Motorists hit by card clone scam
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Making changes to the distribution unannounced is the sign of a complete
arse, Holmes.
(FU reset)
Alan Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Graham Murray" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Alan Holmes" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> I've been using OE for about 35 years and never ever had any trouble with
> >> it.
> >
> > On what hardware and OS? The IBM PC was launched in 1981, 26 years
> > ago. Windows was later than that, and it was even later that Windows had
> > a native TCP/IP stack.
>
> For your information, the internet was started by the Americans as a means
> of interaction between universities and state departments,
Bzzt, wrong. ARPANET was initiated in 1969 as a tool for exploring the
value of packet switched networks. The primary motivation for building
ARPANET was to give a consistent method for researchers to access
mainframe computers without having to use a different terminal
application for each computer to be accessed.
> this was extended to similar institutions in other parts of the world, I
> started to use it sometime in the late 60s early 70s,
You are talking absolute shit, the first email was not sent until 1973.
And the chances of you having access to one of the 9 hosts available in
the 1960s is nil. The chances of you having access to ARPANET before the
separation of MILNET from ARPANET in 1984 is also nil.
Indeed the possibility of any grown up allowing you to play with a
computer is probably zero.
> my estimate of 35 years for OE was, perhaps, a little bit over the top,
No, it wasn't "a little bit over the top" it was complete and utter
cock. There wasn't even a platform available to run OE on in 1972. The
first version of Windows wasn't available until 1985, and OE didn't
appear, named as Outlook Express until Windows 95 OSR2.
> but it has been around for a very long time, with no problems.
It has been around for not much more than a decade, with many problems.
The early versions did not allow the user to back up the address book,
and were just about 100% non standards compliant. And Outlook Express
was notorious for beign broken from its first implementation and
insecure from version 4.0 onwards.
OE permits a remote application to over-ride all its security features,
and uses Internet Explorer as a rendering engine so that even if you
don't use IE, OE makes damn sure that every security vulnerability in IE
is your problem.
The only way that anyone could declare that OE has been around with "no
problems" is to be terminally stupid or to have their head so far up
their own arse that they cannot smell the coffee.
> The only problem I have with it is not to be able to stop crossposted
> articles which can be a real nuisance.
The only problem you have is being dumber than a Cocker Spaniel. A
Cocker Spaniel that has been used for mysterious and terrifying
experiments in practical lobotomy.
arse, Holmes.
(FU reset)
Alan Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Graham Murray" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Alan Holmes" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> I've been using OE for about 35 years and never ever had any trouble with
> >> it.
> >
> > On what hardware and OS? The IBM PC was launched in 1981, 26 years
> > ago. Windows was later than that, and it was even later that Windows had
> > a native TCP/IP stack.
>
> For your information, the internet was started by the Americans as a means
> of interaction between universities and state departments,
Bzzt, wrong. ARPANET was initiated in 1969 as a tool for exploring the
value of packet switched networks. The primary motivation for building
ARPANET was to give a consistent method for researchers to access
mainframe computers without having to use a different terminal
application for each computer to be accessed.
> this was extended to similar institutions in other parts of the world, I
> started to use it sometime in the late 60s early 70s,
You are talking absolute shit, the first email was not sent until 1973.
And the chances of you having access to one of the 9 hosts available in
the 1960s is nil. The chances of you having access to ARPANET before the
separation of MILNET from ARPANET in 1984 is also nil.
Indeed the possibility of any grown up allowing you to play with a
computer is probably zero.
> my estimate of 35 years for OE was, perhaps, a little bit over the top,
No, it wasn't "a little bit over the top" it was complete and utter
cock. There wasn't even a platform available to run OE on in 1972. The
first version of Windows wasn't available until 1985, and OE didn't
appear, named as Outlook Express until Windows 95 OSR2.
> but it has been around for a very long time, with no problems.
It has been around for not much more than a decade, with many problems.
The early versions did not allow the user to back up the address book,
and were just about 100% non standards compliant. And Outlook Express
was notorious for beign broken from its first implementation and
insecure from version 4.0 onwards.
OE permits a remote application to over-ride all its security features,
and uses Internet Explorer as a rendering engine so that even if you
don't use IE, OE makes damn sure that every security vulnerability in IE
is your problem.
The only way that anyone could declare that OE has been around with "no
problems" is to be terminally stupid or to have their head so far up
their own arse that they cannot smell the coffee.
> The only problem I have with it is not to be able to stop crossposted
> articles which can be a real nuisance.
The only problem you have is being dumber than a Cocker Spaniel. A
Cocker Spaniel that has been used for mysterious and terrifying
experiments in practical lobotomy.
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:39:45 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > You only saw one price - check better, in several shops, in several
... > countries. Macs are always more expensive in the end.
...
... MacBook Pro
...
