• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Speeding up hard drives?

T

Thomas

Flightless Bird
I read in another post something about speeding up hard drives, or access to
the read write cycles. I have 2 drives installed on My Windows 7 64 bit
machine. I have a Gigabyte MB with a dual core Intel 3 gig processor. I
don't understand a whole lot about IEDE modes and some of the settings I
have seen seem to be missing or just not available. The drives are both
7200 RPM, one is a 500 Gig (Primary) and the other is a 1 TB. Is there a
method of speeding up the access/read/write of these drives?
 
G

GTS

Flightless Bird
Maybe, but mistakes will make your system unusable and possibly wipe out
your installation. At the least you would want to do a full backup first.
Given your stated level of knowledge, I'd strongly recommend leaving things
be. Unless you're an extreme gamer or performance hobbyist or do very disk
intensive work like large database operations there's unlikely to be any
benefit worth the risk.

"Thomas" <bettablue@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hu8gv2$n8q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> I read in another post something about speeding up hard drives, or access
> to the read write cycles. I have 2 drives installed on My Windows 7 64
> bit machine. I have a Gigabyte MB with a dual core Intel 3 gig processor.
> I don't understand a whole lot about IEDE modes and some of the settings I
> have seen seem to be missing or just not available. The drives are both
> 7200 RPM, one is a 500 Gig (Primary) and the other is a 1 TB. Is there a
> method of speeding up the access/read/write of these drives?
>
 
P

Peter Foldes

Flightless Bird
Thomas

Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive that is fast
then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or plus. Costly but extremely
fast

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"Thomas" <bettablue@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hu8gv2$n8q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>I read in another post something about speeding up hard drives, or access to the
>read write cycles. I have 2 drives installed on My Windows 7 64 bit machine. I
>have a Gigabyte MB with a dual core Intel 3 gig processor. I don't understand a
>whole lot about IEDE modes and some of the settings I have seen seem to be missing
>or just not available. The drives are both 7200 RPM, one is a 500 Gig (Primary)
>and the other is a 1 TB. Is there a method of speeding up the access/read/write of
>these drives?
>
 
K

Ken Blake

Flightless Bird
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:19:55 -0400, "Peter Foldes"
<maci252211@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Thomas
>
> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive that is fast
> then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or plus. Costly but extremely
> fast


And even faster (but more costly) is a solid state drive.

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
 
G

Gilgamesh

Flightless Bird
"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:dpag065sjdo7tj3p8iqumiionn3b62dqe2@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:19:55 -0400, "Peter Foldes"
> <maci252211@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thomas
>>
>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>> that is fast
>> then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or plus. Costly
>> but extremely
>> fast
>
>
> And even faster (but more costly) is a solid state drive.

From what I've seen of solid state drive specs the read write speeds are
slower than 7900 RPM SATA drives.
Are there any specific ones you are thinking of?

>
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
 
C

Canuck57

Flightless Bird
On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
> Thomas
>
> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
> plus. Costly but extremely fast


Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk to
disk or disk to net or net to disk.

Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
 
J

John B. Slocomb

Flightless Bird
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:05:45 -0600, Canuck57 <Canuck57@nospam.com>
wrote:

>On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>> Thomas
>>
>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>
>
>Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk to
>disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>
>Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.


I tried this with a 2.66 processor Dual core (4 processors) chip, 4
gig memory. Fedora 12 and Gnome 2.28.2.

Copying a 1,569,816 byte file from file to file on the same disk and
in the same partition took 13.12 seconds with Linux and 30.91 with
Windows 7 - hand timed.

Not quite 3 times but close enough.

