Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #6493 > unrolled thread

Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10

Contents

  Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 16:48 -0400
    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2015-08-24 17:16 -0400
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Mandy Liefbowitz <mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> - 2015-08-25 01:18 +0100
        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Mandy Liefbowitz <mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> - 2015-08-25 14:43 +0100
    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy deep - 2015-08-24 17:05 -0600
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-24 20:02 -0400
        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 19:47 -0500
          Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-08-24 21:21 -0400
            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Tommy Troll <elkabong99@Itroll.org> - 2015-08-24 21:40 -0400
            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:47 +0000
            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> - 2015-08-25 09:42 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-25 10:07 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2015-08-25 10:53 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-25 09:31 -0500
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 17:03 +0000
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-25 13:12 -0400
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-25 17:16 -0400
                      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-08-25 21:54 -0400
                        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-25 19:13 -0700
                        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 09:15 -0400
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-28 21:24 -0500
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 02:29 +0000
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-25 17:05 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-08-30 19:18 -0400
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-30 17:39 -0700
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Godzilla <godzilla@lizardboss.invalid> - 2015-08-31 00:40 +0000
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-30 22:34 -0500
            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2015-08-25 10:48 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> - 2015-08-25 12:45 -0400
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy pjp <pjpoirier_is_located@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 14:16 -0300
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2015-08-25 22:35 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-25 17:11 -0400
        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Linux User <linux.user@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-25 01:53 +0100
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Mandy Liefbowitz <mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> - 2015-08-25 01:09 +0100
        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@kb.invalid> - 2015-08-24 17:37 -0700
          Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Mandy Liefbowitz <mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> - 2015-08-25 15:05 +0100
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-08-24 21:19 -0400
        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 01:47 +0000
          Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy mechanic <mechanic@example.net> - 2015-08-25 12:40 +0100
          Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-25 08:06 -0400
            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy deep - 2015-08-25 21:01 -0600
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:22 -0600
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:49 -0500
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 10:11 -0400
              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 09:16 -0400
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy deep - 2015-08-26 07:56 -0600
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 10:13 -0400
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-08-26 16:18 +0200
                      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 12:09 -0400
                      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-26 12:47 -0600
                      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy deep - 2015-08-27 09:29 -0600
                        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-08-27 17:38 +0200
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-26 10:41 -0500
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 12:11 -0400
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-26 12:48 -0600
                  Just plonk the guy vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-08-26 16:58 +0000
                    Re: Just plonk the guy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-26 10:03 -0700
                      Re: Just plonk the guy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 15:02 -0400
                        Re: Just plonk the guy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-26 12:12 -0700
                        Nomination for August KOTM vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-08-26 21:26 +0000
                          Re: Nomination for August KOTM Gary Burnore <gburnore@panix.com> - 2015-08-28 19:59 +0000
                    Re: Just plonk the guy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-26 12:49 -0600
                      Re: Just plonk the guy vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-08-26 19:03 +0000
                        Re: Just plonk the guy JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-08-26 14:30 -0500
                          Re: Just plonk the guy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-08-26 13:23 -0700
                          Re: Just plonk the guy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-27 15:38 -0600
                        Re: Just plonk the guy chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-08-27 07:04 -0500
                          Re: Just plonk the guy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-27 15:38 -0600
                            Re: Just plonk the guy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-28 13:13 -0600
                        Re: Just plonk the guy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-27 15:37 -0600
                    Re: Just plonk the guy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-26 15:00 -0400
                      Re: Just plonk the guy vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-08-26 22:16 +0000
                        Re: Just plonk the guy "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 15:37 -0700
                        Re: Just plonk the guy Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-26 16:10 -0700
                          Re: Just plonk the guy vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-08-27 08:33 +0000
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-31 21:09 -0500
                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-01 12:12 +0200
                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 09:57 -0700
                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-01 14:43 -0400
                      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 12:18 -0700
                        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-01 21:44 +0200
                          Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-01 20:30 -0400
                            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 18:04 -0700
                            Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 08:24 +0200
                              Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-01 23:48 -0700
                                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 09:26 +0200
                                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-02 05:12 -0700
                                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 10:44 -0400
                                    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-02 08:01 -0700
                                Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 09:17 -0400
                                  Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-02 07:02 -0700
                        Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-01 20:28 -0400
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-25 22:18 -0600
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-08-30 22:39 -0500
    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2015-08-25 19:11 +0200
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-25 17:13 -0400
    Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 00:07 +0800
      Re: Looking at Microsoft's Privacy Policy GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-08-26 12:50 -0600

