Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #74135 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-09-09 00:32 +0200 |
| Last post | 2018-09-09 23:54 +0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 288 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2018-09-09 00:32 +0200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-09 17:19 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-09-09 11:26 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:14 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-06 23:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-09-09 18:17 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-09 11:50 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 15:26 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 13:34 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-10 16:39 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 17:34 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 16:56 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 13:34 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-10 18:39 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 16:35 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-11 06:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 08:41 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:42 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-09-11 16:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:55 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 06:21 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 08:46 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-11 14:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 13:47 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-12 06:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:21 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Mark Lloyd <not@mail.invalid> - 2018-11-06 10:48 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 11:59 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server anon <noreply@mixnym.net> - 2018-09-10 20:39 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-09-10 23:20 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-11 16:30 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-11 14:59 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-11 17:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 00:28 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-11 20:46 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-09-12 18:17 +1200
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-12 19:34 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-13 13:59 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-09-13 16:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-13 22:39 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Elden <usenet@moondog.org> - 2018-09-14 20:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-15 11:54 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-09-15 08:41 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-15 16:04 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 09:07 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-15 15:55 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2018-11-06 09:24 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2018-11-06 15:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 12:29 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 12:34 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 12:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-06 12:55 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 13:35 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 11:17 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 17:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 15:05 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 20:00 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-06 17:29 -0800
OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 09:16 -0500
Re: OT: About OS/2 (Was:Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server) SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 09:58 -0500
Re: OT: About OS/2 Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 19:07 +0000
Re: OT: About OS/2 Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nobody <nobodysaysitalldoesntit@nobo.org> - 2018-11-06 18:14 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 20:01 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2018-11-06 19:06 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-06 14:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2018-11-07 18:58 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 18:04 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Leonard Blaisdell <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-07 17:13 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Dave Yeo <dave.r.yeo@gmail.com> - 2018-11-08 14:58 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 09:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 09:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 10:44 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 11:13 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-07 08:43 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 11:46 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 11:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 12:05 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:36 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 12:41 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:20 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:13 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 07:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:12 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 14:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 13:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 19:00 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:10 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:16 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:18 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:06 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:00 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 12:37 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 16:19 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-09 11:56 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:51 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:25 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:12 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 17:46 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 08:58 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:03 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 22:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:06 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:29 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-10 08:38 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:53 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-07 13:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 07:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 09:15 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 11:57 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 11:09 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 12:14 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 10:10 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 08:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 11:56 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 21:07 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 22:06 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:11 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 22:19 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:32 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 09:54 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-09 11:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 11:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 21:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 