Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-11 > #15848 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-31 19:08 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-01-07 02:07 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 121 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-11
This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 19:08 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 15:19 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2024-12-31 15:41 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-31 21:09 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 21:40 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 22:14 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 22:16 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 22:46 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-01 07:50 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 08:37 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-01 09:20 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 10:06 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-01 23:31 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 19:26 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 19:14 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-01-01 09:38 -0600
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Gregg Fowler <totsob@yahoo.com> - 2025-01-01 14:45 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 10:20 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 11:42 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 19:28 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 14:34 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 18:17 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 18:30 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 19:23 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 20:10 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 08:32 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-02 19:00 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 15:04 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 15:18 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:10 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 23:46 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 00:15 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 08:58 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 12:11 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-01 23:38 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 18:54 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-01 19:28 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 23:59 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 00:16 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 05:31 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-02 18:21 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 21:55 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 10:18 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 21:25 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 13:06 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-04 09:48 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:28 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-04 21:16 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:44 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 13:29 -0700
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 08:55 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 19:22 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 15:04 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-03 01:58 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 22:12 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-03 08:41 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-03 07:16 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-03 20:24 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-03 15:38 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 22:36 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 11:26 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-01-03 06:13 -0600
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 13:47 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 21:26 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-03 20:24 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-01-04 06:43 -0600
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 10:20 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 13:47 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 13:16 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:26 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 14:35 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 00:15 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-06 14:47 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:20 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:21 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-02 18:50 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 21:57 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 22:41 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 10:37 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 10:28 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-01 20:19 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 15:24 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-01 21:14 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 17:10 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 00:19 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 22:12 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 19:26 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-01 23:53 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 21:54 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 22:42 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 05:29 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-02 18:39 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 21:56 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 10:18 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 21:27 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-01-26 19:07 +1100
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-27 17:14 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-31 20:45 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-01 01:27 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 21:33 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 13:45 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2025-01-02 13:50 +0100
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 09:47 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 10:37 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-03 05:20 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-03 16:48 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:32 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-01-05 01:39 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:43 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:45 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2025-01-08 00:00 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 14:14 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 00:15 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-05 22:29 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 06:29 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2025-01-08 00:09 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:24 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-07 22:44 -0500
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-01-09 09:02 -0700
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-06 14:48 +0000
Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-07 02:07 +0000
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 18:21 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl6ouo.dio.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #15950 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote:
>
> > People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff :-)
>
> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, too--kills
> the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in the posting that
> started this thread.
Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive
further updates". It's a corner case, for a very limited timeframe and
for uncommon scenarios. But realizing that, would require that you
actually *read* - for comprehension - what you're referring to.
I already put this in perspective [1]. Repeating what's mostly FUD,
doesn't make it any less FUD.
Anyway, it's a ('technical') 'news' story. What do you expect? Stories
about all the systems which do *not* have - these or other - problems?
