🚀 go-pugleaf

Now that Rod has been proven a moron, it's just a joke to him.

Laugh it up, loser.

Rod Speed wrote in message ...
>
>Aaron <chaaron@lave.net> wrote in message
>news:7pm2mt$po9$1@mochi.lava.net...
>> Rod Speed wrote in message ...
>>> Aaron <chaaron@lave.net> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Aaron <chaaron@lave.net> wrote
>
>>>>>> That is one of the nice things I remember from Linux, and the
>>>>>> little Unix I saw in the military.  You create a partition, either
>>>>>> the whole hard disk, or only part of it, and give it a volume
>>>>>> label.  Then you can access it with that volume label.
>
>>>>>> Why didn't Microsoft think of this when they started?
>
>>>>> There are awkwiditys with any OS.
>
>>>>> You dont have to fart around recompiling
>>>>> the kernal, unlike unix quite a bit of the time.
>
>>>> Did I mention recompiling kernals and such?
>
>>> You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant.
>
>>> Yes, unix does the drive labelling better, and the install
>>> etc much worse. There are awkwiditys with any OS.
>
>>>> I asked about one simple feature that Microsoft, in its infinite
>>>> wisdom, did not implement. And by now they wish they had.
>
>>> Its always easy with 20/20 hindsight.
>
>> Yes, granted.
>
>>>> Why do you think they finally have the Active Directory?  Not to
mention
>>>> the industry standard things like fully qualified domain names,  URLs,
and
>>>> UNCs. Networked computers being able to use 26 resources is a joke.
>
>This is just plain wrong anyway. There are other ways
>to use networked resources that aint limited by that
>drive letter limitation, without using active directory.
>
>>> Having to recompile the kernal is a joke.
>
>> I'm sorry, I thought you could remember more than one item at a time.
>
>I'm not at all sorry that you cant manage any
>better than this, it gives me something to laugh at.
>
>> I never mentioned anything here other
>> than the volume label/drive letter situation.
>
>Like I keep telling you, you have always been and always will be,
>completely and utterly irrelevant, as it what you have mentioned.
>
>> There are many things that Unix/Linux does better than Windows,
>> and many things that Windows does better instead.
>
>Indeed. So there aint the slightest point in hyperventilating
>about the undoubted cruditys with Win9x drive lettering.
>
>OS choice is about the totality of the OS, all the areas
>it does better, and all the areas it does worse, when
>they are relevant to what you want to use it for.
>
>And the drive letter limitations with Win9x are easy enough to work around
anyway.
>
>> That is not the point of this chain.
>
>You dont get to rule on that any time soon.
>
>> Granted we are argueing here, but can't you please stick to the topic at
hand?
>
>Request denied.
>
>>> All OSs have their awkwiditys.
>
>
>