Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!midway!ellis.uchicago.edu!lrm3
From: lrm3@ellis.uchicago.edu (Lawrence Reed Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: 32 bit addressing
Message-ID: <1991May20.232846.8557@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 20 May 91 23:28:46 GMT
References: <674629203.8@macgate.fidonet>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (NewsMistress)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 28

In article <674629203.8@macgate.fidonet> Jim.Spencer@p510.f22.n282.z1.fidonet.org (Jim Spencer) writes:
>What nonsense.  First, do you really think that NeXT or Sun will treat you
>better.  Hell, for most machines the problem would arise to begin with because
>you wouldn't be getting a free upgrade.  Second, unless you have a problem
>most of us don't, your machine is NOT defective.  It does exactly what it was
>designed to do in exactly the way it was designed to do it.

From Webster:
defective \di-'fek-tiv\ adj
(14c)
1a: lacking something essential: FAULTY < defective pane of glass >

My usage of the word defective is consistent with this definition.  If you
want to argue semantics, email me; don't bore the rest of the net with silly
flames.

If the machine was designed in a manner consistent with the product
specification, I wouldn't be complaining.  However, it lacks an essential
element of the specification, and is therefore defective.

I don't know how NeXT or Sun would treat me if they sold me a defective
machine.  Do you?

Lawrence Miller (rather annoyed)

Handy way of dealing with people like this:
^k
ji/Jim.Spencer@p510.f22.n282.z1.fidonet.org/h:j<Return><Esc>ZZ