kony wrote:

> On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 22:59:47 GMT, Curious George
> <cg@email.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>As have I and many others. Problem is these things tend to degrade to
>>something much less than a "debate."
>
>
> Of course they do, and when you actively participate in that
> as well it's a bit too late to come back and point at the
> opposing view.
>
>
>>Exchanging valid arguments is
>>one thing. Posting to repeatedly correct flawed arguments or to
>>simply hold ground regardless is something quite different.
>
>
> Then what would you prefer, that arguments go on flawed?
> I"m well aware that you think you're right when you get into
> arguments, but who doesn't have same belief in same
> situations?
>
>
>>>Well, let's not get too carried away here. What you described is akin to
>>>the point I'm making about the the over all value/cost of Netbeui, or lack
>>>of it, but Kony hasn't argued that part. He's stuck to the argument it's of
>>>'value' under certain circumstances, not 'universally'.
>>
>>I think you're giving more credit than is due. AFAIK He has never
>>acknowledged ANY limitations of NETBUI that would limit its use to
>>"certain situations".
>
>
> You really should pay more attention to my posts then, I
> certainly did mention routablity previously.
>
>
>
>>>What I find illogical is his apparent conviction that this limited 'value',
>>>if such exists, justifies the cost of continuing support; hence my penny
>>>for a 100 bucks analogy.
>>
>>If M$ can indeed "force" anything they want on the market, and their
>>proprietary NETBUI is indeed superior than why not "force" NETBUI on
>>the market, esp the small network consumer market? Certainly the
>>answer is in the question. Yes support, including the already mind
>>numbing complexity of the products and features the company already
>>maintains, is indeed also a factor.
>
>
> I feel WinXP has made it pretty clear that MS sought to
> dumb-down networking and make it easier for the new users.
> Which is easier for (those users), multiple protocols where
> they have to pick things or just having TCPIP do it all by
> default?

That argument is nonsense as Netbeui hasn't been a 'default' protocol for
multiple generations. Which is no wonder because you were TOLD that Netbeui
was going away before Win98 hit the streets.

So what's your next conspiracy theory?