Print - The Memory-Optimization Hoax

As you've surfed the Web, you've probably seen browser pop-ups such as "Defragment your memory and improve performance" and "Minimize application and system failures and free unused memory." The links lead you to utilities that promise to do all that and more for a mere $9.95, $14.95, or $29.95. Sound too good to be true? It is. These utilities appear to do useful work, but at best, RAM optimizers have no effect, and at worst, they seriously degrade performance.

Literally dozens of so-called "memory optimizers" are available—some are commercial products and others are freeware. You might even be running such a product on your system. What do these products really do, and how do they try and fool you into thinking that they live up to their claims? Let's take a look inside memory optimizers to see exactly how they manipulate visible memory counters in Windows.

The Memory Optimizer UI
Memory optimizers typically present a UI that shows a graph labeled Available Memory and a line representing a threshold below which the product will take action. Another line typically shows the amount of memory that the optimizer will try to free when it runs. You can usually configure one or both levels, as well as trigger manual memory optimization or schedule optimizations. Some of the tools also display the processes running on the system.

When a scheduled optimization job runs, the utility's available-memory counter often goes up, sometimes dramatically, which appears to imply that the tool is actually freeing up memory for your applications to use. To understand how these utilities cause the available-memory line to rise, you first need to understand how Windows manages physical memory.

Windows Memory Management
Like most modern OSs, Windows implements a demand-paged virtual-memory system. An OS uses virtual memory to give applications the illusion that a computer has more physical memory than it actually does.

On 32-bit Windows systems, processes have a virtual-memory address space of 4GB that the OS typically divides equally between the process and the system. Thus, a process can allocate as much as 2GB of virtual memory, depending on the amount available. The total amount of virtual memory allocated to all processes can't exceed the sum of the system's paging files and most of its physical memory (the OS reserves a small portion of physical memory).

Given that processes can, with a large enough paging file, allocate virtual memory that exceeds the computer's physical memory capacity, the Windows Memory Manager subsystem must share physical memory among processes and the Cache Manager's cached file data. As Figure 1 illustrates, the Memory Manager assigns each process (e.g., Microsoft Word, Notepad, Windows Explorer) a part of physical memory, which is known as the process's working set. The portions of the kernel and drivers that are pageable, in addition to pageable kernel-memory buffers, called paged pool, and physical memory that the Cache Manager manages, are assigned their own working set, called the System working set.

The Memory Manager expands and contracts the System and processes' working sets in response to the needs of processes for quick access to their code and data. The computer's memory-management hardware requires that Windows manage working sets and virtual memory in page-size blocks. (On 32-bit x86 processors, pages are typically 4096 bytes in size. However, the OS and memory-intensive applications also use large pages of 4MB as an optimization, when possible.)

When a process accesses a page of its virtual memory that isn't present in its working set, the process incurs a page fault hardware exception. When that happens, the Memory Manager assigns a page of available physical memory to hold the newly accessed data. Additionally, the Memory Manager might decide to expand the process's working set by adding the page to the working set. However, if the Memory Manager deems the process's working set to be large enough, it will exchange a page already in the working set with the new page, choosing for replacement the page that the process accessed least recently, under the assumption that the process is least likely to access that page in the near future.

When the Memory Manager removes a page from a process working set, it must decide what to do with that page. If the page has been modified, the Memory Manager first puts it on the modified page list, a list of pages that eventually will be written to the paging file or to the memory-mapped files to which the pages correspond. From the modified page list, the Memory Manager moves pages to a pool called the standby list. Unmodified pages go directly to the standby list. Thus, you can view the standby list as a cache of file data.

Available Memory
I stated earlier that the Memory Manager gives a page of available physical memory to a process that experiences a page fault, but I haven't told you what defines available memory. The standby list is part of physical memory that the Memory Manager considers to be available. The other pools that contribute to available memory are pages that contain data belonging to deallocated virtual memory (e.g., pages containing data that belongs to processes that have exited) and pages that were freed and subsequently filled with zero data by the Memory Manager's low-priority zero page thread. Those types of pages are stored on the Memory Manager's free list and zeroed page list, respectively.

Figure 2 shows the transitions that occur between working sets and the page lists. Once per second, a system thread wakes up and calls the Memory Manager's working set manager to examine the System and processes' working sets. If available memory is low, the working set manager removes pages from the processes that haven't incurred many page faults in the past second. The removed pages go to the modified or standby list as appropriate and contribute to available memory. An important side effect of this tuning mechanism is that if the system needs memory for other processes, the Memory Manager takes pages from idle processes' working sets. Thus, those working sets eventually disappear, meaning that processes that remain idle for a sufficient length of time eventually consume no physical memory.

When a process needs a new page of physical memory, the Memory Manager first determines whether the page the process is accessing is in the standby or modified page list. The page will be in one of these lists if the page was removed from the process working set and not reused for another purpose. Placing that page back into the process working set is called a soft page fault because, unlike hard page faults, it doesn't involve a read from the paging file or other file on disk.

If the page isn't in the standby list or the modified page list, the Memory Manager takes a page from a list that has a page on it, checking first the free list, then the zeroed page list, and finally the standby list. If no memory is available, the Memory Manager triggers the Balance Set Manager to trim the process working sets and populate one of the three lists that make up available memory. If the Memory Manager has to remove a page from the zeroed page, free, or standby list for reuse, it determines how to access the targeted code or data, which can include reading the data from a paging file or an executable image or creating zero-filled data—if the application is allocating fresh data and the page taken wasn't from the zeroed page list.

Creating Available Memory
With that understanding of the Memory Manager's behavior, we can now turn our attention to the workings of RAM optimizers. The available-memory value that RAM optimizers display is the same value that the Task Manager shows as Available in the Physical Memory section on the Performance tab, which Figure 3 shows. That value is the sum of the sizes of the standby, zeroed page, and free lists. System Cache is the sum of the sizes of the standby list and the System working set. (In Windows NT 4.0 and earlier, File Cache reflects the size of only the System working set.)

RAM optimizers take advantage of the Memory Manager's behavior by allocating, then freeing, large amounts of virtual memory. Figure 4, page 21, shows the effect a RAM optimizer has on a system. The first bar depicts the working sets and available memory before optimization. The second bar shows that the RAM optimizer creates a high memory demand, which it does by incurring many page faults in a short time. In response, the Memory Manager increases the optimizer's working set. This working-set expansion occurs at the expense of available memory and—when available memory becomes low—at the expense of other processes' working sets. The third bar illustrates how, after the RAM optimizer frees its memory, the Memory Manager moves all the pages that were assigned to the RAM optimizer to the free list, thus contributing to the available-memory value. Most optimizers hide the rapid decline in available memory that occurs during the first step, but if you run Task Manager during an optimization, you can often see the decline as it takes place.

Although gaining more available memory might seem beneficial, it isn't. As RAM optimizers force the available-memory counter up, they force other processes' data and code out of memory. Say that you're running Word, for example. As the optimizer forces the available-memory counter up, the text of open documents and the program code that was part of Word's working set before the optimization (and was therefore present in physical memory) must be reread from disk as you continue to edit your document. The performance degradation can be severe on servers because the file data that's cached in the standby list and in the System working set (as well as the code and data used by active server applications) might be discarded.

Other RAM Optimizer Claims
Some vendors make additional claims for their RAM-optimizer products. One claim you might see is that a product frees memory that's needlessly consumed by unused processes, such as those that run in the taskbar tray. All such claims are untrue because Windows automatically trims idle processes' working sets. The Memory Manager handles all necessary memory optimization.

Developers of RAM optimizers also claim that their products defragment memory. The act of allocating, then freeing a large amount of virtual memory might, as a conceivable side effect, lead to blocks of contiguous available memory. However, because virtual memory masks the layout of physical memory from processes, processes can't directly benefit from having virtual memory backed by contiguous physical memory. As processes execute and undergo working-set trimming and growth, their virtual-memory–to–physical-memory mappings will become fragmented despite the availability of contiguous memory.

Having contiguous available memory can improve performance in one case: when the Memory Manager, to maximize the behavior of the CPU memory caches, uses a mechanism called page coloring to decide which page from the free or zeroed page list to assign to a process. However, any minor benefit that might result from making available physical memory contiguous is heavily outweighed by the negative impact of discarding valuable code and data from memory.

Finally, vendors often claim that RAM optimizers regain memory lost to leaks. This claim is perhaps the most patently false assertion of all.

The Memory Manager knows at all times what physical and virtual memory belongs to a process. However, if a process allocates memory, then doesn't free it because of a bug (an occurrence known as a leak), the Memory Manager can't recognize that the allocated memory won't be accessed again at some point and must wait until the process exits to reclaim the memory.

Even in the event of a leaking process that doesn't exit, the Memory Manager's working-set trimming eventually will steal from the process's working set any physical pages that are assigned to leaked virtual memory. That process sends the leaked pages to the paging file and lets the system use physical memory for other purposes. Thus, a memory leak has only a limited impact on available physical memory. The real impact is on virtual-memory consumption (which Task Manager calls both PF Usage and Commit Charge). No utility can do anything about virtual-memory consumption other than kill processes that are consuming memory.

Fraudware
I have yet to see a RAM optimizer that lives up to any of its claims. If you look closely, you'll often see that vendors have buried long-winded disclaimers on their Web sites that state what I've explained—that the product might not have any impact on a system's performance and might actually degrade it. Even without knowing how these products take advantage of the Memory Manager to inflate a highly visible and provocatively named memory metric, common sense suggests that if RAM optimization were possible (and could be implemented by so many small-time upstarts), Microsoft developers would have long since integrated the technology into the kernel.

Regarding Mark Russinovich's technically detailed and otherwise excellent article Internals: "The Memory-Optimization Hoax" (January 2004, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 41095), which debunks memory "optimization" utilities, I have just one comment: Free memory is the enemy of true performance.

This statement might strike many computer users as ridiculous, but with explanation it makes sense. Mark's article touches on this concept but then buries it under technicalities. If my OS isn't using all its memory, it's not using my machine to full capacity. Yes, a small portion of memory must remain unallocated to give the system room to work in, but all the rest of the memory should be used. I'm not referring to a situation such as running the system at near-maximum capacity and filling the entire virtual memory subsystem with a data set. I'm referring to modern, lightly loaded systems with large amounts of excess physical RAM that under usual circumstances will never be completely used. Ideally, the OS should use such excess RAM for caching, reallocating it only as needed. If the OS aggressively frees memory for some unknown future need, then data that the OS could have retrieved from RAM will instead require a disk read, incurring a massive performance penalty.

I became aware of this counterintuitive concept when I began to use FreeBSD. I learned from a Usenet thread that near 100 percent memory usage is not only "normal" but indicative of a properly working system. Now, I measure an OS not only by how much memory it keeps free but also by how much it uses. I realize that the situation is a bit more complicated than I've described, but my point is that free memory is not your friend. You paid good money for your RAM. Do you really want it to be unused?

I agree that an OS's job is to give memory to processes running on a system so that the processes can run efficiently and that this job requires using all physical memory. However, as I stated in my article, the Windows Memory Manager allocates memory by effectively using all "free" memory for cached file data, which the standby list stores. The Memory Manager uses this system to assign to certain processes only the memory they actually need so that other processes can get the memory that they actually need. One way the Memory Manager accomplishes this goal is by taking memory away from a process that doesn't need it and placing the unneeded memory on the standby list. If that process requests data from the standby list, it receives the data immediately; however, the memory demands of other processes might require that they also take memory from the standby list. The standby list serves as the file-system and paging-file cache, and even though memory on the list is considered "available," it's nevertheless actively used and therefore doesn't fit Henry's definition of free memory.
--Mark Russinovich

I agree 99 % with your analysis. However, the Windows memory management algorithm is not perfect (who, err, which is?:). Consequently, in rare circumstances, brute-forcing pages out of physical memory might actually improve performance of some applications. For a - somewhat related - discussion on Linux's VMM logic, the discussion on http://lwn.net/Articles/83588/ might be interesting ( I am not qualified to judge Windows's against Linux's MM).

I would agree that some claims are frivolous or incorrect, however to state the creating more Available Memory doesn't help is incorrect IMO.For gamers forcing other processes out of memory to the VM is a good thing. Not everyone likes to use Task Manager to End Processs. One game for example is Planetside. Its a fun game, but a major resource hog, the more Free Memory you can throw at it the better, and the pause after quitting to get back to the desk as the system unpages other stuff is fine with me. It shows that the utility did exactly what I wanted it to do, which was free memory for use by the game. As for Memory Leaks not being helped, I'll study more on that one. While it may not fix the memory leak issue, even forcing the unused data to the VM so that the process can use more Physical Memory again is a good thing. It speeds things back up. Though, I'll agree that the only real fix is to restart the applications from time to time if not even restarting Windows. Players of Planetside and other games will agree the more memory the better. If your claim that more Available Memory not being beneficial was correct, with regards to gaming, then most all Gamers (who lead the push for higher end PC parts)are all wrong for running 1Gb + of memory to increase performance. We should all be happy as clams with 512Mb as we can just page everything to VM and run it from there. If you decide to argue that gamers don't make up a large portion of the computing community you again would be wrong. Its a multiBillion dollar industry that is only getting bigger as time goes on. I will agree a desktop user running Word, Browswers, email, etc prob wouldn't find these Utilities useful, I think they can have a place of usefulness in the gaming Community for games we love that happen to be RAM HOGS.

Criticism is good but do you have solution for freeing RAM when my comp is slow with 512 MB of RAM? If it's true that memory management frees up my RAM after process exit, why is my RAM so occupied? Windows is not as perfect as you write in your article. They also have many bugs and some of your claims are not true at all.

I agree with the problem with these "memory optimizers" - I've tried some and they claim it works, but I don't notice or gain anything. For gamers like myself, though (and anyone that wants to free up more memory), more memory is key. And so is reducing the CPU cycles taken up by unnecessary programs. Going through Task Manager is a pain, but a co-worker told me about this software called TAG. I downloaded it, ran it, and it did a real nice job of clearing things out of memory and loaded them back in when I was done playing. It doesn't claim to be one of these "force memory to disk and then unload it" and they say so on their website. Just want to throw in my 2 cents of what I've found that actually works.

I agree with your comments on the Memory Management process. What I recommend to enhance your Windows experience is to de-activate any useless "Startup program" or "Service". Good links to find more on these points are: == 12 Tweaks for performance (+ help to disable services) http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/supertweaks.htm == Utility to disable Startup Applications http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/freeware/autoruns.shtml == List of Startup Applications http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_index.htm And, if you need a RAM Optimizer (because you run Windows 95/98/ME), you can use this little one. It has a very small memory footprint. http://www.jfitz.com/software/RAMpage/ I quote from the FAQ: "Note that NT, 2000 and XP are all based on the NT kernel. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that freeing memory does anything to improve performance or reliability on these systems, (in fact it will generally have a minor negative impact on performance). These versions also include memory monitoring screens in the Task Manager, so I don't think there is much point running RAMpage on these systems."

There's hundreds or even thousands of registry tweaks available for free on the net. Don't pay a dime for tweaking programs eaither.

Does the program Cache Boost fall into the category of memory optimizer? Cacheboost optimizes the System Cache-Management of Windows XP/2000/NT and Windows .Net Servers. This results in an best performance boost - without any new hardware, any hardware tweak, and without restricting your system's stability. Simply install Cacheboost and you are ready to go. No special configuration or rebooting is needed. Within minutes you activate unused resources of your Windows XP/NT/2000 and Windows .Net systems. CODE More Info: http://www.systweak.com/cacheboost/overview.asp

I would like to know your opinion about all those claims of "perfect" memory management and memory compactation that RDBMS like Oracle claims. It isn't real memory masked behind virtual memory? What kind of memory compactation they do, if they relay in virtual memory paging?

hey guys - i might be getting off the topic a bit here but can't resist putting this in... over the years i have noticed that when doing a ctrl-shift-esc (start task manager) explorer memory size can be quit large (click on memory column to sort by size). i have found the best way to fix this problem (aside from the obvious "reboot fixes 9 out of 10 problems) is to 'end task' on explorer then do a 'file' 'new task' and type explorer. this starts a new instance of explorer with a lot smaller footprint (also save yourself $9.95)!!

Instead of trying to push processes away from memory, gamers should not start them in the first place. When using a 2000/XP system I suggest to create an "hardware profile" for gaming and enable in it only those services needed for gaming. Creating a "gaming user" too helps to control what starts using "run" keys in the registry (give a look at them using Russinovich's Autoruns). It requires a system restart, but it's a clean and inexpensive way to control what is running.

I agree that these memory optimiser things are a load of nonsense. I particularly like the helpful well argued comments some people have left: "and some of your claims are not true at all." - Miro (btw miro your ram is so occupied: because it can be, and because that makes things go faster, generally.) Greg, dont be a pedant, he obviously meant more avalible memory in relation to the memory that you actually HAVE. The more memory the merrier really, if i had 2Gb of ram i'd be a bit annoyed if half of it sat about being free and useless. I like my games a lot, but fact is, your going to be far more sucessful in freeing up resources for games if you actually kill the programs using memory before the running the games. A little thing called WinPatrol is quite nice, allowing you to view all active tasks and then kill them one after another, (enter, down arrow, enter, etc.) and then kill WinPatrol itself, before going into your game. If you really do get some placebo effect from running the memory cleaner, which leaves programs open to start taking up memory again (and slowing things down while taking that memory up) then go for it, why not. I'll go try that TAG thing now.

Windows 98 was never as perfect as the article implies. I use MemoryBoost not only because it helps me control the RAM usage, but it also tells me what is going on, something Windows 98 never did. I agree that the basic memory management in Windows is OK, but memory managers provide a bit of forward-planning that Windows doesn't have: if I want 10MB available for a busy app to grab without waiting, then it should be there. I shouldn't have to wait at a critical moment in the execution my app while Windows fiddles with RAM and writes a whole load of stuff to disk. That can happen when the app is less busy. That's what my memory manager does for me. I agree that a lot of the marketing surrounding memory managers is phoney and over-hyped, and I appreciate this article for restoring some sanity to the issue.

Do you want a pc super fast and without stupid errors? Do a clean install of xp + updates. Be very carefull in what antivirus you use (the most popular are the worst!!!). Only Install what you realy need. System utilities should be called system stupidities cause they only make your pc go slower (defrag register cleaners and disk utilities are already in windows - don't waste money on that). Install a good firewall, good anty-spyware and your system is perfect!

@Greg Waggoner: If you think about what youre saying, then those huge, memory hogging games will eventually achieve what your ram optimizer did; their memory footprint will grow until they squash other processes out of the memory space. If youre prepared to wait for this to happen, then what is the point of running a memory optimizer? after all.. youre prepared to wait while the memory optimizer does it @Miro: Your computer is slow because you have too much junk running on it. Format windows and start again. You will never be as technically accomplished as Mark Russinovich is, so please do not claim that the man does not know what he is talking about @APK: Is your program code as hard to follow as your English? :) I found your comment hard to read, but have a question regarding APK Ramcharge 6.0++ - it seems to work in the same way as every other memory "optimiser" ? I wonder what a super intelligent MCSE, P+I, CNA etc etc person is doing, running a news software so lame. Does Schumacher drive a Lada? @Doug: Remember that all these programs that "activate unused resources of your blah.." - it's more sensationalist rubbish, and just another program you have to run.. Remember, that the more things a computer is doing, the slower it is going to get.. Loading a system with 50 different optimizers, boosters and super duper wonder programs should make it 50 times faster, right? no.. @Luigi: best comment in this thread @Donn: Hangon.. you say that windows memory managers arent artificially intelligent enough to know what youre going to do next, but some canned shareware program is? The only thing great about a memory manager is that you can telll it when to force all the apps out to disk.. If windows could do this, then you wouldnt need such a program, but the best method of forcing in memory programs back onto disk is not to start them at all @John: a good firewall makes a system perfect? oh dear.. I dont run a firewall, and never have done.. I kinda got a bit of a mental block about the whole process of opening up a dangerous port then having firewall software pester my cpu and have it look at every packet that comes through.. better to just close the port.. prevention, not cure :)

APK - Mark has done an excellent job with this article describing why memory management optimizer applications do not live up to what they claim. To address a couple of points in your last post: "He's looking @ it PURELY from an Operating System mechanics perspective, but overlooking applications" - this is entirely true. Memory management should be entirely the domain of the OS. If done properly, there should be no need for an app to "fix" it. I don't know about earlier WinOSs (e.g., 95), but on a modern OS (e.g., XP) and certainly on modern hardware I believe Windows memory management would only be harmed by an app such as these. Regarding Mark's work, I've used his programs for several years now (and bought his book purely on the strength of his freeware). The programs he writes do not require the source code for Windows, as you have claimed he has. I do not believe he has access to the source. He explains clearly in his book how he uses Windows debugger to peek inside OS structures. From there, it's just a matter of DLL injection, dynamic driver loading, and run-time installation of services on remote machines - and anyone could duplicate his work. (These are not simple things, but they are documented in print and the web). The only reasons no-one else has made open-source clones of Mark's tools is because the tools: 1) Have earned a reputation of extremely high quality, 2) Are already freeware, and 3) Are kept up-to-date. It is not because no one else has access to the resources necessary to create them. I don't think Mark has any kind of an unfair "advantage" over anyone else (like the source). --- Regarding memory optimizer programs: I have found one use for them. At my church we run an old, old computer for digital recording, running 98 I believe. We do schedule a memory optimizer to run shortly before each service, because the computer has been known to skip during its recording. After time, of course, the other apps are loaded back into physical mem, but that gives us long enough to record the entire service without a blip. Is this an endorsement for this type of app? Certainly not. We are running at the very edge of what this hardware is capable of doing - and that is the only reason this type of app helps at all. An upgrade is really the more correct solution to this problem. As I stated at the beginning: modern OS, non-ancient hardware -> no problem.

PS. Mark's mistake of hardcoding the path of the paging file *IS* absolutely the mistake of an expert programmer. It's what you do to get a quick working version so you can actually work on the important things of the program. It isn't difficult to change after the fact, and almost all good programmers I know do similiar things. Of course, it was poor quality control that it wasn't caught before release, but then again, show me a programmer who is good at QA'ing his own work, and I'll show you a programmer who is in the wrong job.

I completely agree with Donn Edwards' post dated July 7th. Windows cannot foresee what a user will be doing next and this is what Mark Russinovich has ignored in his otherwise very useful article. Many of the recent postings here are really off-topic. I'd be interested in some reports that give us some figures on the performance improvements that have been observed after letting a memory manager free the RAM thereby providing maximum RAM resources to an application that is started subsequently. Heinz Wehner (Karlsruhe, Germany)

Sunday_Billy: "I do not believe he has access to the source." Well, iirc, he worked for & still does work for IBM: Does that company have sourcecode for NT based Os'? Yes, it does, & if Mark works for them (as I have heard say he does or did) then it makes sense. LOL. See http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ This came from a former employer he & I both contracted out our wares to in fact who informed me of this fact. He also stated that many folks claimed Mark disassembles & steals the work from Linux Sources, & also Windows itself that he does. see above - again. P.S.=> I have MANY other points to bring up that will illustrate the 'imperfection' of NT based Os' memory mgt., straight from Microsoft's Knowledge Base in fact, but will wait for Dr. Mark Russinovich to reply here to my points first... & then, I will use them! apk Just do it, rather than using a rather weak argument that is getting more and more tired every time you repeat it. Comments: - I'd guess that in excess of 90% of PC's out there have their pagefile on drive c, so this isn't going to be a problem for them. - VM on Win9x/Me was at best a marginal VM for an unstable OS. - I wonder how many free software apps have any QA done on them, and following on from that, this problem might have been resolved earlier if it had been an open sourced app. - Making unsubstantiated allegations about code theft is dangerous, will win you no friends, and sounds a lot like sour grapes. Apps like SoftIce and Mark's free tools have real uses for writing and debugging one's own code.

The report from Martin Meszaros has been the only one so far. I wish there would have been more reports and figures like it now takes 2 seconds to launch an application while it took 10 seconds before freeing the RAM for example. As for creating my own figures, I'd be interested in some recommendations for freeware products. I've downloaded APKRamCharge.exe v7.0.4.44 from the Internet. Is that the latest version? I've also got GDS RAM2Free 1.0.3 which is very basic but may be provides all you ever need. Heinz Wehner (Karlsruhe, Germany)

I will agree with the statements Microsoft Windows uses Ram. But there are some bugs in the Memory Management. In some Posibilities the Cache Manager will grow and grow and will not Release RAM. This could cause a Systemcrash. You can test it by your Selfe, take a System with a lot off files and try to copy them over a Networkshare with the Explorer. The RAM used for Chache Manager will grow and grow and the System do not release this RAM because it has noth enough time to do it. In some cases (very fast Harddisks and Network, other treads that needs Systemperformance like Virus-Scanner) the System will Crash complete with errors like 1020, Noth enough Ram, e.g. The only way to prevent a Systemcrash is to force the System to free the Cachemanager. MK

This article is a good study if not for questions raised on the author's credibility. I hope both parties will settle their issues as their skills and knowledge can be put to better use.

apk- it appears you are basing all of your claims on a single post to a newsgroup years ago, not on anything provable or repeatable. You haven't really countered any of Dr. Mark's assertions from a technological standpoint. If you could provide a range of successful examples of how a ram "optimizer" could actually benefit me as a power user or programmer or DB admin, I'd love to hear them. I'd willingly buy such a product if it could really help. Respectible, highly-certified scientists once thought they discovered cold fusion, but it was an misinterpretation of the results because their success story could not be repeated. Can your user's single success story from years ago be repeated?

Great Scott! APK's numerous and highly repetitious responses read like examples from a freshman textbook on logical fallacy and deceptive rhetoric. APK:"Comments from a user that had problems with a news reader, which a RAM optimizer, the first one in fact, "APK RamCharge 6.0++" cured (user is MCSE, MCP+I, CNA etc. & knowledgeable in this field)" - Quote from Martin the alt.binaries.* downloader omitted. - Fallacy 1: Hasty Generalization - A single example used to prove a general point. Fallacy 2: Appeal to Anonymous Authority. Aside from some meaningless alphabet soup, no attribution is given for this guy's knowledge of memory management. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting an MCSE, and I've known some I wouldn't trust to format a floppy disk. I also find it ironic that APK makes big with his customer's credentials while simultaneously dissing MR's notable credentials. This Martin guy might be a whiz, but the fact that he was trying to use XNews to download giant binaries (porn, warez, or whatever) from Usenet does not speak well for his savvy IMHO. Why didn't he just use one of the many newsreaders that are designed to handle binaries without heroic memory management techniques? APK:"You have made mistakes before, & you and I know it!" Poisoning the Well. - Since MR has made mistakes (which being human he almost certainly has) therefore his opinions are not to be relied on. This is completely bogus. APK:"Example - The hardcoded C:\pagefile.sys you made which I caught for you in your PageDefrag.exe 2.21 program recently" Here the infamous hard-coded pagefile bug rears its head for the first (but unfortunately not the last) time. APK gets a LOT of mileage out of this simple omission. In fact, he mentions PageDefrag at least fifteen times, and each time in association with the words "bug", "mistake", "error", and so on. Curiously, APK makes numerous repeated references to MR's mistakeS (plural) but the only actual example he seems able to bring to the table is this one "rookie" mistake of hard-coding the location of the swap file. APK manages to create the impression that MR just didn't know why this could be a problem, until he was rescued by APK's superior knowledge. But there's no actual evidence of any of this, it's just innuendo. Here are a few more examples of Alex pummelling that deceased equine. APK: --"This is WHY Dr. Mark Russinovich changed that hardcoding I found in his PageDefrag 2.20 & below versions that have existed in it for YEARS now..." --"(This error of his in PageDefrag 2.20 & below versions..." --" His hardcoded location of C:\PAGEFILE.SYS in PageDefrag 2.20" --"That program PageDefrag 2.20 & below versions had that bug for years..." --"Do you think he would have issued PageDefrag 2.21 upon my suggestions of the points I made in my last paragraph, which showed where he 'erred' in his hardcode??" --"...issued a new model of PageDefrag 2.21 per my suggestions with this fixed..." --" That hardcode c:\pagefile.sys location in pagedefrag 2.20 & below existed FOR YEARS in this program had that bug/error/hardcode in it..." --"...it shows his lack of understanding of a virtual memory subsystem component & how to make it more efficient by moving it to another disk (whereas again, he hardcoded the c:\pagefile.sys in his pagedefrag 2.20 program until I told him about this potential issue & how folks move it to gain performance)." --"I also illustrate a FACT, about virtual memory systems mistakes Mark made in PageDefrag 2.20 that existed for years (The hardcoded location of c:\pagefile.sys in it) that until I told him about it?" OK, I think we got the idea. MR made a _mistake_. Calling it a bug is wrong. Hard-coding a value is NOT a software bug. APK tries to make it sound like a bug, but it's not. Its a deliberate limitation put into a program usually for reasons of expediency or laziness. The mistake was not hard coding the value. The mistake was in failing to go back and improve the code later. But in the real world, this happens all the time, and until APK provides some attribution for his own prowess, I ain't buyin' his superiority in this respect. This is an interesting quote: APK:"You're right, it is ONLY 15 lines of code MAX via the Win32 API to read the registry for the pagefile.sys location... so, why on earth didn't he do that in the first place then?" Hmm, maybe he didn't think it was that important? Maybe nobody but APK ever complained about it? Maybe he had to take a crap for God's sake and just wanted to finish the damn thing? I can't say for sure I'd always want 15 more lines of code added to a project if what I wanted was a small utility. If the same thing were done in an enterprise application, I could see getting all hot and bothered. But it's just a simple utility, and one that's been around for a long time. APK: "This is because the OS & progs are not splitting drive head movement time with the paging operations of the virtual memory subsystem & that uses the pagefile.sys file!" The argument that having swap on a separate drive improves performance has merit, but it's NOT the huge deal APK pretends. He's assuming that the second drive is NOT busier than the system drive, a faulty assumption. Back in the late '90s, servers were the only machines likely to have multiple drives, and when they did, the boot drive was often the LEAST active drive. Most workstations didn't have multiple drives, so that was a moot point too. This: APK:"Nope, I still think this shows a lack of his quality control & also lack of understanding of some points in virtual memory & system optimization for performance, since this program of his DEALS with a virtual memory component..." and this: APK:"...it shows his lack of understanding of a virtual memory subsystem component & how to make it more efficient by moving it to another disk." are more ad hominem attacks, based on a single, minor mistake. This is also a good example of a formal error in reasoning. APK's conclusion is based on a faulty syllogism. Here's APK's argument: *Bad programmers make rookie mistakes. *MR made a rookie mistake. *Therefore MR is a bad programmer. This is a fallacy of formal logic. Change the terms a bit, and you can see how ridiculous it is. *Sweaty shoes make bad smells. *This rotten egg makes a bad smell. *Therefore this rotten egg is a sweaty shoe. Here's a great one. APK:"I agree: The theory in the article is SOUND, & should be, I know FIRST-HAND how Mark uses traces (which many of this tools he has @ SysInternals are geared to supplement Windows Debugger & SoftIce which I am aware that he uses...[Bunch of completely off-topic nonsense about MR engaging in warez cracking and peer-to-peer piracy omitted]...I am not sure if Mark does this, I have heard say he does from a former employer of ours, but I took it with a grain of salt (until Mark tried to disassemble my work & still took it with salt, but A LOT more after that)!" Here's a summary of the previous paragraph: APK:"Mark Russinovich uses SoftIce. Crackers might use SoftIce. You know he uses SoftIce, right? Pirates could use SoftIce. Did I mention MR uses SoftIce?" This is the most pernicious and morally repugnant argument that APK makes. Mr. Kowalski, if you want to accuse MR of illegal acts, then please do so in court, where your evidence can be weighed fairly. If not, then kindly keep your poisonous insinuations to yourself. Your accusations may in fact be actionable. APK:"Above all, this article of his? Well, it's 'academia based theory' based solely on observations, & apparently not with apps that can & do benefit from memory manager tools!" APK:"Whereas I show "REAL WORLD" results with applications used, hardware used (especially 1gb RAM my user has), & OS type + memory optimization tool he used (mine) & concrete gains in performance by using one by a user & with which apps & circumstances." A great example of the fallacies of Hasty Generalization and Relativist Fallacy. APK's "REAL WORLD" results consist of a single anecdotal incident from some guy downloading porn with a crappy port of a text newsreader. Given my choice between "academia based theory" and a dodgy testimonial from a one-handed typist, I'll go with the theory. APK also makes frequent use of the straw man fallacy, setting up a bogus claim that MR never made, then knocking it down and crowing about it. Here's an example: APK:"If caches & memory mgt. in NT based OS' IS perfect? How come my user above needed one to speed up his system using XNews newsreader..." APK doesn't come right out and claim that MR said NT memory management is perfect. That would be too obvious a lie. Instead APK IMPLIES something that MR never said, then later brings it up again more explicitly. APK knocks this straw man down several times. Here, APK takes another stab at character assassination: APK:"This came from a former employer he & I both contracted out our wares to in fact who informed me of this fact. He also stated that many folks claimed Mark disassembles & steals the work from Linux Sources, & also Windows itself that he does." Say wha? Yeah, I can see Mark working late into the night, slaving away over his 'SoftIce Tool of Evil®' trying to "disassemble" Linux Sources (that he probably downloaded from Usenet with Xnews.) Gee, APK made a mistake, and it's a real "rookie" mistake too. Maybe I should mention it fifteen or twenty more times. APK thinks you need a Disassembler to steal Linux code! That's an error that he made that I am pointing out to him here on this site! Leaving aside APK's error-mistake which I pointed out to him just now in claiming that anyone would actually need a disassembler to steal Linux code, here we have more nasty insinuations that Mark is a thief. More appeal to anonymous authority, more ad hominem attacks. Did I mention APK's error in claiming you need a disassembler to steal Linux code? A real rookie mistake, that. Here's another straw man: APK:"It also seems like Mark is saying "paging is bad", well then why is it done..." Mark NEVER made such an absurd claim, but APK still hints at it as if it had actually been written in the article. APK:"Paging operations are 'bad' for an app, if you look @ this from a SINGLE APP's PERSPECTIVE ONLY!" APK gleefully knocks down this completely bogus straw man, despite the fact that nobody has ever presented it but him. APK:"I'm not looking to argue with Dr. Mark here... by no means/stretch-of-the-imagination!" Finding evidence in APK's own comments that directly contradict this false statement is left as an exercise for the reader. APK:"am only out to see his viewpoint on this & get him to amend his outright attack on this family of applications, because although his traced observations of memory mgt. in the NT based Os family is accurate while looking @ it from a PURELY Operating System perspective & single app paging scenario? It does not hold up under ALL circumstances, with all applications... they vary, & WIDELY in their design is why!" Another straw man, and a lovely example of the Relativist Fallacy. I could go on and on, but frankly, it's too much work. APK:"...it's especially true when someone basically is telling us all that "the world is flat" pretty much, when you know it's not!" A great example of the practice known as Misleading Vividness. Basically, this means creating a ridiculous exaggeration and pretending it's actually relevant. In closing, I point out the final irony of APK's last post. APK:"P.S.=> Heinz, URL link to my latest toolset is here: http://www.hawaiihardwarez.com/Files/APKWin2kTools2002SR6Final.zip" APK's package is hosted on a WAREZ site! See, it's hawaiihardWAREZ.com. Rather ironic given APK's repeated insinuations that MR is a pirate. And his toolkit includes MIRC utilities! MIRC is often used to trade pirate software and illegal kiddie porn. Hmmm, APK's software. Hmm. Illegal piracy. Hmm. Nasty stuff, insinuation.

APK: "What exactly are YOU trying to do here to myself?" Responding to you and noting that you are defaming the character of Dr. Russinovich - which you clearly are in implying that he steals code - along with exposing the logical fallacies in your argument, hardly qualifies as "character assassination." APK: "That is the name Mr. Jonathan Bryant gave the site since it is hosted out of Hawaii... lol! It is NOT a 'warez' site" I'm sure he knows that. In case you missed it he was obviously doing a pastiche of your post, specifically the part where you used the fallacy of the "undistributed middle," e.g. your potentially libellous implication that Dr. Russinovich steals other peoples' code because you say he uses SoftIce, a program that can be used for such a purpose. APK: "I have had multiple diskdrive personal systems for decades" Really? You've been using computers with more than one hard drive for, at a minimum, more than 20 years? That's impressive! What type of drives were you using back in the early 1980s then? What operating systems? Were they 5.25" rotary/VCM drives or an older type? I'm sure you'll have no trouble enlightening us! Oh and if my cursory web search is correct in suggesting that you're in your late 30s, wouldn't that put you in your mid-teens at that time? You must have been quite the child prodigy! APK: "Really? So, a multiply certified end-user showing a specific Operating System family, application set, & hardware configuration does not [counter Dr. Russinovich's assertions from a technological standpoint?]" Well no it clearly doesn't. How do we know who this Mr. Meszaros is? Your appeal to the authority of this unknown person's technical credentials is as logically flawed as every other fallacious argument you have produced in this discussion. Furthermore, where is the full technical specification of the system Mr. Meszaros was using on which he succeeded in producing a benefit? You certainly didn't post it. All you posted was a single anecdote about a single program, noting a couple of RAM stats. APK: "Tell us all then: What does [counter Dr. Russinovich's assertions]?" Well you could, for example, give us a full hardware/software description of a test system, then document your findings using verifiable, reproducible experiments with accepted benchmarking software. That would be one way of silencing your critics. Alternatively you could explain, from a technical standpoint, exactly why Dr. Russinovich's assertions don't hold water. For reference, hearsay and appeals to unknown persons' authority are not considered acceptable forms of proof. Well?