12:01 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 21:33 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:13 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:19 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:23 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:29 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:46 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-09 23:27 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 16:50 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 00:19 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:29 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:40 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:17 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-09 17:59 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:20 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:41 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 00:51 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:14 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:17 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:27 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:26 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:22 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 18:56 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 12:09 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 16:08 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 16:38 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 17:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 18:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 11:30 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 18:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 12:54 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 21:03 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 14:52 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 22:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 15:39 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-11 19:26 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 02:43 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 20:45 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 20:43 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-12 09:03 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-12 12:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-12 13:40 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-12 18:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 08:53 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 16:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-12 14:22 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-12 22:00 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 08:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-13 23:49 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-13 19:51 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 13:22 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 09:27 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 16:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 12:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 17:17 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 12:49 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 18:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 13:23 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 18:36 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 19:01 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 14:32 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 19:47 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-15 15:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 21:09 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-15 20:02 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-15 13:49 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-10 09:48 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 11:16 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-10 18:20 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-10 18:57 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-11 09:06 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Spooge <sp00ge@goop.invalid> - 2018-11-11 17:11 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-11 17:26 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 21:27 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-09 15:21 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:05 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2018-11-08 15:35 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:09 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 14:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 14:50 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 14:23 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:02 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 19:04 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 19:39 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 14:50 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2018-11-09 13:19 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 17:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:38 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 20:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:33 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-10 10:02 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-10 13:55 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 19:47 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 20:08 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 21:45 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 22:22 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-09 14:53 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 10:20 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-09 09:29 -0600
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-09 15:13 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 20:56 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-08 20:57 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:05 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-11-08 12:35 -0800
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 16:30 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 18:56 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 21:52 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-08 20:11 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:41 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-11-07 11:47 -0700
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 12:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-07 13:11 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-07 14:31 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2018-11-08 09:11 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-11-07 17:55 -0500
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 16:11 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-09-12 14:10 -0400
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-12 18:35 +0000
Re: No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 23:54 +0800
Page 7 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 15 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 20:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4kcs3Fu0e6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78228 |
