Prev: Jabra GN 5035 (Unknown device)
Next: restore SD card capacity
From: Unknown on 19 Apr 2010 11:26
It has absolutely nothing to do with what I would like them to do. It is
your statement
"those won't get rolled into a service pack". You seem to be absolutely sure
of that.
"VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:hqguuq$tn1$1(a)news.albasani.net...
> Unknown wrote:
>
>> How can you state the following? Wouldn't it be beneficial to release a
>> service pack
>> to tie up all the loose ends?
>>
>> . All you get now are
>> functional updates that are either considered part of security updates
>> or
>> can be applied to code branches for their newer and supported versions;
>> however, those won't get rolled into a service pack.
>
> When you own 51% of Microsoft's stock then you can tell them what YOU
> would
> like them to do.


From: kraut on 19 Apr 2010 11:37
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:26:19 -0500, "Unknown" <unknown(a)unknown.kom>
wrote:

>It has absolutely nothing to do with what I would like them to do. It is
>your statement
>"those won't get rolled into a service pack". You seem to be absolutely sure
>of that.
>"VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message
>news:hqguuq$tn1$1(a)news.albasani.net...
>> Unknown wrote:
>>
>>> How can you state the following? Wouldn't it be beneficial to release a
>>> service pack
>>> to tie up all the loose ends?
>>>
>>> . All you get now are
>>> functional updates that are either considered part of security updates
>>> or
>>> can be applied to code branches for their newer and supported versions;
>>> however, those won't get rolled into a service pack.
>>
>> When you own 51% of Microsoft's stock then you can tell them what YOU
>> would
>> like them to do.
>
From: kraut on 19 Apr 2010 11:38
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:26:19 -0500, "Unknown" <unknown(a)unknown.kom>
wrote:

>It has absolutely nothing to do with what I would like them to do. It is
>your statement
>"those won't get rolled into a service pack". You seem to be absolutely sure
>of that.
>"VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message
>news:hqguuq$tn1$1(a)news.albasani.net...
>> Unknown wrote:
>>
>>> How can you state the following? Wouldn't it be beneficial to release a
>>> service pack
>>> to tie up all the loose ends?
>>>
>>> . All you get now are
>>> functional updates that are either considered part of security updates
>>> or
>>> can be applied to code branches for their newer and supported versions;
>>> however, those won't get rolled into a service pack.
>>
>> When you own 51% of Microsoft's stock then you can tell them what YOU
>> would
>> like them to do.
>
From: VanguardLH on 19 Apr 2010 13:22
Unknown wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote ...
>
>> Unknown wrote:
>>
>>> How can you state the following? Wouldn't it be beneficial to release a
>>> service pack to tie up all the loose ends?
>>>
>>> . All you get now are functional updates that are either considered
>>> part of security updates or can be applied to code branches for their
>>> newer and supported versions; however, those won't get rolled into a
>>> service pack.
>>
>> When you own 51% of Microsoft's stock then you can tell them what YOU
>> would like them to do.
>
> It has absolutely nothing to do with what I would like them to do. It is
> your statement "those won't get rolled into a service pack". You seem to
> be absolutely sure of that.

When was the last time you saw a service pack for Windows 286, 286, 3.x,
95, 98, ME, NT3.5, NT4.0, or Windows 2000? There were updates long after
the last service pack. They are mostly security updates. They NEVER got
rolled into a service pack. History told me what Microsoft does, as well
as every other software vendor regarding what are considered standard
practices for unsupported software.

So what did you produce a decade ago that you still FULLY support and on
what you waste your time that generates you no revenue?
From: Michael on 19 Apr 2010 14:08
"VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:hqi3g1$pvv$1(a)news.albasani.net...
> Unknown wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote ...
>>
>>> Unknown wrote:
>>>
>>>> How can you state the following? Wouldn't it be beneficial to release a
>>>> service pack to tie up all the loose ends?
>>>>
>>>> . All you get now are functional updates that are either considered
>>>> part of security updates or can be applied to code branches for their
>>>> newer and supported versions; however, those won't get rolled into a
>>>> service pack.
>>>
>>> When you own 51% of Microsoft's stock then you can tell them what YOU
>>> would like them to do.
>>
>> It has absolutely nothing to do with what I would like them to do. It is
>> your statement "those won't get rolled into a service pack". You seem to
>> be absolutely sure of that.
>
> When was the last time you saw a service pack for Windows 286, 286, 3.x,
> 95, 98, ME, NT3.5, NT4.0, or Windows 2000? There were updates long after
> the last service pack. They are mostly security updates. They NEVER got
> rolled into a service pack. History told me what Microsoft does, as well
> as every other software vendor regarding what are considered standard
> practices for unsupported software.
>
> So what did you produce a decade ago that you still FULLY support and on
> what you waste your time that generates you no revenue?

His kids?
--


"Don't pick a fight with an old man.
If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you."


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Jabra GN 5035 (Unknown device)
Next: restore SD card capacity