APK: Write Mark about it, he & I exchanged this information in email. No 'innuendo' whatsoever, he'll verify this I am sure as being 100% truth. I'm not going to spend my time tracking down your evidence for you. It's up to you to back up your claim, not me. If you have correspondence, post it. WeaselSpleen - "Here, APK takes another stab at character assassination" APK: What exactly are YOU trying to do here to myself? Please... go back to wherever you came from, & try to formulate a technical reply @ least, OK? Give us a break already... I'm trying to point out your bogus reasoning and flawed arguments. Character assassination is the attempt to impugn the character of a person through the use of innuendo and subtle implications without the need to present factual evidence. That is what you did. Refuting is pointing out flaws in your reasoning, showing why your arguments don't stand up to critical examination. That's what I did. If I were to start bandying about suspicions that you engage in immoral conduct, then that would be character assassination. I didn't do that. Unless you count my obviously ironic example below, In which case you need to learn the meaning of irony. I DID say your accusations were morally repugnant. But then again, you're the one who made them, for all to see. APK:>Absolutely hilarious! Is this the BEST you can do? God grant me strength... Are you just pretending to be dense or did you really not understand the point? Since you don't seem to have understood the extremely obvious meaning of my comment, I will explain it to you in short sentences. The logic of your argument is invalid. Even if I accept your premises, your conclusion is still invalid. It's invalid because the logical argument you use to get there is invalid. Your original and bogus argument: Mark uses SoftICE. Thieves use SoftICE. Therefore Mark is a thief My facetious and obviously sarcastic equivalent argument: YOU have a web site with warez in the name. Thieves have web sites with warez in the name. Therefore YOU are a thief. It's the exact same syllogism you used. Same argument. Same conclusion. The point was NOT to accuse you of some absurd offense. If my argument is hilarious, then so is yours, since they are THE SAME ARGUMENT. The point was to show how ridiculous your argument was by showing how it could be used to make absurd attacks on you just as easily. Now do you understand? APK: (That is the name Mr. Jonathan Bryant gave the site since it is hosted out of Hawaii... lol! It is NOT a 'warez' site, email him about that & I am sure he will tell you the same as I just have). I don't give a rodent's rectum what Johnathan Bryant says. The "warez" in the name proves nothing, just as the "fact" that MR uses SoftICE proves nothing. It's irrelevant, which was the point I was trying to make. Thanks for helping me to demonstrate my point. APK: It does serve as an example of Mark's knowledge about virtual memory performance being weak above all things since this article is ABOUT virtual memory/memory performance largely. A silly example. You assume that there is only one possible reason Mark would do this, and that it MUST be from ignorance. That's absurd. It's trivial to find examples of people not doing things when they know they should do them. Doctors smoke cigarettes even though they know it's bad for them. Police drive over the speed limit even though they know it's illegal. Intelligent people post long-winded arguments on web forums even though they know it's futile. And yes, programmers sometimes hard-code paths in their programs even though they know it's bad practice. As I've pointed out, there are many reasons why he might have hard coded the path name. Maybe he was ignorant(least likely.) Maybe he was lazy (more likely). Maybe he was busy (most likely). Maybe he just didn't think it was very important. (Hint: It's NOT very important.) The fact that it went unchanged for so long makes me suspect that he probably didn't have a lot of complaints about it, not that he didn't know how to fix it. Maybe he fixed it hoping you would finally shut up and leave him alone. APK: When Mark replies (and I have written him requesting him to do so here), (You better hope MR is a very very patient person. If not, you're probably already killfiled, blacklisted, and spam-filtered to hell and back.) APK: I will put out articles by Microsoft from Technet &/or their knowledgebases online to indicate other areas where MS NT-based Os' need alteration in VM areas for their applications to work properly in fact... Why do we need to wait for something that might never happen to see your "proof" of something nobody ever doubted in the first place? Nobody said Windows memory management is perfect. The original article wasn't about memory management, it was about crooks ripping off ignorant users with false claims about snake-oil software that doesn't do what it claims. Show me the technet article that says Mark Russinovich is ignorant about virtual memory systems. Show me the knowledgebase article that says Mark Russinovich uses SoftICE to steal code. Show me ANYTHING from Microsoft that says you should go out and buy a memory optimizer program. I just did a search for Mark Russinovich on the Microsoft site. Know what it returned? Ten articles that reference Mark Russinovich as a respected professional with valuable information to share. Nothing about code stealing, nothing about SoftICE, nothing about his horrible faux pas of hard-coding the path to the pagefile in a freeware utility. APK: illustrating as nice as NT based Os' are? They are NOT perfect for all scenarios in the Virtual Memory area of operation. Straw man. Nobody said Windows memory management is perfect. Nobody but you said anything about the perfection of Windows memory management one way or the other. Everybody here knows there are bugs in software. If you prove there are bugs in Windows, you've proven something everyone already accepts anyway. Straw man. WeaselSpleen -"He's assuming that the second drive is NOT busier than the system drive, a faulty assumption." APK: So you move it to a disk that is not as busy, if you have one... that is pretty simple. Why can't you be this reasonable all the time? Glad you agree with me. Unless of course you want to add a third drive just to hold the swap file. I'm sure some MCSE somewhere has probably done just that. Oh, I know, you have two gigs of dedicated ramdisk on your machine. Yep, standard equipment there, my Mom's got one on her E-Machine... (Hint: that's sarcasm.) APK: Mark's initial builds of this program that were around for years now & many versions left this inflexible. AND NOBODY CARED! APK: The MAIN point however, again, is that hardcoding was in place that indicated that Mark's know-how in this area evidenced by his own work (which I corrected with him in email by pointing this out to him) is/was then, weaker than it should be especially since he wrote this article about Virtual Memory Performance. No, it doesn't. I've said this before and since you seem to like repetition I'll say it a few more times. There are several possible reasons why he might have left the hard-coded path in the program. You claim there is only one possible explanation, that Mark's "know-how in this area" is "weak". I claim there are multiple possible reasons that do not require Mark to be ignorant or weak in knowledge. Please provide an actual response to this instead of repeating your same claim again. By the way, thanks for finally admitting that the program was written years ago. WeaselSpleen - "Back in the late '90s, servers were the only machines likely to have multiple drives" APK: Oh really? Give us a break... I have had multiple diskdrive personal systems for decades, & many powerusers do! Do you know what the word LIKELY means? It means PROBABLY. It means that for a given population, there is a high probability that any given sample will meet the criteria. Not 100 percent. Not all the time. Just mostly. I've been putting my swap file on a separate drive for years. But I'm NOT using a typical workstation, and neither are you. Years later, most computers STILL only have one hard drive. Corporate workstations, introductory level home computers, and computers in schools across the country. One drive. Don't believe me? Go to the Dell web site and look at their best selling configurations for their home computers. One hard drive. Look at their top selling business workstations. One hard drive. Go to Gateway's configurations. One hard drive. Go to IBM. One Hard drive. Are you starting to see a pattern here? I offer as evidence the freely available web sites for three major manufacturers. It's true today, and it was even MORE true back then. Don't waste your time pointing out that you can order a second drive for many of those configurations. Everyone knows that is an option. I'm not saying you can't have them, I'm saying it's not typical. APK: You make it seem as if YOU are the 'authority' on what folks the world over set their machines up like or something... No, I make it seem like I have a passing familiarity with common practice in the industry. If some heavy-duty poweruser has an UW320 SCSI controller with RAID-5 in his home computer, that's cool But it's not typical, and I'm not going to assume everyone is so... special. When you have a small subset (power users) of a much larger set (all users) then it is LIKELY that any given randomly selected user is NOT a power user. Guess how much knowledge of technology is necessary to confirm the validity of this statement? None. Doesn't matter if you're talking about computer hard drives or goosedown feather pillows, the reasoning is the same. APK: you, the 'all-knowing one'... please! You sure do love that straw man. Make up some stupid claim that nobody ever said but you, then knock it down and brag about it, pretending you've actually made some sort of point. I never said I am the 'all-knowing one'. If you claim I did, you're a damned liar. Flap your wings and cock-a-doodle-doo all you want to, you're not impressing anyone but yourself. APK: (And, if you have not checked your calendar lately? It's now the 21st century... not the late 20th!) What the hell are you talking about? I never mentioned the 20th or 21st century, nor did I bring up calendars. YOU are the one who brought up the old software written back in the '90s, not me. If you didn't want to talk about software from the '90s, why did you bring it up? APK: Ah, I see: You must own a large company that manufactures PC... I must be speaking to the owner of DELL, Compaq/HP, or Gateway then? This is pure beauty. Person X is not the owner of a large PC manufacturer. Therefore Person X is not qualified to talk about hard drive configurations. Unfortunately for you, your argument cuts both ways. You are ALSO not the owner of a large PC manufacturer. Therefore, using your own reasoning, you are not qualified to comment on typical PC configurations. In other words, by your logic, your opinion is just as worthless as mine. Fortunately, I don't make asinine claims about only CEOs being allowed to discuss things, so I'm not screwed over by my own reasoning. I shall ignore your apparent belief that most major manufacturers actually HAVE individual owners. APK: LOL, my apologies, but your response? Hilarious, & no technical merit on this subject. Don't you have better things to do other than spout drivel & take up pagespace here? (Can we have a technical response please, instead of drivel? Thanks!) Why should I give a technical response to your non-technical argument? My premises are solid and backed by documentation. My conclusions are valid and relevant to the subject YOU proposed. If you want technical responses, try posting some technical arguments in the first place. So far all I've seen is insults, finger pointing, and you chanting your softice-pagefile-hardcode mantra. Here's a great example of APK at his most erudite. ME (talking about pointing out all APK's errors of reasoning):I could go on and on, but frankly, it's too much work. APK: Yes, and tying your shoelaces is up there with it... lol, oh the mental strain! Listen, Mr. Kowalski, if you want a flame war, I'll be happy to incinerate^h^h^h accomodate you in an appropriate forum. Meet me on alt.flame and I'll be just as vicious as you want. Since this is not the appropriate place, I will instead point out the flaw in your argument. A lovely example of the lowest form of Ad Hominem. Instead of responding with a reasonable argument, or even a witty retort, you start using childhood insults. You seem to think I'm somehow bewildered by your argument, when in fact I'm tired of them. It's tedious pointing out all of your errors to you because there are so many of them. APK: For someone who spouted nothing but b.s.? That is the pot calling the kettle black! I made no false claims, I told no lies, I didn't claim you were a criminal, or dishonest, or an incompetent programmer. So what exactly is this b.s. you're talking about? I attacked your logic, your arguments, and your statements. The evidence is there for all to see in your own words. Your insults look like a smokescreen to cover a lack of a good response. APK: P.S.=> Bottom line - The fact Mark made a mistake in the hardcoded location of pagefile.sys to C:\ drive... [snipped yet another huge long run-on sentence outlining the Hardcodian heresy] Your statement is wrong. The fact that Mark hardcoded the pagefile location means one thing and one thing only. It means he hardcoded the pagefile location. Anything you say about WHY he did this is supposition. If you have proof to the contrary, post it. You think it means he is pig-ignorant about Windows programming? I think it means he was being lazy, or didn't think it was that important for a free tool. Occam's razor applies. APK: ..especially regarding virtual memory performance... which this article is largely about. apk No, your final statement is false. The article is about software swindlers ripping people off by making false and misleading claims about their ability to improve performance. It's a warning to users not to be ripped off. You're the one who turned it into a virtual memory nitpick session. That's the part I really don't understand. Why do you care so much about MR's warning users against being ripped off, when you give your program away for free? You have a collection of free utilities, and from what I can see they don't suck, so why all the malice? This is truly priceless... amos_olson - "Can your user's single success story from years ago be repeated?" APK: I don't know, you'd have to ask him yourself. Faced with reasoning like this, there's really not much you can do but shake your head.

Oldie but a goodie: the MWNH guide to APK http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=8510980933&r=3650926043#3650926043

The_More_You_Know, thanks for the link. This clearly establishes that that the world famous APK, Winner of the prestigious Ziff-Davis Five Star Lameware award, Developer of such powerful Win32 applications as "Uninstall.bat" and the award-winning "APKdeletefile.exe", black belt master of foot-in-mouth style kung fu, is an undiscovered Usenet Kook. These threads are a goldmine of information about APK's attitudes, ethics, and mental state. The thing I find most hysterical is that in 2000, the amazing APK, in his own installation routine for APKTools, ...wait for it... hard-coded the path to the Windows operating system. Yes, APK, who has been REAMING Mark Russinovich for days over his alleged use of a hard-coded path to the Windows swap file in a free utility, was actually charging shareware fees in 2000 for an entire SUITE of utilities in which he hard-coded the path to the Windows system folder, not once but many times. Strangely, although APK claims it would be "only" 15 lines of code to read the swap file location from the registry, in his OWN software, he deliberately ignored the system-provided environment variable and hard-coding the actual FULL PATH to the operating system itself. Alex Kowalski, I have to take my hat off to you. You are the most extraordinary hypocrite I've ever seen. This is just too rich! Let's see now, let me find some of those earlier quotes and apply them to your own work: "I don't know what kind of programmers you know, but hardcoding? Is DEFINITELY 'frowned' upon! I doubt Mark himself will agree with you... I know I don't." - APK explaining why his programming style is definitely frowned upon, and that he doesn't agree with his own actions. "...made a pretty big 'boo-boo' in that program hardcoding the [file path] location in it." - APK points out how he made a big boo-boo when he hard-coded a path. "[APK]'s knowledge of this topic, hands on, is indeed imperfect & flawed (his hardcode of [c:\WINNT\SYSTEM32] indicated this to me in his [APKTools]." - APK explaining why his knowledge is imperfect and flawed. "His hardcode (bad business period) in [APKTools]" - APK points out that his programming approach is "bad business period". "Hardcoding it in the first place? BAD BUSINESS, rookie type coder error, & lastly makes for an inflexible program." - APK explains how he is a rookie type coder who writes inflexible programs. "That's the kind of thing beginner programmers do, & it can cause problems & did..." - APK points out that his beginner programmer errors can and do cause problems. On and on it goes, literally HUNDREDS of examples of his insults, attacks, lying, and hypocrisy. Not to mention the discovery that he has tried to illegal pirated serial numbers, plagiarized Microsoft's own documentation, and illegally used Microsoft's trademark on his products? And then he has the astonishing audacity to say pot-kettle-black to me? OK, I've seen enough, my side hurts from laughing so hard. Alex, I'll look forward to your postings on alt.alexander.kowalski.kook.kook.kook! PS=> Good to see APK's insults have not changed much over the past several years. He still thinks references to tying shoes is a devastating insult. APK four years ago: "If this is intelligent, telling me to "wank off", then you must think tying your shoes is tough!" APK Two days ago: "Yes, and tying your shoelaces is up there with it... lol, oh the mental strain!" PPS=> I just noticed that APK's latest version of his software includes AOL's intellectual property. I'm sure he has a signed permission form on file, LOL! LOL! LOL!

Without more information, it is hard to tell exactly why the single quoted user's system "stopped crawling." It could be that APK RamCharge 6.0++ crashed right at that moment and the additional free memory space was what the system needed. The other day my system sped up when I turned on the stereo. Correlation does not prove causality.

WeaselSpleen - "That's the part I really don't understand. Why do you care so much..." APK: "I am showing an example above from a certified knowledgeable user that..." You didn't answer the question. Why are you so hostile to MR's warning? Why do you accuse him of criminal acts? (Hint: repeating the above argument yet another time is not an answer to this question.) APK: "Easily understood, real-world concrete results that showed how a Memory Optimization program IMPROVED his overall performance." I've already explained why this is insufficient. Is it your belief that simply repeating the same statements over and over will make them credible? Let me explain AGAIN why this argument of yours is of no value: A. It was one guy, one time. That's not a sufficient sample to draw any general conclusions from. Repeating it doesn't make it more than one guy. B. We have only your word this guy even exists. There's no independent confirmation of your claim. That means it is of no value. Independent confirmation of results is the foundation of the scientific method. APK: "The hardcode of C:\pagefile.sys in his PageDefrag 2.20 (a program Mark developed to..." This argument has been rejected. It will never become acceptable no matter how many times you repeat it. Everyone accepts that MR hard-coded the path. Not in dispute. Everyone accepts that hard-coding file paths is generally not recommended programming practice. Not in dispute. Nobody but you derives the astonishing and completely unsupported conclusion that since MR used a hard-coded path once in this one particular program, therefore he must not know about memory management. Provide proof that you know WHY he did it. Without such proof I REJECT your claim for both logical and pragmatic reasons. This claim is REJECTED. Try something else. APK: "His having to correct for this @ my suggestion simply illustrates his knowledge of this area of the operating system's operation is not as perfect as it might seem..." This invalid argument was already REJECTED. Try something else. APK: "since he erred in hardcoding its location to C:\pagefile.sys for YEARS and MANY VERSIONS of that program he created..." Previously REJECTED. Try something else. APK: "The fact is, Mark overlooked a VERY fundamental performance point in that the pagefile.sys..." REJECTED. Try again. APK: "If he can overlook such a fundamental performance tweak in his own code? He can overlook things..." REJECTED. Try again. APK: "No malice @ all, but you arstechnica guys? Pretty sad really... why do you follow me around online to other forums & websites like you have for YEARS after I left your forums?" I had never visited Arse Technica until yesterday. I'd never heard of you or your fan club until I saw your offensive and hostile postings on this web site. I responded to YOU, here and now. No paranoid delusion is necessary to explain my reaction to your belligerent and obnoxious behavior. I always react negatively to insults and rudeness. Don't like taking it? Stop dishing it out. While I found several of the members' postings to be condescending and rude, your own behavior on the forum was so extraordinarily hostile and offensive that it made the others seem quite reserved in comparison. I'm surprised they tolerated your presence there as long as they did. If you came to my place acting like that, I'd have shown you the door in thirty seconds flat. APK: "Don't you have jobs (I would say not if you have time for this) or families to attend to rather than follow me around trying to harass me continually?" It's not surprising that you believe you're being followed around. Scary, but not surprising. APK: "Like I stated above, & have archived in IE .mht format: Already once here, Arstechnica forum members had their posts removed." I'm not a member of arstechnica and never have been, so I don't care. What I really don't understand is why you think anyone cares what file format you choose to use for archiving. You can videotape your monitor for all I care. Better yet, take up calligraphy and make lovely parchments of each posting. APK: "I am archiving this one as well, because you folks don't understand "nice", you only understand what you dish out, which is force." You've never been nice, why should anyone else? Nobody is obligated to be nice to someone who is nasty and insulting. Nobody owes you niceness. And if you define force as using logic and reason to destroy your lame arguments, then I'm guilty of using force. Your attitude sucks. You are rude, belligerent, offensive, hostile, and deceptive. You could have posted a counter to MR's article that provided reasoned arguments politely phrased. You chose instead to use insults, innuendo, and libelous accusations. That is why you encounter hostility. APK: "That will be taken care of shortly! Enough is enough, & you will be bringing it on yourselves & your website is all I can say." Dude, you're scary. You've just issued a threat on a public forum. If I were the publisher, I'd be forwarding your threat to law enforcement ASAP. APK: "Off to archive this one as evidence as well of your continual harassment of me over the years online which has gone on unceasingly & continues on as evidenced by this thread as well." I'd never heard of you until last week, so how could I have been harassing you over years? If you're talking to the person who posted the ars technica link, kindly compose coherent responses where it's clear who you're talking to. APK: "P.S.=> "[insincere apology snipped] Apologize for filling this forum with dozens of repetitions of the same flawed argument, why don't you. You've posted more than anyone, and with less content. APK: "Really? Thanks! Show me those hardcodes in my installer or my apps then... then, we'll see who the 'hypocrite' (or in your case, liar rather) is... ok?" Let's go download the current version of PageDefrag from Sysinternals. Well looky there. No hard-coded path. So by your own definition, you are now a liar. Of course there's no way that you might have fixed your code sometime in the intervening four years. APK: "You've followed me around here to this site, NTCompatible.com, 3dfiles.com, MajorGeeks.com forums & just keep it up." Again, if you're talking to me, you're full of crap. I've never been a member of any of those forums. If you're talking to the guy who posted the link, make it clear. APK: "Thanks for the ammunition I suppose, this will help my attorney alot, Ken "Caesar" Fisher" The New York Bar lists three attorneys named Ken Fisher. Which one is yours so I can call him and ask him if he really represents you. You ARE aware that it's illegal to file false charges, aren't you?

The newsreader "keeping news headers in RAM" example makes me suspest that as each article arrived, the paging mechanism asked for another page (roughly) and with full RAM and few-to-none free or zero pages available, that meant a disk access for each news article (or each memory page of headers at least). The nearly useless quote does not say how busy the disk (disks? who knows?) were. I can imaging that if this was the case there might be a perceptable slowdown. BUT - wouldn't loading and then exiting ANY large program - IE, AIM, etc, have the same effect as a so-called memory optimizer - creating a pool of free or zero pages that could be drawn from without incurring a physical page fault each time? Seems like the actions of the so-called RAM optimizers are not unique in this regard. Regarding the "page coloring" of free or zero pages to enhance CPU cache effectiveness - why would either free or zero pages be valuable to have in cache - obviously they are requested so they can be changed (invalidated)? Is the idea to expand the working set with pages that would fall into the same cache lines? Thanks for answers that will not show up in court transcripts.

I laughed so much at the responses to this artice, which I for one found quite informative, that people in my office thought I was on drugs. APK - are you for real? I have added this page to my favorites and will periodically drop by! CF

memmismanagement: You raise a good point, but the real question is why anyone would continue to use the wrong tool for the job. The ability to send binaries over USENET was originally a feature intended to allow exchange of small binary objects among researchers. It later got turned into a way to share porn and warez, which is its primary use today. XNews was intended primarily for text reading. APK's customer was trying to use a small utility that maintained its data structures in RAM rather than using a more robust application designed for the task of extracting binaries.

Alex, here's an analogy. A restaurant makes cheeseburgers. They make big cheeseburgers that people pay for, and they also give away small cheeseburgers for free. One day you try a free sample and it doesn't have cheese on it. Conclusions that any reasonable person might draw: * Cook ran out of cheese that day. * Cook made 97 cheeseburgers that day and just forgot about that one. * Cook had to cut back on free cheese due to a money problem. * Cook was very busy preparing expensive cheeseburgers, and made a decision not to put cheese on that free burger to save some time. Here we have four separate possible reasons. Do any of the above require that the cook be incompetent? No. Are any of these hard to believe? No. Question: Which one will you, Alex Kowalsi, choose? Answer: None of them. You reject all of these reasonable explanations, and insists on a fifth explanation: The cook doesn't know that cheese goes on a cheeseburger, and therefore his opinions on cheeseburgers are useless, and nobody should ever trust anything the cook says about cheeseburgers in the future. Furthermore, because you pointed out the missing cheese, you are therefore more knowledgeable about cheeseburgers than the cook, and everyone should listen to you. APK: "LOL! WeaselSpleen "The TOUGH guy..." Give us a break, 'Weasel' (your name fits you well 'Weasel') OK? " You threatened me. I responded. Don't like it when someone calls your bluff? Then don't make empty threats you can't live up to. BTW, I'm glad that you know weasels are aggressive predators and don't back down in the face of a threat. ;) APK: "Arstechnica members posted here earlier on this month..." Whatever, nobody cares. APK: "You stated that the error in PageDefrag 2.20 & below that existed for years before I notified Mark Russinovich about it has nothing to do with this article? Beg to differ:" Permission denied. When I said "try again" I meant try something else, not try repeating yourself word for word. APK: "The fact Mark made an error in a program about Virtual memory performance improvement DOES show his knowledge about this area is imperfect, no matter what YOU say (you, the authority on this subject..." No, it doesn't, no matter what YOU say (you, the authority on being an arrogant ass.) When I said "try again" I meant try something DIFFERENT, not repeat the same rejected argument again. APK: Since this article is about Virtual memory/memory performance? I would say it has ALOT to do with it...[Yet another repetition of APK's same error in reasoning deleted] The original article is not about virtual memory and memory performance. It's about why memory optimizing software is a rip-off. You don't seem to have actually read the article. This discussion is not about memory management. It's about your offensive conduct, your distortions, insinuations, and your failures in reasoning. APK: "(Little disputing that). " Since I've successfully disputed your bogus argument many times, this is false. And since you have never countered any of my arguments, you obviously know it's false. My conclusion is that you're deliberately pretending to be pig-ignorant. APK: "'Weasel': Try to use technical arguments here as others ave since @ least they have merit on this." You mean like your technical argument that MR is a thief? Or your very sophisticated technical discussion about tying shoelaces? Maybe it was your brilliant technical white paper on why only CEOs are allowed to disagree with you? I'm surprised you aren't teaching Donald Knuth how to scramble eggs. Since you're apparently incompetent at simple reasoning, I'm going to present it to you as a programming issue. Pretend your argument here is a piece of software instead of a verbal argument. Here's why your program sucks: 1. It depends on undocumented API calls (You use special knowledge of MR's state of mind not available to anyone else) 2. It's badly documented spaghetti code with no comments. (Jumps around, no consistency, hard to follow) 3. It does not produce sane output (Your conclusions are invalid) 4. It has extraneous features that are irrelevant to the core purpose. (You go off on random tangents) 5. It has a terrible user interface (Your presentation of your arguments is incoherent and babbling, your use of the written language to express yourself is quite poor.) If your code resembles your arguments here, then you are a crap programmer. Now from observing your past behavior here, I feel safe in predicting you will next try to pretend that I said you are a crap programmer. It's not true, but frankly, I wouldn't mind if you made that false claim, since any repetition of the phrase "you are a crap programmer" in a comment addressed to you just makes me feel good. APK: "Keep it on topic, or is this beyond your lack of technical expertise (if you have any in this field other than typing on a keyboard that is)." Correcting your glaring errors is always on topic. The next time you post, you will once again recycle the same arguments you've used in every previous posting, even though they've been rejected. You will once again fail to provide documentation for any claims. You will once again claim to have special knowledge of MR's reasons for doing things, but you won't provide any proof of this amazing claim. And you'll still be wrong, no matter how many times you do it. You're a troll, and apparently a pretty stupid one, since you can't even come up with good insults. Anything else you say from this point forward will only be a repetition of the same errors you've been making from the beginning, so I'm not wasting any more of my valuable time on you. Since I know you will claim this is some sort of victory, I hereby grant you, Alexander Kowalski, full permission to twist and distort my words however you want, lie about me, and generally act like a total ass. Congratulations, you're a weiner. Have fun waiting for Mark to respond.

APK: You apear to have missed my post above. Is there any chance of you addressing the questions I asked. Also, I just dowloaded Dr. Russinovich's program and I don't see any hard-coding of the pagefile.

APK: I'll give you one more chance. Do you plan to address my two previous posts or are you simply ignoring them because you cannot answer without admitting some kind of fault with your reasoning?

If you're in search of better performance then having a fast processing computer system with sufficient RAM capacity will allow the opportunity for optimal memory management given the OS can compliment the task. Eliminate the need for the pagefile to physical disk and you will eliminate the need for arguments on the latency of Windows use of VM. Creating the use of an application to fix a physical problem is wasted time better spent working a real job to pay your bills.

I created an ID on this site just so I could post this to APK: Dude. Get a life! WeaselSpleen: your post on 8/20 slayed me. Does anyone remember what the article was about? Too funny! I rated this thing at "1" only because of APK's pathetic behavior. The rest gets a 5.

APK: I asked if you could "address my post" (i.e. the one of Aug 15), not "address the last sentence of my post and otherwise rehash, yet again, the same arguments - half of them fallacious, the other half irrelevant, that you've been making throughout this thread." It seems reading comprehension is not your strongpoint. I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that you have been using "multiple diskdrive personal systems for decades." What were these hard drives/computers you were using 20+ years ago when, by my reckoning, you were in your mid-teens? You sem strangely quiet on this point. I wonder why... And I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence beyond hearsay and appeals to an unknown person's authority that memory optimization programs have any tangible, real world benefit. Continually restating your anecdote about a supposed customer of yours is far from sufficient and, contrary to the statements in your post, you have *never* given us the full stats of this system that supposedly benefited from your program. All you've provided is the newsgroup program he was using and a few RAM numbers. How is that sufficient for something as paltry as anecdotal evidence to hold up? Answer: it isn't. Not by a long shot. And then there's this customer of yours: all I can say is *thank you* for giving out his screen name at NTcompatible! I searched under that name and read the first few posts that came up. Result: you know when people say that the only thing certification really proves is the ability to become certified? Well this guy is the textbook example! His "MCSE, MCP+I, CNA" reponse to someone who can't get his Win2K computer to join his domain is, "Try netbeui." ROFL! But it gets better: in a thread about putting the pagefile in a RAM disk he notes, "generally iuse a pagefiule for swapfile." I don't think the ignorance of this statement even needs to be addressed. And for a final example: someone asked how to install Win2K on a computer that can't boot from CD. His repsonse: "Boot to win98 floppy, make a fat32 paritition. Copy smartdrv froma win98 machine or this will caus epain. Copy \i386 to c: from dos, in another pc. (move the hard drive) then run c:\i386\winnt from dos." Hmmmm, well yes, technically this will work...but it's a *retarded* way of doing it given that you can simply boot from a standard Win98 bootdisk, which has CD-Rom support, and run winnt.exe from the CD. Clearly the guy's credentials - asuming he's not lying about having them - aren't worth the paper they're printed on. He's an idiot! As such, and taken together with the scant "evidence" you have provided, there is no good reason why anyone should accept your anecdote about his memory optimization success. But of course, if you have some *real* evidence to prove your argument, something that is *not* based on anecdotes from idiots, I'm all ears.

Oh and I just wanted to address some specific points: "Mark's article here deals in improving virtual memory/memory performance" No...it...doesn't. It is an article asserting that memory optimizers are essentially a waste of time. It is not an article about "how to improve performance." Like I said, reading comprehension. "Bottom Line on PageDefrag hardcode: This illustrates his working knowledge of the improvement of virtual memory performance IS NOT PERFECT @ all" It does nothing of the sort. As someone else has already explained several times, there are *many* reasons why he could have done this and only one of them suggests ignorance. Your argument that the *only* reason he could've done it is due to ignorance is, logically, a fallacious one. You have no way of knowing that Dr. Russinovich hard-coded the pagefile due to ignorance. For all you know he did it deliberately while he was testing the program and simply forgot to change it for the release. "he is not accounting for the fact that some applications (as the example Martin Meszaros above provided) can benefit from the use of a Memory Optimization program." A benefit that you have been singularly unable to prove in this thread. "I have nothing to hide" Great! I look forward to hearing about your multiple hard drive computer, circa 1980 then. I love tech nostalgia! "I also offer tests you can perform regarding paging above as well which you can try to see "how bad paging is" &/or WHY it is done" Er, where? I've read this whole thread and I have yet to see you offer any such thing. "Benchmarks have proven skewable in TOO many circumstances over time, & I don't put my stock into them 110% & use them only as a 'guide' @ times, but personally put much more stock into concrete real-world results with applications @ work in real-world practice." I have no problem with that reasoning. How about this then: show us the results of some reproducible tests on a specified platform, using some popular, commonly-used, real-world software (e.g. MS Office apps, PhotoShop, Premiere, etc.) in order to prove your argument. Give us something *worthwhile* that can be independently verified. Until you do that your argument has no standing here. You know what though? I'm pretty certain you won't do this. In fact I'm willing to bet that the real motivation for your posting here (other than self-aggrandizement, of course) is that Dr. Russinovich is arguing that memory optimization software is a waste of time and a con....and you are the author of memory optimization software. You don't like the fact that someone of his standing is basically calling you a fraud. Is it because the truth hurts? Or is it because you're not a fraud and can in fact substantiate your argument that memory optimization software can be useful? I'll leave that up to you to decide.

Memory management is not a problem in Windows especially in the NT platform. So the need for applications that attempt to free memory by forcing page faults, which then squeezes current and active program working sets to a minimum. Thereby forcing active code to the dreaded page file, obviously degrading your memory optimization no matter where that page file is located. Anytime the OS requires the need for disk acquisition it causes performance problems even with the fast seek times of the latest hard disks. Yes it helps to isolate the page file on it's own disk if you must use it. But how many everyday users have that luxury? The best thing anyone can do for system performance is too eliminate the page file and hard disk from memory with having as much RAM as possible. And do not use these so called "memory optimizer" programs, they only force the OS to use even more of the page file for memory.

APK said..."Again, let's use what you said: How many folks have that luxury? Not everyone has 2-4gb of RAM online." :) True. But the whole idea of this editorial is based on the use of these so called "memory optimizer" programs. Your assertion is claiming the need of such a tool because Windows is unable to perform the proper methods of memory management, and I disagree. The technical reasons why have been examined already in this subtle editorial point of view. APK said... "Additionally, it's been noted that some programs will not run (or run right) or install w/out a pagefile.sys being present as well. You need to have it around due to the design of some applications, as well as the tremendous size of their datasets." If I understand correctly how Windows XP in particular approaches the use of the page file is that XP is using this template at all times, regardless of it existing on disk or in RAM. Windows Virtual Memory Management is predictable, well balanced and stable in XP and NT as long as the hardware space is available. These things need to be considered with how and what type of applications are being used in order to achieve optimum performance. The Win9x OS platform of course has issues because of it's limitations but nothing that would require the same kind of programming technique to force memory optimization. Any way you look at it the results are the same when forcing Windows to do something that it wasn't programmed to allow. I think the article from Mark speaks volumes because of it's logical explanation of the outcome when using the application in question. He seems to understand as I do what is taking place with regards to Windows as well as what will happen when using "memory optimization" tools. I respect his point of view form his background. I don't agree with the ideals of "memory optimization" applications that attempt memory management in Windows by their very reasoning and programming approach.