... Italia - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... France - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... Deutschland - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... Belgique - EUR 2,019 (GBP 1,369.98)
... Nederland - EUR 1,989 (GBP 1,349.62)
... UK - EUR 1,988 (GBP 1,349.00)
...
... And why is a Mac (slightly) cheaper in the UK than in those other
... countries? Because UK VAT is lower than in the other countries listed.
...
... If you want cheaper Macs, complain to your rip-off government.
Now, compare that to the price of PCs.
Funny, how you can't keep up with the subject of the discussion...
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > You only saw one price - check better, in several shops, in several
... > countries. Macs are always more expensive in the end.
...
... MacBook Pro
...
... Italia - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... France - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... Deutschland - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
... Belgique - EUR 2,019 (GBP 1,369.98)
... Nederland - EUR 1,989 (GBP 1,349.62)
... UK - EUR 1,988 (GBP 1,349.00)
...
... And why is a Mac (slightly) cheaper in the UK than in those other
... countries? Because UK VAT is lower than in the other countries listed.
...
... If you want cheaper Macs, complain to your rip-off government.
Now, compare that to the price of PCs.
Funny, how you can't keep up with the subject of the discussion...
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> I'm not French, Einstein.
Then leave the country immediately.
> I'm not French, Einstein.
Then leave the country immediately.
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:39:45 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked
> like this:
>
> ... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> ...
> ... > You only saw one price - check better, in several shops, in several
> ... > countries. Macs are always more expensive in the end.
> ...
> ... MacBook Pro
> ...
> ... Italia - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... France - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... Deutschland - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... Belgique - EUR 2,019 (GBP 1,369.98)
> ... Nederland - EUR 1,989 (GBP 1,349.62)
> ... UK - EUR 1,988 (GBP 1,349.00)
> ...
> ... And why is a Mac (slightly) cheaper in the UK than in those other
> ... countries? Because UK VAT is lower than in the other countries listed.
> ...
> ... If you want cheaper Macs, complain to your rip-off government.
>
> Now, compare that to the price of PCs.
You said
"Check the prices in Europe - Macs' go though the roof."
And you were talking crap.
> Funny, how you can't keep up with the subject of the discussion...
Funny how you can't even remember what you said.
And comparing like for like,
A 17" laptop from Red Submarine, a real no-name brand with a headline
price of £1200 from http://www.gear4music.com/
Looks good value for money?
Well by the time you finish upgrading it to have:
2GB RAM
160GB HDD
DVD re-writer
Core 2 Duo 2.33GHz
Vista
Then the price rises to £2093.01 compared to £1899 for a MacBook Pro
with the same spec. And of course for the Windows laptop you're going to
have to fork out extra for a basic set of applications, whereas the
MacBook comes with a free installation of iLife and you can use it right
out of the box.
Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
brainless troll.
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:39:45 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked
> like this:
>
> ... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> ...
> ... > You only saw one price - check better, in several shops, in several
> ... > countries. Macs are always more expensive in the end.
> ...
> ... MacBook Pro
> ...
> ... Italia - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... France - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... Deutschland - EUR 2,000 (GBP 1,357.26)
> ... Belgique - EUR 2,019 (GBP 1,369.98)
> ... Nederland - EUR 1,989 (GBP 1,349.62)
> ... UK - EUR 1,988 (GBP 1,349.00)
> ...
> ... And why is a Mac (slightly) cheaper in the UK than in those other
> ... countries? Because UK VAT is lower than in the other countries listed.
> ...
> ... If you want cheaper Macs, complain to your rip-off government.
>
> Now, compare that to the price of PCs.
You said
"Check the prices in Europe - Macs' go though the roof."
And you were talking crap.
> Funny, how you can't keep up with the subject of the discussion...
Funny how you can't even remember what you said.
And comparing like for like,
A 17" laptop from Red Submarine, a real no-name brand with a headline
price of £1200 from http://www.gear4music.com/
Looks good value for money?
Well by the time you finish upgrading it to have:
2GB RAM
160GB HDD
DVD re-writer
Core 2 Duo 2.33GHz
Vista
Then the price rises to £2093.01 compared to £1899 for a MacBook Pro
with the same spec. And of course for the Windows laptop you're going to
have to fork out extra for a basic set of applications, whereas the
MacBook comes with a free installation of iLife and you can use it right
out of the box.
Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
brainless troll.
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] (Steve
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
...
... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
... brainless troll.
You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
...
... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
... brainless troll.
You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:50:45 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] (Steve
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > I'm not French, Einstein.
...
... Then leave the country immediately.
Sit down and wait. I'll fetch a bone for you.
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > I'm not French, Einstein.
...
... Then leave the country immediately.
Sit down and wait. I'll fetch a bone for you.
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> looked like this:
>
> ...
> ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
> ... brainless troll.
>
> You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> looked like this:
>
> ...
> ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
> ... brainless troll.
>
> You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:28:20 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] (Steve
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
... > [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
... > looked like this:
... >
... > ...
... > ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
... > ... brainless troll.
... >
... > You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
...
... So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
No, I don't. But your mouth is obviously FULL of it - enjoy!
Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
...
... > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
... > [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
... > looked like this:
... >
... > ...
... > ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how you're a
... > ... brainless troll.
... >
... > You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
...
... So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
No, I don't. But your mouth is obviously FULL of it - enjoy!
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:28:20 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> looked like this:
>
> ... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> ...
> ... > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> ... > [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> ... > looked like this:
> ... >
> ... > ...
> ... > ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how
> ... > ... you're a brainless troll.
> ... >
> ... > You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
> ...
> ... So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
>
> No, I don't. But your mouth is obviously FULL of it - enjoy!
Hau ab, du kleiner arschloch.
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:28:20 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> looked like this:
>
> ... Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> ...
> ... > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:14:07 +0100, in rec.travel.europe,
> ... > [email protected] (Steve Firth) arranged some electrons, so they
> ... > looked like this:
> ... >
> ... > ...
> ... > ... Funny how you can't keep up with the crap you spout. Funny how
> ... > ... you're a brainless troll.
> ... >
> ... > You really are a Mac user... IQ inferior to 50.
> ...
> ... So you admit you were talking crap. Now drop dead.
>
> No, I don't. But your mouth is obviously FULL of it - enjoy!
Hau ab, du kleiner arschloch.
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
"Magda" <magda@eu> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:32:13 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "Calif Bill"
> <[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like
> this:
>
> ...
> ... Usenet is about that old, but OE is not. The bottom posting came
> about
> ... because we used KSR-33 Teletypes as input devices. Was hard to edit
> the
> ... received stream, and you typed at the bottom of the message. The
> VT-52 CRT
> ... monitors were similar, so you always got bottom posting. So I guess
> most of
> ... these people are living in the past. I think top posting is nice for
> a
> ... quick response. Do not have to go the bottom of the message to see
> the
> ... response.
>
> That's what snipping is for.
>
If you want bottom posting like it was always done, then you can not snip.
news
[email protected]...> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:32:13 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "Calif Bill"
> <[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like
> this:
>
> ...
> ... Usenet is about that old, but OE is not. The bottom posting came
> about
> ... because we used KSR-33 Teletypes as input devices. Was hard to edit
> the
> ... received stream, and you typed at the bottom of the message. The
> VT-52 CRT
> ... monitors were similar, so you always got bottom posting. So I guess
> most of
> ... these people are living in the past. I think top posting is nice for
> a
> ... quick response. Do not have to go the bottom of the message to see
> the
> ... response.
>
> That's what snipping is for.
>
If you want bottom posting like it was always done, then you can not snip.
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1hwztsm.ejcg3f95miajN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
> Calif Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The bottom posting came about because we used KSR-33 Teletypes as input
>> devices. Was hard to edit the received stream, and you typed at the
>> bottom of the message.
>
> That's complete horseshit.
>
> With KSR-33s one didn't quote back any context. Not unless one was as
> mad as a box of frogs. Quoting context really came in with Vistar
> terminals and the like.
>
You just added onto the message.
news:1hwztsm.ejcg3f95miajN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
> Calif Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The bottom posting came about because we used KSR-33 Teletypes as input
>> devices. Was hard to edit the received stream, and you typed at the
>> bottom of the message.
>
> That's complete horseshit.
>
> With KSR-33s one didn't quote back any context. Not unless one was as
> mad as a box of frogs. Quoting context really came in with Vistar
> terminals and the like.
>
You just added onto the message.
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
On 23 apr, 00:09, Deeply Filled Mortician
<deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
> Make credence recognised that on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:17:09 +0100,
> [email protected] (SteveH) has scripted:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Deeply Filled Mortician <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu>
> >wrote:
>
> >> >Windows 1.0 was launched in November 1985. It was a pile of poo, a
> >> >tradition that has been consistently maintained right the way up to the
> >> >present day.
>
> >> Windows is not bad. Not great, but better than anything else that's
> >> been available.
>
> >> The alternative is to go Mac, but be prepared to change worlds - and
> >> open your wallet!
>
> >Where did this gem of 'knowledge' come from?
>
> >Mac hardware is no more expensive than any other quality computer
> >hardware. My MacBook was stupidly cheap when compared with a lot of the
> >WinTel machines out there. The OS is actually *cheaper* than Windows if
> >you want the same functionality.
>
> >So, in conclusion, you're talking shite.
>
> Gawd, here we go again with a bunch of passionate Mac defending
> diatribe with a few ousting clauses like '"quality computer hardware"
> and "same functionality".
