It's back. No support for Linux, Mac, or FreeBSD.

Oh, and no support for Win 95/98 either:

We're sorry, Napster is not currently compatible with your operating
system.

Napster is currently compatible with Windows XP/2000.
Windows 95, Windows NT and the Mac OS are not supported at this
time.

If you are planning on using Napster on this computer, the service
will not be compatible and you should discontinue registration. If
you will use Napster on a different computer, with a compatible
operating system, please continue.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

In article <bsOdne_R0IvjrFSiRVn-gg@comcast.com>
Linønut <linønut@bone.com> wrote:

LOL!

You Linux dirtbags kept claiming that you have the latest and the best
in all technologies.

No major Internet music store supports your sorry OS.


So far you have no support for DRM, how do you expect anyone to trust
you with copyrighted music files?

You are nothing but thieves and low lives.

Linux Sucks wrote:
n all technologies.
mp3s ? They are not os specific.

all DRM schemes do is add extra costs that
are unnecessary and feed m$ for no reason.

the future is:

http://www.scenemusic.net/

Linux Sucks wrote:
everybody cool stopped using
Napster in like -- 2002.

In article <xDayb.19566$n56.6825@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink .net>
John Bailo <jabailo@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hey idiot, read the rest before you reply.
Fuckhead.


Bullshit.
It protects your sales, you idiot.
Microsoft doesn't make money out of DRM.
In fact they bundle it for free with their Windows Media Services which
you get for FREE if you buy the OS.

So does Real.

Only you Linux losers are left out in the cold.

Linux Sucks wrote:

Didn't you get some dick up your ass this week? Quit taking the
frustration out on the rest of us, we aren't homos!

RXX

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:17:04 GMT, Linux Sucks <linux@sucks.sucks> wrote:

You say that as if it is a bad thing.


--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/

In article <3FC9461A.3060002@online.no>
RCS <rcs333@online.no> wrote:


That was your mom.

You are, and you cannot prove otherwise.

In article <slrnbsijsu.vdo.postmaster@cardinal.haucks.org>
Bob Hauck <postmaster@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

If you think that being left behind in all technologies and getting them
last thing with limited availability and support is a good thing then
you prove that you are Linux idiot.

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Linux Sucks mumbled this incantation:

And Mac users.

I wish we Linux users were left out in the cold re DRM. Unfortunately,
Linus himself supports DRM. I believe he supports it so as to make it
harder for legislation to make Linux illegal.

It is a sad world we live in.

And you just make it a little bitter more sad, my friend.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

In article <q-SdnfwiNbEx-lSiRVn-iw@comcast.com>
Linønut <linønut@bone.com> wrote:

Only in QuickTime, fuckhead, Real player and Windows Media player both
support DRM on Mac, you stupid, incompetent dickbreath.

So if your chief jackass thinks it is a good thing, why don't get a clue
and see why?
But you can't shitstain, you are blinded by your own incompetence.

Yep, Linux advocates are sad and sore losers, I agree.

I am not your friend.
I don't have a retarded friend who claims that he killfiled me three
times already and lied.

Feel free to fuck off again.

Linux Sucks wrote:

If you believe adding support for a technology that only exists to restrict
what you can do with your own computer is a good thing then this only
proves how dumb the average win-idiot it.

--
Nigel Feltham - spanking trolls since 1999

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Linux Sucks mumbled this incantation:

For many technologies (e.g. clustering), it is Windows that is behind.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:15:51 GMT, Linux Sucks <linux@sucks.sucks> wrote:
As opposed to being just a regular idiot that buys what some corporation
tells him to buy?

DRM is corporate greed run amuck. If the RIAA members won't sell me
music without it, then I'll not buy their music. That won't impact my
life very much at all. I think that the RIAA will be finding out that
even a lot of Windows users feel the same way. Someone else will come
along to sell us music that doesn't restrict our rights.

But the music industry can feel free to self-destruct if it wants to.


--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Bob Hauck mumbled this incantation:

There are still plenty of people sharing their files on gnutella, even
from U.S. ISPs.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

Linønut wrote:

public sharing is old news

the cool people have gone into trusted tree
networks where it's all one-on-one -- escape
the thought police that way...

Linønut <linønut@bone.com> wrote in message news:<bsOdne_R0IvjrFSiRVn-gg@comcast.com>...
Screw all this I want to see an anonymous file sharing program. By the
way I have never stopped sharing music online. I just don't share as
much as I used to. only share like 200 to 300 files. It used to be in
the thousands. By the way my GTK-Gnutella can find any MP3 I want so
screw paying 99 cents for a freaqing song.

ANY PROGRAMMERS LISTENING !

I will pay you guys to develop a p2p like program thats totally
anonymous. I think I am asking for too much here.

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Maredia, A mumbled this incantation:

Check this out:

http://freenet.sourceforge.net/

Freenet is free software which lets you publish and obtain
information on the Internet without fear of censorship. To achieve
this freedom, the network is entirely decentralized and publishers
and consumers of information are anonymous. Without anonymity there
can never be true freedom of speech, and without decentralization
the network will be vulnerable to attack.

Communications by Freenet nodes are encrypted and are
"routed-through" other nodes to make it extremely difficult to
determine who is requesting the information and what its content is.

Users contribute to the network by giving bandwidth and a portion of
their hard drive (called the "data store") for storing files. Unlike
other peer-to-peer file sharing networks, Freenet does not let the
user control what is stored in the data store. Instead, files are
kept or deleted depending on how popular they are, with the least
popular being discarded to make way for newer or more popular
content. Files in the data store are encrypted to reduce the
likelihood of prosecution by persons wishing to censor Freenet
content.

There's more to it than that. Read it for yourself.

I think I'll look into it myself!

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

In article <b3ed946d.0311301944.8e097ab@posting.google.com>
anyo409@yahoo.com (Maredia, A) wrote:

Another proof that Linux asswipes are pirates.

In article <NfydnYELiu8fhFeiRVn-tA@comcast.com>
Linønut <linønut@bone.com> wrote:

Bullshit, but hey what do you know about Windows?
You never use it seriously to talk about it.

Go ahead, let's laugh a bit, tell us (without copying from any web
source) in details why Windows clustering is "behind", you dumb cunt.

Wow, lots of eggs on your face.