To start off with I offer this disclaimer. I am a member of both NTCompatible as well as Arstechnica. I use the same screen name on both. There are several things that have bothered me thoughout these comments that I would like to address. First, as far as Duhmez's example, in the very quote presented, "So here I am with 1 gig of memory usage,(my machine physically has 768 MB)". So here we are faced with what is likely a grossly inefficient program, whose memory usage was likely the cause that he has surpassed the amount of ram he has installed by 33% and his application, not necessarily his system had slowed. One of my first questions was did he perhaps have a fixed size pagefile? Was the system optimized for programs or background processes? Was a large system cache enabled? What other applications were open? Too many questions left unanswered to use this as a prime example of why memory optimization programs are good. On top of this, the program itself seems inefficient, perhaps the memory optimization program had the effect of pushing some of the memory used by this bloated program from the working set, something which the OS would not likely do because it is in fact the active program and actively using the memory, thus freeing it to reuse memory that it had already used inefficiently, this more speak to the fact of the memory optimization program working to cover inefficiencies in a poorly written program rather than an OS VMM issue. However you look at it though, this example does not answer anything conclusively. Now, I'm not saying that memory optimization programs are inherently bad or anything of the sort, however a reliable, reproducible example would make a much stronger case as to why the basis of this article would be in error. Secondly, from APK, "Dr. Mark Russinovich made statements above that Microsoft never put out tools for clearing RAM out, they did in the clearmem.exe program (character mode app in reskits for NT)! Error... Now, He plainly states this stuff in black & white in his article above that if doing this was so good, why didn't MS put out tools like this or build them into the OS? Well, again, they did! Clearmem.exe console mode app in NT reskits in fact... ". This is not in fact what was stated by Dr. Russinovich. What was stated was, "common sense suggests that if RAM optimization were possible (and could be implemented by so many small-time upstarts), Microsoft developers would have long since integrated the technology into the kernel." So, while clearmem might have been put out by MS, it was not integrated into the kernal and was in fact part of a resource kit, resource kits are in fact not supported by MS. As evidenced on this link: http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/reskit/tools/default.asp As for the oft repeated hardcode error, I think we can all agree that it in fact was an error. However, ALL software have errors in them and they will range from the simple to the complex whether the actual coder is inexperienced or greatly experienced. So no, I won't accept that simply because he made an error, years ago no less, that he does not know what he is talking about, even if we accept something as having been true years ago, does it necessarily make it true now? Until a proven, reproducible example that clearly shows how, when, and why a memory optimization program clearly benefits a system, I am inclined to agree with the article when it says that, "If you look closely, you'll often see that vendors have buried long-winded disclaimers on their Web sites that state what I've explained—that the product might not have any impact on a system's performance and might actually degrade it." Please keep in mind that he is discussing "system performance" and not application performance which are two very different things indeed.

gee, first time I've ever read a discussion on this site - I ended up establishing an account just for the entertainment value... ;D

Rob~1 said..." Any way you look at it the results are the same when forcing Windows to do something that it wasn't programmed to allow." APK said..."I beg to differ: The methods used for these types of programs are PURE Win32 API calls, & that IS "Windows" itself!" Correct, and what I was really trying to say is that Windows of course allows it with respect to this area of communication but probably wouldn't approve of this method by forcing page faults to clear portions of occupied memory that Windows considers viable to the active processes. So the question comes to mind is the average user capable of deciding when to use such a program to thwart Windows intentions to provide a balanced and stable system environment. A lot of R&D ($$$) goes into software (MS), especially at the level of an Operating System and for it to perform as it does is no accident. Granted the world is an imperfect place and as we are so will the things we create. Interesting to know and learn new things aside from the disagreements. This was a good read anyway. :)

APK, Regarding my question on whether or not the pagefile was a fixed size. Your response, "So, the questions you asked about pagefile size aren't really an issue,". This is why I feel that in fact it could be. Say you have a fixed pagefile size because you feel you have an adequate amount of RAM and set your pagefile to some amount, for sake of argument here I'll say 256MB. Now in this instance, and I'm being pretty specific here, Duhmez had 768MB of RAM and he had 1GB in total VM usage. So he has now exhausted his fixed size pagefile. I've run into instances on NT based OS'es (how do you abbreviate that?) and it's not exactly pretty. These OS'es will still increase beyond that limit (otherwise your programs would crash and some poorly written ones still in fact will) but you take a pretty hefty performance hit in doing so. I don't know what amount NT (2000 or XP) increases it but it would be possible with a hefty program to hit the limit again and again and force yet another increase, if you fall into this repeatedly, your system will come to a crawl. So in my mind without knowing exactly where the boundary is and whether the user set the pagefile as a fixed size could indeed come into play.

Why would I use one of these Optimizers? When I start up the game I want it to run smoothly, especially if it is a fast action game like an FPS (First Person Shooter) such as the Planetside MMOG (Massively Multiplayer Online Game). As you state the game will eventually shove other things out of memory and page them to disk or just unload them. The problem with letting it do it that route is that when it happens the game stutters, sometimes for a few minutes as the system struggles to handle the intense operations for the game AND choose/unload things that are not currently needed. This stutter is unacceptable, whether online or in a single player environment. Utilizing one of the Optimizers makes the process much faster (since the system is not actively trying to handle the Game's overhead as well (physics, sounds, graphics, networking, etc)). The Optimizer Utility usually accomplishes the task in less than 20 seconds, saving long periods or stuttering gameplay during rather inopportune times. I will agree that they are probably useless to the standard computer user, but I think that some of the well done ones have a place in the Enthusiast or Gamer community.

To Tk, I'll take a look at WinPatrol, there are also ways to unload the .dlls via batch file commands. Often I don't want to totally shut down a program, but rather force it to page and have it available when I end the game or alt-tab and need to use it. Often there are so many things that need an "End Task" that to get everything back up requires a reboot. I play multiple times through the day and do not wish to reboot following each game session. Thus the Optimizer is a good alternative, if not as clean a route as "End Task"

APK: "Yes, you do... and, I am seeming to be arguing with an English teacher rather than a computer scientist here... not worth it, you don't get fundamental concepts & comparisons!" Pardon? Not only are you utterly wrong but I can't even begin to fathom how you've managed to make such a stupid assumption given that I have not deigned to talk about my profession or my qualifications anywhere in this thread! FYI, yes I do get "fundamental concepts & comparisons" with regard to this topic. Unfortunately you *don't* seem to have an understanding of what constitutes a reasonable assumption. Naturally this makes your argument look rather silly, which I would not have thought was in your best interests. Your choice I suppose. APK: "The topic of this article is about Memory Optimization programs being harmful right? I show otherwise & give an example of where a program of this type helps performance" You have not shown otherwise as your evidence is flawed to the point where it cannot be reliably accepted. You have repeatedly failed to present a *reproducible* experiment that proves your assertions. Your argument has been roundly and repeatedly discredited as bunk. APK: "My showing this & correcting Mark about it (Which he patched for & thanked me on) shows his knowledge about Virtual Memory performance was indeed, faulty & lacking." No it doesn't. I'm not going to waste my time explaining why it doesn't yet again. Either you're not capable of understanding why it doesn't, or you know it doesn't and are simply repeating your knowingly flawed argument endlessly in order to "win" the discussion. Frankly I don't really care which it is - the assertion is still retarded either way. APK: "Trying to discredit me with useless information like that URL of their of edited posts of mine" Edited posts? So you're claiming that you never said those things? How very convenient. Personally I find it much more likely that you're simply lying, given their standing on the Internet vs. yours. Your conduct in this thread only backs that up further as it seems you'll stoop to practically any level to avoid having to admit fault, doesn't it? APK: "Anyhow, we don't need an English teacher here" Phew! Lucky I'm not one of those then, isn't it?! APK: "we need computer scientists!" You have no idea how right you are! APK: "try some technicals, ok?? Apparently, you cannot & it is beyond you." Apparently you seem to have lost the ability to comprehend the written word. Read above. APK: "It also seems that most everyone here agreed about pagefile.sys movement as well! That is, except yourself Veritas!" On the contrary, I did as well (again: reading comprehension is a wonderful thing)! *Nobody* denies that the hardcoding was a mistake. *Only you* think that the mistake indicates lack of knowledge. Guess who's making the grade-school error in assumption here? Now excuse me while I go make myself some dinner and wait for you to substantiate your claims with reproducible data. What was that I said above about how I bet you'll never do that? Seems I get more right with every post, don't I?! Tick tock tick tock...

APK, this is for you: AHAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAHAHAHA, and HA! On the one hand, I thank you for the entertainment. On the other, I shall now cease to encourage you by responding to your utterly ridiculous drivel. P.S. There is no P.S. Insert predictable APK drivel here ____________

Oh no! Not APK again! Doesn't this guy ever learn? He writes very, very simple programs, writes about them as if they're rocket science, and then blusters repetitively when he's caught out. He's a menace! Please, people, do yourselves a favour and ignore him - I witness the sad debacle on ArsTechnica, where he proved himself time and time again to be rude and offensive to other members using the same misunderstanding tactics and bad English. EVERYONE on that very large forum witnessed this uncivility and sad self-humiliation. Forum Admins - please Ban Him Now before he becomes like a cancer and spreads around every thread... Peace.

qwertyz - "On the other, I shall now cease to encourage you by responding to your utterly ridiculous drivel" >>Responding to what you see as drivel with what everyone else sees as drivel will make you no friends... Sure, & what was that you just posted? >>Good God man, you're making personal attacks! Useful information?? Not whatsoever. You're only making yourselves look bad. >>And again. ANYHOW: Some questions for yourself, Veritas, WeaselSpleen, & The More you Know (arstechnica all, no doubt because I post a thread from your forums below indicating you are doing this following me around again trying to bother me! Too bad, seems you've nothing better to do & too much time on your hands apparently.) >>...and again... QUESTIONS - 1.) Do others besides myself offer examples that show where Memory Optimization programs as they are called by Mark help to improve their system performance? (YES) >>Yes, but that doesn't make them right, only examples to back up an argument. 2.) Does Dr. Russinovich's PageDefrag 2.20 & below affect the same area as Memory Optimization programs in pagefile.sys (a crucial virtual memory component)? (YES) >>So what? That's irrelevant! 3.) Does my pointing out he made a mistake in PageDefrag 2.20 & below that existed for many versions & for years & correcting him on its hardcoded C:\PAGEFILE.SYS location indicate that he may not be as strong in this area as this article appears since it shows he was not aware of pagefile movement to other disks other than C:\ drive root improve the performance of virtual memory since no disk head movements are in contention between paging operations and OS + Programs file I/O & it gave me grounds to question his VERY 'absolute' assertions here in this article? (YES) NO - and not all the assertions are "absolute", if you spend the time to read it... 4.) Does my pointing out that Microsoft put out a similar tool in clearmem.exe (a character mode resourcekit tool for the same basic purpose as today's Graphical Memory Optimization tools) seem relevant here? (YES, & mainly because if this type of tool was utterly useless, why would MS put one out @ all? It's not part of the kernel, but was put out as a tool by Microsoft themselves.) Yes, but you're omitting saying what it's useful for, and why it hasn't been developed further into a bells and whistles tool with GUI to stamp out the competition, as is Microsoft's usual practice with software that is genuinely useful. You arstech folks are only showing once again, as you have @ other forums online like NTCompatible.com, that you DO INDEED, keep following me around online years after I left your forums trying to bother myself. >> You go back to your attacking stance again... All you're doing is making yourselves look bad, point-blank. Veritas mentioned your 'standing' online, & if this type of behaviour is indicative of it? Well... keep it up! (It's YOUR rep, not mine): >>...and again... Above all - It's pretty obvious that you fellows are from Arstechnica, especially since "The More You Know" is a member there & the post below evidences it yet again. You guys have already had your posts removed here once & yet you all came in again disrespecting the forums manager here (who have already removed many of your postings of useless b.s. that is off this topic & not related)! >>...and again (isn't that a Status Quo record?) If this type of reply is the best you can do?? Well, then you're wasting your time & others' time here as well! >>...Repetition NOW, I am aware it's you guys from arstechnica! >> Is your record scratched? This post from your forums right @ its very beginning, shows you are here doing this type of thing to me again or trying to (one of your own members informed me of it in fact via private message @ another forum): http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 >>Have you read these at all? Can't you see how angry you made other people with your ridiculous spamming? Can't you take a HINT? They only turned on you because you attacked them, just like you're doing here. Take a chill pill! Don't you arstechnica guys value your "esteened" standing online? >>Stop attacking "them". (Not that it ever was imo, because if you lookup "Peter Bright" in groups on Google. He is PeterB, one of your forums mods in fact. You look that up, & you can see he has harassed others online & is being threatened by a lawsuit for libel in fact. >>Your name is mud so you drag others through it? He's one of your forum leaders no less. Good leaders lead by example, & that's SOME example! >>Pot, Kettle... Apparently, you folks (not all of you but many) there are troublemakers & do not care. This thread only evidences more of it in addition to the one I put up from your UBB forums board @ arstechnica. (Please, try to keep it on topic @ least like one of your fellow board forum members in zen69x did... I don't bother you guys & have not posted on your forums in years to avoid conflict. Only thing I can think of? Is that you're still stinging from the beating you took from me years ago, & you need to let it go folks... move on, ok?) >>Er, read the threads again, dude - I think it is you who are stinging from the massive beating you got - didn't they find out where you lived? I think we can find that address again... APK P.S.=> Sorry folks, I am trying to keep this on topic, waiting for Dr. Russinovich to reply since I wrote him weeks ago on this & he has not replied to date to myself + others that posted valid examples of where Memory Optimization programs have been shown to improve performance. >>I wonder why...? These arstech guys? Well, you see what you see is all I can say... it's just how they (some of them, not all) are is all, nothing more! apk >>What, you mean fed up with you touting the same old rubbish and posting the same deranged, almost intelligible nonsense? >>Wake up and smell the coffee!!

Look, you braindead tosser, I don't write software anymore - I test and break other people's. I find the bugs in the code - it is what I am good at. That is what qualifies me to recognise good code from bad - and trust me, yours is well, not really bad, just re-used lumps of code that are jammed together to create programs of questionable value. I am NOT from ArsTechnica, I just pop in there every now and again, like I do with other forums. I don't know how you think you've "shot me down", but then again, your thinking seems shall we say, a little flawed in general. I won't provide examples, because a) you never seem to understand them (see posts from others above), b) if you do reply to a comment it's to distort what has been said in a vain attempt to turn things to your advantage and c) There is no point even talking to you. I won't bother posting again, so save your fingers typing a reply. Just think for a moment and ask yourself why you think people attack you and tell you to f-off. No - REALLY think about it this time, instead of coming back with some cheap comment, full of gloating how you "shot down" someone - and just consider the possibility that you could be wrong on one or two counts. Or perhaps you're too braindead to even concieve that possibility, as your other posts suggest. Cert Out.

Oh, PS to above. In answer to your questions, from about 1980 - 1992 I used to write code, but decided one day it was more fun to break other peoples. Why did the guys from ArsTechnica post here? Probably because they noticed you talking bollocks again and decided to see if you would listen to reason this time around. Clearly not. I feel no need to post a technical argument to you, as you have pretty much ignored or shown that you have not understood the sound technical arguments put to you by those ArsTech guys - who strike me as being very intelligent, BTW. How dare you compare yourself to Mark Russinovich. Your programs are in a different league - the fourth division primary school league. Really out this time.

Just to settle 2 points; 1) No - I don't write Shareware or Freeware, I assist in the development of software that people around the world pay big bucks for. My company only looks at $10m deals or above - so don't make me laugh with your $25 rubbish! 2) You say that hard coded lines are a mark of bad programming? Well look to your own code - I can and will provide links to remind you and the world how you hard-code paths, replace system files and install everything to All Users with system priveliges! I guess that means I'm a MUCH better coder than you, because I spot the errors in your code - right? Trust me - you do NOT look good.

Heh! You are so predictable, I just can't resist... I must... No, I can't! You say your 2-year old niece does your testing? That explains a lot! If you think that Quality Assurance is just checking boxes, then you obviously don't know anything about it! Who sits down with Product Management and Development to agree on the products that can/can't be produced in the timeframe? Who discusses product design from UI downwards with Development? Who conducts usability studies with users and differentiates wish list items from must-have features? Who reads through and finalises the Design Specifications from DLL and API level upwards? Who examines and verifies the Functional Specifcations? Who creates the so-called "checklists" from the Functional Specifications closely with Development, agreeing on what can be tested in a given timeframe? Who tests the product, interpreting the "checklists" into what has been written together with all change requests and other unforeseen circumstances in the software? Who goes back and examines the code in faulty areas to find the bugs in it? Not the developers, that's for sure. *All* a developer's job is is to write code. QA have to understand not only the newly written code, but also the mindset of the different groups of users that will actually use the software. So don't tell me your 2 year old niece could do it - although that would explain your abysmal Mickey Mouse programs! Oh, and Mark's programs aren't "Dime a dozen" like yours - they are all really useful multi-computer low level tools, unlike your useless (as Mark says) single computer toys cobbled together from old bits of code - I mean, you've still got 2002 all over them! Who would use such antiquated programs. And where is your evidence that you've ever done anything good? All I see is hot air and drivel! There is nothing you've said here that constitutes evidence of anything except that you're a prize idiot! So long, kid!

I have found that putting your OS and pagefile on a fat16 and setting the pagefile at 1 1/2 times the amount of physical ram you have and setting the min and max to the same size keeps the pagefile fully defragmented. I have had clients that NT4 would BSOD the pagefile was so badly fragmented. They were amazed at how much faster thier pc responded and how many apps they could run. Keeping the pagefile size the same at all times also speeds up boot time and makes initial loading of apps much quicker. I have 256MB on my unit at home and use a 400 mb pagefile and I intentionally try to make it crash but can only slow it down by loading about 30 major apps and perhaps 15 or so smaller ones. Fat 16 is also good for quick recovery of your os.

APK, you make me ROTFLMAO. kloyless, I've done the same thing with pagefile settings, although not on a FAT16 partition. Putting it at 1.5 times the size of physical ram does very well on NT. A properly configured, tuned and maintained system does not need memory scramblers, uh, I mean optimizers.

The fact that many years ago I once drove into the back of another car does not say anything about whether or not I'm a good driver and even less about my knowledge of the engine of the car. I made a mistake but no harm was done other than my ego and front bumper were dented. Let's suppose I didn't have the bumper fixed or replaced. I knew at the back of my mind that it should be done but other things were more important and it didn't seem to bother anyone else. Until someone pointed out that in case I ever drove into another car it might not work as expected. In fact, I should get the biggest fender available in case I drove into an 18 wheeler. All this becomes even less important when discussing the finer details of the inner workings of the fuel injection system and the merits of claims that fuel additives can improve upon the efficiency of the original design which certainly has evolved through the years. To suggest that the tale of an apparently competent mechanic - transporting blocks of granite in his SUV and the implied results of pouring some stuff in the fuel tank - does not lend credit to the effectiveness of the fuel additive he used on the output of his V8 engine. First of all there are too many unknown factors in the equation and secondly the said improvement in power has to be quantified in other ways than effectively stating that "it was no longer crawling". It would in fact be easy to carry out such an experiment in a controlled environment, using different generations of fuel injection systems on the same engine, using the same fuel and additives. Measuring the output and the efficiency of the engine would also be simple. I guess the motivation of the manufacturers of those fuel additives to carry out such experiments could to a degree be governed by the expected results. The absence of such scientifically measured results does not indicate the uselessness of such fuel additives. Neither does the tale of the apparently competent mechanic - transporting blocks of granite in his SUV and the implied results of pouring some stuff in the fuel tank lend credit to the effectiveness of the fuel additive he used on the output of his V8 engine - prove the usefulness of such fuel additives. No matter how often we hear this tale about the apparently competent mechanic transporting blocks of granite in his SUV. Ignoring the question why he used his SUV to transport blocks of granite in the first place, when for all we know, his SUV may have been stacked full of office supplies that fell off the back of a lorry. To even hint that someone who years ago drove into the back of another car and didn't bother to have the fender fixed clearly has no understanding of the inner workings of the fuel injection system is clearly daft, to say the least. No matter how often we hear about the fender bender and the fender eventually being fixed as per suggestion of someone who once had a pint in the same pub the apparently competent mechanic once drove past on his way to show someone how to transport blocks of granite in a SUV possibly stacked full of office supplies that may have fallen off the back of a lorry for all we know. This actually reminds me of this cleaning lady at a local hotel who did not speak a word in any language other than her native tongue. She none the less frequently gave guests lengthy, philosophical monologues about the effect the current weather might have on the harvest of hay in the autumn. This was all in her native tongue which the tourists didn't understand and all they asked was how to get to the pub! When it became obvious that the tourists did not appreciate her speech about the harvest of hay she would start all over again, this time more slowly, as she was certain that by simply repeating the same speech slowly, over and over again they would eventually grasp the importance of what she was saying. They never did and they could not have cared less. If anyone bothers to reply to this post, repeating the tale of the apparently competent mechanic transporting blocks of granite in his SUV or claiming that not fixing the fender proves a lack of understanding of the inner workings of a fuel injection system, I reserve the right to respond in my native tongue. Respectfully, TJ

Really, reading all of this has proved to be the most histerical laughter filled experience I would have ever expected from a technical paper. Why everyone keeps glorifying this "APK" person with continuous replies humoring his obvious craving for attention, is beyond me. (Prediction: APK will quote the above sentence and state that if understanding X is beyond me, then "tying my own shoe laces must be really hard") It is obviously clear to anyone reading this that has more than two working neurons, that APK is simply on some personal quest for glory, character assassination, and flat out trolling. Continued demagogy deconstructed over and over again by Weasel, Veritas et al, complete (and obviously intentional) ignoring for logical deconstruction of his so-called "facts", the list goes on... Really, there is no need nor acheivable purpose in further ridiculing and exposing this person's demagogy. He has done an excellent job of ridiculing himself already with his obvious "I watch Crossfire" pseudo-debate tactics, which Weasel has already done a fine job of exposing some 30 posts ago. To quickly summarize, for the benefit of casual visitors (not even going to pretend to be understood by APK as it is obvious he chooses to ignore any logic or is simply unable to follow it): Let's assume, for argument's sake, that the allegation that some _free_ software released a decade ago used a hardcoded path to access the pagefile is true. It is OBVIOUS to anyone with a working pair of neurons that this was the product of convenience rather than lack of knowledge. It is also OBVIOUS that just because he used a hardcoded path to the pagefile, that doesn't mean the man doesn't know about the benefits of placing the pagefile in another disk. It just means that the man was doing a small utility, for _free_, was probably busy doing other things (or just had to go eat, for fsck's sake), and figured "who cares?". And who cares indeed? So he only catered for a subset of the universe with his program. BIG DEAL. It does not signify lack of knowledge, it signifies he had other things to do. He equally did not cater for Linux users with that particular program. Does allow us to logically conclude he has no knowledge of Linux? Or does it simply mean that it is a specific tool, with a specific purpose, available at no cost, and which happened (years ago) to be restricted, for a matter of convenience, to pagefiles located in the C:\ drive? Really, any programmer will tell you, when you're in the development stage of a product, what matters is the core functionality. Side features such as a nicer looking GUI, nice little registry based autodetection, etc comes afterwards. In fact this is true of any project, software related or not. You have to prioritize things; secondary features are... well, secondary. To not understand that the man just wanted to get the thing working cleanly and worry about aditional matters later is simply limited. To use that to somehow try to make him pass for incompetent or unknowledgeable in something which isn't even related is pure bad intent. And yes, APK, I know you're going to come here and, for the umpteenth time, state the benefits of using the pagefile on a separate disk. And the funnest thing is I never even said anything to the contrary, but you will still repeat it. Again, speaking for the rest of the population, as APK is clearly either on a personal quest or just doesn't understand what others say: the fact that Mark Russinovich did not cater for every specific system configuration available in the early versions of his free utility does not mean that he does not understand memory management. Really, even a child would understand this, one can only wonder how a supposed programmer not only fails to understand things such as development priorities but even goes as far as to ignorantly relate accessing the registry to memory management. That's right, APK: EVEN IF your claim was true, something which obviously has the same probability of being so than pigs flying, it would STILL not mean the man is ignorant of memory management. If anything, it would mean the man is ignorant of accessing the registry to find out the location of the pagefile. So even if your ridiculous unsubstantiated assumption was true, it would still have no bearing to this case, and would still not support any of what you've said. Now, as for the supposed case where APK's program helped some "super duper intelligent ABCDEFGH qualified expert power user extreme" guy... APK, the mere fact that you base your claims on this unverified, incomplete anecdote, goes a long way toward casting a very bad image of your professional competence. As others have repeatedly stated here, and you have either chosen to ignore, or were unable to understand: one single isntance of a poorly documented, uncontrolled, experience is hardly relevant to prove anything. That episode basically amounts to you standing on a city street, holding a rock, and saying "this rock keeps tigers away." "How so?" others ask? To which APK replies "well, you don't see any tigers around, do you?". It is a travesty of a fallacy implying a casual relationship where none exists. As stated before by several people, there is no complete information on the conditions of the experiment, there is no way of repeating the experiment, there is no accurate definition of the subjective descriptions used in the computer's status (sorry, "crawling" and "no longer crawling" don't cut it). Hey, right the other day, I was using my computer and it crashed. I looked out the window and a bus was going by. OH MY GOD! Hear ye, hear ye, discovery of the century: renowed computer expert, certified with over 500 different documents, noticed that his computer crashed while a bus was going by! Read all about it, BUSES CRASH COMPUTERS!!! Please... :roll: Finally, and returning to topic: I agree completely with the original author's appraisal that "memory optimization" software is both useless and a sham. As has been thoroughly specified in the technical description of the thread's author, nothing of what these types of sotwares do is anything that the operating system itself won't do. The "bottom line", as APK likes to call it, is that if a process needs more memory, the OS will free up physical RAM to provide it. Period. All that these programs offer is the ability to do so "on demand". Which is as futile as taking out things from your refrigerator to make room for something which you're not going to put there in the first place. Or, if you are indeed going to put something in RAM, then you won't need any stupid program to do the paging for you, because the OS itself will do it! The only possible conceivable use for this sort of programs is if you somehow want the paging to happen before-hand - i.e. if you have an under-specced system and will be doing something which needs to be close to realtime, and the program that does that particular something isn't very well written in the first place. Even still you would accomplish the exact same thing by simply killing whichever superfluous processes you have that are consuming RAM in the first place. Even better, as the change would be permanent, as opposed to only lasting until any of the other processes became active again, at which time you would have all the paging to be done again. To gamers, church people recording sessions, etc: do not use memory optimizers. Reduce the system load instead, kill active processes (especially those which consume more memory), disable unnecessary services, etc. It will do you no good to free up X MB of physical RAM temporarily before starting a game, only to have that same RAM be swapped out 5 minutes later during the game because one of the processes you paged out became active again. In other words: if you'll be needing free memory, eliminate the things that are occupying it. Temporarily paging them out is useless, as they will only page back in when they become active again. And if they don't become active again (i.e. idle services, etc) then it's useless as well, as their working set would have been paged out anyway when the game asked for memory. And _even_ if you somehow had some weird undocumented need to page memory out on demand only to release it again: just open IE and close it, for fsck's sake. Or whatever more memory intensive program you may have. Run something that takes up memory, then close it, and you will have achieved EXACTLY the same effect those so-called "memory optimizers" achieve, only you did it without having to spend $$ on some sham bloatware program.

Oh and by the way, the supposed "certifiably super intelligent guy", super duper power user computer expert because he has a bunch of certificates... Please. If there's somewhere I've seen more incompetents, overbloated egos, and outright idiots, it's with certificate holding pseudo-gurus. As someone said here before, having a certificate only proves the ability to obtain a certificate. Of course, APK will use this addendum to my post as a an opportunity to focus on this and completely ignore everything I said above, but oh well who cares, what I wrote was aimed at people with an actual intellect anyway.

Sigh... As expected, APK's reply was nothing more than a tired repetition of what he has already said before, and which has already been deemd logically invalid in countless opportunities. APK: "BUT, by the same token blerg... doesn't that invalidate Dr. Russinovich's Phd, & also my dual degrees in this field?" Your point being? As I said, credentials prove nothing but the ability to obtain credentials. The validity or lack thereof of your own credentials is of no consequence to the discussion, the original point was that just because that guy had some MSCE ABC DEF GHI++ cert doesn't say anything to his technical competence. In fact, it says more to his incompetence, as he had such a porrly running computer in the first place (good job for someone with so many supposed certifications). Again, if there's anywhere I've seen more incompetence, arrogance and pseudo-gurus that know nothing, that is with 50-certificate waving ignorants. APK: "That error of hardcode in his work? Well, it relates to this because it too deals in virtual memory as do Memory Optimizers programs as he calls them. " So, by your logic, if the man forgot to type a semi-colon (;) in a memory management program (causing it not even to compile most likely), that would mean he does not know how memory management works. Because, as everyone knows, if you make a "mistake" on a program that deals with memory management, that automatically means you do now know what memory management is. That is what you say, yes? APK: "I point out that if Dr. Russinovich is going to put out a program that deals in virtual memory management like pagedefrag.exe, he should have understanding that its pagefile.sys is NOT locked down to C:\ drive root only." Again, you choose to ignore what I and others said concerning this. Just where do you see the connection between the man not bothering to implement a certain feature (such as catering for customly placed pagefiles) and him somehow not know that it is possible or desirable? He was developing a free tool, probably simultaneously with other projects. He did the core work, he got it to function as expected. Catering for pagefiles on other drives (more specifically, accessing the registry in order to find out where the user may have thought of placing his pagefile) was obviously deemed to be secondary by him (as he did not implement it in the early versions). Now tell me, how does this mean he did not know people could place the pagefile on another disk? Or that it might be good for them to do so? All it means is that he considered it more important to get the thing working and worry about catering for all possible system configurations afterwards. Again, just because a given *FREE* tool does not cater for every possible user on the universe, it does not mean that the author does not know what is possible or what can be done. It just means he did not cater for it in the initial versions of the FREE tool, which noone forced you to use anyway. Prediction: APK will reply to what I said above with yet another repetition of what he's said before, possibly something like "He made a MISTAKE because HE HARDCODED a path in a program that deals with memory management, that means he DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT MEMORY MANAGEMENT". And I will laugh as I read that reply, because he will be proving my point yet again. APK: "Nope, I know he knows how to access the registry... all of his work shows this." You just made my point yet again. I was not saying that he didn't know how to use the registry; I was saying that if his so-called "error" meant he didn't know something, it could only mean he didn't know how to use the registry. Weasel is indeed right, you do like that straw man :lol:. In case you actually missed the whole point instead of choosing to ignore it, I will repeat it, in slow motion this time - read carefully: For whatever reason, the man chose not to bother implementing registry auto-detection of the location of the pagefile. This was in a free tool, in a FREE tool (read it twice), which noone forced you to use. Sure, he could have made it cater for users who have their pagefile on another disk. He could have also catered for users who are sight impaired, by making his program read all the instructions out loud. He could have also made his program work through voice recognition, thus saving you the trouble of moving the mouse. He could have also made his program put butter on your toasts, if you have your computer connected to a properly set up robotic arm. He could have also made his program tell you when the next Solar eclipse will happen. He chose not to do any of those things. Does that mean he does not know there are blind people, or what a Solar eclipse is, or how to put butter on a toast? Well, in your mind, I'm sure it does. APK: "Ok then, YOU explain why Memory Optimization programs helped the users they did above on NT based Os then!" Impossible, given the lack of information and detailed controlled experiment, plus the inability to reproduce said experiment caused by said lack of information and detail. Also irrelevant, as WHATEVER your program allegedly accomplished (even assuming it helped in any way) would have been accomplished by the guy launching ANY program which consumes a lot of memory then closing it again. The exact same effect, with necessarily the exact same consequences, as that is exactly what so-called "memory optimizers" do. Again, we reach the same conclusion: "memory optimizers" are worthless and useless, they do nothing that the kernel itself doesn't already do, and they accomplish nothing that isn't already accomplished just by launching whatever program you're going to use. By the way, speaking of the windows kernel which you so repeatedly complain about being imperfect: would you really have us believe that your program does not rely on the Windows Kernel to perform whatever sham it performs? Because unless you're patching the Windows Memory Manager in memory, sorry to break it to you, but your program is relying on the very Memory Manager that you so much complain about. Which again further supports the fact that whatever your program does is already supported by Windows, and is in fact already done whenever any given process needs memory. Instead of pursuing your obviously populistic claims of "who cares about theory, see see see this guy is leet and he needed my program see see I'm good", I would suggest you yourself brush up on Memory Manager functioning, and try to gain an understanding of what your program is doing. And why it (momentarily) makes free memory. And why ANY OTHER PROGRAM that requires memory will always cause the same effect. For those who are unaware (which I don't believe includes APK, he's just unwilling to admit it), I suggest you take a read of the original author's article. It very well summarizes the workings of the Windows memory manager, and does a very good job at demonstrating the redundancy of "malloc()/free()" types of programs. For those who are unwilling to read it, the basic concept summarized is here: whenever a process asks for memory, the operating system will go through a range of steps to provide it. These steps include looking to see if there is currently enough physical (on-chip) memory available, and making some available if there is none. This means stealing from other processes' memory (by writing it out to hard disk). Now, this is EXACTLY what this sort of "memory optimization" programs rely on. They DO NOT implement anything new into the kernel (as APK himself admitted, early on in his posts, when he said he did not use a driver in his program). They DO NOT provide anything new that isn't already done by the operating system when ANY program asks for memory. The only thing they do is ask for a huge bunch of memory, then say they don't need it anymore. Again, I predict APK will reply with a bunch of further repetitions the likes of "then WHY does my super intelligent MSCE ABC DEF++ OMG OMG L33T+ user say he was helped by my program once?" To which I will say beforehand, (repeat actually, as I have already said this a few lines above): whatever happened on that idiot's clearly badly configured computer (1 GB in use on a 768 MB RAM computer, while doing nothing other than browsing for p0rn, please... Ask him how many spywares he had) is IRRELEVANT, as whatever APK's program allegedly caused (if anything, there has been no proof of causal relation yet) could have been caused as well by launching ANY memory hungry program and closing it again. As to the rest of APK's points, they are of no consequence and only come to prove that he is on a personal quest of some sort, as he readily admits (APK: "Anything other than Dr. Russinovich replying @ this point? Is moot..."). BTW, APK: "I am sure since most folks here know I wrote him about this months ago now, they are wondering where he is for reply?", here's a hint: "most folks here" are laughing at you for your obvious attempts at doing nothing but slinging mud in Mark's direction, and your repeteated "I emailed him, where is he?" comments are only making you look worse. Little other hint: Mark has probably killfiled you years ago, as anyone other than a Saint would have done by now. Have fun waiting for him to glorify your insults by answering them.

Sigh... APK, you seem to be under the misguided impression that I am interested in wasting my time arguing in some mud sling fest with someone who's on an obvious personal quest of some sort. Firstly, to reply to your most infantile arguments: it was YOU who brought up (repeatedly, like 80 times throughout the thread) the fact the the guy was an ABCD EFG HJI cert super duper user. I merely told you that proves nothing, and you're only impressing your own ego with your blatant repetition techniques. No one cares how many certs the guy had, deal with it. As for your fixation with arstech, I can care less as I've neither visited that site nor know anyone from there. So hate them all you want if it makes your day. As for my own credentials... Please. :roll: I won't even glorify your mentecapt innuendo - I have no need to prove myself to you. Really, judging by your lack of understanding of how your own program causes any difference on a computer, it would seem there would be little need to even prove anything :lol:. I'm not in the habbit of beating up on ignorants. By the way, about the blerg username, little hint: bugmenot.com. The technical reasons why your software is useless have already been explained, for the benefit of any casual visitors. Whether you are able to understand them or not is of little consequence. Really, it's sad when the guy who made this "memory optimizer" doesn't understand that whatever his program may have done to help anyone (if we are to believe that alleged experience by that alleged person whose mere relation to you has yet to be verified), *whatever* your program did to help the guy would have happened in *exactly* the same way had he opened any memory hungry program and closed it again. That you can't (or pretend not to) understand that, that your program is, by it's very definition, useless, as ANY advantageous side effects it might have, anyone could obtain those SAME advantageous side effects just by running ANY memory hungry program and closing it again. Sorry, your program is useless. Deal with it. Oh and BTW, your point that your program is also free is moot, as the original article was addressing ALL memory optimizers. In case you're unaware, there are several commercial ones out there, all equally useless as the SAME effect. Yes, the SAME effect, whatever magically helped the super duper genious that had his computer so infected with crap that it was taking 1gig out of 768 ram on idle, whatever effect your program or any commercial memory optimizer might have had on it would be accomplished by just running ANY memory hungry program then closing it right away. Really, the fact that you can't understand how your program does exactly the same that any other program, game or application would do just by running and closing is sad enough. But the fact that you somehow believe that ANYTHING your program does, it's not actually Windows that's doing it for you... Sorry to break it to you, but unless you wrote some ring 0 solutions, guess what your little program is using to do it's thing? The Windows Kernel! The exact same thing, the exact same functions, as any other program who allocates memory then deallocates it. Really, your constant references to how buggy the Windows Memory Manager is only top the patheticness in your whole argument, by further proving that you have no clue (or pretend not to, which is worse) of how your program works. Yeah, I'm sure you'd like us all to believe your not doing this out of a personal vendetta. That your not just pissed that Mark exposed your useless program and all like it for what it is (exposed being a too strong word, really, as anyone with any understanding of modern OSes will laugh at the idea). Hey, snake oil sells, no need to be sad, really... Quite frankly, either you're some Marketing guy with the little pointy hairs [1] trying to pass as a programmer, or you are simply pretending for some reason to be as obtuse a rock. You claim you're not on a personal quest, so that says alot as to which of the two is more likely. In either event, it is of little importance. As I said in my first post, glorifying your trolling attempts by replying to them will lead to nowhere. :lol: The funniest part is your actual belief that passè debate tactics of the 70's will impress anyone. "He made an error in a program which was related to blah, so he knows nothing about blah." Uh huh, so if he made a spelling error in an article about bleh, that would mean he knew nothing about bleh, according to you, right? Even if it _was_ an error to begin with, lol. But well, you've repeated it about 5,000 times already, so it must have become true. Nice try... :roll: Get over it dude, topic's lost any sort of interest ages ago, you lost any credibility like 150 posts ago. By your own actions, I might add. Again, have fun waiting for anyone of any worth taking you serious :rofl:. And hey, knock yourself out replying with further repetitions (funny how he's made my prediction kung fu look good by fulfilling each and every one of the "Prediction:"'s I stated prior to his posts). Go for it, only one thing though: you'll be writing to /dev/null as far as I'm concerned. Don't expect me to spend any more time in this little spectale of yours, the correct information was given for any concerned visitors, you're either a troll or a rock, and I'm not about to spend my valuable time trying to talk sense to either of the two. And I don't know Mark from anywhere, but I have a strong feeling unless he enjoys stepping on trolls you're going to be waiting for a long time for him to come and answer your insults. Bye now, thanks for the laughs. [1]: Scott Addams' Dilbert cartoon

1. APK, you are a bragging idiot, your mother should have told you that. 2. Even a 9 year old can get MCP certification and that says a lot about the knowledge and intelligence level involved. 3. Memory optimizers are not usefull, if you paid for one you have been cheated. Next time you find out that the application you use is crap, change the application instead of paying for yet another crappy application which should "fix" it. 5. While memory optimizers may not be usefull their existence is a clear sign that Windows NT/2K/XP/2003 memory management leaves a lot to be desired. Let's face it -- Windows memory management and caching is so bad that it should be rewritten from scratch. One proof of that ultimate badness is the possibility to speed-up system by using SuperCache to cache pagefile! 6. Someone on this thread said that no OS has that part perfect. That is true. But, some have it much better than the others. Read what Anandtech wrote about Mac OS X here [http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232]. 7. What Mark did in his article was to advise all of us not to waste money on useless applications but to learn how the system works instead and to cope with the problem on the system level. You are free not to accept his advice. In the end, it is your money that gets wasted. 8.Driver development without tools such as Compuware Driver Studio is HARD. Anyone claiming the opposite should prove his or her involvement in the field by providing us with the working driver source code. 9. Having SoftIce is the proof of piracy in exactly the same way as having some CD burning program installed. However, NOT HAVING SoftIce is the proof that you never did any serious driver development. 10. There are 10 groups of people, those who work and make errors and those who hunt their errors and criticize. Personally, I prefer to be in the first group. And if you are now laughing at me because you believe that I don't know how to count then you don't understand binary system.

