On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_? And where
> he studied? And how he got his job? Am I asking too much???
>
> Every time I see him on the show, he seems so competent. In comparison,
> Jeff Smith just blunders along. I remember in the earlier years when J.S..
> would constantly refer to his cook Craig, and how much I wanted to see
> him, and how nervous he seemed in the beginning. Anyway, I like him. I
> like him a lot.
>
> Vivian

Frankly, I think that a lot of the research and recipe development came from Craig Wollam or other staffers at WTTW in Chicago. (I've never seen any of the earlier Smith video from Tacoma in the 1970's.)

What most comments fail to take into account was that Smith was essentially a philosopher, not a chef. He often referred to a course he taught, "Food As Sacrament". Thia gives more insight into cooking, eating, and religion. His show was, at the start, never meant to be a step-by-step guide to culinary perfection. It was meant to make the home cook THINK about what he was doing, why, and for whom. It was meant to broaden the viewr's cultural and culinary horizons.

Back to Mr. Wollam: I don't know exactly when he fell in with the Smith production team, but I truly believe that he did a lot of the off-camera work as the show gained attention. Half of the US could probably do a proper mirepoix if you stood over their shoulder, but very few could taste a finished dish and tell you whether the ingredients were minced or chopped brunoise. Craig is one of that small percentage.

Wollam was the food professional; Smith was a food philosopher. Paul Bocuse was a chef; Paul Cezanne was a food fantasizer.

I'll miss Smith, not for his techniques (because they were awful), but for his multidisciplinary approach to food.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_? And where
>> he studied? And how he got his job? Am I asking too much???
>>


>
>Frankly, I think that a lot of the research and recipe development came from Craig Wollam or other staffers at WTTW in Chicago. (I've never seen any of the earlier Smith video from Tacoma in the 1970's.)
>
>What most comments fail to take into account was that Smith was essentially a philosopher, not a chef. He often referred to a course he taught, "Food As Sacrament". Thia gives more insight into cooking, eating, and religion. His show was, at the start, never meant to be a step-by-step guide to culinary perfection. It was meant to make the home cook THINK about what he was doing, why, and for whom. It was meant to broaden the viewr's cultural and culinary horizons.
>
>Back to Mr. Wollam: I don't know exactly when he fell in with the Smith production team, but I truly believe that he did a lot of the off-camera work as the show gained attention. Half of the US could probably do a proper mirepoix if you stood over their shoulder, but very few could taste a finished dish and tell you whether the ingredients were minced or chopped brunoise. Craig is one of that small percentage.
>
>Wollam was the food professional; Smith was a food philosopher. Paul Bocuse was a chef; Paul Cezanne was a food fantasizer.
>
>I'll miss Smith, not for his techniques (because they were awful), but for his multidisciplinary approach to food.

Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.

Sad that the guy ended his TV career on a shameful note.

Smith single handedly brought balsamic vinegar to the US. Hardly
anyone ever heard of it until he started to use it. Same with the
citrus reamers that became very popular.

He really made it simple for many of us to upgrade our cooking from
using mom's recipes to some new adventures.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>
> >> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_?
>
> Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
>
>
You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?

On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>>
>>>> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_?
>>
>> Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
>>
>>
> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>

My guess is the come from new users on Google Groups that are reading
them for the first time.

"Troll Disposal Service" wrote in message
...

FRAUD impersonation of me posted on eternal-september, this is
NOT my news server any more.



"Troll Disposal Service" wrote ...


>Aioe.org NNTP Server

Note that this is my new news server, aioe. org. All other posts
are forgeries. Posts from Troll Disposal Service and Acme Bully
Control on any other server are illegal forgeries and frauds.
Please report them promptly.

On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?

That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
"future" of Usenet. LOL

Jill

On 7/4/2015 10:29 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_?
>>>
>>> Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
>>>
>>>
>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>
>
> My guess is the come from new users on Google Groups that are reading
> them for the first time.

They always do... and Vivian (whoever she was) is long gone and will
never read the reply.

Jill

jmcquown wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On 7/4/2015 10:29 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > > On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT),
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal
> > > > > > Gourmet_?
> > > >
> > > > Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> > >
> >
> > My guess is the come from new users on Google Groups that are
> > reading them for the first time.
>
> They always do... and Vivian (whoever she was) is long gone and will
> never read the reply.
>
> Jill

Grin, Vivian was pretty fun to read! I think she dropped out around
2001 but not sure.

