OT: New low for Microsoft!

[Douglas Furlong]

On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 13:16, duncan brown wrote:
> Matthew Miller said:
> > Yeah, sure would suck to have software designed to take capabilities of
> > what sounds like a pretty average machine three years from now. Oh, the
> > humanity.
> 
> listen, buddy, on what side of the linux fanboy line do you live?
> 
> someone find a strong branch and a rope, we're going to have a lynchin'!
> 
> and computers that are around now are overpowered, people don't need more
> than  3ghz, hell, most people don't need more than 700mhz (given enough
> ram).  the new direction in chip fabrication needs to be slower, more
> efficient, smaller and less power hungry.
Depends on what you mean by "need". Some people say they don't "need" a
computer full stop. They don't "need" to check their email, view web
pages or any of that stuff.

However, you feel you "need" nothing more then a 700mhz machine to do
the things you listed.

How about we replace "need" with "want"?

In which case I DO "want" to be able to play the latest greatest games
at higher resolutions (I was playing quake 2 at above average resolution
for many years).

I like having all the graphics switched on, I like the fact that on my
21" monitor I can play at a resolution above 640*480.

I "need" the latest greatest machines to be able to do what I "want" to
do. Which is play those games. However I don't "need" that specced
machine to run linux to do the browsing etc.

Just because you don't want/need some thing, please don't assume that
every one else is clueless, we may just have different desires.

Doug