Christian Mattar wrote: > > Hi! > > JTK wrote: > > > > Now, > > > if we're talking SECONDS that may be a different matter. Who gives a > > > ratsazz if one is 2 ms faster than the other ??? And besides, in order > > > to post a true value you have to run these so-called speed tests in a > > > sterile medium without the benefit of congestion/connection anomalies. > > > What's 'faster' in one venue can be slower in another but we're still > > > talking milliseconds. BAH !! Nothing but marketing hype. > > > > > > > Hmm. I must be getting old. Back in my day, if we wanted to compete > > with a competitor, instead of a litiniy of excuses, we simply produced a > > better product. Or at least one with equal performance. > > Well, that's sooo yesterday. I told you I was getting old ;-). > Today, you just bundle it with the OS... > Right: Microsoft bundles a better product with the OS, so Mozilla's got two knocks against it. > Christian
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) DeMoN LaG
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Ben Ruppel
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) {-- Rot13 - Hateme
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) DeMoN LaG
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) David Bate
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Jay Garcia
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) JTK
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Jay Garcia
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Christian Mattar
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Marc Attinasi
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) JTK
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Topics Man
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Ben Ruppel
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) DeMoN LaG
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Ben Ruppel
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) DeMoN LaG
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Sam Emrick
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) David Bradley
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Ben Ruppel
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Asa Dotzler
- Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released) Dave Huang
