71–80 of 123 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lack of right click in activity monitor really frustrates me, especially since I'm more likely to be irritated already when I have to open it.
Activity Monitor (the macOS one) definitely has right-click.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And nowadays I don't think it can kill assistant/Cortana.
I just killed Cortana on a windows 10 laptop and on a windows 11 workstation with it... why lie if you are proven wrong in about 10 seconds?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder whether he actually believes these things, or Microsoft convinced him to knowingly lie about them.
>Microsoft convinced him to knowingly lie about them He hasn't been employed by Microsoft in a really long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just killed Cortana on a windows 10 laptop and on a windows 11 workstation with it... why lie if you are proven wrong in about 10 seconds?
The person you are replying to used the phrase, "I don't think". That means they're not certain, which means they're not lying. Might wanna refrain from shooting from the hip in regards to the tone of your last sentence.
> There should be nothing that TaskMgr can't kill Except Defender/Malware Protection...
>Except Defender/Malware Protection... I just checked and it can definitely kill malware protection so I don't know where you got that information but it's false. And even without checking, being able to disable malware protection is a necessary feature in any OS, for SW development and debugging activities, so I would assume malware protection could be easily killed without a problem by the user with admin privilege…
> And even without checking, being able to disable malware protection is a necessary feature in any OS, for SW development and debugging activities, so I would assume malware protection could be easily killed without a problem by the user with admin privileges.
Lol, one would assume wouldn't they... in 11 even setting the GPs for all of the antimalware stuff to off won't stop the processes from running. You can still get it to a decently "get out of my way" level though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The person you are replying to used the phrase, "I don't think". That means they're not certain, which means they're not lying. Might wanna refrain from shooting from the hip in regards to the tone of your last sentence.
Being anal aside why spread FUD when you can easily test if your thought is true or not. Makes no sense no matter what when he can just be silent if he doesn't know if his statement is true or not but no better start shit stirring for no reason whatsoever.
First, how do you know they're in front of a Windows machine and not casually commenting from their phone only to have life get in the way and make them set their phone down before they can Google it?
Second, I argue that FUD isn't spread if you're commenting and saying "I don't think it does this". Were they to say, "You cannot do this," then they would be spreading FUD. They didn't, they were corrected publicly, and anybody reading this thread can see as much. Maybe they'll even edit their post after they see this, who knows!
Edit: Even if I'd agree that they're spreading FUD, it's so minor and innocuous that it's not even worth getting angry at them.
Edit 2: If it's as easy for them to test if it's true or not, then anybody else with a Windows machine who sees that comment should also have just as easy a time testing it themselves. IMO that only serves to make this less FUD-dy than people are suggesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being anal aside why spread FUD when you can easily test if your thought is true or not. Makes no sense no matter what when he can just be silent if he doesn't know if his statement is true or not but no better start shit stirring for no reason whatsoever.
>... why spread FUD when you can easily test if your thought is true or not. First, how do you know they're in front of a Windows machine and not casually commenting from their phone only to have life get in the way and make them set their phone down before they can Google it? Second, I argue that FUD isn't spread if you're commenting and saying "I don't think it does this". Were they to say, "You cannot do this," th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>... why spread FUD when you can easily test if your thought is true or not. First, how do you know they're in front of a Windows machine and not casually commenting from their phone only to have life get in the way and make them set their phone down before they can Google it? Second, I argue that FUD isn't spread if you're commenting and saying "I don't think it does this". Were they to say, "You cannot do this," th…
You are making excuses for someone who didn't even take 2 minutes before talking about a subject matter he doesn't know anything about. He used "I think" like every other bad actor when spreading FUD. I don't even care anymore I call people out if they talk shit if you want to be the one making excuses for them so be it.
That's a lot of strong rhetoric to throw at someone's character over such an innocuous comment that hardly anybody is ever going to see, just because they are wrong about something (which, let's be honest, is relatively no big deal to be wrong about).
I really hope you have a good day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are making excuses for someone who didn't even take 2 minutes before talking about a subject matter he doesn't know anything about. He used "I think" like every other bad actor when spreading FUD. I don't even care anymore I call people out if they talk shit if you want to be the one making excuses for them so be it.
You're calling them a liar, a "bad actor" (implying ill intent), suggesting they're "talking shit", etc. That's a lot of strong rhetoric to throw at someone's character over such an innocuous comment that hardly anybody is ever going to see, just because they are wrong about something (which, let's be honest, is relatively no big deal to be wrong about). I really hope you have a good day.
Apologies for attacking Dave's credibility on an unrelated thread, but his comments on Linux are absolutely falsehoods. He said that all Linux machines have some sort of proprietary blob Linus Torvalds put in there on EVERY release, for his own purposes. Compared to Windows, which is entirely closed source.. I just blocked his channel after that. https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/rb2xzk/dave_plummer_... Related…
> Not to attack Dave's credibility on an unrelated thread Isn't that exactly what you're doing? Not saying you shouldn't; 'anything this person says should be taken with a grain of salt, or perhaps even suspicion' with reason seems like a fine point to make.