On 11/8/18 8:13 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-08 9:52 p.m., nospam wrote: >> In article <HV5FD.234743$X82.231542@fx22.iad>, SilverSlimer >> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >> >>>>> It had DOS as much as it needed to since people, by using Windows 95, >>>>> were migrating from a massive platform onto a new one and still needed >>>>> some sort of assurance that their software would continue to operate. >>>>> Much of it could within Windows 9x, but some couldn't and being >>>>> able to >>>>> load DOS to run it became necessary. >>>> >>>> win 95 was a shell on top of dos, which greatly limited what it could >>>> do. >>> >>> That's how most people saw it as well and I have to admit that I had no >>> reason to think otherwise >> >> because that's what it is. >> >>> but Peter Köhlmann in comp.os.linux.advocacy >>> made a decent case for why it _wasn't_ just a shell. >> >> much of what he says is wrong, especially about macs. > > Well, he _has_ been proven wrong on several occasions but he tends to > get things right along the way. He is wrong more often than he is right. >>>>> However, 9x in general was more >>>>> capable than MacOS at the time and even Apple knew it. >>>> >>>> nonsense. >>> >>> Nope. >> >> not nope. >> >> win95 was catching up to where mac os was a decade earlier, but still >> wasn't quite there. >> >> apple's problem was that they mostly sat on their butt all that time, >> with a lot of internal infighting and canceled projects, plus microsoft >> abused their monopoly position. > > To me, it's fairly debatable as to whether Microsoft already had a > monopoly position by the time Windows 95 was released. If there was a > moment in time at which other companies could still oust Microsoft, it > was 1994/1995 but admittedly, once 95 was released, it was pretty clear > that a monopoly was forming. Nobody could deny that it was an > unprecedented success. Even before that they had the lion's share of the market. > As for Mac sitting on its ass, I agree since that's more or less what I > experienced. The PC was moving forward fairly quickly but it seemed that > Apple, most of the time, just came up with pointless ideas which didn't > benefit the company or users in any way. They seemed to be banking on > the fact that their product wasn't the PC and was therefore interesting > as an alternative. They were struggling to modernize, and had a number of years where they were not innovating as much as I would have liked. Jobs coming back was a HUGE benefit to them. And their customers... and really the industry as a whole. >>>>> That's why they >>>>> started to develop Copland in response to it and eventually felt the >>>>> obligation to attempt to purchase BeOS. It didn't happen and they >>>>> moved >>>>> onto NeXT. >>>> >>>> no, that's not why they started to develop copland. >>>> >>>> copland actually began in the late 1980s, long before there was a >>>> windows 95 or even win 3.x, but by 1995, it was a mismanaged mess, in a >>>> mismanaged company. >>> >>> Regardless of when the development started, there was no doubt that >>> Copland was going to end up being a response to Windows 9x since 9x >>> remedied many of the drawbacks of MacOS. >> >> nope. copland began well before win95 and was very definitely *not* a >> response to win95. > > What I'm saying is that had it released, it would have been _perceived_ > as a response to Windows 95. Maybe... but that is quite different than BEING one. :) ... >> btw, i dug up inside mac, and not only did it give the pinouts for the >> various ports, but it even gave partial schematics, in addition to how >> to write drivers. >> >> <https://i.imgur.com/P369DRz.jpg> >> <https://i.imgur.com/kAACU57.jpg> >> >> anyone who wanted to design hardware or software for the mac could >> easily do so, something which many companies did. >> >> those who claim apple blocked anything were simply looking for an >> excuse to blame someone else. > > It's hard to imagine that the people reminiscing about the old days in > technology have a bone to pick with Apple but it is possible that they > are very biased in reporting what the company was doing. > Do you not see bias now? It was the same then. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 20:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4kbu2FtqpiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78193 |
On 11/8/18 7:03 PM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-08 9:49 a.m., nospam wrote: >> In article <ziXED.643698$cL2.14429@fx43.iad>, SilverSlimer >> <silver@slim.er> wrote: >> >>> >>> It had DOS as much as it needed to since people, by using Windows 95, >>> were migrating from a massive platform onto a new one and still needed >>> some sort of assurance that their software would continue to operate. >>> Much of it could within Windows 9x, but some couldn't and being able to >>> load DOS to run it became necessary. >> >> win 95 was a shell on top of dos, which greatly limited what it could >> do. > > That's how most people saw it as well and I have to admit that I had no > reason to think otherwise but Peter Köhlmann in comp.os.linux.advocacy > made a decent case for why it _wasn't_ just a shell. It was still DOS... with some changes / improvements and a GUI shell. >>> However, 9x in general was more >>> capable than MacOS at the time and even Apple knew it. >> >> nonsense. > > Nope. Largely opinion based, but in most ways Mac OS was ahead in the GUI area, Windows had some benefits in its multitasking and the like (though the difference was not as big as some claimed -- BOTH were too prone to crashing). >>> That's why they >>> started to develop Copland in response to it and eventually felt the >>> obligation to attempt to purchase BeOS. It didn't happen and they moved >>> onto NeXT. >> >> no, that's not why they started to develop copland. >> >> copland actually began in the late 1980s, long before there was a >> windows 95 or even win 3.x, but by 1995, it was a mismanaged mess, in a >> mismanaged company. > > Regardless of when the development started, there was no doubt that > Copland was going to end up being a response to Windows 9x since 9x > remedied many of the drawbacks of MacOS. Mac OS was beginning to struggle under Extensions and other changed tacked on to an older OS. Apple knew they had to move to a newer / better kernel. >>>>> The original Mac line was very much proprietary. >>>> >>>> it was not. >>> >>> You clearly see the Mac's history with rose-coloured glasses and have a >>> skewed definition of proprietary. >> >> more accurately, you have a clear *lack* of knowledge about many things >> apple, believing many of the myths. > > I have no reason to doubt the historians especially since they are not > zealots in any way. By all means show support. I am open to it. ... >>> We're still at an impasse in regards to your definition of proprietary. >>> Proprietary does not prevent anyone from developing for a platform. >>> Windows is proprietary yet people develop for it all the time. However, >>> on the PC side, only the operating system is proprietary if you use >>> Windows and the hardware is very much standardized across the board, >>> unlike the original Mac and much of Apple's hardware going into the late >>> 90s. >> >> apple uses industry standards wherever possible. >> >> the problem is that many of those are not that good, so apple either >> chose something more capable or they designed something better. >> >> the original mac had rs422 serial ports, which were a superset of >> rs232. existing rs232 devices worked perfectly fine without *any* >> issue, however, they could never be as fast as rs422 devices. >> >> the mac ii's slots were nubus, which was designed by texas instruments. >> later, apple switched to pci slots, also not their design. >> >> as mentioned above, macs supported postscript, another industry >> standard. >> >> the list goes on... > > You make a good case and I'd be a fool to challenge you. I surrender to > your wealth of knowledge, good sir. I am impressed. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 22:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <081120182219259140%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78222 |
In article <g4kbu2FtqpiU1@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > Mac OS was beginning to struggle under Extensions and other changed > tacked on to an older OS. that's because extensions patched all sorts of stuff, often not that well, causing problems with other extensions, especially ones that patched the same traps, as well as unrelated apps. > Apple knew they had to move to a newer / > better kernel. yep. and they're thinking about that even now. technology moves fast. nothing lasts forever.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-09 21:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4n560Fi4ucU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78231 |
