From: DenverD on
> The fastest I saw a PC with windows go was 9.8m/s^2

only because you didn't use the newer and obviously more powerful
M$-Superb Professional Enterprise Ultimate Supreme Gravity 2010 Sneak
Preview Closed VIP Beta Anti-Classic Plus X12

--
DenverD (Linux Counter 282315) via Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (20090817),
KDE 3.5.7 "release 72-11", openSUSE Linux 10.3, 2.6.22.19-0.4-default
#1 SMP i686 athlon
From: Kevin Nathan on
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:13:40 +0100
DenverD <spam.trap(a)SOMEwhere.dk> wrote:

>> The fastest I saw a PC with windows go was 9.8m/s^2
>
>only because you didn't use the newer and obviously more powerful
>M$-Superb Professional Enterprise Ultimate Supreme Gravity 2010 Sneak
>Preview Closed VIP Beta Anti-Classic Plus X12
>

Well, *I* did and the results were disappointing, until you took into
account it was a Microsoft product:

7.3 m/s

:-)

--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- (temporarily offline)

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.5-pae
9:24am up 21 days 23:38, 38 users, load average: 0.48, 0.71, 0.87

From: wolfgang kern on

"houghi" figured:
>
> The fastest I saw a PC with windows go was 9.8m/s^2

That seem to were a situation when the PC crossed the desc
border and going to hit the floor ... :)

__
wolfgang


From: Thomas on
houghi wrote:
> Kevin Nathan wrote:
>> My older brother has been running Vista starting with 2GB RAM. He was
>> having various problems (he actually calls Microsoft Support!) and the
>> solution to at least one of the problems (an MS update not running to
>> completion) was an increase to 4GB RAM at MS's suggestion. That fixed
>> it and now he's pissed because the system doesn't ever get to even 2GB.
>> Amazing lack of software engineering on Microsoft's part... :-)
>
> The fastest I saw a PC with windows go was 9.8m/s^2
>
> houghi

You owe me a keyboard, houghi. (And a half a cup of coffee.)

Thomas
From: Darrell Stec on
Martin inscribed forevermore utilizing silicon chips::

> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:22:40 -0500, Darrell Stec <darstec(a)neo.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>That does not seem to be much of a solution unless I am missing something.
>>Besides my system only has 1 GB RAM which is minimum for WinXP
>
> Hardly, WinXP runs adequately on my PC with 3/4 of that.

How many different computers do you use in one day? Adequately is relative.
Maybe you are use to slower performance or do not use memory intensive
applications.

--
Later,
Darrell
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Prev: unable to install Skype
Next: UPS / SLES 10 question