I will answer you just because I feel sorry for you. Bragging == repeateadly stating (or asking) something until it gets bleached out or until everyone turns blue in the face. Bragging != proving anything with facts. You can prove things with some facts but not just by repeating your line 1,000,000 times. Those allegations that Mark doesn't know his stuff are plain stupid and everyone is going to laugh at you (in fact, everyone is doing it already -- guess what, you have just made a fool out of yourself). If you ask someone to answer your questions why do you offer an answer yourself? If my opinion is different it won't change because you write YES after the question. Suggesting the right answer is not the polite way to ask questions. There are people who will say that "this and that hair growth lotion helped me, you should try it" but that should not be taken as the evidence. There is also a psychological factor of a typical buyer -- they are seeing the "benefits" just because they want to -- in other words, they have weak personalities and can't accept and/or face their own mistakes. Do not mix Superspeed and Supercache with those programs that Mark mentions here. Superspeed and Supercache both have RAM disk driver and are actually doing some pretty damn good caching. I would pay for such a program but not for Memboost or Ramturbo or (insert your favorite here). But then again, I have different needs and they can be satisfied with Superspeed while it may not help someone who wants to play games. What I am certain of - ram optimizers won't help them either. I have took MCSE test from CD just for fun without any preparation and I got 78%. It is rediculously easy. I could pass the exam anytime. But I am not stupid to get into that and then to have to pay Microsoft for recertifications later and thus feed their cashcow. QUOTE: "WHERE THESE PROGRAMS HELPED THEM!" I will put it simple for you -- if you have malaria taking an aspirin may help you in short-term but does it cure your disease? NO. Grow up please. Tsk, tsk, tsk... if you ever bothered to try Compuware Driver Studio you would know that it doesn't work without DDK and you would not ask such a stupid question. OF COURSE that I have looked at the DDK. Microsoft code samples are almost useless. Not to mention that certain things are so poorly documented (I will take UPS minidrivers as an example but it goes for almost everything else). On the other side Compuware Driver Studio has C++ library (built from source code thet you also get in the package), has great documentation and relieves you of writing that BORING 90% of driver code that serves as glue to operating system kernel and lets you concentrate on real work -- managing the hardware itself. SoftIce? Not needed in driver development? You are off this planet really. Do you mean you NEVER MAKE MISTAKES? You never had to DEBUG something? Go bark upon a tree, you are not a developer, at least not a good one. Good developer uses debugging, code coverage and profiling tools. If you don't use them you have your self-esteem set to high or you are complete moron that likes doing everything by hand and still lives in 2000 as far as software development is concerned. There are much easier ways to "steal other's code" than using SoftIce. Educate yourself, visit www.datarescue.com. And NO, SoftIce IS NOT ONLY hackers toolkit -- IT IS THE BEST SYSTEM, DRIVER AND APPLICATION LEVEL DEBUGGER EVER. ACCEPT THAT. If you want to test how much memory optimizer is useful try this -- open photoshop and create 100x100cm truecolor document at 300 dpi. Warning: it will take 399 MB or RAM to do that so I do not advise you to do that if you do not have at least 1 GB of RAM installed like I do. Next add some noise -- 5% of uniform will do. Now for the funniest part -- run Gaussian blur with say 9 pixels radius. What? Your computer does not respond? Windows is swapping? Photoshop seems to do something but it doesn't? Try memory optimizer but I doubt it will help you. And now to answer your questions: 1. yes they do BUT that is not enough of a proof that memory optimizers are useful. They haven't backed their claims with performance measurements PERIOD. 2. NO, if I remember correctly, pagedefrag defragments page file on disk using internal API that works only for NTFS partitions making it contiguous. It does not do anything even remotely similar to those fraudware applications. It was even useful in days of Windows NT. Now PerfectDisk can do that and a lot more. 3. NO you didn't managed to prove anything by correcting a hardcoded path in someones program. You will either accept that and stop bragging or you may as well die trying but believe me you have better chances to die than to prove something or convice anyone that HE is less knowledgeable than YOU in ANYTHING. 4. NO. Regular Joe SixPack user does not use (or even does not know about) resource kit. Btw, those tools are UNSUPPORTED and Microsoft DOES NOT CLAIM that their clearmem.exe is good or that it does wonders like you do for those memory optimizers. Clearmem.exe is only an additional proof that nobody should pay for memory optimizers because resource kit can be found on windows CD.

Oh yes, you said: "Memory Optimization programs operate also on the same file to improve performance when needed." THEY DO NOT. YOU ARE WRONG AND YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T KNOW. CRAWL BACK UNDER YOUR ROCK.

APK, this comment is to let you know about the results of playing around with your tool and a few other memory optimizers. I was expecting some noticeable effects on the startup time of memory hungry applications but I've observed none. I can't explain why the extra RAM available at application startup time doesn't make a noticeable difference. Fact is I don't see any benefits on my systems. So my conclusion is that memory optimizers are of very limited value if at all. I don't understand why you have invested so much time with your contributions to this thread. It's certainly better to spend your time with something really useful. I've never seen a discussion like this one here before. It's been weird to say the least. Heinz Wehner

God, I wish I'd never used this guys software - he's a complete joke. Let me just say that I didn't know anything about anything when I sent that email to him - and now I wish I hadn't. STOP USING ME AS YOUR ONLY EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS "HELPED" BY YOUR POS SOFTWARE!! I now realise what utter rubbish it is - I tried the mspaint trick, and it does the same thing. I feel like I've been had, and now I feel like I'm being used. APK; I wrote you in good faith, you jerk, now quit citing me as your ONLY example of someone that likes your software, because I DON'T anymore.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! Funniest thing I've seen in years!!! Who is this APK Bozo anyways?

Hey guys just a word from the wise, as I've read this thread from the beginning and need to say something to get you guys to move on. Let's look at it from the end users perspective They don't understand the details, they don't want to understand, they all think we are a bunch of overpaid geek's, they don't even care what the OS is. THEY JUST WANT THE PROBLEMS FIXED. Having installed, repaired, upgraded DOS, OS/2, Windows, Mac OS, blah..blah...blah from their beginnings I too would like to see the OS's fixed. The only difference between what I want and what the end-user wants is I know the problems will never go away on Windows. It is severely FLAWED. There should be no blame placed as all OS's eventually run up against their limitations and hence a new OS is born. Dos to Windows NT....Windows to Linux? Maybe Longhorn, who knows. You guys might have all been really fired up about your long flame but the world doesn't care, The winner is "I don't care",and the bottom line is MOVE ON! End-

Calling me an IDIOT isn't "Name Tossing" then? Can anyone say "Hypocrite"? I am AMAZED that you wonder why you are getting responses such as these when you totally deserve them - if not an outright ban for being such a laughable jerkoff!! BTW, it really wasn't me who posted as Martin Meszaros above... I think he's had second thoughts. Keep going! Your pathetic attempts to prove yourself are just the funniest thing ever - and those Ars Technica links do you NO favours - it's obvious to everyone except you why they descended on you. Oh - and why hasn't Dr Russinovich responded to you? He's probably busting his nuts laughing, and doesn't want an inbox full of your torrential spam. One crappy "Memory Optimisation" tool does not make you a guru - name ONE other thing you have done that has had as much success. *Listens to pin dropping, then waits for diahorretical deluge* Really - you couldn't make this stuff up! Pass the popcorn, someone!

ROTFLMAO!!! APKs "Security and Speed Guide 2003". He assumes NetAdmins = Joe Noddy Clueless User! http://www.avatar.demon.nl/APK.html Oh my aching sides!!!

Anonymous User - "for being such a laughable jerkoff!! " APK - Yes, ok... @ least I can deal with this on a technical level to shoot you & yours down easily enough! Yep - that's the only thing you CAN deal with on a technical level - but which direction are the shots really going...? APK - Sure... & he wants to use MsPaint to open HUGE image files & create them too which takes TIME! Certainly MORE time than using a Memory Optimizer program which can automatically gauge & commit RAM as needed to help in situations like his, & in nanoseconds? It takes but a few seconds to load an image into mspaint - your argument is so lame it needs crutches! No memory optimiser takes "nanoseconds", as any 2 year old could tell you. Run any benchmarking program after using any so-called optimiser and tell me how much of a performance benefit it's made. NADA. Nichts. Zilch. Zippedy Zip. As for your other lamo-warez, I mean, everyone uses 3DfX now, don't they... Just more useless poop. Best stick to clearmem if you MUST use something to get RAM back - and you don't want to waste valuable seconds opening an image file - after all, clearmem is free.

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 I just read that thread @ arstechnica's forums (which I left years ago because of namecalling and putting people down rudely). I have one thing to say to the guys from Arstechnica like Anonymous User, Certif1ed, Veritas, and Blerg: Grow up, and leave this man alone. Thats in your best interests because from this post here he has torn you apart on the technical issues. You just are not in his league in this area and look pretty dumb by this point. I agree with APK on one point and think it would be nice to see Dr. Mark Russinovich reply on APK's example above of where a Memory Optimizer helped a user above out of his jam with XNEWS reader as well as the others above like hacki01 whose example is another good point showing these programs help people in diferent circumstances. Microsoft put out clearmem.exe as was pointed out as well. It all makes me wonder if these programs are just completely useless or if they are good in some circumstanes. It lookslike they can be. The name calls are not needed here arstechnica. Go away.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Some people never learn. APK posting as Anonymous, pretending to be someone else!!! You can tell it's APK, because he's the only one sitcking up for him(self!!!). What a lame ass jerk!! This is the best comedy ever - you couldn't make it up!

PS only APK thinks he's torn anyone apart. Everyone else can see a You're right no-one else is in his league - we all left the sandpit aged 5.

Oh god, not APK. Off ticking other people off now, are we? In case no one knows of this waste of sperm, then look into this site. Be warned, read his first post, or you will feel sorry for him at first but this always is brought upon himself. APK, take a deep breath and relax.

http://www.winnetmag.com/Windows/Articles/ArticleID/41095/pg/2/2.html sorry, forgot the URL ;)

Hey APK - I was unclear on one thing. Has your program ever helped out Mark Meszaros' endless quest to download usenet porn more efficiently?

Usually RAM cleaners do have virus. I dont feel like registering.. this is from my experience.

OK.. So with all these intelligent people discussing this topic why isn't someone doing imperical testing to PROVE the issue one way or the other. Benchmarking? Hey, everyone has opinions but what about raw undeniable facts? This was a good discussion until you guys started taking aim at each other. Who really cares if some stole code, downloads porn or is paranoid or not. None of this answers the question at hand. If this is actually a performance discussion then here is what I do when I build a system for gamers: Dual Processors, if they can afford it ;-) RAM RAM RAM Matched hard drives chained on the same bus. Never chain a HD and a CD on the same bus. The pagefile(s) is always on the secondary HD bus and is of fixed size @ about 40% of physical memory. The OS is multiboot, High powerd games & a regular work environment. The OS install is the extreme least you can get away with for the Games boot. All unused hardware is disabled and whatever services can be turned off or set to manual are done so in the Games boot. The work environment is whatever you want. The more you INSTALL the slower it will boot because of a larger registry read during startup. The more you RUN the slower it will operate. The Gamers boot is lightnig fast with all availiable resources at the games service. My personal testing with optimizers in this configuration have actually degraded performance or had no measurable effect AND often caused problems. While I didn't benchmark this in the work boot, I can say that there have been times when starting and running a ram op has stopped the current active application from chugging along, however short lived. My experiences have mostly been that the ram op itself will freeze and cause it's own set of problems or there will be unexpected problems with some applications when they are active that are not experienced when they are not running at all. I would still like evidence, beyond our opinions (and bickering) that actually settles the issue! My current position it that there is nothing on the market that can beat a computer thats properly configured for the task it will most be used for! An here's one that's curious: Microsoft claims that minimizing an application put into a different (lower) memory usage state. I'd love to see that tested!!! TEK

Dual processors are a waste of time with most games, which are not written to take advantage of SMP - anyway, the latest crop of Intel processors are all hyper-threading, so getting 2 of those is a waste of time and money in a Windows XP system. RAM is not the answer to everything. 1Gb is plenty for anyone ATM - the call for a greater amount is again cost-ineffective for the minimal performance improvements it might return. Your comments about HDDs and CDs on the same bus are moot these days - and since most modern motherboards come with SATA, this is also pretty much yesterday's advice (2 years ago, more like). You put the pagefile on the 2ry HD Bus? Why? You said earlier that the HD and optical drives should be on separate buses - how many do you have? Why multiboot the O/S when you could simply log in as a different user and get a different profile? This suggestion is just silly - unless you only work in Linux. Disabling unused hardware is also only going to squeeze out a few drops of performance - for the inconvenience of disabling hardware that you might actually use, why not just upgrade the processor to something a bit more meaty that can cope? These are all moot gaming "tweaks" that were valid about 3-5 years ago, but with modern hardware and operating systems, pretty much redundant except for the obsessive hobbyist that must get those extra 2 points on 3dMark. Who cares? Most games run fine on modern hardware with little or no tweaking, and, as I said, using different profiles will resolve most resource-affected issues. Modern PCs are multi-purpose and multi-tasking. They don't NEED to be configured for a specific purpose - (except servers), although it is a fun hobby. Get with the 21st Century, Mr TEK! If your machine freezes up running a RAM optimizer, don't run the thing - de-install the useless POS - read Mark's article! They're useless toys that do nothing the O/S doesn't already do for itself. Microsoft's claims are totally valid - when an app is minimised, it uses less physical RAM. This can be easily demonstrated: Open up an application, say, Internet Explorer. Now open up Task Manager. Highlight the Iexplore.exe process, then minimise all IE windows. Watch that RAM figure plummet! I guess that settles the issue once and for all - the Operating System is the only RAM Optimizer you'll ever need. ;0)

This is wonderful satire. It should be printed, bound, and sold. Thanks so much. Y'all made my day.

I see some things above that show where Memory Optimizer programs helped people where their systems were not working right or where their programs were not working right and the memory routines of the operating system did not help them. I think this is something you look at not from a performance boost perspective but from a system tool that gets you around application hangups perspective judging from the replies above and the evidences in them like Mr. Meszaros example and the ones from hacki01 too. And why would Microsoft have built the clearmem tool that does this task since it is such a program too if they are useless. Mr. Russinovich not replying after he was written to do is also making me wonder about this too.

I see some things above that show where Memory Optimizer programs helped people where their systems were not working right or where their programs were not working right and the memory routines of the operating system did not help them. >>Only where APK's wild imagination sees them! Seriously, the minimise app trick works so well that what Mark says is perfectly correct. Memory Optimisers are redundant. I think this is something you look at not from a performance boost perspective but from a system tool that gets you around application hangups perspective judging from the replies above and the evidences in them like Mr. Meszaros example and the ones from hacki01 too. >>But those are OLD examples - Windows XP has come a long way. Application hangs may not be completely a thing of the past, but they sure as heck don't happen so often these days! And why would Microsoft have built the clearmem tool that does this task since it is such a program too if they are useless. Because back in days of yore it might have proved useful occasionally. Notice that it's never been supplied with the operating system - why? Because it's pretty useless to the end user. Mr. Russinovich not replying after he was written to do is also making me wonder about this too. I expect Dr Russinovich has a whole load of paint he needs to watch drying first...

You didn't note the Minimise Windows trick at all - apart from saying it was not true after someone else pointed it out to you! So what if you found one microscopic, inconsequential error in Dr Russinovich's code. It's no big deal, and you've mentioned it so many times now that it's really boring. Let it go - it proves NOTHING. Martin Meszaros has already replied and said that he realises his big mistake. Saying that clearmem is quite useless to the end user (which you seem to agree with...) is NOT the same as saying that the ResKits are useless. That is a very silly deduction to make! Spouting the same tired drivel over and over does not make something more real. As you said - anyone can make a mistake. Your mistake is constantly coming back here and stating stuff that is providing anyone with the technical knowledge necessary to change a plug with a good belly laugh at your naive impression that you are somehow better than Dr Russinovich or other esteemed members of this forum. Give it up and write a program that does something useful if you want to prove yourself so badly.

To the arstechnica idiots that have tried to ruin this thread and have made a favorite website of mine in arstechnica look poorly here: The last anonymous user was another one from that arstechnica link above obviously. It is obvious he was after APK only from reading the url below and totally messed up as well to top things royally off, what a fool. I found it very funny He had the nerve to call APK names and totally blundered ontop of it. No wonder he hasnt posted again even as anonymous coward. Hilarious. The others above did no better in my opinion under anonymous and only zen was civil. He usually is. I think that the last anonymous coward is obviously a brit from his spelling of minimise vs minimize and that gives his origins away for the most part. Probably PeterB who took many a beating from APK technically each time he attempted it on forums all over the internet. Why dont you just go away idiots and let the rest of us discuss this thread in peace since we actually read the material and know what was covered here? You know how bad you make our website look doing this anonymous idiots? (I mean that last set of anonymous idiots that missed the fact APK already covered how minimizing windows releases free memory more. I did not know that did not work on Windows 95 and 98 APK, thank you for that fact) APK doesnt bug you at the arstech website and from what I have seen since I go there is he has not been there in years and yet you came here to bother him as is seen here from your own forums http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 I actually searched APK on our website a year or so ago and saw he had not been to our sites in ages. In fact I recall He tried to be nice to you all and he left when he saw it did not work. Some of you are mentally disturbed I am thinking since you cant drop this issue here apparently. He got the better of you everytime (especially when he said "you put down my work but what have you done" as he did here, and not one of you could say a thing. So you kept it up after your forums onto others as well and nobody appreciated it and you got booted everytime) He shot you all down there years ago and every place you attempted to do so to him like NTCompatible.com and 3dfiles.com as well as majorgeeks saw him just get the better of you away every time as he has here. Arstechnica people who did not act like this are excused (I am one myself, but we have a pack of rats on our site though) but the url above shows what is going on and the anonymous posters are just more idiots from that website. I have seen them in action before and this is typical of them. Please excuse some of my fellow forums members. They dont know when to let it go. Steve

Wow! I last posted to this thread on Aug 29 and happened to find it linked in another forum today, so I thought I'd check it out to see if there had been any resolution. I am in awe. Literally in awe. Not only is the thread still going on but now APK is even INVENTING OTHER POSTERS (*cough* "Steve" *cough*) to back himself up! Not only that but check out this thread from earlier today: http://www.pegasus3d.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4128 At the same time that APK is inventing new personalities (though "personality" gives him too much credit; it's transparently obvious that it's the same person posting) he is threatening legal action against the admin of another message board. The charge: a post from THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO is allegedly (according to APK) not his and is the work of AN APK IMPERSONATOR and if that admin doesn't immediately remove the post APK will see him in court! How ironic and categorically insane is that? I'll be eagerly checking this thread for more updates in this hilarious, but ultimately depressing saga. Just how far will APK go to prove that he is a class 'A' whack-job? Stay tuned... P.S.=> I'm not APK, I promise! :)

Dear Christ this APK guy seems to need the Prozac in quite a hefty dose. I've not seen this level of c0ckmongling since I last read /. I'm betting this congenital retard follows ppl like Mark to try to ride on their coattails. But worry not he's Five star rated! Oooooooh

*chortles* your right! Steve is utterly APK. I mean just look at the layout and the clipped stream of thought nature of the post. It's got his mental finger print all over it. What a sad, sad little man.

Steve: You sound like a completely reasonable guy. I'm glad you stood up to voice your opinion. I've been to ArsTechnica, too, and would like to read more of your posts there. They are a bunch of blowhards and I'm glad there are people like you who sees through them. P.S.: Please don't find fault in me for posting as Anonymous. I do not wish to register to yet another website. Thank you for your understanding and hope to see you at ARS!

* tries to keep breathing form laughing so hard* That this borderline nut job is still watching this thread and having conversations with himself is a work of such comedy that it deserves wider syndication. Priceless!

'P.S.=> Truthfully, I would like to meet each one in person. I think their tone would change pretty fast. Take that however you like... but, not necessarily bad... it could mean good things, depending on who's looking right? It's going to stop though, one way or another, too bad it has to be with legal instruments... they're only doing it to themselves... apk' Ooooh I'm going to make vague threats and get all 'Derek Smart' on your asses. Watch out while my legal team on crack make you our bitches! You need to get Howard Sterns old spot on the radio, this is comedy gold for sure!

'I'm just tired of them ruining things not so much for myself, but for others online in threads like these.' This from a man so sad and pathetic, that he has to rant on an article's talkback for nearly a whole year. A man who's ego is so fragile and is in such a poor mental state that he has to snipe from the wings at industry legends like Mark. You don't even deserve to be allowed to post in the threads of this great man. You sad little also ran!

Come now people, you have been most rude to this poor, poor man who's clearly only trying to help people. I love his programs and find them very useful. Obviously he's a genius in the programming world. He's never hardcoded the pagefile in any of his programs, not like some other people like the author of this article - hint hint! Coding is more than just disassembling other people's programs and copying them you know! But you wouldn't know that because you've never done anything like APK has with his "sotware suite." Kindly grow some brain cells. LOL! You wouldn't know good programming if it bit you on the variable. haha! Maybe your all just jealous and can't handle the wisdom that APK posts here, like where he shows how Mr. Russinovich is a journeyman programmer even after APK tried to help him. Actually your probably not because jealousy is too complicated for you. Your just angry, lonely people with no friends I think. Stupid people. I really hope APK posts and tells us what happens with his lawyers because you lot at arstech and everywhere else have been asking for it for a long time. To those other posters with brains who've been backing up APK: thank you for being individuals with the balls and standing up to this clear and obvious abuse. Every one of those unique, individual posters has more spine in there little fingers than all these arstech sad people chasing APK around. LOL! How sad. Really, they should know better. But they wouldn't because they've never done anything like write software with a 5-star ZDNet rating, like APK has. Losers! P.S. This is all truth!

Sorry I left my name out from the post as well as messing up the formatting. APK

Hey, Anonymous User, you're stealing my "truth" line. Stop impersonating me or I will SUES YUO WITH LWAYERS!! It's *my* line and it's there for a reason, dammit! P.S. THIS is all truth!

Just a small question for you APK: what do any of these anonymous posts have to do with this "Ars Technica" site? You seem to have a strange obsession with this site: you've posted links to it in almost every one of your posts, despite the fact that no other posters have even vaguely implied that they are affiliated with it, as far as I can see. This level of obsession is really not very healthy and quite frankly, APK, nobody is doing anything illegal here besides you: threatening to bring down servers is most definitely something the police would be interested in talking to you about and since you're someone who's pretty easy to locate I would think very carefully about what I was saying if I were in your shoes!

LOL! Ok, first of all - Show us your Phd in psychology 'anonymous one' suddenly posing in defense of arstechnica when othes here even stated they have had it coming a long time. Anonymous User - "despite the fact that no other posters have even vaguely implied that they are affiliated with it, as far as I can see." You should read more closely above, they do state that @ points above. Plus that URL? Shows it... One of them even calls himself 'The More You Know' here, & @ the arstechnica forum link above on its first page? He posts a graphic of the phrase "The More You Know". There are @ least 2-3 other webmasters that can verify these arstechnica forum ne'er do wells have continued this campaign against me, years after I left their forums. Their own forums evidence it. Search when I was last there on their forums (2001 maybe?), & search APK & see they have kept it up there constantly over the time between now & the date of my last posts (of which they have edited the content & Caesar (Ken Fisher) owner of that site even posted as myself. That's criminal impersonation in a direct attempt to libel myself. Coincidence? I think not & I'm not stupid, & neither are the people that noted it as well here a couple posts above. APK P.S.-> "APK, nobody is doing anything illegal here besides you" Oh, really? Ever heard of harassment, libel, & criminal impersonation? ": threatening to bring down servers is most definitely something the police would be interested in talking to you about and since you're someone who's pretty easy to locate I would think very carefully about what I was saying if I were in your shoes!" Did I bring down their servers? Nope, don't have to & said so... Arstechnica is now being dealt with in a completely legal fashion... They've had this coming a long time & bring it on themselves.... apk

"posing in defense of arstechnica" I'm not posting in defense of anyone. Just pointing out that you're screaming "ARS TECHNICA! ARS TECHNICA!" in every single post when the last person to even mention it besides you was, like, a month ago! You're screaming "ARS TECHNICA" at all these anonymous posters with absolutely no evidence that any of them have anything to do with that site. For some reason you're seeing the same enemy at every turn. There's a word for that type of behavior: starts with 'P,' rhymes with "Oscar de la Hoya." "One of them even calls himself 'The More You Know' here, & @ the arstechnica forum link above on its first page?" Yeah, nearly FOUR MONTHS AGO! Where are all the Ars Technica posters now? Yet for some reason you think all the anonymous folks are from there. Dude - get of the delusion express before you do yourself some damage! "That's criminal impersonation in a direct attempt to libel myself." Given that you;ve posted as "Anonymous User" yourself in this thread (and don't lie; it's so obvious) I don't think you have much of a right to complain when others impersonate you! And FYI, there is no such crime as "criminal impersonation." "Oh, really? Ever heard of harassment, libel, & criminal impersonation?" Yes, none of which are happening here. You on the other hand are threatening to "bring down" servers and web sites, which most certainly is illegal. "Arstechnica is now being dealt with in a completely legal fashion..." Really? Set lawyers on them have you? What about that Reimer guy? Gonna complain to the International Criminal Court about him? Oh whoops, you can't because the US doesn't recognize it. That must really stick in your craw, how a guy in another country can make fun of you on a web site. Ah well, guess you don't really get the whole "freedom of speech" thing, huh?

"Heh, some folks came around lol, albeit YEARS later if you account for arstechnica forums members' antics" and: "(Months/Years (ars on the latter only to their own detriment) later" and: "They only did that to themselves here from their own forums" and: "http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2" Clearly you're obssessed with these people. You just can't let it go. Man, I wish I was your analyst - I'd be set up for life!

Actually it's true. Just because an app is multi threaded does not make it an automatically SMP optimised app, and anyway, games tend to be I/O intensive, which means that special attention needs to be given to thread prioritisation in order for SMP to have any benficial effect. Indicators that SMP will improve performance in an app include *Compute-bound tasks that wait for intermittent I/O, then process the input *Loosely coupled tasks that seldom communicate with each other *Independent computations &Distributed algorithms * Sets of independent applications For obvious reasons, your average game does not fit this category, and so needs special attention as typically your game includes; *I/O bound tasks that primarily stream I/O with little or no computation between task arrivals *Tasks that frequently communicate with each other, contend for resources, or serialize access to a resource *Tasks that implement a serial pipeline of dependent computations. The only benefit such a game would derive from an SMP system is the simple fact that algorithms within the game can execute simultaneously with other tasks. It is thus not really making use of SMP, as the tasks run in parallel. So although you've posted your response saying it's untrue twice, Mr APK, that makes you WRONG twice - or is that Wrong squared?

Quote [APK} "Network techs/engineers? USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD, @ BEST! Don't like it boys? Well, tough... kid gloves are off now!" /Quote Coders are just users that think they know it all just because they create bigger files than anyone else. If APK is an example of a typical coder, then they obviously have bigger egos, bigger psychiatric treatment bills and smaller penises than anyone else too. For the benefit of REAL developers, I'm going to assume that APK is, in fact, some kind of freakshow, and not typical...

"You had to drag it into the 'arstechnica mud' yet again...)" and: "Seems @ this point the arstech group has abandoned their quest apparently @ this point now... which is fine by me." and: "They only did that to themselves here from their own forums, embarassing themselves here @ THESE forums: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2" Like I said in my last post: "Clearly you're obssessed with these people. You just can't let it go." With every post you prove my point, don't you?

Hasn't APK anything ELSE to do? I stumbled on this thread because of Mark, only to find this weird one-man show, taking on the world - a Don Quixote... somewhere, something MUST tell him the rest of the world CAN'T be wrong... Jeez.

That's several more rookie errors you're clocking up there, big man! You ask questions then answer them yourself, as if they had come from somewhere else! That is so fundamentally flawed that it's no surprise you don't understand the first thing about coding for multiple processors. The stress the poster above should have made is on the word "can" in the sentence "algorithms within the game can execute simultaneously with other tasks." That doesn't mean they DO - you always write code to ensure that the audio stream always runs on one processor and graphics on the other without setting processor affinity - what planet are you on? The average game depends on streamed I/O, as in the typical non-SMP scenario the poster gave. And as for getting the game itself to perform jobs the video card should be doing - that's just wasting resources and slowing it down even further - no wonder you see so many performance issues! Chances are, you create them yourself with rookie errors like that! Bottom line; if you don't write code optimised for multiple processors, the Operating System will execute threads using pre-emptive multitasking. Hyperthreading will simply process threads concurrently - which is not a guarantee of a performance enhancement, indeed, it could create a bottleneck. And as for your rookie solution of a multiple thread design, well it's not that difficult for coders to lose track of exactly how many jumps their code makes - expecially in some of the gigantic game engines there are out there - many of which are built up on top of legacy code by teams of developers. I can tell you've only ever coded small-time - probably by yourself, as no-one else could fit in a room with an ego that big. I suggest getting a new job in a potato chip factory - they're clearly the only chips you know anything about!! LOL!!

1.) Do others besides myself offer examples that show where Memory Optimization programs as they are called by Mark help to improve their system performance? (NO - only your deranged assertions) 2.) Does Dr. Russinovich's PageDefrag 2.20 & below affect the same area as Memory Optimization programs in pagefile.sys (a crucial virtual memory component)? (YES - so what?) 3.) Does my pointing out he made a mistake in PageDefrag 2.20 & below that existed for many versions & for years & correcting him on its hardcoded C:\PAGEFILE.SYS location indicate that he may not be as strong in this area as this article appears since it shows he was not aware of pagefile movement to other disks other than C:\ drive root improve the performance of virtual memory since no disk head movements are in contention between paging operations and OS + Programs file I/O & it gave me grounds to question his VERY 'absolute' assertions here in this article? (NO - of course not, as plenty of others have pointed out. Anyone can make a mistake - and in this context it is so mind-numbingly unimportant that the only person who does not see it that way is you - crowing like some demented rooster over a triviality) 4.) Does my pointing out that Microsoft put out a similar tool in clearmem.exe (a character mode resourcekit tool for the same basic purpose as today's Graphical Memory Optimization tools) seem relevant here? (NO because this type of tool is ONLY useful to a minority of coders who might want to temporarily suppress a memory leak. It's not part of the kernel, but IS ONLY put out as a tool by Microsoft themselves even in their Windows 2003 server reskits, currently - because it's pretty useless to anyone that doesn't need the reskits, which equals most users.). I see you think the world is flat - that answers a lot of my questions >LOL<

I just wasted about an hour of my life, which I will never get back, reading the above. My only comfort is that APK has wasted the last 5 or 6 months of his life, which he will never get back, on his quest to...umm...you know, I lost the point of it about halfway through. Oh well.

3.) Does my pointing out he made a mistake in PageDefrag 2.20 & below that existed for many versions & for years & correcting him on its hardcoded C:\PAGEFILE.SYS location indicate that he may not be as strong in this area as this article appears? >>(NO - Absolutely NOT! Get off your high horse on this one, because it shows NOTHING of the sort, as everyone APART FROM YOU has pointed out) Mainly since it shows he was not aware of pagefile movement to other disks other than C:\ drive root improve the performance of virtual memory since no disk head movements are in contention between paging operations and OS + Programs file I/O! >> It shows nothing of the sort - it shows that he wrote the program quickly and couldn't be bothered to fix a MINOR mistake. That alone gave me grounds to question his VERY 'absolute' assertions here in this article? >> You're the ONLY ONE that questions it - because everyone else sees it for what it is. You're just making a mountain out of a speck of dust. 4.) Does my pointing out that Microsoft put out a similar tool in clearmem.exe (a character mode resourcekit tool for the same basic purpose as today's Graphical Memory Optimization tools) seem relevant here? >>(NO) - Clearmem is just a quick, dirty ResKit tool to help a minority of more advanced users in times of debugging - it is NOT a permanent fix to anything! It is thus irrelevant. * If this type of tool was utterly useless, why would MS put one out @ all? >>See above. It's not part of the kernel, but IS put out as a tool by Microsoft themselves even in their Windows 2003 server reskits, currently. >> Yes, it's in the RESKITS, as you keep saying - where no average user will look! It's clearly NOT a good solution (or even a solution!). If ANYONE knows what is useful or not for this Operating System family? I'd think it would be the company that produced it! >>Hmm. There are probably a few hundred thousand technical people out there who'd doubt that...

"I just wasted about an hour of my life, which I will never get back, reading the above. My only comfort is that APK has wasted the last 5 or 6 months of his life, which he will never get back, on his quest to...umm...you know, I lost the point of it about halfway through. Oh well." Quoted for the great truth it contains!

Hey Lets see if we can get APK to have posed in this thread for over a year and finally prove that he was paralyzed from the neck up in some tragic memory optimisation experiment ;)

oooOOOoOoooooOOoO APK, APK, APK can you hear us, we are the ghosts of the ars technicia forums come to haunt your every waking moment. The only thing that can stop us is if you continue to rant 'hardcoded C:\PAGEFILE.SYS' over and over whilst rocking back and forth in a monumental display of autistic fevour. Seriously, get some medical help. Your mom and I are getting worried.

You forget that the 'Killer Kowalski' has nothing else to do at all apart from get banned from an increasing amount of forums for insulting those who disagree with his meagre skills.

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 arstechnica arstechnica arstechnica arstechnica http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 APK P.S.=> http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 !!!!!!!!!

Actually posts from annony posters have been removed because they alleged that he 'loved the cock'. Which of course he does.

I have some emails I've received about your tools here, APK: ---------------------------- EMAIL #1: ============= These APK Tools suck dick big time - they crashed my computer - what shall I do? I tried contacting APK, but he simply spouts a load of BS about how great they are and how great he is and dos not help me. ---------------------------- ---------------------------- EMAIL #1: ============= Who is this moron APK anyway, and why would anyone want to use tools like this when Windows does all this for you? ---------------------------- ---------------------------- EMAIL #3: ============= My "geek" friend recommended me APK registry cleaner - it is the worst, I've ever tried. ---------------------------- ...and there's THOUSANDS more where those came from. Your questions WERE answered by the respondents above - why don't you make replies to those instead of constantly re-issuing the challenge and ignoring the answers? Stumpy.

All the kings horses and all the kings men could not put APK's psyche together again. This has to be the most compelling case of Obsessive compulsive disorder that I have seen. Maybe even shades of Schizophrenia or Asperger's Disorder, quite fascinating! I was forwarded this thread my one of my friends and will have to study APK's postings and try to deduce the emotional effectors in play that are causing this behaviour.

