Obama Tax Move Won’t Impact Indian Firms, Murthy to President

Sindh Today ^ | May 8th, 2009

[nickcarraway]

Indian IT firms would not be impacted by the tax reform proposal of US President Barak Obama, Infosys Technologies chairman and chief mentor N.R. Narayana Murthy told President Pratibha Devisinh Patil Friday.

“Obama’s tax proposal will not impact Indian firms as they already pay taxes in the US. It is only American firms operating in India who would have to repatriate taxes on profit earned outside the US when it becomes a law,” Murthy told Patil at an interactive session at the Infosys campus.

The president, who is on a three-day visit to Karnataka since Thursday, paid a visit to the sprawling Infosys campus housing its corporate headquarters on the outskirts of this tech hub.

When the company’s top management made a power-point presentation on its global operations during the interactive session, Patil also asked Murthy how the Indian IT industry could cope with the pressures of global recession and lower technology spending.

Murthy replied that the industry could sustain the growth momentum by expanding into the domestic market and driving the growth rate with innovation and product development.

“Indian firms will have to safeguard their IPRs (intellectual property rights) to move up the next level of value chain and compete with their peers in a global market,” Murthy argued.

The president also sought information on the IT bellwether’s contribution to society as part of its corporate social responsibility.

“The president was keen to know about our guiding spirit and principles that drive Infosys’ growth in the global market,” Murthy told reporters later.

President Patil planted a sapling in the Infosys campus and went on a buggy ride to see for herself the company’s state-of-the art facilities.

[AmericanSphinx71]

[HiTech RedNeck]

Obama is the uncoolest cat this side of prison bars.

[Tuketu]

LEMME SEE! If I incorporate in INDIA or any TAX HAVEN, and dissolve the American Corporation, I am EXEMPT FROM US TAX? I think I get it.

[grey_whiskers]

President Patil planted a sapling in the Infosys campus and went on a buggy ride to see for herself the company’s state-of-the art facilities.

Sums it up, right there.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, that's right. Given the quality of Indian software, BUGGY ride is indeed accurate in that fashion as well.

A 'twofer. /Brian Valentine>

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

LOL, you can see the writing on the wall.

[An_Indian]

poor Indian president went on golf-cart type buggy ride INSIDE a corporate campus as opposed to an wealthy US president who would have made the same tour in a gas-guzzling SUV (the gas which funds taliban and al-queda who in turn kill American soldiers)! Classic! How shameful for India! :rollsEyes:

[grey_whiskers]

You must not be familiar with the free-traitor rhetoric of US executives that the jobs given to H1-B holders from India, or offshored outright, are "buggy-whip" jobs. Even though usually US citizens have been required to *train in* their replacements, while the executive crows loudly that the Americans are "unqualified" to do the work.

Not to mention the abysmal reputation of Indian-written software...

Merely outsized greed on the executives' part, and (likely enough) mercantilism on the part of India, as well as blackmail (move jobs *here* or we won't open our young population to your company's products); all the while merely cherry-picking the intellectual property of the Western company before emerging as a lower-cost-base competitor.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

As for the ‘abyssmal’ part, I’ve got a friend who used to handle electronic circuit validation for this company called Solectron.

He too has an opinion or two about the shoddy work that used to come to his office from the US, which his team corrected and sent back.

Just ask yourself, if Indian software is so bad, then how come they’re making billions?

Something doesn’t follow...

[grey_whiskers]

Just ask yourself, if Indian software is so bad, then how come they’re making billions?

Bill Gates ruined the business world by conditioning them to accept crap as the norm.

And as I have written earlier, the lifecycle costs of bad software are dispersed among many other line items where they do not stand out.

As far as, "why they are making billions" you might enjoy reading this (check out the last paragraph of it) and this...

Most customers tend to choose on price first, until the quality positively sucks (see also Dell's customer service).

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Simple economics and logic would dictate that the outsourcing industry would have collapsed on the ‘crap’ that you say it generates, long time ago, were any of your allegations, true. It’s what now, 15 years and booming?

The two posts you linked me to are full of opinionated BS that just doesn’t jive with reality.

So I will ask you specifics. What exactly in Bill Gates’ software is ‘crap’? What is yor standard of reference? How bad are the policymakers in companies like his, that they would sidetrack logic and sound economics to ignore the ‘dispersed lifecycle costs’ as you allege? Something has to fall, if there was any truth in your allegations, and since they haven’t, you are likely, if not certainly, wrong.

I fail to understand why hiring Mckinsey’s talent to generate jobs, is wrong, either.

Speaking of customer service, I once had a complaint against Verizon’s internet connection. I had an intermittently unstable connection, because of what I guessed was a loose contact on the pole that the wires were coming off of to my residence. Every time the wind made the pole oscillate (the pole was weakened by a recent storm), my connection would reset itself. To get Verizon’s customer service, completely based in the US, to understand the issue at hand, was pure, unadulterated hell, with the main reason being that every time the agent ran a test on my connection remotely, his equipment would show that it was stable. Tired of his incompetance, I simply switched off Verizon’s DSL modem without informing him, and asked him to test my connection.

He kept insisting that the equipment was switched off, while I insisted that it wasn’t, and that was when he decided to send a repairman to the premises, who then promptly fixed the fault upon my advisement. The connection has been stable since.

I’ve had such internet problems in other countries that I’ve lived in too, namely Australia, Singapore and India, and in none of these places did making a complaint for a loose connection involve a 2-hr phone call insulting my intelligence. The problem was conveyed in probably less than 10 minutes. So much for US-based customer service.

[grey_whiskers]

I'll reply tomorrow, it's past my bedtime.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Simple economics and logic would dictate that the outsourcing industry would have collapsed on the ‘crap’ that you say it generates, long time ago, were any of your allegations, true. It’s what now, 15 years and booming?

Life isn't simple. Nice to see I've hit a nerve.

The two posts you linked me to are full of opinionated BS that just doesn’t jive with reality.

Yes, most of the opinionated BS is in the quoted material from the outsourcing proponents, which is why I included that material, and a good debunking of it, in the second article.

So I will ask you specifics.

Oh dear, drawing himself up to his full height...

What exactly in Bill Gates’ software is ‘crap’?

What ISN'T, except Word and Excel?

Blue screen of death, cost, bloatware, unnecessary features, an environment geared towards backdoors and hacking and viruses, the whole "service pack" phenomenon. It takes a lot of nerve to use your customers as beta software testers.

What is yor standard of reference?

Anything else.

How bad are the policymakers in companies like his, that they would sidetrack logic and sound economics to ignore the ‘dispersed lifecycle costs’ as you allege?

Non-sequitur and red herring. Microsoft isn't the only company using H1-B and offshore resources in preference to US workers.

Something has to fall, if there was any truth in your allegations, and since they haven’t, you are likely, if not certainly, wrong.

Tell me again how well Sun microsystems is doing.

I fail to understand why hiring Mckinsey’s talent to generate jobs, is wrong, either.

Re-read the articles. McKinsey was explicitly hired to *take* jobs from other places, and how they did it was largely described in the 2nd article, trading on the networking among, and (at the time) golden reputation of GE alumni. It's understandable, given India's status as a Third World country, with more of its citizens than the entire population of the US existing on a dollar a day or less, that they'd be desparate for sources of cash.

Tired of his incompetance, I simply switched off Verizon’s DSL modem without informing him, and asked him to test my connection. He kept insisting that the equipment was switched off, while I insisted that it wasn’t, and that was when he decided to send a repairman to the premises, who then promptly fixed the fault upon my advisement.

So you (by your own admission) lied through your teeth to the repairman, who saw and correctly pointed out that the modem was switched off.

But you call *him* incompetent?

I’ve had such internet problems in other countries that I’ve lived in too, namely Australia, Singapore and India, and in none of these places did making a complaint for a loose connection involve a 2-hr phone call insulting my intelligence. The problem was conveyed in probably less than 10 minutes. So much for US-based customer service.

If you are telling the truth about it. By your own admission, you lied to the phone agent to get your way. What assurance I have you are telling the truth about this? But if you *are*, notice that you had no problems comprehending his speech; and that he properly escalated the situation.

However, none of this addresses the issues of shoddy workmanship, and a dishonest emphasis on short-term profits at the expense of the customer, using cheap Third World labour as the current mechanism, which was the point of the articles I sent you.

Nice try, though.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Your previous post validates exactly what I've always thought about your posts- verbal m@sturbation, and nothing else.

It's plainly evident from the above picture that Microsoft knows exactly what they are doing, opinionated loudmouths notwithstanding.

[grey_whiskers]

I think that's funny.

If you had actually read the thread my post #11 was pointing out that offshoring only succeeded as a *consequence* of Microsoft's shoddy product: once companies were used to a horrible user experience, there was no need for experienced coders or pre-release quality control, since Bill Gates' firm had already lowered the bar for any other entrants.

This was not in itself a comment in any way on Microsoft's current practices on offshoring. Incidentally, Microsoft was not a huge offshoring firm in the early days (which is when most of their growth was). Try Googling pictures of Microsoft's staff when it was just 15 people or so, and Gates a wide-eyed child.

In response, you post a chart of Microsoft's stock price (which has fallen by roughly 50% in the last year, and has been -- to be charitable -- treading water for the last 8 years or so). Which only argues against your *own* claims.

I suggest you go back to lurking, as your efforts to prove your assertions on this thread have been a dismal failure; how much more so your ad hominem attacks.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

In response, you post a chart of Microsoft's stock price (which has fallen by roughly 50% in the last year, and has been -- to be charitable -- treading water for the last 8 years or so). Which only argues against your *own* claims.

Look at the chart again, and keep in mind prevailing economic conditions. That chart doesn't seem to indicate any major problems with MSFT.

Opinionated BS is exactly what you've been spouting all along, and this isn't the first instance, either. You had made an equally ignorant remark a couple of moons ago, in an article you wrote about India's manufacturing capabilities, too.

[grey_whiskers]

Nice try.

The chart indicates Microsoft has reached the top of their maturity curve; companies at that point usually go for ill-advised acquisitions, or try to cut costs to fool shareholders that their profits are still growing organically.

Which is why they are also cutting 5,000 positions, I guess.

It's fun to watch your continued harping -- and incorrectly, at that -- on a chart of your own, which refutes your earlier central contention.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

This thread.