Carol

--

On 7/4/2015 1:54 PM, cshenk wrote:
> jmcquown wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> On 7/4/2015 10:29 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT),
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal
>>>>>>> Gourmet_?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>
>>>
>>> My guess is the come from new users on Google Groups that are
>>> reading them for the first time.
>>
>> They always do... and Vivian (whoever she was) is long gone and will
>> never read the reply.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Grin, Vivian was pretty fun to read! I think she dropped out around
> 2001 but not sure.
>
> Carol
>
I didn't discover rfc until around 1997 so no, I don't really remember
Vivian. I do know people who are using Google Groups stumble onto these
posts from long ago and dredge them up from time to time. The posters
don't tend to bother to come back to find out if they got a response.
Flash & Go... onto whatever it is they do while they're out of school.

Jill

jmcquown wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On 7/4/2015 1:54 PM, cshenk wrote:
> > jmcquown wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >
> > > On 7/4/2015 10:29 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > > On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:01:42 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT),
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN.
> > > > > > > HSU wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal
> > > > > > > > Gourmet_?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > > > > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > My guess is the come from new users on Google Groups that are
> > > > reading them for the first time.
> > >
> > > They always do... and Vivian (whoever she was) is long gone and
> > > will never read the reply.
> > >
> > > Jill
> >
> > Grin, Vivian was pretty fun to read! I think she dropped out around
> > 2001 but not sure.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> I didn't discover rfc until around 1997 so no, I don't really
> remember Vivian. I do know people who are using Google Groups
> stumble onto these posts from long ago and dredge them up from time
> to time. The posters don't tend to bother to come back to find out
> if they got a response. Flash & Go... onto whatever it is they do
> while they're out of school.
>
> Jill

Thats true Jill! Some do almost a drive by shooting. On being here, I
was sort of occasional checker back from 1995 but I don't recall the
email I used then and i was a lurker, rarely posted then. I don't
think I had a recognizable foot print before around 2007 or so.
Dabbles in it before then but more like i recognize names, than folks
recognized me from before then.

Carol

--

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_? And where
>> he studied? And how he got his job? Am I asking too much???
>>
>> Every time I see him on the show, he seems so competent. In comparison,
>> Jeff Smith just blunders along. I remember in the earlier years when J.S.
>> would constantly refer to his cook Craig, and how much I wanted to see
>> him, and how nervous he seemed in the beginning. Anyway, I like him. I
>> like him a lot.
>>
>> Vivian
>
>Frankly, I think that a lot of the research and recipe development came from Craig Wollam or other staffers at WTTW in Chicago. (I've never seen any of the earlier Smith video from Tacoma in the 1970's.)

<snip>

Google groups strikes again. There's been a spate of these posts
across all groups for at least 6 months now. Am curious as to why that
is...

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 5:13:09 PM UTC-4, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
> >> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_? And where
> >> he studied? And how he got his job? Am I asking too much???
> >>
> >> Every time I see him on the show, he seems so competent. In comparison,
> >> Jeff Smith just blunders along. I remember in the earlier years when J.S.
> >> would constantly refer to his cook Craig, and how much I wanted to see
> >> him, and how nervous he seemed in the beginning. Anyway, I like him. I
> >> like him a lot.
> >>
> >> Vivian
> >
> >Frankly, I think that a lot of the research and recipe development came from Craig Wollam or other staffers at WTTW in Chicago. (I've never seen any of the earlier Smith video from Tacoma in the 1970's.)
>
> <snip>
>
> Google groups strikes again. There's been a spate of these posts
> across all groups for at least 6 months now. Am curious as to why that
> is...

I've no idea. I use Google Groups, but it shows me newest posts
first. I'm not about to scroll through tens of thousands of subjects
to find something from 1994.

Cindy Hamilton

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:24:21 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 5:13:09 PM UTC-4, Je�us wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:32:33 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 1:50:39 PM UTC-4, VIVIAN. HSU wrote:
>> >> Can anyone tell me what he does other than _The Frugal Gourmet_? And where
>> >> he studied? And how he got his job? Am I asking too much???
>> >>
>> >> Every time I see him on the show, he seems so competent. In comparison,
>> >> Jeff Smith just blunders along. I remember in the earlier years when J.S.
>> >> would constantly refer to his cook Craig, and how much I wanted to see
>> >> him, and how nervous he seemed in the beginning. Anyway, I like him. I
>> >> like him a lot.
>> >>
>> >> Vivian
>> >
>> >Frankly, I think that a lot of the research and recipe development came from Craig Wollam or other staffers at WTTW in Chicago. (I've never seen any of the earlier Smith video from Tacoma in the 1970's.)
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Google groups strikes again. There's been a spate of these posts
>> across all groups for at least 6 months now. Am curious as to why that
>> is...
>
>I've no idea. I use Google Groups, but it shows me newest posts
>first. I'm not about to scroll through tens of thousands of subjects
>to find something from 1994.

