Thread: Linux vs Windows

For the user it's Windows
Unix systems own Windows on a different level ...

o.m.g.......
i...I, am actually getting to say this.
should'nt this be in the computers../// section??? (haha)

anyways, windows and intel are one and the same.
'windows works' - oxymoron.
mac and unix and stuff can be compared to a.m.d., not many people know 'bout it, and it's not as publicity oriented, so not as 'hotcake' like as windows.

in a nutshell - windows is at the bottom of the pile.period. bottom of anything you like.

I am a simple man when it comes to computers; all I want is for the basic shit to work, like playing dvd disks or running simple programs or whatever. Therefore as far as I'm concerned Linux eats unwashed dick. I've been using it for the past couple of months as my flatmate had a spare computer which happened to have linux on it, and it is fucking shite. Harumph.

Bah, only one thing is enough to make me keep using Windows in the future and it's called DX10.

Originally Posted by Diabolos_dolcefarniente

anyways, windows and intel are one and the same.
'windows works' - oxymoron.
mac and unix and stuff can be compared to a.m.d., not many people know 'bout it, and it's not as publicity oriented, so not as 'hotcake' like as windows.

You ARE an idiot after all.

sigh..... if you say so.......

WINDOWS ROCKS!!!!!

Originally Posted by Diabolos_dolcefarniente

sigh..... if you say so.......

And I DO say do.

Did you know that Apple use Intel CPUs in their systems now? Why did you say: "anyways, windows and intel are one and the same"? This is totally retarded.

http://news.com.com/AMD+surpasses+In...3-5939522.html
I quote: "AMD surpasses Intel in U.S. retail stores"
So you say people don't know about AMD?
Even DELL are now selling AMD machines for home, business and servers.

okay okay,

i WAS just saying that a.m.d rocks in comparison to intel.
and fine, not giving enough credit to the general awareness of this here day's society.

don't bite my head off for this.

- the report of amd kicking intel, it must be fairly new. look back a year. would this have been the case.
okay no p.s.3 either but, my drift being.....

AMD's new processors are inferior to Intel's !

Originally Posted by Diabolos_dolcefarniente

okay okay,

i WAS just saying that a.m.d rocks in comparison to intel.
and fine, not giving enough credit to the general awareness of this here day's society.

don't bite my head off for this.

- the report of amd kicking intel, it must be fairly new. look back a year. would this have been the case.
okay no p.s.3 either but, my drift being.....

For christ's sake, please stop posting.
AMD's getting their butt kicked in the single-core, dual-core and even quad-core department. Heck, their Quad FX solution that was meant to counter Intel's Kentsfield, is using twice the power to achieve 80% of its rival's performance.

Don't even get me started on the PS3 and how weak it actually is.

im interested about the p.s 3.
i think it still has a thread in the comp. forum right.
do tell do tell. i won't make the mistake of buying it then.
look whatever ok, so it's a pemanent thing, intel vs. amd. dual core , core2 duo whatever. i just like it if oblivion works well. i have enough friends to tell me what to buy to reeeeeally bother.
and since you're as updated as they come i seal my lips on the topic.
but i would like to know about the p.s.3.