Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #321207 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-16 17:58 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-09-25 08:40 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 262 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-16 17:58 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 05:03 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:36 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 10:42 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 10:58 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:34 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 10:59 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 11:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 11:18 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 11:23 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 11:45 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 12:18 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:28 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:13 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 05:03 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 07:55 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 08:49 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 08:57 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-18 16:06 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 09:19 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 10:02 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 19:10 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 10:27 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 19:49 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 11:31 -0700
Snit has significant issues Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 23:43 +0200
Re: Snit has significant issues Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 15:40 -0700
Re: Snit has significant issues Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-19 00:56 +0200
Re: Snit has significant issues Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 16:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 10:19 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 10:22 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 10:34 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 10:37 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 11:22 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 11:48 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 12:01 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 12:21 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 13:04 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 05:14 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 10:14 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:09 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 12:35 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 10:55 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 11:10 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 12:34 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 10:50 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 11:03 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-22 21:21 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 14:59 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 15:22 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-22 23:38 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 17:00 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 01:50 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 19:02 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 14:43 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-22 22:18 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 03:35 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 20:56 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 05:13 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 22:20 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 05:35 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 22:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 05:54 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 23:04 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 06:51 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 scooz <scooz@myemailisspamfree.net> - 2015-09-23 09:00 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:20 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-23 18:34 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:51 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:19 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 17:30 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 10:44 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 18:06 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:27 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 18:38 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:07 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:16 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 14:43 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 22:13 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 15:29 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-24 00:45 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-23 18:50 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-24 10:54 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-24 12:21 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 09:27 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-24 17:32 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 16:58 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-25 10:11 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 09:26 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-25 12:35 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-25 12:08 -0500
"Nobody" looking for perky balls? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-25 10:37 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 15:03 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-27 05:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 08:44 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-27 09:04 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 11:25 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:57 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-26 22:33 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 05:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:04 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-25 10:07 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 14:55 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:14 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 18:50 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 21:38 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 07:59 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 16:13 -0600
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 14:58 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:13 -0700
More FUD. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-26 17:11 -0600
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-26 20:14 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 20:57 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 21:42 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 20:33 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 19:14 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-30 23:15 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-24 16:33 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-24 19:12 +0100
