Re: XP: Cool feature with a weakness

On 14/4/07 1:12 PM, in article C245B0B0.7D2FC%SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"Snit" <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Wally" <wally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
C2467131.32371%wally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 4/13/07 8:53 PM:

On 14/4/07 9:22 AM, in article C2457AD3.7D2A4%SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"Snit" <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Steve Carroll" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
noone-15A773.19121313042007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 4/13/07 6:12 PM:

In article <C2456E72.7D282%SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Snit <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Steve Carroll" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
noone-BAFC0F.17283313042007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 4/13/07 4:28 PM:

To quote Steve from an earlier message in this thread:

"I can, from a user account, hold down the control, option and Apple
keys
on a modern Mac while pressing the number 8 and it will "screw with"
others (who may want to run graphics apps or whatever)... and it'll stay
that way when I log out. There is no video card in this equation..."

Assuming that does in fact stay in effect when a normal user logs off,
that's the same "problem" you're talking about with display drivers on
Windows.

Well, it's not the exact same problem but it does contain the ability to
"screw with" a user even after logging out. A person logging back in to
that account couldn't really use an app like Photoshop or Painter with
the
screen whacked out like this. I once did this to my wife and she thought
the video circuitry was crapping out;)

My prediction... Snit will change the criteria from his OP:

"Here is the weakness: I can change the orientation from my user account,
even a non-Admin, and the orientation will stay altered even when I log
out... >>>>> " - Snit

Watch for the conditions regarding 'accounts' that will undoubtedly
appear
that stray from this 1st post;)

Wow, Steve, how poorly your predictions are.

Bull. I called it perfectly.

So... any minute now you're going to create a thread entitled "OSX: Cool
feature with a weakness"... right? I mean, you were wrong about XP so you
should be retracting this thread and apologizing while you create the new
thread that truly *is* a part of the 'experience on an OSX machine'.


Hey, Steve... your BS is not working.

I talked about how it is a mistake to have a non-admin user account be able
to set video settings that would strongly adversely effect other users.

You talked about far more than that Snit! see below.

You
claimed the same thing could be done on OS X, and yet you cannot find *any*
support for your claim... and I have examples of many machines where this is
*not* the case.

Actually Steve was very careful *not* to claim that they were the same
thing!

"Well, it's not the exact same problem but it does contain the ability to
"screw with" a user even after logging out. A person logging back in to
that account couldn't really use an app like Photoshop or Painter with
the screen whacked out like this. I once did this to my wife and she
thought the video circuitry was crapping out;)"-Steve Carroll

And as for Steve's prediction...

"My prediction... Snit will change the criteria from his OP:

"Here is the weakness: I can change the orientation from my user
account, even a non-Admin, and the orientation will stay altered even
when I log out... " - Snit

In your OP you talked about changing the orientation from your "user
account" and then stated that it could also be done from "even a non-Admin"
account!

But since then you have restricted your comments to reflect only non-admin
accounts ..such as...

"I pointed out that it is a bad thing to have a non-admin user be able to
modify the screen settings to be able to "mess with" other users."-Snit

Steve's prediction was correct!

"Watch for the conditions regarding 'accounts' that will undoubtedly appear
that stray from this 1st post;)"-Steve Carroll

Steve was also explicit when he talked about the weakness (?) in OSX...

"I can, from a user account, hold down the control, option and Apple keys on
a modern Mac while pressing the number 8 and it will "screw with" others
(who may want to run graphics apps or whatever)..."-Steve Carroll

"a modern Mac"! and you respond by talking about ...

G3 machines running 10.3 and a G4 machine running 10.4.! LOL

"Steve claimed to have an example, but it is something I know darn well does
*not* do as he says on, at least, G3 machines running 10.3 nor my G4 machine
running 10.4."-Snit

Steve's example was clearly the machine(s) that he tried it on...'moderm
Macs' But I can confirm that on my G4 400 with 10.4.8 onboard it performs
exactly as Steve said it would...control-option-command-8 the screen
reverts, shut the computer down or log out whatever you want to do, restart
or log back in and the screen is still as it was as a result of the keys
pressed!

So what you claim to ..."...know darn well..." is certainly not a fact on
all Macs of that vintage...does yours act as you suggest? Personally I doubt
it!


To bury that BS of yours you made up stories about how I did not know
keystrokes you have no way of know if I did or did not know

As for knowing the keystrokes to use...you *knew darn well* what they were
did you Snit? LOL!

(I did, by the
way) and then puffed up your chest in pride as you predicted I would call
you on your lies.

Do you *still* deny you are consumed by your hatred?

Are you certain that it is he that is being consumed Snit? ;-)


I was wondering when you would try to come to Steve's "rescue".

There was never a need for a 'rescue' as Steve was never in strife!

Yeah,
Wally, about now, when Steve has completely backed himself into a corner
with his lies, you come over the hill in the nick o' time....

