Users cling to old Microsoft operating systems | CNET News.com
“Even though Microsoft said this week that it will stop distributing Windows 98 at the end of this month, a new study shows that a substantial number of businesses, both large and small, are still using it.
The study, released this week by technology consultant AssetMetrix, found that more than 80 percent of companies still have some machines using Windows 95 or Windows 98. Of those companies still using the older operating systems, an average of 39 percent of desktops were running either Windows 95 or Windows 98. “
There’s a couple of ways that this could be taken…
The first would be the one Microsoft will likely claim: That this is a mark of a good operating system, and that MS is suffering from it’s own dedication to quality.
However, there’s a little blip further on in the link that tels the real story:
“Windows XP, the most current version of Windows, was found on just 6.6 percent of the machines.”
Which tells me that the quality of the older work isn’t the issue… it’s what they’re tacking onto the newer work.
Libya Agrees to Arms Inspections
“Libya’s decision to dismantle its weapons program was first announced Friday in London by British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Bush spoke minutes later, saying if Libya followed through with its commitment, ‘its good faith can be returned.'”
Amazing what a little testicular fortitude can do, isn’t it? Too bad the last occupant of Mr. Bush’s position didn’t have any.
John Hawkins over at Right Wing News has been watching the space cowboys over at the septiuc tank known as the Democratic Underground, and came up with this gem.
“What, exactly, did bin laden do again?
All we know is that he cheered from the sidelines. What’s the point of capturing him? Is he directly involved in anything?
Since Bush is friends with the Bin Ladens, maybe he just picked one and said, “Can we use him as our bogeyman?” It could be that Osama volunteered to be poster”
Oh, it gets better.
“He has served the CIA faithfully for 27 years… He has been directly involved in all his assignments for his employer.”
It gets better yet. Yes, folks, leftists really do think like this.
Read the whole thing, link at the top.
The Volokh Conspiracy seems to think the idiodic ruling in the aforementioned Jose Padilla case will be over-ruled. It worries me that anyone can even consider this as an issue.
Yes, I saw the Boortz post about it this morning, and that’s troubling, too, but not shocking; Bootz is a libertarian… and their rabid mistrust of anything government is legendary. In this case as in most others, it blinds them to bigger problems.
ABCNEWS.com : Appeals Court Says Bush Can’t Hold U.S. Citizen
What about ‘We are at war” do these idiots not understand?
Dan Drezner is falling into a trap, I think. One the Democrats have been falling into for some time, for a different reason.
He complains, in his recent Slate article:
“A third criticism has slowly emerged over the past six months. It agrees with the logic of Bush’s grand strategy, but questions whether the policy implementation has been up to snuff. This line of argumentation has less to do with substance and more to do with process. To sum it up, Bush’s management of foreign policy has been too detached for his own good. “
He then proceeds to list a number of such instances. One particularly easy target, for me was this one:
“The latest process screw-up was last week’s decision to bar allies outside the coalition of the willing in Iraq from receiving reconstruction contracts. The Defense Department memo in question was badly worded and badly timed. Claiming that the policy was “necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States” made it seem like the administration trusted Egypt and Saudi Arabia more than Germany or Canada. Releasing the memo the day before Bush was to call the leaders of France, Germany, and Russia to discuss forgiving Iraq’s prewar debt was none too bright. White House officials admitted to the New York Times that they were “surprised by both the timing and the blunt wording” of the memo.”
To which I responded:
Dan;
I can certainly understand how you come to the conclusions you do in your article. However, I think you may be missing a subtle point or two.
For example, you point up the apparent stumble in sending out word that those who didn’t co-operate in the initial move against Iraq, wouldn’t profit on the clean up… Just as Baker was making his tour, trying to drum up support for forgiving Iraqi debt.
In case you’d not noticed, once all the smoke had blown off, and the screaming predictable screaming had died down, nations like France, and Germany, who are on the excrement list… and rightly so… were lining up to sign onto the debt restructuring plan.
This is quite unlike the run-up to our attack on Saddam, when it was fashionable to ‘rise up against America’… even among some of our own left.
And the announcement wasn’t withheld, or sprung on these idiots suddenly. The administration had told everyone involved that the contract ban against those not assiting would be in place, before during and after the war.
But notice that following that timed event, things smoothed out, to everyone’s amazement. Indeed, the change is such among such nations, now, where they’ve been playing along with us very nicely indeed, with none of the anti-American posturing of just a few months ago, and they’re in a figurative sense writing checks to support the reconstruction.
As a matter of logic, how can this be? By what information is coming our way, the full and happy involvement in such debt re-structuring that we’ve seen in the last few days would seem at least an unlikely if not impossible outcome of this event. Yet, we see what can only be described as wild success.
