Linked by mjhi11 on Thu 16th Sep 2010 20:13 UTC
Apple I love OSNews, but it does seem like some of its editors enjoy just a little too much taking a good natured jab at Apple upon occasion (well, more like every chance that particular editor can get). I thought it time for a little good news and analysis about Apple that critics often overlook.
Thread beginning with comment 441564
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Sat 18th Sep 2010 02:13 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

What I love about reading the comments on OSNews.com are the number of people jerking off over specifications whilst ignoring that specifications aren't the be-all and end-all of qualifiers when it comes to evaluating a new kit. What use is it to have a high specced machine if it is a complete clusterf-ck when it comes to reliability and stability? Do people here actually think about more than just benchmarks and how fast their machine is? I sometimes wonder whether most people here just run benchmarks all day and trolling on OSNews.com about how their computer is 'so much better than Apple' because of higher performance numbers.

For me I couldn't give a rats ass about performance; I want a fast, reliable and functional computer that allows me to do what I want without all the rigmarole that the Windows world puts me through. Windows 7 is marginally better than Windows Vista but all the problems (I have listed in the past - so don't ask me to f-cking repeat them again) still remain. Its all very nice crowing about specifications but it is the operating system that makes or breaks the computer and quite frankly I couldn't give a brass wazoo about the ability to build my own if I am saddled with Windows being the only viable desktop operating system.

Edited 2010-09-18 02:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by Shkaba on Sat 18th Sep 2010 02:30 in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

Windows 7 is marginally better than Windows Vista but all the problems (I have listed in the past - so don't ask me to f-cking repeat them again) still remain.


You are marginally wrong here


Its all very nice crowing about specifications but it is the operating system that makes or breaks the computer and quite frankly I couldn't give a brass wazoo about the ability to build my own if I am saddled with Windows being the only viable desktop operating system.


And here you are completely wrong (or in other words not marginally but significantly). Both the hardware and the software (OS) are important for the overall performance. Last but not least Windows is not the only viable OS (neither is OS X)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Sun 19th Sep 2010 04:32 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You are marginally wrong here


So you make a statement and provide no evidence to back it up. How am I wrong - on what basis am I wrong?

And here you are completely wrong (or in other words not marginally but significantly). Both the hardware and the software (OS) are important for the overall performance. Last but not least Windows is not the only viable OS (neither is OS X)


Yes but performance is not the be-all and end-all decider when it comes to ones experience using a computer - if you actually read my post instead of scanning it quickly whilst pulling suff out of your ass you might actually realise that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by Kasi on Sat 18th Sep 2010 03:03 in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
Kasi Member since:
2008-07-12

Double

Edited 2010-09-18 03:09 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1