Rare Apple I computer sells for $216,000 in London

[Rod Speed]

SG1 wrote:

"Jim Brown" <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8q3lb1FosgU1@mid.individual.net...

Roddles with a different name. Those turns of phrase are a dead give away.....

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you actually are that stupid.

 

[Peter Flass]

On 1/23/2011 6:14 PM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:

Seebs<usenet-nospam@seebs.net> writes:
Basically, Microsoft single-handedly invented the botnet and the email
virus. Actually, I'm not quite sure that's fair. Technically, the GOOD
TIMES jokers *invented* the email virus, as an abstract concept, but
Microsoft was by far the first company to actually implement the necessary
infrastructure.

there was xmas exec on bitnet in nov87 ... vmshare archive

CHRISTMA EXEC? You had to manually save and execute it, though many did.

 

[Seebs]

On 2011-01-24, Joe Thompson <spam+@orion-com.com> wrote:

On 2011-01-23, Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:
Seebs wrote
Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.
If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive
and install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a real
choice. -- Joe

Exactly. That I could, of course, load something else doesn't change the
fact that it was extremely difficult to not buy a copy of Windows.

-s
--
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

 

[Rod Speed]

Joe Thompson wrote

Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote
Seebs wrote

Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.

Wrong. If you cant find one with the OS you want preinstalled, even someone
as stupid as him should have been able to install the OS he prefers instead.

If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive and
install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a real choice.

Oh bullshit. Of course you have a real choice.

You may find that some of your choices cost more than others.

Your problem.

 

[Jim Brown]

Seebs wrote

Joe Thompson <spam+@orion-com.com> wrote
Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote
Seebs wrote

Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.
If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive
and install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a
real choice.

Exactly. That I could, of course, load something else doesn't change
the fact that it was extremely difficult to not buy a copy of Windows.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

Yes, it would be more convient if the bulk of the market wanted the
OS you prefer, but when it doesnt, you still have a real choice of OS.

It isnt as if it even costs you any more for the OS you prefer.

And even if it did when the OS you prefer is not free, you get to wear
the fact that the OS or app you prefer isnt what the market prefers.

Thats just basic market economics, stupid.

 

[SG1]

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8q49n9FomsU1@mid.individual.net...

Joe Thompson wrote
Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote
Seebs wrote

Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.

Wrong. If you cant find one with the OS you want preinstalled, even
someone
as stupid as him should have been able to install the OS he prefers
instead.

If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive and
install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a real
choice.

Oh bullshit. Of course you have a real choice.

You may find that some of your choices cost more than others.

Your problem.

And all of your choices disagree with any choice Roddles would make. We
choose to breathe Roddles.

 

[Joe Thompson]

On 2011-01-23, Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Seebs wrote
Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.
If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive
and install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a real
choice. -- Joe
--
Joe Thompson -
E-mail addresses in headers are valid. | http://www.orion-com.com/
"...the FDA takes a dim view of exploding pharmaceuticals..." -- Derek Lowe

 

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:

there was xmas exec on bitnet in nov87 ... vmshare archive
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=CHRISTMA&ft=PROB
old risk digest
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/5.81.html#subj1

the xmas exec is basically social engineering ... distributing a
compromised executable and getting people to load & execute.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011b.html#9 Rare Apple I computer sells for $216,000 in London

bitnet annoucement on vmshare
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=BITNET&ft=MEMO

tymshare made its vm370/cms online computer conferencing available to
SHARE user group organization in aug76
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/

recent post about the internal network ...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#4

including old email about plans to convert the internal
network to sna/vtam
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#email870306

also references old email about the executive committee being told that
PROFS was an SNA application (among other things) used to justify
converting the internal network to sna/vtam:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#email870302
in this old post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#7

and somewhat similar discussion here ... where somebody forwarded
me a lengthy log of email discussing how sna/vtam could be
the nsfnet backbone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#email870109

in this old post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#21

some of the same people involved in the above referenced email exchanges
(about sna/vtam for nsfnet backbone) ... were later involved in the
transfer of cluster scaleup ... mentioned in this old post about jan92
meeting in ellison's conference room:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13

also referenced in this other email
http://www.garlic.com/~lhwemail.html#medusa

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

 

