The stupidest statement this year
zara
20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF Mezei.
Maybe someone can clue this clueless moron in?
Alan Browne
> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF Mezei.
There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
them have stopped at Windows XP.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.
dorayme
> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF Mezei.
the ten Mac users around (you, me, Michelle, Wes, Jolly Roger,
Tim, ...) to upgrade to Lion whereas it took 20 weeks for 40
million Windows users to adopt W7.
--
dorayme
Tommy Troll
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>On 2011-10-10 20:00 , zara wrote:
>> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
>> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF Mezei.
>
>There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
>them have stopped at Windows XP.
>
>http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
Sandman
Tommy Troll <tom....@earthlink.net> wrote:
Which is probably exactly what you would have said about the Mac had
most people stayed with System 7 instead of installing Lion :-D
You troll wannabe's, you're so feeble :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Lloyd E Parsons
Except when it doesn't of course. XP will run fine on newer boxes, so
just because they stopped at XP doesn't mean the hardware didn't get
replaced.
And given the sales volumes of wintel boxes, you can bet your ass they
replaced hardware at a quicker clip than we maccies do.
--
Lloyd
Kurt Ullman
Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
> In
> > Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
>
> Which is probably exactly what you would have said about the Mac had
> most people stayed with System 7 instead of installing Lion :-D
>
> You troll wannabe's, you're so feeble :)
Says volumes about the durability of Dell, HP, etc., since there is no
such thing as a Windows *machine*. It also says volumes about the newer
OSs since people stick with the one a few generations older.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
Martha McGee Adams
> On 2011-10-10 20:00 , zara wrote:
>> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
>> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF Mezei.
>
> There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
> them have stopped at Windows XP.
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
Martha McGee Adams
> In article<mr-1B9C04.23...@News.Individual.NET>,
> Sandman<m...@sandman.net> wrote:
>
>> In
>>> Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
>>
>> Which is probably exactly what you would have said about the Mac had
>> most people stayed with System 7 instead of installing Lion :-D
>>
>> You troll wannabe's, you're so feeble :)
>
> Says volumes about the durability of Dell, HP, etc., since there is no
> such thing as a Windows *machine*.
What's your point? You believe the 36.2% of XP machines are new and that
Win7 has been installed only on new machines?
Sorry, but this is fuck head reasoning.
Martha McGee Adams
> On 10/11/11 4:44 PM, Tommy Troll wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:38:55 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-10-10 20:00 , zara wrote:
>>>> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
>>>> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF
>>>> Mezei.
>>>
>>> There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
>>> them have stopped at Windows XP.
>>>
>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>>
>> Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
>
> Except when it doesn't of course. XP will run fine on newer boxes, so
> just because they stopped at XP doesn't mean the hardware didn't get
> replaced.
Hey, stupid! Most new PCs come with Windows installed. You really
believe Windows Morons took the time and got through the pain of
installing a former unsupported (for the last 3 years) version of Windows?
> And given the sales volumes of wintel boxes, you can bet your ass they
> replaced hardware at a quicker clip than we maccies do.
Of course, with equivalent features, PCs cost about 50% the price of
Macs. Many gamers use them and whenever new equipment appears on the
shelves -- say 6 core CPUs -- they want it NOW.
I have a 10 years old computer that I put aside 2 years ago with some
parts in it that are 14 years old (rebuilt). It worked 12 hours a day
for 8 years and is still in perfect working order. It's just that, when
you're asked $40 for 256 MB of old RAM, you finally figure out it's
better to buy a new one.
You people are such a bunch of Morons, it's hard to believe.
Erik Richard Sørensen
Agreed! - And WinXP Pro SP3 + latest sec.upd. runs both better and
faster than Win7 on a new Core2Duo 2.4ghz HP box. Yes, I'm running both
OS X and XPPro on my MacPro QuadCore.:-) - Btw. the other day we
upgraded an Acer with an AMD 3500+ CPU and max. RAM to Win7... Gosh it's
slow...
Cheers, Erik Richard
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC, <mac-m...@Mstofanet.dk>
NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Text Processing - www.nisus.com
OpenOffice.org - The Modern Productivity Solution - www.openoffice.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Erik Richard Sørensen
Not quite... I know rather a lot Win users that have downgraded from
Win7 to XPPro as the main system. OK, most of them do keep a partition
with Win7, but they don't use it...
Redjak
"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message news:j72f3k$gdf$1...@dont-email.me...
takes in a lot of territory. And all the same "hardware" is used in
Macs and PC's. That has been established years ago.
Lloyd E Parsons
And no, the hardware inside the Macs is not the same as your usally
low-ball priced wintel boxes you wintrolls try to pass off as 'the same'
--
Lloyd
Martha McGee Adams
> Martha McGee Adams wrote:
>> What's your point? You believe the 36.2% of XP machines are new and
>> that Win7 has been installed only on new machines?
