Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:57:00 +0100 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> To: "Konstantinos Konstantinidis" <kkonstan@duth.gr>, <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Brad Knowles" <brad.knowles@skynet.be> Subject: Re: A breath of fresh air.. Message-ID: <01e401c17fbe$0f0ae2d0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <0112071641320B.01380@stinky.akitanet.co.uk><000b01c17f42$c23ab140$0a0 0000a@atkielski.com><3C110351.4748B559@duth.gr><005001c17f6c$e60c0ef0$ 0a00000a@atkielski.com> <15377.17350.796336.801464@guru.mired.org> <006901c17f70$19a2f820$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C11560B.A035DEF3@duth.gr> <009401c17f9c$5bad3bf0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a05101007b837448d6ad8@[10.0.1.16]> <010601c17fab$1cd2b270$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a0510100fb8375b52c121@[10.0.1.16]> <016f01c17fb4$b3c1fc00$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a0510101eb8376b377aa1@[10.0.1.16]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brad writes: > But it's not a general problem. It isn't? If I define it so, why wouldn't it be? > I've already answered this question. No, you have avoided it. > Come up with a real world situation, and maybe > you'll get a real world answer. I've given a hypothetical situation, and I expect a hypothetical answer. > So long as you continue to persist in creating > totally inappropriate flights of fancy in the > framing of your loaded questions, we will refuse > to give you the answer you want to hear. In other words, it is impossible to answer my question without saying "Windows," and so reasons must be found not to answer it. That's what what I wished to demonstrate. > ... and given the reactions I saw last time you > went on a spamming spree ... I'm not spamming anyone, nor have I done so in the past. > Well, if you don't exist, then I sure wish > you would acknowledge the fact that you don't > exist and disappear in a poof of self-contradictory > logic. If I do not exist, then logically I cannot acknowledge anything, nor can I disappear, since I was never there in the first place. > Because you are being excessively annoying in > your unending pursuit of an answer that you will > not, and cannot, receive. I seem to annoy you, probably because I have questioned your opinions, and you have realized that you cannot objectively defend them, and you do not wish to admit that they are merely opinions, with no greater objective validity than the opinions of anyone else. > I do not dispute that Windows has the highest unit > "sales" figures for OSes so far, but keep in mind > that until recently you simply could not buy or sell > an x86 machine without Windows installed (and "sold"), > regardless of the purpose that the machine was going to > be put to. Do you not equate sales with use? If not, what is the reason for not equating them? Do you have reason to believe that Windows is being removed from a statistically-significant proportion of machines sold with the OS, and replaced with something else? If so, what else is replacing it, and what is the basis for your belief? > Maybe that's your general case, but I do not > necessarily accept that definition. What is your definition? > Until you can get an agreement on the basic terms > of discussion, you cannot rationally make any > higher-level argument. See above. I actually made my point long ago, however. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01e401c17fbe$0f0ae2d0$0a00000a>