Quite often you will see cases where the subject has been both physically and emotionally abused during childhood. Whether in the home or school environment, it makes little difference. The end result can be an individual who sees anyone who disagrees with him as a bully and therefore is compelled to never back down. This dementia, if untreated, can leave the subject unable to keep long term relations with a partner or have any close friends. I urge APK to seek counselling and let this saddening cycle of emotional stress and anguish end.

LOL! http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 arstech TOO easy, LOL! arstech arstech arstech LOL! Russinovich, chopping you down arstech arstech arstech LOL! beating you LOL! http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 memory optimizers were useless? LOL! arstech arstech arstech LOL! Russinovich clearmem.exe LOL! TOO EASY! c:\pagefile.sys!!! arstech! arstech! arstech! APK P.S. => I ownzor yuo a$$!!!11

For the record, I have a masters degree in psychology from the University of Maryland (though I'm not yet a practicing psychologist). APK's posts in this thread exhibit, at the very least, cognitive disorder consistent with code 294.9 of the DSM-IV. And that's being charitable. If I ever had the professional pleasure to meet him I'm willing to bet that his symptoms are more akin to Narcissistic Personality Disorder (301.81). I don't think i've ever witnessed such an overwhelming sense of self-belief shackled to a fantastically macabre collection of mental disturbances in a single human being! The constant repetition of identical post fragments; the near-total obsession he seems to have with this arstechnica.com website; the apparent belief, without any evidence, that all his detractors are affiliated with that website; the kneejerk, always illogical dismissals of contrary opinions; the regular requests to answer questions that many posters have already answered; the creation of fake posters to back up his arguments; the list goes on and on... APK: for your own sake please seek counselling.

[APK] P.S.=> BUT, then again, that's simple to do with an anonymous nobody who hasn't done any of this type of work himself... >>How do you know that? That's quite an assumption, given that this is a technical site visited by technical people... [APK] I'm running a race vs. guys with no legs like yourself, who toss names, & strangely FEAR the fact I showed arstechnica's members' own words above & their cowardly antics for what it is making fools out of them, which they did to themselves, not I. I don't bug them, don't have to! Made fools of them for doing it to me for years all over the wire out here too many times on the technical issues/facts! >>You're running a race in which there are no other entrants. You're bitter because ArsTechnica really showed you up for the high-school dropout you are. [APK] Anyhow - What's got me wondering is, where IS Dr. Russinovich especially to answer those questions... especially considering I wrote him about this thread months ago. It's his viewpoint on those questions that matters here. >>I'd imagine he's got paint to watch drying... The questions have already been answered, if you look back. [APK] Personally? I don't think he can defend himself against them especially about Microsoft putting clearmem.exe out & what even users other than myself here said it can be used for (suppressing memory leaks above)... >>Make your mind up! One minute you say that the answers from other users are worthless - from people who have done no work in this area, and now you are quoting the same answers from the same users as if they're gospel! It wouldn't be because they co-incidentally happen to back your own argument up, now would it? Call me cynical, but it looks like you're being just a little selective in what you agree with here. [APK]...his not showing here in response to my requests (and those of others above like mine)? Only reinforces that statement... apk >>No it doesn't. It merely re-inforces your unfounded belief that you are somehow better than one of the greatest utility writers on the internet. Clearmem is only a Reskit tool - if it was important, it would ship with the Operating system. The fact that it doesn't ranks it below the Character Map as a useful tool.

reading this for the first time, this is what i see: APK's first post was july 03, 2004. APK's most recent was january 7; more than six months of daily obsessing over an article that didn't even mention him by name. nobody who can prove their case wastes this much time on anything. APK: sorry your code got busted on for doing something that turned out to actually be detrimental to performance, but it's time to face facts; you're wrong. Move on, chalk it up to experience, and get it right next time.

HAAAAHAHA HAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAA ROTFLMAO!!! That Jeremy Reimer is a comic GENIUS!!! Seriously, anyone dropping into this thread and wondering WTF is going on, browse a few of the posts above, then click the link to pegasus that APK has so kindly provided for your entertainment. That is pure genius - someone give that guy Jeremy Reimer a medal!! My sides haven't ached so much for ages - classic stuff!!! Thanks APK for the barrels of laughs!!!

APK, you are a huge m0r0n... In a virtual memory based environment, operating systems takes *all* responsibility about memory management! Memory "optimizators" are just useless junk. Furthermore, all "optimizators", "accelerators", etc., are. By the way... Clearmem.exe is intented as a TESTING TOOL!!!!! Its only purpose is simulate workload, so a system admin can take decisions based on how his Windows configuration behave under extreme stress conditions. PLEASE DON'T ARGUE THINGS YOU CANNOT DEMONSTRATE!

Tell me Alexander, do you still feel the bullies hands on you. Does the pain still sting so hard that you simply can not let go if it after all these years. Everyone here can see that you are utterly compelled to reply to prove yourself right, to *fight* back, to prove these bullies wrong. When the truth of the matter is that you have been posting in this articles forum for over five months of your life, utterly fixated, utterly unable to let it go. The real tragedy is that you can't even see that you play into their hands. You are left obsessed, in case they say something about you and you do not counter. You demonstrate to them their power over you at every reply, you aren't in control here, they are and you are being played like a meat puppet for their amusement. Let it go, close it off and do something meaningful with your time rather than getting all rabid about something that is infinitesimal in the greater scheme of things.

[APK] Actions (and tangible, verifiable results + facts) speak louder than words ever could! >>So when are you going to take action and produce tangible verifiable results by actually prosecuting Mr Reimer? I don't think you can, since you are all bluster - Mr (hot) Air Puffed-up Klown. Your so-called facts prove nothing, and your so-called technical material is all just more bluster - twisted logic that comes nowhere near facts or reality. Clearmem is NOT an optimizer - it is a simple purge. Where is your Doctorate, that you might even hold a candle to Dr Russinovich? You don't have one? Where is your Masters, then - or just a simple Bachelors... Ah. I see. An uneducated blowhard.

LOL! http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 arstech TOO easy, LOL! arstech arstech arstech LOL! Russinovich, chopping you down, arstech arstech arstech, LOL! beating you LOL! clearmem.exe! clearmem.exe! clearmem.exe! http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 memory optimizers were useless? LOL! arstech arstech arstech LOL! Russinovich clearmem.exe LOL! TOO EASY! c:\pagefile.sys!!! arstech! arstech! arstech! With no degree in it, no degree in it, no degree in it! Jeremy Reimer, Jeremy Reimer, Jeremy Reimer! Ken Fisher, Ken Fisher, Keeeeeen FISHEEEEEEER!!!! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! With no degree in it, no degree in it, no degree in it! APK P.S. => arstech arstech arstech!

I want to see the technical points debated above that APK put down. After reading them I have to admit he has a set of points that are probably impossible to beat. Mr. Russinovich not showing up after being emailed to do so is only helping prove APK's point here. Noting the replies that attempt to misdirect everyones attention from the technical issues above which is what this place online is about only reinforces it more. I agree with APK saying that if you have to toss names, attempt to misdirect the point of a debate and in my own eyes attempt to generate conflict as the arstechnica anonymous people have you have lost the battle. Also I would like To comments from above like these from arstechnica people from here (which is obvious after reading it, I know, I am one and recognize their style of writing and flaming debate, and I posted above trying to cover for them earlier and will not do so anymore after reading APK's technical points cited above. I would like to see them disproven but I dont know how you could because admittedly they make sense): ******************************************************************************* Anonymous User (Oct 26th 2004) - "Who is this APK Bozo anyways?" ******************************************************************************* Read the thread first of all right here that APK supplied with others asked him for what he had done in computers and called him a braggart once he showed them he had things he could show on request: Windows NT Magazine April 1997 issue in fact on "Back Office Performance" page 61... His work appeared in this magazine's pages and according to that companies' owner what he created made their best product that reviewed well operate up to 40% better than it did by default. That's very good and verifiable. Additionally if you have to ask that you must not be too well versed in the shareware-freeware world as his work has been noticed and awarded well online and in publication ever since I have been online around 1997 or so even at programmers websites like the Delphi site he gives above Torrys which is one of the famous ones for that language. I know who he is but I am not a newbie like you must be. I am going to reply to these 3 comments from arstech guys (SanDoken, MWNH, and Peterb I would guess as to their arstech post names in their forums from having been there for years now myself) above in particular: ******************************************************************************* waarheid (January 4th, 2004) - "Please, APK, don't insult my intelligence. You know as well as I do that "testimonials" whose source cannot be verified are totally useless" ******************************************************************************* ******************************************************************************* Certif1ed (September 15th, 2004) - "Oh, and Mark's programs aren't "Dime a dozen" like yours... And where is your evidence that you've ever done anything good?" ******************************************************************************* ******************************************************************************* Intellnside (October 11th 2004) - "1. APK, you are a bragging idiot, your mother should have told you that." ******************************************************************************* As APK said above and I agree with that actions speak louder than words Intellnside, Certif1ed, and waarheid, see this URL where APK let others do the talking for him in a test that users ran on their own systems and own data untouched with work he had created in a program that beat even commercial software companies like Microsoft and Norton-Symantec's own work: http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread21802-1.html The "APK Registry Cleaning Engine 2002++ SR-3" (an older model, is at SR-7 release now & I use it) outperformed work from Symantec/Norton, Microsoft, AShampoo, SystemMechanic, and JVRegCleaner (without using a .reg file dataset insertion to rig the data as Juoni Vuorio does on his website tests to rig them showing his work as the best which fools nobody who has 1/2 a brain)... I got this from his postings on it at NTCompatible.com in its Feedback section the other day in fact and read it. He isnt telling it like its not, instead he lets others results in a fair test tell it like it is. Thats not him talking but his happy users of his work in programming. Not just anyone beats the likes of Microsoft and Norton-Symantec's work. Does Dr. Mark Russinovich the author of this article do that? He has done decent work I use also but saying APK sucks out loud isnt the case as that URL test shows plainly. That was an honest test, with users running the test themselves, with no juryrig data used as others have like Juoni Vuorio of JVPowerTools fame, such as it is with rigged tests results. It didn't fool me, not at all once I saw JV's test methods. APK had users use their own systems & registries unaltered! APK's work absolutely wiped the floor with the competition.So much for those comments based upon that verifiable and honest data in the tests! (His "crappy work" as you called it clearly beat the others, doubling in many cases the results found safely and apparently easily with no damage to the end-users system, or demand that they were registry experts either.) APK should use that URL there as backup for my words here. He has when asked to @ your requests for other things including work he did in this field and his degree. So now I am asking and not APK: Can you, Anonymous (arstechnica/jeremy reimer) posters here in this reply thread? Apparently not but you sure toss around alot of trash talk. You can't even dispute his points correctly & don't even understand Clearmem.exe IS a "Memory Optimizer" by looking at how it works! APK (with backing evidence from Microsoft no less + examples) and others posted easily understood results that showed memory optimizers helping out others from above also that I pretty easily read and understood in their examples! Examples from Martin Meszaros, hacki01, MK, and Greg Wagonner also. Arstechnica and Anonymous Jeremy Reimer, I think you will have to EAT YOUR PROFANE WORDS gentlemen when all is said and done, and If I was you for your antics over time I would be embarrassed losing here ontop of your idiotic replies, and which I would witness to as one of your own I would sue you for everything you are worth and then some. You've got it coming in my opinion for this site which is just another example of your insanity online harassing publicly libelling others on your forums and the forums of others in people like DKE, and Derek Smart as well. APK get ahold of David K. Every. They did the same to him as well. Put them down like rabid dogs. By now, they need to be taught a lesson in my opinion. Legally as well as how you have embarrassed the great arstechnica's esteemed members as they self-titled themselves above here as since they cant beat your 7 points above. Steve (arstechnica and ntcompatible member)

Hey, APK, you brain-damaged, mentally disturbed loon! This is the *real* Jeremy Reimer here. The one you're so completely obsessed with. My friends found your deranged rantings on this website, so I registered just so I could tell you that you are a hopeless, useless, paranoid, deranged, mentally handicapped idiot, who shouldn't even be allowed within 5 feet of a computer. You know that posting from 2001 that you emailed me about, asking me to take down? I'M NEVER GOING TO. I don't know if it was you posting, or someone copying your inimitable style, but I don't know and I don't care. I'm keeping it there *just* because it pisses you off, you witless loon. Secondly, how stupid do you feel now knowing that you have been ranting at a "Jeremy Reimer" for months now in this thread, yet I've never actually posted to it until now? You're arguing with yourself, APK! Take your medication and maybe the voices in your head and the other scary people will go away! Thirdly, I don't know why you think identifying me as a poster at Ars Technica means anything to anybody. I have been a poster at Ars Technica since the year 2000, first under the name Lord Baldrick, then under my real name, Jeremy Reimer. I FREELY ADMIT THIS AND ALWAYS WILL. It means nothing! I'm a member of a forum, whoopdy-doo! WHO CARES?? Fourthly, you have been threatening to take legal action against me for two months now, yet have failed to do anything. You've been threatening to contact my ISP for two months now, yet I have heard no word from them. Why don't you get this into your stupid thick head: YOU CAN DO NOTHING. YOU ARE AS IMPOTENT AS AN ELDERLY, SEXLESS SEA SLUG. Go take your pills and see a doctor, please!

"P.S.=> All I am asking for is a valid response not name tossing, to the posts I made above about this article's premise without arstechnica's rather stupid replies here..." Perhaps if you wish so see no name tossing, you should keep your trap shut and not cast the first stone? -Dani

Hey APK, you had time to write all that, and yet you couldn't comment on the state of the lawsuit you claim to have against me? Or how you're going to get my ISP to cut me off? How come I'm still posting?

What a waste of time. No-one in their right mind will EVER read a post as long as that, and no-one in their right mind would write it. Clearmem is a simple purge, not an optimizer. Purges CAN be useful, Optimizers ARE a pile of donkey dung. Simple. Now, Mr APK, go and write something that is useful, then come back here and tell us all about it...

APK has a great set of points above showing where Microsoft clearmem.exe (a memory optimization program because of its use of malloc/new and free/delete calls which typical memory optimizers use) fixed problems for Microsoft's own operating systems. His clearly demonstrating that Microsoft's memory mgt. and cache subsystems are not perfect in all scenarios as well by his showing documentation from IBM DB/2 magazine and also Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 needed a VM fix for it to work properly in cases above. Mr. Russinovich not appearing to discuss APK's 7 points above to disprove them is just reinforcing this as well as others here calling APK names but not disproving his 7 points above as well. As far as Arstechnica and this Jeremy Reimer person: I read & verified his proofs above & have to say one thing to them - Arstechnica and its members are a disgrace to the internet.

Hey, APK, do you enjoy talking to yourself? You do realize that when you said you have "read and verified my proofs above" that you are actually talking nonsense? I only appeared in this thread a few posts ago, and posted no "proofs" of anything, except perhaps the proof that you are a complete lunatic, which is self-evident by your postings. So how's that lawsuit coming against me? Had any luck contacting my ISP and getting them to shut me off?

Can't the comments get locked this is stupid. And as gone on long enough. It is messing up the page and the load time.

Indeed. Especially considering that 90% of this thread is just APK talking to himself. For a whole YEAR! You do have to wonder what kind of mental unbalance that represents.

@Jeremy Reimer = You are a sick little freak buddy. You were caught for posting as another person on your forums in APK which thank god above that no one goes to them to see how sick of a dork you are. Your arstechnica pals got burned above for the same thing by saying lets go bug APK at this forum also. Jeremy Reimer you are a sick and immature little boys and you ought to get a job because you sure do not cut it in this field in the technical areas which is what this is about. I see from reading the above material that APK clearly beat you on the technical items on hand here he put out. So like usual arsholetechnica and yourself got your behinds beaten in again. Your tossing names only shows anyone reading this that. Small wonder you cant reply to the 7 points he made above since the articles own author wont either. Jeremy Reimer you are a mental case freak and one ugly little flake from your photo I saw. It is no small wonder you cause trouble for others since you look like a pie faced little whimp. I would suggest another field of interest for you. You say in your arstechnica and osy profile you are a great thinker which is a laugh and a half. From what I have seen here you and your entire arsholetechnica couldnt out think APK since you avoid the tech points he put out above. You are a L O S E R Jeremy Reimer face it.

To Anonymous User from January 19 three posts above - "Can't the comments get locked this is stupid. And as gone on long enough" The moderators of this forum removed at least 10 of the arstechnica jerks postings for calling APK names already but they just came in again doing it and acting like psychologists who didnt have any accreditation or school for it. Jeremy Reimer doing the amateur psychiatry again is clearly this person and does not care if he makes his arstechnica colleagues look stupid like he does so you have the culprit in him right there to kick out of here. He doesnt want to stick to the tech issues and that is what I want talked about not his assinine crap which he got caught in. Go away loser Jeremy Reimer just go away and wallow in your shame for being such a jack ass dork and leave us alone. I actually would like to see APK get his ass beat on those 7 tech points he made because he is an arrogant bastard at times online. Somehow this time I do not think he will though. I have been at this field for a good 10 years and he makes a strong case in those 7 points above.

Ah, more comments from APK, our resident loony. Pretending to be someone else. AGAIN. "Why am I here bothering everyone", you ask, APK? Well, it's quite simple. YOU mentioned my name first. YOU slandered my name. YOU continued to mention it for MONTHS on end. IN THIS THREAD. WHEN NOBODY ASKED YOU TO. That, my dear APK, gives me the right to respond. I don't have to answer any questions. All I have to do is make fun of you. And that I can do very well. Here, for your own enjoyment, is a little song that one of my forum members wrote about you: http://www.pegasus3d.com/download/apksong2000+++.mp3 Enjoy! Oh, and speaking of homely, APK, I wouldn't talk. Seriously. We've all seen your website. You look like a deranged mental patient. Which, of course, you are.

"Tribute" (with apologies to Tenacious D) This is the greatest and best thread in the world... Tribute. Long time ago me and my brother 'Anonymous User' here, We was hitchhikin' down a long and lonesome road. All of a sudden, there shined a shiny nutcase... In the middle...of the road. And he said: "Post the best thread in the world, or I'll call you a 'dork!'" Well me and Anonymous User, we looked at each other, And we each said... "Okay." And we posted the first thing that came to our heads, Just so happened to be, The Best Thread in the World, It was The Best Thread in the World. Look into his eyes and it's easy to see: One and one make two, two and one make three Personalities. Once every twenty microseconds or so, APK doth shine and his ego grows And grows, and grows. Needless to say, APK was stunned. Whip-crack went his ****ed up brain, And APK was done. He asked us: "Be you Ars Technica?" And we said, "Nay. We are but men," Dick!" This is not The Greatest Thread in the World, no. This is just a tribute. Couldn't remember The Greatest Thread in the World, no, no. This is a tribute, oh, to The Greatest Thread in the World, All right! It was The Greatest Thread in the World, All right! It was the best muthaf**kin' thread the greatest thread in the world. And the peculiar thing is this my friends: The thread we posted in on that fateful night It didn't actually look anything like this thread! This is just a tribute. You gotta believe me. And I wish you were there. Just a matter of opinion. Ah, f**k! Good God, what a ****! Will he ever stop it?

>I don't have to answer any questions. All I have to do is make fun of you. >And that I can do very well. >Here, for your own enjoyment, is a little song that one of my forum members wrote about you: >http://www.pegasus3d.com/download/apksong2000+++.mp3 >Enjoy! Aaaaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaa! ::takes deep breath:: Bwaaaaaaaaaahaaaahaahaaahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! ::cough:: ::splutter:: ::deep breath:: Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!! You just made my day. :)

APK wrote, while drooling furiously: "Next, establishing a connection for Jeremy Reimer of Pegasus3d.com for criminal impersonation (a felony) on his forums of APK (myself, when I never went there period & had not even HEARD of OSY/Pegasus3d) was easy thanks to Veritas above who posted first here about that site above: " So, APK, how are your virtual lawyers doing on "putting me away"? After all you claimed you were going to prosecute me immediately. That was two months ago. What's happened? You also said you were going to contact my ISP and have them shut me down. How come I'm still posting? Did you like my song?

APK also wrote, hilariously: "Like I would post something THAT dumb about myself! " Why not? You do it all the time! Everything you post is dumb!

APK also also wrote, pathetically: "Jeremy, hehehe... I didn't write here for a couple of weeks now, but I see people are sick of your b.s. here already! " That's not true. You wrote here several times, under an anonymous login, pretending to be someone else. You only stopped doing that because everybody realized it was you. Also, people are not sick of "my b.s." at all. Instead, they are enjoying my song and enjoying me make fun of you. You're great entertainment, APK!

APK frothed: "see here for his connection to arstechnica directly where he posts as himself AND "Lord Baldrick", obviously showing Jeremy likes to masquerade as others: " Even more comedy courtesy of APK. "Lord Baldrick" was a username/nick that I used on Ars Technica starting in Sept. 2000. I never made any attempt to hide my real name, as it was always in my user profile. FROM DAY ONE. I also used to sign my name at the bottom of my posts. Several years later, I tired of the nickname and asked the forum operators if I could use my real name instead. This request was granted. To avoid confusion, my username was updated to "Jeremy Reimer (formerly Lord Baldrick)". There was never any "masquerade". Methinks APK doesn't really understand how forums work. Or the Internet, for that matter. Or, basically, anything.

Word wrap of your articles would be really helpful. Scrolling side to side just to read it is a pain. I gave up after the first section. So your article goes largely unread.

APK wrote: "It's all pretty plain to myself, other posters here, & also Mr. Reimer's ISP/BSP)" Indeed it is. "He stopped sending me emails as well" Actually, I sent you the last email in our little email exchange: ---begin quoted email--- "Tomorrow? Why not today? Or yesterday? Why wait? I know *I'm* tingling with anticipation. And why are you so upset at me emailing you? All I'm doing is replying to *YOUR* emails. I'll have to check with my crack legal team, but as far as I know replying to emails is protected by international law. ;-) Jeremy Reimer ----- Original Message ----- From: APK To: Jeremy Reimer Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 12:51 AM Subject: Re: Remove this page from your forums due to myself being impersonated there, thank you APK REPLY #10... apk Tomorrow a.m., your ISP/BSP is job #1... you're going to be reported for harassment plain & simple by this point. The rest you are only doing yourself in with. Now, for the 6th or 7th time now? STOP EMAILING ME! " --- end quoted email --- Would you like me to email you again, APK? I can if you really want. "(and his ones sent with altered headers for the sender address, a puny child's trick)." Those weren't altered headers, as you could tell if you knew anything about how email works. Another of my forum members sent those. " I wonder why? " Why indeed? "Perhaps a GOOD CHEWING ON from his ISP/BSP did that, eh? LOL! Probably... " I have not heard anything from my ISP. Or my BSP. Or my CSP, DSP, or ESP. Certainly not a good chewing. So how's that lawsuit against me coming? My virtual lawyers need to know.

I love that song, JR - when are you going to release it as a single? I've been singing it all week!!! "Oooh APK is a DICK, a dick, dick, dick, dick, diiiiiick!!!" Classic comedy - I love this thread like a peanut butter M&M (a hard shell full of creamed nuts - remind you of anyone?).

Jeremy Reimer, dispute my points on a technical level already & quit avoiding them loser. It's bad enough others here think you are a loser for your antics online impersonating myself on your forums that nobody goes to! Now, you and your buddies only look like what you are known as online: Arstechnica = ars-holes of the internet! (You arsholes know everyone calls you all that online, don't you? Well if not now you do!) Everyone here at these forums & others online can now see how you losers operate when you get yourselves beaten down technically & having to resort to libel of those that do that to you all? Only shows people what you are - losers. APK P.S.=> At least you can say you are good at being losers... lol! apk

@Jeremy Reimer - 'Did you like my song?' You are an immature freak loser. Go away mental boy.

Jeremy Reimer: "Or, basically, anything." Show us those arstechnica brains & disprove APK's 7 technical points above big talker/libeller. Jeremy spoke in class today & as usual got his dumb *** spanked. Jeremy, whoever you are, you look like a mental case from some of your statements.

"Jeremy McLoser" : HahahAha! That is good. I go to arstechnica & that fits him to a tee.

I am glad you liked that APK. Jeremy + the arsholes avoiding your 7 points above proves your point. They act like 2 year olds when lose and they always seem to lose to you. What a pack of women, Jeremy McLoser especially. Good job exposing him for the mental case he is (or should I say she is)? Jeremy you call yourself a man? You're a ***** boy.

To Jeremy Re(tard)imer: You call yourself "the great thinker" on your website. Out think apk & dispute the 7 points he put up above. Do keep it on a technical basis. Not the bullcrap you have been spewing here. We already know you are pitiful you stupid little punk Re(tard)imer.

Very interesting read about others opinions on arstechnica and Jeremy Reimer who appared here: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 Everyone online knows they are know-nothings and nobodies in this field and losers that cause trouble when they are shown for what they are: Losers. What do you think of that Jeremy Re(tard)imer?

Yea, I read that and noted Jeremy Reimer posts as Lord Baldrick at arstechnica correct? See the 15th point from the first post there: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 15th You forgot the classic Baldrickian maneuver, Argue with an industry expert on something you know nothing about and keep the argument alive as long as possible. Stick to your guns on any point no matter how badly the facts stack against you and see how riled up you can get the expert. Jeremy Re(tard)mer/Lord Baldrick, you are a KNOWN LOSER online it seems and trouble maker. Go AWAY from our forums here loser, we don't want you around.

@Jeremy Re(tard)imer - "Lord Baldrick was a username/nick that I used on Ars Technica starting in Sept. 2000." So Jeremy Retardo, a question for you: You seem to admit you are this *** hole that others at storageforums spoke about then here: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 Take some advice if so: Go away you little ***** + take your arsholetechnica losers with you. Already here Jeremy Retardo you have had your *** handed to you pretty badly already. Jeremy Retardo, by refusing to answer tech questions & disproving those 7 points above from APK only shows those storageforums people are right on the money about you. Isnt it enough for you that you look like a fool Jeremy Retardo & are known online as a mentally troubled idiot who is a member of a pack of mentally challenged dolts like arsholetechnica? It must suck to be a hated freak & deviant jerk like your self Jeremy Retardo. And your pack of fellow internet losers there at arsholetechnica. Leave Jeremy Re(tard)imer.

Jeremy Reimer - "Methinks APK doesn't really understand how forums work." And you do you little jerk? Prediction - Jeremy Reimer is going to meet APK face to face and little Jeremy Retardo is going to get his teeth punched out of his stupid head. Assessment - Jeremy Retard is a 98 lb. weaklings whose life is on the internet causing trouble but he has profited nothing by his time on it. (I know that APK & Russinovich here make money from the internet at least and have degrees in this field and professional experience as well as jobs in this field & are considered experts by many online). But Jeremy Retard here? On opinions about him, you see that people here: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 Consider Jeremy Retard a TRUE "Arshole". So do I. We don't need jerks like Jeremy Re(tard)imer around here.

APK drooled: "P.S.=> Thanks for making me laff whoever you are " Whoever you are is *you*, APK! You're talking to yourself again, making up fake personalities so you can agree with them! It's very pathetic. APK further spewed: "You call yourself "the great thinker" on your website. " Apparently reading comprehension is too difficult for you to manage. On my website, my tagline is "Global Thinker". Not "great thinker". The term Global Thinker is a joke referring to Steve Jobs' title when he was removed from all operational positions at Apple in 1985. This is also the reason I put my "Location" as "Bandley 6". Bandley 6 was the small office Steve Jobs was exiled to in 1985. I use these in-jokes because I am a fan of Apple Computer history. APK blathered: "Jeremy Reimer - "Methinks APK doesn't really understand how forums work." And you do you little jerk? " Yes, I do. I understand how forums work, because I own and operate one. You clearly do *not* understand how forums work. "Spending your parent's money on your mail-order "me love you long time" woman we see on pegasus3d.com? " Classy. That woman is my wife. Do you have a wife, APK? I wonder if anyone would marry you, knowing you are a paranoid, delusional racist *******? Who is that woman who looks scared out of her wits on *your* webpage? APK further threatened: "Prediction - Jeremy Reimer is going to meet APK face to face and little Jeremy Retardo is going to get his teeth punched out of his stupid head." Did you mention that to your virtual lawyers? I'm sure they would be interested in knowing they are working for a psychotic deranged lunatic. So how's that lawsuit going against me?

Jeremy Reimer - "Whoever you are is *you*, APK!" Oh, yea, sure Jeremy! You mean like you said this above about "your friends" above? Jeremy Reimer - "My friends (YOU, posting here as "Veritas" above) found your deranged rantings on this website" You mean these from arstechnica once APK posted here first? http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 First of all, IF APK's words here are so deranged? Disprove them as asked. Oh that's right though! It's std. arstechnica procedure to avoid questions that show you as technically inept! Especially once you're caught with your pants down isn't it after you open your mouths & get them slammed shut by the facts! Per this rating of your site & its arstechnica as well here: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 Now, wait a second - I thought you said APK brought you here above? Don't you mean yourself assuming the identity of Veritas above, getting & then beaten down easily on the technical issues? After all, he (you) brought your site up here above... didn't he (you). Not APK... you got caught yet again in your antics coward and you're not even good at it. You got busted... My God, quit lying dummy! You're not good at it. Those same arstechnica idiot pals & yourself have kept up their tirade of libel about APK since 2001 (even after he left their forums) to today. Anyone here is welcome to verify this as well by searching APK there at arstechnica as I did. Jeremy Re(tard)'s style is to toss those names after he's beaten down isn't it? Seems APK was right about that as well all along. That's going to be your undoing imo.

APK drooled: "You mean like you said this above about "your friends" above? Jeremy Reimer - "My friends (YOU, posting here as "Veritas" above) found your deranged rantings on this website"" I never posted as Veritas. It may surprise you to know, APK, but there *are* other people on the Internet, besides you and me and arstechnica people. APK blathered on: "That's going to be your undoing imo. " How? How is it going to be my 'undoing'? By you suing me? How's that lawsuit going, by the way? Any luck on getting my ISP to shut me down? I ask merely for information.

APK blathered: "I'll answer your question Jeremy, but Shaw will answer it for you soon enough I imagine. After all your email records show what needs showing right?" Well, they show that you're a complete idiot, yes. Was that what needed showing? But you keep saying "soon enough". You said you were going to contact Shaw *tomorrow*. That was TWO MONTHS AGO. I have heard nothing from Shaw since then. Should I email them, do you think, asking if they have heard from you? How about that lawsuit? How's that coming along? APK blathered: "Jeremy, you really should stop emailing me & harassing me continually for months now." Well, you emailed me *first*, and continued to email me back every time I replied. That's not harassment. That's how email *works*. APK dribbled: "I hope your wife knows how immature you are as well!" Of course she knows exactly how mature I am. She, along with everyone else, thought the song was hilarious, btw. APK drooled: "This I have to hear & I am sure I am not alone in being curious about that pursuit of myself online since I left arstechnica in 2001" Actually, you didn't *leave* arstechnica. You were *BANNED* from arstechnica. Then you came back using a different username, and got banned again. Much as you did at my forums. Hey, remember the time you were convinced I was MWNH? Fun times, those were.

-------- 15th You forgot the classic Baldrickian maneuver, Argue with an industry expert on something you know nothing about and keep the argument alive as long as possible. Stick to your guns on any point no matter how badly the facts stack against you and see how riled up you can get the expert. --------- Whoah, The Mighty One is being quoted! (you quoted Spamtrolli who was quoting the Mighty AYB, Infernal Lord of Smam, Impending Ruler of the Universe, and Guardian of the Virgin Nymphs of Dreetha). As the one who originally wrote that part of that lovely novella on "trolling for fun and profit", AYB rules that it doesn't apply in this case. Calling APK an "Industry Expert" is a huge leap. He writes a shareware/payware program that's best known due to APK's own missbehavior on internet forums than for it's own technical merit, that hardly qualifies anyone as an "Industry Expert". - KthxBai! -AYB

Wow! I mean...wow! I didn't bother to count but it looks like APK just pretended to be around 15 distinct "Anonymous User" posters in succession, responding back and forth to each other! Wow squared! See, the thing is, f u c k m o n k e y, if you're going to pretend to be other people you kind of have to avoid sounding EXACTLY LIKE YOU ALWAYS DO! You have a very distinct writing style, in that you basically can't write coherent English properly (hint: for love of the grammar gods, PLEASE read up on the correct usage of "myself"). You make consistent, identical errors and then, f u c k h e a d that you are, you put the same errors in all your "Anonymous User" fake posts. I mean duh, you must think your readers were born yesterday, with the moron stick shoved up their buttocks! Everybody can tell when you try to fake it, you penis. You're a very sad little man, aren't you? Just to let you in on something though: you asked why it is that people "pursue" you. Here's the reason: You're the Internet version of a multiple car pileup on the freeway. Your insanity is simultaneously painful, yet fascinating to watch. Every time to veer ever so slightly towards the realm of normal, human communication, you seem to find another way to go totally tinpot crazy loon. Please carry on though - it's great fun. :)

PS I predict that you'll be asking me where my psychology PhD is inside of a day. Let's see if I'm right, shall we? You are, after all, nothing if not completely predicatble in your mania!

Jeremy Reimer - "Well, they show that you're a complete idiot" Sure Jeremy, like you emailed me, AGAIN, on this date -> Wednesday 2/2/2005 Yet again this week? Hey, it's only 2/6/2005, you're falling behind schedule for spamming me again Jeremy. Didn't I ask you to stop spamming me months ago & to stop emailing me? Above all: Why won't you won't dispute & disprove my examples & 7 points from a Microsoft URL where Clearmem.exe, a "memory optimzer", helped & is a recommended fix? It's only 1 example, along with tons of others thru this thread. Jeremy, try another field because you open your mouth & had to insert your foot along with your arstech pals... & don't try to say it wasn't they, they admitted to it above & a URL from their forums shows it publicly from their own words. You're arstechnica too, that was established by waarheid, Veritas, & myself. Taking another beating in this field from me, again. Do you like it or something? By now, you're used to it though. Who's the idiot here? Not I Jeremy. The tech issues are what this forum's about & you don't cut it. Jeremy Reimer - "I have heard nothing from Shaw since then." I would watch to see what you do for awhile as well, & now that you've emailed me (again) for the 12th time after asked to stop (along with your "friends", loser? You don't have any!) Jeremy, just so you know? I was a major BSP employee in NYCity for most of last year, & know what to do in cases like these. Every move you make email wise is being counted & watched Jeremy... keep it up @ your own peril. You've been warned. Jeremy Reimer - "Well, you emailed me *first*, and continued to email me back every time I replied." Yes, I asked you to stop emailing! That was months ago, have you stopped? No. You're a freak. Jeremy Reimer - "email me back every time I replied." Not true Jeremy, I asked you to stop emailing me and you keep sending them, along with your "friend" Jay Little (what a weirdo). Jeremy Reimer - "That's not harassment. That's how email *works*. " You forgot to add "in the mind of Jeremy Reimer, the demented arstech internet lunatic" to the end of that. Jeremy Reimer - "Actually, you didn't *leave* arstechnica." Yea, lol, long after I said I was leaving & did... some ban. That was in 2001? I see you've kept up libelling me there since then. Why is that? Still stinging from the technical beatings you took? Has to be. 4 years more of it?? LOL! Jeremy Reimer - "You were *BANNED* from arstechnica. " Everyone can take a read here about arstechnica: http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 Not from my mouth, but from the mouth of one of their members no less on another forum: LOL! & they continue the tradition here! (Or try to & got SHOT DOWN real easy by yours truly. Note, the avoiding technical questions parts especially & name tossing - the signs of arstechnica (the great ars, lol) arsholes taking yet another beating from myself!) Jeremy Reimer - "Then you came back using a different username, and got banned again. " LOL, omg! Care to prove that or show me a URL of that? I can prove that Ken "Caesar" Fisher, the owner of arstechnica posted as myself however. Just like yourself posting as myself on your forums? That's criminal impersonation with libellous intent. Jeremy Reimer - "Much as you did at my forums. " You really ARE sick, aren't you? I have never gone to your forums... who does? Nobody has ever heard of them. (Either you are mentally disturbed, or you are stupid, because it's your funeral fool) Philipp@NTCompatible.com can attest to the fact you arstechnica people have done that there though, lol... coming there under assumed names, being banned, being caught & admitting you were doing it from arstechnica. Along with 3-4 of his moderators no less, & others there who had seen it. Jeremy Reimer - "Hey, remember the time you were convinced I was MWNH? " Jeremy, lol, that was years ago, & I don't live in the past... apparently, your sick obsessed mind does. I recall very little of my time there. Why bother? Nobody there could teach me anything. Why else do you freaks from arstechnica do things like this here, & your own forums prove that, here as to your weirdo stalking of myself (especially, since it points to this forum and this thread): http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 ? LOL, you're freaks. Give up boys, you're not cutting it & also showing people that you are weirdos. APK P.S.=> I have my own fanclub of psycho stalker obsessed freaks, now aren't I priveleged? LOL... apk

APK drooled: "I can prove that Ken "Caesar" Fisher, the owner of arstechnica posted as myself however. Just like yourself posting as myself on your forums? That's criminal impersonation with libellous intent. " Sure you can. So if you have this clear-cut case against the owner of arstechnica, how come you haven't sued them? Or me for that matter? "Jeremy Reimer - "Hey, remember the time you were convinced I was MWNH? " Jeremy, lol, that was years ago, & I don't live in the past... apparently, your sick obsessed mind does. I recall very little of my time there. Why bother?" Well, if you can't recall, you had "iron-clad" proof that I was actually someone else (in this case MWNH) As I recall you were going to sue back then as well. Clearly you have a problem with understanding how forums work and clearly you have a long history of insane paranoia. And you also have an obsession with making up imaginary people to "agree" with you. Just like this imaginary "Jessica" you invented. But this is the most hilarious thing of all: APK posted, WHILE LOGGED IN AS APK: "Why do the arstechnica forums members follow APK around like this? " You can't even remember who you are logged in as! Here's a hint for the future: when inventing new imaginary friends, don't let them post AS YOU! So how's that lawsuit going against me? Had any luck getting Shaw to cut me off? I haven't heard anything from them.

