Interpret this sentence

[Commander Kinsey]

"In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact that many had predicted it would arrive"

I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean! Have reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html

[Ross Clark]

Simple version:
In 2020, Apple made an announcement. Many had predicted [that] it [this
announcement] would arrive, but that didn't make it any less shocking.

[Snit]

On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:

> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>
> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!

While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
they were pretty amazing.

> Have reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>
> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[T]

Why Kinsey,

Everyone know that means "Apple is putting together
slogans like that to put into sentences whilst
dancing on very thin ice wearing Doc Martens
and a backpack filled to point of bursting with
tungsten bars while balancing buckets of boiling
water on the tip of their noses and also for some
reason there are sharks below the ice ..."

Geez, do I have to interpret everything for you????

[Commander Kinsey]

I think what they meant to write was:
"In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for [those who] had predicted it would arrive"

"The fact that many" just doesn't make sense where I replaced it with [].

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>
>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>
> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
> they were pretty amazing.

Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things. It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving forwards.

[David Brooks]

A good article.

Thanks for sharing. :-)

--
David

[Commander Kinsey]

Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.

[David Brooks]

I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
and engines!

You have no idea how I used to yearn for B&O products to listen to music
- sadly, now that my hearing has deteriorated, they would be a total
waste of money. Yes, REALLY sad, I know. 🙁

https://www.coggles.com/life/tech/is-bang-and-olufsen-worth-it/

--
David

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 04:25:44 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (aka "Commander Kinsey",
"James Wilkinson", "Steven Wanker","Bruce Farquar", "Fred Johnson, etc.),
the pathological resident idiot and attention whore of all the uk ngs,
blathered again:

<FLUSH the subnormal sociopathic trolling attention whore's latest
attention-baiting sick bullshit unread again>

--
damdu...@yahoo.co.uk about Birdbrain Macaw's (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL)
trolling:
"He is a well known attention seeking troll and every reply you
make feeds him.
Starts many threads most of which die quick as on the UK groups anyone
with sense Kill filed him ages ago which is why he now cross posts to
the US groups for a new audience.
This thread was unusual in that it derived and continued without him
to a large extent and his silly questioning is an attempt to get
noticed again."
MID: <be195d5jh0hktj054...@4ax.com>

--
ItsJoanNotJoann addressing Birdbrain Macaw's (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"You're an annoying troll and I'm done with you and your
stupidity."
MID: <e39a6a7f-9677-4e78...@googlegroups.com>

--
AndyW addressing Birdbrain:
"Troll or idiot?...
You have been presented with a viewpoint with information, reasoning,
historical cases, citations and references to back it up and wilfully
ignore all going back to your idea which has no supporting information."
MID: <KaToA.263621$g93.2...@fx10.am4>

--
Phil Lee adressing Birdbrain Macaw:
"You are too stupid to be wasting oxygen."
MID: <uv2u4clurscpat3g2...@4ax.com>

--
Phil Lee describing Birdbrain Macaw:
"I've never seen such misplaced pride in being a fucking moronic motorist."
MID: <j7fb6ct83igfd1g99...@4ax.com>

--
Tony944 addressing Birdbrain Macaw:
"I seen and heard many people but you are on top of list being first class
ass hole jerk. ...You fit under unconditional Idiot and should be put in
mental institution.
MID: <VLCdnYC5HK1Z4S3F...@giganews.com>

--
Pelican to Birdbrain Macaw:
"Ok. I'm persuaded . You are an idiot."
MID: <obru31$nao$3...@dont-email.me>

--
DerbyDad03 addressing Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"Frigging Idiot. Get the hell out of my thread."
MID: <4d907253-b3b9-40d4...@googlegroups.com>

--
Kerr Mudd-John about Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey LOL):
"It's like arguing with a demented frog."
MID: <op.yy3c0...@dell3100.workgroup>

--
Mr Pounder Esquire about Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"the piss poor delivery boy with no hot running water, 11 cats and
several parrots living in his hovel."
MID: <odqtgc$iug$1...@dont-email.me>

--
Rob Morley about Birdbrain:
"He's a perennial idiot"
MID: <20170519215057.56a1f1d4@Mars>

--
JoeyDee to Birdbrain
"I apologize for thinking you were a jerk. You're just someone with an IQ
lower than your age, and I accept that as a reason for your comments."
MID: <0001HW.1EE2D20300...@news.eternal-september.org>

--
Sam Plusnet about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"He's just desperate to be noticed. Any attention will do, no matter how
negative it may be."
MID: <rOmdndd_O7u8iK7E...@brightview.co.uk>

--
thekma...@gmail.com asking Birdbrain:
"What, were you dropped on your head as a child?"
MID: <58ddfad5-d9a5-4031...@googlegroups.com>

--
Christie addressing endlessly driveling Birdbrain Macaw (now "Commander
Kinsey" LOL):
"What are you resurrecting that old post of mine for? It's from last
month some time. You're like a dog who's just dug up an old bone they
hid in the garden until they were ready to have another go at it."
MID: <59d8b0db...@news.eternal-september.org>

--
Mr Pounder's fitting description of Birdbrain Macaw:
"You are a well known fool, a tosser, a pillock, a stupid unemployable
sponging failure who will always live alone and will die alone. You will not
be missed."
MID: <orree6$on2$1...@dont-email.me>

--
Richard to pathetic wanker Hucker:
"You haven't bred?
Only useful thing you've done in your pathetic existence."
MID: <orvctf$l5m$1...@gioia.aioe.org>

--
cl...@snyder.on.ca about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
""not the sharpest knife in the drawer"'s parents sure made a serious
mistake having him born alive -- A total waste of oxygen, food, space,
and bandwidth."
MID: <s5e9uclqpnabteheh...@4ax.com>

--
Mr Pounder exposing sociopathic Birdbrain:
"You will always be a lonely sociopath living in a shithole with no hot
running water with loads of stinking cats and a few parrots."
MID: <os5m1i$8m1$1...@dont-email.me>

--
francis about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"He seems to have a reputation as someone of limited intelligence"
MID: <cf06cdd9-8bb8-469c...@googlegroups.com>

--
Peter Moylan about Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL):
"If people like JWS didn't exist, we would have to find some other way to
explain the concept of "invincible ignorance"."
MID: <otofc8$tbg$2...@dont-email.me>

--
Lewis about nym-shifting Birdbrain:
"Typical narcissist troll, thinks his shit is so grand he has the right to
try to force it on everyone
MID: <slrnq16c27....@jaka.local>

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:50:20 +1200, Ross Clark, another mentally challenged,
troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE blathered:


> Simple version:

Simpler version: The attention-starved, trolling wanker SUCCESSFULLY baited
you demented troll-feeding senile assholes, again!

--
Birdbrain (now "Commander Kinsey" LOL) baiting the senile assholes in these
groups:
"Having read the utter bullshit about dying if you fall in a freezing lake
for 15 minutes, I've tried it on many occasions. It takes 30 minutes to
even get chattering teeth, an hour to shiver nicely, and 2 hours to shiver
hard."
MID: <op.yvpol...@red.lan>

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 04:30:44 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered again:

> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
> they were pretty amazing.

As predicted, the dumbest among the trolling and troll-feeding senile
assholes in these groups, couldn't resist taking the PROVEN clinically
insane attention whore's latest idiotic bait.

--
Glenn Hall in comp.os.linux.advocacy about Shit the git:
"That person is like a constantly running toilet that won't stop. Does he
ever stop talking about UI consistency? No matter what anyone replies, he
adds a few more branches to the spider web as it grows and grows. It's a
waste of time." 31 Oct 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/c8dd8a244fe1eb2c

[Peeler]

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 22:11:11 -0700, T(wat), the idiotic trolling and
troll-feeding senile asshole, babbled again:

> Why Kinsey,

Take a guess, you troll-feeding senile T(rumptard)!