On 11/8/18 8:19 PM, nospam wrote: > In article <g4kbu2FtqpiU1@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >> Mac OS was beginning to struggle under Extensions and other changed >> tacked on to an older OS. > > that's because extensions patched all sorts of stuff, often not that > well, causing problems with other extensions, especially ones that > patched the same traps, as well as unrelated apps. Yes. I remember playing with the Extensions manager and having different sets for different needs. I do NOT miss that. :) >> Apple knew they had to move to a newer / >> better kernel. > > yep. and they're thinking about that even now. technology moves fast. > nothing lasts forever. I know they are always looking to improve macOS, but are they looking to replace the full kernel? Would be interested in hearing about that. When Mac OS X was first released, Jobs *did* say the plan was to have it work for the next 20 years. We are not too far from that. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-10 08:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <101120180838066001%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78333 |
In article <g4n560Fi4ucU5@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >> Mac OS was beginning to struggle under Extensions and other changed > >> tacked on to an older OS. > > > > that's because extensions patched all sorts of stuff, often not that > > well, causing problems with other extensions, especially ones that > > patched the same traps, as well as unrelated apps. > > Yes. I remember playing with the Extensions manager and having different > sets for different needs. I do NOT miss that. :) some were rather slick while others were pretty bad. some had to run in a particular order because one or more patched things incorrectly. > >> Apple knew they had to move to a newer / > >> better kernel. > > > > yep. and they're thinking about that even now. technology moves fast. > > nothing lasts forever. > > I know they are always looking to improve macOS, but are they looking to > replace the full kernel? Would be interested in hearing about that. nobody outside of specific groups at apple knows what's being considered for future products, let alone actually released, but they're always looking at options. > When Mac OS X was first released, Jobs *did* say the plan was to have it > work for the next 20 years. We are not too far from that. :) yep.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-10 09:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5iCFD.967164$Vl2.772419@fx46.iad> |
| In reply to | #78343 |
On 2018-11-10 8:38 a.m., nospam wrote: > In article <g4n560Fi4ucU5@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: < snip > Useless diatribe, most likely. -- SilverSlimer Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-10 11:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4olemFshfsU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78351 |
On 11/10/18 7:53 AM, SilverSlimer wrote: > On 2018-11-10 8:38 a.m., nospam wrote: >> In article <g4n560Fi4ucU5@mid.individual.net>, Snit >> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>> Mac OS was beginning to struggle under Extensions and other changed >>>>> tacked on to an older OS. >>>> >>>> that's because extensions patched all sorts of stuff, often not that >>>> well, causing problems with other extensions, especially ones that >>>> patched the same traps, as well as unrelated apps. >>> >>> Yes. I remember playing with the Extensions manager and having different >>> sets for different needs. I do NOT miss that. :) >> >> some were rather slick while others were pretty bad. some had to run in >> a particular order because one or more patched things incorrectly. >> >>>>> Apple knew they had to move to a newer / >>>>> better kernel. >>>> >>>> yep. and they're thinking about that even now. technology moves fast. >>>> nothing lasts forever. >>> >>> I know they are always looking to improve macOS, but are they looking to >>> replace the full kernel? Would be interested in hearing about that. >> >> nobody outside of specific groups at apple knows what's being >> considered for future products, let alone actually released, but >> they're always looking at options. >> >>> When Mac OS X was first released, Jobs *did* say the plan was to have it >>> work for the next 20 years. We are not too far from that. :) >> >> yep > > Useless diatribe, most likely. Why did you post when you had nothing to say other than to insult others in an effort to feel better about yourself. Oh. Got it. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-07 14:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <VUGED.487372$oM2.402822@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #78035 |
On 2018-11-07 11:05, nospam wrote: > In article <uKEED.198613$LL1.84557@fx23.iad>, Wolf K > <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, >> >> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of >> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the >> OS. mac OS > > i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create > windows. Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. >>> not amiga os, >>> and even that took a decade for windows to be even somewhat useful, >>> with windows '95. >> >> Windows was DOS with a pre-built menu system plus a few simple to use >> settings (such as customising the menus for different users). It was >> essentially useless until 3.x. > > win 3.x was only slightly better than earlier versions. as i said, > windows '95 was when it was actually usable. > >> To control user access, you had to go >> into DOS. But that was so limited in the early versions of DOS that any >> attempt to limit access could be over-ridden during boot, something our >> students found out almost immediately. From Win95 one, user access was >> better controlled, but still easy to work around. >> >> Windows NT was the first non-DOS version. It was a derivative of OS/2, >> whose first version MS developed for IBM. Up to Windows 2000 IIRC, a >> system folder was labelled OS/2 > > so far, so good. > >> There's more. FWIW, I preferred DOS over Windows, and OS/2 over both. >> I liked Mac OS, but didn't like Apple's unwillingness to permit device >> customisation beyond what they decided was acceptable. A DOS machine, >> and hence Windows, was almost infinitely customisable. > > complete nonsense. > > apple did not stop *anyone* from customizing anything, and in fact, mac > os was designed to be tweaked and modified in all sorts of ways, with > full documentation as to how to do it. > > because of that, a whole category of mac software and hardware existed, > doing things not possible on dos or windows. OK, my error. FTR, DOS was fully documented, too: I spent a lot of time learning DOS (have of course forgotten 90% or more of it) and batch files and such. Plus all the undocumented stuff that fellow geeks discovered. However, Apple very quickly built a walled garden, for good reasons, at the time when MS was strong-arming PC makers into selling Windows machines, giving away API data, and encouraging everybody and his goat to write for Windows. Apple's design philosophy diverged from the then prevailing attitudes. Steve Jobs realised that a computer is an appliance, and set out to design the most reliable and easy to use appliance possible. He also realised that for a lot of people computers were geeky weirdness, so he set out to make it both a useful and very cool appliance, one that you didn't have to understand in order to use. Just like a car. That was his innovation. [1] Technologically, Apple innovated hardly at all. Ever since, Apple's competitors tried to catch up, and have succeeded in doing so. Since Steve's death, Apple's ability to innovate design and function has slowed, so that current smartphones equal or exceed the iPhone's capabilities, and the high end tablet has become a new form factor for the PC. Fromm what I've seen/read of the latest iPad, it's finally catching up to that level. >> As was >> Commodore's OS, but that's another story. > > actually, not as much, but the key problem was it had very little > software available compared to mac, dos and windows. software > developers were not interested. I think it was because Commodore didn't understand that a computer isn't just the hardware. Unlike Apple and the DOS machine makers, they sold a bare machine, with a few pointers to where usable software could be acquired. They also for too long neglected both in-house and supported 3rd party software development. By the time they realised that a personal computer is an appliance, it was too late. That's how I see it, anyhow. [1] My brother has been an Apple user since Apple II. He never cared to know how the machine worked, he just wanted an easy to use way of cataloguing his stamp collection. He 's used Filemaker for years. -- Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.com "Gentics is not genealogy." (Gragham Coop, Ph.D.