[1] Message-ID: <vl1ok6.7ro.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 21:55 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl720i$3h9eh$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #15977 |
On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote: >> >> > People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff >> > :-) >> >> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, >> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in >> the posting that started this thread. > > Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive > further updates". It's a corner case ... Which only started happening after a particular update.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 10:18 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl8h1g.5bk.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #15993 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > > > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote: > >> > >> > People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff > >> > :-) > >> > >> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, > >> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in > >> the posting that started this thread. > > > > Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive > > further updates". It's a corner case ... > > Which only started happening after a particular update. Duh! But - as I *wrote*, but you ignored and snipped - the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time and only in very uncommon scenarios. But don't let facts get in the way of your unsubstantiated contentless Microsoft/Windows bashing. If this is all the ammunition you have, you don't have much. And FYI, no-one in this Windows group has reported that they have actually experienced this 'problem'. I wonder why *that* is!?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 21:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl9kkj$2vmi$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16023 |
On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> >> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: >> >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote: >>>> >>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff >>>>> :-) >>>> >>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, >>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in >>>> the posting that started this thread. >>> >>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive >>> further updates". It's a corner case ... >> >> Which only started happening after a particular update. > > ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time > and only in very uncommon scenarios. Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ? Hardly worth worrying about, really ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 13:06 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlbf8u.ppk.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #16050 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > > > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> > >> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > >> > >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff > >>>>> :-) > >>>> > >>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, > >>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in > >>>> the posting that started this thread. > >>> > >>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive > >>> further updates". It's a corner case ... > >> > >> Which only started happening after a particular update. > > > > ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time > > and only in very uncommon scenarios. ['Convenient' silent snips duly noted.] > Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ? I would say much, much fewer, thousands, if that many. But you, nor I, nor anyone else, are to know, especially not the uninformed author of your 'alarming' reference. > Hardly worth worrying about, really ... Exactly. Glad you finally see the light!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 09:48 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlbhnn$gdje$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16070 |
On 1/4/25 8:06 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote: > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: >> >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff >>>>>>> :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this, >>>>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in >>>>>> the posting that started this thread. >>>>> >>>>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive >>>>> further updates". It's a corner case ... >>>> >>>> Which only started happening after a particular update. >>> >>> ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time >>> and only in very uncommon scenarios. > > ['Convenient' silent snips duly noted.] > >> Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ? > > I would say much, much fewer, thousands, if that many. > > But you, nor I, nor anyone else, are to know, especially not the > uninformed author of your 'alarming' reference. A classical strategy of alarmist trolling is to toss out a seemingly huge number, but avoid context. Here, the number is one (1) million, but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users. >> Hardly worth worrying about, really ... > > Exactly. Glad you finally see the light! Precisely, for even if its ~1M, as a percentage of the 1.6B user bas, its 1 out of 1600 users = 0.06% - which means ~99.94% were unaffected. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 00:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlcjn1$mcpa$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16074 |
On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote: > Here, the number is one (1) million, > but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users. Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows is so “popular”? So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in greater numbers”.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 21:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlcq2l$ndi8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16085 |
On 1/4/25 7:28 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote: > >> Here, the number is one (1) million, >> but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users. > > Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows is > so “popular”? > > So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in > greater numbers”. Nah, that's not how statistics work: the larger the sample size, the greater the confidence is that a 99.994% reliability assessment is true. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 02:44 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlcrlk$nnbu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16100 |
On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 21:16:52 -0500, -hh wrote: > On 1/4/25 7:28 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >> On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote: >> >>> Here, the number is one (1) million, >>> but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users. >> >> Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows >> is so “popular”? >> >> So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in >> greater numbers”. > > Nah, that's not how statistics work: the larger the sample size, the > greater the confidence is that a 99.994% reliability assessment is true. Except, the less the value of such wonderful-sounding numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 13:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vlc5n0$k642$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16070 |
Frank Slootweg wrote on 1/4/25 6:06 AM: > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ? > > I would say much, much fewer, thousands, if that many. > > But you, nor I, nor anyone else, are to know, especially not the > uninformed author of your 'alarming' reference. > >> Hardly worth worrying about, really ... > > Exactly. Glad you finally see the light! > The 'thousands' in low numbers is the more accurate quantity. Why? An end user using an Oct or Nov 24H2 Media Creation Tool media(USB or CD/DVD) system would have to not be updated with the neither the Oct or Nov LCU(with its included SSU). Timeline is an impacting factor. The initial article(Zdnet, Lance Whitney) was written on Dec. 30th, the MCT for creating USB/CD/DVD media was updated on Dec. 24th. -i.e. the author on the initial referenced article, while possibly well intention-ed, reported the issue ~6 days, after mitigation. The likelihood of 'millions' having downloaded the pre-December MCT and not having updated to 24H2 via Windows Update or the Catalog's LCU/SSU and then used that earlier MCT created USB/CD/DVD media would be a marginal quantity(especially when the majority of all users rely on Windows Updates(and that majority would also include Enterprise admin managed which have long practiced updating via admin tools and to a lesser extent USB/CD/DVD media(preferring available current install.wim(not install.esd) ISO's. i.e. The article is just another of Whitney's often released missives leaving out current and useful information in the context of the article Note: Linux group removed from cross-posting - no relevance -- ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 08:55 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <EVwdP.318140$%aWb.223464@fx18.iad> |
