Stop being so harsh, she's obviously speaking in metaphor. Let me spell it out for you:

An intimate knowledge of electrical interworkings coupled with the proper tools for using this knowledge is like a "batter" that is baked into success. Simply applying this "batter" to everyday working applications is much like printing your own money or "pushing currency down the wire."

The prose is actually quite beautiful, if you think about it.

I don't get it. Your post is totally condescending like you think you're proving him wrong but every part of your post agrees with what he said.

Except he isn't punching you for giving out copies of his own flute recordings, he is punching you for giving out copies of any recordings, whether they are your business or not.

The worst part is that he's not all that bright, so a lot of times he'll punch you for no good reason at all and then expect you to apologize.

MS-DOS 1.0 was released in '81 and work on the OS2/NT project started in '85. Are you telling me that you are completely sure that none of the code from one project was recycled into a project that was started four years later?

If anything, I'd be willing to bet that if they shared any coders, there's got to be some recycling on some level, no matter how unimportant. Avoiding reinvention of the wheel is not a new concept.

I personally don't care one way or another, it's just that you seem to be awfully arrogant about your position here, you don't have any proof to back it up, but you're still being an asshole about it. Your whole argument that it "ran on non-x86 processors" is a complete logical non-sequitur. What does one have to do with the other? You do realize that these two things are not related, right?