APK drooled: "that she posted via my account on my system here." Sure she did, APK. Just like all your other imaginary friends posted here as well. Funny how they all have *EXACTLY THE SAME POSTING STYLE* as you do. Right down to the grammatical errors. It's pretty pathetic, actually. So, how's that lawsuit coming that you have against me? Had any luck in getting Shaw to cut off my internet access yet? It's going on three months now.

You know, it's kind of amusing, APK, how you constantly accuse me (and other people) of following you around on forums... And then in your NEXT paragraph, trying to attack me, you quote someone from ANOTHER forum. The irony of this is quite delicious. Because in trying (unsuccessfully) to attack me, you've actually followed me around on other forums, and followed other people following me. Exactly the same behavior you claim to be so "shocked and appalled" about in relation to yourself. Anyway, how's that lawsuit going against me, APK? Any luck getting Shaw to cut off my Internet access? It's been 3 months and counting since you swore you were going to do it "tomorrow". How's it going so far?

Answer my questions first. 1. How's the lawsuit against me going? 2. Have you had any luck getting Shaw to cut me off? I numbered them to make it easier for you.

"P.S.=> Why do I get the feeling we won't hear from Jeremy again? " I don't know, I wonder why? Anyway that's the wrong number for Shaw, sorry to break it to you. "Lumpsum of your email to me that you were asked to stop sending my way 3 months++ ago were in the email to them." Interesting. I'm sure the nonexistent people you sent these emails to are having a huge laugh over your own stupidity and ignorance of the law. Not to mention everything else. "You have kept up a libel tirade & campaign against me... 4 years of it up to this year 2005 on your forums @ your site & arstechnica. " Actually, I never mentioned you until you emailed me three months ago. So that's another delusion right there. If anyone wants to read all the emails that APK is claiming will cause Shaw to cut me off, they are all right here: http://www.pegasus3d.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4128 Read the whole thread and judge for yourself who is insane! And APK you haven't answered my question about the lawsuit. That's question #1, if you lost track.

APK, you don't have to reply three times to one post. It just makes you look like even more of a retard. Oh wait, did I say retard? I meant drooling moronic retard. Sorry. APK drooled: "Jeremy, I spoke to them again last night. Funny you stopped calling me names like you have above - too late now boy." Funny, I have done no such thing. I've insulted you in each and every post and will continue to do so until the end of time. It's only fair, after all. Did I mention you were a drooling moronic retard? Just checking to make sure. APK: "Jeremy, I spoke to them again last night." Yes, yes, I'm sure you did. I'm sure they have your number on speed-dial, you talk to them so much. APK: "And, as Lord Baldrick you never libelled me @ arstechnica? Answer that Jeremy. " No, I didn't, and I can say that with some certainty because, unlike you, I actually understand the definition of libel. APK: "Tell us Jeremy: How many posts about myself have been made on arstechnica of a libellous nature behind my back since 2001 to today since I left there?" Again, none, because you don't understand the definition of libel. APK: "And, are you an arstechnica forums member who has gone by both Lord Baldrick AND Jeremy Reimer?? " Yes, I have already stated that, and stated that it is blindingly obvious. However, it also has nothing to do with anything. APK: "Acceptable Use Policy Management Team Shaw Internet Services Shaw Cablesystems ..." Yes, I understand that these people exist, what I'm debating is whether you actually contacted them. Because the standard policy is for both the accuser and the accused to receive emails about the existence of the accusation. I have received no such emails from Shaw. APK: "I answered it above, but will do so again! You will find out soon enough once this step has run its course" That is a non-answer. If you were going to file a lawsuit you would be legally required to have done it by now. There is such a thing called the Statute of Limitations. You can't just say you are going to sue someone forever and then never do anything about it. And now for some answers: "3 last questions for Jeremy here from me because the answers will be saved for forwarding to internet.abuse@shaw.ca: A.) Did I ask you to stop emailing me 3-5 times Jeremy thru our correspondence in email approximately, repeatedly? " Yes, but then you continued to email me again each time I answered, thus rendering your initial pleas null and void. "B.) Did your friends email me as well & did I ask for them to do so?? " Yes, they did, and no, you didn't, but unfortunately for you, it's not against the law to send somebody email. You might want to look that up before involving your virtual lawyers. "C.) And, did you stop when I simply & politely asked you to stop emailing me??) " Firstly, you didn't say it politely. I thought more like frantically. I replied to each and every email you sent me. "D.) Jeremy, does internet.abuse@shaw.ca exist or not? " It exists, but sadly, you seem perpetually unable to figure out how it works, what it's for, or how to use it.

Do you realize that you just posted the same thing like 5 times? Do you realize what a fool that makes you look? APK: "LOL, we will see! That, or your site will be 'taken down' one way or another." Is that a threat? Can we add that to your earlier threats of physical violence? Those are both things that could result in legal action against you, by the way. APK: "Jeremy, your "site" though? It's not even a money maker... not worth it either way. " I don't run the site to make money. It's a personal hobby site. It's for me and my friends. But of course you already know that. APK: "Look at the signature, I would NEVER put something that STUPID up about myself. " Sure you would. You do it all the time. You're doing it right now. Anyway, since you're too stupid to understand what libel is, let's educate you a little bit. Libel is the publication of a PROVABLY FALSE FACT with the intent to harm the reputation or business (or both) of another party. Now, to make it stand in court, you have to be able to prove that it is fact, not opinion. That's the key to the whole issue. Opinions cannot be disproved. So, if I were to libel, say, John Doe, I would have to post something about John Doe that contravened known facts. For example I could post that John Doe was in prison for a brief period, when in fact he had no criminal record. That's falsifiable. However, if I was to call John Doe a stupid retarded brain-damaged moron, that's an opinion, and it's not falsifiable. Now, once you have proven the false accusation, you must then prove that it caused you measurable harm to your financial or mental well-being. But we would never get to that point anyway, because of the first point, you see? I don't have a law degree, btw. This is just basic information that nearly everybody knows. Except for you, of course. APK:"P.S.=> Tell me more about that statute of limitations & how it applies to an ongoing live crime like email harassement" It's not email harassment because you kept replying. It's a regular email conversation. One that *you* initiated, by the way.

Oh, one last thing: APK: "You ADMIT you know it is me asking you remove what I didn't post on your site! " I admit that you told me to remove it, yes. I have always said that. But I don't know if you wrote it or not. Maybe you did and just forgot? Or maybe you just want to make trouble for no reason? How can you prove that it wasn't you writing it in the first place?

APK: "How about Libel Jeremy? You say you can define it??" I just did. You missed it.

Actually, your comments provide two very good examples of libel. Libel, as we've learned, consists of publishing provably false statements. So, example #1: APK: "I am Jeremy the no degree wannabe!" This is provably false, as I have a B.Sc. in Physics and a B.Ed. in Education. This can be documented and verified. So that's one example of libel that I could conceivably sue you for. Example #2: APK: "I had to have mommy buy a foreign **** to marry" That's provably false in two ways. One, it's provable that no financial transactions took place from my mother to my fiancee and future wife, or any members of her family. Two, it's provably false that my wife is "foreign", as she was born in Canada and thus a Canadian citizen. So that's another example of libel that I could conceivably sue you over. Aren't we having fun learning today?

A one-sentence summary from a web page is giving me a "thrashing"? Um, okay. I guess lawyers don't really need to go to school after all, they can just go to legal-definitions.com and get the Coles Notes version? Sure. Makes you wonder why all those law students spend all that money on their education. APK: "Not true on the last 4-5 now the last 2-3 months. " This is provably false. Each email I sent you was met with a reply, thus rendering your previous objections null and void. Sending an email is not against the law. Maybe you missed that one on legal-definitions.com. Oh noes!

In addition: APK: "Sure you do, like your LAW degree & your understanding of the statute of limitations?" Firstly, I never claimed to have a law degree. Secondly, my understanding of the statute of limitations appears to be intact. Thirdly, it is provable that I have the degrees I stated. You can request this information from the University of British Columbia. That's what the libel laws mean when they say "provable".

APK: "So Jeremy, you "Great thinker" as you call yourself online (who's outthought himself apparently this time, lol)? " I already mentioned that the "Great Thinker" line is incorrect. Do you not know how to read? APK:"Does it matter WHO states a legal meaning? As long as IT IS RIGHT? " The definition provided there is incomplete. Some would consider that not right; others would merely consider it not complete. APK: "This one's no big contract to read thru & does it change the fact you've been at it for years now & are about to land in the bighouse for it? " People do not go to jail just because some lunatic *thinks* it. I remain, quite happily, free from incarcaration, thanks. APK:"Between the libel of myself by you & yours + the email harassment?" Neither of which exist (there was no libel and no harassment), and neither of which are criminal actions anyway? You do know the difference between criminal and civil courts, right? APK:"LOL!" LOL indeed. APK: "You're going down Jeremy!" Not in this universe. APK: "Pretty mucyh found it out today, & I won't lose a minute's sleep over it. " That's good. I suggest you get some sleep right now.

Yes, I must be crumbling under the pressure. That's why I reply to every post you make, calmly and cooly, every single time, without fail. Makes sense to me. APK: Shaw's techs ALREADY agreed you have lost it there. Check with them if you like. I don't have to, because Shaw's policy (like most ISPs) is to inform both the accuser and the accused of any harassment charges that they plan on acting upon. Since I have heard nothing from Shaw, there are only two possible reasons: 1. You never emailed them. 2. You emailed them, and they ignored you. Either of these reasons are fine by me. I'm quite happy with either outcome.

APK drooled: LOL, I am pretty happy at this point & will be moreso once you go down. Which will never happen, as I've established. APK wrote, incomprehensibly: Where are your names now suddenly Jeremy? That statement makes no sense. APK dribbled, ridiculously: If you're SO "tuff" jeremy, send another of those harassing emails my way again, won't you? I'm confused. I thought you didn't *want* me to email you? Now you're explicitly asking me to email you? Incidentally, an email by itself cannot be consider harassment. You'd have to use harassing language. Like, for example, much of the language you've used against me in this thread.

What was really hilarious, though, was when you got all angry about me telling you to get some sleep. You really should get to bed though! You need your beauty sleep! :)

APK blathered: "Shaw, so you know, also BASICALLY/IN ESSENCE (not a direct quote but one that stuck with me) states in their charter on their site basically this: " Uh, what? You left that part blank. Much like your mental state! LOL!

To send you *another* harassing email, I would first have to have sent you one to begin with. But the funny thing is this: You claimed my *last* email would be my undoing. It was not. Why would any further emails be any different? Basically you can't have it both ways. Either the emails I sent you already are enough to take action, or they aren't. And I don't know what you mean by "A bit late on the threats". I have made no threats. You've made plenty, however. Too bad you are completely incapable of backing them up with any kind of action.

For example, this could be considered a threat: "Call me it sometime to my face chickendick! I'd end you. REAL FAST... " But of course it's easy to be an Internet Tough Guy, isn't it?

APK dribbled: "Yea, REAL cool customer there. You are SO easy to 'rattle in your game' it is funny." Except for the fact that I remain completely unrattled. "No more name tossing suddenly too? Scared Jeremy." You said that before, and I replied with more insults. I'm happy to insult you further though. APK, you are a witless moron. You are a drooling, idiotic, pathetic, useless piece of human refuse who couldn't find his own ugly face with two hands and a map. There, was that insulting enough for you?

That's an awfully nice invitation, APK, but I have no plans to visit New York any time soon. BTW, why did you sign your name twice? Are you really losing your marbles completely this time?

Yes, I do think I will be "found innocent". Basically, because such events never happened. Thus, there will be no "trial". And no "conviction". And, well, basically nothing. Nothing but a lot of hot air! LOL!

APK wrote: "you didn't deny that did you?" I did, actually. Not only did I deny it, but I used it as an example of what a REALLY libellious statement would be. Because it's provably false. That all happened earlier today. Have you forgotten already?

APK drooled: "P.S.=> Jeremy, I could forward you the email which was ALL of your emails to me that I sent to Shaw upon request." Well, why don't you? Then I can reply to your forward! It'll be FUN! APK drooled: "Ever heard of the sword of damocles you wanna be literati?" Yes, I have. It doesn't apply in this case, because you have no threat to apply. No sword, in other words.

You do realize I'm never going to stop replying to your inane rantings, don't you? You should give up now while you're behind. APK blathered: "Would I like to face you man to man someplace? That takes 2 men, you don't qualify by ANY means. " Sorry, I'm not a homosexual and thus have no interest in such an activity.

"I'm not behing you, but Shaw certainly is." That's not even a word. "Send me another email talker." What's an email talker? "Since I lied about contacting them & forwarding you the content of the harassing email you sent my way where I asked you to stop?" I'm glad you finally admitted to lying about that.

"Know what happens if you do? " Probably exactly the same thing that happened the last time. NOTHING.

But you *already* dared me to email you again, and I ALREADY DID. And NOTHING HAPPENED. So I've already proven my point that you have no case against me. What's the point of proving it again? Maybe I will in a month or so, if I'm really bored.

"Should I stop now & come back in tomorrow to tell everyone the results Jeremy? " Sure, why not? I'll still be here. I'll ALWAYS be here.

"Either way you lose don't you?" Actually, either way, I win. I already answered your dare. Now I'm ignoring it. I win both times. :D Night night, APK, don't forget to get your beauty sleep!

"gee I thought he said he sent one again." No, I said I sent one before. And I did. And nothing happened. "LOL, he does, his "I'll always be here" will probably be from a jail cell" I remain unimprisoned, LOL!

"Jeremy, did you send me another harassing email?" I never sent you any harassing emails. All my emails were polite and pleasant. "Yes or no... answer it. Answer it here publicly." I already did. "I never dared you to do so. I said you'd never dare." That's the same thing, you loony! "Well, we will see, either way? 24 hours is a LONG wait with the sword of damocles hanging over your head" Indeed, but since there's no Sword and no Damocles, it's no time at all to wait to prove you wrong yet again. This is fun! I'm really enjoying this discussion. Shouldn't you be getting off to bed?

You should get your beauty sleep. It's another long day of insane trollish ranting for you tomorrow, you need your energy!

"If your message is in regard to slander/libel or harassment, contact your local law enforcement or legal representative and Shaw will cooperate as appropriate." So did you contact your local law enforcement? Did it hurt when they laughed at you?

"I told you NOT to email me again. What is your malfunction?" None, as I'm not an electronic device. Replying to an email is only polite. I did the only polite thing. Did you?

"1.) Continue talking big, & yet act paralyzed, not sending me another harassing email " But I never sent you any harassing emails in the first place. Shouldn't you be getting some rest? Don't want to be all tired and cranky tomorrow, do you? It's your big day! The day you finally put me away in jail, LOL!

"I dont see another harassing unwanted email here yet Jeremy... smart move! " That's because I never sent any in the first place.

"And, what dare was that?" To send you another email. Which I did. And nothing happened. So I've already answered your dare, there's no point in doing it again. "I don't see this harassing email you said you'd send again, I dont want it and Jeremy? You decide your own fate." I never sent any emails that were harassing. Shouldn't you be getting ready for bed? Aren't you getting sleepy? Big day tomorrow LOL! "P.S.=> Heh, I got sent a bet already & it is that you will eat crow & be humiliated here publicly... guess who, of ALL people, sent me it?" That doesn't even make any sense. You MUST be getting sleepy!

"Still think I haven't contacted & sent your harassing 3 months of email to Shaw? " Yes, I do, because you publically admitted that you were lying when you said you did that. LOL! Nighty night!

"You lost bad man, so wear your fools cap & leave." Nonsense. Simply by not leaving, I prove conclusively that I've won. So I don't intend to ever leave. Ever. I don't care how long this "discussion" goes on, a year, ten years, whatever. We'll see who dies first. :) How old are you, by the way?

Your dares mean nothing to me. I've already conquered them. They are meaningless, just like you. Get some sleep, APK, you're going to need it! You'll be all cranky in the morning! "Where are your anonymous arstech pals now suddenly to back you?" Asleep, most likely. As should you be!

"No more name tossing my way fool? Why is that...? Your jets get cooled suddenly?? Why is that?" I'll toss names your way any time you like, you disgusting, putrid pile of animal excrement. "I know why - PURE FEAR and PURE chickenshittedness!" You're insane. But it's going to be fun seeing how insane you become without any sleep! Whee!

"Jeremy Reimer - "Yes, I do, because you publically admitted that you were lying when you said you did that" WoW... Jeremy has turned psychic?" No, see, this is the thing, you said that in the PAST. If I was predicting anything it was the PAST. Look: here, you said it again: "Well, you could email me again harassing me more as you said you would since I lied here about being in touch with your ISP & the law regarding arstech & yourself... " You lied about the whole thing! Liar!

"Suddenly, which is VERY funny, the URL's from ars that blew past the crap security design of their logon scripts? " Um.... that never happened. You registered on ars. You were banned. You registered again under a different name. You were banned again. At no time was the "security" of ars compromised in anyway. Sorry to disappoint you! LOL!

"LOL, the very SECOND you harass me again in email? Shaw.ca will find you guilty (you already are you know in their eyes) from the crap you sent me for 3 months with your pals... WELL, once I get it?" But I already sent you an email, after you had uttered exactly the same threats. It was a very nice email. Very polite. Your response? NOTHING. I mean, we could do this forever, right? You threaten to cut off my internet access if I send you an email. I send you an email. You threaten to cut off my internet access if I send you *another* email. I send you *another* email. Etc. How long will this insanity go on? I predict another six months, personally.

You do realise that your ratings on this article have given you a much wider audience APK? I mean I've seen this thread linked in countless forums now. As people come here to read about the article that Mark wrote only to find this diatribe of madness and one mans crusade to show the world just how much solvent you can huff from a bag and keep the ability to type.

Morning, APK, my dear deranged loon! Rise and shine! Did you have a good sleep? Or did you get any sleep at all! I think I caused you a sleepless night, personally. Anyway, today is your BIG DAY! The day you claimed you would be "putting me away"! Good luck, LOL! :) "Where is this "I'll be here forever" stuff? " Well, I'm still here, aren't I? You're still unable to get rid of me. You're still impotent, useless, and pathetic. A lot of HOT AIR! LOL!

"Jeremy, give it up... aren't you ashamed from this below in my next post " What next post? There is no next post! Maybe your feverish insanity caused you to collapse on your keyboard in a twitching heap? Someone of your advanced age should be more careful!

"Deranged loon am I Jeremy? " Yes, you are. That much is evident by your posts. For example, you think that sending someone email is "harassment". You think that calling someone names is "libel" (except, apparently, when *you* do it, then it's okay) You think that both these things are criminal actions and will result in jail sentences. So, good luck with "putting me away", you crazed mental patient! Only 18 hours left!

"Send me an email Jeremy," "I asked you not to do it again mind you" So which is it? Do you want me to send you an email or don't you? Because if you want me to, I won't, but if you don't want me to, I will. How about that? Only 17 hours left until the "Sword of Damocles" falls! LOL!

APK, you deranged, retarded rhesus monkey, do you WANT me to email me or do you NOT want me to email you? Because if you want me to, I won't, but if you don't want me to, I will. All clear? Only 16 hours until the "Sword of Damocles" falls! LOL! "What would YOU do??" What I would do, is taunt you mercilessly until you give up in despair. Oh wait, I *am* doing that. Well, I guess I'll carry on then!

"He's sadly leaving me little choice & his ISP's personnel get another call from me" Oh noes! Not another call from APK! Less than 15 hours until the Sword of Damocles Falls! Whatever will I do? *swoon*

WELL!!! What would YOU do?!?!?! Don't live in the past. BTW, have you heard about what happened on ars 4 years ago? Let me tell you... Let me tell you, again... and again.. and again... and again... and again... (infinite loop) But I'm not living the past!!! No, siree!!! 5 stars!!! MCSE, MCP+I, CNA ... this is your brain. this is your brain on drugs.

13 hours to go! The excitement is mounting! What will happen when that Sword of Damocles falls!

Well, APK, your 24 hours are up: "LOL! Well, we will see, either way? 24 hours is a LONG wait with the sword of damocles hanging over your head... especially if you hung it there yourself! apk " Indeed. It was not so much a LONG wait, more of an entertaining one. And now it's over. APK, you've lost. You tried everything in the book: insulting me, insulting my friends, insulting my wife, threatening to sue, threatening to have my ISP cut me off, even threatening me with physical violence. Guess what? NONE OF IT WORKED WORTH A DAMN. I'm still here, and you're not, and your foolishness and idiocy and lies are now preserved in this thread for all time. I have to say; it feels good.

If anyone wants to know WHY Jeremy is tossing names at them? Read this from above & his OWN words from here on these forums quoted: February 7th here above: "Because in trying (unsuccessfully) to attack me, you've actually followed me around on other forums" http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 I didn't see "Jeremy Reimer" posting there! I only see Santilli (jeremy reimer) self glorifying himself as his persona Santilli. He didn't deny it even here for weeks! Suddenly he does though? Jeremy there also exposing ALL arstechnica debate methods when losing an argument online. Now, if Santilli is brought up? Jeremy tossing names! I wonder why that is? Defensive reaction at being caught is what! & alt.fan.jeremy-reimer That in & of itself? HILARIOUS! Nuts but hilarious! Jeremy calls himself a "Brilliant Man" & GOD no less! Pretty pitiful & obvious.

Jeremy Reimer, after that exposing of yourself with your own words I would leave here. You have not contributed to this forum's discussion on a technical level and have only attempted to put down others. You only succeeded in embarassing yourself + your arstechnica colleagues & their tactics online thoroughly @ this point! Solely only judging by your name tossing antics reactions to people noting 'santilli' above & your attempts to bury your self-glorifying tactics posting as others at other forums? You thoroughly have humiliated yourself with your own words imho.

Hey, the forum software unborked itself! Awesome. Now, let's get back to our regularly scheduled APK-related insanity. APK seems to be extremely obsessed about "Santilli" these days. I'm not entirely sure why; nothing APK does makes any sense. But Santilli has a long posting history on arstechnica, storagereview and pegasus3d.com, and I'm sure he thinks it's quite hilarious that you think he and I are the same person. Tell me, APK, are MWNH and I the same person? How about Veritas? How about Jay Little? What about Rave? Santilli, we know, we get it already. Are there any others? Perhaps I am actually EVERY PERSON ON THE ENTIRE INTARWEB!!!11

Jeremy, didnt you hear me? Again: Jeremy Reimer, after that exposing of yourself with your own words I would leave here. You have not contributed to this forum's discussion on a technical level and have only attempted to put down others. You only succeeded in embarassing yourself + your arstechnica colleagues & their tactics online thoroughly @ this point! Solely only judging by your name tossing antics reactions to people noting 'santilli' above & your attempts to bury your self-glorifying tactics posting as others at other forums? You thoroughly have humiliated yourself with your own words imho.

Jeremy you said APK followed you elsewhere (seems you and arstechnica did that here, pots calling the kettle black). The URL from their forums pointed right to here no less and you give yourselves away more. You stated APK found YOU posting there per your own words above from February 7th I will quote again: "you've actually followed me around on other forums" I like others also dont see a Jeremy Reimer posting there at http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 I only see youself (which you didn't deny until today rather suddenly along with name tossing tactics) posting there glorifying Jeremy Reimer as Santilli. What is psychologically interesting is that whenever myself or anyone brought Santilli up? You called us names, tried to bury that evidence, & more. You gave yourself away Jeremy, along with every tactic you use when losing badly there as well. The alt.fan.jeremy-reimer posts are further examples of your attempts to self glorify yourself as well. It seems to me that you have no self confidence Jeremy if you must attempt to build up your Jeremy Reimer persona as others online (Lord Baldrick at arstechnica, & doubtless Santilli as well). Imo, you have simply been caught so obviously here that you look quite the fool to all reading here while you call them names when they pointed it out after reading your own words above from February 7th. Dont you have any shame at being caught like this red-handed Jeremy?

APK dribbled: "Jeremy, didnt you hear me? Again: Jeremy Reimer, after that exposing of yourself with your own words I would leave here. " I'm sure you'd really like it if I did; however I have no plans to ever leave this thread, barring the complete collapse of the forum software that hosts it of course (and it's nearly happened before.. I can't tell you how liberating it is to escape from that 20-character limit prison!) I find it far too entertaining to play with you, APK, you are like an amusing toy, predictable, yes, annoying, sometimes, but ever so laughable! You clearly suffer from some cognitive disorder, yet, strangely, I cannot bring myself to feel any sympathy for you. Just like the crazy insane man on the streetcorner, if he leaves you alone it's okay, but the moment he starts in on you he's fair game, and this is a game that I am indeed enjoying. So sit back, relax, and enjoy another year's worth of APK's insane, paranoid, delusional, and nonsensical ranting. Maybe we could have contests? Guess which forum poster APK will think I am next! We could place bets and everything. It'll be fun!

Jeremy, anyone that has to post elsewhere to self-glorify himself has ahem, problems. What is this alt.fan.jeremy-reimer material where you call yourself GOD and a 'brilliant man' from above also, lol? Above you plainly admit to being Santilli via your own words on February 7th "you've actually followed me around on other forums" & we dont see a Jeremy Reimer posting there, (ONLY Santilli promoting Jeremy Reimer)! Your reactions via tossing names @ anyone noting Santilli above? Simple reinforces you have confidence problems. Spend your Valentine's Day with this supposed wife of yours instead assuming that is real as well.

True, Jeremy never denied being Santilli for weeks here. Suddenly now today he does? BuStED! That alt.fan.jeremy-reimer "Jeremy Reimer is GOD" and "Jeremy Reimer that BRILLIANT man" stuff is absolutely hilarious. Psycho boy Jeremy live in concert cant escape his own words it seems and tosses names in defensive efforts failing more & more and miserably imo.

LOL, look @ Reimer's name tossing reaction here, like a 12 year old kid! "I won't leave" etc.

Arstechnica DESTROYED & exposed. They can thank their own boy Jeremy Reimer for that imo. They played themselves & got caught.

Arstechnica, in fact, is not destroyed, but is still around and growing stronger every year. APK, on the other hand, gets weaker every year. Coincidence? I think not!

Also interesting to note: every psychological problem that APK has, he blames on other people. Let's observe: 1. Early in this thread, long before I even arrived, he created a fake user called "Steve" who agreed with his every word. Unfortunately "Steve" had precisely the diction, vocabulary and grammatical errors that APK had, and this ruse was uncovered almost immediately. APK's REACTION: Start accusing everyone ELSE of creating fake identities, seemingly at random. 2. APK, back in his wars with Arstechnica before he was banned there multiple times (making multiple accounts) spammed his utterly useless APK Tools 2000+++ or whatever the hell they are called, expecting great praise. Some of the more technical people noted how his installation often failed because it used hardcoded paths for the OS directory. APK's REACTION: In this thread, he attacks Mark Russinovich for using hardcoded paths. 3. APK posts things of a psychotic and dangerously unstable nature; people (including psychiatry students) call him on this. APK's REACTION: Accuse everybody ELSE of having psychological disorders. You see how this works? When you understand APK's tiny little mind, it becomes easy and fun to play with him. Just think of something, accuse him of it, and watch as he accuses YOU of it! It's fun for the whole family!

Jeremy Reimer - "APK is also clearly jealous that he doesn't have his own Usenet newsgroup. :D " ROTFLMAO, like your alt.fan.jeremy-reimer where you post things like this about yourself? http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 (Little ego-strokin' there Mr. Reimer?) LOL!

I would like to know how Jeremy Reimer knows anyone is on dialup (much less APK) unless he follows them around online? Jeremy Reimer - "Kind of sucks you're on dialup" You didn't follow APK around online Jeremy? If not, how would you know he is online via dialup connections??

Really how would you know that Jeremy unless he posted it here? I searched this entire thread & didnt see where APK (or anybody) said they used dialup. Jeremy, psycho-stalking APK are we?? ROTFLMAO!

Jeremy really: So, how do you know anyone here is on dialup here Jeremy, unless you have been stalking them online elsewhere where they may have mentioned this? After all, I did not see APK or anyone here mention they used dialup either in this thread. Been stalking APK here @ other spots like your arstechnica buddies posted about doing here in regards to this thread itself to follow him here & harass him more? http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 From above?

Jeremy Reimer - "APK, on the other hand, gets weaker every year" http://www.cenatek.com/press.cfm 2nd article down is by APK right? Not in customer success stories but in reviews. Seems that cenatek took a review of APK's that he wrote up of their Rocketdrive solidstate diskdrives pretty seriously on their website recently enough. Do you have anything on corporate website pages like those Jeremy (other than your private playpen arstechnica)? I see he is featured on a few this way like SuperSpeed.com and Executive Software (diskeeper) as well. That's not looking too weak to cenatek is it?

I want an answer to this quote of Jeremy Reimer from above today: "Kind of sucks you're on dialup" I would like to know how Jeremy Reimer knows anyone is on dialup (much less APK) unless he follows them around online psycho stalking them all over the place?

Jeremy Reimer - "Start accusing everyone ELSE of creating fake identities" Didn't YOU do that Jeremy? Your last incidence of it was a couple posts above: Jeremy Reimer - "APK, back in his wars with Arstechnica before he was banned there multiple times (making multiple accounts)" Care to prove that? Also, prove how you know APK is on dialup. Like was asked above due to your own statement there, Really... How would you know that about he or anybody else used dialup unless you were stalking them online?? Answer it Jeremy.

He wont answer about knowing APK is on dialup because it shows him stalking APK around the wire like somekind of obsessive-compulsive freak. LOL, that alone would bust him here even more than his name tossing reactions to "Santilli" above have today.

Since it is Valentine's Day? Well, let's see how much Jeremy LOVES + Self-worships himself (IF "Santilli" above didn't do it for ya, lol) shall we: Group: alt.fan.jeremy-reimer [Post new message] Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news:bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.142... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence >> of >> our lives!! > > I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED! :) OMG! Straight from alt.fan.jeremy-reimer here: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 A bit of mental masturbation there Jeremy? Embarassed yet @ your own words?? Jeremy, instead of "self-worshipping" yourself on Valentine's Day today? Go spend time with this wife you allegedly have instead of looking more foolish than you have here already. AND, do answer the question about how you know APK is on dialup since he did not mention it here. How COULD you know that unless you stalk him online elsewhere as your arstechnica cronies & yourself proved here already: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 Jeremy you & arstechnica have lost all credibility here a LONG time ago.

ROTFLMAO @ Jeremy Reimer from his self-love newsgroup posts and as Santilli above also. Since it is Valentine's day today Jeremy, DO remember to answer the question of HOW you know APK or anyone is on dialup here... if you haven't stalked them elsewhere to find that out?

"Learning to love yourself: It is the GREATEST love, of all" Whitney Houston dedicated to Jeremy Reimer here next: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 ROTFLMAO @ Jeremy Reimer there & as "Santilli" above. Is that self-created newsgroup posts there a "Happy Valentines Day" card, lol, to himself maybe? Beyonce Knowles is better "You got me lookin' SO CRAZY in love" LOL, with himself as Santilli & from his personal self-worship newsgroup too. Answer this question Jeremy Reimer: So, Jeremy how DO you know APK is on dialup (or anybody else) if you do not follow them around online stalking them you crazo? "Lookin' so CRAZY in love..." lol...

ROTFLMAO hahahahahaha @ Reimer the self-worshipper & obviously BUSTED one. That last posting clinched it with material from his private love-nest newsgroup & the Whitney Houston + Beyonce tunes! LMAO, thank you for this humor today on Valentines day people.

"Learning to love yourself: It is the GREATEST love, of all" Whitney Houston dedicated that tune to Jeremy Reimer here apparently, since his next words are below from his "Happy Valentines Day card (note today's date is V-Day) to himself" next: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 Group: alt.fan.jeremy-reimer [Post new message] Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news: bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.1 42... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence >> of >> our lives!! > > I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED! :) ROTFLMAO!!! Jeremy between that, your arstechnica pals following APK around as you evidenced months ago here POINTING TO HERE from this URL: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 And, lastly not answering HOW YOU KNOW apk or anyone is on dialup? (Since you allegedly don't follow them around online like the sicko obsessed compulsive disorder victim you are, how would you know if APK is on dialup) You got played. You played yourself.

Here's how I knew you were on dialup, APK: I guessed. You see, I have a thing called a human brain. You'd be surprised how useful such a thing is, or at least you would be if you actually had one. I knew that you were insane and obsessive-compulsive, that you HAD to reply to every single post I made, without fail, or you'd, I don't know, explode or something. I knew that you *used* to be on broadband, via Roadrunner (rr.com) but that you apparently no longer had this address, because you didn't use it to email me. (It's possible but not likely that you were disconnected from Road Runner after numerous abuse complaints were directed at abuse@rr.com from myself, MWNH, GOD, Caesar and others, but observe again how APK accuses other people of things that he does himself-- he almost certainly got the idea to email abuse@shaw.ca from this, as he is incapable of coming up with new ideas himself) What's more likely is that APK simply is too poor to afford broadband anymore, not being able to hold down a job because he is psychotic and completely antisocial, not to mention incompetent, and certainly the money isn't rolling in from sales of APK Crapware 2000+++ Graphical Ping 32-Bit Engine SP3 3053.43.7! So anyway, I noticed that this thread was getting really long (someone noted that it was over 980k of text) I also noticed that APK was only able to reply about once for every one of my replies (back when we were limited to 20 characters or less from the broken forum software) I put two and two together and guessed that you were on dialup, which you have now confirmed. Thanks! Oh, and Happy Valentine's Day, APK! Too bad you never found a woman to love you. Or anyone else, for that matter.

Oops, I meant to type "once for every one of my four replies". APK's probably forgotten about that now, as it happened nearly 12 hours ago.

Anyway, APK, doesn't it really stick in your craw that you, the great amazing APK can only get crappy dialup, whereas your arch-nemesis Jeremy gets speedy broadband? You must just *hate* that! I guess you'd better stop obsessing with people on the Internet and get yourself a job!

Jeremy between the above post "loving yourself" today on Valentine's Day? Yourself & arstechnica pals following APK around (as you evidenced months ago here) POINTING TO HERE from this URL: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 LOL!

Some questions for Jeremy Reimer to answer: * Jeremy, when is the last time APK was @ arstechnica forums posting there? (From searching arstech myself - I saw 2001 as the last time APK was there & he left and did not return there since. I have seen you all follow him elsewhere online like 3dfiles.com, ntcompatible.com, majorgeeks.com & more though like here!) * Jeremy why have your arstechnica forums people kept libelling APK for 4 years after he left your forums from 2001-2005? (Once more - I actually searched arstechnica & found a volume of libel directed APK's way that was indisputable evidence of libel there in fact. I think arstechnica has a definite libel case heading their way @ this point.) * Did APK come here looking for trouble from you & your astechnica cohorts here, or did arstechnica or yourself (again anonymously/impersonating others) post about APK here first? I saw the first references to arstechnica did not come from APK by any means here. BUT, APK did later expose the fact you posted @ arstechnica to bother him HERE though, right here from arstechnica's own forums: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2

I didnt see APK post since Feb. 10th Jeremy, So how on earth can you say it was APK Jeremy? He never said he was on dialup here ever... And, since you mention it? From the Feb. 10th 20 character limited posts above section?? It looks to me like the posts made by those that didn't agree with you above came @ T1 speeds, outpacing your own PLUS waarheid & veritas supporting you! Boy you are reaching Jeremy and the evidence above contradicts you badly.