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-07 13:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4h1hvF75c4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78047 |
On 11/7/18 12:19 PM, Wolf K wrote: > On 2018-11-07 11:05, nospam wrote: >> In article <uKEED.198613$LL1.84557@fx23.iad>, Wolf K >> <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: >> >>>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, >>> >>> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of >>> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the >>> OS. mac OS >> >> i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create >> windows. > > Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some: * Double clicking * Trash can (or the like) * Graying out inactive items * Full file system in GUI (as icons) * GUI based hierarchical folder structure * Drag and drop * meta-data associations with icons * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering) * Checkmarks next to menu items * Keyboard shortcuts * X to close a window (NeXT, really) ... -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <081120180033234111%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78053 |
In article <g4h1hvF75c4U1@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, > >>> > >>> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of > >>> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the > >>> OS. mac OS > >> > >> i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create > >> windows. > > > > Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. > > Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then > made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some: > > * Double clicking > * Trash can (or the like) > * Graying out inactive items > * Full file system in GUI (as icons) > * GUI based hierarchical folder structure > * Drag and drop > * meta-data associations with icons > * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering) > * Checkmarks next to menu items > * Keyboard shortcuts > * X to close a window (NeXT, really) that's a good list, however, there was no 'x' to close a window in macos. that came later with nextstep, which microsoft also copied. one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac os with regions. he tells the story better than i do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 07:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4j0k7Fke45U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78089 |
On 11/7/18 9:33 PM, nospam wrote: > In article <g4h1hvF75c4U1@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, >>>>> >>>>> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of >>>>> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the >>>>> OS. mac OS >>>> >>>> i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create >>>> windows. >>> >>> Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. >> >> Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then >> made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some: >> >> * Double clicking >> * Trash can (or the like) >> * Graying out inactive items >> * Full file system in GUI (as icons) >> * GUI based hierarchical folder structure >> * Drag and drop >> * meta-data associations with icons >> * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering) >> * Checkmarks next to menu items >> * Keyboard shortcuts >> * X to close a window (NeXT, really) > > that's a good list, however, there was no 'x' to close a window in > macos. that came later with nextstep, which microsoft also copied. Sure... and on the list I note that came from NeXT. But the point is many of these things we take for granted on pretty much any desktop GUI are things that Apple introduced. > one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for > overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill > atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, > not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac > os with regions. he tells the story better than i do. I have read it... and I allude to it briefly with the "self-redrawing windows (and double buffering)" item... but I admit that could be more clear. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 10:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <081120181049070998%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78113 |
In article <g4j0k7Fke45U2@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>> Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. > >> > >> Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then > >> made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some: > >> > >> * Double clicking > >> * Trash can (or the like) > >> * Graying out inactive items > >> * Full file system in GUI (as icons) > >> * GUI based hierarchical folder structure > >> * Drag and drop > >> * meta-data associations with icons > >> * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering) > >> * Checkmarks next to menu items > >> * Keyboard shortcuts > >> * X to close a window (NeXT, really) > > > > that's a good list, however, there was no 'x' to close a window in > > macos. that came later with nextstep, which microsoft also copied. > > Sure... and on the list I note that came from NeXT. But the point is > many of these things we take for granted on pretty much any desktop GUI > are things that Apple introduced. yep > > one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for > > overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill > > atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, > > not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac > > os with regions. he tells the story better than i do. > > I have read it... and I allude to it briefly with the "self-redrawing > windows (and double buffering)" item... but I admit that could be more > clear. :) i have heard it firsthand, and what you're calling self-redrawing windows is not the same as arbitrary regions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 09:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4j5o8FljecU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78118 |
On 11/8/18 7:49 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article <g4j0k7Fke45U2@mid.individual.net>, Snit
> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then
>>>> made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some:
>>>>
>>>> * Double clicking
>>>> * Trash can (or the like)
>>>> * Graying out inactive items
>>>> * Full file system in GUI (as icons)
>>>> * GUI based hierarchical folder structure
>>>> * Drag and drop
>>>> * meta-data associations with icons
>>>> * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering)
>>>> * Checkmarks next to menu items
>>>> * Keyboard shortcuts
>>>> * X to close a window (NeXT, really)
>>>
>>> that's a good list, however, there was no 'x' to close a window in
>>> macos. that came later with nextstep, which microsoft also copied.