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

#6902

On 8/25/2015 12:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 09:31:34 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2015-08-25, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/24/2015 9:21 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/24/2015 7:02 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>>>> On 2015-08-24 7:05 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is
>>>>>>>> building a Death Star.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're right, the Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Surface RT, Surface Pro,
>>>>>> Surface RT 2, Surface Pro 2, Surface Pro 3, Surface 3, Mouse,
>>>>>> Keyboard,
>>>>>> Zune and Kinect don't exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you Linux losers ever right about _anything_ ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are Linux users collectively responsible for that remark, "Snit?"
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft built those?  In Redmond?  I thought they contracted the
>>>> work for their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>>>
>>>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that
>>>> stuff. Could be wrong, though.
>>>>
>>> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech
>>> also don't qualify as "hardware companies". One would be hard pressed
>>> to find many items in their possession from companies that meet your
>>> criteria.
>>
>>      Well, that quite often is the point of many of our counter arguments
>> regarding "Apple Quality". Apples and HP's are coming off of the same
>> assembly lines in China with the same spare parts sourced from some
>> other Chinese factory.
>>
> Which are bogus counter arguments.  Not all Chinese mfgs are equal, nor
> are the items the mfg for the various companies.

How did you become qualified to assess Chinese manufacturers?  Why don't 
you detail just which Chinese companies build Apple's products and tell 
in precise detail what makes them better than the companies that build 
Dell's or HP's products?

I already know you can't meet the challenge I laid out above. 
Everything you write comes from your ass.


>>      One wonders how long that can go on before the Chinese companies
>>      manage
>> to cut out the middle men.
>
> An idiot with no business sense might wonder, but the Chinese mfgs have
> honed their mfgs skills to a fine point.  They can ramp up a new line
> ready to go quicker than anybody for a price no one else can match.

You don't seem to comprehend what you responded to.

> Why would they want to jump into the low profit sales part with all its
> support and other costs?

Jump into it?  They're already there!  Apple gets the big margins, not 
their Chinese lackeys.  But one day those lackeys will wake up...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6903

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:24:52 -0500, Nobody wrote:

> On 8/25/2015 12:03 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 09:31:34 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-08-25, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>>>> On 8/24/2015 9:21 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/24/2015 7:02 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2015-08-24 7:05 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is
>>>>>>>>> building a Death Star.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're right, the Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Surface RT, Surface
>>>>>>> Pro,
>>>>>>> Surface RT 2, Surface Pro 2, Surface Pro 3, Surface 3, Mouse,
>>>>>>> Keyboard,
>>>>>>> Zune and Kinect don't exist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you Linux losers ever right about _anything_ ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why are Linux users collectively responsible for that remark,
>>>>>> "Snit?"
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft built those?  In Redmond?  I thought they contracted the
>>>>> work for their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling
>>>>> machines?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that
>>>>> stuff. Could be wrong, though.
>>>>>
>>>> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech
>>>> also don't qualify as "hardware companies". One would be hard pressed
>>>> to find many items in their possession from companies that meet your
>>>> criteria.
>>>
>>>      Well, that quite often is the point of many of our counter
>>>      arguments
>>> regarding "Apple Quality". Apples and HP's are coming off of the same
>>> assembly lines in China with the same spare parts sourced from some
>>> other Chinese factory.
>>>
>> Which are bogus counter arguments.  Not all Chinese mfgs are equal, nor
>> are the items the mfg for the various companies.
> 
> How did you become qualified to assess Chinese manufacturers?  Why don't
> you detail just which Chinese companies build Apple's products and tell
> in precise detail what makes them better than the companies that build
> Dell's or HP's products?
> 
> I already know you can't meet the challenge I laid out above. Everything
> you write comes from your ass.
>
Lots of reviews and tear downs of various levels of computers/tablets/
phones are very good places to find out that information.

But in spite of you trying to play stupid, because you already knew that, 
isn't very original.  But then again, you haven't shown yourself to very 
bright about any subject so far.
 
> 
>>>      One wonders how long that can go on before the Chinese companies
>>>      manage
>>> to cut out the middle men.
>>
>> An idiot with no business sense might wonder, but the Chinese mfgs have
>> honed their mfgs skills to a fine point.  They can ramp up a new line
>> ready to go quicker than anybody for a price no one else can match.
> 
> You don't seem to comprehend what you responded to.
> 
>> Why would they want to jump into the low profit sales part with all its
>> support and other costs?
> 
> Jump into it?  They're already there!  Apple gets the big margins, not
> their Chinese lackeys.  But one day those lackeys will wake up...

Nope, the mfgs have found out how to make great money without having to 
put up with end users at all.  Make it, ship it with whatever label is 
needed on it, and the company that ordered the manufacturing gets to put 
up with all of that.

Damned smart move on their part imo.





