Re: Newsreader??
 

On 31 Jan 2007 04:00:32 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>On 31 jan, 11:30, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 31 Jan 2007 01:50:35 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 30 jan, 19:01, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:48:21 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne, _the_
>>
>> >> chancellor (*)) wrote:
>> >> >The Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:29:15 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne,
>> >> >> _the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >I've been using Free Agent to access newsgroups for years. It's no
>> >> >> >> >longer free and I've got 1 day left to use it without paying.
>>
>> >> >> >> i paid for Agent.
>>
>> >> >> >It must be quite special if you pay for it. Why do you?
>>
>> >> >> because I liked the free version and so paid up. Its not much. Nobody
>> >> >> pay, no software.
>> >> >> I'm happy to pay if the price doesn't get silly, which it does for
>> >> >> some software.
>>
>> >> >I pay around £100 a year for upgrades on notation software, but it's
>> >> >worth it. It saves thousands of pounds each year for people like me.
>>
>> >> Having a Mac you will miss all the fun of finding out exactly what Vista will do
>> >> for you.
>>
>> >Not really, since the better bits are a copy of Mac OS X
>>
>> >http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/16555680.htm
>>
>> You miss the point. The fun is in running the system evaluation tool that MS
>> provides that convinced me in seconds that the basic upgrade costing EUR 150
>> provides almost zero, that I don't have already.
>>
>> Exactly what are the best bits of Mac that I am missing? What is on offer looks
>> like 3D cosmetics that I can well do without.
>
>I said exactly the opposite - I said that the best bits of *VISTA* are
>copied from OS X. Not the same thing at all.

Not the same as opposite either.

I've come to the conclusion, that whatever these intangible things are I don't
want them, because they are only in the full blown version of Vista, which I
have no intention of wasting money on.
There is nothing in the EUR150 upgrade that is copied from OS X AFAIK.
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:08:46 +0100, Erick T. Barkhuis
<[email protected]> wrote:

> if you buy a book, are you allowed to sell it to
>another - just that copy, of course? I guess so.
>
>Suppose you download software, pay up, acquire a licence key, and use
>it...can you sell it to somebody else and does this other person acquire
>the right to use it?

if you cannot, we have been swindled.
--
Mike Reid
UK walking, food, photos "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Spain walking, food, tourism "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk"
Beginners UK flight sim addons "http://www.lawn-mower-man.co.uk"

Re: Newsreader??
 

On 31 jan, 14:45, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2007 04:00:32 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 31 jan, 11:30, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 31 Jan 2007 01:50:35 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >> >On 30 jan, 19:01, Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:48:21 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne, _the_
>
> >> >> chancellor (*)) wrote:
> >> >> >The Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:29:15 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne,
> >> >> >> _the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> >I've been using Free Agent to access newsgroups for years. It's no
> >> >> >> >> >longer free and I've got 1 day left to use it without paying.
>
> >> >> >> >> i paid for Agent.
>
> >> >> >> >It must be quite special if you pay for it. Why do you?
>
> >> >> >> because I liked the free version and so paid up. Its not much. Nobody
> >> >> >> pay, no software.
> >> >> >> I'm happy to pay if the price doesn't get silly, which it does for
> >> >> >> some software.
>
> >> >> >I pay around £100 a year for upgrades on notation software, but it's
> >> >> >worth it. It saves thousands of pounds each year for people like me.
>
> >> >> Having a Mac you will miss all the fun of finding out exactly what Vista will do
> >> >> for you.
>
> >> >Not really, since the better bits are a copy of Mac OS X
>
> >> >http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/16555680.htm
>
> >> You miss the point. The fun is in running the system evaluation tool that MS
> >> provides that convinced me in seconds that the basic upgrade costing EUR 150
> >> provides almost zero, that I don't have already.
>
> >> Exactly what are the best bits of Mac that I am missing? What is on offer looks
> >> like 3D cosmetics that I can well do without.
>
> >I said exactly the opposite - I said that the best bits of *VISTA* are
> >copied from OS X. Not the same thing at all.
>
> Not the same as opposite either.

You said "the best bits of Mac are in Vista". I said "the best bits of
Vista are in Mac".
Close enough to opposite.

> I've come to the conclusion, that whatever these intangible things are I don't
> want them, because they are only in the full blown version of Vista, which I
> have no intention of wasting money on.
> There is nothing in the EUR150 upgrade that is copied from OS X AFAIK.

