From: "Geo." 

Rich,

anyone here can startup WMP9 and see how much screen space it wastes. As
for the amount of memory used, I haven't commented on that other than to
ask you how much memory WMP9 uses when started up. I asked that because
WMP6.x starts up instantly for me and when I tried WMP9 it took about 6
seconds to startup which suggested to me it's loading a whole lot of shit
that 6.x doesn't load. I dropped the issue because you said it uses less
memory and I didn't think it was worth loading it (and the DRM that comes
with it) onto one of my systems to find out if you were giving me info from
the default setting or if you have tweaked yours (by changing the cache
settings or something) to use less memory.

Geo.

"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e28ff48$1{at}w3.nls.net...
   Yep.  So far not only have you made no attempt to support your lies, you
are vague and evasive in defining "effeciency".  Of course, you
already admitted that you don't have WMP9 anywhere.  Prior to that you
acknowledged that you have no clue how much memory these applications use
and were embarrassed to be told that WMP9 used less memory than WMP 6.4 in
the scenario you questions.

   Do you want to continue making yourself the fool with your lies and other
statements?

Rich

  "Geo."  wrote in message
news:3e28a081$3{at}w3.nls.net...
  You deny that WMP6.x uses the screen more efficiently than WMP9?

  Geo.

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e2867fd$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     He posted false statements regarding efficiency and then used his false
  statements to justify his subsequent statements.

  Rich

    "David N. Barnett"  wrote in message
  news:lfig2vcl8sc2491jbuqhj4o0rco145gqre{at}4ax.com...
    On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:21:05 -0800, "Rich"  wrote in message
    :

    |   In other words, you made up everything you wrote without ever
  considering that the fiction you posted is false.

    He asked a question.  How can a question be fictitious?

    --dnb

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4