-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6601

On 2015-08-25 9:42 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 8/24/2015 9:21 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On 8/24/2015 7:02 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>> On 2015-08-24 7:05 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is
>>>>>> building a
>>>>>> Death Star.
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>>>>
>>>> You're right, the Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Surface RT, Surface Pro,
>>>> Surface RT 2, Surface Pro 2, Surface Pro 3, Surface 3, Mouse, Keyboard,
>>>> Zune and Kinect don't exist.
>>>>
>>>> Are you Linux losers ever right about _anything_ ?
>>>
>>> Why are Linux users collectively responsible for that remark, "Snit?"
>>
>> Microsoft built those?  In Redmond?  I thought they contracted the
>> work for
>> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>
>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
>> Could be wrong, though.
>>
> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech also
> don't qualify as "hardware companies". One would be hard pressed to find
> many items in their possession from companies that meet your criteria.

Chris Ahlstrom's imaginary dick just shrank.


-- 
A.M
Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7039

Neil wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 8/24/2015 9:21 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Nobody wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On 8/24/2015 7:02 PM, A.M wrote:
>>>> On 2015-08-24 7:05 PM, deep wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>>>>>> Death Star.
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>>>>
>>>> You're right, the Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Surface RT, Surface Pro,
>>>> Surface RT 2, Surface Pro 2, Surface Pro 3, Surface 3, Mouse, Keyboard,
>>>> Zune and Kinect don't exist.
>>>>
>>>> Are you Linux losers ever right about _anything_ ?
>>>
>>> Why are Linux users collectively responsible for that remark, "Snit?"
>>
>> Microsoft built those?  In Redmond?  I thought they contracted the work for
>> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>
>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
>> Could be wrong, though.
>>
> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech also 
> don't qualify as "hardware companies".

That may well be true, these days.

> One would be hard pressed to find 
> many items in their possession from companies that meet your criteria.

Whatever.  Que sera sera.

-- 
The power to destroy a planet is insignificant when compared to the power of
the Force.
		-- Darth Vader

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7062

On 8/30/15, 4:18 PM, in article ms02us$94m$1@dont-email.me, "Chris Ahlstrom"
<OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

>> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech also
>> don't qualify as "hardware companies".
> 
> That may well be true, these days.

Apple has its own hardware facilities and makes its own Mac Pros... I think.
Could be wrong.

-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7065

On 2015-08-31, Snit, published this proof of the Infinite Monkey Theorem:
> On 8/30/15, 4:18 PM, in article ms02us$94m$1@dont-email.me, "Chris Ahlstrom"
><OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>>> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech also
>>> don't qualify as "hardware companies".
>> 
>> That may well be true, these days.
>
> Apple has its own hardware facilities and makes its own Mac Pros... I think.
> Could be wrong.
>

The facilities have nets below the windows.
To catch the jumpers wallets.

-- 
♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7077

On 8/30/2015 7:39 PM, Snit wrote:
> On 8/30/15, 4:18 PM, in article ms02us$94m$1@dont-email.me, "Chris Ahlstrom"
> <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>>> So, by those standards, Apple, HP, and most others in computer tech also
>>> don't qualify as "hardware companies".
>>
>> That may well be true, these days.
>
> Apple has its own hardware facilities and makes its own Mac Pros... I think.
> Could be wrong.

http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/video/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6551

On 2015-08-24 21:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Microsoft built [list of MS hardware]?  In Redmond?  I thought they contracted the work for
> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>
> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
> Could be wrong, though.

Which electronics vendors are also builders?

You have 30 seconds....

hah!

-- 
Best,
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.ca

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6567

On 8/25/2015 10:48 AM, Wolf K wrote:
> On 2015-08-24 21:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Microsoft built [list of MS hardware]?  In Redmond?  I thought they
>> contracted the work for
>> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>
>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
>> Could be wrong, though.
>
> Which electronics vendors are also builders?
>
> You have 30 seconds....
>
> hah!
>
Why limit it to electronics vendors? I was shopping for toilet seats the 
other day, only to find that several of the brands available were made 
by the same manufacturer. Same for almost any product these days.  ;-)

-- 
Best regards,

Neil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6573

In article <mri5ve$g44$1@dont-email.me>, neil@myplaceofwork.com says...
> 
> On 8/25/2015 10:48 AM, Wolf K wrote:
> > On 2015-08-24 21:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >> Microsoft built [list of MS hardware]?  In Redmond?  I thought they
> >> contracted the work for
> >> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
> >>
> >> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
> >> Could be wrong, though.
> >
> > Which electronics vendors are also builders?
> >
> > You have 30 seconds....
> >
> > hah!
> >
> Why limit it to electronics vendors? I was shopping for toilet seats the 
> other day, only to find that several of the brands available were made 
> by the same manufacturer. Same for almost any product these days.  ;-)

I think there's basically only four appliance manufactuers for fridges, 
stoves, washing machines etc.

