Oliver Wrong wrote:
>"chrisv" <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>
>> Oliver Wrong wrote:
>>
>>>When Linux does something, the Linux advocates love it. When
>>>Microsoft does the exact same thing, Microsoft gets criticized. That's a
>>>double standard.
>>
>> Execpt you're making it up as you go along, Wrong. That's called
>> dishonesty.
>
> What if I could provide concrete evidence of Microsoft being criticized
>not for being late with implementing a feature that was available in Linux,
>but for implementing it at all?
That would be nice to see. Too bad you failed miserably with your
first attempt below.
>> M$ does not get critisized for improving their products. What *might*
>> happen is that they will get some "it's about time" ridicule. No
>> double-standard involved, buddy.
>
>http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/b745f0ccd48e5e0/7dec3a079244258d
>
> Here, Vista is being accused of slowing down the Internet due to the
>fact that it is implementing the IPv6 protocol. This feature has been
>present in Linux for some time now. The critics aren't saying "It's about
>time, Microsoft" but rather "No, don't do it! IPv6 will slow down the
>Internet worst than SPAM and DDoS attacks!"
Thanks, Wrong, for proving yourself a liar, just like most all
Wintrolls are. Unless you can provide the name of the person who said
anything like "don't do it" in that thread? In fact, everyone knows
that M$ has no choice but to support IPv6.
You should really work on your reading comprehension, Wrong. M$ was
NOT criticized in that thread. The story was about the fact IPv6 will
require more overhead and may slow things down, and that Vista will
introduce IPv6 onto the Internet in large quantity.
|
|
