[Am-info] Dishonesty in ads] - OT

[Mike Stephen]

Well I won't fall into your name calling fits...  If you wish to drop your
discusions please do.  I do not have time to read your accusations and
respond in kind.  Unlike you I do not think you are an idiot, or anything
like that.  I just think you might be blinded by your own bias.  If AT&T did
not buy IBM's global network, please tell me who did?  And when AT&T bought
IBM's global network please tell me that they swapped all the OS/2 servers
out for .... What?  Did they replace all the OS/2 servers with.... NT?  (NT
was not able to run the systems at that time).  Because you were not
involved with AT&T and OS/2 at the time, I find it amusing that you can
speak for the many thousands of AT&T employees.  But then I did not work for
IBM in 1987 when OS/2 was born.  I did the beta testing for Microsoft OS/2
back then. In 1992 I joined IBM to teach employees the use of OS/2 1.2, then
1.3, then 2.0.  In 1994 I left IBM.

Some of the students attending my training courses (taught with three others
in Western Canada) were you guessed it... employees of AT&T.  But none of
them was you.....  I think I would have remembered.



Oh well..  I will learn not to take heed of any of your postings.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoffrey" <esoteric@3times25.net>
To: "Mike Stephen" <mikestp@telus.net>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Am-info] Dishonesty in ads] - OT


> Mike Stephen wrote:
> > There is no innacuracy.  In Canada AT&T used OS/2 extensivly through the
> > organisation.... Why do I know?  I was in the Support department of IBM
in
> > 1992-1994.  AT&T Canada was one of my clients.
> >
> > PS AT&T in Canada are knows to be the remnents of Rogers long distance.
> >
> > I was informed by my client that OS/2 was used a lot in the US
organization
> > as well.  I imagine today it is no longer used.  It certainly was from
1992
> > till at least 1997...
>
> Bullshit.  I'll not argue this any further with you.  You're an idiot as
> far as I'm concerned.  You make statements you can not prove.  I've been
> with AT&T since 1977, AT&T has never used OS/2 as an official produc, or
> in any large capacity.  There may have been a few covert installs, but
> nothing as you describe.
>
> >
> > Most corporations used OS/2 at least in some areas.
>
> Now that's a useful statement, you could say that about anything.  Most
> corporations used paper clips at least in some areas...  That was a
> waste of bits...
>
> >
> > Seems to be a petty point on your part....  However I really don't care
what
> > you think of OS/2.  You never used it and are not familiar with its
> > functions and advantages.   I admit today OS/2 is not used much anymore,
and
> > it is very unlikely to see any resurgence in its use.  But I fail to see
why
> > you and people like you seem to "hate" anything other than your current
os
> > pet of the month.
>
> You are so blinded by your ignorance.  I've never said one bad thing
> about OS/2, I've questioned your comments, and now your integrity.  The
> issue has nothing to do with OS/2, but your comments regarding the use
> by various companies.  You in turn, keep turning it around into an
> non-existent issue of my opinion of OS/2.  You're no better then the
> Microsoft folks yourself.  Someone says it's an apple, you say no it's
> not it's green.
>
> The bottom line is you're a bigger OS/2 biggot then all the folks you
> call biggots.  You're the one that needs to look in the mirror.  When
> you make statements that people know are not true, your integrity is
> damaged, and it'll take a long time before anyone accepts anything you
> say at face value.
>
> As noted, I'll not discuss this further, I've taken it off the list,
> further comments by you regarding the issue of your integrity and the
> use of OS/2 at AT&T will not be responded to.
>
>
> --
> Until later: Geoffrey esoteric@3times25.net
>
> I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
> to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?
>
>