| In reply to | #15945 |
On 2025-01-01 23:59, Paul wrote: > On Wed, 1/1/2025 7:28 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: >> On 2025-01-01 18:38, rbowman wrote: >>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:34:06 -0500, Joel wrote: >>> >>>> Yeah, weird, huh? It's like they can't make it right from the >>>> beginning, they need people to put up with bugs to test it in the wild, >>>> how is their internal testing so poor? Being on the cutting edge with >>>> M$ is just spinning one's wheels. Linux is the refuge. >>> >>> I really hate defending Microsoft but when they do a release how are they >>> supposed to test every possible combination of hardware and software? >> >> No, but they should give people the option to take a wait and see approach rather than force updates on everyone who didn't pay for a Pro license. Some people want every update the moment it's available; others like my wife want to watch the other computer crash and let the corporation fix the issue before she installs them. >> >>> Linux has gotten better but it was problematic on laptops and there were/ >>> are lists of Linux friendly laptops. The Windows world assumes it's going >>> to work. >>> >>> Apple has a much easier task since they know exactly what the software is >>> going to run on. >> >> I have yet to see an Apple update screw anything up but it is definitely easier for them since there aren't as many MacOS configurations to consider. >> > > There is a button in Windows Update, to delay the installation of patches. > > "Pause Updates" Pull-down menu == "Up to 5 weeks (35 days)" > > This should be sufficient, you can resume updates when your desktop is > free and a block of time is available for the update to happen. Is that actually available to Home users too? I know that people using Pro can do so but I'm not so sure with the default version. > The purpose of this, is to control the "arbitrariness" of updating. > It does not stop updating altogether. People here have also achieved > that (no updates) by breaking stuff :-) The "Update Orchestrator" > exists, to try to keep updates flowing, by noticing damage to > the update system. > > Windows used to have a control variable between 0..4, and one of the > values made it so updates only showed up if you clicked the button > to check for updates. That made the control of it, perfectly manual, > and if you wanted to stop updating for three years, you could. The > design intent of the current scheme, is to not do it like that, > and (long term average) always be receiving updates. I used to believe that it was imperative for people to get updates as quickly as possible to prevent hackers from exploiting known issues. However, it seems that there is no winning solution here. Either you apply updates immediately and risk having your system go down because Microsoft didn't test things properly or you risk having the system taken over by bad agents. With Linux, you'll get a quick patch but the likelihood that the system will go down as a a result of it is minimal compared to Windows and the second situation is not likely to happen even if you don't apply it. At some point, people need to consider these two scenarios and ask themselves whether Windows truly is better for them than Linux is. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 19:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <lto7b9Frr0kU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #15967 |
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:55:47 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > Is that actually available to Home users too? I know that people using > Pro can do so but I'm not so sure with the default version. I don't have access to anything with the Home edition but I believe there is a setting where it will not automatically update if you say it's on a metered connection. How many people have Home? Even the cheap Beelink mini came with Pro as did the Acer Swift 3 laptop.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 15:04 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <KjCdP.414705$bYV2.181660@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #15985 |
On 2025-01-02 14:22, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:55:47 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > >> Is that actually available to Home users too? I know that people using >> Pro can do so but I'm not so sure with the default version. > > I don't have access to anything with the Home edition but I believe there > is a setting where it will not automatically update if you say it's on a > metered connection. > > How many people have Home? Even the cheap Beelink mini came with Pro as > did the Acer Swift 3 laptop. It's possible that a lot of models come with Pro. Nevertheless, Home is still shipped on a lot of the computers sold. This laptop came with Home but I upgraded it using my Pro license. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 01:58 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <ltouidF1d8hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #15990 |
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 15:04:58 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > It's possible that a lot of models come with Pro. Nevertheless, Home is > still shipped on a lot of the computers sold. This laptop came with Home > but I upgraded it using my Pro license. I never paid attention buy scrolling down Amazon's laptop selection it looks like $400 is the dividing line although there are flyers on both sides. Some showed 'Windows 11 S' which I didn't know about. I suppose if you were buying a laptop for your grandmother restricting it to only run Microsoft Store apps might be good, knowing Granny won't be able to figure out how to turn S off. Learn something new every day.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 22:12 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <OAIdP.38926$vfee.7142@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #16004 |
On 2025-01-02 20:58, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 15:04:58 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > >> It's possible that a lot of models come with Pro. Nevertheless, Home is >> still shipped on a lot of the computers sold. This laptop came with Home >> but I upgraded it using my Pro license. > > I never paid attention buy scrolling down Amazon's laptop selection it > looks like $400 is the dividing line although there are flyers on both > sides. Some showed 'Windows 11 S' which I didn't know about. I suppose if > you were buying a laptop for your grandmother restricting it to only run > Microsoft Store apps might be good, knowing Granny won't be able to figure > out how to turn S off. Learn something new every day. A laptop that limits a Windows user to applications in the Windows Store is limiting that user to limited amount of very limited software. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 08:41 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <ltpm59F4tt4U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #16005 |
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:12:46 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > A laptop that limits a Windows user to applications in the Windows Store > is limiting that user to limited amount of very limited software. It does have some good stuff like WSL now. I'm pretty sure I got PuTTY from the store too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 07:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl8kf0$3t53g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16005 |
On Thu, 1/2/2025 10:12 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
> On 2025-01-02 20:58, rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 15:04:58 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>
>>> It's possible that a lot of models come with Pro. Nevertheless, Home is
>>> still shipped on a lot of the computers sold. This laptop came with Home
>>> but I upgraded it using my Pro license.