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, Shit the git, the senile troll and
troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> A good article.
>
> Thanks for sharing. :-)

No, the unwashed troll thanks YOU for shoving your tongue up his arse again,
Shit the Git, you constantly running toilet!

--
Some facts about the trolling senile shithead:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:01:27 +0100, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> I confess that I enjoy

You enjoy spouting bullshit ENDLESSLY, you abnormal constantly gurgling
toilet!

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:01:27 +0100, David Brooks <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> On 14/04/2023 08:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, David Brooks
>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2023 04:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the
>>>> fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>
>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean! Have
>>>> reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html
>>>
>>> A good article.
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing. :-)
>>
>> Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.
>
> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
> and engines!

Yeah, my neighbour says that about her BMW which keeps going wrong.

Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive and less compatible.

> You have no idea how I used to yearn for B&O products to listen to music
> - sadly, now that my hearing has deteriorated, they would be a total
> waste of money. Yes, REALLY sad, I know. 🙁
>
> https://www.coggles.com/life/tech/is-bang-and-olufsen-worth-it/

B&O does look nice (like Apple, nice for an ornament), but you can get the same sound quality a lot cheaper. I have heard B&O products, I have perfect hearing (of a 16 year old) according to a doctor, and I'm very fussy about sound quality. Yet I wouldn't prefer a B&O over something else (excepting cheap shit of course).

That webpage is clearly written by someone getting paid to. The language used is just like an advert.

But I would like owning something with the word Bang in the name.

[David Brooks]

On 14/04/2023 11:07, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:01:27 +0100, David Brooks
> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>
>> On 14/04/2023 08:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, David Brooks
>>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14/04/2023 04:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the
>>>>> fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!  Have
>>>>> reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html
>>>>
>>>> A good article.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for sharing. :-)
>>>
>>> Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.
>>
>> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
>> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
>> and engines!
>
> Yeah, my neighbour says that about her BMW which keeps going wrong.

One cannot compare a BMW with a Rolls Royce!!!

> Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive
> and less compatible.

I don't believe Apple manufactured electronics parts are simply
'ordinary'. I suspect they'll be better than average quality.

>> You have no idea how I used to yearn for B&O products to listen to music
>> - sadly, now that my hearing has deteriorated, they would be a total
>> waste of money. Yes, REALLY sad, I know. 🙁
>>
>> https://www.coggles.com/life/tech/is-bang-and-olufsen-worth-it/
>
> B&O does look nice (like Apple, nice for an ornament), but you can get
> the same sound quality a lot cheaper.  I have heard B&O products, I have
> perfect hearing (of a 16 year old) according to a doctor, and I'm very
> fussy about sound quality.  Yet I wouldn't prefer a B&O over something
> else (excepting cheap shit of course).

Each to their own!

> That webpage is clearly written by someone getting paid to.  The
> language used is just like an advert.

Agreed.

> But I would like owning something with the word Bang in the name.

Haha! :-D

--
David

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:21:38 +0100, David Brooks <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> On 14/04/2023 11:07, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:01:27 +0100, David Brooks
>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2023 08:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, David Brooks
>>>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 14/04/2023 04:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the
>>>>>> fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean! Have
>>>>>> reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html
>>>>>
>>>>> A good article.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for sharing. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.
>>>
>>> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
>>> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
>>> and engines!
>>
>> Yeah, my neighbour says that about her BMW which keeps going wrong.
>
> One cannot compare a BMW with a Rolls Royce!!!

Indeed, a BMW is overpriced, a Rolls Royce is vastly overpriced.

>> Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive
>> and less compatible.
>
> I don't believe Apple manufactured electronics parts are simply
> 'ordinary'. I suspect they'll be better than average quality.

They're not even in the top ten, which are:

#1 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM)
Revenue (TTM): $71.66 billion
Net Income (TTM): $30.53 billion

#2 Intel Corp. (INTC)
Revenue (TTM): $69.54 billion
Net Income (TTM): $13.30 billion

#3 Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM)
Revenue (TTM): $42.10 billion
Net Income (TTM): $12.94 billion

#4 Broadcom Inc. (AVGO)
Revenue (TTM): $33.20 billion
Net Income (TTM): $11.50 billion

#5 Micron Technology Inc. (MU)
Revenue (TTM): $30.76 billion
Net Income (TTM): $8.69 billion

#6 NVIDIA Corp. (NVDA)
Revenue (TTM): $28.57 billion
Net Income (TTM): $5.96 billion

#7 Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT)
Revenue (TTM): $25.79 billion
Net Income (TTM): $6.53 billion

#8 ASE Technology Holding Co. Ltd. (ASX)
Revenue (TTM): $23.04 billion
Net Income (TTM): $2.69 billion

#9 Advanced Micro Devices (AMD)
Revenue (TTM): $22.83 billion
Net Income (TTM): $2.27 billion

#10 ASML Holding N.V. (ASML)
Revenue (TTM): $21.27 billion
Net Income (TTM): $5.85 billion

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/012216/worlds-top-10-semiconductor-companies-tsmintc.asp

>>> You have no idea how I used to yearn for B&O products to listen to music
>>> - sadly, now that my hearing has deteriorated, they would be a total
>>> waste of money. Yes, REALLY sad, I know. 🙁
>>>
>>> https://www.coggles.com/life/tech/is-bang-and-olufsen-worth-it/
>>
>> B&O does look nice (like Apple, nice for an ornament), but you can get
>> the same sound quality a lot cheaper. I have heard B&O products, I have
>> perfect hearing (of a 16 year old) according to a doctor, and I'm very
>> fussy about sound quality. Yet I wouldn't prefer a B&O over something
>> else (excepting cheap shit of course).
>
> Each to their own!

I'm objective.

>> That webpage is clearly written by someone getting paid to. The
>> language used is just like an advert.
>
> Agreed.

Then you shouldn't have used it to further your side of the argument!

>> But I would like owning something with the word Bang in the name.
>
> Haha! :-D

There is actually a company called banggood. And they're not as shit as they sound.

[nospam]

In article <op.13d8d...@ryzen.home>, Commander Kinsey

<C...@nospam.com> wrote:

>
> >> Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive
> >> and less compatible.
> >
> > I don't believe Apple manufactured electronics parts are simply
> > 'ordinary'. I suspect they'll be better than average quality.
>
> They're not even in the top ten, which are:

apple is a fabless chip designer, much like amd and many others.

> #1 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM)
> Revenue (TTM): $71.66 billion
> Net Income (TTM): $30.53 billion

<https://www.extremetech.com/computing/343291-apple-has-procured-tsmcs-e
ntire-first-run-of-3nm-chips>
Apple Has Procured TSMC's Entire First Run of 3nm Chips

previously,
<https://wccftech.com/apple-secured-80-tsmc-5nm-production-capacity-2021
/>
Apple Has Secured 80 Percent of TSMC's 5nm Production Capacity
for 2021

80% of 5nm chips. 100% of 3nm chips.



> I'm objective.

not the word that first comes to mind.

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:

> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>
>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>>
>> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
>> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
>> they were pretty amazing.
>
> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
> other manufacturer is doing similar things.

What other computer maker is using their own chips, and ones that are in many
ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?

> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
> forwards.

The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:58:58 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> What other computer maker is using their own chips, and ones that are in many
> ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?

So for HOW long will your latest shit go on in these 3 ngs, you constantly
running toilet?

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:21:38 +0100, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> One cannot compare a BMW with a Rolls Royce!!!

MORE of your usual endless sick shit in these newsgroups?

