Wonderfully funny Inquirer Intel FUD presentation

Isaac W. wrote:
I would guess that time line would be far sooner being that AMD chips
are less expensive. That being said, I would say early 2007 or 2006
chrismas for all those geeks who want upgrades. I hope the conroe chip
lives up to my expectations. Im likely going to wait for an upgrade
then. AMD might make a really decent chip but it seems to me that AMD
is still not as stable motherboard wise. *shrug*

Have no idea what AMD motherboard you think is unstable, certainly there
is more choice for Intel. The time to decide which computer to buy is
when you need to buy a computer. There will always be something faster
and/or cheaper if you wait six months. Of course you can wait forever to
buy a computer upgrade, and if you just think a new computer would be
fun that's a good thing to do.

One thing is for sure, its going to be interesting how this all turns
out.



--
-bill davidsen )
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me

In article .com,
says...
I was specifically referring to the mass amounts of junk that alot of
the motherboard manufacturers push. They come DOA, Have crap for
customer service, Ect. Ect.

More frikin FUD.

If you want to criticize, put your money where your mouth is and prove
me wrong.

A fool can't be taught.

--
Keith

Your the fool if you can't at least point out possible errors my ways.
You call me a fool and tear into me when I would rather have a
reasonable conversation about these subjects. I have researched and
looked at hardware and reviews always taking a critical eye at what and
who is reporting this review and if there is personal biases involved.

Btw FUD's are stupid IMHO, I said it was invalid and in poor taste
earlier.

Your the one that needs to grow up.

On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W."
wrote:

I would rather have a
reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

max

On 20 Apr 2006 11:56:45 -0700, "Isaac W." wrote:

I was specifically referring to the mass amounts of junk that alot of
the motherboard manufacturers push. They come DOA, Have crap for
customer service, Ect. Ect.

And you think the err, Intel brand name on a mbrd protects you from this
and that *it* is not just "junk" from the same sweatshops? It's been 10
years at least now since Intel made a mbrd which could rank with the best
of the 3rd party brands.

If you want to criticize, put your money where your mouth is and prove
me wrong.

If you hadn't "noticed" by yourself.........shrug

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 00:55:45 +0000, max wrote:

On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W."
wrote:

I would rather have a
reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

....and you're here, umm, why?

--
Keith

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:40:18 -0400, Keith wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 00:55:45 +0000, max wrote:

On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W."
wrote:

I would rather have a
reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

...and you're here, umm, why?

umm, because there are some informative, balanced posters who take a
rational, reasonable look at the issues before the threads devolve
into tailchasing?

because I enjoy reading the flamefests, just like reading Roddy Speed
on the storage NG?

because I feel like it?

because I like to see how far people go to get the last word in?

max

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 04:44:56 +0000, max wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:40:18 -0400, Keith wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 00:55:45 +0000, max wrote:

On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W."
wrote:

I would rather have a
reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

...and you're here, umm, why?

umm, because there are some informative, balanced posters who take a
rational, reasonable look at the issues before the threads devolve
into tailchasing?

But you implied that such things aren't possible here.

because I enjoy reading the flamefests, just like reading Roddy Speed
on the storage NG?

Ah, another troll, IOW.

because I feel like it?

because I like to see how far people go to get the last word in?

Shoot.

--
Keith

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips max wrote in part:
On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W." wrote:
I would rather have a reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

Perhaps you are confusing "possible" with "probable".
Definitions of "reasonable" vary. Everyone must use their own.

-- Robert

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 16:42:20 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
wrote:

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips max wrote in part:
On 20 Apr 2006 16:07:25 -0700, "Isaac W." wrote:
I would rather have a reasonable conversation about these subjects.

Some things aren't possible on this NG...

Perhaps you are confusing "possible" with "probable".
Definitions of "reasonable" vary. Everyone must use their own.

OK, a slight bit of hyperbole on my part - some things aren't probable
on this NG.

Surely you've noticed that - you're a regular here (here referring to
csiphc, not csi, which I don't frequent).

I figure discussions leave the realm of reasonable when the
name-calling starts, but as you say, everyone has their own
definition. It does seem to be a predictable pattern across usenet.

max