..
John B. Slocomb
(johnbslocombatgmaildotcom)
 
P

Paul

Flightless Bird
Gilgamesh wrote:
>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:dpag065sjdo7tj3p8iqumiionn3b62dqe2@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:19:55 -0400, "Peter Foldes"
>> <maci252211@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>> drive that is fast
>>> then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or plus.
>>> Costly but extremely
>>> fast
>>
>>
>> And even faster (but more costly) is a solid state drive.
>
> From what I've seen of solid state drive specs the read write speeds
> are slower than 7900 RPM SATA drives.
> Are there any specific ones you are thinking of?
>

This is one of the first consumer SATA III interface SSDs, and it actually
delivers data faster than SATA II on reads. There is room for improvement
on writes, so this won't be the fastest drive. I would expect Intel
to develop something to match them, but give Intel a bit of time
to do the job right. The previous generation Intel SSD was pretty good.
(You can plug this into a SATA II port if you want. Your read speed will
drop a bit.)

Crucial RealSSD C300 CTFDDAC256MAG-1G1 2.5" 256GB SATA III $680 retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&SelectedRating=-1&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1

"In the end I get read speeds of 350 MB/s and writes of 210 MB/s"

http://www.crucial.com/pdf/Datasheets-letter_C300_RealSSD_v2-5-10_online.pdf

It is still an immature technology. A firmware fix is needed for that
particular drive, but is probably being shipped on new units by now.
Anandtech is good at beating up the drives and making them
malfunction :) They do better testing than many of the manufacturers.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2974/crucial-s-realssd-c300-an-update-on-my-drive

Paul
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>> Thomas
>>
>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>
>
> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk to
> disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>
> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy operations,
> especially on large files such as 4gb media files.

If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run that
crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>
>>
>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk
>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>
>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>
> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run
> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>
>
>

It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but you're
too fucking stupid to see that.

--
Alias
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>> Thomas
>>>>
>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk
>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>
>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>
>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run
>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>
>>
>>
>
> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but you're
> too fucking stupid to see that.
>
> --
> Alias

So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
Windows and move to Linux? I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may be
faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard drive
>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM or
>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk
>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>
>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>
>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run
>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
> Windows and move to Linux?

Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.

> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may
> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.

It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less with
Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops with
Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs and
DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing Windows
has going for it is using it for gaming.

--
Alias
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>> drive
>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000 RPM
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk
>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>
>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run
>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
>> Windows and move to Linux?
>
> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>
>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may
>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>
> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the transfer
> speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux. Yet another
> is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time which is much
> quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less with Linux. Another
> is the fact that you can have multiple desktops with Linux and you can't
> with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs and DVDs much quicker and
> better than Windows. About the only thing Windows has going for it is
> using it for gaming.
>
> --
> Alias

If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving to
Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen anytime
soon. Get over it. Find something else to do with your time. Take more
drugs.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files disk
>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to run
>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>
>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>
>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may
>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>
>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs
>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving
> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
> anytime soon.

Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine, chum.\

> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
> Take more drugs.
>
>
>

Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.

--
Alias
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files
>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want to
>>>>>> run
>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>
>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>
>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may
>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>
>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs
>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving
>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>> anytime soon.
>
> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
> chum.\
>
>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>> Take more drugs.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on Dell's
> web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>
> --
> Alias

BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files
>>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they all
>>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want
>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
>>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>>
>>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>>
>>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files may
>>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>>
>>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
>>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs
>>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving
>>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>>> anytime soon.
>>
>> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
>> chum.\
>>
>>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>>> Take more drugs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
>> Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
> Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
>
>
>

A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Over 12 million
happy users says you're full of shit. How many NEW Windows users have
bought Windows 7 without it being preinstalled on a computer? Two?

--
Alias
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hub77o$l4q$2@news.eternal-september.org...
> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files
>>>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and they
>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want
>>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone ditch
>>>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying files
>>>>>> may
>>>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
>>>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>>>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns CDs
>>>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving
>>>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>>>> anytime soon.
>>>
>>> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
>>> chum.\
>>>
>>>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>>>> Take more drugs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
>>> Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
>> Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
>>
>>
>>
>
> A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Over 12 million happy
> users says you're full of shit. How many NEW Windows users have bought
> Windows 7 without it being preinstalled on a computer? Two?
>
> --
> Alias

There you go again with that magical 12 million users. You have no way of
knowing how many saps use that shitty OS. Just because 12 million were
unfortunate to download that dribble, doesn't mean 12 million are stuck
using that OS. That is your big lie.