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-10-25 11:50 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-23 19:28 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 20:56 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-23 22:53 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-23 21:01 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-24 18:15 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 12:20 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-24 23:12 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 16:51 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 00:03 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 17:10 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-10-25 00:20 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-24 17:45 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 05:23 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 08:40 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 10:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-26 13:21 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 11:01 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 07:32 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-23 18:26 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:39 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 10:07 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 10:37 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 10:59 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:28 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 11:38 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 18:45 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:48 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:54 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 11:48 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:55 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 12:02 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:13 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:53 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 12:00 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:13 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:45 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-22 21:15 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 19:23 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 19:30 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-23 04:53 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-23 05:03 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 03:31 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-23 05:46 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-23 04:50 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-23 09:58 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:27 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-23 12:36 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:53 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 10:12 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 10:35 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 11:03 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:28 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 11:39 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:50 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 11:54 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:03 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 12:09 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:16 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 12:23 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 12:30 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 04:54 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 09:20 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 09:32 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 09:39 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 11:46 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:07 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 12:28 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 13:00 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:39 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-25 08:40 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 11:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 12:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:59 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:45 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-25 09:33 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-25 08:43 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 10:02 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-25 10:18 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:53 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-09-23 12:03 -0600
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 11:29 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 10:58 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 11:09 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 11:38 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 12:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 12:59 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 13:17 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 07:31 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-23 09:11 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 11:57 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 13:05 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 05:20 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 10:04 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-21 20:45 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 11:48 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-21 21:03 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 12:17 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-21 22:39 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 13:42 -0700
Not just thing has significant issues... look at ccretin chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-21 14:14 -0500
Re: Not just thing has significant issues... look at ccretin Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 12:35 -0700
Turdv has never been credbile. You're a Troll, Turdv. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-09-21 14:54 -0600
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:01 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 12:16 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 09:57 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-18 19:02 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 10:28 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-21 16:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-22 09:42 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-22 06:29 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-22 20:37 +0200
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 scooz <scooz@myemailisspamfree.net> - 2015-09-18 13:38 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-18 11:15 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:50 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Lloyd Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2015-09-17 14:47 -0500
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:13 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 20:32 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 13:36 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 20:38 +0000
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 14:27 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 scooz <scooz@myemailisspamfree.net> - 2015-09-17 18:54 -0400
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 16:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 11:34 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 11:41 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 11:46 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 12:09 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-17 12:18 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:46 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:40 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:40 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:19 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 12:33 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 12:43 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 12:51 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-24 13:06 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:47 -0700
Re: Not just Linux has significant UI issues... a first look at Windows 10 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-25 08:40 -0700
Page 8 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 14 Next page →
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-26 11:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <782a5db6-6b8c-4e79-9794-3a91fd7c20df@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #328577 |