And I believe there's even less manufacturers of CDs and DVDs yet one 
sees hundreds of different names on the packaging.

And how many items you see are the same except for the label. Clear both 
companies bought to resell the same hardware often with a noticable 
difference in price!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6655

On 2015-08-25 12:45, Neil wrote:
> On 8/25/2015 10:48 AM, Wolf K wrote:
>> On 2015-08-24 21:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Microsoft built [list of MS hardware]?  In Redmond?  I thought they
>>> contracted the work for
>>> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>>
>>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that
>>> stuff.
>>> Could be wrong, though.
>>
>> Which electronics vendors are also builders?
>>
>> You have 30 seconds....
>>
>> hah!
>>
> Why limit it to electronics vendors? I was shopping for toilet seats the
> other day, only to find that several of the brands available were made
> by the same manufacturer. Same for almost any product these days.  ;-)

Goes back to department store catalogue days and their house-brands. 
Admiral or Whirlpool, I forget which, made the appliances for several 
different dept. store chains. I suspect the practice is even older. 
Business histories tend to be adulations of the saintly founders, and 
leave out the interesting stuff.

Have a good one,

-- 
Best,
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.ca

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6604

On 2015-08-25 10:48 AM, Wolf K wrote:
> On 2015-08-24 21:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Microsoft built [list of MS hardware]?  In Redmond?  I thought they
>> contracted the work for
>> their hardware out.  They have chip fabs?  Milling machines?
>>
>> I'm fairly certain Microsoft mostly just stamps their logo on that stuff.
>> Could be wrong, though.
> 
> Which electronics vendors are also builders?
> 
> You have 30 seconds....
> 
> hah!

Chris Ahlstrom was schooled yet again. I wonder why anyone bothers to
read the weenie's posts.


-- 
A.M
Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6509

On 25/08/15 01:02, A.M wrote:

>
> Are you Linux losers ever right about _anything_ ?
>

I though they are always wrong in getting right all the time.  Don't you 
agree?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6503

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:05:10 -0600, deep wrote:

>On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>
>>For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>>Death Star.
>
>Microsoft isn't a hardware company.

 Mice. Keyboards. Phones.
 I would slightly differ in that assessment. :)
                                                  M. 

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6507

On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 01:09:11 +0100, Mandy Liefbowitz
<mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:05:10 -0600, deep wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
> >
> >>For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
> >>Death Star.
> >
> >Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
> 
>  Mice. Keyboards. Phones.
>  I would slightly differ in that assessment. :)


You're right of course. But I interpreted his message as "Microsoft
isn't *primarily* a hardware company," and I assume that's what he
meant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6548

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:37:31 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake@kb.invalid> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 01:09:11 +0100, Mandy Liefbowitz
><mandyliefbowitz@the.port.side> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:05:10 -0600, deep wrote:
>> 
>> >On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>> >
>> >>For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>> >>Death Star.
>> >
>> >Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>> 
>>  Mice. Keyboards. Phones.
>>  I would slightly differ in that assessment. :)
>
>
>You're right of course. But I interpreted his message as "Microsoft
>isn't *primarily* a hardware company," and I assume that's what he
>meant.

 Oh. Sorry. If so, then he is, of course, entirely correct. :) 
                                                             M. 

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6511

deep wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>
>>For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>>Death Star.
>
> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.

It's just Slimer, yet again shilling for his beloved Microsoft in a most
embarrasing manner.

-- 
She's the kind of girl who climbed the ladder of success wrong by wrong.
		-- Mae West

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6516

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 21:19:07 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> deep wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>
>>>For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>>>Death Star.
>>
>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
> 
> It's just Slimer, yet again shilling for his beloved Microsoft in a most
> embarrasing manner.

MS is both a hardware and a software company.



-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6537

On 25 Aug 2015 01:47:41 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> MS is both a hardware and a software company.

They probably think of themselves as a 'systems' company or even a 
'solutions' company.

(Ngs trimmed)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6542

On 2015-08-24 9:47 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 21:19:07 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
>> deep wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:48:23 -0400, "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For the paranoid Linux losers who believe that Microsoft is building a
>>>> Death Star.
>>>
>>> Microsoft isn't a hardware company.
>>
>> It's just Slimer, yet again shilling for his beloved Microsoft in a most
>> embarrasing manner.
> 
> MS is both a hardware and a software company.

Amazing how Chris Ahlstrom, who got turned on by the sight of a USB
dongle on a Microsoft Surface tablet, already forgot that his dick got
erect from Microsoft _hardware_ . These people are simply unable to
prevent exposing themselves as fools on a daily basis.


-- 
A.M
Your pet's opinion on technology is more valid than that of a Linux advocate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-10

csiph-web