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:57:18 -0400, nospam, another mentally deficient,
troll-feeding, senile ASSHOLE, blathered:

> apple is a fabless chip designer, much like amd and many others.

HE's a fucking (or rather wanking) stupid TROLL; and YOU are a fucking
stupid troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE!

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange sociopathic
world:
"I saw someone today shovelling his pavement clean, pushing it onto the
road. I waited until he went inside, then drove over the snow fairly
quickly, splattering it back where it was."
MID: <op.ytywd...@red.lan>

[David Brooks]

On 14/04/2023 14:57, nospam wrote:
> In article <op.13d8d...@ryzen.home>, Commander Kinsey
> <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>> Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive
>>>> and less compatible.
>>>
>>> I don't believe Apple manufactured electronics parts are simply
>>> 'ordinary'. I suspect they'll be better than average quality.
>>
>> They're not even in the top ten, which are:
>
> apple is a fabless chip designer, much like amd and many others.

I looked that up!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabless_manufacturing

Thanks. I had no iea about that.

>> #1 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM)
>> Revenue (TTM): $71.66 billion
>> Net Income (TTM): $30.53 billion
>
> <https://www.extremetech.com/computing/343291-apple-has-procured-tsmcs-e
> ntire-first-run-of-3nm-chips>
> Apple Has Procured TSMC's Entire First Run of 3nm Chips
>
> previously,
> <https://wccftech.com/apple-secured-80-tsmc-5nm-production-capacity-2021
> />
> Apple Has Secured 80 Percent of TSMC's 5nm Production Capacity
> for 2021
>
> 80% of 5nm chips. 100% of 3nm chips.
>
>
>
>> I'm objective.
>
> not the word that first comes to mind.

:-D

[lar3ryca]

On 2023-04-14 02:01, David Brooks wrote:
> On 14/04/2023 08:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, David Brooks
>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2023 04:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the
>>>> fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>
>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!  Have
>>>> reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html
>>>
>>> A good article.
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing. :-)
>>
>> Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.
>
> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
> and engines!

It would be, if RR insisted on limiting any accessories allowed, to
those approved by them.

> You have no idea how I used to yearn for B&O products to listen to music
> - sadly, now that my hearing has deteriorated, they would be a total
> waste of money. Yes, REALLY sad, I know. 🙁
>
> https://www.coggles.com/life/tech/is-bang-and-olufsen-worth-it/

--

What's another word for thesaurus?

[nospam]

In article <u1bvh2$1jqka$4...@dont-email.me>, lar3ryca <la...@invalid.ca>
wrote:

> > I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
> > available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
> > and engines!
>
> It would be, if RR insisted on limiting any accessories allowed, to
> those approved by them.

apple doesn't do that.

on the other hand, there are parts only available from rolls royce as
well as other car makers, including toyota, honda, ford, chrysler, etc.

[Joel]

"Commander Kinsey" <C...@nospam.com> wrote:

>"In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
>
>I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean! Have reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
>
>https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html

When I clicked the link, the context of that quote was exactly what I
thought, that they surprised the industry, by being the first large
scale manufacturer, to move away from aging architecture, I dunno how
you're so in the dark about that.

--
Joel Crump

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:28:35 -0400, Joel, another mentally challenged,
troll-feeding, senile ASSHOLE, blathered:

> When I clicked the link, the context of that quote was exactly what I
> thought, that they surprised the industry, by being the first large
> scale manufacturer, to move away from aging architecture, I dunno how
> you're so in the dark about that.

I dunno how YOU could be so in the dark about the trolling attention-starved
wanker, you troll-feeding senile asshole.

[lar3ryca]

On 2023-04-14 11:14, nospam wrote:
> In article <u1bvh2$1jqka$4...@dont-email.me>, lar3ryca <la...@invalid.ca>
> wrote:
>
>>> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
>>> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
>>> and engines!
>>
>> It would be, if RR insisted on limiting any accessories allowed, to
>> those approved by them.
>
> apple doesn't do that.

They certainly do, or attempt to do, when those accessories are programs.

> on the other hand, there are parts only available from rolls royce as
> well as other car makers, including toyota, honda, ford, chrysler, etc.

--
Chris: Hey can I borrow a ten?
Kristen: Sure.
Christen: Thank you.
Kris: You're welcome.

[nospam]

In article <u1c690$1l0ff$2...@dont-email.me>, lar3ryca <la...@invalid.ca>

wrote:

> >>> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
> >>> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
> >>> and engines!
> >>
> >> It would be, if RR insisted on limiting any accessories allowed, to
> >> those approved by them.
> >
> > apple doesn't do that.
>
> They certainly do, or attempt to do, when those accessories are programs.

apple, like many other companies, has a voluntary certification process
that tests and guarantees a given accessory is fully compatible with
existing (as well as future unreleased) products and won't cause any
damage.

users prefer those accessories because they know they will work and
won't need to replace it when they upgrade, but under no circumstances
are they limited to using only those accessories.

they can choose to use *any* accessory they want, or even cobble their
own if they are so inclined.

compare that to hp, where despite having a usb-c port, the hp spectre
laptop will only charge from an hp spectre power adapter. hp has stated
that is intentional. dell and razer fare only slightly better:
<https://images.techhive.com/images/article/2016/03/usb_c_laptop_chartin
g-100649896-orig.png>

note that these are laptops with industry standard usb-c ports and
usb-c power adapters.

only apple and google are compatible with *any* usb-c power adapter.

> > on the other hand, there are parts only available from rolls royce as
> > well as other car makers, including toyota, honda, ford, chrysler, etc.

you are ignoring that carmakers have various parts that are *only*
available from the dealer (no third party alternative) and in some
cases, certain parts can only be installed by a dealer (no third party
auto repair shops).

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:58:58 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>>>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>
>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>>>
>>> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
>>> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
>>> they were pretty amazing.
>>
>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>
> What other computer maker is using their own chips,

Why is that of any importance?

And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply, crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should have.

> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?

I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.

>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>> forwards.
>
> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.

And tomorrow one of the others will do the same. All the chip companies want to have the latest and greatest to sell their chips. So of course they all do research.

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:56:30 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13epo...@ryzen.home>:

> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:58:58 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>
>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>>>>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>>>>
>>>> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
>>>> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
>>>> they were pretty amazing.
>>>
>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>
>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>
> Why is that of any importance?

"even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."

Do they?

Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.

>
> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
> have.

There are pros and cons to that. Sure.

>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>
> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.

Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
knows that.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day

Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
weaknesses.

>
>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>> forwards.
>>
>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>
> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.

Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?

> All the chip companies want to have the latest and greatest to sell their
> chips. So of course they all do research.

And even with that Apple has pulled ahead. We shall see how long that lasts.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:05:56 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:56:30 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13epo...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:58:58 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>>> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>>>>>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>>>>>
>>>>> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
>>>>> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
>>>>> they were pretty amazing.
>>>>
>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>
>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>
>> Why is that of any importance?
>
> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>
> Do they?

Yes, it's in their best interests.

> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.

Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just work.

>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>> have.
>
> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.

No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.

>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>
>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>
> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
> knows that.

And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.

Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?

> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>
> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
> weaknesses.
>
>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>> forwards.
>>>
>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>
>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>
> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?

Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on average it's pretty much the same.

>> All the chip companies want to have the latest and greatest to sell their
>> chips. So of course they all do research.
>
> And even with that Apple has pulled ahead. We shall see how long that lasts.

Not long.

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:05:56 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>
> Do they?