How? Based on what we know, it doesn’t make sense. Could it be that we don’t have all the information upon which to judge the matter? Could it be that what looked like a blunder was in fact, a policy masterstroke? The result, in that case, at least would seem to indicate so.
The Democrats at the moment are in serious electoral trouble. They are so not only because of their own misdeeds and a large mistrust of them following the Bill Clinton era, but also but a President they keep under-estimating, and about whom the leftist press invariably has been projecting the worst possible picture they can. Can it be you’ve fallen into the same trap? They certainly seem happy to have you on board, if I read DU correctly, for example.
And mind, this is merely one example of how Mr. Bush continues to out perform the naysayers. By no means am I suggesting he’s perfect. But is your read of the man and his actions what it is because you’re being misled? Are you ALLOWING yourself to be misled?
I saw this business with Hinkley last night, (the guy who shot Reagan is getting out on unsupervised visits) and wondered what possible motivation this judge could have had. I should have said something in here that it looked politically motivated to me.
Drudge apparently thought so, too, and did some homework on the point.
“U.S. District Court Judge, District of Columbia. Room 6321, 333 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC, 20001. 202-273-0440.
Judge Paul L. Friedman was an assistant to Lawrence Walsh in Iran-contra investigation. He was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton. His best known decision is FEC v. GOPAC, 897 F.Supp. 615 (DDC 1995), in which he ruled against GOPAC. Judge Friedman was also an attorney in the law firm of White and Case for almost two decades.
Judge Friedman was born February 20, 1944. He received his B.A. from Cornell in 1964, and his J.D. from S.U.N.Y. Buffalo in 1968.”
Now what possible motivation could such a man have in ruling in a case involving a near-fatal attack on a Republican Icon, do you suppose, hmmmm?
Jeffrey Overstreet’s interview with John Rhys-Davies
Yes, I’m a LOTR fan, have been since the late 60’s.
I was rather disappointed when Viggo Mortensen turned into such an idiot. But this interview with John Rhys-Davis I found encouraging.
Says Rhys-Davis, in part:
“I’m burying my career so substantially in these interviews that it’s painful. But I think that there are some questions that demand honest answers. ….. I think that Tolkien says that some generations will be challenged. And if they do not rise to meet that challenge, they will lose their civilization. That does have a real resonance with me.”
On reading this, my eyebrows went up, bigtime. And in truth, this is spot on; If you read any of the background writings surrounding the author, the idea of his writing this epic was, in part, to create unique western mythology; one centered around early England, in the hopes of extending the reach of English Culture. Given the collapse of British colonialism doing his lifetime, and two world wars, the latter of which nearly cost England their country, his concerns are easily identified and understood. Sad that so many who claim to understand Tolkien miss this important point.
An interesting sidebar to this point is that Rhys-Davis grew up in Colonial Africa, and so perhaps has a better grasp of cultural value and what happens when cultures collapse from external pressure as surely happened in that part of the world.
He goes on from there:
“I mean, the abolition of slavery comes from Western democracy. True Democracy comes form our Greco-Judeo-Christian-Western experience. If we lose these things, then this is a catastrophe for the world”.
He echoes my thoughts, often expressed in these spaces, when he points out:
“…and there is a demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about, that we daren’t bring up because we are so cagey about not offending people racially. And rightly we should be. But there is a cultural thing as well.
By 2020, 50% of the children in Holland under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent. You look and see what your founding fathers thought of the Dutch. They are constantly looking at the rise of democracy and Dutch values as being the very foundation of American Democracy. If by the mid-century the bulk of Holland is Muslim and don’t forget, coupled with this there is this collapse of numbers … Western Europeans are not having any babies. The population of Germany at the end of the century is going to be 56% of what it is now. The populations of France, 52% of what it is now. The population of Italy is going to be down 7 million people. There is a change happening in the very complexion of Western civilization in Europe that we should think about at least and argue about. If it just means the replacement of one genetic stock with another genetic stock, that doesn’t matter too much. But if it involves the replacement of Western civilization with a different civilization with different cultural values, then it is something we really ought to discuss because, g**dammit, I am for dead white male culture. ”
Ryhs-Davis knows full and well, this is far from a popular POV in Hollywood…
“You do realize in this town what I’ve been saying [is like] blasphemy “
He caps it with:
“But if Tolkien’s got a message, it’s that ‘Sometimes you’ve got to stand up and fight for what you believe in.'”
Too bad Mortensen doesn’t understand that, despite that message being bluntly placed into the script, and into the book itself:
“Those without swords can still die on them”.
Rhys Davis has come up several notches in my view.
I highly recommend a read of this interview.
My compliments to Mr. Overstreet for having the testicular fortitude to post this interview; and my compliments to Andrew Sullivan for turning us on to it
CNN.com – Material Girl covers Clark with praise – Dec. 16, 2003:
“LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) –The Material Girl has stepped onto the political stage and endorsed Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark.