>>
>> Sorry, but this is fuck head reasoning.
>
> Not quite... I know rather a lot Win users that have downgraded from
> Win7 to XPPro as the main system. OK, most of them do keep a partition
> with Win7, but they don't use it...
>
> Cheers, Erik Richard
exclusively for the last 10 years but, though Win7 doesn't offer all the
bells and whistles that were expected, XP doesn't offer them either.
OTOH, security on Win7 has been improved a lot.
downgrade "Win7 to XP"
About 20,900 results (0.10 seconds)
downgrade "vista to XP"
About 427,000 results (0.22 seconds)
Now, since this is a Mac group, about Apple's future, see:
"Apple to run into Samsung Google and eventually Amazon head on"
MuahMan
> On 10/11/11 8:54 PM, Redjak wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Special hard drives? Special Ram? Special USB ports? Special DVD
drives? Special Video cards?
Martha McGee Adams
>
> Lloyd E Parsons wrote:
>> On 10/11/11 4:44 PM, Tommy Troll wrote:
>>> <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 2011-10-10 20:00 , zara wrote:
>>>>> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
>>>>> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF
>>>>> Mezei.
>>>>
>>>> There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
>>>> them have stopped at Windows XP.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>>>
>>> Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
>>
>> Except when it doesn't of course. XP will run fine on newer boxes, so
>> just because they stopped at XP doesn't mean the hardware didn't get
>> replaced.
>>
>> And given the sales volumes of wintel boxes, you can bet your ass they
>> replaced hardware at a quicker clip than we maccies do.
>
> Agreed! - And WinXP Pro SP3 + latest sec.upd. runs both better and
> faster than Win7 on a new Core2Duo 2.4ghz HP box. Yes, I'm running both
> OS X and XPPro on my MacPro QuadCore.:-) - Btw. the other day we
> upgraded an Acer with an AMD 3500+ CPU and max. RAM to Win7... Gosh it's
> slow...
Check the chart here:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2355703,00.asp
No relevant differences between XP and Win7, safe for resources needed
for better security, I suppose.
Redjak
"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message news:j72vr2$e6n$2...@dont-email.me...
company and is associated with people who own other computer
companies, and they have taken thousands of PC's and Macs apart.
Except for the real low buckers - the parts are exactly the same.
How many computers have you even looked inside. Another "voice of
authority" - the fact - a doddering old slobbering fool, clinging to
the myths of the past. Go gum on some oatmeal and take a nap.
The Apple motto; "there's a sucker born every minute.
Lloyd E Parsons
company which has a completely different experience with Macs and Wintel
boxes...
Makes any other stories about him as fictional as the first!
> How many computers have you even looked inside. Another "voice of
> authority" - the fact - a doddering old slobbering fool, clinging to the
> myths of the past. Go gum on some oatmeal and take a nap.
>
for lots of years.
> The Apple motto; "there's a sucker born every minute.
>
--
Lloyd
Lloyd E Parsons
> On 10/11/2011 06:14 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:
>> On 10/11/11 4:44 PM, Tommy Troll wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:38:55 -0400, Alan Browne
>>> <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2011-10-10 20:00 , zara wrote:
>>>>> It took only 2 weeks for 10% of users to upgrade to Lion. It had taken
>>>>> 20 weeks for Windows 7 to get to the same level of adoption. - JF
>>>>> Mezei.
>>>>
>>>> There is a much larger base of Windows users. And a hell of a lot of
>>>> them have stopped at Windows XP.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
>>>
>>> Says volumes about the durability of Windows machines.
>>
>> Except when it doesn't of course. XP will run fine on newer boxes, so
>> just because they stopped at XP doesn't mean the hardware didn't get
>> replaced.
>
> Hey, stupid! Most new PCs come with Windows installed. You really
> believe Windows Morons took the time and got through the pain of
> installing a former unsupported (for the last 3 years) version of Windows?
>
>> And given the sales volumes of wintel boxes, you can bet your ass they
>> replaced hardware at a quicker clip than we maccies do.
>
> Of course, with equivalent features, PCs cost about 50% the price of
> Macs. Many gamers use them and whenever new equipment appears on the
> shelves -- say 6 core CPUs -- they want it NOW.
>
> I have a 10 years old computer that I put aside 2 years ago with some
> parts in it that are 14 years old (rebuilt). It worked 12 hours a day
> for 8 years and is still in perfect working order. It's just that, when
> you're asked $40 for 256 MB of old RAM, you finally figure out it's
> better to buy a new one.
>
> You people are such a bunch of Morons, it's hard to believe.