>>
>> Sure... and on the list I note that came from NeXT. But the point is
>> many of these things we take for granted on pretty much any desktop GUI
>> are things that Apple introduced.
>
> yep
>
>>> one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for
>>> overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill
>>> atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it,
>>> not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac
>>> os with regions. he tells the story better than i do.
>>
>> I have read it... and I allude to it briefly with the "self-redrawing
>> windows (and double buffering)" item... but I admit that could be more
>> clear. :)
>
> i have heard it firsthand, and what you're calling self-redrawing
> windows is not the same as arbitrary regions.
>
Fair enough. I may have things worded poorly, too. Here is where I got
that info:
<http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/05/gui.ars>
-----
One critical advance from the Lisa team came from an Apple
engineer who was not a former PARC employee, but had seen the
demonstration of Smalltalk. He thought he had witnessed the
Alto's ability to redraw portions of obscured windows when a
topmost window was moved: this was called "regions". In fact,
the Alto did not have this ability, but merely redrew the
entire window when the user selected it.
-----
Aqua introduced the idea of a GUI where every window was
double-buffered in memory, so that any redraws happen
off-screen and aren't visible
-----
Actual quotes shown there are on page 4 and 7.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 11:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <081120181157417822%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78122 |
In article <g4j5o8FljecU1@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>> one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for > >>> overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill > >>> atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, > >>> not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac > >>> os with regions. he tells the story better than i do. > >> > >> I have read it... and I allude to it briefly with the "self-redrawing > >> windows (and double buffering)" item... but I admit that could be more > >> clear. :) > > > > i have heard it firsthand, and what you're calling self-redrawing > > windows is not the same as arbitrary regions. > > > Fair enough. I may have things worded poorly, too. Here is where I got > that info: > > <http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/05/gui.ars> > ----- > One critical advance from the Lisa team came from an Apple > engineer who was not a former PARC employee, but had seen the > demonstration of Smalltalk. He thought he had witnessed the > Alto's ability to redraw portions of obscured windows when a > topmost window was moved: this was called "regions". In fact, > the Alto did not have this ability, but merely redrew the > entire window when the user selected it. > ----- > Aqua introduced the idea of a GUI where every window was > double-buffered in memory, so that any redraws happen > off-screen and aren't visible > ----- > > Actual quotes shown there are on page 4 and 7. aqua is os x, long after quickdraw in classic mac os, and very different in all sorts of ways. classic mac os actually didn't have double-buffered windows initially, although some games implemented it on their own and offscreen drawing was added later.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 11:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4jcfgFn4btU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78123 |
On 11/8/18 8:57 AM, nospam wrote: > In article <g4j5o8FljecU1@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>> one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for >>>>> overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill >>>>> atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, >>>>> not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac >>>>> os with regions. he tells the story better than i do. >>>> >>>> I have read it... and I allude to it briefly with the "self-redrawing >>>> windows (and double buffering)" item... but I admit that could be more >>>> clear. :) >>> >>> i have heard it firsthand, and what you're calling self-redrawing >>> windows is not the same as arbitrary regions. >>> >> Fair enough. I may have things worded poorly, too. Here is where I got >> that info: >> >> <http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/05/gui.ars> >> ----- >> One critical advance from the Lisa team came from an Apple >> engineer who was not a former PARC employee, but had seen the >> demonstration of Smalltalk. He thought he had witnessed the >> Alto's ability to redraw portions of obscured windows when a >> topmost window was moved: this was called "regions". In fact, >> the Alto did not have this ability, but merely redrew the >> entire window when the user selected it. >> ----- >> Aqua introduced the idea of a GUI where every window was >> double-buffered in memory, so that any redraws happen >> off-screen and aren't visible >> ----- >> >> Actual quotes shown there are on page 4 and 7. > > aqua is os x, long after quickdraw in classic mac os, and very > different in all sorts of ways. Right... the Aqua comment is about double-buffering to speed the process and leads to less tearing and the like. > classic mac os actually didn't have double-buffered windows initially, > although some games implemented it on their own and offscreen drawing > was added later. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 13:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <081120181323038193%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78127 |
