Log in

No account? Create an account

Good Grief

Posted on 2009.10.17 at 01:00


ehowton at 2009-10-19 18:01 (UTC) (Link)
"You're running the Vista kernel, dumbass." AND "If you think that Vista 2 Windows 7 is a truly new Operating System"

While I appreciate someone who's recently stopped delivering pizza for a living coming at a long-time professional in the industry with boldness, the inverse of that is rudeness. Nothing screams, I'm an ignorant prick louder than being rude. That aside, let's see what the the President of Microsoft's Window Division, Steven Sinofsky says about it:

"Windows Vista was about improving those things ... Memory management, networking, process management, all of the security hardening, all of those things will carry forth, and maintain the compatibility with applications that people expect. Windows Vista established a very solid foundation, a multiyear foundation, particularly on subsystems like graphics and audio and storage and things like that, and Windows 7 will continue to build on that foundation as well."

Now I know he's just some high-powered, high-paid executive and you're a nobody, but by God you're a nobody who took some programming classes in some junior college in a Southern state, so I expect you to understand that a major point release isn't about "completely rewriting the code from scratch." Its about building upon the things which work. Its a modified kernel. Hell, XP was considered "5.1." Its a goddamn naming convention. Solaris changed their naming convention back during Solaris 7. So while Solaris 10 is *really* 5.10, it too was a COMPLETELY NEW OPERATING SYSTEM depending upon how you choose to acknowledge those things, and different people have different ideas about these things. To be kind, its very simplistic of you to think that the only way to have a new operating system is if the kernel is completely new. Its not your way or the highway. Sometimes even people in the industry have a difference of opinion on this, and they're way smarter than you are. So pretty please, with sugar on top, don't throw out 'dumbass' while tightly grasping that painfully glaring mirror.

"...but rather want to continue to express your unconditional love or Vista 2 Windows 7"

Where did I imply this? Oh - I didn't! You made a false statement. You lied. According to most tenants of the Christian religion, this means you're going straight to hell. Do not pass 'Go' do not collect $200. You have fallen short of the glory of God. No, you didn't accidentally misunderstand, you deliberately told an untruth to make it appear as if somehow, were I a fanboy of the new Windows operating system, it would undermine my words. You have a problem with Microsoft's naming convention? Go bray at someone who cares, but don't put words in my mouth. Its akin to cheating. If you cheat to win, its not really winning. And you have the gall to call me shallow? I'm disappointed in you. Now, go to hell.

"what OS is going to run faster on your box"

Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position and then refuting it, thus giving the appearance that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. Introducing apples to an orange comparison is akin to cowardice. No one likes a coward. Your question can't possibly be answered accurately, as (per your example) OSX won't run natively on just any x86 box. So if it can't be installed but Windows 7 can, one could then say "Windows 7" will run faster:

I'm not saying your argument is wrong, simply that its invalid.

Previous Entry  Next Entry