What version of OSX are you using, Petronski?
OSX.5 Leopard includes Wikipedia articles in its findings for definitions. If your OSX is a lower version, it doesn't include access to Wikipedia results in the results from "All Reference Libraries". So for Mac users with Leopard, your comment about "doing a better job than Spotlight" is questionable because Spotlight provides the Wikipedia article.
Also, using Wikipedia's article on ad hominem, your comment could be construed to be Ad hominem abusive:
Ad hominem abusive Ad hominem abusive (also called argumentum ad personam) usually and most notoriously involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
Incidentally, that quotation was copied verbatim from the Wikipedia entry brought up by Spotlight in Leopard.
Now, I did not really see an abusive comment in your first post, especially not any hint of a sexual nature. I, being gifted of a spotlessly clean mind, assumed you were implying that Mac users would be salivating over the prospect of a new big cat sooner than expected.
I'm typing on the Dell now, but the Mac is Leopard I think 10.5.5, maybe we missed an update. I'll check for the specifics later.