it's dude's project :) However, if I understand that all correctly it's big. Very big. > I guess I'm wondering to what degree this could be possible, and if this > would make it (Reaper/w Paris hw) fall somewhere between a dedicated dsp > system (Paris/PT), and a fully Native system? Personally, what I'm hoping for is a creamware type situation w/o the hard-to-use SCOPE software. Disk streams, mix control, VSTi and GUI all comes off the app, but the actual summing and Paris EQ's/EDS FX/latency and I/O control DSP is slamming it on the PCI cards. With the Reaper architecture, I could even see someone writing controls to use the Cs16's. Perfect world man! AAI don't want to get ahead of ourselves here. As far as the rewriting of the driver, I'm pretty sure Mike's main priority has just been locking it down for multiprocessor CPUs ("just" - LOL, OK). Mike and I have talked about the feasibility of a translation layer over PSCL that allowed Reaper access to the hardware like the PARIS app has - it's a cool idea we've kicked around, but it's not up to me to commit Mike by implication to a massive plan of action. I think we in the community need to get some forward motion going that doesn't involve Mike just so he isn't carrying the whole weight of the platform's future development on his shoulders. Establishing a good solid working relationship with the Reaper developers with simple collaborative projects like PAF support that we can tick off fairly easily is a great place to start right now, and the more stuff we proactively tackle ourselves the more Mike can pursue PARIS-specific angles he finds interesting. We can talk about - well, to call it what it would be, "PARIS 4.0 = Reaper 4.0" - after we've achieved paf and ppj support in Reaper so our stuff can talk to their stuff reliably, and hopefully at some point some nice solid ASIO drivers so their stuff can talk to our stuff reliably Actually, as I understand it Doug W's box would be capable of Paris AND midi/HUI type control with moving faders. I am allllll for that. AA "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:49bf5b68$1@linux... > > > Well, after that, we need Doug W. to build us a motorized box that would > bolt on to the bottom of the C-16 so we have motorized faders; ) > > I have to stop thinking now; ) Ok back to Reaper and Paris.I hope I didn't delve too deep in it, I just want to reiterate to the masses the possibilities to get them all excited about support NOW so we can move this direction :) AaronChuck, I am not sure if you remember me, Don Orason. Myself and Dave Goldwag were local guys around Scotts Valley, CA where EMU is located. Anyway, back in Pre- 3.0 Paris days, Dave and I were on the beta team and were the only "real recording studio" guys on the team. We sat in on most of the discussions that were held on a conference call with Edmund for the development of Paris. EMU employees did not really understand the product very much but Ed Rudnick and a few others were totally behind it and wanted it to really become a contender for Digi. It appeared at that time that Edmund was totally behind the product, even though he didn't listen to feature requests as well as he should have...he had his own agenda. In my opinion and from having an inside seat...the real problem was Creative Labs they would not supply enough funds to keep Paris moving forward... That is my take...but it was a great time when we would all get together and try get all the bugs worked out...Also, there was another version that was created, I can't quite remember what was different but I think Dave had a working version...from memory their was definitely something cool about it...I think you (Chuck) heard or saw this version...am I correct?? Well that's my 2 cents! DonHeya Don! Welcome! Martin Harrington wrote on Mon, 16 March 2009 19:12 My point exactly, see my previous post. Martin H Lend An Ear Sound On 17/03/09 12:08 AM, in article 49be4156$1@linux, "chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote: > > Just playing devils advocate... > > If the omf files paris generates are flawed in some basic way, you can't > assure that they will work flawlessly with reaper, no matter how much cutting > you do on reaper. Fair enough observations. But starting from the guess that they're broken in some kind of fundamental way will mean we do nothing and get precisely jack shit. I'm working from the assumption that they're likely fundamentally OK, but were rushed out the door in such a hurry at the last moment that something minor and sloppy got missed that can potentially be compensated for on input (assuming a coder willing to work with us on the input end, which we now have). I certainly may be wrong in that guess. I hope someone spends the half-hour needed to bounce out and upload an OMF to find out for sure.Here is the story I also have an insider perspective, I believe the truth is Creative bought Ensoniq for their sound cards. They didn't care all that much about the