XP 2400+ Thouroughbred Vs. XP 2400 Palomino

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 12:57:12 -0700, Werner wrote:

"Wes Newell" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:59:21 -0700, Werner wrote:

Look he

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_3734_4348^7923,00.html

Hogwash.

So what can you put on an ASUS A7V266-C board? Every Athlon CPU?

Any Socket A cpu they make.

Even you cannot set the CPU power to 1.65V on that board?

Those are some pretty bold words.:-) In the second place, 1.65v isn't
required to make a cpu run. There's plenty of other choices that will work
between 1.5v and 1.85v.

And besides that, what brought this board up, not I, nor the person with
the original question IIRC.

And learn how to post.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core 2100+ CPU @2400MHz
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/

I'll top post this just for you.

That's utterly rediculous.

Now try and figure out which one of your 4 paragraphs I'm responding
to.:-)


On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:44:33 +0000, Buffalo wrote:


"Stacey" :
Dumb****..

http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usen.../faq_topp.html

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm

http://www.google.com/search?q=usene...te+top-posting --

Stacey

Well, you're a real piece of work. Here's a quote from your top link:

" But if you place all your comments at the top, the reader has to scroll
down the page and hunt to see what it is you are replying to. I, and most
other newsgroup regulars, tend to ignore people who make it too much hard
work to figure out what it is they have to say. If you deliberately make
it difficult for people to understand you, you shouldn't really be too
surprised or disappointed when they don't respond."

I use OE and when I follow a longer post, It makes it more difficult,
takes more time and more work to keep scrolling down through all the
'garbage' that the 'bottom posting' replier was too lazy to remove . Now
if the replier had 'top posted' I don't have to scroll down at all. That's
why I disagree with the above quoted statement. Just because someone else
says it (maybe they use a different NG reader) doesn't make it easier for
me or necessarily right. So, if you're using OE, then top posting in
threads is usually much easier and faster to follow.
MTCW.

PS: I bottom posted just for you. :-)

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core 2100+ CPU @2400MHz
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/

I'll top post this just for you.

That's utterly rediculous.

Figure out who I'm repsponding to?

Now try and figure out which one of the paragraphs I'm responding
to.:-)


On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:44:33 +0000, Buffalo wrote:


"Stacey" :
Dumb****..

http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usen.../faq_topp.html

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm

http://www.google.com/search?q=usene...te+top-posting --

Stacey

Well, you're a real piece of work. Here's a quote from your top link:

" But if you place all your comments at the top, the reader has to scroll
down the page and hunt to see what it is you are replying to. I, and most
other newsgroup regulars, tend to ignore people who make it too much hard
work to figure out what it is they have to say. If you deliberately make
it difficult for people to understand you, you shouldn't really be too
surprised or disappointed when they don't respond."

I use OE and when I follow a longer post, It makes it more difficult,
takes more time and more work to keep scrolling down through all the
'garbage' that the 'bottom posting' replier was too lazy to remove . Now
if the replier had 'top posted' I don't have to scroll down at all. That's
why I disagree with the above quoted statement. Just because someone else
says it (maybe they use a different NG reader) doesn't make it easier for
me or necessarily right. So, if you're using OE, then top posting in
threads is usually much easier and faster to follow.
MTCW.

PS: I bottom posted just for you. :-)

Wes Newell wrote:

Me too

I'll top post this just for you.

As a matter of fact


That's utterly rediculous.


why not just


Now try and figure out which one of your 4 paragraphs I'm responding
to.:-)

spead it all



On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:44:33 +0000, Buffalo wrote:


over the page.


"Stacey" :
Dumb****..

http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usen.../faq_topp.html

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm

http://www.google.com/search?q=usene...te+top-posting --

Stacey

Well, you're a real piece of work. Here's a quote from your top link:

" But if you place all your comments at the top, the reader has to scroll
down the page and hunt to see what it is you are replying to. I, and most
other newsgroup regulars, tend to ignore people who make it too much hard
work to figure out what it is they have to say. If you deliberately make
it difficult for people to understand you, you shouldn't really be too
surprised or disappointed when they don't respond."

I use OE and when I follow a longer post, It makes it more difficult,
takes more time and more work to keep scrolling down through all the
'garbage' that the 'bottom posting' replier was too lazy to remove .


Bingo only a DUMB **** doesn't know how to delete the crap.

Now
if the replier had 'top posted' I don't have to scroll down at all.
That's why I disagree with the above quoted statement. Just because
someone else says it (maybe they use a different NG reader) doesn't make
it easier for me or necessarily right. So, if you're using OE, then top
posting in threads is usually much easier and faster to follow.
MTCW.

PS: I bottom posted just for you. :-)


Thanx... This is SO much easier to read isn't it?

--

Stacey