In which I graciously accepted your correction, and you replied (quote): Heh heh heh.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Whatever. The ignorance repeated itself on this thread.

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

The peak in the 1999-2000 period was due to the Y2K rush.

MSFT has been outsourcing for almost a decade before that- all through that ramp on the graph.

As for job cuts, you have to consider the economic conditions under which the same is being done, too.

Besides, where were the majority of the job cuts from? India?

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

You are trying too hard to make it appear like MSFT stock is doing badly in the market. Face it, it’s not. Especially when you compare it with its peers.

[grey_whiskers]

The peak in the 1999-2000 period was due to the Y2K rush.

Yup. So it wasn't organic growth, as you originally implied.

It's gonna be fun to see whether you run out of toes or bullets first.

MSFT has been outsourcing for almost a decade before that- all through that ramp on the graph.

You know, if you stopped and thought about it, you'd realize that you've contradicted yourself *again*. From your admission that the 1999-2000 peak is due to externalities, you have admitted that there need be no correlation between a company's stock price and the actual success of the company, nor of its internal state.

And then you turn around and attempt to claim (without substantiation either) that Microsoft's stock price is a function of its outsourcing.

FAIL.

Here's a hint. What major competitors did Microsoft have in the PC operating system world? Can you say "Clinton-era anti-trust suit based on position as a monopoly?"

The mere fact that the govt. pursued the suit is an indication it wouldn't get laughed out of court.

And companies with near monopolistic positioning don't have to be careful about internal processes, nor about pricing.

(See also the famous Lily Tomlin skit from Saturday Night Live where she reprises her role as a switchboard operator.)

...and speaking of obsolete technologies...

why didn't the Indian executive who took the buggy cart to tour the plant, ride in a bodacious Tata instead?

As for job cuts, you have to consider the economic conditions under which the same is being done, too.

If companies are truly successful, they continue to do well even in downturns, without having to resort to layorffs.

Besides, where were the majority of the job cuts from? India?

(Microsoft didn't say...but Mittal Steel is laying off 1000 people in the United States. Must be because of the world-beating management again. It's funny how "globalism" is always interpreted to mean "jobs, money and intellectual property go from the US to the Third World".)

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

You are trying too hard to make it appear like MSFT stock is doing badly in the market. Face it, it’s not. Especially when you compare it with its peers.

I'm not even trying for that in the first place. I'm just pointing out that the days of extreme growth are OVER. Like Wal-Mart and GE.

...I get it: you're one of those trolls getting paid 50 cents per post.

Didn't know they needed those in Australia.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

 

Yup. So it wasn't organic growth, as you originally implied.

There you go, making ASSumptions and dancing over them. I never claimed the spurt wasn't organic. Also, LOL, are you selectively blind to that huge ramp just before the Y2K anomaly?


The Y2K anomaly boosted the price of MSFT stock exactly because their services were more in demand, during the period. It's not an anomaly without reason, mind you. Of course, as from your other asinine posts, it should be evident to the casual observer of the requirement to take your BS down with heaps of salt.

 

 

It's gonna be fun to see whether you run out of toes or bullets first.

Oh, I don't know. After all, I see you don't have legs to stand on, having blown them off a long, long time ago, with your BS here.

 

From your admission that the 1999-2000 peak is due to externalities, you have admitted that there need be no correlation between a company's stock price and the actual success of the company, nor of its internal state.

 

ASSumptions. Next!

 

Here's a hint. What major competitors did Microsoft have in the PC operating system world? Can you say "Clinton-era anti-trust suit based on position as a monopoly?"

The mere fact that the govt. pursued the suit is an indication it wouldn't get laughed out of court.

And companies with near monopolistic positioning don't have to be careful about internal processes, nor about pricing.

(See also the famous Lily Tomlin skit from Saturday Night Live where she reprises her role as a switchboard operator.)

 

Wake me up when MSFT goes the way of Enron.

 

...and speaking of obsolete technologies...

why didn't the Indian executive who took the buggy cart to tour the plant, ride in a bodacious Tata instead?

Hmm, could it be that the car is not yet readily available yet? BWAHAHAHA! And the golf-cart, IIRC was electric.

 

 

If companies are truly successful, they continue to do well even in downturns, without having to resort to layorffs.

You are wrong. Companies needn't keep everyone they've hired, for eternity, to show that they are doing well. Hiring is correlative to market demand, and the economic climate. If a huge chunk of the economy isn't doing well, then MSFT which relies on that portion of the economy for its growth, wouldn't do well, either. Simple, clear, free market parameters here. Of course you wouldn't know squat, because you are a Commie shill who has apparently mastered their art of exaggerating the disadvantages while downplaying the successes of private enterprise.

 

Microsoft didn't say...but Mittal Steel is laying off 1000 people in the United States. Must be because of the world-beating management again. It's funny how "globalism" is always interpreted to mean "jobs, money and intellectual property go from the US to the Third World".

Companies are responsible to their share-holders. If you know better than them, perhaps you should start your own, follow your own policies to the dot, and then show the rest of us how to do so, and succeed.

 

 

 

I'm not even trying for that in the first place. I'm just pointing out that the days of extreme growth are OVER. Like Wal-Mart and GE.

You've been pooh-poohing these companies, ad nauseam, for ages, now. I'd expect this from a typical union thug supporter. Wait a minute...

 

 

...I get it: you're one of those trolls getting paid 50 cents per post.

Didn't know they needed those in Australia.

 

Hahaha! You make for a perfect little red card-carrying, anti-free-market union worker, and you're the one to talk? There are plenty of your tribe of losers in Australia too. In fact, it's a rampant problem here. Perhaps you might be interested in whoring your talents to them.

[grey_whiskers]

There you go, making ASSumptions and dancing over them. I never claimed the spurt wasn't organic. Also, LOL, are you selectively blind to that huge ramp just before the Y2K anomaly?

No, I already explained it. The part about the maturity curve.

The Y2K anomaly boosted the price of MSFT stock exactly because their services were more in demand, during the period.

Or it was the "industry halo effect". How much did Microsoft ITSELF *sell*, as a result of Y2K remediation? It was mainly legacy IBM code (COBOL and the like) which was causing worry in corporate suites.

Wake me up when MSFT goes the way of Enron.

Enron collapsed due to fraudulent accounting. Why are you bringing them up at all, let alone comparing them to Microsoft?

Hmm, could it be that the car is not yet readily available yet? BWAHAHAHA! And the golf-cart, IIRC was electric.

Like shooting fish in a barrel. Lead with your chin next time, why don't you? You'd last longer.

From this site:

"Top Emailed Features • Car insurance: What you must know • Why you MUST have loan insurance • How to get a tax refund? Have you tried this? • Ask a question • News on your Desktop Moneywiz • Stocks & MFs Even as Tata Motors [Get Quote] is racing against time to get its new Singur plant near Kolkata ready for commercial roll-out of the Nano by October 2008, the company may need an out-of-the-box solution to overcome some delays in the integrated plant and component park structure proposed for the vehicle."

Hmmm. Announced commercial roll-out by October 2008; announced delays, and problems with components.

Now *there's* a comparison to Microsoft for you.

You are wrong. Companies needn't keep everyone they've hired, for eternity, to show that they are doing well. Hiring is correlative to market demand, and the economic climate.

Or to the greed of the executives. What is Microsoft's net profit per copy of Windows sold? What % of the cost is "labor" due to programmers? Hint: Several years back, before the dividend, Microsoft had enough in cash that they could have parked the money in US Treasuries, and received about a billion a year in CASH. Risk free. And without jeapordizing cash flow from continuing operations. Which would have funded all the US programmers in perpetuity. But instead, they gave the cash to shareholders as a dividend. Which is an overt admission by management that they have literally no idea on how to use the money profitably, and so resort to returning it to the owners.

A company that rich doesn't need to save money by hiring Third Worlders.

Of course you wouldn't know squat, because you are a Commie shill who has apparently mastered their art of exaggerating the disadvantages while downplaying the successes of private enterprise.

That is one of the funniest lines I've *ever* read on FR.

Go ahead and report me to Jim Robinson and the Mods as a Communist infiltrator. Be sure to include this post as evidence.

Companies are responsible to their share-holders. If you know better than them, perhaps you should start your own, follow your own policies to the dot, and then show the rest of us how to do so, and succeed.

Then Mr. Mittal had better get on the ball, as his stock has dropped 50% in the past year.

Remember, you're the one who alleged that a stock price is an indication of a company's health.

You've been pooh-poohing these companies, ad nauseam, for ages, now. I'd expect this from a typical union thug supporter. Wait a minute...

They've deserved it for ages. Wal-Mart for using Red China as a supplier; GE for hyping "ecomagination" and the Jack Welch "offshoring" fad, as well as the era of the imperial CEO (how's Nardelli working out since leaving GE...? And it's great how the Welch protegé at Boeing delivered their new Dreamliner on time, isn't it?); and Microsoft for producing crap and overcharging for it. You won't hear me complaining about the large pay awarded the late Robert Goizeuta of Coca-Cola; nor yet of the money paid to Jim Cramer when he was at Cramer Berkowitz. (Read his book Confessions of a Street Addict, btw. It's got a fascinating discussion of how he was snookered by a smooth talking Indian would-be CEO.)

I'm not pro-union, as your fevered wishful thinking would have it. I am against incompetent CEOs being paid nearly as much as successful ones; and still more against CEOs covering up their own incompetence by shafting their competent workers, by bringing in Third Worlders to cut short-term costs.

Hahaha! You make for a perfect little red card-carrying, anti-free-market union worker, and you're the one to talk? There are plenty of your tribe of losers in Australia too. In fact, it's a rampant problem here. Perhaps you might be interested in whoring your talents to them.

No, I'm none of those. But it is the mark of desperation and ignominy repeatedly to resort to repeated non-sequitur ad hominem attacks.

BTW, what's a red card anyway? Do politicians in Utter Pradesh carry them if they belong to the Communist Party?

Cheers, you increasingly frustrated troll, you.

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

No, I already explained it. The part about the maturity curve.

Explain why the growth spurt in 1999-2000 was not "organic".

 

 

Like shooting fish in a barrel. Lead with your chin next time, why don't you? You'd last longer.

Eh? You were the one asking why the company didn't use Tata cars on campus, as if they were obliged to do so. I gave the probable reason, and you came up with this nonsense above.