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 1:21:40 PM UTC-4, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote: > On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 10:12:52 -0700 (PDT), cc wrote: > > > On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 11:40:44 AM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >> On 10/26/15, 5:23 AM, in article > >> a0cfcae3-d0c5-4e5b-b969-aad7f6c80a00@googlegroups.com, "cc" > >> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 8:20:26 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: > >>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>> On 10/24/15, 5:03 PM, in article sea30.ap@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > >>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> On 10/24/15, 4:12 PM, in article famsnf93.ksdf@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > >>>>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>>>>> You realize that changing the size of a malloc()'d buffer is one line > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>> code, right? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Peter said they did nothing. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Was Peter one of the Notepad developers? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> As likely as him having programming anything else. :) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If you don't trust his opinion, why use him as a reference? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hey, I am talking to you, too, and you demonstrated today you are > >>>>>>> functionally illiterate. Maybe he can come into the conversation and you > >>>>>>> two > >>>>>>> can talk about your three different views. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You inability to compose with clarity says more about your literacy that > >>>>>> it does the reader's. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Of course, he also said they recompiled it. Which is not much but IS > >>>>>>>>>>> something. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> That's got to be one of the most idiotic things you've ever said. And > >>>>>>>>>> that's saying a lot... > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Not interested in your games of insults based on your own lack of > >>>>>>>>> understanding. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It's your lack of understanding that "recompiling" does not mean > >>>>>>>> everybody > >>>>>>>> grabs a shovel and gets to work for many hours or days. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> See: you are functionally illiterate. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> See: you are still lost. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Anyway, if you cannot figure out that software is made for uses not sure > >>>>>>> what to do to help you. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Have a good day! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Always. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> The clarity of the quote is fine. You admitted you are functionally > >>>>> illiterate when you said you found it challenging. Then you showed you could > >>>>> not figure out that software is made for uses. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I admit that when quoted material does not attibute the writer of that > >>>> material it can be challenging to determine its source, particularly > >>>> if one is not blessed with psychic powers, which I am not. > >>> > >>> > >>> Snit quoting Peter directly: > >>> > >>> Peter Köhlmann: > >>> ----- > >>> That is the normal case with that imbecile Snit Michael Glasser It > >>> is extremely rare that this dishonest swine will actually quote > >>> verbatim what someone else said, but instead that cretin will make > >>> up what he wishes has been said, in order to be able to troll > >>> ----- > >>> > >>> Snit quoting Peter quoting someone else: > >>> > >>> Peter Köhlmann: > >>> ----- > >>> | For example, if I modified a BSD variant and tried to pass it > >>> | off as "Linux" to people I would be stopped. I know of no > >>> | example of this but I think it is pretty obvious the license > >>> | holders would not allow this. > >>> > >>> What's confusing? Putting Peter's name with a colon above a quote > >>> that's not his? Not properly attributing the quote that isn't Peter's? > >>> The minor addition of the "|", a non-standard usenet quote character? > >>> > >>> Snit: > >>> ----- > >>> | I'm a retarded liar. > >>> ----- > >> > >> You left out > > > > Nothing. > > > > "In short: cc busted himself and I am done with him. At least for > > now he is set to auto-read with Carroll." > > > > How many lies can you tell in a month? You're on record pace. > > > How so? By telling more lies this month than in any previous month prior, that's how.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 07:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bcef40ea-7fcd-4ab7-9baa-2872baeef34e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322130 |
On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: > cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake and > > has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it is not. > > Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but everything the > > VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it is. > > I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. > Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: > https://vid.me/zkiY Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My bad on the size limit though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 18:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtujnd$ekb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #322280 |
cc wrote: > On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >> cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake >> > and has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it >> > is not. Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but >> > everything the VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it >> > is. >> >> I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. >> Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: >> https://vid.me/zkiY > > Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered > to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, > it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My > bad on the size limit though. It is no wonder that the size limit is relativly unknown. Because it has been around 54K for a long time, Notepad comes from the Win3 era, and it is basically just some code around a edit-widget. And that one had a 64k-limit. This limit was only lifted after Notepad was compiled as a 32bits application, because now the edit-widget has no longer the old size constraint. But it is still the old code from the Win3 era
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 09:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D22823C9.5CD55%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322305 |
On 9/23/15, 9:26 AM, in article mtujnd$ekb$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > cc wrote: > >> On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >>> cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake >>>> and has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it >>>> is not. Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but >>>> everything the VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it >>>> is. >>> >>> I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. >>> Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: >>> https://vid.me/zkiY >> >> Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered >> to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, >> it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My >> bad on the size limit though. > > It is no wonder that the size limit is relativly unknown. Because it has > been around 54K for a long time, Notepad comes from the Win3 era, and it is > basically just some code around a edit-widget. And that one had a 64k-limit. > This limit was only lifted after Notepad was compiled as a 32bits > application, because now the edit-widget has no longer the old size > constraint. But it is still the old code from the Win3 era How do you know what they have done with the code? Remember: it is closed source. In any case, the bug in question also applies to WordPad, File Explorer, MS Paint, and *many* third party apps. The "Restore Down" widget not only does not work in Tablet Mode (which is fine) it is not grayed out. Same thing with the menu items. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 10:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e2fa577b-e831-483c-bec1-74900e2a0fcf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322315 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 12:39:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > On 9/23/15, 9:26 AM, in article mtujnd$ekb$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann" > <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > > > cc wrote: > > > >> On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: > >>> cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake > >>>> and has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it > >>>> is not. Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but > >>>> everything the VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it > >>>> is. > >>> > >>> I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. > >>> Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: > >>> https://vid.me/zkiY > >> > >> Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered > >> to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, > >> it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My > >> bad on the size limit though. > > > > It is no wonder that the size limit is relativly unknown. Because it has > > been around 54K for a long time, Notepad comes from the Win3 era, and it is > > basically just some code around a edit-widget. And that one had a 64k-limit. > > This limit was only lifted after Notepad was compiled as a 32bits > > application, because now the edit-widget has no longer the old size > > constraint. But it is still the old code from the Win3 era > > How do you know what they have done with the code? Remember: it is closed > source. > IDA Pro works. That's how I knew it was still MFC. I didn't run through every call to see if the 54k limit was still in place, but what can you do. I trusted a search and was wrong. No biggie. But anyway, a disassembler is how you would know it still has old code. It imports legacy functions, and uses legacy APIS from legacy dlls. You can check some of that with depends.exe, but it's easier to see in a disassembler.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 10:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D228317E.5CD93%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322323 |
On 9/23/15, 10:07 AM, in article e2fa577b-e831-483c-bec1-74900e2a0fcf@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 12:39:29 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> On 9/23/15, 9:26 AM, in article mtujnd$ekb$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann" >> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >> >>> cc wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >>>>> cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake >>>>>> and has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it >>>>>> is not. Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but >>>>>> everything the VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it >>>>>> is. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. >>>>> Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: >>>>> https://vid.me/zkiY >>>> >>>> Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered >>>> to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, >>>> it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My >>>> bad on the size limit though. >>> >>> It is no wonder that the size limit is relativly unknown. Because it has >>> been around 54K for a long time, Notepad comes from the Win3 era, and it is >>> basically just some code around a edit-widget. And that one had a 64k-limit. >>> This limit was only lifted after Notepad was compiled as a 32bits >>> application, because now the edit-widget has no longer the old size >>> constraint. But it is still the old code from the Win3 era >> >> How do you know what they have done with the code? Remember: it is closed >> source. >> > > IDA Pro works. That's how I knew it was still MFC. I didn't run through > every call to see if the 54k limit was still in place, but what can you > do. I trusted a search and was wrong. No biggie. A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. But, sure, you did admit to your error and I commend you for that. That bullet point of your lies and ignorance has been updated to reflect that. * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! > But anyway, a disassembler > is how you would know it still has old code. It imports legacy functions, and > uses legacy APIS from legacy dlls. You can check some of that with > depends.exe, but it's easier to see in a disassembler. The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code. In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do have build numbers that suggest it has been. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 10:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322334 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > > > A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. Nope. Even worse, it's right in the code in the comparison after the GetFileAttributes call. It could have been even quicker. Next time I'll uninstall parallels tools and call it a fix. > The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code. > In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do > have build numbers that suggest it has been. You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2283D5A.5CDD6%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322341 |
On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> >> >> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. > > Nope. And then you blamed Google! LOL! * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! >> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code. >> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do >> have build numbers that suggest it has been. > > You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. > Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal posts from you. Again! -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <950cb721-f039-49e8-a321-787335da40fb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322362 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article > 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" > <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >> > >> > >> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. > > > > Nope. > > And then you blamed Google! LOL! > I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number from. > * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when > this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your > credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed > you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted > to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! > > >> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code. > >> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do > >> have build numbers that suggest it has been. > > > > You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. > > Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. > > Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal > posts from you. Again! > Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed. Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 18:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fds.kjf930@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #322375 |
cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article >> 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" >> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. >> > >> > Nope. >> >> And then you blamed Google! LOL! >> > I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number > from. >> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when >> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your >> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed >> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted >> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! >> >> >> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old code. >> >> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do >> >> have build numbers that suggest it has been. >> > >> > You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. >> > Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. >> >> Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal >> posts from you. Again! >> > Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still > had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code > because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the > same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed. > Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child. He thinks Linux and FreeDOS are the same thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2284209.5CE09%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322378 |