I know lots of people who purchased Windows 7 without it being preinstalled.
So If know quite a few, then there are millions of others. Oops.
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hub77o$l4q$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>> news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a hard
>>>>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files
>>>>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and
>>>>>>>>>> they all
>>>>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want
>>>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone
>>>>>>> ditch
>>>>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying
>>>>>>> files may
>>>>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>>>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with Linux.
>>>>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>>>>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>>>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>>>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns
>>>>>> CDs
>>>>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>>>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and moving
>>>>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>>>>> anytime soon.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
>>>> chum.\
>>>>
>>>>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>>>>> Take more drugs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
>>>> Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
>>> Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Over 12 million
>> happy users says you're full of shit. How many NEW Windows users have
>> bought Windows 7 without it being preinstalled on a computer? Two?
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> There you go again with that magical 12 million users. You have no way
> of knowing how many saps use that shitty OS. Just because 12 million
> were unfortunate to download that dribble, doesn't mean 12 million are
> stuck using that OS. That is your big lie.

Wrong. The figure is based on updates, not ISO downloads.

>
> I know lots of people who purchased Windows 7 without it being
> preinstalled. So If know quite a few, then there are millions of others.
> Oops.
>
>
>

Note I wrote, and I quote, "NEW Windows users". How many NEW Windows
users are there that didn't buy Windows with it preinstalled? Two? None?

--
Alias
 
E

Epsom F. Shagnasty

Flightless Bird
"Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
news:hubaau$2kh$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>> news:hub77o$l4q$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>> news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a
>>>>>>>>>>>> hard
>>>>>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at 15,000
>>>>>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy files
>>>>>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and
>>>>>>>>>>> they all
>>>>>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want
>>>>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone
>>>>>>>> ditch
>>>>>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>>>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying
>>>>>>>> files may
>>>>>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>>>>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with
>>>>>>> Linux.
>>>>>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot time
>>>>>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>>>>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>>>>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns
>>>>>>> CDs
>>>>>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>>>>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and
>>>>>> moving
>>>>>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>>>>>> anytime soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
>>>>> chum.\
>>>>>
>>>>>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>>>>>> Take more drugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
>>>>> Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>> BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
>>>> Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Over 12 million
>>> happy users says you're full of shit. How many NEW Windows users have
>>> bought Windows 7 without it being preinstalled on a computer? Two?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alias
>>
>> There you go again with that magical 12 million users. You have no way
>> of knowing how many saps use that shitty OS. Just because 12 million
>> were unfortunate to download that dribble, doesn't mean 12 million are
>> stuck using that OS. That is your big lie.
>
> Wrong. The figure is based on updates, not ISO downloads.
>
>>
>> I know lots of people who purchased Windows 7 without it being
>> preinstalled. So If know quite a few, then there are millions of others.
>> Oops.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Note I wrote, and I quote, "NEW Windows users". How many NEW Windows users
> are there that didn't buy Windows with it preinstalled? Two? None?
>
> --
> Alias

Does it really matter? What matters is that Windows 7 is selling millions
and millions of copies. Ubuntu is free yet most reject it. Ubuntu is on
less than one percent of the desktops. It doesn't matter how many updates
there are, the fact of the matter is, Ubuntu can't even give itself away.
Nothing else really matters in your quest as the Ubuntu Marketing
Department.

They (Ubuntu wanks) get what they pay for! LOL!
 