 

Now *there's* a comparison to Microsoft for you.

A private company tries to handle situations that were beyond its control, and fixes them. You, a card-carrying, union-supporting Commie, have a problem with that?

* Yawn *

 

 

Or to the greed of the executives. What is Microsoft's net profit per copy of Windows sold? What % of the cost is "labor" due to programmers? Hint: Several years back, before the dividend, Microsoft had enough in cash that they could have parked the money in US Treasuries, and received about a billion a year in CASH. Risk free. And without jeapordizing cash flow from continuing operations. Which would have funded all the US programmers in perpetuity. But instead, they gave the cash to shareholders as a dividend. Which is an overt admission by management that they have literally no idea on how to use the money profitably, and so resort to returning it to the owners.

 

Here's your rallying flag:

 

 

 

A company that rich doesn't need to save money by hiring Third Worlders.

Did you lose your job to one? I wouldn't be surprised, after having witnessed your idiocy this far.

Then Mr. Mittal had better get on the ball, as his stock has dropped 50% in the past year. Remember, you're the one who alleged that a stock price is an indication of a company's health.

I also included prevailing market conditions as a consideration, smart-@ss.

 

I'm not pro-union, as your fevered wishful thinking would have it. I am against incompetent CEOs being paid nearly as much as successful ones; and still more against CEOs covering up their own incompetence by shafting their competent workers, by bringing in Third Worlders to cut short-term costs.

 

You don't get to decide. Sucks for you, though.

 

Go ahead and report me to Jim Robinson and the Mods as a Communist infiltrator. Be sure to include this post as evidence.

LOL, from your repeated, impotent "you're a troll" shrills, I'd have expected you to have done so to me, by now.

 

 

No, I'm none of those.

 

 

BTW, what's a red card anyway? Do politicians in Utter Pradesh carry them if they belong to the Communist Party?

Check your wallet. It's the one with the symbol I've reproduced, above.

 

Cheers, you increasingly frustrated troll, you.

 

Ah, the futile cries of impotence...

 

[grey_whiskers]

Explain why the growth spurt in 1999-2000 was not "organic".

*You* were the one who attributed the stock bump to Y2K issues -- without backing it up. (Unless you're trying to tell me that the stock price spiked on the release and sales of "Windows ME"...)

Eh? You were the one asking why the company didn't use Tata cars on campus, as if they were obliged to do so. I gave the probable reason, and you came up with this nonsense above.

Learn how to read: I was pointing out that Tata motors has had to delay final production/delivery of the cars for nearly a year. And the delay was due in part to schedule slippage. The analogy to Microsoft (e.g. Longhorn/Vista release) is obvious.

A private company tries to handle situations that were beyond its control, and fixes them. You, a card-carrying, union-supporting Commie, have a problem with that?

I'm making fun of their ineptitude. If they were in a real, competitive market, instead of a fiercely nationalistic, impoverished one (which undercuts many competitors on cost structure) they'd be toast.

"greed of the executives...resort to returning it to the shareholders" misquote.

You deliberately misquoted me ("out of context") is the term we use in the States. Much as you admitted lying to the internet supplier. The point is that corporations exist to create a profit for the shareholders above and beyond the rate of return elsewhere. Management is paid for its ability to select products and markets, and implement delivery of those products to the markets, so that the shareholders make more money than elsewhere, and at least more than U.S. Treasuries (the standard benchmark for "risk-free rate of return, at least before students and trolls elected Obama.)

"Seal of the Communist Party" deleted.

Where'd you get that? Utter Pradesh, or an Obama campaign rally?

Did you lose your job to one? I wouldn't be surprised, after having witnessed your idiocy this far.

Even worse, I've had to clean up some of the messes they made. But those who live in squalor (or poor business practice) don't know the difference -- which is why I railed against Bill Gates. Earlier operating systems just weren't as buggy (and still aren't) as Windows. And if Gates hadn't come out with sh*t, companies wouldn't have seen that poor level of quality as the norm.

I also included prevailing market conditions as a consideration, smart-@ss.

You didn't at first on Microsoft's Y2K spike, which I had to point out to you. And even after I pointed it out to you, you *still* persisted in asking why it wasn't organic. And the answer is the same as the one you ignored earlier: stock price does not correlate with profits or the state of the company in the short term.

You don't get to decide. Sucks for you, though.

No it doesn't -- I get to make money cleaning up after the incompetence of said Third-Worlders, as I pointed out.

LOL, from your repeated, impotent "you're a troll" shrills, I'd have expected you to have done so to me, by now.

Ask the mods. I hit the abuse button when people post things that might hurt FR; not on juvenile insults, which are unimportant.

Check your wallet. It's the one with the symbol I've reproduced, above.

I don't own one. Kinda cool that you knew where to find one in short order, though. Which party *did* you vote for in India's elections this month?

And just think: At 50 cents per post, you've probably earned close to a *week's* normal salary from trying to bait me. You ought to be able to go out somewhere nice this weekend.

Ah, the futile cries of impotence...

Leave your sex life out of this!

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

*You* were the one who attributed the stock bump to Y2K issues -- without backing it up. (Unless you're trying to tell me that the stock price spiked on the release and sales of "Windows ME"...)

Learn to read, and more importantly, comprehend. I didn't attribute the stock spike rise to the Y2K "issues" specifically. There was a rise in demand for updating and correcting various archaic software that were critical to many businesses, and Microsoft benefited from that demand, directly and indirectly.

 

 

Learn how to read: I was pointing out that Tata motors has had to delay final production/delivery of the cars for nearly a year. And the delay was due in part to schedule slippage. The analogy to Microsoft (e.g. Longhorn/Vista release) is obvious.

I think any company that would have had to relocate its entire manufacturing plant at the last notice, would have problems with delay. Big deal.

 

 

I'm making fun of their ineptitude. If they were in a real, competitive market, instead of a fiercely nationalistic, impoverished one (which undercuts many competitors on cost structure) they'd be toast.

Tell that to Jaguar, Land-Rover and Ford. Or more closer home, to Chrysler and GM. Perhaps Enron too, speaking of dishonesty and ineptitude.

 

"Seal of the Communist Party" deleted.

Ha ha ha! Struck a nerve, didn't I?

 

 

Where'd you get that? Utter Pradesh, or an Obama campaign rally?

From your idealogues.

 

Even worse, I've had to clean up some of the messes they made.

As what, a janitor?

 

But those who live in squalor (or poor business practice) don't know the difference -- which is why I railed against Bill Gates.

Oh, so now you're into class-warfare as well. My, my, the multi-talents!

 

Earlier operating systems just weren't as buggy (and still aren't) as Windows. And if Gates hadn't come out with sh*t, companies wouldn't have seen that poor level of quality as the norm.

Yeah, present OS's have to handle a wee bit more than your generic dot-matrix printer, and a 3.5" floppy drive. Are you honestly a programmer?

 

 

You didn't at first on Microsoft's Y2K spike, which I had to point out to you. And even after I pointed it out to you, you *still* persisted in asking why it wasn't organic. And the answer is the same as the one you ignored earlier: stock price does not correlate with profits or the state of the company in the short term.

Umm, no. I gave you that information without you having asked for it. I gave it so that you might get a clue. Obviously, you didn't. Check back.

 

No it doesn't -- I get to make money cleaning up after the incompetence of said Third-Worlders, as I pointed out.

Again, as a janitor?

 

 

I don't own one. Kinda cool that you knew where to find one in short order, though.

Yes, I have do deal with the idiots of your tribe, quite often. The world is filled with them, these days. And, as evident from your posts, quite vocal too.

 

 

And just think: At 50 cents per post, you've probably earned close to a *week's* normal salary from trying to bait me. You ought to be able to go out somewhere nice this weekend.

Oh I wouldn't know... since you're the expert, suggest me some places that someone like you might frequent.

 

Leave your sex life out of this!

Firstly, everything you see needn't be about sex . Especially not the word 'impotent' (it's a good idea for you, to go out more often... seems like the cleaning fluid vapors are taking its toll on you). It will profit you tremendously to wear out a dictionary right now, to find the various meanings of the word in question. Secondly, like I asked of you earlier, learn to read, and more importantly, comprehend. That comment was for you, not me. Quit prattling.

 

 

Since it is obvious your favorite pastime is to type long, boring, idiotic, juvenile retorts and illogical theorizations (like I recognized the verbal m@sturbator in you, quite early on), I will stop obliging you from now. Try and make it a short reply, if you need to, that is. You need to get over your habit, and regain control of your life, at some time, soon.

 

Oh, and one more thing. Isn't this way, way, way past your bedtime? I'm sorry I kept you indulged in your addiction all night. Don't you have to go to your politburo meet or whatever you canvass it as, in the morning?

[grey_whiskers]

I didn't attribute the stock spike rise to the Y2K "issues" specifically.

From your post #21 this thread:

The peak in the 1999-2000 period was due to the Y2K rush.

And the peak was from your post #15 which was a time-series chart giving Microsoft's stock price.

So yes, you explicitly DID attribute the stock spike rise to the Y2K "issues".

You've been caught out lying again, as you admitted lying to the DSL guy in your post #12.

I think any company that would have had to relocate its entire manufacturing plant at the last notice, would have problems with delay. Big deal.

It *IS* a big deal, as it delayed the release of a long-awaited product long enough to both give a competitor room to enter the market, and allow the worldwide economy to slow down, thereby depressing sales. There's a reason businesses refer to a "Window" of opportunity /pun>

Tell that to Jaguar, Land-Rover and Ford. Or more closer home, to Chrysler and GM. Perhaps Enron too, speaking of dishonesty and ineptitude.

Jaguar and Land-Rover have had reputations for quality issues for a long time. But why did you mention Ford? -- as they are the only major US automaker to neither need, nor request a "bailout". (Incidentally, the problem with the US automakers is more one of Unions on the one side -- read "massive lifetime healthcare benefits" -- and government meddling on the other (read "arbitrary changes in safety requirements and CAFE standards").

Enron didn't have a manufactured product. Or wait, they did, if by "manufactured" you mean "made up out of whole cloth." Their arrogance and dishonesty got to them in the end, which is a good thing.

Ha ha ha! Struck a nerve, didn't I?

No. Its like calling Ronald Reagan or Sarah Palin homosexual: so completely false that it discredits the accuser. I was trying to save *your* reputation on this forum.