And, as always, ever more shit keeps flowing out of the senile shithead's
shit-filled head into these newsgroups... It won't stop any time soon, will
it, senile cretin? <BG>

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 2:02:50 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.13esq...@ryzen.home>:

> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:05:56 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:56:30 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.13epo...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:58:58 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 13, 2023 at 8:25:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>>>> <op.13dfs...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the fact
>>>>>>> that many had predicted it would arrive"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While many had predicted Macs might move from Intel to their own chips, few
>>>>>> thought it would happen any time soon. And then the chips were introduced and
>>>>>> they were pretty amazing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>
>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>
>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>
>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>
>> Do they?
>
> Yes, it's in their best interests.

So which one does?

>
>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>
> Making our choice more limited.

Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.

> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
> work.

What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?

>
>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>> have.
>>
>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>
> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>
>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>
>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>
>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>> knows that.
>
> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.

Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
others in the dust like this for more than year?

> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?

You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
example?

>
>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>
>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>> weaknesses.
>>
>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>> forwards.
>>>>
>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>
>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>
>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>
> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
> average it's pretty much the same.

Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me. I do like their
automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).

>
>>> All the chip companies want to have the latest and greatest to sell their
>>> chips. So of course they all do research.
>>
>> And even with that Apple has pulled ahead. We shall see how long that lasts.
>
> Not long.

Curious if you have a date when Intel or someone else will generally be seen
as ahead.

[J. J. Lodder]

Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:56:30 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.13epo...@ryzen.home>:
>
> > On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:58:58 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Apr 14, 2023 at 12:01:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> >> <op.13dps...@ryzen.home>:
> >>

> >>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:30:44 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com>:

> > And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>
> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>
> > All the chip companies want to have the latest and greatest to sell their
> > chips. So of course they all do research.
>
> And even with that Apple has pulled ahead. We shall see how long that lasts.

Not really. It is Dutch/German technology by ASML/Zeiss
that makes it possible.
(and they have an absolute monopoly on it
that isnt likely to be broken soon)

Apple doesn't actually make the chips,
Samsung and TSMC do that for them, using ASML machinery.
Apple only designs the chips.

And ASML will sell their lithography machines to others,
like for example to Intel. (but not to China)
So others will catch up,

Jan

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:13:24 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> So which one does?

Spreading your stench in these groups again, you filthy senile troll?

[nospam]

In article <op.13esq...@ryzen.home>, Commander Kinsey

<C...@nospam.com> wrote:

> > Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
> > in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>
> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like into
> this machine, and it'll just work.

no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 3:26:01 PM MST, "nospam" wrote
<140420231826015988%nos...@nospam.invalid>:

I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
Certainly PCs are more backward compatible. But I wonder if he actually uses
anything that does not work on a Mac.

[nospam]

In article <Jwl_L.110625$qpNc....@fx03.iad>, Snit

<brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software...
> >>> and
> >>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
> >>
> >> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like
> >> into
> >> this machine, and it'll just work.
> >
> > no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
>
>
> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.

the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.

sometimes it can be made to work, and there can be compatibility
issues.

> Certainly PCs are more backward compatible. But I wonder if he actually uses
> anything that does not work on a Mac.

of course not.

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 5:04:04 PM MST, "nospam" wrote
<140420232004048993%nos...@nospam.invalid>:

> In article <Jwl_L.110625$qpNc....@fx03.iad>, Snit
> <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software...
>>>>> and
>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>
>>>> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like
>>>> into
>>>> this machine, and it'll just work.
>>>
>>> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
>>
>>
>> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
>
> the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
> with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.

By PC in this context I think the implication is Windows. But fair enough...
if you had not been following.

> sometimes it can be made to work, and there can be compatibility
> issues.

Agreed.

>> Certainly PCs are more backward compatible. But I wonder if he actually uses
>> anything that does not work on a Mac.
>
> of course not.

Likely not... but there are some things that might not.

[nospam]

In article <LDm_L.444120$5CY7....@fx46.iad>, Snit

<brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software...
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
> >>>>
> >>>> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like
> >>>> into
> >>>> this machine, and it'll just work.
> >>>
> >>> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
> >>
> >>
> >> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
> >
> > the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
> > with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.
>
> By PC in this context I think the implication is Windows.

that's actually irrelevant.

> But fair enough...
> if you had not been following.

knock off the condescending attitude.

[Snit]

On Apr 14, 2023 at 6:33:04 PM MST, "nospam" wrote
<140420232133049377%nos...@nospam.invalid>:

> In article <LDm_L.444120$5CY7....@fx46.iad>, Snit
> <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software...
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I like
>>>>>> into
>>>>>> this machine, and it'll just work.
>>>>>
>>>>> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
>>>
>>> the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
>>> with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.
>>
>> By PC in this context I think the implication is Windows.
>
> that's actually irrelevant.

When the focus is Windows, Linux is not relevant.

>
>> But fair enough...
>> if you had not been following.
>
> knock off the condescending attitude.

Curious what it is like to go through life seeking to be offended. Just not my
style. But let me try again in a way that might fit your needs:

Ah, surely you have been following Commander Kinsey's comments and
computer usage quite closely, and thus your reference to Linux is
completely and utterly off topic in regards to his usage. How dare
you, heathen!

LOL!

Is that better for you?

[Joerg Lorenz]

Why are you feeding this eternal Troll?

/X-Posting intentionally left unchanged/.

--
Sent with *Betterbird* from a Linux-System running on a MacBook Pro.
Simply better. https://www.betterbird.eu

[Peeler]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 18:26:01 -0400, nospam, another brain dead troll-feeding
senile cretin, blathered:

> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.

ALL his dumbest baits will ALWAYS work with you troll-feeding senile
assholes! It's not quite his fault as he's clinically insane. But YOU are
just miserable useless troll-feeding senile shitheads!

[nospam]

In article <Lzs_L.1543888$8_id....@fx09.iad>, Snit

<brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I
> >>>>>> like
> >>>>>> into
> >>>>>> this machine, and it'll just work.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
> >>>
> >>> the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
> >>> with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.
> >>
> >> By PC in this context I think the implication is Windows.
> >
> > that's actually irrelevant.
>
> When the focus is Windows, Linux is not relevant.

there is no focus on windows, especially when comparing to a mac.

he said 'any piece of hardware' would work. that is false.

> >> But fair enough...
> >> if you had not been following.
> >
> > knock off the condescending attitude.
>
> Curious what it is like to go through life seeking to be offended.

projection

[Commander Kinsey]

Apple is a religion, you can't use logic with these people.

[Snit]

On Apr 15, 2023 at 4:39:43 AM MST, "nospam" wrote
<150420230739432025%nos...@nospam.invalid>:

> In article <Lzs_L.1543888$8_id....@fx09.iad>, Snit
> <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Making our choice more limited. I can plug any piece of hardware I
>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>> this machine, and it'll just work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> no you can't. not everything will work, and it's the same with macs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do think it is fair to say MORE works with PCs, or at least used to.
>>>>>
>>>>> the simple fact is that some stuff doesn't work with a pc, most often
>>>>> with linux, which many hardware makers do not support.
>>>>
>>>> By PC in this context I think the implication is Windows.
>>>
>>> that's actually irrelevant.
>>
>> When the focus is Windows, Linux is not relevant.
>
> there is no focus on windows,

That is what he uses. That is the context. Sorry you missed it, but it is
understandable why you did.

Not sure why you want to argue about it, or why you seek to take offense.

> especially when comparing to a mac.
>
> he said 'any piece of hardware' would work. that is false.
>
>>>> But fair enough...
>>>> if you had not been following.
>>>
>>> knock off the condescending attitude.
>>
>> Curious what it is like to go through life seeking to be offended.
>
> projection

See above where you took offense over nothing.

[Commander Kinsey]

All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets slightly better, and so on.

>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>
>> Making our choice more limited.
>
> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.

Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route, you can't just buy any hardware to add.

>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>> work.
>
> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?

Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.

>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>> have.
>>>
>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>
>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>
>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>
>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>
>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>> knows that.
>>
>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>
> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
> others in the dust like this for more than year?