Yeah, it's been many years since I looked at the posting side of
google groups, so I really don't know what's going on there. All I
know is these posts have been seemingly randomly appearing over all
sorts of groups. Most odd.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>
> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>
> Jill

I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?

I don't think the future should be anything. Our fears, hopes, and desires, have little control over the future. Web-based applications are a reality here and now. Sorry to be the one to have to tell you this. Feel free to live in your little bubble. I have no problem with people sticking their fingers in their ears and going "nah nah nah nah!" Just don't make me a fall guy for your ignorant world view.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >>
> >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >>
> >> Jill
> >
> >I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>
> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>
> --
> Bruce

If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?

How about you don't? Great logic you have there - using something
entirely inappropriate and incompatible, instead of using something
designed for the job.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >>
> >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >>
> >> Jill
> >
> >I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>
> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>
> --
> Bruce

Google groups is pretty good. I don't get any line warping problems and it even cleans up the posts so I don't have to wade through a bunch of stacked quote. It makes posts a lot more readable.

Of course all that is pretty irrelevant because in the end, I have to use a web based program to post to newsgroups on a Chromebook. If you're such a clever lad, you tell me what my options are. Or are you just a person that likes to complain endlessly? I promise to give it a go but you gotta give me something besides bitching.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >> >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >> >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >> >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >> >>
> >> >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >> >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >> >>
> >> >> Jill
> >> >
> >> >I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >>
> >> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> >> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> >> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
> >>
> >> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
> >> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
> >>
> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
> reader.
>
> --
> Bruce

I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:42:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> >>
>> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>
>> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
>> reader.
>>
>I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.

I know how you feel. I wanted people to tell me how I can turn my
toaster into an intergalactic space ship, but got no help at all.
They're all idiots out there, I tells ya.

Then again, you're the resident tech guru here - why don't you write
one for the POS?

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:40:12 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> How about you don't? Great logic you have there - using something
> entirely inappropriate and incompatible, instead of using something
> designed for the job.

Where do you get off giving advice on things you don't even use. Quit being a ****wit. Oh, I forgot... this is rfc. That's the norm. Excuse me if I ignore your advice from fantasyland. Hee hee.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:48:11 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:40:26 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >> >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >> >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >> >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >> >>
> >> >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >> >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >> >>
> >> >> Jill
> >> >
> >> >I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >>
> >> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> >> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> >> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
> >>
> >Google groups is pretty good. I don't get any line warping problems and it even cleans up the posts so I don't have to wade through a bunch of stacked quote. It makes posts a lot more readable.
>
> It may look good on your side, but people on the other side are
> complaining.
>
> >Of course all that is pretty irrelevant because in the end, I have to use a web based program to post to newsgroups on a Chromebook. If you're such a clever lad, you tell me what my options are. Or are you just a person that likes to complain endlessly? I promise to give it a go but you gotta give me something besides bitching.
>
> I don't know anything about Chromebooks. But if I had to use GG, I'd
> try to clear up the mess manually. Insert manual line breaks, for
> instance.
>
> --
> Bruce

As I have said - there's none of those problem with Google Groups. The formatting comes out beautifully. What's the problem?

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:49:36 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:42:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> >>
> >> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >>
> >> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
> >> reader.
> >>
> >I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.
>
> I know how you feel. I wanted people to tell me how I can turn my
> toaster into an intergalactic space ship, but got no help at all.
> They're all idiots out there, I tells ya.
>
> Then again, you're the resident tech guru here - why don't you write
> one for the POS?

Why don't you deal with your own problems - ****wit.


Thanks for learning me my newest favorite word from other lands. It has that certain old world charm - you ****wit. Hopefully, it won't get me banned from Google Groups. :-)

dsi1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> > On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> > >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> > >>
> > >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should
> > be the >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> > >>
> > >> Jill
> > >
> > > I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot
> > > that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the
> > > world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile
> > > devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop
> > > client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards
> > > web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how
> > > I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >
> > You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> > that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> > wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
> >
> > But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG
> > is. And you won't accept anything from anybody.
> >
> > --
> > Bruce
>
> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
> Usenet on a Chromebook?