From your idealogues.

Your use of that word isn't even *wrong*.

English isn't your first language, is it?

As what, a janitor?

No, a contractor brought in to do so.

Oh, so now you're into class-warfare as well. My, my, the multi-talents!

Re-read my comments. I have always been against the poor results which came out of Microsoft Foundation Classes.

(See "blue screen of death" in my earlier comments.)

Yeah, present OS's have to handle a wee bit more than your generic dot-matrix printer, and a 3.5" floppy drive. Are you honestly a programmer?

Yup. And like *real* programmers, I have contempt for Windows. It's not an OS, but a POS.

Umm, no. I gave you that information without you having asked for it. I gave it so that you might get a clue. Obviously, you didn't. Check back.

You're lying again. You presented post #15 as an attempt to show that Microsoft was successful after the outsourcing, without mentioning the Y2K spike AT ALL. I pointed out the overall flat performance of the Microsoft stock after the Y2K era -- at which point you seized on the Y2K spike as important. When I pointed out it wasn't "organic" (sustainable growth) you then said, without evidence, that Microsoft was benefiting from Y2K issues.

Then, after I pointed out that most Y2K remediation centered around legacy COBOL (not microsoft code), in post #29 you changed your tune *again*.

Yes, I have do deal with the idiots of your tribe, quite often. The world is filled with them, these days. And, as evident from your posts, quite vocal too.

I'm not a member of a tribe. I'm an American. I guess thinking of people on a tribal basis is still the rage in Third World countries, such as India? As far as the being filled with idiots, yes. That's why I'm against US companies hiring so many of them to save a comparatively small amount of money on labor costs.

Again, as a janitor?

Oh, I get it. Calling someone a janitor must be hinting they are a member of the Dalit caste in your world. It's wasted on Americans.

Oh I wouldn't know... since you're the expert, suggest me some places that someone like you might frequent.

Why bother? You can't afford the plane fare to the States from Australia.

Firstly, everything you see needn't be about sex . Especially not the word 'impotent'

You're the one who used the word, being blissfully unaware of American slang.

Since it is obvious your favorite pastime is to type long, boring, idiotic, juvenile retorts and illogical theorizations (like I recognized the verbal m@sturbator in you, quite early on), I will stop obliging you from now. Try and make it a short reply, if you need to, that is. You need to get over your habit, and regain control of your life, at some time, soon.

No, my favorite pastime is FReeping. Your opinion about me is in direct contradiction to the feedback I receive from most other FReepers -- who have been posting on this forum long before you; and many of whom, unlike yourself, have graduate-level degrees from US Universities.

I'm glad that your are finally giving up, I was afraid you were going to strain something in futile and selfattempts to insult me.

Oh, and one more thing. Isn't this way, way, way past your bedtime? I'm sorry I kept you indulged in your addiction all night. Don't you have to go to your politburo meet or whatever you canvass it as, in the morning?

Sometimes I stay up late, sometimes I don't. And your mention of the Politburo reminds me -- not only did you fail to comment on Jim Cramer's book from my post #26, but you haven't yet mentioned how *you* voted in India's elections.

Look! You just earned another 50 cents.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Hey genius, there’s a difference between the Y2K issue, and the increase in demand because of the Y2K problem. You have a comprehension problem. Stick with janitorial work.

As for the DSL “lie” that you’ve been dragging along like a parasite all along, yea, I had to do that because the alternative would have been to suffer a faulty connection, because of a loop-hole in Verizon’s complaint service system. Use your d@mn brain.

I won’t bother replying to the rest of your post. It reeks of the same garbage you’ve been spouting this far. And you had to refer to Dalits? Really? After all your frequent “Third Worlder” references? LOL! You Sir, are a pathetic, old joke.

[grey_whiskers]

Hey genius, there’s a difference between the Y2K issue, and the increase in demand because of the Y2K problem. You have a comprehension problem. Stick with janitorial work.

And you have STILL never explained what it was about Y2K which would drive Microsoft's profits up, when most of the Y2K concerns were over legacy COBOL code which is on mainframes, not easily replaced at that time by PC's.

Nor have you explained your constant flip-flops on the subject.

Nor yet have you explained why a chart of Micosoft's stock price which showed its plunge after Y2K, and remaining pretty flat, after the plunge, is a good argument for offshoring in general.

As for the DSL “lie” that you’ve been dragging along like a parasite all along, yea, I had to do that because the alternative would have been to suffer a faulty connection, because of a loop-hole in Verizon’s complaint service system. Use your d@mn brain.

So you finally admit that you lied to get your way. And even then, you put the word lie in quotation marks.

Hasn't it crossed your mind that escalating the problem to an on-site representative was a *good* thing to do? And you left unaddressed altogether my experience with an even more clueless rep which ended up costing me $$ for a fault with a brand-new, out-of-the-box component on initial installation.

I won’t bother replying to the rest of your post. It reeks of the same garbage you’ve been spouting this far. And you had to refer to Dalits? Really? After all your frequent “Third Worlder” references? LOL! You Sir, are a pathetic, old joke.

Actually, most of the rest of the post was calm responses to increasingly shrill and personal insults on your part.

The remark about Dalits is relevant, because they *are* an issue in India. Which, if you hadn't noticed, is in the title of the thread. And the reason I refer to "Third Worlders" is that despite all of the PR campaigning, India is still a Third World country.

As far as the remainder of the post beyond responding to your insults, you should be reminded that you are still dodging the questions about Jim Cramer's book and how *you* voted in India's elections.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

 

And you have STILL never explained what it was about Y2K which would drive Microsoft's profits up, when most of the Y2K concerns were over legacy COBOL code which is on mainframes, not easily replaced at that time by PC's.

 

Use your brain. Many factors here. For one thing, increased pressure in enterprises to upgrade their systems. Secondly, more demand for PCs for programmers to correct the problem. Thirdly, demand for Microsoft's services to make products to help counter the problem, directly or indirectly. Fourth, contract obligations for them to repair problems in systems they've designed for large enterprises, not limited to the military and space agencies.

 

 

Nor yet have you explained why a chart of Micosoft's stock price which showed its plunge after Y2K, and remaining pretty flat, after the plunge, is a good argument for offshoring in general.

 

You haven't explained why the graph remaining pretty flat on a more-or-less high price for all the time since the Y2K peak, is a good argument against offshoring, which began nearly a decade before, and included the ramp on the graph as well.

 

 

So you finally admit that you lied to get your way. And even then, you put the word lie in quotation marks.

There was no way out. If you know how service provider's technical service system works, you'd know that they don't escalate calls to higher reps, without an issue being logged into their system. My problem was unique to them, in that it got caught up in a loop-hole in their fault detection mechanism, where the problem would not be detected by their remote diagnostics equipment, when they wanted to do so. When the technician landed up in my place, and as I had indicated to you earlier, upon my advisement, he was able to fix the problem. What he did immediately, from my apartment premises, was discuss with his higher-up, the unique nature of my problem, after which they modified their error-reporting system, to enable the log record feature on the modems, for all their customers in the area. In fact, if I recall correctly, he even thanked me for doing what I had done, telling me that I had no other way out.

 

Hasn't it crossed your mind that escalating the problem to an on-site representative was a *good* thing to do?

See above.

 

 

 And you left unaddressed altogether my experience with an even more clueless rep which ended up costing me $$ for a fault with a brand-new, out-of-the-box component on initial installation.

What are you talking about? I seemed to have missed this.

 

Actually, most of the rest of the post was calm responses to increasingly shrill and personal insults on your part.

LOL, you're the one to talk! When I mentioned my experiences, quite early on, all I did was politely indicate to you that I've known people who've experienced idiocy and shoddy workmanship from the other side as well. Read up on that Solectron anecdote. You started coming with rude replies to me, completely basing your BS on your ASSumptions that I was (a) Indian (b) Live in India (c) Don't have an American Master's degree, and so on. It was funny, because I let you play on that theme.

 

 

Now some choice cuts from your post just before the one I'm replying to above:

You're the one who used the word, being blissfully unaware of American slang.

http://www.pierretristam.com/Bobst/library/wf-241.htm

 

EXCERPT:

 

"...But with these considerations firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace: to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete..."

- Ronald Reagan.

 

LOL, so you must have again ASSumed Reagan was making an "American slang" sexual reference there, hmm? Knock yourself out on that one...

 

Yup. And like *real* programmers, I have contempt for Windows. It's not an OS, but a POS.

But still, the US military uses it, not to mention even having signed up a long-term contract very recently to continue using it, and extending Microsoft's service obligations to them, uniquely, for about over a decade from the date on the contract. Perhaps you could entertain them to a suggestion to move away from Windows software.

Secondly, and not limited to this, NASA uses it as well.

Thirdly, so do most universities and research institutions, not only in the country, but also around the world. You could be making good money in marketing them replacements, as your belief in Microsoft products' inferiority is rock-solid.

 

As far as the remainder of the post beyond responding to your insults, you should be reminded that you are still dodging the questions about Jim Cramer's book and how *you* voted in India's elections.

Oh that? I don't have a vote there.

 

Your use of that word isn't even *wrong*.

English isn't your first language, is it?

You go overboard for typos, don't you? LOL!

 

Here's a something from your end, cut-copy-pasted verbatim:

 

I'm glad that your are finally giving up, I was afraid you were going to strain something in futile and selfattempts to insult me.

Wow, such mastery and command of what would be your, ahem, "first language"? LOL! No wonder you lost your job to some third-world scavenger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you have STILL never explained what it was about Y2K which would drive Microsoft's profits up, when most of the Y2K concerns were over legacy COBOL code which is on mainframes, not easily replaced at that time by PC's.

 

Use your brain. Many factors here. For one thing, increased pressure in enterprises to upgrade their systems. Secondly, more demand for PCs for programmers to correct the problem. Thirdly, demand for Microsoft's services to make products to help counter the problem, directly or indirectly. Fourth, contract obligations for them to repair problems in systems they've designed for large enterprises, not limited to the military and space agencies.

 

 

Nor yet have you explained why a chart of Micosoft's stock price which showed its plunge after Y2K, and remaining pretty flat, after the plunge, is a good argument for offshoring in general.

 

You haven't explained why the graph remaining pretty flat on a more-or-less high price for all the time since the Y2K peak, is a good argument against offshoring, which began nearly a decade before, and included the ramp on the graph as well.