You may be right - I don't care enough to find out the details of
what's in the various bits of Vista, just as the design of the ashtray
in a Trabant is of no particular interest.

http://www.tuaw.com/2006/12/15/video-david-pogue-proves-vista-doesnt-copy-os-x/

B;

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:14:39 +0100, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:33:51 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin <[email protected]>
>arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ...
> ... I don't think 4.2 is on general release.
>
>One of the versions starting with a *4*!
>
> ... It has the best e-mail spam filters I have come across. I have turned off all my
> ... hand made Agent filters except the one that kills 60% of my spam because it is
> ... in an Asian character set.
>
>You still get that?! I haven't seen one of those in five years. Mailwasher is the best! :)

I haven't seen one for several years either.

Agent is best without mailwasher. :-)
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:44:52 +0100, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:39:17 +0100, Erick T. Barkhuis
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>B Vaughan:
>>> David Horne wrote:
>>>
>>> >The Reid wrote:
>>
>>> >> i paid for Agent.
>>> >
>>> >It must be quite special if you pay for it. Why do you?
>>>
>>> I did too. Note that this is software, which we purchased,
>>> not a service that we pay for.
>>
>>In case of software, there's not much difference.
>>Note that you don't purchase the software, but only obtain a licence to
>>use it. The software isn't yours.
>
>Unless I have to renew the license every year, it's the same to me as
>if I bought it.

a bit like husbands :-)
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:57:58 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin <[email protected]>
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:

... On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:14:39 +0100, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:
...
... >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:33:51 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin <[email protected]>
... >arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... >
... > ...
... > ... I don't think 4.2 is on general release.
... >
... >One of the versions starting with a *4*!
... >
... > ... It has the best e-mail spam filters I have come across. I have turned off all my
... > ... hand made Agent filters except the one that kills 60% of my spam because it is
... > ... in an Asian character set.
... >
... >You still get that?! I haven't seen one of those in five years. Mailwasher is the best! :)
...
... I haven't seen one for several years either.
...
... Agent is best without mailwasher. :-)

Clearly, you never used it.

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:44:53 +0100, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:31:22 +0100, Tim C. <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>Following up to Erick T. Barkhuis <[email protected]> :
>>
>>>B Vaughan:
>>>> David Horne wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I did too. Note that this is software, which we purchased,
>>>> not a service that we pay for.
>>>
>>>In case of software, there's not much difference.
>>>Note that you don't purchase the software, but only obtain a licence to
>>>use it. The software isn't yours.
>>
>>In the same way that the content of many books you buy don't belong to you
>>either.
>
>So have you ever mentioned to someone that you've just licensed the
>contents of a book, or do you say you bought it?

It's fairly normal to ask for permission to copy a part into another
publication.
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:08:46 +0100, Erick T. Barkhuis
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Tim C.:
>> Following up to Erick T. Barkhuis <[email protected]> :
>>
>> >B Vaughan:
>> >> David Horne wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >The Reid wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> i paid for Agent.
>> >> >
>> >> >It must be quite special if you pay for it. Why do you?
>> >>
>> >> I did too. Note that this is software, which we purchased,
>> >> not a service that we pay for.
>> >
>> >In case of software, there's not much difference.
>> >Note that you don't purchase the software, but only obtain a licence to
>> >use it. The software isn't yours.
>>
>> In the same way that the content of many books you buy don't belong to you
>> either.
>
>OK. true.
>
>There's just one more question (this is really a question, since I'm not
>sure of the answer): if you buy a book, are you allowed to sell it to
>another - just that copy, of course? I guess so.
>
>Suppose you download software, pay up, acquire a licence key, and use
>it...can you sell it to somebody else and does this other person acquire
>the right to use it?

If nobody including the seller use it afterwards, in most cases.
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:59:07 +0100, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:57:58 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin <[email protected]>
>arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:14:39 +0100, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> ... >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:33:51 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin <[email protected]>
> ... >arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ... >
> ... > ...
> ... > ... I don't think 4.2 is on general release.
> ... >
> ... >One of the versions starting with a *4*!
> ... >
> ... > ... It has the best e-mail spam filters I have come across. I have turned off all my
> ... > ... hand made Agent filters except the one that kills 60% of my spam because it is
> ... > ... in an Asian character set.
> ... >
> ... >You still get that?! I haven't seen one of those in five years. Mailwasher is the best! :)
> ...
> ... I haven't seen one for several years either.
> ...
> ... Agent is best without mailwasher. :-)
>
>Clearly, you never used it.

You have never used Agent 4.2

"Blacklist. Any e-mails you bounce back get their senders details put on the
blacklist for easy removal if they come back. You can even set it to
automatically bounce and delete blacklisted e-mails, or whole domains off the
server. Plus, MailWasher can use external blacklists such as ORDB and Spam Cop
or you can specify your own."

I hope you aren't bouncing back e-mails. Spam rarely comes from the person named
in the header.
--

Martin

Re: Newsreader??
 