Help me out here? I have a tablet with chrome and use it for
newsgroups. Do you mean something else?

Carol

--

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:56:45 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:49:36 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:42:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> >> >>
>> >> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>> >>
>> >> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
>> >> reader.
>> >>
>> >I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.
>>
>> I know how you feel. I wanted people to tell me how I can turn my
>> toaster into an intergalactic space ship, but got no help at all.
>> They're all idiots out there, I tells ya.
>>
>> Then again, you're the resident tech guru here - why don't you write
>> one for the POS?
>
>Why don't you deal with your own problems - ****wit.

My only problem is deciding whether I should poach or boil some eggs
this morning.

>Thanks for learning me my newest favorite word from other lands. It has that certain old world charm - you ****wit. Hopefully, it won't get me banned from Google Groups. :-)

You haven't noticed yet that it isn't working on me. Your attempt at
insults, I mean. You're really bad at it. Much like your tech
'knowledge' really.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:49:30 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:40:12 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>
>> How about you don't? Great logic you have there - using something
>> entirely inappropriate and incompatible, instead of using something
>> designed for the job.
>
>Where do you get off giving advice on things you don't even use.

Because you're a pig-ignorant ignoramus who doesnt care about Usenet
(and stated that elsewhere in the thread), or other users of Usenet.

>Quit being a ****wit. Oh, I forgot... this is rfc. That's the norm.
>Excuse me if I ignore your advice from fantasyland. Hee hee.

'My guess' is that without your family, you'd have nothing and would
be either be a vagrant, or be very familiar with hair nets. Somebody
like you without an ounce of common sense wouldn't get far without a
lot of help.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:59:26 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:52:43 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:48:11 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:40:26 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >> >> >> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >> >> >> > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >> >> >> > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >> >> >> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Jill
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >> >>
> >> >> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> >> >> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> >> >> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
> >> >>
> >> >Google groups is pretty good. I don't get any line warping problems and it even cleans up the posts so I don't have to wade through a bunch of stacked quote. It makes posts a lot more readable.
> >>
> >> It may look good on your side, but people on the other side are
> >> complaining.
> >>
> >> >Of course all that is pretty irrelevant because in the end, I have to use a web based program to post to newsgroups on a Chromebook. If you're such a clever lad, you tell me what my options are. Or are you just a person that likes to complain endlessly? I promise to give it a go but you gotta give me something besides bitching.
> >>
> >> I don't know anything about Chromebooks. But if I had to use GG, I'd
> >> try to clear up the mess manually. Insert manual line breaks, for
> >> instance.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce
> >
> >As I have said - there's none of those problem with Google Groups. The formatting comes out beautifully. What's the problem?
>
> So much for "I promise to give it a go". As I said, the problem's on
> the other side. On the side of the majority of people who use real
> newsreaders. But you don't care about other people Then you'll just
> have to accept that you'll get the occasional complaint and that some
> people won't read your posts.
>
> --
> Bruce

The reality is that you are completely clueless about posting to newsgroups in this new age of computing. Thanks for wasting my time. Rest assured that you won't get that chance again.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 2:10:43 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:56:45 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:49:36 PM UTC-10, Je�us wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:42:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >> >>
> >> >> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
> >> >> reader.
> >> >>
> >> >I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.
> >>
> >> I know how you feel. I wanted people to tell me how I can turn my
> >> toaster into an intergalactic space ship, but got no help at all.
> >> They're all idiots out there, I tells ya.
> >>
> >> Then again, you're the resident tech guru here - why don't you write
> >> one for the POS?
> >
> >Why don't you deal with your own problems - ****wit.
>
> My only problem is deciding whether I should poach or boil some eggs
> this morning.
>
> >Thanks for learning me my newest favorite word from other lands. It has that certain old world charm - you ****wit. Hopefully, it won't get me banned from Google Groups. :-)
>
> You haven't noticed yet that it isn't working on me. Your attempt at
> insults, I mean. You're really bad at it. Much like your tech
> 'knowledge' really.