>>
>> I never paid attention buy scrolling down Amazon's laptop selection it
>> looks like $400 is the dividing line although there are flyers on both
>> sides. Some showed 'Windows 11 S' which I didn't know about. I suppose if
>> you were buying a laptop for your grandmother restricting it to only run
>> Microsoft Store apps might be good, knowing Granny won't be able to figure
>> out how to turn S off. Learn something new every day.
>
> A laptop that limits a Windows user to applications in the Windows Store
> is limiting that user to limited amount of very limited software.
There is a short procedure, for taking the laptop out of "S" mode,
so you can move on. The majority of users, that's the first thing
they do. The only annoyance, is setting up an MSA long enough to
complete the removal procedure.
Only IT departments seek to shackle users to the drain pipe.
Q2 2022
Microsoft Store
44,275 gaming apps [copies of Flappy Birds, down from the original 200,000 copies]
10,000 apps hosted
personalization category
192 mobile titles [these statistics seem rather suspect]
And Linux is in the store, as Bash shell distros via WSL/WSLg.
Done out of sequence, you will be told there is a step to do,
before the Store will do the download (set up Bash shell to load distro).
The distro stays in a container (a previous version was a file tree).
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/sxNWHpSS/Good-Times-At-The-Store.gif
My Linux container "ext4.vhdx" is currently 8GB in size.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/0QpQBTgv/Ubuntu-On-W11-Home-Bash.gif
Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 20:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <ltqvbvFbjgeU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #16034 |
On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 07:16:32 -0500, Paul wrote: > My Linux container "ext4.vhdx" is currently 8GB in size. I haven't fired up a WSL instance in a while but iirc the reported size seemed to be much larger than what was being used. It worked so I never dug into it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 15:38 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl9hs8$2hs6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16045 |
On Fri, 1/3/2025 3:24 PM, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 07:16:32 -0500, Paul wrote: > >> My Linux container "ext4.vhdx" is currently 8GB in size. > > I haven't fired up a WSL instance in a while but iirc the reported size > seemed to be much larger than what was being used. It worked so I never > dug into it. > From my notes file, and specific for perhaps, a WSL2 install. optimize-vhd -Path .\ext4.vhdx -Mode full https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/disk-space ******* A number of environments have toolage for this sort of thing. The most impressive one, was some flavor of VMWare, which zeros out unused container bits (in the logical sense rather than the physical sense), then it "compacts" the container as normal. The more crude procedures, the user is responsible for using "zerofree" on unmounted partition, or "sdelete64.exe -z" on a drive letter first, and the compaction tool rebuilds the container, removing all the zero portions of the partition as it goes. # Compacting a VHD used under VirtualBox, when VboxManage # has no support for VHD compaction... # Zero the white space inside the partition(s) inside the WIN10.vhd first. diskpart select vdisk FILE=F:\WIN10.vhd compact vdisk ******* Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 22:36 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS -- If Your Time Is Worth Nothing |
| Message-ID | <vl7lve$3oahj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16004 |
On Thu, 1/2/2025 8:58 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 15:04:58 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> It's possible that a lot of models come with Pro. Nevertheless, Home is
>> still shipped on a lot of the computers sold. This laptop came with Home
>> but I upgraded it using my Pro license.
>
> I never paid attention buy scrolling down Amazon's laptop selection it
> looks like $400 is the dividing line although there are flyers on both
> sides. Some showed 'Windows 11 S' which I didn't know about. I suppose if
> you were buying a laptop for your grandmother restricting it to only run
> Microsoft Store apps might be good, knowing Granny won't be able to figure
> out how to turn S off. Learn something new every day.
>
I use W11 Home as my daily driver *specifically* for the
ability to test a "low SKU". You can see the pause menu here.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/9F4rNwmY/Windows11-Home-Pausing.gif
Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-11
csiph-web