Post funny computer screenshots or photos

[EPPM]

I knew that Vista/Server 08 would give you some stupid UAC prompts, but I think I have the user rights to eject an USB stick :/

[CabaProductions]

CURSE YOU STEVEN SINOFSKY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, Sinofsky is now a copyright claimer-troller.



I just debugging the web page. lol

[Lukas Marsik]

CURSE YOUR POAH-KNEES!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gabrielustuca]

[gabrielustuca]

Another funny photo:

[CaptainPeanut]

CURSE YOU STEVEN SINOFSKY!!!!!!!!!!!!

*snip*

Too much caps.
Too much punctuation.
Too few guns.

[WinPC]

Most of the ones on this page are just fan-made images anyway, and not actual screenshots of original unmodified software.

[Pwned]

Most of the ones on this page are just fan-made images anyway, and not actual screenshots of original unmodified software.

Actually all of them so far.

[WinPC]

At least the YouTube screenshot was a real screenshot though...

[Pwned]

At least the YouTube screenshot was a real screenshot though...

No, it's fake. It's actually taken down by Hasbro, not Sinofsky.

[WinPC]

I guess then it was edited? Also, it's still technically possible to lie to YouTube about your name (as far as I know), which is why I thought it was real.

[Pwned]

You can edit it via the debugging utilities in your browser:

[john11]

I guess then it was edited? Also, it's still technically possible to lie to YouTube about your name (as far as I know), which is why I thought it was real.

Eh? Hasbro tells Youtube to remove the copyrighted video, and signes the message as "Steven Sinofsky", instead of Hasbro, so Youtube pulls down the video and attaches a notice telling users that the claim was by Steven Sinofsky...

[WinPC]

Unfortunately, anyone can claim to be whoever they want on the Internet, especially when they're behaving childishly (not referring to anyone on this forum, by the way), and this (from what I've heard, anyway) is no exception.

Just because Hasbro "supposedly" requested YouTube to remove the copyrighted video, does NOT mean that it was necessarily Hasbro itself and not just someone using their name to cause trouble. Similarly, it's still theoretically possible to "claim" to be Steven Sinofsky and yet be a completely different person at the same time. This is one of the main reasons why not everything on the Internet is 100% accurate.

And yes, I'm fully aware that Pwned said that this was a fake.

[hounsell]

Just because Hasbro "supposedly" requested YouTube to remove the copyrighted video, does NOT mean that it was necessarily Hasbro itself and not just someone using their name to cause trouble. Similarly, it's still theoretically possible to "claim" to be Steven Sinofsky and yet be a completely different person at the same time. This is one of the main reasons why not everything on the Internet is 100% accurate.

I would point out that YouTube are legally obliged to check to a reasonable degree that the DCMA takedowns are legitimate.

I know that they often don't, but what you're talking about has nothing to do with content claims on YouTube.

[john11]

Unfortunately, anyone can claim to be whoever they want on the Internet, especially when they're behaving childishly (not referring to anyone on this forum, by the way), and this (from what I've heard, anyway) is no exception.

Just because Hasbro "supposedly" requested YouTube to remove the copyrighted video, does NOT mean that it was necessarily Hasbro itself and not just someone using their name to cause trouble. Similarly, it's still theoretically possible to "claim" to be Steven Sinofsky and yet be a completely different person at the same time. This is one of the main reasons why not everything on the Internet is 100% accurate.

And yes, I'm fully aware that Pwned said that this was a fake.

I know you know this is a fake, but I thought Google checked DCMAs quite well... Didn't they publish some statistics on how many were rejected from each country etc. Or maybe they often don't check them properly, as hounsell said.

[ender]

Google checks DMCAs fairly well, but YouTube has an automated system that's being abused to hell and back by the publishers.

And to get back on topic, here's two more Bob pictures:
running in 4608x3456 resolution (the largest I could find that lets it run without glitches)

and running at 6688x5016 (the largest I could get VMWare to use)

[3155ffGd]

Found this on the Internet

[Windows 386]

Yes! I can finally upgrade my Windows NT 3.51 to Windows XP.

The background image is from Windows XP Setup under Windows ME.
And the Setup window is WINNT32.EXE from Windows 2000 Setup. It is changed by using Resource Hacker. I changed the word 2000 to XP. Because I installed Microsoft Office 97 the font of "Welcome to the Windows XP Setup Wizard" has been changed.

Offtopic Comment

The image on this topic is a joke. But this threat http://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewto ... =6&t=26847 is about upgrading Windows NT 3.51 to Windows XP and is not a joke.

Found this on the Internet
*Image File*

I think this is from win31.de. Made by Gaby.

[WinPC]

Found this on the Internet

That's just Calmira, possibly running on Windows NT 3.1. It's certainly interesting, yes, but I don't find it particularly "funny" or otherwise unusual except for the conflicting WINVER dialog boxes (which, by the way, make it harder to determine the actual version of Windows running in the above screenshot).

[ender]

I think it's Calmira on Windows 3.1 with Win32s - winver.exe from NT 3.1 runs on Win32s, and shows a weird build number like that.

[gamelover101]

Google checks DMCAs fairly well, but YouTube has an automated system that's being abused to hell and back by the publishers.

And to get back on topic, here's two more Bob pictures:
running in 4608x3456 resolution (the largest I could find that lets it run without glitches)
-snip-
and running at 6688x5016 (the largest I could get VMWare to use)
-snip

I don't see the difference.

[CabaProductions]

If Microsoft will use MLP: FIM names (Rainbow Dash, Equestria, Applejack, Pinkie Pie, Twilight Sparkle, etc.) for Microsoft pre-release software code names, what's next?

[AlphaBeta]

If Microsoft will use MLP: FIM names (Rainbow Dash, Equestria, Applejack, Pinkie Pie, Twilight Sparkle, etc.) for Microsoft pre-release software code names, what's next?

I don't understand you too much. Why would MS use such codenames?

[hounsell]

They wouldn't.

He just needs something to help him get off.