All of them. Go and look back in history.

>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>
> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
> example?

Everywhere.
"I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's raining".

Sometimes it's even used twice!
"I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning as "I see that was the right choice to make.

>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>
>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>> weaknesses.
>>>
>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>
>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>
>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>
>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>> average it's pretty much the same.
>
> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.

All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're removing useful things.

The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.

An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts, and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the filename, yet it says "no results found". Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS.... "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?

> I do like their
> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).

That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything taken away from me. For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine. If I wanted it there I'd put it there. It's like employing a servant in your house who makes their own decisions, so you can never find anything.

[Snit]

On Apr 27, 2023 at 8:53:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.133ef...@ryzen.home>:
...

>>>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>>>
>>>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>>>
>>>> Do they?
>>>
>>> Yes, it's in their best interests.
>>
>> So which one does?
>
> All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more
> powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets
> slightly better, and so on.

There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share. But sure,
they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be sure) but it is
not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.

>
>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>
>>> Making our choice more limited.
>>
>> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
>> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.
>
> Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route,
> you can't just buy any hardware to add.

There are trade off. But what hardware that you use are you thinking of? What
hardware would not work on my Mac? There is some... often tied to specific
industries, but it is a lot less common than it once was.

>>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>>> work.
>>
>> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?
>
> Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common
> knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.

Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
even add additional memory. I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
chip -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.

But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?

>
>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>> have.
>>>>
>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>
>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>
>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>
>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>
>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>> knows that.
>>>
>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>
>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>
> All of them. Go and look back in history.

I would love examples.

>
>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>
>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>> example?
>
> Everywhere.
> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
> raining".

There is a different connotative meaning.

>
> Sometimes it's even used twice!
> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
> as "I see that was the right choice to make.

The language is being used for emphasis.

>
>>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>>
>>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>>> weaknesses.
>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>>
>>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>>
>>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>>> average it's pretty much the same.
>>
>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>
> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
> removing useful things.

And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
front-most. That is absurd. And they have taken away the ability to easily go
up directories in their web browser, and have made some settings harder to
see. They want to make it more like the iPhone. On the iPhone there is a
reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
Mac.

>
> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>
> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
> filename, yet it says "no results found".

That is broken!

> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?

My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).

>
>> I do like their
>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>
> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
> taken away from me.

I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
(though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
the like).

> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.

You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.

> If I wanted it there I'd put it there. It's like employing a servant in your
> house who makes their own decisions, so you can never find anything.

I rarely if ever have that issue (though I tend to not throw things out so I
get tons of garbage).

[Peeler]

On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 04:52:48 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
> and in the price range they

Ah, the resident "human toilet" starts gurgling again! LOL

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 27, 2023 at 8:53:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.133ef...@ryzen.home>:
> ...
>
>>>>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>>>>
>>>>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>>>>
>>>>> Do they?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it's in their best interests.
>>>
>>> So which one does?
>>
>> All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more
>> powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets
>> slightly better, and so on.
>
> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.

Are you going to tell us that reason?

> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be sure) but it is
> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.

I doubt they're more than 6 months.

>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>
>>>> Making our choice more limited.
>>>
>>> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
>>> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.
>>
>> Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route,
>> you can't just buy any hardware to add.
>
> There are trade off. But what hardware that you use are you thinking of? What
> hardware would not work on my Mac? There is some... often tied to specific
> industries, but it is a lot less common than it once was.

Any upgrade you can think of. Faster CPU, graphics card, NVME drive, more RAM, ....

>>>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>>>> work.
>>>
>>> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?
>>
>> Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common
>> knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.
>
> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
> even add additional memory.

That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't provide RAM sockets (for size?). My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.

> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
> chip

RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.

> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.

Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and more expensive.

As long as they come with 10 times enough RAM so they're futureproof they'd be fine. But I bet Apple don't do that. They prefer you to throw away (which is environmentally wrong) your computer and get another one. Also, RAM is too expensive to buy enough for 10 years time.

Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3 years? Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.

> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?

Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either Mac or Linux missing.

>>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>>> have.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>>
>>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>>
>>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>>> knows that.
>>>>
>>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>>
>>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>>
>> All of them. Go and look back in history.
>
> I would love examples.

I'm not doing your homework for you.

>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>
>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>> example?
>>
>> Everywhere.
>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>> raining".
>
> There is a different connotative meaning.

I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?

>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>
> The language is being used for emphasis.

It emphasizes nothing in the example above.

>>>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>>>
>>>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>>>> weaknesses.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>>>
>>>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>>>> average it's pretty much the same.
>>>
>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>
>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>> removing useful things.
>
> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
> front-most. That is absurd.

Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere to it.

> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
> up directories in their web browser,

Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.

> and have made some settings harder to
> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.

I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone? One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a dishwasher?

> On the iPhone there is a
> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
> Mac.

On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them! I have to wave the mouse around them to find them! Don't they realise, sometimes I don't even want to use them, I just look to see who far down the document I am? I can't do that if they're hidden!

>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>
>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>
> That is broken!
>
>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>
> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).

What is searchlight?

>>> I do like their
>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>
>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>> taken away from me.
>
> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
> the like).

Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.

>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>
> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.

I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move things yourself, you'll never find them.

>> If I wanted it there I'd put it there. It's like employing a servant in your
>> house who makes their own decisions, so you can never find anything.
>
> I rarely if ever have that issue (though I tend to not throw things out so I
> get tons of garbage).

I don't follow.

[Snit]

On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:

> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 27, 2023 at 8:53:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.133ef...@ryzen.home>:
>> ...
>>
>>>>>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do they?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's in their best interests.
>>>>
>>>> So which one does?
>>>
>>> All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more
>>> powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets
>>> slightly better, and so on.
>>
>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>
> Are you going to tell us that reason?

They make excellent products. Screens second to none. OSs which allow for more
interactivity between apps. Generally easier to use and often a better UI
(though they are losing it on this one to some extent).

>
>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>> sure) but it is
>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>
> I doubt they're more than 6 months.

Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
hard.

>
>>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>>
>>>>> Making our choice more limited.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
>>>> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.
>>>
>>> Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route,
>>> you can't just buy any hardware to add.
>>
>> There are trade off. But what hardware that you use are you thinking of? What
>> hardware would not work on my Mac? There is some... often tied to specific
>> industries, but it is a lot less common than it once was.
>
> Any upgrade you can think of. Faster CPU, graphics card, NVME drive, more RAM,
> ....
>
>>>>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?
>>>
>>> Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common
>>> knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.
>>
>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>> even add additional memory.
>
> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
> provide RAM sockets (for size?).

Size and weight. And for laptops I get it. For a desktop it is silly. Even if
on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
chip).

> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.

Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
casual user.

>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>> chip
>
> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.

Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive. It allows things to be
much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.

>
>> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
>> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.
>
> Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many
> pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and
> more expensive.

It would bump the price up.

>
> As long as they come with 10 times enough RAM so they're futureproof they'd be
> fine. But I bet Apple don't do that. They prefer you to throw away (which is
> environmentally wrong) your computer and get another one. Also, RAM is too
> expensive to buy enough for 10 years time.

They come with enough for most people, even at the low end, but you can get it
with more. The problem is there is literally NO way to upgrade it.

>
> Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3
> years?

Macs tend to be in service longer than PCs. Not sure where you got the idea
otherwise. Those who do a lot of upgrading on their PCs tend to use them even
longer, but that is a fairly small slice of the market.

> Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had
> some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.
>
>> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?
>
> Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same
> applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either
> Mac or Linux missing.

But no actual device you can name?

