Don't start getting facts in the way of Tom's BS
Have you presented any facts yourself? No, just fanatical M$ B$.
I know: HOW DARE THEY RUN BENCHMARKS! They should just humbly genuflect.
*
** List info, subscription
Ars has a nice article with the bizarre news that XP mode in W7 requires
_specific_ versions of AMD or Intel's processors:
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/05/r2e-microsoft-intel-goof-
up-windows-7s-xp-mode.ars
Thank you,
Mark Snyder
-Original Message-
Don't start getting facts
Actually if you'd been reading the posts you'd note I hadn't said anything
about MS BS, just your BS. Maybe drink some tea or something, calm down,
take a walk?
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
Don't start getting facts in the way of Tom's BS
Have you
Actually if you'd been reading the posts you'd note I hadn't said anything
about MS BS, just your BS. Maybe drink some tea or something, calm down,
take a walk?
Go watch the calming fishes that cguys.org so thoughtfully provides.
Speed Test: Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista
http://www.pcworld.com/article/164485/speed_test_windows_7_may_not_be_much_
faster_than_vista.html
PC World's speed tests against Vista show Win7 is 1-4 percent faster,
below the threshold of human perception.
Why am I not $urprised?
Speed Test: Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista
http://www.pcworld.com/article/164485/speed_test_windows_7_may_not_be_much_
faster_than_vista.html
PC World's speed tests against Vista show Win7 is 1-4 percent faster,
below the threshold of human perception.
Wow. They couldn't
Wow. They couldn't even wait for the article to whip out the weasel words.
*May* not be *much* faster? On a synthetic test?
Is this the best you could do?
I guess it is tough not having right on your side.
Why am I nor $urprised?
Is this the best you could do?
*I* don't have to do much at all. The question you should be asking, Is
this the best the reviewer could do?
I guess it is tough not having right on your side.
Very true, which is why the article comes off as so weak. Speaking of weak:
PC World's speed tests
Writers in the tech press are stating frankly that M$ (lisp or whistle
here, which ever appeals) is continuing their trend of slowing operating
systems. XP was slower than NT/2000. Vista is slower than XP. Now w7
will be slower than Vista. My dog can detect trends this obvious!
Thank you,
Writers in the tech press are stating frankly that M$ (lisp or whistle
here, which ever appeals) is continuing their trend of slowing
operating
systems. XP was slower than NT/2000. Vista is slower than XP. Now w7
will be slower than Vista. My dog can detect trends this obvious!
Time to
Time to send Fido back to trend analysis school. Even the article didn't
say that Win7 is slower than Vista.
As you pointed out, testing used synthetic benchmarks. Vendors tend to
code for these well-known benchmarks. We expect real world experience to
be worse.
As you pointed out, testing used synthetic benchmarks. Vendors tend to
code for these well-known benchmarks. We expect real world experience
to
be worse.
Actually, the expectation is that real-world results will be just be
different. Synthetic benchmarks only measure what they were designed
You have a talent for missing the obvious.
My comment about DDR was in regards to one improvement out of many. A
series of small improvements will add up: 2% here, 3% there, 1%
someplace
else... and the total can be 20%, 30%, 40%, 100% or more. That's how
the
job is done.
You said no
Just for grins and googles, I did sample searches and found the following:
Results 1 - 10 of about 4,350 for windows 7 faster
http://www.google.com/search?source=ighl=enrlz=q=%22windows+7+faster%22a
q=foq=
Results 1 - 10 of about 98 for windows 7 slower
A 44-1 ratio of the word faster over slower.
Did you search on unimpressive?
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/
Jeff Wright
As you pointed out, testing used synthetic benchmarks.
Vendors tend to code for these well-known benchmarks.
We expect real world experience to be worse.
Actually, the expectation is that real-world results will
be just be different. Synthetic benchmarks only measure
what they
Mac Mini review that was faster for all sorts of reasons
Despite your ureasoned commentary, the text you quote makes exactly that
point faster for all sorts of reasons. That's the difference of looking
at parts vs looking at the whole. This magazine's speed test shows that
as a whole Win7 is
Let's just conveniently forget the hundreds of hands-on reviews that *all*
indicated much better performance on the same hardware over Vista. We found
the one that says what you want it to say.
PCWorld is the first to run scientific benchmarks.
I find your don't-bother-me-with-the-facts
Despite your ureasoned commentary, the text you quote makes exactly
that
point faster for all sorts of reasons. That's the difference of
looking
at parts vs looking at the whole. This magazine's speed test shows that
as a whole Win7 is unimpressive.
Guard, turn, dodge, parry, spin, thrust!
You bet it's appalling, that's exclusively your gig.
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
PCWorld is the first to run scientific benchmarks.
I find your don't-bother-me-with-the-facts attitude appalling.
PCWorld is the first to run scientific benchmarks.
Three unconfirmed tests by some slacker are scientific? You sound like a
fine, upstanding young man, allow me to tell you about a slightly used
bridge I have for sale.
Oh, and no they aren't the first; far from it. I linked to a scientific
FWIW,
I installed Win 7 RC on a Intel dual core w 2 gigs ram and a nvidia
512 graphics card. 160gb new SATA drive in less than 20 minutes to
the final desktop.
YMMV
Rich
*
** List info, subscription management, list
Don't start getting facts in the way of Tom's BS, I'm using it to help get
my yard in this weekend.
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Rich Schinnell richnrockvi...@gmail.comwrote:
FWIW,
I installed Win 7 RC on a Intel dual core w 2 gigs ram and a nvidia
512 graphics card. 160gb new SATA drive
23 matches
Mail list logo