Lies are lies Snit! there is no "nick o' time" that can change that! the
simple fact is that you can not demonstrate any lies from Steve...it's that
simple!

but you make no
more sense than he does and your lies are just as transparent!

And yet just as your accusations about Steve I wager you will not
demonstrate one lie from me!

You, of course, babble more than he does, but that is the closest thing you
have to "style". Regardless, the facts stay the same:

I am right: it is not a good thing for a non-admin user to
be able to mess with other users on either OS X or XP...

As I said previously your changing to emphasize non-admin accounts as
opposed to your OP proves Steve's prediction to have come about!

at
least in some cases on XP this does happen (stock standard
Dells, for example) but there is no reputable example of
this *ever* happening with OS X.

The feature that Steve mentions is there for a good reason, whether anyone
has used it and shut down leaving the feature enabled for the next person
who may not want it is frankly immaterial, the point being made is that it
'could' happen!

If, however, some Macs
have the flaw you claim they do then, yes, I would note it
as a flaw... there simply would be no reason not to.

I do not claim to have mentioned any 'flaw' it seems perfectly reasonable to
me that if I set up my monitor to White on Black then I expect it to remain
that way until changed, why you expect it to revert to Black on White after
a restart?


In the course of the debate Steve spewed all sorts of trolling. It is
detailed more elsewhere, but a decent summary would include Steve having:

It is contained in 'your' post Snit that IMO automatically disqualifies it
from being considered a "decent summary'!


* Lied about my views on video cards
* Lied about my knowledge of shortcut keys
* Lied via falsely attributing quotes to me
* Taken quotes out of context and spewed them as if they had meaning
* Made BS accusations about drugs
* Asked for apologies for some comment he cannot point to
* Got confused as to what OS is being referenced
* Tried to tell me what my "gripes" are
* Dishonestly "translated" what people have written
* Dishonestly and repeatedly snipped and ran
* Repeatedly posted with sock puppets and started trolling threads
* Asked for my advice and failed to thank me when I gave it

Yup! told you so!

And you, Wally, it can be completely predicted, will not call Steve on *any*
of his BS,

For two reasons...
Because I have called you on yours! and I have detected no BS from Steve!

I will have absolutely no problem disagreeing with Steve if ever I have a
different opinion than him on something, because I have no doubt that his
opinion will be based on solid reasoning, whereas with you ....well look at
this reply from you for example you are completely unable to respond in an
honest way to one single point that I put to you ...not one!

but *will* spew all sorts of BS such as when you try to pretend
that in context a "user account" and a "non-admin" account are somehow not
synonymous!

Simply because of your own words Snit....

"Here is the weakness: I can change the orientation from my user
account, even a non-Admin, and the orientation will stay altered even
when I log out... " - Snit

"... from my user account, even a non-Admin,.."

Clearly you are indicating rightly so that that they are/can be different
types of account therefore you cannot claim them to be synonymous as one
would by definition have to suggest the other, that simply is not the case
as a users account may or may not be a non-admin one!


No thanks, Wally... I have already grown bored with Steve's BS on this
topic... he has, as he always does, humiliated himself and piled lie on top
of lie. If you have nothing of value to add, which you almost surely do
not, do not expect me to give you as much attention as I just give your
buddy co-troll Steve.

The humiliation is yours in you making this post but not being able to
counter one single point that I put to you previously!

PS: when are you going to suck your other co-trolls into the fray... you
know the "professional" web designer who needed my help to figure out how to
validate his CSS and the moron who thought the tilde meant "the hard drive
only" and claims sex and incest are, to him, identical?

See what I mean Snit.....so sad!
The only good thing from your point of view must be that when someone says
'how the mighty have fallen' you can be confident that they are not
referring to you! as far as I can remember you have always been down where
you are. :-(

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP: Cool feature with a weakness
    ... of course, but if I switch user, the setting does not follow. ... If I change things in that account as well, ... Do you know what "specifically" means Snit? ... Where did Steve specifically claimed it *did* effect the login screen? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: XP: Cool feature with a weakness
    ... Snit wrote: ... If I change things in that account as well, ... Where did Steve specifically claimed it *did* effect the login screen? ... a non-Admin user can alter settings for other users? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: XP: Cool feature with a weakness
    ... of course, but if I switch user, the setting does not follow. ... If I change things in that account as well, ... Your testing disagrees with what Steve claimed (he ... Do you know what "specifically" means Snit? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Article: The Most Dangerous Words on the Web
    ... Snit wrote: ... And, of course, they do not mention using a non-Admin account. ... According to the Maccies the typical user reads e-mail, browses the web, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: XP: Cool feature with a weakness
    ... "I can, from a user account, hold down the control, option and Apple keys ... Snit will change the criteria from his OP: ... Wow, Steve, how poorly your predictions are. ... a modern Mac while pressing the number 8 and it will "screw with" others ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)