‘I think he has a good handle on foreign policy, I think he’s good with people, and I think he has a heart and a consciousness,’ pop singer Madonna said. ‘He’s interested in spirituality — I mean, those things mean a lot to me.’
The singer and children’s book author met Clark a few weeks ago for over an hour. In an interview recorded last week with CNN’s Denise Quan, Madonna said they discussed his becoming president.”
So, lemme understand this; Madonna lives… where?
The two were introduced by “Bowling for Columbine” filmmaker Michael Moore, who was an early supporter of Clark
Ooooh… THERE’s an endorsement… A liar and someone who’s oblivious to reality.
You figure out which is which.
“PARIS (AP) – French President Jacques Chirac said Wednesday he will ask parliament to pass a law banning Islamic head scarves and other religious insignia in public schools, a dramatic and potentially explosive move aimed at shoring up the nation’s secular tradition.”
Chirac said he would push for a law to be enacted in time for the school year that begins next autumn. Islamic head scarves, Jewish skullcaps and large crucifixes would fall under the ban.
Ah, there’s the socialist solution; remove religion from public life.
I admit I was half asleep when I heard the story this monring. But the tale, as I recall it, goes:
FNC’s green room yesterday afternoon. Mort Kondrake is prepping for his early eveining gig on FNC, and Former Clinton Secratary of State Alrbright in the same room, getting ready for a different show. They strike up a conversation.
Allbright says words to the effect of: ” Do you supose that Bush has been holding BinLaden waiting for a politically good moment to tell us?”
They really do think this way, Gang. It’s like I said yesterday: They’ve lost their collectivist minds.
More on this as I manage to find it. It’s fairly early yet on the east coast, and not much is moving.
Update: The wires are now moving a claim from Allbright that she was just kidding.
Yeah, right. Fire getting a little hot, there, Maddie?
Iraqi Minister Scolds U.N. for Inaction Regarding Hussein:
“UNITED NATIONS, Dec. 16 — Iraq’s foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, accused the United Nations Security Council today of having failed to help rescue his country from Saddam Hussein, and he chided member states for bickering over his beleaguered country’s future.”
Settling scores with the United States-led coalition should not be at the cost of helping to bring stability to the Iraqi people,” Mr. Zebari said in language unusually scolding for an occupant of the guest seat at the end of the curving Security Council table.
“Squabbling over political differences takes a back seat to the daily struggle for security, jobs, basic freedoms and all the rights the U.N. is chartered to uphold,” he said.
Gee. Do you think they’ll pay attention to the message?
Deb Orin at the NY Post lays it out
Republicans are rightly annoyed, and point out that if anything like this had happened at an event where a top Republican was present and did nothing to stop it, we’d hear no end of it between now and November.
“It’s disgraceful. It’s like an Upper West Side Manhattan left-wing Ku Klux Klan mentality,” said Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.). “If some Southern redneck talked like this about a liberal, everyone would denounce it. But because it’s Upper West Side humor, somehow it’s supposed to be chic.”
The Truth Laid Bear: President Saddam — Again?
The Bear asks an interesting question:
“During the buildup to the war, and since, many who opposed the war declared it an “illegal” action and a violation of international law.
Now that he has been found to be alive, I’d ask this to those who considered this an illegitimate war: will you now stand up and demand that Hussein be placed back in power? He was, after all, the “legal” ruler of Iraq.
And if not, why not? “
I’ve tried popping that one on a few folks who have this ‘illegal war’ thing stuck in their craw. The silence that follows the question is usually impressive. Reality, after all, is a tool to enlightenment. Or at the least, in the case of liberals, it confuses them enough that you can get a word in edgewise.
Dean: America Not Safer After Saddam’s Capture: “WASHINGTON — Anti-war candidate Howard Dean (search) said Monday ‘the capture of Saddam has not made America safer,’ directly contradicting President Bush and drawing the wrath of two Democratic presidential rivals.”
The kindest angle that one cam come up with here is that Dean has just exposed himself (again) as an idiot of monumental proportions… someone who under no condition whatever should be allowed anywhere near the reins of power.
The only other possible angle is one that is perhaps a little more realistic:
That being that Dean is reacting to bolster support among his base. Consider the comment from one of Dean supporters in reaction to Saddam’s capture… comments we saw echoed again and again:
“I can’t believe this. I’m crying here. I feel that we now don’t have a chance in this election.”
Dean’s saying to his supporters that ‘it doesn’t really mater”… a political parallel to “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain over there” He’s simply trying to minimze the damage done to his candidacy by President Bush simply doing his job well.
So, Dean is either a cold calculating so and so who cares more about his own power, than he does the welfare of the country, else he’s an idiot who thinks the world’s safety is not hamred by a genocidal madman being loose.
Which will you have, Democrats?