rest of there products and they already owned EMU, so they handed EMU the Ensoniq line. The people in charge of EMU saw Ensoniq products as the competition, they thought Ensoniq products were inferior to EMU products and in their arrogance they wanted to kill everything Ensoniq. Scott Emmerman was in charge, he made the decision, HE wanted to kill Ensoniq, and he did. The problem was they were suppose to recoup some of the investment, and they were sitting on a ton of Ensoniq product, especially Paris. They wanted to keep on cashing in with Paris. In order to Keep on selling Paris they had to get people to think they were going to move forward with PARIS. They never wanted to spend money on Paris, they just wanted to make a quick buck. When they got in the shipments of Paris hardware it was in pieces, they found that a bunch of it had not been painted yet, so they came up with the idea of Painting the hardware EMU blue. It became all part of the scam to make everyone think that they were serious about Paris, The truth is, the plan from day one was to liquidate the inventory. They also changed their name to EMU/Ensoniq to make people think they were serious. They told people that they were working on new hardware, I never saw anything. They even lied in press releases about capabilities to sell more Paris product. There were modules that Ensoniq was working on, but I have my doubts that EMU ever really had anything new under development. Here is a press release that we now know has falsehoods in it about development and support for third party motorized control surfaces. http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM01/article/EMU_ENSONIQ/ PARIS-Pro.html The EMU guys despised Ensoniq products and said so, notice that they never put the Ensoniq name on any other product? Once the product was gone, Ensoniq was gone. They changed their name back to EMU. When they got rid of enough of the Paris inventory, they were done signing contracts with ID. They blew out the last of the inventory. The EndWhen I was reading this article of (you are correct) lies, something funny struck me. This group has supported and furthered the Paris platform longer than any of the manufacturers. AAHello everyone (I still exist), Don's post is basically correct so here is some of the "rest of the story".....The real energy behind Paris at EMU during this time was Kevin Monahan. I met him and volunteered my local studio to help with real life testing of Paris. I also began communicating with Brian Tankersly to try and connect the real world value of Paris to the marketing strategy at EMU. I ended up getting very deep into the politics of Paris/EMU as well as becoming more involved in the software testing (the Mac multiple MEC timeclock issues were discovered in a marathon test session in my studio). All of us worked hard (with Edmund) to try to convince EMU to put more resources into Paris but the complexity of trying to support the "outside" product within EMU proved too much. There are many sub- stories that occurred (including my on-going friendship with a number of Paris related people) and I have continued to lurk on the site. I still use Paris in my new studio (now located on the east coast in Ace Frehley's old "Ace in the Hole" studio) and am ever hopeful that Edmund will once again apply his many programming talents to audio. Dave "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote: >When I was reading this article of (you are correct) lies, >something funny struck me. > >This group has supported and furthered the Paris platform >longer than any of the manufacturers. And the irony of that is: It seems that even in the early days, it was the guys that just wanted to help move things forward with no significant financial benefit to themselves (or none at all) were doing so even then - as it is now, and in the more recent past with the "Chunkworx" stage... and it was those that could stand to make the most money from it (ID & CL/Emu/Ensoniq) were the ones that allowed their own agendas to cause it to tank. Neilnah, no idea how much. Lost interest in that years ago. AA "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:49c568f7$1@linux... > > I think SXSW, is now getting diluted. They have major acts and touring > acts > steeling the thunder from the little guy trying to make it. Now it's > about > showcasing an established act. This is like The independent film > festivals, > at one time it was a chance for the little guy and his camera to get > noticed > and get a deal. Now all of the independent film festivals are full of > multimillion > dollar budget films filled with top motion picture movie stars. How is > that > independent? > > It becomes hard to even get in to these festivals now. I can only imagine > what it costs a band to go to SXSW and play. Has anybody played SXSW, or > knows what it costs? > > http://apnews.excite.com/article/20090321/D9728PP80.html > > http://apnews.excite.com/article/20090321/D972JKCG1.html