Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 4AA703800008E; Sun, 6 May 2012 08:51:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SR0uk-0004iR-UC for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 06 May 2012 13:50:14 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SR0uk-0004iI-HM for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 06 May 2012 13:50:14 +0100 Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SR0ui-0000ob-MT for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 06 May 2012 13:50:13 +0100 Received: from mtaout-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.65]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q46Co5jB019382 for ; Sun, 6 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.69] (host-92-0-52-194.as43234.net [92.0.52.194]) by mtaout-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id 06314E00008C for ; Sun, 6 May 2012 08:50:04 -0400 (EDT) From: pat To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 13:53:08 +0100 Message-ID: <1336308788.2541.16.camel@g4gvw-high-grade> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1336308605; bh=5L0wA9kMinc0s9lL3JUhjkynEVcqRRl9xmBm/C2oMHQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=hsI1qlDVT7jsUeS1D5y2b5Pk8PTlmlaLcaDEoGnyjCyPyzwl9gLdk9/aEk/Zf51Vz q+sUx5HrhAneYhfjLiEx/VJfrrRPhbfHfBatIfWNnoUlmcrShf5C4D5IMgd5pvd9EY 62fbvUO9DR92kpd01DNpan+6fMZ4Jy3S9jhXx+Zg= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:457162816:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: I was trying to make a point in a humourous fashion but seem to have sparked an interesting debate. Operating systems may be judged in many ways - rather like a multi-course meal. One's favourite dish may not suit the other diners for a variety of reasons. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [64.12.206.40 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (g4gvw[at]aol.com) -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 5c1f37c04fc013ebbc2288fd3791d043 Subject: LF: Open Sauce Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:480570688:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-d021.2 ; domain : mx.aol.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1db4054fa673d05671 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none I was trying to make a point in a humourous fashion but seem to have sparked an interesting debate. Operating systems may be judged in many ways - rather like a multi-course meal. One's favourite dish may not suit the other diners for a variety of reasons. What I strongly resent (and I hope more PC component manufacturers, vendors and users will too) is the threat that Microsoft are attempting in their quest for dominance. It is a restrictive practice and the thin end of an insidious wedge intended to remove competitiveness. It will also in the opinion of many industry pundits remove an incentive to further development of personal computing and connectivity. Arguments that running virtual machines within Windows are not an answer. Strangely, it is reported that Microsoft are major contributors to the Linux kernel! One wonders why? -- 73 es gd dx de Pat G4GVW, Nr Felixstowe, East Coast, UK