A

Alias

Flightless Bird
Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hubaau$2kh$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>> news:hub77o$l4q$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hub6tf$j6j$4@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:hub6ml$j6j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>> Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@hewhoismasked&anonymous.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:hub63o$gkk$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2010 04:35 PM, Epsom F. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:KjYNn.39687$Ak3.26286@newsfe16.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2010 1:19 PM, Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doing that is playing with fire. Leave it be. Of you want a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard
>>>>>>>>>>>>> drive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is fast then next time purchase one that can run at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 15,000
>>>>>>>>>>>>> RPM or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> plus. Costly but extremely fast
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, Vista/Win7 is the slowest OSes out there to copy
>>>>>>>>>>>> files
>>>>>>>>>>>> disk
>>>>>>>>>>>> to disk or disk to net or net to disk.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Run Solaris, Linux (any version), Open/Free or Net-BSD and
>>>>>>>>>>>> they all
>>>>>>>>>>>> consistantly run 3 to 10 times faster than Vista/Win7 for copy
>>>>>>>>>>>> operations, especially on large files such as 4gb media files.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you already have Windows 7 or Vista, who the hell would want
>>>>>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>>>>>> that crappy Linux just to copy files? LOL!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's just another example of how Linux is superior to Windows but
>>>>>>>>>> you're too fucking stupid to see that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So if Linux is so superior to Windows then why doesn't everyone
>>>>>>>>> ditch
>>>>>>>>> Windows and move to Linux?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because most people believe the FUD. You're a prime example.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'll tell you why. You are lying again. Linux
>>>>>>>>> is NOT superior and never will be superior. Granted, copying
>>>>>>>>> files may
>>>>>>>>> be faster but that isn't why people use their computers. Ooooops.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's one of the reasons and, unlike Windows, Linux tells you the
>>>>>>>> transfer speed. Another is surfing the web which is safer with
>>>>>>>> Linux.
>>>>>>>> Yet another is email which is safer with Linux. Another is boot
>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>> which is much quicker with Linux. Another is cost which is far less
>>>>>>>> with Linux. Another is the fact that you can have multiple desktops
>>>>>>>> with Linux and you can't with Windows. Another is that Linux burns
>>>>>>>> CDs
>>>>>>>> and DVDs much quicker and better than Windows. About the only thing
>>>>>>>> Windows has going for it is using it for gaming.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If that's the case, then everyone would be ditching Windows and
>>>>>>> moving
>>>>>>> to Linux. Guess what hotshit? It isn't happening and will not happen
>>>>>>> anytime soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, yes it is. You don't like it but that's your red wagon, not mine,
>>>>>> chum.\
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Get over it. Find something else to do with your time.
>>>>>>> Take more drugs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Three years ago, no Ubuntu anywhere. Now it's in the stores and on
>>>>>> Dell's web site. You're wrong, plain and simple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>> BFD. Very few people use Ubuntu. Windows 7 is selling millions while
>>>>> Ubuntu can't even give itself away! LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Over 12 million
>>>> happy users says you're full of shit. How many NEW Windows users have
>>>> bought Windows 7 without it being preinstalled on a computer? Two?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> There you go again with that magical 12 million users. You have no way
>>> of knowing how many saps use that shitty OS. Just because 12 million
>>> were unfortunate to download that dribble, doesn't mean 12 million are
>>> stuck using that OS. That is your big lie.
>>
>> Wrong. The figure is based on updates, not ISO downloads.
>>
>>>
>>> I know lots of people who purchased Windows 7 without it being
>>> preinstalled. So If know quite a few, then there are millions of others.
>>> Oops.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Note I wrote, and I quote, "NEW Windows users". How many NEW Windows
>> users are there that didn't buy Windows with it preinstalled? Two? None?
>>
>> --
>> Alias
>
> Does it really matter?

Of course it does. You're just too stupid to understand it.

>What matters is that Windows 7 is selling
> millions and millions of copies.

Not a whole lot of copies to people who've never used Windows. Ubuntu,
OTOH, is being used by former Windows users. See the trend?

> Ubuntu is free yet most reject it.

A lie.

> Ubuntu is on less than one percent of the desktops.

Yet there are millions and millions of new desktops so the real number
is different than you would like to mislead people to believe.

> It doesn't matter
> how many updates there are, the fact of the matter is, Ubuntu can't even
> give itself away. Nothing else really matters in your quest as the
> Ubuntu Marketing Department.

Another lie.

>
> They (Ubuntu wanks) get what they pay for! LOL!
>
>
>

Do you really think your lies are funny?

--
Alias
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top