Jeremy Reimer - "I meant to type "once for every one of my four replies"" Jeremy I noted what the last poster did from the area you said to look @ above, when posts were limited to 20 approximate characters etc. & it seems that the Anonymous Posters there that stuck up for APK came at rates exceeding your cable connection speeds by FAR. Outpacing yours, waarheid (funny he appears here again, he connected you with arstech with Veritas), & Veritas (another reappearing arsboy) posts combined. Another LIE Jeremy?

Jeremy Reimer - "arch-nemesis Jeremy" Ahem: Psychopath Jeremy Reimer is more like it. Since it was shown that whoever didnt agree with you (when the forum here was limited to 20 char. posts, & you said anyone that didnt agree with you & arstechnica is APK above)? How come their posts came faster than your cablemodem ones above did?? I just looked when you stated that Jeremy & you got dusted in speed of replies... so how come you say APK has 56k if he is they?? No Jeremy, I think you have been following APK around online harassing him for YEARS now as your arstechnica libel of him from 2001 to 2005 recently evidence. How DO YOU KNOW HE IS ON dialup Jeremy if you haven't followed him around online lurking around like the freak you are?

http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 What a complete lunatic! Are you embarassed by your own antics or what loony boy?

Jeremy Reimer - "I also noticed that APK was only able to reply about once for every one of my replies (back when we were limited to 20 characters or less from the broken forum software)" First of all I noted as well that Jeremy, Veritas, & Waarheid (our 3 arstech loons here) posted SLOWER than the Anonymous Users in that period on Feb 10. Far faster than their cable connections even. Jeremy, care to rephrase your LAME excuse for stalking APK all over online? He never said he was on dialup here did he? I would bet he has elsewhere & you followed him around lurking in the shadows as the coward you are. Email harassing APK too I see from above? You are just digging your grave as well as arstechnica's.

Jeremy Reimer - "I also noticed that APK was only able to reply about once for every one of my replies (back when we were limited to 20 characters or less from the broken forum software)" Jeremy caught in yet another lie here. Jeremy couldn't even see/admit that Veritas, waarheid, & HIS OWN posts came slower than those Anonymous people's did above on the 10th above when this forum was limiting itself to 20 char posts! Jeremy, you are losing credibility with each post. Live your illusions whacko, the facts cleanly show otherwise.

Never mind Reimer lying here, we already realize & see that Jeremy lies about how he knows APK supposedly uses dialup connections! That much is obvious & that he's a liar or deluded nut if he thinks we cannot see how much the Anonymous Users posts rates came faster than his cable connection did! What is more weird about him are these things he wrote about himself imo next! Between this: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 And this "Santilli" self-glorification of Jeremy Reimer from February 7th above which I will quote again: "you've actually followed me around on other forums" I dont see a Jeremy Reimer posting there at http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 ? BUT, Santilli (Reimer again) self-glorifying Jeremy Reimer (himself) there? Wow... red alert people -> Jeremy Reimer = online fruitcake of the highest order possible!

APK drooled: "First of all I noted as well that Jeremy, Veritas, & Waarheid (our 3 arstech loons here) posted SLOWER than the Anonymous Users in that period on Feb 10. Far faster than their cable connections even." That doesn't even make any sense. They posted slower but they posted faster? Clearly you've gone around the bend. You can't even remember when you're pretending to be someone else and when you're not! This is hilarious. I've clearly touched a nerve. I shall have to see what else I can taunt you about, in order to make you break down even more! More insanity! More deranged APK-isms! More! More! More!

Some questions for Jeremy Reimer to answer in addition to how he says APK is on dialup! Answer my questions below, & quit avoiding them Jeremy as you have thru this entire thread. You lose credibility constantly, especially with this lunacy: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 (The last poster disproved Jeremy's insane reasoning & lies of how he knows supposedly APK is on dialup! The evidences of the Anonymous Poster reply speeds exceeding those of his, Veritas, & waarheid's cable connection rates combined on Feb. 10th above when posts were limited to 20 characters showed it): * Jeremy, when is the last time APK was @ arstechnica forums posting there? (From searching arstech myself - I saw 2001 as the last time APK was there & he left and did not return there since. I have seen you all follow him elsewhere online like 3dfiles.com, ntcompatible.com, majorgeeks.com & more though like here!) * Jeremy why have your arstechnica forums people kept libelling APK for 4 years after he left your forums from 2001-2005? (Once more - I actually searched arstechnica & found a volume of libel directed APK's way that was indisputable evidence of libel there in fact. I think arstechnica has a definite libel case heading their way @ this point.) * Did APK come here looking for trouble from you & your astechnica cohorts here, or did arstechnica or yourself (again anonymously/impersonating others) post about APK here first? I saw the first references to arstechnica did not come from APK by any means here. BUT, APK did later expose the fact you posted @ arstechnica to bother him HERE though, right here from arstechnica's own forums: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 Jeremy Reimer, I think you had best leave now. Between your self-glorifying newsgroup "APK is jealous of" lol, you stated above? You look like a prime lunatic.

Jeremy Reimer - "Clearly you've gone around the bend" About that Jeremy, here in your OWN words worshipping yourself? http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 And this "Santilli" self-glorification of Jeremy Reimer from February 7th above which I will quote again: "you've actually followed me around on other forums" I dont see a Jeremy Reimer posting there at http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2608 BUT, Santilli (Reimer again) self-glorifying Jeremy Reimer (himself) there? Wow-> Jeremy Reimer = online fruitcake of the highest order possible! What gives you away on the Santilli stuff is how you called anyone names above that referred to it & how you tried to bury it. Obvious you are embarassed about both of those and you ought to be, you whacko nutcase. Ahem: We know it was Valentine's Day yesterday Jeremy, but loving yourself is NOT what that day is about you blatant nutjob! BUT, who knows what goes thru the mind of a loono like Jeremy. Your own lies & evidence above about your knowing APK is on dialup? Shotdown by the very place you said to look above Feb 10th where it seems that Anonymous Posters outpaced your reply rate + those of Veritas & waarheid 5-to-1 almost! Care to tell the truth for once about how you can say APK uses dialup then, you clearly delusional nutjob? Answer the last poster's 3 questions too!

Jeremy Reimer: You have been caught repeatedly lying and your evidence is not any good either about how APK is on dialup as you stated above. If he was the Anonymous posters from Feb 10th then how on earth could he as a dialup user outpace your reply rate above as those Anonymous Posters did. Everyone that doesnt agree with Jeremy Reimer = APK now right? Jeremy, after your newsgroup self-worshipping posts saying YOU ARE GOD you wrote yourself above? Not many people think you are sane. Arstechnica & yourself being caught following APK here as well did not help your 'cause' either. Jeremy, out of respect for yourself and your innocent arstechnica forums colleagues, you really should leave. You are as believable as the boy who cried wolf @ this point. You are not contributing to the technical issues here & are a known troublemaker apparently online from the storageforums post about your methods you use when losing posts debates, like name tossing, avoiding questions (like you have the 3 simple ones asked of you above by the last 2 posts), libelling others, and now it seems email harassing them also as you have been caught for thru your ISP Shaw.ca also. Do yourself and all others here a favor: Please leave. Thank-You.

APK isn't the one getting laughed @ here by any means imho, but rather arstechnica & their (Jeremy Reimer's) refusal to leave or answer questions asked of them. Looking over Jeremy Reimer's post of: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 Group: alt.fan.jeremy-reimer [Post new message] Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news: bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.1 42... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence >> of >> our lives!! > > I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED! From his own self-promoting newsgroup he created & said this about here: Jeremy Reimer - "APK is also clearly jealous that he doesn't have his own Usenet newsgroup. :D" Above? Made others & myself here wonder about his sanity. Topping that off with the fact his ISP has caught & nailed him for email harassment for 3 months & numerous times including spoofing email headers? Don't wonder why he is not replying anymore here. Lying about how he "knows APK is on dialup" here topped it off. His own evidence failed & showed him to clearly be either insane or a liar. Either one is not making anyone but arstechnica & Jeremy out to be flakes of some sort with mental issues.

"APK isn't the one getting laughed @ here by any means imho" He (and by he, I mean you) is, actually. This thread is getting linked to on sites worldwide and more and more people are discovering the true lunacy that is APK. Eventually this thread will have to be archived, so I can preserve forever the complete insanity and mental psychosis that you, APK, are exhibiting here. I think I'll make my own anti-APK website, give you something to add to your phony lawsuit with your phony lawyers. Make you REALLY mad! It's going to be so hilarious! Especially now as you seem to be so angry that your comments have stopped making even the SLIGHTEST amount of sense, I think this is the perfect time for such a thing. After I tell a few more popular comedy sites about this thread, that is. Perhaps, if I'm really lucky, I'll get a whole bunch of people in a whole bunch of different forums laughing at you, and you'll have to register at each and every one of those forums just to respond in your usual insane ways! As you fall deeper into insanity, you'll get banned from each and every one of these forums for bad behaviour, which will make your life even more unbearable. Well, it was just an idea. On the other hand that does seem like a lot of work, and it's much easier just to make fun of you in this one thread. But either way, keep up the lunacy, APK! Keep up the deranged ramblings! And remember: EVERYBODY'S laughing at you. Cheers!

APK lied: "Topping that off with the fact his ISP has caught & nailed him for email harassment for 3 months & numerous times including spoofing email headers? " Except that never happened. I've received no emails from Shaw about this matter. EVER. How does it feel to be caught lying so easily and so often?

Looks like APK is getting desperate: APK wrote: "Jeremy Reimer, I think you had best leave now." "Jeremy, out of respect for yourself and your innocent arstechnica forums colleagues, you really should leave." "Do yourself and all others here a favor: Please leave. Thank-You." and the final coup de grace: "Don't wonder why he is not replying anymore here." (said after I didn't reply for, what, 8 hours? Wishful thinking on your part, APK!) The truth is, the more you plead, the more you beg, the more you desperately want me to leave, the more determined I am to stay here forever. Even if this forum software breaks, I'm just going to copy the entire thread and recreate it on a different server, so the truth about APK's insanity will be preserved forever. As an important historical document, of course. LOL!

Jeremy Reimer - "And remember: EVERYBODY'S laughing at you." Right... see your own weird words here along with Santilli above which you called most repliers names about & tried to bury above: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 Group: alt.fan.jeremy-reimer [Post new message] Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news: bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.1 42... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence >> of >> our lives!! > > I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED! ??? Jeremy Reimer - "APK is also clearly jealous that he doesn't have his own Usenet newsgroup. :D" Avoiding the 3-4 simple questions above? You're only making yourself look worse than ever along with your "I know APK is on dialup" proof above that shot you down in & of itself. Jeremy Reimer - "Even if this forum software breaks, I'm just going to copy the entire thread and recreate it on a different server, so the truth about APK's insanity will be preserved forever." APK isn't following arstechnica around the wire like was evidenced here has he? APK isn't bugging them @ other sites OR their own, does he libelling them from 2001-2005?? I think there is very little question of who is insane here Jeremy. Answer the questions marked by asterisks above that were asked of you why don't you as well???

Jeremy Reimer - "I've received no emails from Shaw about this matter." Give it time Jeremy because you haven't sent him anymore emails strangely from your own email account now have you? Other than spoofing them to him right?? You're digging your own grave & unfortunately for those @ arstechnica that have nothing to do with any of your antics??? Theirs as well because of libel being generated there after he left there in 2001, all the way to 2005. Care to deny that Jeremy???? It'd be pretty difficult to do since people can see that for themselves easily enough. Your "writing a song" above about him is libel Jeremy (slander as well since it is spoken) & you have clearly lost your mind if you think you have any chance @ escaping your own stupidity here, via email harassment on record with your own ISP Shaw.ca, & also from your antics here as well. Give it time and surely whoever is correct here will come out ontop of this all. As was stated above - APK isn't seen bothering others @ arstechnica & was gone from their in 2001. Yet, a libel tirade there spans over 4 years and 5000 posts there. Arstech members are clearly here doing this as well per this URL: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 As well. No denying clear print of it from their own mouths, the proof per waarheid & Veritas above you are an "arsholian" also, is there? Other webmasters from other sites can attest to it as well being ongoing online harassment online as well. You're losing it Jeremy. Take a good look @ your own rantings, being caught in b.s./lies (like how you know APK is on dialup, that lasted a whole microsecond until others noted to look where YOU said to above on Feb 10th), avoiding simple questions that incrimnate you, email harassment & more? You are just architecting your own online suicide in the making (especially with the posts as Santilli above & your newgroup self-glorifying madness), you supply the ammunition you are shooting yourself & arstechnica with is all.

Going to make it easy on you, Answer the 3 questions asked of you above (going to avoid them again?): 1.) Jeremy, when is the last time APK was @ arstechnica forums posting there? (From searching arstech myself - I saw 2001 as the last time APK was there & he left and did not return there since. I have seen you all follow him elsewhere online like 3dfiles.com, ntcompatible.com, majorgeeks.com & more though like here!) 2.) Jeremy why have your arstechnica forums people kept libelling APK for 4 years after he left your forums in 2001 (stretching from 2001-2005 currently)? (Once more - I actually searched arstechnica & found a volume of libel directed APK's way that was indisputable evidence of libel there in fact. I think arstechnica has a definite libel case heading their way @ this point.) 3.) Did APK come here looking for trouble from you & your astechnica cohorts here, or did arstechnica or yourself (again anonymously/impersonating others) post about APK here first? Answer them Jeremy, you have avoided them long enough.

I save this page every day in case it gets pulled. Classic comedy, curteousy of APK - the biggest BUTT of everyone's jokes these days. If I get a dumb user asking me a question - you know, those really, really, seriously, deranged dumb questions? I call them "APKs" in your honour, as you are without doubt the dumbest schmuck I have ever had the pleasure of laughing at. Ars Technica is alive, well and doing really well since they trashed your *** - I looked through those threads you kindly keep posting, and you got a real roasting - man, you were burned over and over again. Keep posting this crap, please - I have started to rely on it for a really good belly laugh in the mornings :0D

Sad i know, but i have been reading this thread occasionally for the last couple of months since i discovered it. Compelling stuff, really. I didn't know that this sort of thing actually existed! Seeing as it is the entertainment business that we are in, I think that after all this effort the thread deserves a review. (ok, ok, i'm not giong to claim to be a journalist with quals for this sort of thing - just a llllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwly soul - and I think it might be all the coffee that has put me up to this. Either that or the lab pixies) here it is, an amateur review of "The memory-optimisation Hoax" In the early days i read everything. I didn't even know what i had stumbled on. I just wanted to know about the memory thing. But i was drawn in by one poster who seemed to be emphatic. About everything. On retrospect i liken it to an experience i once had when a roommate of mine experienced a severe manic episode in which he went from having some good money-making ideas, to planning huge rallies, to saving the world, and then to conquering it,and then straight to the psych ward. Up until very late in the piece, everyone involved wasn't sure whether he was making the most sense of anyone they had ever met, or just plain losing it. We didn't know whether to participate with the possibility of being part of something world-changing, or to label the whole thing as lunacy and walk away. The line between these two possibilities is thin, I'm sure you will agree. So to parallel this story with the early days of "The memory-optimisation Hoax", I think that many readers previously unfamilliar with the workings of memory optimisation will have read the first couple of months of this thread trying to work out which side they should identify with so as to 'catch the big wave into shore', as it were. Such a compelling read... keep looking for the bit of info or the comment that allows you to 'without a doubt' select the correct side. And by selecting the correct side, we can all stroke our egos for being so clever. Nice. I'm sure i am not alone in the opinion that this phase of "The memory-optimisation Hoax" was like the first season of a really good sitcom. I think that as soon as i began skipping the APK entries the warning bells should have started ringing. It wasn't a conscious thing, it was just that 'damn if he wouldn't make a wonderful broken record'. It was like living next to the train tracks. you're always hearing the same noise, and it doesn't take very long for you to just block it out. Anyway, In a juvenille sort of way I began to just get off on reading the abuse and general responses that APK's postings had attracted. His postings were generally very long and detailed and a bit hard to follow (the sign of a great deal of intelligence and knowledge, no doubt!?). A pointer for all you budding argumentative types out there - remember that it is difficult for people to stay interested in your cause when they can't make literal sense out of you. With the continuation of the thread, it slowly became apparent that something was terribly wrong - even though at this point readers hadn't been provided with links to follow to other sub-plots. To cut a long story short, the Main Character APK was clearly showing signs of mental instability. Participating readers began to express their professional opinion and urged APK to seek medical assistance, for his own sake. A truely remarkable time in the course of "The memory-optimisation Hoax", where reader participation and emotional response came to the fore for the sake of the main character. I liken this response to that evoked during a particular episode of Happy Days, where Arthur Fonzarelli was caught in the dilemma of whether to foolishly risk all - attempting to clear 'deadman's gap' (or whatever it was called) on his Harley - or make the adult, responsible, and ultimately more manly choice of swallowing some of his biker pride and walking away with his life. All readers collectively and simultaneously held their breath... This is a real (made up) quote from one avid follower of the thread " I was a bit affected after viewing the first thousand or so pages... it really did seem like a bit of a human crisis ". Would APK seek medical advice, or would he just keep on truckin'? Strange that in the end it would not be a piece of information that would be the giveaway on which side of the argument to support, but rather the behavioural patterns of the thread's participants. ****** "The memory-optimisation Hoax" rapidly approaches its anniversary entry. We've witnessed some great themes and highs along the way. To name a few... The 'You aren't qualified to comment' theme The 'ARStechnica' subplot, with special guest star 'Headless Horseman' the 'APK loses the plot in real life, and this is subtly and seamlessly crafted into the script' theme (For all you canadians, this was much like when the guy who played Pete in Macguyver went blind for real) The addition of the evil genius JR, whose conviction is matched only by his stickability The litigation mini-series (wrt the virtual legal wars, statuette of limitations (she was small-breasted), harrassment, suspected libel etc) "Haiku" the Thread ThemeSong the christmas/new years eve sing-along the valentines special ---this is a skeleton list which could be filled out if there are any enthusiastic archivers out there--- More recently, however, i have been doing a whole lot of mind-numbing data analysis, and i can't help but check here every time i get really bored (which is OFTEN). Unfortunately, with repeated frequent viewing the content has become a little thin. Its now like a sitcom in the 10th season. We need new surprises! That ol' gag of APK pretending to be everyone under the sun just doesn't cut it anymore. I think it is time to wrap it up. Do it cleanly while the interest is still there. So How's it going to end? personally, my money is on the Big J. He was a late addition to the thread, and i'm not sure if we would be friends in real life because he's a bit of a bullyboy who really shoud stop teasing the nut case from the other side of the wire mesh fence, but at least he is coherent... and strangely enough (contrary to 'anonymous' belief) seems to post mainly as himself. This makes his character both more believeable and easier to identify with. (We have to think of the role models for the younger generation, you know) Misc. Guidelines for characters of "The memory-optimisation Hoax" 1. Lists of questions appear to achieve nothing, regardless of whether they are answered or not. Therefore, characters should avoid issuing them if at all possible. 2. Mindless repetition should be cut from the script. There will come a time when this kind of 'Sledge Hammer' approach will simply alienate viewers. 3. Its just not right that APK should be allowed to be all abusive and tyrading one day, and then a week later claim to be all bunnies and duckies and things. Characters should remain proud of the abuse they hurl - at the time they hurl it and indefinitely 4. No referencing posts that are more than three days old. This will help to keep the focus on the argument and dialogue that is immediately relevant to followers with short attention spans 5. Oh, and the links are great but please, only one posting of each link. --------- Thanks for tuning in Rob

"Classic comedy, curteousy of APK - the biggest BUTT of everyone's jokes these days." Sorry to break it to you APK, but Jeremy did NOT write that. I will not let him claim my mockery for himself - he's perfectly capable of mocking you in his own right. It's plain to everyone that you did not leave Ars Technica - you were BANNED. At least twice. For the same dumbass behaviour you're exhibiting here - give it up! Do the decent thing and quit this madness - your butt is getting so kicked. Remember "Pinkysqueaks"? Oh, you were sooo rumbled, sooo quickly. Remember "Cybordeath"? How obvious was it to everyone that it was APK - the only person on this planet who doesn't realise how deranged he is. People have stopped answering your "technical" (*cough!*) questions because you don't even notice when they reply. Go join the forums at www.disney.com and leave technical sites to those that have clues. --*NOT Jeremy*--

http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 Group: alt.fan.jeremy-reimer [Post new message] Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news: bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.1 42... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence >> of >> our lives!! > > I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED!

Why wont Jeremy answer these questions? How about his pals from Arstechnica here then?? 1.) Jeremy, when is the last time APK was @ arstechnica forums posting there? (From searching arstech myself - I saw 2001 as the last time APK was there & he left and did not return there since. I have seen you all follow him elsewhere online like 3dfiles.com, ntcompatible.com, majorgeeks.com & more though like here!) 2.) Jeremy why have your arstechnica forums people kept libelling APK for 4 years after he left your forums in 2001 (stretching from 2001-2005 currently)? (Once more - I actually searched arstechnica & found a volume of libel directed APK's way that was indisputable evidence of libel there in fact. I think arstechnica has a definite libel case heading their way @ this point.) 3.) Did APK come here looking for trouble from you & your astechnica cohorts here, or did arstechnica or yourself (again anonymously/impersonating others) post about APK here first? Answer them Jeremy (or arstechnica members), you have avoided them long enough already haven't you? You appear to be either scared, or knowingly guilty. Either way, you will be heading to court I imagine for an ongoing concerted case of online libel.

Rob (posting as anonymous) above is a classic case of contradictions: Rob/Anonymous - "His postings were generally very long and detailed and a bit hard to follow (the sign of a great deal of intelligence and knowledge, no doubt!?)." Pot calling the kettle black? Rob/Anonymous - "Participating readers began to express their professional opinion" Didn't Jeremy say they were STUDENTS above? Didn't one of those "psychologist" wannabe's state he was not a professional?? You are not worth reading, you contradict and twist things ending up only looking like a liar once anyone looks at your statements imo.

http://www.pegasus3d.com/download/apksong2000+++.mp3 Big mistake. That looks like libel and slander combined. Between Jeremy & Arstechnica following APK here and other places ontop of libelling him on their forums from 2001 when he left their site all the way up to 2005 currently? You judge.

An answer to the 3 questions 3 postings above would be nice from Jeremy or the arstechnica gang imho.

Sure, APK, I'll answer your insane questions. 1) I don't know; you got banned and came back under a different name so many times it's difficult to tell. 2) They haven't, because you don't understand the definition of libel. 3) You posted about the arstechnica people first. You *definitely* posted about me first, because I didn't even enter the thread until last month or so. And let's add another of APK's lies: "Give it time Jeremy because you haven't sent him anymore emails strangely from your own email account now have you?" This is, sadly, another easily-verifiable lie from The Great Liar, APK. APK *dared* me to send an email to his account. I did so, because it seemed funny at the time. He responded that I had the "Sword of Damocles" over my head and then said I had 24 hours before it fell. I counted the 24 hours down, and, of course, nothing happened. Another lie from APK. During the 20-character post limit, he again dared me to email him. "U don't DARE email me" he said, in his best APK frothing. So, I emailed him again, reminding him about how physical threats were a dangerous thing to utter, even on the Internet. And he responded by saying Shaw would cut me off, etc, etc. Of course nothing happened, because unfortunately for APK, it's not against the law to send email. Now APK has responded with two more lies: 1. Shaw warned me about sending him email (They did no such thing) 2. I stopped sending him email (this would seem to be contradicted by point 1, but never underestimate the illogic and insanity of APK!) Anyway both 1. and 2. are a lie. Of course everybody knows that APK is a liar except APK, who is incapable of understanding the concept, so it's a bit pointless even telling him, but I will continue to do so anyway. A 3rd party observer to the thread (welcome!) wrote: "personally, my money is on the Big J. He was a late addition to the thread, and i'm not sure if we would be friends in real life because he's a bit of a bullyboy who really shoud stop teasing the nut case from the other side of the wire mesh fence, but at least he is coherent... and strangely enough (contrary to 'anonymous' belief) seems to post mainly as himself." There are times, I admit, when I feel badly about taunting and teasing someone who is obviously mentally deficient and suffers from all sorts of delusions, mental illnesses, psychosis, etc. Then I remember the fact that he emailed *me* first, and he mentioned *me* first in this thread, and then I remember the not-so-nice things he said about me and my wife, and I realize I don't care if he's insane, he's been attacking me, and I'm going to respond. If APK would leave me alone I would happily leave him alone. Sadly, that's never going to happen, because he's insane. But that doesn't mean I have to let him have the last word.

Jeremy Reimer - "I don't know; you got banned and came back under a different name so many times it's difficult to tell." Care to prove APK returned under different names there Jeremy? That's libel in & of itself since you apparently cannot and have avoided that. APK proved the self indulgent idiocy YOU post from your own newsgroup and also that you are from arstechnica. He also showed that arstechnica forums members like yourself have kept up a libel campaign against him from when he left those forums in 2001 all the way to today currently in 2005. You are not looking very credible Jeremy. Just like how you stated you could prove APK was on dialup above. Your own proof shot you down. APK said he was going to report you to Shaw.ca for email haraasment and did so. Where did he say Shaw.ca was going to "cut you off"? Jeremy, it seems to me your arstechnica people mentioned him here first didn't they? Jeremy Reimer - "There are times, I admit, when I feel badly about taunting and teasing someone who is obviously mentally deficient and suffers from all sorts of delusions, mental illnesses, psychosis, etc." Jeremy Reimer - "Jeremy Reimer - "APK is also clearly jealous that he doesn't have his own Usenet newsgroup. :D" " So are you saying APK is delusional (better look at your own newsgroup material. Looks like the pot calling the kettle black), mentally ills, psychotic (I dont see him posting libel about you or arstechnica at arstechnica as you all have)? Jeremy at your forums @ pegasus3d.com? You posted not only that slanderous song about APK you said things about the girl he is in the picture with and here as well. Did APK give you explicit permission to post the contents of his email on your forums? Better rethink your b.s. Jeremy. Jeremy Reimer - "If APK would leave me alone I would happily leave him alone" You came here Jeremy, not APK to your forums, or arstechnica. I think that after your little song up there his attorneys wont leave you alone almost certainly. Jeremy Reimer - "1. Shaw warned me about sending him email (They did no such thing)" Where did APK say they did warn you? He said he forwarded emails to your ISP where he asked you 4-5 times to stop emailing HIM, repeatedly. He made a reasonable request for you to remove a posting on your forums he did not make. You know it was he asking you to remove that from the posting here no less. How did you reply to that, here no less? Jeremy Reimer - "You know that posting from 2001 that you emailed me about, asking me to take down? I'M NEVER GOING TO. I don't know if it was you posting, or someone copying your inimitable style, but I don't know and I don't care. I'm keeping it there *just* because it *******you off, you witless loon." Jeremy Reimer - "Even if this forum software breaks, I'm just going to copy the entire thread and recreate it on a different server," Childishly on your part on both of those accounts in my estimation at least. The second one demonstrates INTENT to libel him further no less. That song of yours you did about APK in that .mp3 link Jeremy? That IS libel AND slander. No doubt about it. You're going to be sued imho Jeremy, along with arstechnica. Jeremy Reimer - "APK *dared* me to send an email to his account" APK never dared you to do that. He said you don't dare. You have not sent him an email since, or one that was not spoofed right? Jeremy Reimer - " APK! Too bad you never found a woman to love you." How can you say that? You don't know him personally or his life and relationships. More libel. Jeremy Reimer - "Sadly, that's never going to happen, because he's insane" Jeremy, have you ever had to undergo any type of psychiatric care yourself? Judging from that newsgroup post in a newsgroup you created to worship yourself it looks like, I would guess that you possibly have. Jeremy I think you and your arstechnica forums are in deep in this one and going to go down hard. 4 years of libel directed APK's way on those forums is going to be impossible to defend yourselves against imo, especially since APK has not been to arstechnica since 2001.

The_More_You_Know -August 17, 2004 arstechnica was mentioned BY an arstechnica member here first. Read it yourself above Jeremy, before you call ANYBODY delusional. In fact, that The More you Know person? That very person posted that APK was here at this forum: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 No less & no denying it as it is clear to anyone reading it. Pointing out APK was here in this forum was his intent & it seemed to me with intent for arstechnica members there to come bother APK here no less, in plain print FROM his post @ arstechnica under the same name no less. It's very clear to see who is doing what here. I did look @ arstechnica and APK has not been there since 2001 (though you libel him and say he has? PROVE IT Jeremy. You have to prove your statements OR IT IS LIBEL ON YOUR PART!) I also checked on Veritas posts & those of others on & around Dec. 6th above here (check it yourself) posting about APK here where APK asked you to first reasonably remove a post he did not make @ your forums, which you readily admitted you know he emailed you on it! When APK was asked above what Pegasus3d.com has to do with arstechnica here: "Only if you're deluded. What does pegasus3d.com have to do with arstechnica" APK showed you ARE from arstechnica no less with your name being in their forums as Jeremy Reimer which you yourself admitted to above. As your name and as another assumed name Lord Baldrick. Jeremy you are in, or going to be in, deep legal trouble. If anything? From your .mp3 song about APK with your name in it as the artist no less slandering and libelling him. And, you say APK is 'crazy' etc.? Jeremy Reimer - "Jeremy Reimer - "You know that posting from 2001 that you emailed me about, asking me to take down? I'M NEVER GOING TO" There! You stated it yourself that YOU know APK emailed you nicely no less about your removing that. You admit it there. Jeremy Reimer - "Jeremy Reimer - "Even if this forum software breaks, I'm just going to copy the entire thread and recreate it on a different server," Clear intent to libel further in plain print. APK did not post a thing about arstechnica first either above all, this shows an ongoing concerted effort to libel APK in addition to his not being @ arstechnica since 2001, and they continuing libellous posts about him. I actually checked that out. Above all from APK? Not a word about arstechnica from APK came out of his first here prior to arstechnica people posting links from their forums here either. Care to dispute these points Jeremy?

well, sorry APK about the inconsistencies. In case you didn't notice, what i wrote was part honest opinion, part parody, all throwaway. The lack of direction, consistency what-have-you was intended as a reflection of what has been going on here for the last year. And in any case, it was not intended as a list of accurate, verifiable points. It was a story. At 2am i thought it was sort of funny. Now i only think that bits of it are funny. Soon, i think that i will think that it wasn't worth the time when i could have been sleeping. Ever felt that way? Just for the record, APK was the one who started talking about JR on this thread first. Elsewhere, like on jeremy's site, I think it was jeremy. but who really cares anyway. You sem to be very good at referencing posts above, APK, so why don't you head up there and have a look yourself. say, when did you stop posting as yourself. You don't even sign at the bottom anymore. Is there love lost? I can understand people like me writing anonymously, but for the seasoned veteran of the thread, don't you think it is a bit off? Hey, no need to reply 'tearing me apart' with those silly acronyms for online emotions and stuff. IT WAS PARODY. There is nothing to tear apart. Rob

Jeremy this song you have put up for an entire month now nearly from your website for others to download and listen to that you authored yourself and sang (I saw all of that from its MP3 properties and title): Jeremy Reimer - "Here, for your own enjoyment, is a little song that one of my forum members wrote about you:" http://www.pegasus3d.com/download/apksong2000+++.mp3 Jeremy Reimer -January 20, 2005 That is libel and slander Jeremy. As far as it being one of your forums members & not yourself? Seems you are lying Jeremy. The .mp3 file has YOUR name written all over its properties, title, and it is YOU singing it. Jeremy you have not only dug yourself a hole badly there but additionally kept email harassing APK which Shaw.ca has on record as well! APK in those emails you posted at your forums definitely had 4-5 times asked you to STOP emailing him. You kept it up nevertheless. I read that at YOUR pegasus3d.com forums and never saw where APK gave you any permission (explicit or not) to post his email to you there either. APK simply sent you emails where he asked nicely no less for you to remove a post he did not make @ your forums which you know it is he emailing you on it. Your musical talents Jeremy? Your biggest downfall imo. Definitely slander and libel put up publicly for all to see for a long time now. I would seriously be worried were I you. Your statements APK bothered you here first? Untrue. Your arstechnica people were shown to have come here first, have kept up posting about APK on their forums (in a libellous manner for 4 years now after APK left there. You say he had not? PROVE IT JEREMY. Its libel if you don't!) From data on their own forums AND postings made here first about APK? It's not too hard to ascertain who is doing what to whom. Jeremy Reimer - prepare to be sued for libel and slander as well as email haraasment & quite possibly criminal impersonation. One of those will definitely stick to you imo, @ least one.

@Rob/Anonymous User: First of all. Are you also an arstechnica forums member also, past or present? Rob/Anonymous User - "Just for the record, APK was the one who started talking about JR on this thread first" Untrue: See above where pegasus3d.com was mentioned first. It was NOT from APK or by APK by any means first. APK did mention he emailed a J. Reimer to remove a posting someone did with clear intent to libel him @ Jeremy Reimer's website pegasus3d.com though via criminal impersonation though after that was posted. As to your being sorry? I think the arstechnica gang is going to be FAR more than sorry when this all comes out of the wash. If you are one of them you just buried yourself as well imo and involved yourself.

na, i have nothing to do with any of that ****. I'm not technical at all. And least of all in my ARSe. Its just the human and social situation i am interested in. This has been quite a show so far. I'm kind of interested in what drives people to generate this sort of thing. Its funny that you claim not to have a forum or anything, APK, because technical titles aside that is exactly what you have generated here in this thread. What would you do if people other than you stopped replying? It would be like your fanclub had gone away. What would you do then? Return to the ramblings on the 'technical issues'? No-one would believe that you are truely interested in 'the technical issues' after reading this post. If you are then you should go away to another place, restart the discussion in the polite manner that you are so fond of, and quit the turf war. Oh, and i love the bit about the possibility of me being from those forums, and how if i am then i just buried myself and them. I scarcely believe that i just did anything to bury myself or them - regardless of whether i am associated or not. In the case that i am, what then? what exactly is it that you would claim i have done? In the case that i am not, then what difference does it make? Reality is that i finally wanted to see if you could provide entertainment-on-command. It is true. you can. If you had had any sense then you wouldn't have even acknowledged my first post, given that you thought it was so ridiculous. Instead, you just had to take the bate like the good little goldfish you are. I can see how participation in this could become addicitive... you are the kind of person that got picked on in school because you always gave the desired response. You're a grown man now. Perhaps it is time for you to learn that high school lesson!? Over and out Rob (well, really you shouldn't reply to me or reference me because i am just so so silly and stupid. but you will. And if you don't, then maybe, just maybe you are making progress and are beginning to 'learn that lesson'. Little steps, my son, little steps)

@Rob/Anonymous User: First of all. Are you also an arstechnica forums member also, past or present? Just curious are you or not... answer it. I also do not see youself or Jeremy backing up your claims you all made above either. Eating your words?

read the first sentence of my post. why do you ask a question when the answer is already given

and in any case there is no need to back up claims. none of it matters or is of any consequence. gawd! rob

lines like " are you or not... answer it" are imperative commands. thats not a very nice way to ask for something. especially something that has already been given. does it make you feel more in control? rob

From reading this thread today I have to say that APK has handed Jeremy Reimer and his pack of Arstechnica bungling dolts their ***** at every turn. Every accustation they made turned up lies. Examples of it are that Jeremy said APK is on dialup and where to look on Feb 10TH and I saw the anonymous posters putting out 10x as many replies as Jeremy on his cablemodem did. Jeremy stated the reverse. Jeremy said APK posted at arstechnica as others? I did not see it either. Jeremy had best prove that because thats libel by itself. Jeremy and Rob here stated APK posted about pegasus3d.com/Jeremy Reimer's site first? Again a lie. Either they are deluded as the accused APK of libelling him more, or just know the are on the ropes losing badly doing anything to bury their losing miserably to APK again as they always have in the past everywhere online that I have seen. Arstechnica is caught redhanded posting from their forums no less to bug APK here and Jeremy Reimer is an arstechnican too? Anyone that sticks up for that either deluded dimwit crazo or blindman is arstech as well. Stupid to do because that little song of Jeremy Reimer's is libel and slander without a doubt. Its obvious he posted as APK on his pegasus3d.com site by this point as well. His emailing and harassing APK as well which Shaw.ca knows about as well? You'd have to be out of your mind or his family to even think of backing Jeremy Reimer I feel.

@Jeremy Reimer & Arstechnica - You certainly wrecked things for yourselves haven't you?