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:

there was xmas exec on bitnet in nov87 ... vmshare archive
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=CHRISTMA&ft=PROB
old risk digest
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/5.81.html#subj1

the xmas exec is basically social engineering ... distributing a
compromised executable and getting people to load & execute.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011b.html#9 Rare Apple I computer sells for $216,000 in London

can't tell for sure whether this is going to be duplicate or not

bitnet annoucement on vmshare
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=BITNET&ft=MEMO

tymshare made its vm370/cms online computer conferencing available to
SHARE user group organization in aug76
http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/

recent post about the internal network ...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#4

including old email about plans to convert the internal
network to sna/vtam
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#email870306

also references old email about the executive committee being told that
PROFS was an SNA application (among other things) used to justify
converting the internal network to sna/vtam:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#email870302
in this old post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#7

and somewhat similar discussion here ... where somebody forwarded
me a lengthy log of email discussing how sna/vtam could be
the nsfnet backbone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#email870109

in this old post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#21

some of the same people involved in the above referenced email exchanges
(about sna/vtam for nsfnet backbone) ... were later involved in the
transfer of cluster scaleup ... mentioned in this old post about jan92
meeting in ellison's conference room:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13

also referenced in this other email
http://www.garlic.com/~lhwemail.html#medusa


--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2011-01-23, Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

Joe Thompson wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

Well before MultiFinder as I said, and MultiFinder wasnt OS multitasking anyway.

Sure it was.

Nope, it was an addon, not multitasking as part of the OS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MultiFinder

So was windows until NT.

--
⚂⚃ 100% natural

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

 

[Rod Speed]

Jasen Betts wrote

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Joe Thompson wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

Well before MultiFinder as I said, and MultiFinder wasnt OS multitasking anyway.

Sure it was.

Nope, it was an addon, not multitasking as part of the OS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MultiFinder

So was windows until NT.

Nope. And that was well after multitasking in Win anyway.

 

[Seebs]

On 2011-01-24, Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

Not particularly, no.

Yes, it would be more convient if the bulk of the market wanted the
OS you prefer, but when it doesnt, you still have a real choice of OS.

Not really.

It isnt as if it even costs you any more for the OS you prefer.

It sort of does.

Thats just basic market economics, stupid.

No one denied that it was; maybe you should save the word "stupid" for times
when it's applicable?

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that, say, you basically
get to choose which products to buy. If the only way to get a burger king
burger were to buy a burger from McD's, at which point you could throw the
burger out but keep the carton, then go to BK and have them put a free burger
in the carton, that would not be a "real choice" the way the current system
is.

-s
--
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

 

[Jim Brown]

Seebs wrote

Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote
Seebs wrote
Joe Thompson <spam+@orion-com.com> wrote
Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote
Seebs wrote

Back in the day, I once spent a day and a half trying to find
a vendor who was willing to sell me a non-Windows laptop.

But was so stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out that
even you should be able to add anything you liked to the hardware.

It doesn't count as a "real choice" unless it's on the same terms.
If I have to pay for Windows even though I intend to wipe the drive
and install another OS before Windows ever boots, I do not have a
real choice.

Exactly. That I could, of course, load something else doesn't change
the fact that it was extremely difficult to not buy a copy of Windows.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

Not particularly, no.

Yes, it would be more convient if the bulk of the market wanted the
OS you prefer, but when it doesnt, you still have a real choice of OS.

Not really.

Yes, really. It wouldnt even cost you a cent more.

It isnt as if it even costs you any more for the OS you prefer.

It sort of does.

Pigs arse it does.

Thats just basic market economics, stupid.

No one denied that it was; maybe you should save
the word "stupid" for times when it's applicable?

Its completely applicable there.

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that,
say, you basically get to choose which products to buy.

And that is precisely what you got when the alternative is quite literally free.

If the only way to get a burger king burger were to buy
a burger from McD's, at which point you could throw the
burger out but keep the carton, then go to BK and have them
put a free burger in the carton, that would not be a "real choice"

Corse it would be.

And thats nothing like the situation with PCs anyway.

> the way the current system is.

 

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:42:52 +1100
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

Jasen Betts wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Joe Thompson wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

Well before MultiFinder as I said, and MultiFinder wasnt OS
multitasking anyway.

Sure it was.

Nope, it was an addon, not multitasking as part of the OS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MultiFinder

So was windows until NT.

Nope. And that was well after multitasking in Win anyway.

You missed the point - until NT Windows wasn't an OS, MSDOS
was the OS and Windows was an addon.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/

 

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:52:21 +1100
"Jim Brown" <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Seebs wrote

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that,
say, you basically get to choose which products to buy.

And that is precisely what you got when the alternative is quite
literally free.

It's not free if you account for your time. When the only way to
buy a PC is to buy it with Windows installed (and therefore paid for) the
cost of installing Windows is zero (no money, no time).

The cost of installing another OS is the cost of obtaining it
(download time plus blank media - or purchase cost of installation media at
a minimum) plus the (moderately skilled) time it takes to install it.
That's not zero.

Now this all changes if you get the PC without an OS for less than
the cost of the same PC with an OS or if there is a choice of pre-installed
OS on the hardware of your choice. Neither is common even now.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/

 

[jmfbahciv]

Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:52:21 +1100
"Jim Brown" <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Seebs wrote

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that,
say, you basically get to choose which products to buy.

