Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 10:58 UTC
Windows Two weeks ago, I published an article in which I explained what was wrong about Randall Kennedy's "Windows 7 Unmasked" article. This was noted by Infoworld's editor-in-chief Eric Knorr, who suggested that Randall and I enter into an email debate regarding the various points made in our articles. We agreed upon publishing this email thread as-is, unedited (I didn't even fix the spelling errors), on both Infoworld and OSNews. We agreed that Randall would start the debate, and that I had the final word. Read on for the entertaining email debate (I figured it would be best to give each email its own page, for clarity's sake. My apologies if this makes each individual page much shorter than what you're used to from OSNews).
Thread beginning with comment 338930
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Adam S
by rexstuff on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 17:41 UTC in reply to "Comment by Adam S"
rexstuff
Member since:
2007-04-06

Well, I'm with Thom on this one. Changes in thread count is just an indicator of... changes in thread count.

Randall may have some historical evidence to give his argument some credence, but ultimately his entire argument is fallacious: one of correlation vs causation and historical fallacies.

Perhaps in the past, changes in thread count have accompanied significant changes in the kernel. But a stronger argument is needed to establish causality.

(However, I do tend agree with Randall's assessment of Rock > Techno, but there's no accounting for taste ;) )

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Adam S
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 17:46 in reply to "RE: Comment by Adam S"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

(However, I do tend agree with Randall's assessment of Rock > Techno, but there's no accounting for taste )


Of course, rock > techno, but it's all irrelevant.

Fiona Apple > everything.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Adam S
by suryad on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 19:38 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Adam S"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

Well I do agree rock > techno

But house/progressive > rock

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Adam S
by computrius on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 21:24 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Adam S"
computrius Member since:
2006-03-26

Pretty much everything is better than techno.. Techno is really only one step above pop as far as being completely meaningless tripe ;)

BTW, thom won this hands down. The other guy pretty much spent the entire time flailing around trying to change the subject, and throwing out personal attacks when he couldn't come up with an argument.

Edited 2008-12-02 21:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Adam S
by segedunum on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 01:04 in reply to "RE: Comment by Adam S"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

The question is, do we look within the OS and the kernel for any evidence that we can that things have actually changed, or do we use hearsay from PDCs and blogs about improvements people say have happened? Anybody who believes the latter has taken leave of their senses. Fallacious doesn't quite cut it, and alas, using hearsay has never disproved, or proved, a thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2