>
>>>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>>>> knows that.
>>>>>
>>>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>>>
>>>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>>>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>>>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>>>
>>> All of them. Go and look back in history.
>>
>> I would love examples.
>
> I'm not doing your homework for you.

So just your feelings. OK.

>
>>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>>
>>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>>> example?
>>>
>>> Everywhere.
>>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>>> raining".
>>
>> There is a different connotative meaning.
>
> I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday
> English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?

It is not an uncommon word.

Yes, I did that to you on purpose. LOL!

>
>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>
>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>
> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.

For you or for others?

>
>>>>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>>>>> weaknesses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>>>>
>>>>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>>>>> average it's pretty much the same.
>>>>
>>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>>
>>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>>> removing useful things.
>>
>> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
>> front-most. That is absurd.
>
> Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you
> could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere
> to it.

Better than the big transparent mess they used to have. That was madness.

>
>> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
>> up directories in their web browser,
>
> Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.

If you are on whatever.com/FAQ/some_topic/sub_topic. Something like that.

>
>> and have made some settings harder to
>> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.
>
> I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone?
> One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a
> dishwasher?

Has Windows even made it to one set of settings. They had two competing
systems to set settings for some time. It was loony.

>
>> On the iPhone there is a
>> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
>> Mac.
>
> On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them!

Same on macOS by default... though I have mine showing.

> I have to wave the mouse around them to find them! Don't they realise,
> sometimes I don't even want to use them, I just look to see who far down the
> document I am? I can't do that if they're hidden!

Absolutely agree. Glad I can turn them back on.

>
>>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>>
>>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>>
>> That is broken!
>>
>>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>>
>> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
>> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).
>
> What is searchlight?

Apple's Find feature. Works well... though not perfectly.

>
>>>> I do like their
>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>
>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>> taken away from me.
>>
>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>> the like).
>
> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.

Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).

Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.

>
>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>
>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>
> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
> things yourself, you'll never find them.

Ever use an hour glass?

[Peeler]

On Tue, 30 May 2023 17:15:31 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> They make excellent products. Screens second to none. OSs which allow for more
> interactivity between apps. Generally easier to use and often a better UI
> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).

The troll comes back after a month, resumes his absolutely idiotic baiting
and Shit the Git, Usenet's "constantly running toilet", INSTANTLY starts
feeding the gay wanker again! Just HOW desperate are you troll-feeding
senile assholes? LMAO

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 27, 2023 at 8:53:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.133ef...@ryzen.home>:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>>>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do they?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it's in their best interests.
>>>>>
>>>>> So which one does?
>>>>
>>>> All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more
>>>> powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets
>>>> slightly better, and so on.
>>>
>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>
>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>
> They make excellent products.

No better than many others. And the others are compatible.

> Screens second to none.

No better than many others.

> OSs

There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.

> which allow for more interactivity between apps.

They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.

> Generally easier to use

I find them harder to use. They hide everything form the user, treating the user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower intelligence level.

> and often a better UI
> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).

All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.

>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>> sure) but it is
>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>
>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>
> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
> hard.

Not possible, they're just another chip maker.

>>>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Making our choice more limited.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
>>>>> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.
>>>>
>>>> Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route,
>>>> you can't just buy any hardware to add.
>>>
>>> There are trade off. But what hardware that you use are you thinking of? What
>>> hardware would not work on my Mac? There is some... often tied to specific
>>> industries, but it is a lot less common than it once was.
>>
>> Any upgrade you can think of. Faster CPU, graphics card, NVME drive, more RAM,
>> ....
>>
>>>>>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>>>>>> work.
>>>>>
>>>>> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?
>>>>
>>>> Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common
>>>> knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.
>>>
>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>> even add additional memory.
>>
>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>
> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.

Not that much difference.

> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
> chip).

More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.

>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>
> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
> casual user.

The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if I wanted.

>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>> chip
>>
>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>
> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.

All Apples are prohibitively expensive.

> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.

I assumed that was for space.

So how much RAM do they have in there? I can't believe there would be space for the 128GB I can put on my motherboard.

[Snit]

On Jun 22, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.16za7lb6mvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 27, 2023 at 8:53:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.133ef...@ryzen.home>:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Apple users always make a fuss when Apple does something, even though every
>>>>>>>>>>> other manufacturer is doing similar things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What other computer maker is using their own chips,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why is that of any importance?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "even though every other manufacturer is doing similar things."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do they?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it's in their best interests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So which one does?
>>>>>
>>>>> All of them, which is why Apple hasn't skyrocketed to computers 100 times more
>>>>> powerful than everyone else. They get slightly better, then another gets
>>>>> slightly better, and so on.
>>>>
>>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>>
>>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>>
>> They make excellent products.
>
> No better than many others. And the others are compatible.

Yet they have higher customer satisfaction scores, lower dead on arrival
rates, greater return purchases, etc.

>
>> Screens second to none.
>
> No better than many others.

What other systems come with ones that are as good or better?

>
>> OSs
>
> There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I
> sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.

Agreed.

>
>> which allow for more interactivity between apps.
>
> They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.

They have solutions that serve me better than other solutions.

>
>> Generally easier to use
>
> I find them harder to use. They hide everything from the user, treating the

> user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower
> intelligence level.

In usability tests, in general people find them easier. Your view and mine are
not the big picture.

>
>> and often a better UI
>> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).
>
> All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows
> millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.

Part of it is they are making the Mac look like the phone... but the phone is
restrained from size and more in ways that the desktop is not.

>
>>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>>> sure) but it is
>>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>>
>>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>>
>> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
>> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
>> hard.
>
> Not possible, they're just another chip maker.

Being smaller and having more control they are able to be more nimble. And
they do not hold onto the past as much as MS does.

>
>>>>>>>> Apple does a lot of unique things. Handling the hardware and software... and
>>>>>>>> in this case a pretty extreme case of hardware.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Making our choice more limited.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing they offer limits you choice. You, in fact, choose to not use them.
>>>>>> They have no control over that. Apple offers choices you choose to not use.
>>>>>
>>>>> Idiot, clearly I meant once you have bought an Apple and gone down that route,
>>>>> you can't just buy any hardware to add.
>>>>
>>>> There are trade off. But what hardware that you use are you thinking of? What
>>>> hardware would not work on my Mac? There is some... often tied to specific
>>>> industries, but it is a lot less common than it once was.
>>>
>>> Any upgrade you can think of. Faster CPU, graphics card, NVME drive, more RAM,
>>> ....
>>>
>>>>>>> I can plug any piece of hardware I like into this machine, and it'll just
>>>>>>> work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What hardware do you use which does not work on a Mac?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh go and read some websites about Mac upgrades will you? It's common
>>>>> knowledge. The OS only works with a limited set of hardware.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>>> even add additional memory.
>>>
>>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>>
>> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.
>
> Not that much difference.

Not sure it would be possible to fit RAM sockets into the MacBook Air and keep
it so small and light.

>
>> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
>> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
>> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
>> chip).
>
> More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.

It would be slower... but you can move things around.

>
>>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>>
>> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
>> casual user.
>
> The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be
> abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if
> I wanted.

If you run a lot of apps at the same time, or some huge app, perhaps. My
current system has 8 GB. It is usually just fine with that. Occasionally I
wish I had 16.

>
>>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>>> chip
>>>
>>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>>
>> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.
>
> All Apples are prohibitively expensive.

In cost comparisons they tend to do well. This is comparing Windows machines
that are configured to include everything you get... and the reality is you
cannot NOT get stuff on the Mac you do not want. So there is a bit of fiddling
to get those comparisons.

>
>> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.
>
> I assumed that was for space.

No. It is less distance to get to the RAM.

>
> So how much RAM do they have in there?

You can get different amounts.

> I can't believe there would be space for the 128GB I can put on my motherboard.

