What do YOU think?

Negative said:
cd's (sic, indeed) was my mistake

I know it was your mistake, but to issue a post correcting english grammar on the internet is both annoying and pedantic, that was why i mentioned it.

He also said:
We were talking about the complete package, btw

Well, in my opinion "the complete package" is open to some interpretation, having never purchased a boxed version of linux i would understand it to be whatever you can download for *free* from the internet - and even with that i would trim off any unnecessary bloat such as all the different window managers (icewm does anything graphical I need), I am aware that a full install of everything suse has to offer is somewhere in the region of 6.5 gig, but who would install /everything/?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pwaring
Originally posted by Terr
To say windows has no security because it has no local-security, it like saying that my house isn't safe because my front door isn't locked against a large tank. Your door might be locked against the tank, but it won't do much good either, so why brag?

>> But how likely is it that a large tank will ram against your door? Less likely than someone gaining local access to your computer.

---

You're really missing the analogy. I won't bother explaining, I applaud your dedication, but not your (seemingly strong) aversion to seeing other peoples' points.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Negative

Although I know what you mean, this is just to get things straight: cd's (sic, indeed) was my mistake, not Pwaring's (Pwarings? Hey, can anyone explain the rules to me, please? Kapperdog? Terr? Something like this? one cd, two cds, a cd's box (as in the box of a cd, or a cds box as in a box for cds)? Correct me if I'm wrong ;) )
We were talking about the complete package, btw.

---

I dunno. It's a matter of preference and common usage nowadays. The public SETS grammar and language, even though language conservatives decry slang and mis-spellings. (I draw the line at 13317 sp33k though... ick.)

Of course it's invincible...not. My god damn closet is more secure than windows.

I suppose your closet contains papers with the recipe for Coca-Cola on it?

X for xenomania
X for xenophobia
X for xerography
X for xerophagy
X for xylolith
X for Xylonite
X for xylophagous
X for xyst

which version is it all abt?

pwaring i was wondering if u knew that in linux anyone with a boot floopy can reset the root password??
plus in linux rescue u get a root shell automatically
that sorta stuffs your whole pressing cancel at windows login argumentmight be easier to compare it to unix sercurity

Negative - to answer your question about the use of an apostrophe. There are two ways to do this in English. The rationale is to indicate ownership, as in the boy's dog. You would not say the boys' dog, if it was one boy. However, with more than one boy it becomes the boys' dog, here showing there are several boys all sharing ownership of the dog. Note that moving the apostophe is correct only when the subject are plural (more than one). Hope this helps and it was not meant as disrespect. pwaring - it is not good form to mock someone in their use of grammar, epecially when they are not using their mother tongue(s).

As a follow up - the use of an "s" always denotes plural and not ownership, as in one dog, two boys, one hundred Belgians, two million Italians etc.

bienvenue

its the user who secures it not the os itself