Re: Un-encumbered by the thought process...

[David Rideout <]

Could this be used for Linux advertising, e.g. by responding to (common???) 
misconceptions people have about computers?  e.g. one could point out that 
that $9 billion went toward taking away one's rights to control their own 
computer...  (cf. badvista.fsf.org)

-David

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Mitch Wiedemann wrote:

> I'm not usually one to poke fun at people who are ignorant of "linux", but I
> found this little gem that some dude named " jerryleecooper" left in the
> talkback section of a ZDNet article (a shill piece, not worth reading).  This
> person is demonstrating black-belt levels of stupidity rarely witnessed in the
> wild.
> 
> "Click and Clack" the "Car Guys" have an apropos term for this state of mental
> prowess.  They call it "Un-encumbered by the thought process."
> 
> http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31199&messageID=579806
> 
> Quote  jerryleecooper's post:
> > 
> >      You are kidding arent you ?
> > Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without
> > windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk,
> > without any drivers, and without any services ?
> > 
> > That sounds preposterous to me.
> > 
> > If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling
> > computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so
> > there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise
> > that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that
> > runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very
> > difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.
> > 
> > Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so
> > it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just
> > snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of
> > dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a
> > huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with
> > Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but
> > finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.
> > 
> > Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be
> > extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start
> > to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of
> > windows. Not possible.
> > 
> > I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.
> > 
> http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31199&messageID=579806
> 
> 
> As you might imagine, the post created an explosion of responses, hopefully
> powerful enough to knock "jerryleecooper" of the Intarweb completely.
> 
> Here's my favorite one:
> > 
> > For the Love of God!
> > />I think you need to re-examine your assumptions. /
> > 
> > For the love of God Jerry! For all our sakes - Open the window
> > when you paint the trailer! Are you trolling or seriously this
> > stupid? I think I've actually gotten stupider having read this.
> > 
> > It's a separate OS you twit. Have a little sense of embarassment
> > and go study before you posts. I'm embarassed FOR you.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>