On 9/23/15, 11:45 AM, in article fds.kjf930@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >>> On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article >>> 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" >>> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. >>>> >>>> Nope. >>> >>> And then you blamed Google! LOL! >>> > >> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number >> from. > >>> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when >>> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your >>> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed >>> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted >>> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! >>> >>>>> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old >>>>> code. >>>>> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do >>>>> have build numbers that suggest it has been. >>>> >>>> You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. >>>> Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. >>> >>> Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal >>> posts from you. Again! >>> > >> Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still >> had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code >> because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the >> same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed. > >> Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child. > > He thinks Linux and FreeDOS are the same thing. > See: you lie over and over and over just to try to get my attention. Wow. And right after you let it be known you likely have repressed homosexual feelings. Listen: I am not offended by your apparent attraction, but I am not interested. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 15:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4e75d7e3-31e2-4c7b-8f49-a058e613effc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322381 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 6:48:36 PM UTC, Snit wrote: > On 9/23/15, 11:45 AM, in article fds.kjf930@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >>> On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article > >>> 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" > >>> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. > >>>> > >>>> Nope. > >>> > >>> And then you blamed Google! LOL! > >>> > > > >> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number > >> from. > > > >>> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when > >>> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your > >>> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed > >>> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted > >>> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! > >>> > >>>>> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old > >>>>> code. > >>>>> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do > >>>>> have build numbers that suggest it has been. > >>>> > >>>> You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. > >>>> Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. > >>> > >>> Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal > >>> posts from you. Again! > >>> > > > >> Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still > >> had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code > >> because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the > >> same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed. > > > >> Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child. > > > > He thinks Linux and FreeDOS are the same thing. > > > See: you lie over and over and over just to try to get my attention. Wow. > > And right after you let it be known you likely have repressed homosexual > feelings. > > Listen: I am not offended by your apparent attraction, but I am not > interested. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Whined the narcissistic, pathologically lying jackass of a drama queen who has, for many years, repeatedly put people's names in thread titles when he's in his special 'hissy fit' mode. Here's what everyone knows is a lie from you: "I do not focus on personalities - I focus on the content of your posts" - Snit Here's a more "interesting"quote of yours: "It is not as if Usenet is something that really matter". - Snit If that were true, why have you spent the last dozen or so years posting to it 24/7/365? Even I can't believe how much trolling you've done in the last couple of weeks or so. Don't they let you out to clean your room anymore? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWBHrgAAoJEC03b6bOr/+dKC0QAI6IrVWlXL8GFMydihN1DtGR PuIuWiSvlvk54xsp8nNk5zqAwXgAJVEPXmotdJtlKp4eh0h9aubsbQEVHOnXO+o/ DQYOiO1aieRM8lNUpFRgE8SYT1jvAAMaqdgg2bVyByxI8Lk5dTRnhBi1VrPIk6Uy xqBjj2RcQYBdkFIF3vrGk/zvJ6fdqTP2GWG7ixSOQF6VJhlPXKjSdJmTl3clG8c6 lqLEegPtUxcmTL/iIGXpTyWQ11LYcrhDTzJZ99UEcQFaxa1WOM8oFaDyx9R96Hc6 9jTukUmrOcyfyu268zuRHUDR+2u5EbLt9ZKJicL/n/fTWz+vff7PnjmrhZotoHzJ HW0I4Q9+hq2PSq8Uk07vfF/Y8tBeHXIetE/iYmSTS3wVa8MhQowxaQVN2VDuALnB aoMFqJuJ1DLfMdx+cHGKAGUmlEy5rakNZlZGuxQ87/ghXtfEzLrnHOM58wLxn5t3 9YmrfPMl4TufdxLneKqORKkJB+6z7+enXt0qeoenaJeLcOS3JknmgvvQM24+LmJG XKUC//xBeZmsMOPcJ/3zHv//Aw0B3o2x3k/Yg6PnBPEBx1pvek+mkbAbpE2twBq4 2tBynSdxibp0bjyHcehRCj209YK11NLCqEGsxebrxCHSCbRz6Z9hSHjkRwiaQrts lKZbvgUYWtKPG1ek2H0R =gu5I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fbcfd7d1-849b-4f08-a026-6185d2ab3102@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322375 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:38:39 PM UTC-4, cc wrote: > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > > On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article > > 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" > > <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. > > > > > > Nope. > > > > And then you blamed Google! LOL! > > > > I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number > from. > > > * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when > > this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your > > credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed > > you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted > > to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! > > Also, hilarious of you to try to take credit. owl made the video and I responded that I was wrong. You had nothing to do with it. You didn't even know until owl posted the video!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D22843BF.5CE13%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322382 |
On 9/23/15, 11:48 AM, in article
fbcfd7d1-849b-4f08-a026-6185d2ab3102@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:38:39 PM UTC-4, cc wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>> On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article
>>> 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc"
>>> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info.
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> And then you blamed Google! LOL!
>>>
>>
>> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number
>> from.
In other words, you got the error from "Google" but then do not blame Google
for the error?!?!?
cc:
-----
If you ask google it just tells you 54k.
-----
LOL!
>>> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when
>>> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your
>>> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed
>>> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted
>>> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info!
>>>
>
> Also, hilarious of you to try to take credit. owl made the video and I
> responded that I was wrong.
I note Owl's video. Pease TRY to learn to read.
> You had nothing to do with it. You didn't even know until owl posted the
> video!
I was focused on other errors of yours and did not pay attention to that
one. Sure.
Meanwhile you keep ignoring your many errors and lies and claiming I made
some but you cannot even say what!
* You lied when you said I was the only one having the problem of
needing to click three times on the "Task View" button. You made
that up, and since then it has been proved others have to as well.
* When it was noted that in Tablet / Desktop modes Windows 10 has
issues with buttons not working (and not being grayed out) and with
buttons that look the same doing substantially different things you
made up a story of iOS doing this with Portrait and Landscape modes.
You, of course, never backed this.
* When shown the "Restore Down" button in Noptepad does not work in
Tablet Mode you talked about how MS does not give "a shit" about
Notepad. I assumed you were staying on topic but you later claimed
you were not (but only after I noted how it also failed in other
programs).
* You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when
this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your
credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed
you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted
to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info!
In other words, cc, you are doing what you do so often: pretending to be
knowledgeable about things you are clearly ignorant about.