Magda wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:38:02 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Martin
<[email protected]>
> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:42:18 +0100, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
> ... >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:36:55 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Tim C.
<[email protected]>
> ... >arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ... >
> ... > ... Following up to Magda <[email protected]> :
> ... > ...
> ... > ... >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:45:28 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, Tim
C. <[email protected]>
> ... > ... >arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ... > ... >
> ... > ... > ... Following up to Magda <[email protected]> :
> ... > ... > ...
> ... > ... > ...
> ... > ... > ... >Not a great difference between them; stay put. I tried
others too, but always came back to
> ... > ... > ... >Agent. Guess I'm too used to it, after 10 years...
> ... > ... > ...
> ... > ... > ... can't teach an old dog new tricks. :-)
> ... > ... >
> ... > ... >Well, you surely *can*.
> ... > ... >
> ... > ... >If the dog will be willing to comply, is another matter.
> ... > ...
> ... > ... Are you willing?
> ... >
> ... >No. Are you?
> ... >
> ... >
> ... >> whisper quietly as Martin might be listening ;-)
> ... >
> ... >No use whispering, he is an old bat! ;)
> ...
> ... Oi! I heard that.
>
> Bats have the finest ears. :)


And they like to sip the *sweetest* nectar, luv...!!!

;--p

--
Best
Greg

Re: Newsreader??
 

The Reid <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:13:21 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne,
> _the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:
>
> >> >Surely there must be some Windows software you would like?
> >>
> >> Agent? :-)
> >
> >I really do like MacSOUP, but others have problems with it. It doesn't
> >support binaries, but I don't read them, and individual doesn't do them
> >anyway.
>
> Flight Simulator?

I had an old mac version in the early 90s which I played with for a
while. Even with the nifty graphics etc. of current versions, I don't
know if it's something I'm after. The only application which I've
awaited a mac version of with eager anticipation was google earth! :)

--
(*) ... of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
(don't email yahoo address) usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Re: Newsreader??
 

Tim C. <[email protected]> wrote:

> Following up to B Vaughan<[email protected]> :
>
> >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:31:22 +0100, Tim C. <[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Following up to Erick T. Barkhuis <[email protected]> :
> >>
> >>>B Vaughan:
> >>>> David Horne wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I did too. Note that this is software, which we purchased,
> >>>> not a service that we pay for.
> >>>
> >>>In case of software, there's not much difference.
> >>>Note that you don't purchase the software, but only obtain a licence to
> >>>use it. The software isn't yours.
> >>
> >>In the same way that the content of many books you buy don't belong to you
> >>either.
> >
> >So have you ever mentioned to someone that you've just licensed the
> >contents of a book, or do you say you bought it?
>
> of course not. I'm with you on this.

There's a difference though. If I misuse some software, the right to use
it can be revoked. This is a bit harder with, say, an orange!

--
(*) ... of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
(don't email yahoo address) usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Re: Newsreader??
 

The Reid <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:13:26 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne,
> _the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:
>
> >I use a 2B pencil and paper. I use the computer for typesetting the
> >music. That's what saves the money too.
>
> so why is composing on paper better?

All I said was that it's what I do.

> Most authors compose at the
> keyboard, I assume?

It depends. I could name some composers who composed entirely at the
keyboard- others entirely in their head. It's not immediately obvious
from the music who did what. Basically, a composer works in the best way
for them, but at the educational level I give more guidance of methods
to try, certainly.

--
(*) ... of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
(don't email yahoo address) usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Re: Newsreader??
 

Martin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:44:53 +0100, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:31:22 +0100, Tim C. <[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Following up to Erick T. Barkhuis <[email protected]> :
> >>
> >>>B Vaughan:
> >>>> David Horne wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I did too. Note that this is software, which we purchased,
> >>>> not a service that we pay for.
> >>>
> >>>In case of software, there's not much difference.
> >>>Note that you don't purchase the software, but only obtain a licence to
> >>>use it. The software isn't yours.
> >>
> >>In the same way that the content of many books you buy don't belong to you
> >>either.
> >
> >So have you ever mentioned to someone that you've just licensed the
> >contents of a book, or do you say you bought it?
>
> It's fairly normal to ask for permission to copy a part into another
> publication.

And fairly normal to have it refused or agreed to at financially harsh
terms. One reason I only set texts by writers out of copyright!

--
(*) ... of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
(don't email yahoo address) usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Re: Newsreader??
 

Following up to The Reid <[email protected]> :

>On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:13:26 +0000, [email protected] (David Horne,
>_the_ chancellor (*)) wrote:
>
>>I use a 2B pencil and paper. I use the computer for typesetting the
>>music. That's what saves the money too.
>
>so why is composing on paper better? Most authors compose at the
>keyboard, I assume?

The piano keyboard, not the PC keyboard, silly. :-)
--
Tim C.