You're the one that brought up "****wit" - ****wit. :-)

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 17:48:02 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 2:10:43 PM UTC-10, Je?us wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:56:45 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:49:36 PM UTC-10, Je?us wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:42:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
>> >> >> reader.
>> >> >>
>> >> >I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.
>> >>
>> >> I know how you feel. I wanted people to tell me how I can turn my
>> >> toaster into an intergalactic space ship, but got no help at all.
>> >> They're all idiots out there, I tells ya.
>> >>
>> >> Then again, you're the resident tech guru here - why don't you write
>> >> one for the POS?
>> >
>> >Why don't you deal with your own problems - ****wit.
>>
>> My only problem is deciding whether I should poach or boil some eggs
>> this morning.
>>
>> >Thanks for learning me my newest favorite word from other lands. It has that certain old world charm - you ****wit. Hopefully, it won't get me banned from Google Groups. :-)
>>
>> You haven't noticed yet that it isn't working on me. Your attempt at
>> insults, I mean. You're really bad at it. Much like your tech
>> 'knowledge' really.
>
>You're the one that brought up "****wit" - ****wit. :-)

And?

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 17:46:40 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>The reality is that you are completely clueless about posting to newsgroups in this new age of computing.
>Thanks for wasting my time. Rest assured that you won't get that chance again.

<fixed the ****ed up line wrapping again)

Yeah. You want to take every single aspect of what makes Usenet
special and useful (such as efficiency and simplicity), and turn it
into some sort of bloated moronic web blog/forum. Yeah. We don't have
enough of them yet, do we?

"Jeßus" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 17:46:40 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
> >The reality is that you are completely clueless about posting to newsgroups in this new age of computing.
> >Thanks for wasting my time. Rest assured that you won't get that chance again.
>
> <fixed the ****ed up line wrapping again)

I see you use Agent. You should have an option to turn on "Word Wrap"
in the Message section across the top of window. That should fix it
for you.

dsi1 > wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:59:26 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:52:43 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:48:11 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:40:26 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>>>>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
>>>>>>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot
>>>>>>> that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the
>>>>>>> world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices
>>>>>>> and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client
>>>>>>> programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards
>>>>>>> web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how
>>>>>>> I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
>>>>>> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
>>>>>> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Google groups is pretty good. I don't get any line warping problems
>>>>> and it even cleans up the posts so I don't have to wade through a
>>>>> bunch of stacked quote. It makes posts a lot more readable.
>>>>
>>>> It may look good on your side, but people on the other side are
>>>> complaining.
>>>>
>>>>> Of course all that is pretty irrelevant because in the end, I have to
>>>>> use a web based program to post to newsgroups on a Chromebook. If
>>>>> you're such a clever lad, you tell me what my options are. Or are you
>>>>> just a person that likes to complain endlessly? I promise to give it
>>>>> a go but you gotta give me something besides bitching.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know anything about Chromebooks. But if I had to use GG, I'd
>>>> try to clear up the mess manually. Insert manual line breaks, for
>>>> instance.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> As I have said - there's none of those problem with Google Groups. The
>>> formatting comes out beautifully. What's the problem?
>>
>> So much for "I promise to give it a go". As I said, the problem's on
>> the other side. On the side of the majority of people who use real
>> newsreaders. But you don't care about other people Then you'll just
>> have to accept that you'll get the occasional complaint and that some
>> people won't read your posts.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce
>
> The reality is that you are completely clueless about posting to
> newsgroups in this new age of computing. Thanks for wasting my time. Rest
> assured that you won't get that chance again.

My iPad would have to be right up there in this new age of computing and it
has a client for newsgroups - newstap! No doubt all the new age android
devices would be similarly supplied so just what is the issue? Should be
one for your Chromebook too.
--
Xeno

dsi1 > wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
>>>>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>
>>>>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's
>>>>> not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is
>>>>> moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google
>>>>> OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte
>>>>> Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a
>>>>> smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>>>
>>>> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
>>>> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
>>>> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>>>>
>>>> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
>>>> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>>>>
>>> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
>>> Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>
>> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
>> reader.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce
>
> I have no problems with the choices you make. That doesn't help me at all.

Oddly enough, you have the same range of choices. I looked at the
limitations of net books, bought an iPad instead.
--
Xeno

Bruce > wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
>>>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Jill
>>>>
>>>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's
>>>> not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is
>>>> moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google
>>>> OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte
>>>> Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're
>>>> such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>>
>>> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
>>> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
>>> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>>>
>>> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
>>> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>>>
>> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
>> Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> If I had to, I'd rather wait until I had access to any normal news
> reader.

