Linked by David Adams on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 19:42 UTC
Humor Funny Or Die has posted a video showing you how to have your very own party to celebrate today's Windows 7 release. It's strikingly similar, yet importantly different from the video that Microsoft put out a couple of weeks ago.
E-mail Print r 4   · Read More · 19 Comment(s)
Order by: Score:
LOL!
by Tuishimi on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 20:16 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

Bunch of free loading pirates!

Reply Score: 3

You could make it a drinking party.
by theTSF on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 20:18 UTC
theTSF
Member since:
2005-09-27

Games like take a shot every time the estimate time dramatically updates itself.

Or perhaps just start drinking after the instal just so Windows 7 just seems that much cooler because after all is said and done it is just an OS.

Reply Score: 2

marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

hey, pssst, little fella! spread a good word about Windows 7 and we will send it to you for absolutely no charge!

~S.B.

Edited 2009-10-22 21:11 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Comment by sbenitezb
by sbenitezb on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 21:17 UTC
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

Oh, you have to be such a looser with a big L to do something like this.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by sbenitezb
by Chicken Blood on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 00:27 UTC in reply to "Comment by sbenitezb"
Chicken Blood Member since:
2005-12-21

Or maybe just not take things so seriously:-)

PS, it;s "loser".

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by sbenitezb
by marcp on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 10:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by sbenitezb"
marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

'P.S', not "PS"

'it's', not "it;s" ...

so please: stop correcting other people's misspells. You're no better with your native language 'skills' and it's a big shame.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Comment by sbenitezb
by Doc Pain on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 11:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by sbenitezb"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

'P.S', not "PS"


'P.S.', not 'P.S' - missing dot after S. I could argue that 'PS' is correct, too, at least in Germany it is used as well as the dotted form, and

Don't take such little mistakes that important. At leas`t no boddy heer i's writhing, New englis ortograffy with lot's off typograffy and grammathik funn, I hope thatt, i`s cleer now. :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by sbenitezb
by marcp on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sbenitezb"
marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

Tell it to mr. know-it-all. I certainly don't know everything and my reply was a simple *irony*.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Comment by sbenitezb
by Doc Pain on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 13:30 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sbenitezb"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Tell it to mr. know-it-all. I certainly don't know everything and my reply was a simple *irony*.


If this really is the case, why do you have to be impolite then?

please get me right: Allthough I may be considered to be a bit pedantic, I usually don't attempt to correct others mistakes, especially when it is such an unimportant thing like obvious mis-spelling or even mis-typing. Here in Germany, it doesn't even matter if you write as scrippeled as I did with an example of "new english orthography" (in relation to today's german newspeak). It is ugly to read, but everyone understands it, and nobody complains about the mass of errors in it. English is not my native language, so I'm no "mr. know-it-all"; you may read all my posts here and you'll find mistakes, for sure. One of them could for example be that I didn't understand your irony as irony. On the other hand, if you irony at somebody, prepare to be ironied back. :-)

Take this as a honest reply, and note the obvious ":-)" at the end of my post, as well as here.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by sbenitezb
by Laurence on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 15:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sbenitezb"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Tell it to mr. know-it-all. I certainly don't know everything and my reply was a simple *irony*.

Except it wasn't 'ironic'

Reply Score: 2

I can get Win7 for free, legally
by theosib on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 21:41 UTC
theosib
Member since:
2006-03-02

My university has some arrangement with Microsoft where students can get free licenses for a variety of different products. A few years back, I got a free, legit copy of WinXP for use with Parallels so I could use certain applications that only work well with Windows (e.g. chip synthesis tools).

For a few months now, we've had the RTM of Win7 available. I've thought about checking it out. But then I realized that the only place I have use for it is in a virtual machine (which may actually violate the EULA). The one remaining PC I have is old enough that Win7 would probably not work very well on it, and the rest of my computers run Linux and MacOS X.