And that is precisely what you got when the alternative is quite
literally free.

It's not free if you account for your time. When the only way to
buy a PC is to buy it with Windows installed (and therefore paid for) the
cost of installing Windows is zero (no money, no time).

The cost of installing another OS is the cost of obtaining it
(download time plus blank media - or purchase cost of installation media at
a minimum) plus the (moderately skilled) time it takes to install it.
That's not zero.

Now this all changes if you get the PC without an OS for less than
the cost of the same PC with an OS or if there is a choice of pre-installed
OS on the hardware of your choice. Neither is common even now.

It is a fact that I could have bought a Dell computer with Unix installed

in 1994. However, they told me that it would take 9 months for them to
make a system disk with Unix on it. another moment in my life when
I was rendered speechless when encountering abject stupidity. I knew then
that MS was in the driver's seat for all PC business.

/BAH

 

[Peter Flass]

On 1/24/2011 3:46 AM, Seebs wrote:

On 2011-01-24, Jim Brown<jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:
Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

Not particularly, no.

Yes, it would be more convient if the bulk of the market wanted the
OS you prefer, but when it doesnt, you still have a real choice of OS.

Not really.

It isnt as if it even costs you any more for the OS you prefer.

It sort of does.

Thats just basic market economics, stupid.

No one denied that it was; maybe you should save the word "stupid" for times
when it's applicable?

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that, say, you basically
get to choose which products to buy. If the only way to get a burger king
burger were to buy a burger from McD's, at which point you could throw the
burger out but keep the carton, then go to BK and have them put a free burger
in the carton, that would not be a "real choice" the way the current system
is.

Not much point in arguing, it would appear. No matter what you say, one
or more clone will just deny it and tell you how stupid you are.

 

[Peter Flass]

On 1/24/2011 5:30 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:52:21 +1100
"Jim Brown"<jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Seebs wrote

However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that,
say, you basically get to choose which products to buy.

And that is precisely what you got when the alternative is quite
literally free.

It's not free if you account for your time. When the only way to
buy a PC is to buy it with Windows installed (and therefore paid for) the
cost of installing Windows is zero (no money, no time).

The cost of installing another OS is the cost of obtaining it
(download time plus blank media - or purchase cost of installation media at
a minimum) plus the (moderately skilled) time it takes to install it.
That's not zero.

Now this all changes if you get the PC without an OS for less than
the cost of the same PC with an OS or if there is a choice of pre-installed
OS on the hardware of your choice. Neither is common even now.

Dual-core pentium for less than $350; Fedora install less than 20
minutes; not having to pay the Bill tax, priceless! Obviously
installing an OS from scratch is not for everyone, but if yu know your
way around a computer it isn't too difficult. Now if only I could get
Samba and VirtualBox to play well together - I had it working but made a
change and broke it :-(

 

[Joe Thompson]

On 2011-01-24, Jim Brown <jb45678@gmail.com> wrote:

Seebs wrote
However, a "real choice" in economic terms suggests that,
say, you basically get to choose which products to buy.

And that is precisely what you got when the alternative is quite
literally free.

Not when there is a product one cannot choose not to buy.

If the only way to get a burger king burger were to buy
a burger from McD's, at which point you could throw the
burger out but keep the carton, then go to BK and have them
put a free burger in the carton, that would not be a "real choice"

Corse it would be.

Not unless McDonald's gave me a refund for the unwanted burger, so that
my free burger was actually free. -- Joe
--
Joe Thompson -
E-mail addresses in headers are valid. | http://www.orion-com.com/
"...the FDA takes a dim view of exploding pharmaceuticals..." -- Derek Lowe

 

[Charlie Gibbs]

In article <0LH_o.512$RQ6.442@news.usenetserver.com>, scott@slp53.sl.home
(Scott Lurndal) writes:

Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:

On 1/22/2011 1:51 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

Charlie Gibbs wrote

Bill Gates would repeatedly whine about how the
government was stifling Microsoft's right to innovate,

Not that they ever have innovated, of course, but they'd like to know
they could if they ever decided to.

Indeed, DOS was not an innovation, it wasn't even orignally developed
by MS. Indeed, Windows was not an innnovation, just a ripoff of Xerox
and Apple. Networking in windows (remember Winsock?) derived from
BSD. Network File Systems? First done by Novell with Netware.
Where's NetBUI today (an example of innovation gone bad)?
IE? First done by Mosiac, then Netscape.
The Zune was not an innovation, nor was the Xbox, nor is their cloud.

Microsoft only innovates in monopolization techniques.

And even there they stole a lot from IBM.

--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!