Re: A89: Re: Re: THEY STILL INPLY THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A89: Re: Re: THEY STILL INPLY THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT
>> It will be funny when AMS 2.x does come out, and its pretty much the same
>as
>> this "beta" version or whatever that this French guy got a hold of..
>>
>> Bryan
>
>What will be funny is when we find out we spent two hours downloading our
>mail reading people's complaints and complaining about something that wasn't
>even a problem because it turns out that this whole thing is the work of a
>French guy related to the guy who made Archive Utility. :P
>
>While I find it incredibly hard to believe that TI didn't make this program,
>they're denying it awfully hard. Then again, after watching Clinton, that
>doesn't hold much weight. Could making an OS like this even concievably even
>be done without being a programmer at TI? Didn't we conclude a long time ago
>that to make our own OS we'd have to crack the encrypting program?
>
>-Zero
There is damning evidence: the Graphlink software now shows a new variable
called idlist that is outide the all the folders, and is along with the
screen. So the programmers knew _exactly_ how this var would be recognized
by the software?? And they factored the 512bit modulus? Let's just say if
someone had the secret key, TI's party would be over, i.e. free flash apps
:) They are taking this knowledge rather calmly, would you say?
TI will deny this, and then when 2.01 is released, they will claim that it
was all a misunderstanding ...
-Mark
felix@megsinet.net
Follow-Ups:
References: