Posted by Michelle Steiner on 05/05/06 10:00

In article <0001HW.C07FABC1003DCF4DF0488530@news.wildblue.net>,
Donald McDaniel <orthocross@invalid.net> wrote:

> Unlike Apple, which will not allow its OS to be distributed as an
> OEM,

More idiocy from you; every Mac sold has an OEM installation of the Mac
OS pre installed.

> >> And do NOT believe the "theory" that only a "Full Retail XP Pro"
> >> will install and run via BootCamp on an Intel Mac. This is just
> >> FUD from ignorant people, or nay-sayers in the Apple camp.
> >
> > Do you know this for a fact, or is just more of you're blowing
> > smoke?
> >
>
> Having installed XP MANY, MANY times using both Retail and OEM copies
> since its Beta days, I know for a FACT that as LONG as the OEM is a
> so-called "FULL OEM", it WILL install on ANY Intel-based machine
> quite easily, as long as there is at least 64MB memory and a CD/DVD
> drive is on the machine and the drive is accessible and available,
> and there is at least 3 GB of free (unallocated) HD space available.

Have you ever installed it on an Intel Macintosh with Boot Camp? If
not, you do not know this for a fact.

> >>> That second sentence is totally unresponsive and irrelevant to my
> >>> question.
> >>
> >> And how was his answer "totally unresponsive and irrelevant"?
> >
> > Because my question had nothing to do with OS wars.
>
> Nor did his response have anything to do with "OS wars".

I guess that you can't read. Here is that sentence again:

> > Yes. I buy computers to run useful applications for me, not to
> > indulge in OS flamewars.

Are you going to quibble over the difference between "OS wars" and "OS
flamewars"?

> Michelle, if you think THAT was "vitriolic" (as you call it), why
> don't you look again at YOUR response to my response to the OP?

Aw, poor baby; can't stand it when someone hits you back. Well, putz,
if you hit someone, don't be surprised if they hit you back. If you
don't want to be hit back, don't hit first. Learn how to take
responsibility for the foreseeable results of your own actions.

> However, I have YET to be intentionally vitriolic in ANY post of
> mine.

In other words; it's natural, and you can't help doing it.

> Let's face it, Michelle: you and the rest of the Mac Fanatics are
> simply anti-Christians,

Let's face it; that is the most moronic thing you've written to date.
To recap; anyone who stands up against Mac bashers--even Mac bashers who
use Macs, like you--is automatically a "Mac fanatic," and all Mac
fanatics are "anti-Christians."

You, dear boy, have totally gone off the deep end. I would recommend
psychological help, but I'm sure that you would rail that psychology is
anti Christian.

> I learned long ago that people are strange. They will love whom them
> will, and they will hate whomever they choose to hate.

As you have so amply demonstrated, at least with your hatred. I haven't
seen any evidence of you loving anyone, though.

> So go right ahead and treat me with hatred, my friend.

I haven't treated you with hatred, and I do not intend to treat you with
hatred. You have certainly demonstrated your hatred of me, though.

> If I can't endure your persecutions, I won't be able to endure anyone
> else's.

You have that backwards, dear heart; I'm the one being persecuted
here--by you.

> And if I can't love you as my sister, I won't be able to love my
> Creator.

I that's what you consider to be love, I dread seeing what you do to
someone whom you hate.

> But I guarantee you, I will continue to speak the truth from my
> heart, as I am commanded to by St. Paul, no matter what.

You can't continue to do something that you haven't been doing already.
I would love to see you speak the truth, but going by your past
behavior, I doubt that you ever will.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.

[Back to original message]