In article <g4jcfgFn4btU2@mid.individual.net>, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >> ----- > >> Aqua introduced the idea of a GUI where every window was > >> double-buffered in memory, so that any redraws happen > >> off-screen and aren't visible > >> ----- > >> > >> Actual quotes shown there are on page 4 and 7. > > > > aqua is os x, long after quickdraw in classic mac os, and very > > different in all sorts of ways. > > Right... the Aqua comment is about double-buffering to speed the process > and leads to less tearing and the like. there's more to it than just that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 12:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g4jg9bFnvehU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #78131 |
On 11/8/18 11:23 AM, nospam wrote: > In article <g4jcfgFn4btU2@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>> ----- >>>> Aqua introduced the idea of a GUI where every window was >>>> double-buffered in memory, so that any redraws happen >>>> off-screen and aren't visible >>>> ----- >>>> >>>> Actual quotes shown there are on page 4 and 7. >>> >>> aqua is os x, long after quickdraw in classic mac os, and very >>> different in all sorts of ways. >> >> Right... the Aqua comment is about double-buffering to speed the process >> and leads to less tearing and the like. > > there's more to it than just that. > Sure... though really my focus was on the first quote. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 10:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ps1u5u$k1c$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #78089 |
On 2018-11-07 8:33 PM, nospam wrote: > In article <g4h1hvF75c4U1@mid.individual.net>, Snit > <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, >>>>> >>>>> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of >>>>> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the >>>>> OS. mac OS >>>> >>>> i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create >>>> windows. >>> >>> Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. >> >> Nope. Apple did copy Xerox some but they PAID to do so. And they then >> made a LOT of modifications to the GUI. Here are just some: >> >> * Double clicking >> * Trash can (or the like) >> * Graying out inactive items >> * Full file system in GUI (as icons) >> * GUI based hierarchical folder structure >> * Drag and drop >> * meta-data associations with icons >> * self-redrawing windows (and double buffering) >> * Checkmarks next to menu items >> * Keyboard shortcuts >> * X to close a window (NeXT, really) > > that's a good list, however, there was no 'x' to close a window in > macos. that came later with nextstep, which microsoft also copied. > > one key difference not listed was arbitrary regions, allowing for > overlapping windows. xerox thought it was too difficult to do. bill > atkinson thought xerox actually had done it, so he went off and did it, > not realizing it hadn't been done. xerox was stunned when they saw mac > os with regions. he tells the story better than i do. > <https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=I_Still_Remember_Regions.txt>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 00:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <081120180033224043%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #78047 |
In article <VUGED.487372$oM2.402822@fx07.iad>, Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, > >> > >> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of > >> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the > >> OS. mac OS > > > > i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create > > windows. > > Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. not quite. apple and xerox had a financial agreement allowing for apple to use xerox's ideas and build upon them. apple added significant ideas from what xerox had. classic mac os was *not* a direct copy, and the difference between them is significant. > >> There's more. FWIW, I preferred DOS over Windows, and OS/2 over both. > >> I liked Mac OS, but didn't like Apple's unwillingness to permit device > >> customisation beyond what they decided was acceptable. A DOS machine, > >> and hence Windows, was almost infinitely customisable. > > > > complete nonsense. > > > > apple did not stop *anyone* from customizing anything, and in fact, mac > > os was designed to be tweaked and modified in all sorts of ways, with > > full documentation as to how to do it. > > > > because of that, a whole category of mac software and hardware existed, > > doing things not possible on dos or windows. > > OK, my error. FTR, DOS was fully documented, too: I spent a lot of time > learning DOS (have of course forgotten 90% or more of it) and batch > files and such. Plus all the undocumented stuff that fellow geeks > discovered. there was dos documentation, but it wasn't available at the local bookstore in a book published by microsoft. many third party authors wrote about it, some better than others. > However, Apple very quickly