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 12:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <614440f1-8cf6-4f5c-a9a3-d54565b0bca4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322386 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:55:54 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > On 9/23/15, 11:48 AM, in article > fbcfd7d1-849b-4f08-a026-6185d2ab3102@googlegroups.com, "cc" > <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:38:39 PM UTC-4, cc wrote: > >> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:28:32 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >>> On 9/23/15, 10:59 AM, in article > >>> 6b446897-e68d-4dba-b9cf-b49afc93c24c@googlegroups.com, "cc" > >>> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 1:37:58 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> A search... where you did not even look at MS's own info. > >>>> > >>>> Nope. > >>> > >>> And then you blamed Google! LOL! > >>> > >> > >> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number > >> from. > > In other words, you got the error from "Google" but then do not blame Google > for the error?!?!? > > cc: > ----- > If you ask google it just tells you 54k. > ----- > > LOL! > > >>> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when > >>> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your > >>> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video you admitted > >>> to your error. > >>> > > > > Also, hilarious of you to try to take credit. owl made the video and I > > responded that I was wrong. > > I note Owl's video. Pease TRY to learn to read. > I fixed your statement above then.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 12:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D22847E2.5CE31%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322390 |
On 9/23/15, 12:02 PM, in article 614440f1-8cf6-4f5c-a9a3-d54565b0bca4@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > I fixed your statement above then. * You lied when you said I was the only one having the problem of needing to click three times on the "Task View" button. You made that up, and since then it has been proved others have to as well. * When it was noted that in Tablet / Desktop modes Windows 10 has issues with buttons not working (and not being grayed out) and with buttons that look the same doing substantially different things you made up a story of iOS doing this with Portrait and Landscape modes. You, of course, never backed this. * When shown the "Restore Down" button in Noptepad does not work in Tablet Mode you talked about how MS does not give "a shit" about Notepad. I assumed you were staying on topic but you later claimed you were not (but only after I noted how it also failed in other programs). * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! In other words, cc, you are doing what you do so often: pretending to be knowledgeable about things you are clearly ignorant about. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 11:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D228434A.5CE11%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322375 |
On 9/23/15, 11:38 AM, in article
950cb721-f039-49e8-a321-787335da40fb@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
>> And then you blamed Google! LOL!
>
> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number
> from.
cc:
-----
If you ask google it just tells you 54k.
-----
Why do you tell such lies when they are so easy to point out?
>> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when
>> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your
>> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed
>> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted
>> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info!
And you have no answer for this. But you sure can make lots of accusations
against me!
>>>> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old
>>>> code.
>>>> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do
>>>> have build numbers that suggest it has been.
>>>
>>> You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code.
>>> Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing.
>>
>> Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal
>> posts from you. Again!
>
> Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still
> had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code
> because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the
> same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed.
By all means do show evidence of this. But keep in mind that even if you do
this does not change the fact the past reasoning I responded to was
incorrect.
> Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child.
LOL! You cannot respond as anything OTHER than a child.
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 12:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3062f71d-9809-4d3c-9337-351aad99588c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #322384 |
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:53:59 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > On 9/23/15, 11:38 AM, in article > 950cb721-f039-49e8-a321-787335da40fb@googlegroups.com, "cc" > <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > > ... > >> And then you blamed Google! LOL! > > > > I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number > > from. > > cc: > ----- > If you ask google it just tells you 54k. > ----- > > Why do you tell such lies when they are so easy to point out? There is no blame in that statement, dipshit. > > >> * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when > >> this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your > >> credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed > >> you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted > >> to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! > > And you have no answer for this. But you sure can make lots of accusations > against me! > What's there to answer? I was wrong about the number and owl showed it. There isn't even a question in there. > >>>> The question was not if it still had old code but if it still *is* old > >>>> code. > >>>> In other words if it has not been updated. We