 

 

So you finally admit that you lied to get your way. And even then, you put the word lie in quotation marks.

There was no way out. If you know how service provider's technical service system works, you'd know that they don't escalate calls to higher reps, without an issue being logged into their system. My problem was unique to them, in that it got caught up in a loop-hole in their fault detection mechanism, where the problem would not be detected by their remote diagnostics equipment, when they wanted to do so. When the technician landed up in my place, and as I had indicated to you earlier, upon my advisement, he was able to fix the problem. What he did immediately, from my apartment premises, was discuss with his higher-up, the unique nature of my problem, after which they modified their error-reporting system, to enable the log record feature on the modems, for all their customers in the area. In fact, if I recall correctly, he even thanked me for doing what I had done, telling me that I had no other way out.

 

Hasn't it crossed your mind that escalating the problem to an on-site representative was a *good* thing to do?

See above.

 

 

 And you left unaddressed altogether my experience with an even more clueless rep which ended up costing me $$ for a fault with a brand-new, out-of-the-box component on initial installation.

What are you talking about? I seemed to have missed this.

 

Actually, most of the rest of the post was calm responses to increasingly shrill and personal insults on your part.

LOL, you're the one to talk! When I mentioned my experiences, quite early on, all I did was politely indicate to you that I've known people who've experienced idiocy and shoddy workmanship from the other side as well. Read up on that Solectron anecdote. You started coming with rude replies to me, completely basing your BS on your ASSumptions that I was (a) Indian (b) Live in India (c) Don't have an American Master's degree, and so on. It was funny, because I let you play on that theme.

 

 

Now some choice cuts from your post just before the one I'm replying to above:

You're the one who used the word, being blissfully unaware of American slang.

http://www.pierretristam.com/Bobst/library/wf-241.htm

 

EXCERPT:

 

"...But with these considerations firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace: to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete..."

- Ronald Reagan.

 

LOL, so you must have again ASSumed Reagan was making an "American slang" sexual reference there, hmm? Knock yourself out on that one...

 

Yup. And like *real* programmers, I have contempt for Windows. It's not an OS, but a POS.

But still, the US military uses it, not to mention even having signed up a long-term contract very recently to continue using it, and extending Microsoft's service obligations to them, uniquely, for about over a decade from the date on the contract. Perhaps you could entertain them to a suggestion to move away from Windows software.

Secondly, and not limited to this, NASA uses it as well.

Thirdly, so do most universities and research institutions, not only in the country, but also around the world. You could be making good money in marketing them replacements, as your belief in Microsoft products' inferiority is rock-solid.

 

As far as the remainder of the post beyond responding to your insults, you should be reminded that you are still dodging the questions about Jim Cramer's book and how *you* voted in India's elections.

Oh that? I don't have a vote there.

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Oh, and before I forget, Obama’s entire presidential campaign was based on race and skin-color. What’s your say on this? Any lingering issues in the underbelly?

[grey_whiskers]

Use your brain. Many factors here. For one thing, increased pressure in enterprises to upgrade their systems. Secondly, more demand for PCs for programmers to correct the problem. Thirdly, demand for Microsoft's services to make products to help counter the problem, directly or indirectly. Fourth, contract obligations for them to repair problems in systems they've designed for large enterprises, not limited to the military and space agencies.

WTF?? Y2K was not about replacing mainframes with PCs.

Microsoft specialized in the PC OS, not in "big iron". The two are not interchangable.

You haven't explained why the graph remaining pretty flat on a more-or-less high price for all the time since the Y2K peak, is a good argument against offshoring, which began nearly a decade before, and included the ramp on the graph as well.

Your major and minor premise are BOTH wrong.

Microsoft stock has not stayed flat *since* the peak.

It has stayed flat since *plummeting FROM* the peak.

And you were the one who presented the stock price (post #15) as though it were monotonically increasing; only after I pointed out the peak and fall did you act like the peak was evidence of Microsoft's own success.

And after I pointed out the fallacy in that idea, you blew a lot of smoke.

Your minor premise (that Microsoft's stock price is a refutation of an argument against offshoring) is likewise invalid. I invoked Microsoft to explain why companies put up with shoddy work as is provided by so many offshorers: Bill Gates got them used to accepting crap as the norm.

Microsoft's own offshoring is a consequence of the maturity of their market niche, as I pointed out earlier. With their net and gross profit margins, and lack of meaningful competitors within their space, the usual lame excuse of "cost cutting for competitive reasons" isn't going to cut it.

There was no way out. If you know how service provider's technical service system works, you'd know that they don't escalate calls to higher reps, without an issue being logged into their system. My problem was unique to them, in that it got caught up in a loop-hole in their fault detection mechanism, where the problem would not be detected by their remote diagnostics equipment, when they wanted to do so. When the technician landed up in my place, and as I had indicated to you earlier, upon my advisement, he was able to fix the problem. What he did immediately, from my apartment premises, was discuss with his higher-up, the unique nature of my problem, after which they modified their error-reporting system, to enable the log record feature on the modems, for all their customers in the area. In fact, if I recall correctly, he even thanked me for doing what I had done, telling me that I had no other way out.

I've found that starting to cancel one's service usually gets their attention pretty well. Or putting a hold on their payment pending resolution.

What are you talking about? I seemed to have missed this.

That's because I didn't put it in. You said that you wouldn't reply to the rest of my post: so I wanted to see how you'd react to a phantom allusion. Interesting that after the earlier retort, you are still reading and responding. :-)

LOL, you're the one to talk! When I mentioned my experiences, quite early on, all I did was politely indicate to you that I've known people who've experienced idiocy and shoddy workmanship from the other side as well. Read up on that Solectron anecdote. You started coming with rude replies to me, completely basing your BS on your ASSumptions that I was (a) Indian (b) Live in India (c) Don't have an American Master's degree, and so on. It was funny, because I let you play on that theme.

Not an "assumption". I bothered to look up your posting history when you printed the reply to my thread on the Bodacious Tatas.

And what I found was this.

As to your being Indian. Your continued posting of the Bhagavad-Gita (like here and here), and your slams at Pakistan (see here and here; coupled with your strong pro-India posting history (this thread, or this...)

Incidentally, I said you were living in Australia, (post #24, where I said " ...I get it: you're one of those trolls getting paid 50 cents per post. Didn't know they needed those in Australia.")

This was based on your post here.

As far as the "don't have an American Master's degree" -- I was pointing out that your view of my posts is a distinct minority on FR; and most of the fans of my posts have advanced degrees, unlike you.

MD's and PhD's tend to look down on those who brag about having a Master's, by the way.

LOL, so you must have again ASSumed Reagan was making an "American slang" sexual reference there, hmm? Knock yourself out on that one...

I didn't dig up the Reagan quote, so I cannot by definition have been referring to it. Incidentally, another reason you have it wrong is that Reagan was speaking in a formal setting, not engaging in juvenile insults in a web-based forum. Context can matter.

But still, the US military uses it, not to mention even having signed up a long-term contract very recently to continue using it, and extending Microsoft's service obligations to them, uniquely, for about over a decade from the date on the contract. Perhaps you could entertain them to a suggestion to move away from Windows software.

Given all the security holes in Windows, and the COTS procurement from Chinese sources, I'd say it would be a prudent thing to do.

Secondly, and not limited to this, NASA uses it as well.

One of my contracts from earlier was related to debugging Windows stuff for NASA.

Thirdly, so do most universities and research institutions, not only in the country, but also around the world. You could be making good money in marketing them replacements, as your belief in Microsoft products' inferiority is rock-solid.

Apple's already working on that, as are many flavors of Linux and UNIX.

Windows has the advantage of inertia, or the concern over "sunk costs".

Doesn't mean it's a good product.

Oh that? I don't have a vote there.

That's a shame, for someone otherwise so fixated on India. Maybe you could help clean up the corruption in the legislature (e.g. in Utter Pradesh, more folks with criminal records were elected than regular politicians, according to the Financial Times).

Wow, such mastery and command of what would be your, ahem, "first language"? LOL! No wonder you lost your job to some third-world scavenger.

Cut and paste. Not a problem with not knowing the language, as your error was.

Incidentally, I still have my job. Multinational company with branches all over the world. Nice try, though.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, and before I forget, Obama’s entire presidential campaign was based on race and skin-color. What’s your say on this? Any lingering issues in the underbelly?

No it wasn't.

Here is one of his campaign speeches on the subject.

He wasn't playing the race card.

So you are lying again.

Nice try, though.

My feelings on the election are expressed succinctly here.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

 

WTF?? Y2K was not about replacing mainframes with PCs.

Microsoft specialized in the PC OS, not in "big iron". The two are not interchangable.

I know of three local establishments that took the decision to upgrade all their computer systems in late 1999, in spite of the lack of an actual necessity for  immediately doing so, because of pressure from the upper management which was convinced / goaded by over-hyped newspaper reports of the Y2K problem.

Those sort of sales.

Also, increased demand for programmers would logically be followed by increased demand for personal computers.

 

Your major and minor premise are BOTH wrong.

Microsoft stock has not stayed flat *since* the peak.

It has stayed flat since *plummeting FROM* the peak.

And you were the one who presented the stock price (post #15) as though it were monotonically increasing; only after I pointed out the peak and fall did you act like the peak was evidence of Microsoft's own success.

And after I pointed out the fallacy in that idea, you blew a lot of smoke.

 

When I meant 'peak' I didn't refer only to the upward ramping half of it.

Next.

 

Your minor premise (that Microsoft's stock price is a refutation of an argument against offshoring) is likewise invalid. I invoked Microsoft to explain why companies put up with shoddy work as is provided by so many offshorers: Bill Gates got them used to accepting crap as the norm.

 

And yet, he continues to make billions. Does. Not. Wash.

 

Microsoft's own offshoring is a consequence of the maturity of their market niche, as I pointed out earlier. With their net and gross profit margins, and lack of meaningful competitors within their space, the usual lame excuse of "cost cutting for competitive reasons" isn't going to cut it.

Why is there a lack of "meaningful competitors" if Microsoft is so "bad"? Competitors like Apple and Linux have had their products specifically designed to help users get used to a non-Windows platform without much difficulty. They have had over a decade and a half, or even more, to damage Windows sales significantly, and yet, their market-share is a mere fraction of that of Windows. "Inertia" cannot sustain such sales without additional impetus, by means sustained popular and institutional preference.