built a walled garden, for good reasons, at > the time when MS was strong-arming PC makers into selling Windows > machines, giving away API data, and encouraging everybody and his goat > to write for Windows. absolutely wrong. apple never built a walled garden. period. i don't know why, but these myths never seem to die. classic mac os was *extremely* customizable, so much so that the entire os could be patched out. apple not only didn't stop developers from patching the os, but there was extensive documentation how, including safe practices to minimize problems. there was also extensive documentation on hardware cards as well. > Apple's design philosophy diverged from the then > prevailing attitudes. Steve Jobs realised that a computer is an > appliance, and set out to design the most reliable and easy to use > appliance possible. He also realised that for a lot of people computers > were geeky weirdness, so he set out to make it both a useful and very > cool appliance, one that you didn't have to understand in order to use. > Just like a car. that part is true. > That was his innovation. [1] Technologically, Apple > innovated hardly at all. that part is absolutely false. > Ever since, Apple's competitors tried to catch up, and have succeeded in > doing so. it took a decade for microsoft to catch up with windows 95. currently, apple's competitors are again trying to catch up, microsoft in particular. windows phone was a complete failure and surface is trying to copy the ipad and not doing very well at it. > Since Steve's death, Apple's ability to innovate design and > function has slowed, so that current smartphones equal or exceed the > iPhone's capabilities, nonsense. > and the high end tablet has become a new form > factor for the PC. yep, mobile is the future, not just apple. > Fromm what I've seen/read of the latest iPad, it's > finally catching up to that level. then you haven't read much. > >> As was > >> Commodore's OS, but that's another story. > > > > actually, not as much, but the key problem was it had very little > > software available compared to mac, dos and windows. software > > developers were not interested. > > I think it was because Commodore didn't understand that a computer isn't > just the hardware. Unlike Apple and the DOS machine makers, they sold a > bare machine, with a few pointers to where usable software could be > acquired. They also for too long neglected both in-house and supported > 3rd party software development. By the time they realised that a > personal computer is an appliance, it was too late. another problem was there was very little developer support. apple and microsoft had developer programs, conferences, trade shows and quite a bit more. > That's how I see it, anyhow. unfortunately, some of what you see is incorrect. > [1] My brother has been an Apple user since Apple II. He never cared to > know how the machine worked, he just wanted an easy to use way of > cataloguing his stamp collection. He 's used Filemaker for years. there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. one need not be a mechanical engineer to drive a car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-08 08:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <W8XED.391569$oH2.194656@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #78088 |
On 2018-11-07 11:33 p.m., nospam wrote: > In article <VUGED.487372$oM2.402822@fx07.iad>, Wolf K > <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >>>>> microsoft windows was mostly a copy of classic mac os, >>>> >>>> IOW, mac os was really DOS? There's something wrong with your memory of >>>> those far off days. Or else your confusing the user interface with the >>>> OS. mac OS >>> >>> i didn't say macos was dos. i said microsoft copied macos to create >>> windows. >> >> Nah, they both copied Xerox. And it was the GUI they copied, not the OS. > > not quite. apple and xerox had a financial agreement allowing for apple > to use xerox's ideas and build upon them. > > apple added significant ideas from what xerox had. classic mac os was > *not* a direct copy, and the difference between them is significant. I agree here. If anything, the Lisa operating system was closer to what Xerox had and the first Mac OS had already significantly built upon that. < snip > >> That was his innovation. [1] Technologically, Apple >> innovated hardly at all. > > that part is absolutely false. > >> Ever since, Apple's competitors tried to catch up, and have succeeded in >> doing so. > > it took a decade for microsoft to catch up with windows 95. > > currently, apple's competitors are again trying to catch up, microsoft > in particular. windows phone was a complete failure and surface is > trying to copy the ipad and not doing very well at it. I agree that on the tablet scene, Windows is a complete joke. However, Windows Phone was quite good and I miss it terribly every day. Unfortunately, an update to Windows 10 Mobile caused the in-call mic to stop working and since it wasn't clear whether it was a hardware issue or a software issue (I'm banking on the latter even though a number of people said it was a hardware problem), I was forced to move away from the platform. Third-party applications were lacking and therefore caused it to be ignored but on its own, it was pretty damned good. < snip > -- SilverSlimer Minds: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-10
csiph-web