"Jeremy Reimer - prepare to be sued for libel and slander as well as email haraasment & quite possibly criminal impersonation. One of those will definitely stick to you imo, @ least one." You know, APK, you've been saying that since NOVEMBER 2004! It's now past the middle of Februrary 2005! I mean, a threat becomes less and less threatening over time when you NEVER ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. That's why I mentioned the Statute of Limitations-- all these supposed "crimes" you mention, as they fade off into the distant past, any slim chance you had for retribution also diminishes into nothingness. "@Jeremy Reimer & Arstechnica - You certainly wrecked things for yourselves haven't you? " On the contrary, as I've mentioned, Arstechnica is doing better than ever, and I'm doing better than ever as well. I've even written popular articles for Arstechnica and joined their writing staff. You know, moving forward, turning hobbies (like writing on bulletin boards) into more serious, paying pursuits, it's all very exciting and fun. You, on the other hand, seem to just sit on your *** year after year threatening to sue everybody and anybody for stupid nonsensical things, and then never actually *do* anything. Doesn't it wear on you, APK? Doesn't it make you feel kind of small, insignificant and useless in life? Even mentally disturbed people can move on in life, you know-- they can seek counselling, get medication, move on with things... it's not a lost hope for you, APK, but you have to get over your persecution complex first. But ultimately, that choice is up to you. What do you want to do with your life, APK? Do you want to spend your entire time issuing false threats and ranting nonsense on discussion boards? Or do you want to get on with your life and let this whole "arstechnica" obsession go? It's up to you.

After reading all of the above proofs of Jeremy's here where he was caught in his own b.s. such as: 1.) Saying APK logged into arstech as others & he cant show that. APK hasnt been to arstech since 2001 Jeremy, get over it OR prove it. It's libel if you don't. 2.) Jeremy's 3 month email harassing APK after being asked to stop + being on record with his ISP for it is yet another. 3.) Jeremy being caught (by his own evidence) of how he says APK is on dialup above on Feb 10th evidence data is another as to his honesty/credibility/believability. 4.) Rob & Jeremy above also saying APK brought up arstech here first? How is that possible, when the posts above show otherwise: The_More_You_Know -August 17, 2004 (above, posting here above about arstech + APK & his posts @ arstechnica pointing to this forum): http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 BOTH show/evidence easily who is bothering whom, clearly. No less & no denying it (as it is clear to anyone reading it.) Jeremy here has proven himself alright! Personally, I am going to ignore him myself. It usually is THE best way to get rid of a problem child/troll/troublemaker online in forums. His MP3 song he puts up for a month or so now? That's about APK, & is libel and slander and grounds for lawsuit in addition to arstechnica's ongoing tirade against APK on their forums, AND here as well. Jeremy is now on MY 'ignore' list & most likely all others as well. After reading his posts as "santilli" above and also from his own posts at his own self-worshipping newgroup here: http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 ? You judge. Jeremy set to "ignore" setting.

Jeremy Reimer - "Even mentally disturbed people can move on in life, you know-- they can seek counselling, get medication, move on with things" Sounds like the voice of first hand experience in addition to your being caught here lying one after another Jeremy Reimer. Have you gone thru that psychiatric care routine yourself Jeremy? You were asked it above... from the looks of it, you have! After all - APK didn't come to you bugging you, but arstech and yours did to he here first since your pegasus3d.com forums were mentioned by obviously yourself or your pals above & APK merely connected you publicly to arstech is all. The evidence for my statements is above, on arstech since 2001 to currently in 2005 where you all maintain a libel campaign against him. Carrying it to here and getting beaten by facts and your own words took care of you here, and at other forums in the past as well. No wonder you obsessed weirdos bug him. Geek angst at being beaten soundly every time maybe? I see it this way: Even if you banned him @ arstech (which = you lost imo)? He hasnt bother you or yours there has he? Prove it if you say otherwise as was asked of you! Remember, by your OWN definitions: It's libel if you don't! On the other hand, he and others proved what you are about easily here currently. Jeremy: DO take your own advice why don't you and leave, or go see your shrink if you cant see reality for what it is instead of following APK around and ontop of that spanking yourself with your own words repeatedly here and elsewhere in the doing of it. All APK & others did was point it out to you that you cant see things for what they are and that your own lies and crap got you burnt here along with arstech, badly.

Well, I gave you one last chance to save yourself, APK, but you didn't take it. Too bad. It's your loss. APK drooled: "Lining up all the ducks Jeremy, or rather, letting you & your arstech buddies do it for me." You know, these have to be the slowest ducks in the entire history of waterfowl. You've been lining them up for FOUR YEARS! How much more "lining up" is required? Arstechnica has heard nothing of any lawsuit. I've heard nothing of any lawsuit. I haven't even heard anything from my ISP! There is no lawyer in the world who would take this "case". Firstly, there's the fact that APK has been talking about it for four years yet has never DONE anything. That's the first strike right there. Secondly, there's the fact that APK doesn't understand the difference between civil and criminal law (or anything to do with law at all). Thirdly, the fact that APK has made several blatant physical threats to myself and other arstechnica people in the thread above and elsewhere basically would dismiss the entire "suit" outright, even if there *was* any merit in it, which there isn't. Anyway, we see yet another example above of how APK always takes anything he is accused of and immediately dismisses it, then turns around and accuses EVERYONE ELSE of the same thing. It's a common mental disorder. You can see above how he takes my concern for his mental and psychiatric help and dismisses it, then immediately accuses ME of requiring such help. APK doesn't want to think about any problems HE might have, so instead he projects them on others, specifically anyone doing the accusation. There was a guy I used to work with who, every time you said something vaguely insulting to him, would turn around and say: "No, YOU'RE a (fill in the blank)" We used to have endless fun coming up with nonsensical things to call him to see if he would repeat the charge back to us. "Dan, you're such a tractor", we'd say. "No, YOU'RE a tractor!" It became kind of an office joke, one that we even let him in on and allowed him to share in the fun. After awhile we used to just say nonsensical things to each other and then respond with the "No, YOU'RE a (blank)" just for the sheer silliness of it. Dan understood the joke and accepted it in the good-natured manner in which it was intended, and eventually used it himself in a joking manner. APK, on the other hand, refuses to understand that he is being made fun of. So anyway, APK, you're such a tractor. (waits for response)

hey APK: do you live with your mother? i'll bet you a million dollars that you do. actually no, scratch that. i'm betting that your mother got knocked up by one of her johns and when her pimp found out he beat the crap out of her. then nine months later you were born and your grandmother stole you away from her crack-ho daughter and raised you as if she was your real mother. am i right? it would certainly explain why you're one psycho-moronic D I C K, that's fo sure! P.S.=> LOL! i bet your gay too! LOL! how's "jessica," your "right-hand girl?" LOL! PS LOL!

LOL at the poster above. So true! APK's been lying for months here above & elsewhere at other forums and been banned for it. He's one sick sad man. You'll get what's coming to you APK for your antics here. APK must really be embarrassed. He got his *** handed to him on a plate. LOL. P.S.=> APK, answer his question: I want to know how you know that JR is Santilli. Answer that or please leave. You're not contributing anything of worth in this thread of a technical nature like other posters here above? Do yourself a favor sadboy and leave the real talking to the big boys LOL!

Hahaha APK got burned about his "friend" called "Jessica" (really his right hand, proved above). It's obvious that he doesn't have any friends since he lives with his crack whore mother, oops I mean grandmother. I bet he has HUGE muscles in his right hand from all the "talking" he's done with his "friend" "Jessica". So sad that he lies and pretends that he has friends? Huh APK?? Get a life man, your defeated here so easily as proved above & elsewhere. Loser!!

Hey gay APK I bet your favorite song is "Whole Lotta Love." Hahaha, cause you love "Jessica" (your right hand in reality, as shown above in this very thread multiple times & elsewhere!) right. "Whole Lotta Love," LOL! P.S.=> You still haven't answered the question about how you know that JR is Santilli, as asked here above. Obviously your lying yet again, like you've been doing for months now, and been caught out @ it once more. And what about those threats of physical attacks you've been throwing out here for WEEKS now. Man, you've got a lawsuit coming your way and no mistake, bully boy. It's just a matter of time LOSER!

APK drooled: "On that statement from myself, in addition to my having left arstechnica in 2001 & being told by your own members @ other forums that you have kept up a libel campaign against me since then up to today. " Um, that's a complete lie (might as well just add it onto the pile, you've got quite a collection) No arstechnica members ever told me or anyone else that I had kept up a "libel campaign" against you for four years. APK dribbled: "That's pretty messed up Jeremy. Why is that happening? What is WRONG with all of you??" Nothing is wrong with us. If you want to know what's wrong, look in a mirror. APK dribbled: "In fact, I have posts marked from there that show where I was saying "can't we drop this & be friends" etc. & a few of your own members like DosFreak & StiSev even saying "leave him alone" & "APK is right in this post you are the ones bugging him" etc." There were one or two posts like that, IN THE BEGINNING. But as your insanity grew, as your personal attacks flew from your insane throthing mouth, even your "friends" like DOSFREAK abandoned you and said they wished they had never stuck up for you. By the time you were banned, nobody, and I do mean NOBODY defended you anymore. Then you returned, got banned again, returned, got banned again, etc. "I left because of that & did try to drop it, YEARS ago no less... seems you guys have the problem you stated above of: " No, you left because you were banned so many times it seems you ran out ways to reregister. APK drooled:"Jeremy Reimer - "Even mentally disturbed people can move on in life, you know-- they can seek counselling, get medication, move on with things" Not myself." Yes, you have made that abundantly clear. You are incapable of moving on, incapable of getting help for your mental problems. WE KNOW. You don't WANT to change. You don't WANT to get better. You prefer this reality that you control yourself. There's only one slight problem-- you don't control other people! So of course if anyone says anything against you, you go nuts. You can't control them, so you lash out, any way you can, anything to make them GO AWAY! Physical threats, horrific insults, threats of lawsuits, whatever it takes. You can't have your precious worldview threatened. Only one problem, APK: I'm not going away. As you can plainly see. I just keep replying, again and again, pointing out all your lies, making you look foolish, weak, and useless. And I will continue to do so. I am nothing if not infinitely patient. Too bad for you! Lol!

Jeremy Reimer - "Um, that's a complete lie (might as well just add it onto the pile, you've got quite a collection)" Anyone like myself that has taken a look over there & searched APK can see you're lying right there Jeremy. I did that last week and stated that here in fact above. You are full of it Jeremy, blind, or extremely delusional. Jeremy nobody deserves that for 4 years running. Answer the question Jeremy: have you ever been thru psychiatric/psychological treatment before of any kind? You certainly seem it.

Jeremy Reimer - "By the time you were banned, nobody, and I do mean NOBODY defended you anymore. Then you returned, got banned again, returned, got banned again, etc" A ban imo <> you won. It means you lost badly having to do that. I found the post where APK said 'can we stop this already' for the most part and tried to make good of it @ arstechnica no less. Anonymous User - "Hahaha APK got burned about his "friend" called "Jessica" (really his right hand, proved above). It's obvious that he doesn't have any friends since he lives with his crack whore mother, oops I mean grandmother." Who is the nut that posted that? Jeremy if you have 'friends' like that you met the wrong ones.

Jeremy Reimer - "No arstechnica members ever told me or anyone else that I had kept up a "libel campaign" against you for four years" Anyone can look there & search APK on arstech forums. Since APK left there in 2001 you arstech nutcases kept up a campaign of putdowns and mockery regarding him. That MP3 song of yours Jeremy is just another evidence of things like those 1000s of posts about APK @ arstech. That's facts Jeremy Reimer, reality. I could find that for myself there and here. You all do follow him around and try to cause trouble as you are doing here and nobody likes it here Jeremy. The moderators of this forum probably do not since they removed your posts and threats to go to APK's home threatening him here no less. Jeremy have you been to psychologists or psychiatrists for mental help counselling and such before? You toss that around alot and you sound like the voice of first hand experience of someone that has. Answer that wont you and quit dodging it because I am curious as are others here asking it of you as well.

I posted that! I'm best friends with APK & we live next door to each other in Syracuse and have done for YEARS now. We're LOVERS! I can't help it if it's the truth. I will not lie and cover up a love that is so pure and I will not stand by and let his insane grandmother and the memory of his clap-ridden whore of a mother mess up his head any more! Who are you though? You're obviously not APK because he would never be so sad + lonely as to post tons of times as "Anonymous User," pretending to be other people, right? Right??? You're clearly an imposter, as proven by JR & others above here and @ other sites for months now. So sad, Mr Sad Boy, LOL!? You should get a life! APK is surely embarrassed that you would speak for him.

hey APK, I bet if you shoot yourself in the face your other personalities would "die" and you'd be able to live without this agonizing multiple personality affliction. hey, it worked for that dude in "Fight Club" so why not you? oh ****, I forgot I wasn't supposed to talk about Flight Cl... *bang* *thud*

No, APK, because I'm a normal, sane functioning member of society. Unlike you. I don't threaten people with imaginary lawsuits over nonsensical rubbish. I don't threaten people physically over the Internet, like you do. I don't rant and rave and cast nasty, racist, sickening insults to total strangers over the Internet, like you do. I don't post anonymously pretending to be other people and have conversations with myself, like you do. I don't lie and make up stories and then get angry at people when they expose these lies, like you do. So you see, APK, I have no reason to seek counselling. However, you REALLY do. "Jeremy, also -> Why don't you email the mods here, & ask them HOW MANY ARSTECH posts they removed here? And why?? " You're clearly insane. How on earth do you think there are any mods here at all? This thread has been going on for OVER A YEAR! Most of it has been you arguing with yourself! Your threats and lies and insane rantings haven't been removed. It's clear that some posts have disappeared (like the long line of 'zzzzzzzzz's that borked up the forum software) but it's also really clear that nobody from this server is actively looking at this thread. If they had, they would have locked it, like, a YEAR ago. You're clearly obsessed with arstechnica due to the drumming you received there four years ago. This is not healthy. You should let this go, like YESTERDAY. APK drooled: "Jeremy, having to ban me @ arstech is NOT a win. You banned me I see you say." It is a win. It was giant win for arstechnica and sanity in general. APK drooled: "I could care less to be honest." No you couldn't. That much is evident by your posts.

he already responsed above "No, APK, because I'm a normal, sane functioning member of society." did you miss that? Rob

Dude, firstly tarantulas are MUCH bigger than banana spiders (legspan is similar but leg size and especially body size dwarf that of the banana spider). Secondly, banana spiders are common to every state in the continental US. Thirdly, so what? Banana spiders are not aggressive and their venom is less worrisome than a bee sting. What's with the hating?

APK - "Anybody, and I mean anybody, can write articles for one thing because it's easy to be a critic/reviewer, quite another to be the chef cooking & creating! Citing it as an "accomplishment" on your site? Doesn't make you look good or important even." Heh, that's really funny. Why? Because YOU cited articles as one of the reasons why you deserve respect in this field: "There is a BIG diff between being an accomplished pro in this field others cite on many levels (networking, programming, articles research work, even 5-5 star rated programs @ CNET...)" So articles are a mark of professional expertise when YOU write them but when other people do they're idiots? You're SO full of s_h_i_t man!

APK: Regarding Arstechnica you said, "Hey, above all - I haven't been to their sites for years, 4 already" Then why did you say, "Syracuse, so you know & you have posts at arstechnica asking "tell me about Syracuse" no less lol?" How could you have known that without going to Arstechnica? Full of s_h_i_t ++

Jeremy said: "This thread has been going on for OVER A YEAR!" To be fair though, APK has only been posting to it since July, 2004. Not that it makes him any less of an insane twatmonkey of the highest order who is in dire need of a brain transplant.

In fact, dude, you're totally lying because YOU have posted this link about a BILLION times in this thread: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=34709834&m=922007845631&p=2 That link is to a forum post from August of last year, yet you say you haven't been to Arstechnica in 4 years. Proof that you're a lying piece of s_h_i_t Dick.

We need a new chapter in this Saga Of A Fruitcake. The current one is getting boring. The time-space continuim paradox of APK not going to Arstechnica in four years, yet admitting to going there is, well, just not crazy enough. His rants about the posts and songs that sing of his craziness being libel seem to miss the point that in libel cases, truth is a valid defense (in the US, anyway). So, that's getting boring, too. You've proven above that you are a master of cut-and-paste. Again, and again, and again, and again. Booorrrring. C'mon, APK. Surely you're creative and imaginative enough to hold our interest with some new craziness. SHOW US SOMETHING NEW!! We want to be entertained!!! a bored reader...

P.S.=> About banana spiders that I saw in Mobile? They were HUGE... as large as a man's hand! Body was tinier (less fat than tarantula but leg width was larger over all circumference. BUT, more arstechnica bullshit nitpicking, up with spell checks & paragraphs spacing critique, about all they're good for along with being punks!)... apk Banana Spiders can grow quite large - leg spans up to about 5 inches http://www.shadygrovetrainingcenter.com/Wildlife/bannana_spider_photo_gallery.htm Tarantulas can grow HUGE - up to 13 inches legspan http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/arachnids/spider/Tarantulaprintout.shtml Good old PINKYSQUEAKS!!! There's a gay handle if ever there was one! - Pink and squeaky!!! APK - the pink, squeaky ******!!!

Sorry CYBORDEATH!!! CYBORFAG, more like! APK is so gay, so gay is APK - Oh APK is gay, gay, gay, what a gay chap is APK!!! (Someone want to set those lyrics to music?)

So, APK, I guess your medication doesn't really have that long an effect, does it? I mean you had that one semi-sane post and then immediately went back to full-on dribbling moron mode. I see you're no longer threatening to sue me or cut off my Internet access, though! Maybe you have given up on that little adventure? I mean you still throw around words like "libel" like it's going out of style, but I haven't seen any actual threats of lawsuits in quite a while. APK drooled: "Shaw.ca was informed, all I can do on that end so far." Yes, since they ignored you like the deranged fruitbat you are, that is indeed all you can do on that end. At all. APK dribbled: "What amazes me the most? That you losers must have been stung by me pointing out to your own forums members you talk alot, but produced SQUAT of note in this field back in 2001 when I was last there... " Actually, tons of people rose to the challenge and demonstrated code that they had written. But because it wasn't presented in the form of crappy Delphi shitware that fails to install and breaks your system, you ignored all of it. You failed to answer any of the more involved Delphi questions that were thrown your way as tests. Just plain ignored them. Nice revisionist history there, you know, anyone can go back and read the threads again and see the truth: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x/a/tpc/f/34709834/m/8510980933/r/3650926043#3650926043 I wonder, APK, when you are lying on your deathbed some thirty or so years from now, will you still be mumbling: "arstechnica... arstechnica.. arstechnica..."? I ask merely for information.

The posts from around 19th Feb are still there for all to see - and in case they're not, here's a copy and paste I just did; "Hahaha APK got burned about his "friend" called "Jessica" (really his right hand, proved above). It's obvious that he doesn't have any friends since he lives with his crack whore mother, oops I mean grandmother. I bet he has HUGE muscles in his right hand from all the "talking" he's done with his "friend" "Jessica". So sad that he lies and pretends that he has friends? Huh APK?? Get a life man, your defeated here so easily as proved above & elsewhere. Loser!! " Pinkysqueaks is one GAY dude! He's sooo Gaaaayyy!!!

APK drooled: "Well, they removed your recent posts from 2/19/2005 & 2/20/2005 that said my mother was a crackfiend & such for one!" I never posted that your mother was a crackfiend. Perhaps I should do now, do you think? But checking with a quick search, that post still exists above. IT'S STILL THERE! IT WAS NEVER REMOVED! APK drooled: "Jeremy you note others @ arstech tried coding, a couple did OK too, even though I found massive holes in their work & had to tell them how to correct it (w/out their sourcecode no less here)... do you code? NO?? " Um, many of the people at arstechnica have real programming jobs, working for real companies, like Microsoft, Adobe, Omni Group... Not some broke dial-up jobless loser whose greatest claim to fame was wrapping a Delphi control and a *******ugly interface around the output to "Ping". You posted no "corrections" to any of their code. You also failed to answer any of the advanced questions about Delphi designed to trick you. APK blathered: "This one threw your "great PeterB" for a loop, lol, & I had him totally fooled too that I knew he ran & installed my software once already (because of installshield versions having problems with one another)... that was fun! I figured of all of you he was smart enough to know how to fix installshield hassles!" Isn't it a hell of a lot easier just to write software that isn't so *******that it breaks on most people's computers? The highlight of all those threads was MWNH telling you how to use %systemroot% so that your hardcoded path batchfile wouldn't break. What a great programmer LOL! So, APK, how does it feel to be proven a liar so easily and so often?

By the way, APK, how's that lawsuit going against me! Had any luck getting Shaw to cut off my internet access? It's coming up on four months now.

A Pathetic Kook seems to have a stuck copy-and-paste command. ___________________________ If archiving this thread is "clear intent to libel," does that infer that this thread is demonstrable of A Pathetic Kook being nuts? ___________________________________ Why does A Pathetic Kook think that anyone who doesn't agree with him is a member of some internet forum? Why does A Pathetic Kook think that anyone who disagrees with him has never done any programming? I, for one, am not going to get into a ******* match with A Pathetic Kook. Some folks (yes, perhaps even myself ) have had enough financial success from programming projects that they/I don't feel the need to compare themselves/myself to some shareware author of questionable products. Especially not A Pathetic Kook.

Wow, I must have really struck a nerve. APK the truth hurts, doesn't it? So much that the only thing you can do is copy and paste a bunch of crap over and over and over and over again! Ouch! So, APK, how's that lawsuit coming that you supposedly have against me? Had any luck getting Shaw to cut off my internet access?

APK - who the hell do you think is going to read a dumb post like that? If you're just trying to bury posts like the one you lied about having been removed, well, here it is again - you're not the only one that can copy and paste! "Hahaha APK got burned about his "friend" called "Jessica" (really his right hand, proved above). It's obvious that he doesn't have any friends since he lives with his crack whore mother, oops I mean grandmother. I bet he has HUGE muscles in his right hand from all the "talking" he's done with his "friend" "Jessica". So sad that he lies and pretends that he has friends? Huh APK?? Get a life man, your defeated here so easily as proved above & elsewhere. Loser!! " You are one gay biyatch who can't code to save his life! Those programs of yours are soooo useless - my dog's unborn puppies could write better. It's quite obvious you faked up all those ratings by submitting them yourself, because I would not wipe my _a_s_s_ on them.

So, APK, how's that lawsuit going that you pretend to have against me? Any luck getting Shaw to cut off my internet access? How does it feel to be the laughingstock of the entire Internet?

And how come a search on ZDnet for your "5 Star ZDnet rated" programs comes up with this: "No software found for apk" Aww, poor APK!

What will A Pathetic Kook bring us today? Will it be more mindless copy-and-pastes? Repeating the same thing twenty times in the same post? It’s been said that a sign of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over, expecting different results. I’m starting to feel bit loopy reading A Pathetic Kook’s same post over and over. I’m hoping he has the tiniest bit of creativity to come up with something new. Is that too much to ask? Or am I crazy? Ah, well. It keeps him off the streets.

Looks to me like he proved his point. APK just really beat the hell out of both this Jeremy Reimer and the arstechnica goonies with the facts when he was asked for them in addition to showing them up as blatant liars and freaks. If this was something I was scoring like a boxing match I would have to say that it is 50 to 0 in his favor.

A quote from August 17th above from an arstechnica member named Weasel Spleen above I had to bring up after reading all of this outrageous crap from arstechnica jerkoffs: "An undiscovered Usenet Kook" http://news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-reimer&post_nr=5273 ***************************************** Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God! Body:"Jeremy Reimer" wrote in message news: bdnxd.543944$nl.538652@pd7tw3no... > "Rave" wrote in message > news:Xns95C4ADC30BA8Fravewiregmailcom@216.196.97.1 42... >> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence of our lives!! >> I agree with this brilliant man! INDEED! ***************************************** I'd say he's been discovered alright. Jeremy, so you are GOD, you total fruitcake?

Quote "Looks to me like he proved his point. APK just really beat the hell out of both this Jeremy Reimer and the arstechnica goonies with the facts when he was asked for them in addition to showing them up as blatant liars and freaks. If this was something I was scoring like a boxing match I would have to say that it is 50 to 0 in his favor. "/Quote C'mon, APK - you need to do better than that! ANYONE can see that YOU wrote that, even though you're bound to deny it. So you're not only gay and a has-been - you're a gay has-been. King Crimson sums up your recent posts very well; "I repeat my self when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat..." I guess that's The Internet 1,437,567,534,143, APK a bit, fat, gay, has-been (his own words, LOL!!!) ZERO LOSER!!!

That's pretty sad that you can't afford $80 per year, LOL! Sales of APKCRapWare2000+++++- not paying the utility bills, eh? Anyway, APKbot seems to be a bit broken these days, as it can only copy and paste the same mindless rubbish over and over and over again. Nice to see that it paused for a bit to pretend to be someone else again: "I'm not APK and I'd just like to say APK won ten bazillion to zero! Signed APK! Oops I mean signed NOT aPK! Lol!" So for a change of pace, today I'd like to talk a bit about alt.fan.jeremy-reimer, since it seems to have replaced "JR=SANTILLI" as the #1 Random Thing APKbot Is Most Obsessed About Right Now For No Apparent Reason. In the days before the www, (I'm talking 1989-93-ish timeframe) Usenet was really the only way we geeks had of talking with each other on a global basis. There was FidoNet, but it was slow and rarely international, and there were other online services, like the Well, but they were expensive and not everyone was on them. But everyone who was anyone was on Usenet. You could even get UUCP gateways to Usenet under DOS, running a terminal emulator called Waffle that was kind of a Unix simulator as well. Those were fun times on the net, and I witnessed many "firsts", like the first ever instance of spam (the Canter and Siegel Green Card Lottery) and the first really destructive worldwide virus/worm (the infamous rtm worm) and such. Kibo was a huge net.celebrity back then, grepping the Usenet feed for his name and replying as if by magic every time you mentioned him. Billy Idol posted on alt.cyberpunk, it was pretty cool. He was way ahead of his time, much like the rest of us, only way richer. :) Anyway, I used to post a lot to alt.religion.kibology (look it up) and alt.slack. Sometimes I posted silly observations or stories (like my N-Man saga) that had no real place anywhere, even in the alt.wilderness. It was this that prompted me to post a request for a newsgroup I could post silly stuff to without worrying about people complaining about off-topic posts (what can I say, I'm a considerate guy!) That was when the legendary Joel Furr of alt.fan.lemurs fame stood up and created alt.fan.jeremy-reimer. It was pretty cool at the time and remains pretty cool today, because it's something fairly rare in cyberspace. Any and every dork can have a webpage, but how many people have their own newsgroup? The particular message that APKbot seems so obsessed about came from Rave, one of my Mac-using friends from my messageboard. He didn't know about the existence of a.f.j-r, but thought it was hilarious, so he posted that message ("JR is GOD!") just for a laugh. I thought it was equally funny so I replied in a similar manner. It's my opinion that the APKbot does not understand humor, which is one of the reasons he has so many problems dealing with human beings. (Of course, I predict that he will now accuse *me* of having no sense of humor, because that's just the way the APKbot works) Anyway that's the story behind a.f.j-r, if you want to read more, there's a whole FAQ that I came up with, which I recently posted there. APK you are welcome to join in the fun-- we recently had a good thread laughing at your incompetence and idiocy. I heard from Martin (the guy who you claim loves your RAM optimizer shitware) and some other guy who also says you were going to sue him way back when. Do you threaten *EVERYBODY* you meet online with lawsuits, APK? I ask merely for information. Speaking of which, how's that lawsuit going that you pretend to have against me? When is the date set for discoveries? My virtual lawyers need to know. LOL!

"http://homepages.borland.com/torry/util_system.htm 8th program listed from top on that page Jeremy. Rated their TOPMOST rating no less, today. Their top rating... & that's from a site ABOUT my peers in this field Jeremy: Delphi coders. A site that has been awarded notoriety by Delphi Informant magazine many times, and is also HOSTED @ BORLAND ITSELF!" Er... you're only 8th on the list because it's ALPHABETICAL!!! How does it feel to be so BUSTED??? Geez! What a gay dork!

As I've mentioned, APK-bot, it's quite simple to do a search on "Santilli" on arstechnica, Storage Review, pegasus3d.com (here posting as Socrates) and many other sites. arstechnica in particular does not allow multiple accounts per person (this is why after being banned as AlecStaar, your account APK was banned, as were all your subsequent new accounts where you pretended to be someone else) Santilli is a gentleman in his mid-40's who lives in California, teaches high school kids basketball and I believe was studying for the bar exam a while back, although I don't think he passed. He has a fetish for fast dual Xeons, SCSI hard drives and well-endowed black women. I know all this because he posted about it on pegasus3d.com, my personal website. Anyone is welcome to search for "Socrates" there and check. Santilli is a bit of a troll, and was almost banned for trolling on arstechnica a couple of times. While I often disagree with his opinions, I let him post on pegasus3d.com because he's a colorful character. His "Guide to Trolling" that you have so lovingly recreated so many times above was actually put together by a bunch of people (as credited above) such as AYB, RQE, Magus, and others. Exactly why APK is obsessed with the idea that I am Santilli is difficult for normal human minds to understand. The fact that his email comes from an ISP that hosts in California and mine comes from an ISP that hosts in British Columbia, Canada, has not seemed to deter APK from continuing his mad quest to prove... um... what is he trying to prove exactly? So anyway, APK, you didn't answer my question: what is the date for the discoveries for the lawsuit you have coming against me? My virtual lawyers need to know! LOL!

methinks the lady, er, copy-and-paste bot doth protest too much. Oh, no. He's not A Pathetic Kook. And certainly not a latent homosexual. Everyone else are idiots, mental patients, and liars, but not him. Sure.

APK drooled: "I emailed them about your emailing me for 3 months w/ your pal Jay Little too. They are handling it. I see you stopped emailing me, so you must have been warned already. " I have heard nothing from Shaw. Certainly no warnings. Didn't we do this like a month ago, where you said that I had been warned not to email you again, and I said that I hadn't, and you DARED me to email you again, and then I emailed you *AGAIN* and then you said "Ho ho! Now I will sue you for sure!" and then later you said "U DON'T DARE EMAIL ME" and then I emailed you AGAIN and nothing happened? Was that not a correct summary of events? APK drooled: "P.S.=> Ever wonder WHY I am consolidating all these points & facts into this 1 post Jeremy? Don't wonder... makes for EASY evidences against you in a court of law & arstechnica as well in one spot, for ongoing libel, slander, harassment, threasts on my life..." Blah blah blah. You still haven't answered my question. WHEN IS THE DATE SET FOR THE DISCOVERIES FOR THIS LAWSUIT? Without a date set for discoveries, there is no lawsuit. So tell me the date.

Boy! You are A Pathetic Kook. You said someone was trying to bury posts. Gee, I wonder who that could be? You're not even trying anymore. Even the copy-and-paste bot you use is bored. I guess I was crazy to hope for a shread of creativy from you, A Pathetic Kook.

A Pathetic Kook does his best to bury posts... My, what an intelligent, creative, and insightful person A Pathetic Kook is. When I grow up, I want to be just like him. And I also want a pony. rofl

Poor, poor A Pathetic Kook. He's got diarhea of the keyboard. So sad, really. You're in my prayers, A Pathetic Kook. Somebody has to care about the infirm. When you're exposed as a fraud, what do fall back on? copy-and-paste. pathetic Weep for A pathetic Kook He needs your prayers.

APK drooled: "What made you stop emailing me then Jeremy?" Nothing, as I didn't stop emailing you. "Fear?? At least you & your pal Jay Little have stopped that which is good, & NO, DO NOT EMAIL ME AGAIN!" Okay, I'll email you again then. Since you obviously want me to so much. APK dribbled: "When my attorneys contact Arstechnica & yourself." And when will this be? I'm still waiting to hear from your "attorneys". I suspect I will be waiting an infinite amount of time.

Wow. APK's clarity of thought in this thread is likely an indication of the quality of his software. Quite the testimonial, wouldn't you say? BTW, could you please post the progress of your new job. My friends and I are starting a pool for how long it will take before they show the door. I said six weeks. My friends don't think you'll last anywhere near that long. They mentioned something about "personality quirks." Do you know what they meant?

At least you leave no doubt (in case anyone is left that wondered), just how totally and completely nuts you are. Yes, we know that you can copy-and-paste. We also know that you can't do anything else. Hey! I wonder what A Pathetic Kook will post next?? *raises hand* OOOO - I bet I do. A Patetic Kook will post another worthless pile. Anyone want to take that bet? It's clear at this point that worthless piles of bs are all A Pathetic Kook knows. Ye shall know a man by his words and deeds.

For giggles, I actually followed the link that A Pathetic Kook gave to his software. The one mentioned here: Anonymous User -February 28, 2005

I'm not Reimer, you idiot. You may post under different names, but not everybody else does. I'm also not associated with the arstechnica site, which you have such an unhealthy obsession with. ________________________________________ If you can't even host your own crap software, you must really be a computer guru, eh? But keep mentioning it. Keep posting a link to a site where it doesn't exist. (Except in your own mind, of course.) __________________________________ You keep asking Reimer if he wonders why you consolidate posts. We all know why. You're a brainless wonder with nothing to say, so you keep repeating the same drivel in the vain attempt that no one will bother to read through your crap and see other people's comments. First you accuse Reimer of trying to bury posts, and then that is the exact tact you use. Just as you accuse Reimer of threatening violence, when it was you who threatened violence. Just you accuse other of being mentally unstable. Just as you accuse others of being... queer. Do you like gladiator movies, APK? _________________________________________ If your intent is not to bury posts, try a short response. In lieu of a concise post from you, we will all know that the idiot act you are putting on is, in fact, not an act. It's just APK being A Pathetic Kook. Just your standard behavior. That must really go over well at the new job. (Assuming that wasn't a lie, too.) _________________________________________ OOO - We're all breathless in anticipation, wondering what you could possibly come up with next from your wondrous, creative pen. ________________________________________ BTW, would you mind posting your email address here. I have some information you might be interested in. ______________________________

Another long, pointless post. It's not an act. You really are this messed up. ___________________________________ We all know how the "voting" took place. You're providing ample proof of your willingness to obscure other people's opinions. You voted for it a thousand times. We all know that. Need a higher rating on software? Call APK. He'll vote early and often. _______________________________________ I really do have some info you'd like to see. Please, post your email address. Pretty please. __________________________________________

No - it is totally obvious to the entire internet, except APK, that those long threads are ALL copied and pasted B.S, just a blowhard blowing about as hard as I have EVER SEEN anyone blowing - more hot air than all the ballons in the world combined - empty wind. The more you post those long threads, the more evident it is that you have nothing to say that is worth saying. It's TOTAL B_U_L_L_S_H_I_T. In fact, it's not even that - you can use BS to fertilise your roses, but the stuff that APK is copying and pasting is just nonsense - repeated drivel, drool and dross. He copies and pastes over and over again - just like he votes for his "own work" (which doesn't seem to exist!) over and over. Actually, I don't think it is his own work - he's proved to the entire internet that he is the Copy and Paste king - he must have copied and poasted the code from elsewhere. Clearly very gay. It even rhymes with APK - so it must be true ;0) APK then burbled; "I cannot believe it... Jeremy Reimer emailed me again a 2nd time today, even when above I asked him to stop per instructions from his ISP & repeatedly so for over 4 months or more now. (Once again, I have reported him yet again to his Shaw.ca ISP once more as well.) Either he is crazy, blind, or just does not respect the law saying thing here like: "Shaw will do nothing."" Er given your behaviour, I doubt very much that Shaw will do anything. It's not that Jeremy doesn't respect the law or Shaw - it's just that you are beneath contempt, with your looooooooooooooooong copy and paste b.s.

Jeremy Reimer, Jeremy Reimer. APK! APK! Jerry, Jerry Reimer, Jerry, Jerry Reimer. APK! APK! To the tune of frere jacque.

P.S.=> Anyone beginning to see/believe that the long posts I have done are NOT full of b.s. yet? apk Erm, no. Your a frikking nutt job and you smell of wee.

The list of software at borland that A Pathetic Kook keeps refering to (HOT!!) is dead. It's a dead page with dead links. None of the links work. APK's statment that his isn't available because of "Updating" is a simple lie. A lie that anyone can verify for themselves. Not that anyone, at this point, really needs verification that APK os completely looney-tunes. So, when APk says his software at borland is rated highly "TODAY!!" it's evident that this "today" exists only in his sad, twisted excuse for a mind. I'm getting bored watching the crazy person...

"If you deny ALL OF THIS? You must be crazy!" It's unfortunate that A pathetic Kook doesn't appreciate the delicious irony of his accusing others of being mentally unbalanced. The freak show continues...

"you do it SO well though making fools outta yourselves w/ your own words & antics for your "cause", whatever THAT is!" Ahhh. Sweet, delicious irony. 5-star irony, if you will. ;)

Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste is boring Copy and paste