[SPAM] [hblug] [Windoze &] The docx problem"

[Brett Wilkins]

Hey guys,

This is hardly what I'd expect to find in a mailing list. Sure, some 
companies are greedy and right bastards in some people's minds, while in 
others they're just doing business. But come one, this is turning into 
bickering, and a flame war.

Stop this now. I read this mailing list expecting to see insightful, 
intelligent conversation, not arguments and flame wars. Debating is 
fine, but this is getting too personal to be a friendly debate. If 
you're going to do this, please keep it between yourselves.

Call me a hypocrite if you must. (I suppose we all remember the little 
tiffy between myself and Cam a couple of months back.) Just don't flood 
the mailing list like this. It doesn't set a good example.

Now, if this conversation is to continue, I'd like to see more evidence 
and references, and less personal attacks and word twists.

Keep it fun, guys.

Cheers,

Brett

Perry Spiller wrote:
> ----------------Earlier, Tony commented--------------------
>>> Can one get a modern windoze OS to work without IE?
>>
>> Yes. 
>
> Perhaps things have changed? I was not aware
> that it was possible to REMOVE IE from a Windoze
> OS. Remove the links to IE, yes; the s/ware, no.
>
> Does anyone else besides you (on this list) know
> how to completely remove all traces of IE from
> a windoze OS?
>
> (From replies viewed since starting this reply, there
> does seem to be some differences of opinion among
> list members.)
>
>
>>>> I don't know why you drag Telecom into it - they are offering their 
>>>> services on a level playing field right now. Opening it up as fast 
>>>> as they can within reason (ie. not allowing full access for 
>>>> everyone to everything at one time, as things would just collapse 
>>>> and degenerate) - they were set targets for opening up exchanges, 
>>>> and have massively exceeded that target, several ISPs publicly 
>>>> saying they are extremely happy with the extra rate at which 
>>>> Telecom is ramping things up for them. They are certainly not 
>>>> locking anybody out of anything at the moment.
>>>
>>> Drag?
>>
>> Yes. Drag. It was a conversation about Microsoft Office. No one had 
>> mentioned Telecom.
>>
>>> It seemed like a valid comparison, to me.
>>> And the history of Telecom and Clear and
>>> traipsing through the Courts? Are you saying
>>> that you're unfamiliar with this?
>>
>> Please do not put words in my mouth, I made zero mention of past 
>> issues between Clear & Telecom, and fail to see why would you 
>> suddenly assume I have no idea about it.
>
> And I made zero mention of Al Quaeda.
> When illustrating certain things, do you
> suggest that all comparisons are void?
>
>
>>> Besides, they're cunning bastards.
>>
>> A personal attack like this speak volumes about you Perry. I won't 
>> add to the cacophony.
>
> Huh? Telecom is a very cunning company
> who's dubious ethics I have proven to my
> own satisfaction.
>
> Recall the efforts of Telecon to manipulate the
> government over unbundling, using decreased
> share prices and other scare-mongering tactics.
>
> A personal example, I was without voice and ADSL
> on two lines for six days, in February 2008. When
> I inquired, I was told that a credit was automatic.
> It wasn't. The next bill proved the company's ethics,
> very clearly. I had to phone to see why their systems
> were set up to favour their revenue streams instead
> of not paying an "automatic" credit for failed service.
>
> Maybe next month?
>
> Failed freedom plan changes.
>
> Arbitrary severance of our Call Minder plan, with
> a less featured substitute, while the same plan is still
> available and in use by others.
>
> Commerce Commission Court action over misleading
> claims regarding the Go Large broadband plan.
>
> I don't keep a full record. It would be too depressing.
> "Cunning bastards" may well be too kind.
>
>
>>> While
>>> keeping the pollies distracted with all sorts
>>> of smoke and mirrors issues, they've been
>>> quietly building the NGN,
>>
>> Quietly building NGN? Haha. They have been VERY vocal about NGN, and 
>> the services they expect to be offering over it, as well as 
>> technologies involved in some of its deployment.
>
> Similar to the other discussions regarding file formats
> types, most people on this list are more savvy than
> many. I could ask any number of people what NGN
> was about - as it related to Telecom - and most, if
> not all, wouldn't know. I suspect the pollies would be
> much the same, in spite of their policy advisors.
>
> I suspect the government's (read: Labour) belated
> unbundling initiative is a too little, too late election
> lolly enticement to the electorate. How many years
> has the TUANZ been calling for it?
>
>
>> Distracting with smoke and mirrors while they build it? Do you think 
>> they should not be allowed to build a modern, high speed 
>> communications framework in this country? I'd like to know what 
>> exactly you would like to see the situation as.
>
> Telecon is in the process of dis-establishing exchanges,
> in favour of NGN cabinets, dotted about the place. Land
> adjacent to the Hastings exchange was sold off, in 2007.
> For modest ISPs, the difference between one 'set' and site
> for ADSL equipment for (say) 10,000 subscribers and
> multiple sets for a few thousand per cabinet, here, there
> and everywhere will make the capital investment unviable.
>
> That may have been a bit of lucky happenstance, perhaps?
>
>>> which will almost
>>> completely outflank all the local loop unbundling
>>> posturing that's going on.
>>
>> The government unbundled the loop. Telecom is complying (exceeding 
>> its compliance obligations even). In addition to this, they are 
>> investing MASSIVE sums of money into infrastructure that will benefit 
>> its customers, and business in general. It almost sounds like you 
>> think that's a bad thing. Please clarify what your above statement means.
>
> See comments above.
>
> What evidence can you adduce in support of your allegation that 
> Telecon is:
> "investing MASSIVE sums of money into infrastructure that will benefit 
> its customers?"
>
>
>>>> So, just because less than 50% of a disputed organisation think MS 
>>>> is anti-competitive, doesn't necessarily make it so.
>>>
>>> Agreed. So what? The EC is quite a nasty
>>> organisation, but at least they're largely free
>>> of unsavoury campaign donations and like
>>> manipulations that go on in USA.
>>
>> Agreed. So what? Al Quaeda is quite a nasty
>> organisation, but at least they're largely free
>> of unsavoury campaign donations and like
>> manipulations that go on in USA.
>
> Please do not put words in my mouth, I made zero mention of past 
> issues between Al Quaeda & its enemies and fail to see why would you 
> suddenly assume I have no idea about it.
>
> Touche?
>
> We'll just have to agree to disagree. You can champion Telecon
> if that's your wish. I decline to join your cheerleader group. Real
> experience of mine indicates that would be imprudent. Telecon NZ
> is one of NZ's most conniving, unethical and avaricious corporates.
>
> I don't mind if you respond, but I'll stop at this point, because
> I do seem to have dragged the thread far away from its
> reason for being.
>
> Perry
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> HBLUG mailing list
> HBLUG at linux.net.nz
> http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hblug
>