|
|
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:34:14 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <20080726221744.0f2a11a4@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:00:18 +0100
> > Conor <conor_turton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > > > The fact that they seem to think that
> > > > getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the
> > > > standard really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude,
> > > > does it?
> > > >
> > > They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility
> > > and it is.
> >
> > They wrote:
> > "You are incorrect in that the motherboard is not ACPI complaint.
> > If it were not, then it would not have received Microsoft
> > Certification for WHQL."
> >
> How does that contradict what I say?
"If it were not (ACPI compliant) then it would not have received
Microsoft certification" is the relevant bit.
>
> > > And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent
> > > built. To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux
> > > users are cheapskates.
> > >
> > To be fair, that just further illustrates how much bullshit you
> > spout.
> >
> Foxconn are cheap shit motherboards just one up from Asrock.
>
And the fact that a single Linux user has written about his
experience with a single Foxconn board (that the makers claim is
only intended to support Windows, so that must be the target market for
their crappy product) says what about Linux users generally? What's
clever about spending more on hardware and software, anyway?
|
|