Yeah - "here we go again" indeed. Last time we did this you, Martin
and Barbara made fools of yourselves. Is your memory really *so*
short?
B;
<deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
> Make credence recognised that on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:17:09 +0100,
> [email protected] (SteveH) has scripted:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Deeply Filled Mortician <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu>
> >wrote:
>
> >> >Windows 1.0 was launched in November 1985. It was a pile of poo, a
> >> >tradition that has been consistently maintained right the way up to the
> >> >present day.
>
> >> Windows is not bad. Not great, but better than anything else that's
> >> been available.
>
> >> The alternative is to go Mac, but be prepared to change worlds - and
> >> open your wallet!
>
> >Where did this gem of 'knowledge' come from?
>
> >Mac hardware is no more expensive than any other quality computer
> >hardware. My MacBook was stupidly cheap when compared with a lot of the
> >WinTel machines out there. The OS is actually *cheaper* than Windows if
> >you want the same functionality.
>
> >So, in conclusion, you're talking shite.
>
> Gawd, here we go again with a bunch of passionate Mac defending
> diatribe with a few ousting clauses like '"quality computer hardware"
> and "same functionality".
Yeah - "here we go again" indeed. Last time we did this you, Martin
and Barbara made fools of yourselves. Is your memory really *so*
short?
B;
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
On 22 apr, 23:53, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:40:55 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, %[email protected] (Steve
> Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... SteveH <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> ... > Deeply Filled Mortician <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> ... > wrote:
>
> ... >
> ... > > >Windows 1.0 was launched in November 1985. It was a pile of poo, a
> ... > > >tradition that has been consistently maintained right the way up to the
> ... > > >present day.
> ... > >
> ... > > Windows is not bad.
> ...
> ... No, bad certainly does not go far enough to describe the minging pile of
> ... shite that is Windows.
> ...
> ... > > Not great, but better than anything else that's
> ... > > been available.
> ...
> ... That's not even close to being true.
> ...
> ... > > The alternative is to go Mac, but be prepared to change worlds - and
> ... > > open your wallet!
> ... >
> ... > Where did this gem of 'knowledge' come from?
> ...
> ... Made up like all of the drivel that Windows FanBoys spout.
>
> Check the prices in Europe - Macs' go though the roof.
Check them yourself - but make a better job of it than Martin and
Barbara did.
B;
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:40:55 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, %[email protected] (Steve
> Firth) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... SteveH <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> ... > Deeply Filled Mortician <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> ... > wrote:
>
> ... >
> ... > > >Windows 1.0 was launched in November 1985. It was a pile of poo, a
> ... > > >tradition that has been consistently maintained right the way up to the
> ... > > >present day.
> ... > >
> ... > > Windows is not bad.
> ...
> ... No, bad certainly does not go far enough to describe the minging pile of
> ... shite that is Windows.
> ...
> ... > > Not great, but better than anything else that's
> ... > > been available.
> ...
> ... That's not even close to being true.
> ...
> ... > > The alternative is to go Mac, but be prepared to change worlds - and
> ... > > open your wallet!
> ... >
> ... > Where did this gem of 'knowledge' come from?
> ...
> ... Made up like all of the drivel that Windows FanBoys spout.
>
> Check the prices in Europe - Macs' go though the roof.
Check them yourself - but make a better job of it than Martin and
Barbara did.
B;
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
On 23 apr, 00:35, [email protected] (SteveH) wrote:
> £749 / £759
> isn't a lot of money for a decently specced and build Core 2 Duo
> notebook.
Oh Lord - here's where Martin comes in with prices for a completely
different Dell : :-)
B;
> £749 / £759
> isn't a lot of money for a decently specced and build Core 2 Duo
> notebook.
Oh Lord - here's where Martin comes in with prices for a completely
different Dell : :-)
B;
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
SteveH ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :
> Apple hardware can't be compared with cheap generic hardware
Yes, it can.
> Apple hardware is pitched to compete with IBM / HP / Compaq etc
IBM don't make PC hardware any more - Lenova are rapidly losing the quality
reputation that ThinkPads in particular have.
Compaq as a brand is a PCWorld special these days, and HP hardware is
generic corporate-bargain-bucket.
> ., and OSX is equivalent to Windows Vista Premium.
And this is a recommendation?
were saying :
> Apple hardware can't be compared with cheap generic hardware
Yes, it can.
> Apple hardware is pitched to compete with IBM / HP / Compaq etc
IBM don't make PC hardware any more - Lenova are rapidly losing the quality
reputation that ThinkPads in particular have.
Compaq as a brand is a PCWorld special these days, and HP hardware is
generic corporate-bargain-bucket.
> ., and OSX is equivalent to Windows Vista Premium.
And this is a recommendation?



