Re: My G5 & Leopard


"Mitch" <mitch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:200120081509024551%mitch@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <f7Nkj.3191$1f.2886@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Murray
<no-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I'm sure they do. And here's how the do it: They challenge the PC guy > to
> perform a task they are very familiar with and for which the PC guy has
> no/little experience. When PC guy asks for assistance they respond with
> "You claim to have a wicked fast Windows PC...so figure it out!". PC > guy
> realizes the absurdity of said "benchmark" and decides not to indulge
> Mactard any further.

That sucked about the PowerPoint file. It was a bull*** "test" and had
little to do with operating system anyway.

But about productivity tests, are they not sporting? Are only clocking tests
are relevant? Because it would seem that clock tests are the only one that
ignores the human element.


Is PC Guy really claiming that a common 'real work' test is done by one
worker challenging another to do unfamiliar tasks?

It doesn't matter if it's common or not if one it's not to one of the participants.

How stupid is that? Has anyone ever claimed that meant something?

LOL! Mactards...need to bias the results in order to "prove" their platform is better. What a bunch of losers you are.


Real-world tasking tests are done with many trials, by people who know
the programs they are using and where the programs are the same.
I don't know of anyone who has ever done a comparison of the type PCGuy
is suggesting. Maybe it's something trolls do, and therefore useless
anyway.

.