[Peeler]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 15:49:53 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

Shit the Git, the "constantly running toilet" is overflowing again! LMAO

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>> sure) but it is
>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>
>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>
> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
> hard.

I found this article on why Apple put RAM on the CPU and Intel doesn't:
https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/why-doesnt-intel-put-dram-on-the-cpu/
Looks like a matter of cost. Intel's strategy is to cache the RAM on the CPU, with even faster memory. So Intel has a small amount of very fast memory on the CPU, and Apple has a large amount of fairly fast RAM on the CPU. Just two different tactics juggling cost and speed.

[Snit]

On Jun 23, 2023 at 3:08:42 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.160igsdpmvhs6z@ryzen>:

Thanks.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 00:19:51 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> Thanks.

Was that your last drip for now?

[bruce bowser]

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 9:43:16 AM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:21:38 +0100, David Brooks <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>
> > On 14/04/2023 11:07, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:01:27 +0100, David Brooks
> >> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 14/04/2023 08:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 08:13:38 +0100, David Brooks
> >>>> <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> >>>>
> >>>>> On 14/04/2023 04:25, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >>>>>> "In 2020, Apple made an announcement that was no less shocking for the
> >>>>>> fact that many had predicted it would arrive"
> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> I can't even begin to work out what that's meant to mean! Have
> >>>>>> reporters lost the ability to communicate clearly?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/apple-mac-silicon-computer-chip-new-b2319356.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A good article.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for sharing. :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh no, I've turned on the groups biggest Apple lover.
> >>>
> >>> I confess that I enjoy being able to afford the best quality products
> >>> available nowadays. Apple is to electronics like Rolls Royce is for cars
> >>> and engines!
> >>
> >> Yeah, my neighbour says that about her BMW which keeps going wrong.
> >
> > One cannot compare a BMW with a Rolls Royce!!!
> Indeed, a BMW is overpriced, a Rolls Royce is vastly overpriced.
> >> Apple electronics is not better, it's just the same, but more expensive
> >> and less compatible.
> >
> > I don't believe Apple manufactured electronics parts are simply
> > 'ordinary'. I suspect they'll be better than average quality.
> They're not even in the top ten, which are:
>
> #1 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM)

(BTW pronounced: táiwān bàndǎotǐ zhìzào 台湾半导体制造)

[Peeler]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 07:21:37 -0700 (PDT), bruce bowser, another demented
troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE, blathered:

>> #1 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM)
>
> (BTW pronounced: táiwān bàndǎotǐ zhìzào 台湾半导体制造)

You want to help the unwashed wanker, troll and attention whore getting his
foot in this ng again? You are off to a good start! <BG>

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
>>> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.
>>
>> Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many
>> pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and
>> more expensive.
>
> It would bump the price up.

Apple shit already costs a fortune, the fanboys wouldn't notice.

Oh but wait, they don't wan their gullible customers to upgrade, they want them to buy a new machine.

>> As long as they come with 10 times enough RAM so they're futureproof they'd be
>> fine. But I bet Apple don't do that. They prefer you to throw away (which is
>> environmentally wrong) your computer and get another one. Also, RAM is too
>> expensive to buy enough for 10 years time.
>
> They come with enough for most people, even at the low end, but you can get it
> with more. The problem is there is literally NO way to upgrade it.

Enough when you buy it. But memory needs increase a lot with time.

>> Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3
>> years?
>
> Macs tend to be in service longer than PCs. Not sure where you got the idea
> otherwise. Those who do a lot of upgrading on their PCs tend to use them even
> longer, but that is a fairly small slice of the market.

The fanboys all want the latest Iphone etc. The rest of us replace the phone when it breaks.

>> Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had
>> some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.
>>
>>> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?
>>
>> Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same
>> applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either
>> Mac or Linux missing.
>
> But no actual device you can name?

Just look some up, I'm not doing your homework for you. I already know they exist.

>>>>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>>>>> knows that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>>>>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>>>>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>>>>
>>>> All of them. Go and look back in history.
>>>
>>> I would love examples.
>>
>> I'm not doing your homework for you.
>
> So just your feelings. OK.

No, just not prepared to waste my time educating you. I know what I know form what I've seen over the years, to find it online is a lot of effort.

>>>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>>>
>>>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>>>> example?
>>>>
>>>> Everywhere.
>>>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>>>> raining".
>>>
>>> There is a different connotative meaning.
>>
>> I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday
>> English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?
>
> It is not an uncommon word.

Yes it is. Go check on google ngram.

> Yes, I did that to you on purpose. LOL!

You have installed the sentience trait chip?

[Commander Kinsey]

>>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>>
>>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>>
>> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.
>
> For you or for others?

For nobody.

>>>>>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>>>>>> weaknesses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>>>>>> average it's pretty much the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>>>
>>>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>>>> removing useful things.
>>>
>>> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
>>> front-most. That is absurd.
>>
>> Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you
>> could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere
>> to it.
>
> Better than the big transparent mess they used to have. That was madness.

Transparent looks nice. All I want is the foreground app to be obviously different.

>>> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
>>> up directories in their web browser,
>>
>> Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.
>
> If you are on whatever.com/FAQ/some_topic/sub_topic. Something like that.

Are you talking about the old days of FTP? Web pages tend to have pages, not lists of files.

>>> and have made some settings harder to
>>> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.
>>
>> I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone?
>> One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a
>> dishwasher?
>
> Has Windows even made it to one set of settings. They had two competing
> systems to set settings for some time. It was loony.

They continue with this. It does make sense. You choose one or the other. Control panel gives you everything, it always has. Settings is for the dopey folk, ex-Apple users probably, who can't handle too many settings at once, it just provides the simple ones like change your wallpaper or make the screen go off after x minutes. It omits things like power down the hard disk and fine tune PCI Express speed vs power consumption.

>>> On the iPhone there is a
>>> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
>>> Mac.
>>
>> On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them!
>
> Same on macOS by default... though I have mine showing.

At least you can change it. I see Linux is at it too.

>>>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>>>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>>>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>>>
>>>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>>>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>>>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>>>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>>>
>>> That is broken!
>>>
>>>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>>>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>>>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>>>
>>> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
>>> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).
>>
>> What is searchlight?
>
> Apple's Find feature. Works well... though not perfectly.

I don't understand why any search function isn't 100% reliable.

>>>>> I do like their
>>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>>
>>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>>> taken away from me.
>>>
>>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>>> the like).
>>
>> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.
>
> Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).

Firstly, dragging from a web browser is up to the web browser and VLC. I tried it and it works with some browsers but not others.

Secondly, why not put an adblocker in your web browser like I do? Saves you even dragging. And where are you dragging it to? Do you open VLC first?

> Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.

But does that drag the image or the link? The computer doesn't know what you meant. I just copy and paste in that instance. Dragging is very old fashioned, I remember having to do that on the very old Macs when you couldn't copy/cut and paste files. You had to get both windows open at once first, very clumsy.

>>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>>
>>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>>
>> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
>> things yourself, you'll never find them.
>
> Ever use an hour glass?

You mean a physical one? For timing eggs? I fail to see the relevance.

[Snit]

On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:36:02 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.180a2ctcmvhs6z@ryzen>:

>>>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>>>
>>>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>>>
>>> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.
>>
>> For you or for others?
>
> For nobody.

Where is the poll to support this?

>
>>>>>>>> https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-ceo-we-hope-to-win-back-apple-as-a-chip-customer-one-day
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does not mean they are ahead in all areas -- the M-series does have
>>>>>>>> weaknesses.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's not Apple making something amazing, it's just technology moving
>>>>>>>>>>> forwards.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Apple M-series chips are an example of Apple pushing technology forward.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And tomorrow one of the others will do the same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sure. But what other computer company does it as often as Apple?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Often doesn't matter. What matters is how good the products are. And on
>>>>>>> average it's pretty much the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>>>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>>>>
>>>>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>>>>> removing useful things.
>>>>
>>>> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
>>>> front-most. That is absurd.
>>>
>>> Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you
>>> could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere
>>> to it.
>>
>> Better than the big transparent mess they used to have. That was madness.
>
> Transparent looks nice.