have no idea... though we do > >>>> have build numbers that suggest it has been. > >>> > >>> You can compare the disassembly between "versions". It is old code. > >>> Using MFC is old code. The build numbers suggest nothing. > >> > >> Nobody suggested it did not have any old code in it. Nice moving of goal > >> posts from you. Again! > > > > Do you not know what "compare" means? "The question was not if it still > > had old code but if it still *is* old code." It still *is* old code > > because you can compare the disassembly and see that it still *is* the > > same old code as previous versions. Nothing has changed. > > By all means do show evidence of this. Get a disassembler (there are several free ones that can handle code this old). Open up a version of notepad. Open up another version of notepad. Compare the results. They are compiled with debug information and you can get the symbols from microsoft's symbol server, hopefully automatically, but I don't know what disassembler you're using. Use symchk to download them otherwise. > But keep in mind that even if you do > this does not change the fact the past reasoning I responded to was > incorrect. You're a moron. > > Everything has to be explained to you as if you are a child. > > LOL! You cannot respond as anything OTHER than a child. I have to speak your language apparently.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 12:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D22847D1.5CE30%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322388 |
On 9/23/15, 12:00 PM, in article 3062f71d-9809-4d3c-9337-351aad99588c@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:53:59 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> On 9/23/15, 11:38 AM, in article >> 950cb721-f039-49e8-a321-787335da40fb@googlegroups.com, "cc" >> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> ... >>>> And then you blamed Google! LOL! >>> >>> I did not blame Google retard. I explained where I got the number >>> from. >> >> cc: >> ----- >> If you ask google it just tells you 54k. >> ----- >> >> Why do you tell such lies when they are so easy to point out? > > There is no blame in that statement, dipshit. Ah, so when you said your error was because Google told you the wrong thing you did not mean to imply that what Google told you was wrong. LOL! Seriously, you are just going off into la-la land. You have nothing of value to offer. So I shall just keep reminding you of your idiotic claims and your lies: * You lied when you said I was the only one having the problem of needing to click three times on the "Task View" button. You made that up, and since then it has been proved others have to as well. * When it was noted that in Tablet / Desktop modes Windows 10 has issues with buttons not working (and not being grayed out) and with buttons that look the same doing substantially different things you made up a story of iOS doing this with Portrait and Landscape modes. You, of course, never backed this. * When shown the "Restore Down" button in Noptepad does not work in Tablet Mode you talked about how MS does not give "a shit" about Notepad. I assumed you were staying on topic but you later claimed you were not (but only after I noted how it also failed in other programs). * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! In other words, cc, you are doing what you do so often: pretending to be knowledgeable about things you are clearly ignorant about. ... >> By all means do show evidence of this. > > Get a disassembler In other words you want ME to back YOUR claim... a clear admission you have not backed them yourself. Not gonna happen. ... >> But keep in mind that even if you do >> this does not change the fact the past reasoning I responded to was >> incorrect. > > You're a moron. And you have nothing but insults. OK. ... -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 09:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D2282530.5CD59%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #322280 |
On 9/23/15, 7:32 AM, in article bcef40ea-7fcd-4ab7-9baa-2872baeef34e@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:21:16 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >> cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Has notepad been updated? No. It's still using MFC for christ's sake and >>> has a 54k file size limit. Is it available in the app store? No, it is not. >>> Maybe they have BIG plans for notepad down the road, but everything the >>> VP has said is currently not true. Let me know when it is. >> >> I don't know what notepad's limit is, but it's far higher than 54KB. >> Here's notepad opening a 31MB file: >> https://vid.me/zkiY > > Nice catch. It's such a popular app that apparently no one has bothered > to update their info. If you ask google it just tells you 54k. Anyway, > it's still an MFC app, which is just as significant if not more so. My > bad on the size limit though. Ah, we can update your bullet points: * You lied when you said I was the only one having the problem of needing to click three times on the "Task View" button. You made that up, and since then it has been proved others have to as well. * When it was noted that in Tablet / Desktop modes Windows 10 has issues with buttons not working (and not being grayed out) and with buttons that look the same doing substantially different things you made up a story of iOS doing this with Portrait and Landscape modes. You, of course, never backed this. * When shown the "Restore Down" button in Noptepad does not work in Tablet Mode you talked about how MS does not give "a shit" about Notepad. I assumed you were staying on topic but you later claimed you were not (but only after I noted how it also failed in other programs). * You claimed Notepad can only handle files sizes up to 54K, when this has not been true since the version on Windows 98! To your credit, after owl proved otherwise with a video and I pointed you to MS's info on it which showed you were wrong, you admitted to your error, but blamed "Google" for not updating info! In other words, cc, you are doing what you do so often: pretending to be knowledgeable about things you are clearly ignorant about. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web