 

I've found that starting to cancel one's service usually gets their attention pretty well. Or putting a hold on their payment pending resolution.

It may get that, but since the connection was shared between me and my room-mates, and to top that, the connection having come with contract obligations that had early termination penalties, and most importantly, because none of us had the time to waste and experiment free market dynamics over a connection, during perhaps the most busiest times of our lives, then. It was also in rural Texas, where applying for a new connection, and getting one, meant about 2-3 weeks of delay. Lastly, the area had a near-monopoly by the said DSL provider, whose only competitor was a cable TV co. that also required of their customers to buy their cable TV package, along with the internet service.

Like I mentioned, what I had done was appreciated by the company, and also forced them to change the way they handled complaints. They were blind to the loop-hole in their automated complaints handling mechanism.

 

What are you talking about? I seemed to have missed this.

That's because I didn't put it in. You said that you wouldn't reply to the rest of my post: so I wanted to see how you'd react to a phantom allusion. Interesting that after the earlier retort, you are still reading and responding. :-)

I thought I was busy for the week, but I have the time now. Besides, your stupidity here couldn't be left unchallenged.

 

Not an "assumption". I bothered to look up your posting history when you printed the reply to my thread on the Bodacious Tatas.

And what I found was this.

As to your being Indian. Your continued posting of the Bhagavad-Gita (like here and here), and your slams at Pakistan (see here and here; coupled with your strong pro-India posting history (this thread, or this...)

Incidentally, I said you were living in Australia, (post #24, where I said " ...I get it: you're one of those trolls getting paid 50 cents per post. Didn't know they needed those in Australia.")

This was based on your post here.

 

LOL, the Bhagavad-Gita quotes. Perhaps you should look a bit deeper into my posting history, into one of my comments on an Evolution / Atheism thread, where I specifically detailed why I was posting those quotes. You'll find it there, and with it, an answer to those quotes. I've also openly declared that I'm atheist, more than many times, on FR.

By the way, one of the "commandments" in the Bhagavad-Gita, so to speak, is to not spread the word to those unwilling to listen. Clearly, I have violated it, and continue to do so, willingly and repeatedly.

Lastly, I post plenty of inflammatory comments against Muslims through which I court the risk of legal prosecution, especially in places that I frequent, such as Australia and Canada, and it is merely prudent to not only conceal my identity, but to actively deceive anyone attempting to pin-point my location, as well. Some of the military-related posts put me in that sort of a risk as well.

Plausible deniability. My IP-related tracks are well-concealed, as well.

 

 

As far as the "don't have an American Master's degree" -- I was pointing out that your view of my posts is a distinct minority on FR; and most of the fans of my posts have advanced degrees, unlike you.

You were perhaps the first person on FR to whom I've admitted to having completed a Master's degree (barring private messages), and this thread, the first mention of the same, publicly.

 

MD's and PhD's tend to look down on those who brag about having a Master's, by the way.

Oh really? You're now sure that I don't have a PhD, as well?

 

I didn't dig up the Reagan quote, so I cannot by definition have been referring to it.

I know you didn't dig it up. I posted it here. The speech was a famous one, and you would have heard of it before my mention here.

 

 Incidentally, another reason you have it wrong is that Reagan was speaking in a formal setting, not engaging in juvenile insults in a web-based forum. Context can matter.

It's not my mistake when you apply sexual connotations to a common word that you mistook for a slang. The interpretation and the perversion, was from your end, not mine.

 

Given all the security holes in Windows, and the COTS procurement from Chinese sources, I'd say it would be a prudent thing to do.

Well, they obviously seem to have the opposite opinion. And they are a more reliable source of opinion than some yahoo with a keyboard, on the internet.

 

One of my contracts from earlier was related to debugging Windows stuff for NASA.

You seem to have a deep penchant for biting the hand that feeds you, in that case. Brilliant, or idiotic? You decide.

 

Apple's already working on that, as are many flavors of Linux and UNIX.

Windows has the advantage of inertia, or the concern over "sunk costs".

Doesn't mean it's a good product.

Yet, sustained sales of Windows-based platforms when there are clear alternatives available, which has continued to cap the market-share that the competitors have been able to capture, seems to suggest otherwise. The alternatives have been available for over a decade, and yet, their main market-share is still rooted in "personal use" sales. Serious institutions continue to use Windows.

 

That's a shame, for someone otherwise so fixated on India. Maybe you could help clean up the corruption in the legislature (e.g. in Utter Pradesh, more folks with criminal records were elected than regular politicians, according to the Financial Times).

It's a pity. I probably have a better say in controlling the corruption in certain localities, in DC and in Canberra and Sydney, than I would, in India.

 

 

Cut and paste. Not a problem with not knowing the language, as your error was.

Mine was a typo that got converted 'ideologies' into 'ideologues' on this Microsoft FrontPage utility that I'm currently using to compose the long comments on this thread. Not an error in not knowing the language, as someone with a functional brain would have figured out from reading most of what I've composed, over here, and elsewhere.
 

Now, for your comment:

 
"I'm glad that your are finally giving up, I was afraid you were going to strain something in futile and selfattempts to insult me."
 

Ma'am (or Sir), that's a wee bit more than a mere cut-copy-paste error, right there. Nice attempt of an escape, though.

 

Incidentally, I still have my job. Multinational company with branches all over the world.

The conflict of interests is funny. Like I said earlier, you have a deep penchant for biting the hand that supposedly feeds you.

 

No it wasn't.

Here is one of his campaign speeches on the subject.

He wasn't playing the race card.

So you are lying again.

Nice try, though.

My feelings on the election are expressed succinctly here.

Cheers!

 

With regard to Obama's election as the POTUS, to say that race had nothing to do with * his * election, is being plainly dishonest, and you know it. It also goes against the grain of the opinion held by most FReepers, if you follow the threads here. Just click on the bold-faced keyword 'obama' in the keyword cloud on top of FR, to confirm what I'm saying. An examination of the percentage of Americans who voted for him, the voters classified by race, would reveal the above, as well. I can dig up comments here on FR that will support this, but I'll leave that to you.

 

Almost every thread detailing anything negative or perceived negative by the members of the demographic concerned, is nearly always followed by a "typical Obama voter" comment, disparagingly.

Since you love to selectively quote the media to justify your biases, what do you have to say about the highlights of this article?

 

Disclaimer: Ignore all typos/ poor grammar by me on this thread, or beyond. I have deliberately chosen not to proof-read my comments because I trust you to have the intelligence now, to look beyond them and infer the intent and meaning of what I type, in spite of them.

[grey_whiskers]

I know of three local establishments that took the decision to upgrade all their computer systems in late 1999, in spite of the lack of an actual necessity for immediately doing so, because of pressure from the upper management which was convinced / goaded by over-hyped newspaper reports of the Y2K problem.

Anecdotes are not data.

All the more from admitted habitual liar.

Secondly, you might want to note that the price of MOST securities jumped in this time frame. The peak was "external" as I have repeatedly pointed out, and not an evidence of any suceess or failure of outsourcing.

Also, increased demand for programmers would logically be followed by increased demand for personal computers.

Depends on the type of programmers.

When I meant 'peak' I didn't refer only to the upward ramping half of it.

You didn't even mention the word peak; I had to point it out to you. Therefore you are blowing smoke again. Your post 15 only had the chart and implied it was monotonically increasing -- you didn't even acknowledge when you posted it that there WAS a downward facing part.

"It's plainly evident from the above picture that Microsoft knows exactly what they are doing, opinionated loudmouths notwithstanding. "

So you didn't mention a peak. You failed to notice the fall after the peak. And now you pretend that you had it in mind all along.

FAIL.

And yet, he continues to make billions. Does. Not. Wash.

That is why I had used the phrase "got them used to accept crap as the norm."

Once they accept it, they keep buying, despite superior alternatives.

Why is there a lack of "meaningful competitors" if Microsoft is so "bad"?

That was true earlier, particularly in earlier days. Competitors such as Linux and Apple are appearing now, after the high costs of maintenance, security, bloatware, and the like add up. But even then, there is the problem of "backward compatibility" -- a blessing to hold onto existing clients, a curse when trying to release a new OS.

"Inertia" cannot sustain such sales without additional impetus, by means sustained popular and institutional preference.

The preference is mostly for Microsoft Office, not the underlying POS.

I thought I was busy for the week, but I have the time now. Besides, your stupidity here couldn't be left unchallenged.

No stupidity on my part. Just lies, blustering, and insults on yours.

LOL, the Bhagavad-Gita quotes. Perhaps you should look a bit deeper into my posting history, into one of my comments on an Evolution / Atheism thread, where I specifically detailed why I was posting those quotes. You'll find it there, and with it, an answer to those quotes. I've also openly declared that I'm atheist, more than many times, on FR.

After much searching: I've found such a post.

So in addition to lying to the internet provider, lying about Microsoft stock, and pretending to be Hindu, it turns you *are* a troll, as I said you were in post #26.

By the way, one of the "commandments" in the Bhagavad-Gita, so to speak, is to not spread the word to those unwilling to listen. Clearly, I have violated it, and continue to do so, willingly and repeatedly.

So this is a further admission of trolling: you claimed to be an atheist and yet hide behind the piety and strictures of a belief system you yourself reject.

Lastly, I post plenty of inflammatory comments against Muslims through which I court the risk of legal prosecution, especially in places that I frequent, such as Australia and Canada, and it is merely prudent to not only conceal my identity, but to actively deceive anyone attempting to pin-point my location, as well. Some of the military-related posts put me in that sort of a risk as well.

Open admission of trolling.

Plausible deniability. My IP-related tracks are well-concealed, as well.

Open admission of intent to deceive.

You were perhaps the first person on FR to whom I've admitted to having completed a Master's degree (barring private messages), and this thread, the first mention of the same, publicly.

After all your other admitted lies, this claim has no significance, since you have no respect for the truth by your own admission and behaviour.

Oh really? You're now sure that I don't have a PhD, as well?

After your admissions on this thread, it becomes irrelevant, since your personal credibility is shot. I still doubt your claim. And even were it proved, you have admitted to something far worse than ignorance, which is dishonesty and multiple inflammatory spamming, including hiding your IP address in an attempt to avoid being tracked down--which, in the context you put it about military related posts, is consistent with foreknowledge of guilt.