Yep, the plague would be preferable to GG

--
Xeno

dsi1 > wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
>>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>
>>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
>>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>
>>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's
>>> not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is
>>> moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google
>>> OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte
>>> Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're
>>> such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>
>> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
>> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
>> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>>
>> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
>> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce
>
> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
> Usenet on a Chromebook?

You could try buying a real laptop. That would be a start.

--
Xeno

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 3:46:54 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> > On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >
> > That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> > "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >
> > Jill
>
> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>

I have seen the future, and it is an iPhone half the size of an iPad.
Everybody over 40 has trouble staring at a tiny screen, and the
necessity of using a specific app to perform any task -- resulting
in screen after screen of tiny icons -- makes mobile devices all but
unusable.

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 11:43:32 PM UTC-10, Xeno wrote:
> dsi1 <> wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> >>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> >>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> >>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> >>>>
> >>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> >>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
> >>>>
> >>>> Jill
> >>>
> >>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's
> >>> not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is
> >>> moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google
> >>> OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte
> >>> Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're
> >>> such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >>
> >> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
> >> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
> >> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
> >>
> >> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
> >> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce
> >
> > If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
> > Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> You could try buying a real laptop. That would be a start.
>
> --
> Xeno

There's no way in hell that I would get another windows laptop. I prefer the Chromebook. It's the main computer that I use at home. I have a Windows tablet. I don't want to load Thunderbird or Agent (hee hee) on that machine. Why are so interested in what I do? Do your consider my business your business? That cracked!

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 11:58:22 PM UTC-10, wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 3:46:54 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
> > > On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
> > > > You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
> > > > 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
> > >
> > > That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
> > > "future" of Usenet. LOL
> > >
> > > Jill
> >
> > I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
> >
>
> I have seen the future, and it is an iPhone half the size of an iPad.
> Everybody over 40 has trouble staring at a tiny screen, and the
> necessity of using a specific app to perform any task -- resulting
> in screen after screen of tiny icons -- makes mobile devices all but
> unusable.

I have no problem with your speculating on the future. You should be encouraged to use your imagination. I doubt we're be using tablets and fingers on a screen as an interface.

On 5/07/2015 8:26 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 11:43:32 PM UTC-10, Xeno wrote:
>> dsi1 <> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 15:46:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:17:23 AM UTC-10, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/4/2015 9:51 AM, wrote:
>>>>>>> You noticed that, too. Don't you just love these
>>>>>>> 20+ year old threads that have been resurrected?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's Google Groups for ya. The very thing dsi1 thinks should be the
>>>>>> "future" of Usenet. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>
>>>>> I never said that Google Groups should be anything. Any idiot that's
>>>>> not blind to what's going on around him would see that the world is
>>>>> moving away from desktop computing and onto mobile devices and Google
>>>>> OSes. We're moving away from using desktop client programs like Forte
>>>>> Agent and Microsoft Office and towards web-based programs. If you're
>>>>> such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>>>
>>>> You're right about mobility and about using multiple devices. But
>>>> that's no reason to make a bad web-based newsreader like GG. It
>>>> wouldn't have been very hard for them to make a decent one.
>>>>
>>>> But you know so little about Usenet, that you can't see how bad GG is.
>>>> And you won't accept anything from anybody.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to
>>> Usenet on a Chromebook?
>>
>> You could try buying a real laptop. That would be a start.
>>
>> --
>> Xeno
>
> There's no way in hell that I would get another windows laptop.
> I prefer the Chromebook. It's the main computer that I use at home.

So, get a Win laptop, dump the Win and put Chrome on it. At least you
would STILL be able to use a decent usenet client.

> I have a Windows tablet. I don't want to load Thunderbird or Agent
> (hee hee) on that machine. Why are so interested in what I do?

You were the one complaining about not having a client to run usenet and
having GG as your sole option.


Do your consider my business your business? That cracked!
>
You post here, you make your business every one else's business. That's
how it works with public forums. You want to keep something private, you
don't use or discuss it here.

--

Xeno

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 8:01:42 AM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> Wow, since 1994 finally a good answer.

It cracks me up that in 1994 this thread died after 6 posts. After
its revival, it garnered another 47 posts.

Who says Usenet is dead?

Cindy

On 7/4/2015 5:40 PM, wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:28:25 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> If you're such a smartypants, you tell me how I'm suppose to post to Usenet on a Chromebook?
>
> How about you don't?

How about you do life a favor and KILL yourself!