Again your ignorance is showing. Ten years eh? Laporte has been at it longer and fits your criteria of MFB so his reviews are pretty solid. Keep dancing.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 10:57 AM, tjpa <t...@tjpa.com> wrote: > On Nov 3, 2009, at 5:17 AM, Wayne Dernoncourt wrote: > >> Most of the people that have tried it seemed to think it >> was pretty good for the OS itself. The biggest exception >> was John Dvorak who said that it ran slower on his notebook >> (?netbook?). >> > > The review I cited was from a guy who I know is heavy into Windows and his > publication has an extensive testing lab (I have been there). John has been > doing this job for over a decade. He knows his stuff. He is as solid a > source as one is likely to encounter. He measures 24% slower on a netbook > for W7 via XP. TWIT does not do any serious testing. Of course WFBs will > pick the reviews that provide the results they want. > > > http://gcn.com/articles/2009/10/30/splitting-the-atom-processor.aspx?s=gcndaily_021109 > > > > ************************************************************************* > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** > ************************************************************************* > ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