I know you didn't dig it up. I posted it here. The speech was a famous one, and you would have heard of it before my mention here.

Exactly. You posted it after the fact, with no introduction or foreshadowing earlier in the thread. Further proof that the usage in that speech would not be the first thing on my mind, compared to your childish retorts -- incidentally, they are exactly the type of diatribes I have seen exhibited by Indians during flamewars.It's not my mistake when you apply sexual connotations to a common word that you mistook for a slang. The interpretation and the perversion, was from your end, not mine.

There was no perversion: impotence is the word used in English to connote erectile dysfunction. I mentioned it because of your juvenile comments earlier in the thread.

Well, they obviously seem to have the opposite opinion. And they are a more reliable source of opinion than some yahoo with a keyboard, on the internet.

ad hominem does not make valid argument. Security risks (as well as RAS, for which Microsoft is NOT known) should be taken into account by the military, and not just smallest cost for COTS.

You seem to have a deep penchant for biting the hand that feeds you, in that case. Brilliant, or idiotic? You decide.

You brought up NASA as "proof" that Microsoft made reliable software. When I pointed out I had to debug Microsoft stuff for NASA (which is explicit evidence that the software is unreliable, or it wouldn't *need* debugging), you came up with a non sequitur attempt at ad hominem which did nothing to address your original mistake.

Yet, sustained sales of Windows-based platforms when there are clear alternatives available, which has continued to cap the market-share that the competitors have been able to capture, seems to suggest otherwise. The alternatives have been available for over a decade, and yet, their main market-share is still rooted in "personal use" sales. Serious institutions continue to use Windows.

Because, as i JUST pointed out ( e.g. "sunk costs"), the purchases do not occur in a vacuum, or on a clean slate. Repeating the results of what I just told you, does not constitute refutation.

It's a pity. I probably have a better say in controlling the corruption in certain localities, in DC and in Canberra and Sydney, than I would, in India.

You are an admitted troll and liar on numerous other points.

So this comment of yours is meaningless.

Mine was a typo that got converted 'ideologies' into 'ideologues' on this Microsoft FrontPage utility that I'm currently using to compose the long comments on this thread. Not an error in not knowing the language, as someone with a functional brain would have figured out from reading most of what I've composed, over here, and elsewhere.

It was typical of the mangling of English by those who do not speak or write it as their first language.

Ma'am (or Sir), that's a wee bit more than a mere cut-copy-paste error, right there. Nice attempt of an escape, though.

I had originally been going to write "selfabuse" and then copied another word from a sentence lower down, using cut and paste. Not an attempt at an escape, but a factual rendition.

The conflict of interests is funny. Like I said earlier, you have a deep penchant for biting the hand that supposedly feeds you.

And again, evidence of your continued bad faith--the mention of multinational companies was because you had accused me of being a janitor.

When I refuted that you moved the goalposts to another irrelevant attempt at insult, rather than admitting your error.

With regard to Obama's election as the POTUS, to say that race had nothing to do with * his * election, is being plainly dishonest, and you know it.

(Comment moved for editorial continuity of response):Since you love to selectively quote the media to justify your biases, what do you have to say about the highlights of this article?

Obama himself clearly downplayed race. So the assumption that the election was "really" about race, is a standard liberal tactic. As evidenced by the fact that you are quoting the Huffington Post (here on FR) as though it is therefore disposative.

And, BTW, in accusing me of selective quoting to justify my biases, by choosing Huffington Post (and attempting to smear FReepers with it) you are demonstrating "projection". As well as, again, dishonestly trolling.

An examination of the percentage of Americans who voted for him, the voters classified by race, would reveal the above, as well. I can dig up comments here on FR that will support this, but I'll leave that to you.

Why bother? Correlation does not imply causation; even on specious "legal reasoning" grounds, the attempt fails, since the Supreme Court has disallowed the doctrine of Disparate Impact based on numbers alone.

Again, poor attempt at a troll; dishonest; and thoroughly incompetent of you.

Almost every thread detailing anything negative or perceived negative by the members of the demographic concerned, is nearly always followed by a "typical Obama voter" comment, disparagingly.

Stupidity, and/or short term self interest on the part of the subject. Read Obama's campaign promises (e.g. the number of jobs to be saved, the "shovel ready" nature of stimulus bills, the "tracking website" to see the dollar-for-dollar spending on the stimulus -- none fulfilled.

And you have people like David Brooks (who I commented upon here who bought Obama's blatherings hook, line, and sinker; as well as Christopher Buckley, so ably skewered by Iowahawk).

Your incompetence at trolling is showing.

Thanks for playing.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

None of your arguments have held, and most of the ones you've attempted to back, are either through anecdotal data from yourself, or from some two-bit opinionated loudmouth such as yourself, from your everyday MSM.

Your futile attempts to support your sinking arguments have lead you to resort to name-calling. FAIL.

I wasn't hiding behind anything when I've admitted out of my own free will, a long time ago, as to why I was doing what I was doing, openly. You selectively choose and distort arguments, and fail to come up with supportive ones for your false hypotheses, this not limited to your hilarious Bill Gates' example of consumers accepting a supposed sub-standard norm that he has chosen, according to you, for all of us. The market has spoken, and continues to do so, in open violation of all your petty beliefs. I understand how that must annoy you to no end.

You always make desperate cries to the Mods to call those who've thrashed your arguments, 'trolls' but no one listens to you, adding to your visible frustration and hopeless desperation.

In the end, here's a consolation prize for your unsatisfactory efforts:

Oh, and thanks for playing, non-apology for your poor usage of the English language in the instance pointed out to you earlier, notwithstanding.

[grey_whiskers]

I haven't contacted the Mods about this thread at all.

You must be projecting.

Or lying and trolling *again*.

But by all means, *PING* them to this thread if you like.

I am not engaging in name-calling, but an objective description of your self-confessed behavious:

1) Posting on multiple sites to flame members of unpopular groups, taking care to hide your IP address.

2) Giving multiple conflicting information about yourself, with the express intent of concealing your identity.

3) Posting on military-related matters in such a fashion as requiring to conceal your identity.

All in these lines:

"Lastly, I post plenty of inflammatory comments against Muslims through which I court the risk of legal prosecution, especially in places that I frequent, such as Australia and Canada, and it is merely prudent to not only conceal my identity, but to actively deceive anyone attempting to pin-point my location, as well. Some of the military-related posts put me in that sort of a risk as well. Plausible deniability. My IP-related tracks are well-concealed, as well."

You *DO* realize that the above could be the actions of a troll...or of someone or something worse?

And your admission that you have lied on so many things does not enhance your credibility on this or any other forum.

I wasn't hiding behind anything when I've admitted out of my own free will, a long time ago, as to why I was doing what I was doing, openly.

No you haven't. You've been hiding behind a false IP address; you have bragged about deliberately planting false clues to your identity, and then playing "gotcha" with other posters (e.g. on the Evo thread, which *YOU* asked me to look up, in which someone asked you to admit you weren't Hindu). You only "came clean" after being called out, which is not the same as "I wasn't hiding behind anything."

You selectively choose and distort arguments, and fail to come up with supportive ones for your false hypotheses

No, I just pointed out the irrationality and shrillness behind YOUR false claims. Even when I pointed out post-by-post how you had shifted goalpoats, contradicted your original position, and changed the subject, with quotes and or post numbers, you ignored it and repeated the original misstatement as though the flaws had never been described -- or even quoted evidence supporting my point as a supposed refutation.

Here's an example. I claimed that Microsoft makes crappy software, with memory leaks, etc.

It is supported by YOUR posts here and here on a thread entitled "Twelve Million Zombie Computers Since January".

Those weren't Macs or Linux boxes or IBM AS/400s or Legacy Vaxes.

Windows.

So even your posts are supporting my original contentions, but instead of admitting it, you attempt to bluster and bully by repeating your knowingly false ad hominem attacks.

Incidentally, another lie of yours was your ad hominem attack on me about the Military's having put a contract to use Microsoft software as proof that my security concerns were erroneous.

This is contradicted by your OWN earlier thread, which you posted here: even a "super secure" version of XP has 15% of the exploits open, and a commitment to a 72-hour window of vulnerability in a "secure" environment? Feh.

Or there's this thread of yours.

So, even by threads which you yourself have posted on FR, my security concerns about Windows, and/or Chicom backdoors, are justified.

But all you could say was to characterize my concerns as those of "a yahoo on the internet" despite your explicit foreknowledge of information which supported my position, which you yourself had posted.

Shill, whore, and troll.

Other examples of your explicit bad faith and trolling include your posting an article from the Huffington Post (in post #37 this thread) in an attempt to brand FReepers as racist; despite your own post here which specifically attacks Black Americans. You're going to claim you're only attacking their behaviour, but you didn't let other FReepers "typical Obama voters" claims to be described by that, so you are guilty under your OWN standard.

(Another example of your animus towards a specific nationality is here.)

Again, projection and dishonesty on your part.

The market has spoken, and continues to do so, in open violation of all your petty beliefs. I understand how that must annoy you to no end.

I'm more concerned about the mayhem and confusion spread by things such as the Conficker worm. I'm sure you can find others, and attach dollar values to them.

But based on your past history on this and other threads, I doubt that you will -- preferring instead to engage in unsupported invective.

Cheers!

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Ah!

Here we go:

 

I haven't contacted the Mods about this thread at all.

You must be projecting.

Or lying and trolling *again*.

But by all means, *PING* them to this thread if you like.

 

Each time you cry "troll!", it seems like you've barely managed to prevent yourself from hitting the 'abuse' button. If you haven't done so, you seem to have a weird addiction with the word. And as I pointed out earlier, coming from you, the threats are hilariously impotent. (STOP! Do not initiate dirty thoughts. I repeat, grey_whiskers, do not initiate dirty thoughts.)

 

I am not engaging in name-calling, but an objective description of your self-confessed behavious:

1) Posting on multiple sites to flame members of unpopular groups, taking care to hide your IP address.

2) Giving multiple conflicting information about yourself, with the express intent of concealing your identity.

3) Posting on military-related matters in such a fashion as requiring to conceal your identity.

 

LOL, this is the internet, not a court of law. One of the best things about it is to be able to speak your mind without having to reveal your identity. As you might have known, there's a draft circulating in the government that requires internet users posting on various public online fora, to reveal their identity. Perhaps you are a proponent of this idiocy.

