 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, so M$ stopped selling Windows XP several years ago. Which begs the
question...
http://tinyurl.com/3x8z92q
...how is this possible?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> OK, so M$ stopped selling Windows XP several years ago. Which begs the
> question...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3x8z92q
>
> ...how is this possible?
Same way this is possible:
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-dash-detergent-unopened-1950s-promotional
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> OK, so M$ stopped selling Windows XP several years ago. Which begs the
>> question...
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3x8z92q
>>
>> ...how is this possible?
>
> Same way this is possible:
>
>
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-dash-detergent-unopened-1950s-promotional
Not the same thing.
You're talking about *one* unit of product. I'm talking about a large
volume of product.
Finding somebody trying to privately sell one unit of something rare
isn't all that surprising. Finding a magor commercial retailler with
stock of a discontinued item *is* pretty damned surprising.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Finding somebody trying to privately sell one unit of something rare isn't
> all that surprising. Finding a magor commercial retailler with stock of a
> discontinued item *is* pretty damned surprising.
Sure, but it should be obvious how it is possible, they simply have not sold
as many copies as they originally bought!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Finding a magor commercial retailler with
>> stock of a discontinued item *is* pretty damned surprising.
>
> Sure, but it should be obvious how it is possible, they simply have not
> sold as many copies as they originally bought!
In 2 years??!? o_O
How many did they buy??
It's like if they stopped cutting down trees, and 2 years later the
local shop was still selling timber. You'd start to wonder how...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It's like if they stopped cutting down trees, and 2 years later the local
> shop was still selling timber. You'd start to wonder how...
Maybe nobody wants to buy the timber anymore because there are two
generations of newer timber available for almost the same price?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> It's like if they stopped cutting down trees, and 2 years later the
>> local shop was still selling timber. You'd start to wonder how...
>
> Maybe nobody wants to buy the timber anymore because there are two
> generations of newer timber available for almost the same price?
Given the number of people screaming and wailing about "Vista sux", this
seems a very unlikely explanation.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Given the number of people screaming and wailing about "Vista sux", this
> seems a very unlikely explanation.
Really, I think it was "Vista sucked" when it first came out. Much less so
now. Everything MS makes sucks when it first comes out.
Plus, Win7 from everything I hear fails to suck.
Plus, I'm pretty sure XP Home sucks more than Vista does. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
C# - a language whose greatest drawback
is that its best implementation comes
from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Given the number of people screaming and wailing about "Vista sux",
>> this seems a very unlikely explanation.
>
> Really, I think it was "Vista sucked" when it first came out. Much less
> so now. Everything MS makes sucks when it first comes out.
>
> Plus, Win7 from everything I hear fails to suck.
Yes, there has been a distinct lack of complaints about Win7. Most
people are only complaining about things that changed in Vista (and
hence are also in Win7). Things like the way any program named
"install.exe" now pops up a priviledge elivation window, regardless of
whether it needs one. (Oh, and of course the ubiquitous massive slowdown
of the entire system...)
> Plus, I'm pretty sure XP Home sucks more than Vista does. :-)
From what I hear, Vista Home Basic sucks pretty hard...
Still, given the number of people whining about Vista and saying XP was
much better (not to mention people with old PCs that can't possibly run
Vista or Win7), you'd think XP licenses would be selling like hotcakes.
Oh, wait. I forgot... Other people just *steal* it, right?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> (Oh, and of course the ubiquitous massive slowdown
> of the entire system...)
I have heard the claim that Windows is the only operating system where each
new version has been slower than the previous version (iow. other OS'es, both
free and commercial, try to always be faster or at the very least equally
fast than the previous version).
And that wasn't like with all bells and whistles enabled by default, but
rather with everything that might be a resource hog turned off which could
be turned off, and benchmarking the system in such a bare-bones situation as
possible.
(I suppose the claim is verifiably false at least in the case of the jump
from MacOS 9 to MacOS X, although one could argue they aren't actually the
same OS (different kernel and all), only that the latter had emulation
support for the former...)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
