On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:07:51 +0200 (CEST), "D.Eth" <>
wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:02:50 -0500, Ringmaster wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:53:17 +0200 (CEST), "D.Eth" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:32:46 +0300, gerooky wrote:
>>>
>>>> Although I must point out that there is an opposite trickle effect.
>>>>
>>>> I try to remain positive about vista, but almost EVERY simple non geek
>>>> user that has vista keeps asking me why its so bad/slow/incompatible
>>>>
>>>> Its true!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Why the hell are they asking you ?
>>>
>>>You must be the MOST irritating mudder - fusker walking the planet. Most
>>>people would knock your teeth out before they'd listen to you ramble.
>>
>> All some dope like you is capable of is attacking the messenger. Can you
>> dispute facts with those of your own? Of course not. That's why you earn
>> the ****wit label. Wear it proudly. You'll be in good company. Lots of
>> fools hang out in this newsgroup.
>
>
>I dispute that it is slow.
>It is not slow to me.
>
>People I know like it.
You only proved you're an idiot. You only count YOUR results and
ignore results conducted by respected experts and even the testing lab
Microsoft itself used to Test XP verses Vista. Then there are the
millions of users that took the time to post to newsgroups, forums and
blogs all saying Vista sucks performance wise.
Hear me laughing at all you twits?
This is how your think and reason:
http://preaprez.files.wordpress.com/...ee-no-evil.jpg
You don't see what you don't want to see and you don't hear what you
don't want to hear. The very essence of a ****wit.