Some day, I might get a netbook. By then, netbooks will be powerful enough to run Win7 as well as current desktops. And then I might just leave it on there and use it. I don't really like Windows though. It's just not the same, not having a UNIX under the hood.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I can get Win7 for free, legally
by secs on Thu 22nd Oct 2009 22:06 UTC in reply to "I can get Win7 for free, legally"
secs Member since:
2009-10-22

But then I realized that the only place I have use for it is in a virtual machine (which may actually violate the EULA).


Really?? Are you serious?

Reply Score: 1

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Some day, I might get a netbook. By then, netbooks will be powerful enough to run Win7 as well as current desktops.


In how many years will that be? :-)

Reply Score: 2

Warning [EXPLICIT]
by jeffmikels on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 04:05 UTC
jeffmikels
Member since:
2009-10-23

Granted, the video is promoting illegal activity, so I guess I should have expected it, but I was surprised when the video ended with some rather explicit language. I'm not opposing the link, but I want to request that if OSnews posts links to other videos with explicit content (language, etc.) an appropriate warning would be given with it.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Warning [EXPLICIT]
by sbergman27 on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 04:47 UTC in reply to "Warning [EXPLICIT]"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Granted, the video is promoting illegal activity, so I guess I should have expected it...
but I want to request that if OSnews posts links to other videos with explicit content (language, etc.) an appropriate warning would be given with it.

Or perhaps people could simply come to realize that accidentally hearing a dirty word will hardly ever result in their burning in Hell. Or really even make much of any appreciable difference in purgatory.

I suppose that it *could* cause one to be ostracized from one's usual social group. But frankly, if so, I'd call it a plus.

I would like to request that OSNews continue to surprise us with colorful language from time to time.

Edited 2009-10-23 04:50 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: Warning [EXPLICIT]
by Arno on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 09:10 UTC in reply to "Warning [EXPLICIT]"
Arno Member since:
2006-01-10

Granted, the video is promoting illegal activity, so I guess I should have expected it, but I was surprised when the video ended with some rather explicit language. I'm not opposing the link, but I want to request that if OSnews posts links to other videos with explicit content (language, etc.) an appropriate warning would be given with it.

Maybe they should have made a copy of the video and beeped out the explicit content. Why not pixalize the mouth when they are saying it!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Warning [EXPLICIT]
by righard on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 14:00 UTC in reply to "Warning [EXPLICIT]"
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

What is the precise harm of hearing a foul word exactly? And might it be possible that by paying no attention to it you'll become immune to that particular harm?
Or do you really need, as you say, a warning before hearing it, so you can mentally prepare to absorb the effect. If so, I advice not to venture outside your own dwelling because there are no censors there.

Also that particular Dutch loanword describes the most fundamental act of life. It's quite natural and I can't see how anybody could be offended by it. Granted, it's the “foul” word to describe that act, but only because of the people that complain about it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Warning [EXPLICIT]
by Mark Williamson on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 16:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Warning [EXPLICIT]"
Mark Williamson Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe some people are browsing at home and their kids can hear what's coming out of the speakers?

Maybe people are viewing this in other environments where deliberately viewing videos with foul language would be frowned upon, hence putting them in an awkward situation if they are encouraged to view it unknowingly?

I don't see the point as being that explicit language causes any real harm to anyone. I think that giving warning it is just better manners. I don't really object personally to explicit language but I typically warn people if a video contains it, just to be polite. For a news site catering to a wide audience I think this kind of politeness would be well-placed.

This is for much the same reason that some people mark links to certain images as NSFW even when they simply depict certain things that we've all seen before. Seeing them won't harm you but you might want to have the choice in advance of where / when / if you look.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Warning [EXPLICIT]
by tomcat on Sat 24th Oct 2009 02:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Warning [EXPLICIT]"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Maybe some people are browsing at home and their kids can hear what's coming out of the speakers?


Ah, that explains the disconnect. Since most Linux geeks are browsing from their parents' basements, and have no girlfriend or wife or children. ;-p

Reply Score: 2