--
Lloyd
Redjak
"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message news:j742tl$9gi$5...@dont-email.me...
Redjak
"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message news:j742kv$9gi$3...@dont-email.me...
Denial - so comforting to you morons who don't have a defense.
>Makes any other stories about him as fictional as the first!
See above.
> How many computers have you even looked inside. Another "voice of
> authority" - the fact - a doddering old slobbering fool, clinging to
> the
> myths of the past. Go gum on some oatmeal and take a nap.
>
>I couldn't tell you how many I've been inside of. I worked in the
>biz for lots of years.
"Lots"?? Right. Is that like "a real very many"? Or "Many, many"?
Or " A real lot", or "Lots and lots".
> The Apple motto; "there's a sucker born every minute.
>
>or 'better products come at a premium price'
Or - - "if you put your faith in that one - then you’re an ignorant
asshole - or worse"
-hh
> >
> > Well,Lloyd, your full of shit- as usual. My bro has a computer company
> > and is associated with people who own other computer companies, and they
> > have taken thousands of PC's and Macs apart. Except for the real low
> > buckers - the parts are exactly the same.
>
> Yeah, your 'bro' - we've seen all you fairy tales about his service
> company which has a completely different experience with Macs
> and Wintel boxes...
>
> Makes any other stories about him as fictional as the first!
-hh
Lloyd E Parsons
Macs.
--
Lloyd
-hh
> On 10/12/11 8:22 AM, -hh wrote:
> > Lloyd E Parsons<lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/12/11 7:22 AM, Redjak wrote:
>
> >>> Well,Lloyd, your full of shit- as usual. My bro has a computer company
> >>> and is associated with people who own other computer companies, and they
> >>> have taken thousands of PC's and Macs apart. Except for the real low
> >>> buckers - the parts are exactly the same.
>
> >> Yeah, your 'bro' - we've seen all you fairy tales about his service
> >> company which has a completely different experience with Macs
> >> and Wintel boxes...
>
> >> Makes any other stories about him as fictional as the first!
>
> > Of course, perhaps Red's "Bro" is none other than John Slade? :-)
>
> Macs.
either ... hence the smiley.
In doing a bit of data mining, at least there really is a John W L
Slade (TBD if it is the one that actually posts here, of course):
"[Slade Computer Consulting] in Crownsville, MD is a private company
categorized under Prepackaged Software. Our records show it was
established in 1990 and incorporated in Maryland. Current estimates
show this company has an annual revenue of $73,000 and employs a staff
of approximately 1."
- via linkedin
Which basically means that this John is a software programmer...not a
hardware guy.
-hh
Redjak
"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message news:j74jc7$12v$1...@dont-email.me...
That's why you have little, tiny pea brains. I can't figure out which
one of you is the more stupid.
Redjak
"-hh" wrote in message
news:99e0b1ed-fd6b-45e9...@q13g2000vby.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 12, 1:39 pm, Lloyd E Parsons <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
> On 10/12/11 8:22 AM, -hh wrote:
> > Lloyd E Parsons<lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/12/11 7:22 AM, Redjak wrote:
>
> >>> Well,Lloyd, your full of shit- as usual. My bro has a computer
> >>> company
> >>> and is associated with people who own other computer companies,
> >>> and they
> >>> have taken thousands of PC's and Macs apart. Except for the real
> >>> low
> >>> buckers - the parts are exactly the same.
>
> >> Yeah, your 'bro' - we've seen all you fairy tales about his
> >> service
> >> company which has a completely different experience with Macs
> >> and Wintel boxes...
>
> >> Makes any other stories about him as fictional as the first!
>
> > Of course, perhaps Red's "Bro" is none other than John Slade?
> > :-)
>
> I don't think so as I don't remember Slade ever talking about
> working on
> Macs.
>.Nor do I recall him working professionally on PC hardware really
>either ... hence the smiley.
>In doing a bit of data mining, at least there really is a John W L
>Slade (TBD if it is the one that actually posts here, of course):
>"[Slade Computer Consulting] in Crownsville, MD is a private company
>categorized under Prepackaged Software. Our records show it was
>established in 1990 and incorporated in Maryland. Current estimates
>show this company has an annual revenue of $73,000 and employs a
>staff
>of approximately 1."
> - via linkedin
>Which basically means that this John is a software programmer...not a
>hardware guy.
What a Luser you are. A luser without a life. So concerned with
everyone else's business. You should have devoted more time to
advancing yourself - but, Losers are Lusers foe a reason.
-hh
> What a Luser you are....
And you're screamingly jealous! :-)
Your attempts at one-upmanship always fall short, such as your claim
of being an "Ex Marine". Literally everyone utterly owned you as
soon as you made that claim.
-hh