Please go on, put your money where your mouth (or keyboard) is, and show us all what you do, where you live, how one may contact you, who you live with, who your dependents are, where your loved ones live, and a couple of photographs of your immediate family, and their backgrounds. You claim to be an honest person, so why the fear? And what's the point in hiding behind a false name like grey_whiskers ?

You could also visit the website WhoIs.com and publish a screenshot of the information drawn off your internet connection, as well. What's to fear in revealing your IP address?

Please lead us the way to an open, honest cyberspace, starting with you.

 

 

All in these lines:

"Lastly, I post plenty of inflammatory comments against Muslims through which I court the risk of legal prosecution, especially in places that I frequent, such as Australia and Canada, and it is merely prudent to not only conceal my identity, but to actively deceive anyone attempting to pin-point my location, as well. Some of the military-related posts put me in that sort of a risk as well. Plausible deniability. My IP-related tracks are well-concealed, as well."

 

You *DO* realize that the above could be the actions of a troll...or of someone or something worse?

And your admission that you have lied on so many things does not enhance your credibility on this or any other forum.

 

See above. Repeat as necessary.

 

No you haven't. You've been hiding behind a false IP address; you have bragged about deliberately planting false clues to your identity, and then playing "gotcha" with other posters (e.g. on the Evo thread, which *YOU* asked me to look up, in which someone asked you to admit you weren't Hindu). You only "came clean" after being called out, which is not the same as "I wasn't hiding behind anything."

 

 

See above. Repeat as necessary.

 

No, I just pointed out the irrationality and shrillness behind YOUR false claims. Even when I pointed out post-by-post how you had shifted goalpoats, contradicted your original position, and changed the subject, with quotes and or post numbers, you ignored it and repeated the original misstatement as though the flaws had never been described -- or even quoted evidence supporting my point as a supposed refutation.

Here's an example. I claimed that Microsoft makes crappy software, with memory leaks, etc.

It is supported by YOUR posts here and here on a thread entitled "Twelve Million Zombie Computers Since January".

Those weren't Macs or Linux boxes or IBM AS/400s or Legacy Vaxes.

Windows.

 

LOL, I'd rather suffer the extremely rare (in over 15 years of use, perhaps twice) malware attacks on my Windows machine (especially when the said attacks were caused by a careless friend using a memory key on my machine, without my permission, where the key had  memory-resident malwares within it) than be straight-jacketed by a machine such as Apple's that barely runs the utilities and softwares I use, without throwing up a couple of hundred compatibility problems.

The US military and NASA, not to mention most large institutions of research, happen to agree with my opinion as well. Windows is a popular platform, and it doesn't pay a renegade developer to make malware that could potentially harm barely 1% of all available computer systems.

Typing cute but factually incorrect reports and vanities, is not what I do for a living.

 

So even your posts are supporting my original contentions, but instead of admitting it, you attempt to bluster and bully by repeating your knowingly false ad hominem attacks.

 

See above. Repeat as necessary.

 

 

Incidentally, another lie of yours was your ad hominem attack on me about the Military's having put a contract to use Microsoft software as proof that my security concerns were erroneous.

This is contradicted by your OWN earlier thread, which you posted here: even a "super secure" version of XP has 15% of the exploits open, and a commitment to a 72-hour window of vulnerability in a "secure" environment? Feh.

Or there's this thread of yours.

 

BWAAHAHAHAHA!

So, I can safely infer that you think the Military is stupid and foolish to stick with Windows, in spite of the aforementioned security issues, than go with impotent competitors like Apple or Linux. Perhaps you should sue them, for risking your tax money and fellow countrymen's lives over "faulty" software. (REMINDER: No dirty thoughts, grey_whiskers!)

 

 

So, even by threads which you yourself have posted on FR, my security concerns about Windows, and/or Chicom backdoors, are justified.

But all you could say was to characterize my concerns as those of "a yahoo on the internet" despite your explicit foreknowledge of information which supported my position, which you yourself had posted.

Shill, whore, and troll.

 

See above. Repeat as necessary.

 

 

Other examples of your explicit bad faith and trolling include your posting an article from the Huffington Post (in post #37 this thread) in an attempt to brand FReepers as racist; despite your own post here which specifically attacks Black Americans. You're going to claim you're only attacking their behaviour, but you didn't let other FReepers "typical Obama voters" claims to be described by that, so you are guilty under your OWN standard.

 

Firstly, the Huffington Post was indicating issues of racial tensions that you were impotently trying to convince me to be non-existent. You've still dodged that particular point, leaving the whole issue unaddressed, and instead, seeking to shoot the messenger, albeit, impotently. (See previous reminder).

Secondly, I wasn't attacking Black Americans; I was indicating my displeasure of making business enclaves to target a particular race. I was not alone there, as can be evidenced by the other comments over there. I had also specifically declared that 'humanity truly disgusts me' and not 'Black Americans truly disgust me.'

 

As usual, you've resorted to clutching at straws, and that too, imagined ones.

 

 

(Another example of your animus towards a specific nationality is here.)

From race, it went to nationality. Shifting sands, and all. Follow the article again. The post was perfectly valid to counter the comment that was being made by chuck_the_tv_out.

 

Again, projection and dishonesty on your part.

* YAWN *

 

I'm more concerned about the mayhem and confusion spread by things such as the Conficker worm. I'm sure you can find others, and attach dollar values to them.

 

Don't be. Unusable / barely usable / crippled hardware, and software, is far more limiting.

 

But based on your past history on this and other threads, I doubt that you will -- preferring instead to engage in unsupported invective.

Astute judgment. I'd rather use my time on actual problems, than imagined ones.

 

Speaking about the merits of your weak arguments, coming from a person who has clearly displayed poor restraint in being able to control his / her perverted imagination on encountering simple, legitimate, connotation-free words, your comments and vanities are pedagogically and intellectually suspect.

[PapaBear3625]

Bill Gates ruined the business world by conditioning them to accept crap as the norm.

More like he had an accurate estimate of the edge of what business would consider "good enough", and rides that edge.

[grey_whiskers]

Each time you cry "troll!", it seems like you've barely managed to prevent yourself from hitting the 'abuse' button...And as I pointed out earlier, coming from you, the threats are hilariously impotent.

You're too insignificant for the abuse button; and Iexplicitly pointed out above that I don't hit abuse for personal invective.

At the same time, I notice you haven't called the Mods in yourself, despite being invited to do so.

LOL, this is the internet, not a court of law. One of the best things about it is to be able to speak your mind without having to reveal your identity. As you might have known, there's a draft circulating in the government that requires internet users posting on various public online fora, to reveal their identity. Perhaps you are a proponent of this idiocy.

No, but then I don't brag about trolling to the point that I have to mislead people even about clues to the Continent I live in, my religious beliefs, or even the IP address, as you have admitted to. So I have no need to "lead the way" as you said.

I noticed, no substantive answer to all the documentation of your lies and bad faith, including lying about the existence of issues you yourself had started threads over.

ad hominem over "openness on the internet" does not excuse lying about other things on a public forum.

LOL, I'd rather suffer the extremely rare (in over 15 years of use, perhaps twice) malware attacks on my Windows machine (especially when the said attacks were caused by a careless friend using a memory key on my machine, without my permission, where the key had memory-resident malwares within it) than be straight-jacketed by a machine such as Apple's that barely runs the utilities and softwares I use, without throwing up a couple of hundred compatibility problems.

So you are straitjacketed by being stuck in Microsoft world. See also my earlier posts about WHY Microsoft retains market share: people being locked in, rather than quality of the product.

And again, anecdotes are not data: many users have suffered far worse than that by relying on Windows and its POS software. The world does not revolve around you.

See above. Repeat as necessary.

OK, I don't mind if I do...

You're a shill, troll, and whore.

So, I can safely infer that you think the Military is stupid and foolish to stick with Windows, in spite of the aforementioned security issues, than go with impotent competitors like Apple or Linux.

The military is taking unnecessary security risks.

I noticed that China is relying on proprietary OS development for its military, and not on Microsoft.

The US military and NASA, not to mention most large institutions of research, happen to agree with my opinion as well. Windows is a popular platform, and it doesn't pay a renegade developer to make malware that could potentially harm barely 1% of all available computer systems.

Like I said all along, they're locked in by sunken costs.

Typing cute but factually incorrect reports and vanities, is not what I do for a living.

You were never accused of that; nor is it what I do for a living.

Secondly, I wasn't attacking Black Americans; I was indicating my displeasure of making business enclaves to target a particular race. I was not alone there, as can be evidenced by the other comments over there. I had also specifically declared that 'humanity truly disgusts me' and not 'Black Americans truly disgust me.'

By your own standards (quoting the HuffPo) you are again lying.

I didn't dodge the question: it was invalid, and an attempt to play the race card. The problem is, not even the Obama campaign itself did so.

So your insinuations, borrowed from HuffPo, and intending to impugn FR as racists, are without merit.

From race, it went to nationality. Shifting sands, and all. Follow the article again. The post was perfectly valid to counter the comment that was being made by chuck_the_tv_out.

The only shifting sands are your ever-changing lies.

Don't be. Unusable / barely usable / crippled hardware, and software, is far more limiting. THE RESULT OF BEING INFECTED WITH SUCH MALWARE.

As usual, you've resorted to clutching at straws, and that too, imagined ones.

Quoting Huffington Post on FRee Republic, to attack the site as racist , is grasping at straws.

Astute judgment. I'd rather use my time on actual problems, than imagined ones.

You've given no indication that you do anything other than try to inflame people and make unfounded insults.

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

Since you’ve begun recycling comments, you may feel free to scroll up and down for replies and arguments.

[grey_whiskers]

More like he had an accurate estimate of the edge of what business would consider "good enough", and rides that edge.

Compare the RAS characteristics of Windows to that of other operating systems in the early days.

VMS hardly ever crashed; neither did mainframes; nor that I recall did early Apples, nor UNIX.

So as Windows happened to gain early acceptance it became the de facto baseline.

And as the decision makers got used to Word and Excel later on, businesses put up with the rest of Windows' crap faute de mieux. Now that there are competitors whose products offer similar functionality for word processing and spreadsheets, Microsoft relies on (among other things) inertia, FUD, and sunken costs.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

????

[MyTwoCopperCoins]

!!!!