Space wasting nonsense. But they have moved on from it.

> All I want is the foreground app to be obviously different.

I want that as well... and modern macOS does not do it as well as older
versions. Wish it did.

>
>>>> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
>>>> up directories in their web browser,
>>>
>>> Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.
>>
>> If you are on whatever.com/FAQ/some_topic/sub_topic. Something like that.
>
> Are you talking about the old days of FTP? Web pages tend to have pages, not
> lists of files.

They still tend to be organized in the background. But I will agree that going
up a directory sometimes leads to errors and that could confuse people.

>
>>>> and have made some settings harder to
>>>> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.
>>>
>>> I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone?
>>> One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a
>>> dishwasher?
>>
>> Has Windows even made it to one set of settings. They had two competing
>> systems to set settings for some time. It was loony.
>
> They continue with this. It does make sense. You choose one or the other.

But not all things are in both. It is madness.

> Control panel gives you everything, it always has. Settings is for the dopey
> folk, ex-Apple users probably, who can't handle too many settings at once, it
> just provides the simple ones like change your wallpaper or make the screen go
> off after x minutes. It omits things like power down the hard disk and fine
> tune PCI Express speed vs power consumption.

Completely insane to have two different systems to set settings. If you want
to make things less "discoverable" have an advanced tab where needed.

>
>>>> On the iPhone there is a
>>>> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
>>>> Mac.
>>>
>>> On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them!
>>
>> Same on macOS by default... though I have mine showing.
>
> At least you can change it. I see Linux is at it too.

Can you not change it on Windows? It is easy on macOS... but NOT the default.

>
>>>>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>>>>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>>>>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>>>>
>>>>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>>>>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>>>>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>>>>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>>>>
>>>> That is broken!
>>>>
>>>>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>>>>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>>>>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>>>>
>>>> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
>>>> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).
>>>
>>> What is searchlight?
>>
>> Apple's Find feature. Works well... though not perfectly.
>
> I don't understand why any search function isn't 100% reliable.

It is generally reliable... but sometimes fails at being almost instantaneous.
My having external drives it has to wake up slows it down at times but I get
that.

>
>>>>>> I do like their
>>>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>>>
>>>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>>>> taken away from me.
>>>>
>>>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>>>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>>>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>>>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>>>> the like).
>>>
>>> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.
>>
>> Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).
>
> Firstly, dragging from a web browser is up to the web browser and VLC. I tried
> it and it works with some browsers but not others.

Works with multiple browsers and VLC... but also just from anywhere. See a
URL... drag it. Can be in the text of a message here or in an email. Does not
matter.

> Secondly, why not put an adblocker in your web browser like I do? Saves you
> even dragging. And where are you dragging it to? Do you open VLC first?

Just drag it to the icon in the dock.

>> Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.
>
> But does that drag the image or the link?

Image.

> The computer doesn't know what you meant.

I want the image. That is why I am dragging an image.

> I just copy and paste in that instance. Dragging is very old fashioned

Drag and Drop and is newer than Copy and Paste.

> , I remember having to do that on the very old Macs when you couldn't copy/cut
> and paste files. You had to get both windows open at once first, very clumsy.
>
>>>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>>>
>>>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
>>> things yourself, you'll never find them.
>>
>> Ever use an hour glass?
>
> You mean a physical one? For timing eggs? I fail to see the relevance.

The sand moves itself.

[Snit]

On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:12:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.18z9zclimvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>
>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
>>>> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.
>>>
>>> Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many
>>> pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and
>>> more expensive.
>>
>> It would bump the price up.
>
> Apple shit already costs a fortune, the fanboys wouldn't notice.

I notice price.

> Oh but wait, they don't wan their gullible customers to upgrade, they want
> them to buy a new machine.

The inability to upgrade RAM *is* an issue for me.

>
>>> As long as they come with 10 times enough RAM so they're futureproof they'd be
>>> fine. But I bet Apple don't do that. They prefer you to throw away (which is
>>> environmentally wrong) your computer and get another one. Also, RAM is too
>>> expensive to buy enough for 10 years time.
>>
>> They come with enough for most people, even at the low end, but you can get it
>> with more. The problem is there is literally NO way to upgrade it.
>
> Enough when you buy it. But memory needs increase a lot with time.

Right. I wish they had a way to upgrade it, even if the off-chip memory was
understandably slower.

>
>>> Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3
>>> years?
>>
>> Macs tend to be in service longer than PCs. Not sure where you got the idea
>> otherwise. Those who do a lot of upgrading on their PCs tend to use them even
>> longer, but that is a fairly small slice of the market.
>
> The fanboys all want the latest Iphone etc. The rest of us replace the phone
> when it breaks.

Again my data is outdated, but at least used to be people held onto Macs a lot
longer than people held onto Windows PCs.

>
>>> Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had
>>> some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.
>>>
>>>> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?
>>>
>>> Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same
>>> applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either
>>> Mac or Linux missing.
>>
>> But no actual device you can name?
>
> Just look some up, I'm not doing your homework for you. I already know they
> exist.

If you think of any to back your point I would like to hear of them.

>
>>>>>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>>>>>> knows that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>>>>>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>>>>>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>>>>>
>>>>> All of them. Go and look back in history.
>>>>
>>>> I would love examples.
>>>
>>> I'm not doing your homework for you.
>>
>> So just your feelings. OK.
>

> No, just not prepared to waste my time educating you. I know what I know from

> what I've seen over the years, to find it online is a lot of effort.

You have your intuition / feelings. OK.

>
>>>>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>>>>> example?
>>>>>
>>>>> Everywhere.
>>>>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>>>>> raining".
>>>>
>>>> There is a different connotative meaning.
>>>
>>> I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday
>>> English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?
>>
>> It is not an uncommon word.
>
> Yes it is. Go check on google ngram.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=connotative&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3&case_insensitive=true

>
>> Yes, I did that to you on purpose. LOL!
>
> You have installed the sentience trait chip?

Not an uncommon. :)

>
>>>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>>>
>>>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>>>
>>> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.
>>
>> For you or for others?

[Peeler]

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 16:58:22 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> You have your intuition / feelings. OK.

What that trolling gay wanker feels is your endlessly blathering senile
mouth on his cock, you troll-feeding senile cretin!

[Peeler]

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 16:53:19 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> The sand moves itself.

Just like your mouth keeps moving all by itself, you troll-feeding senile
shithead!

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 16:49:53 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 22, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.16za7lb6mvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>>>
>>>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>>>
>>> They make excellent products.
>>
>> No better than many others. And the others are compatible.
>
> Yet they have higher customer satisfaction scores,

Those stupid enough to buy Apple are easily conned.

> lower dead on arrival rates, greater return purchases, etc.

At the cost of stupidly priced products.

And what are you comparing them with? Unlike Apples, the competition is 100s of companies.

>>> Screens second to none.
>>
>> No better than many others.
>
> What other systems come with ones that are as good or better?

You buy a monitor with a system? Do you buy your washing machine with the microwave?

>>> OSs
>>
>> There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I
>> sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.
>
> Agreed.

Plural, and names ending with S also look daft. "The girls' clothes." "Jesus' followers."

>>> which allow for more interactivity between apps.
>>
>> They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.
>
> They have solutions that serve me better than other solutions.

You have OCD, you concentrate on silly little things of no use to anyone.

>>> Generally easier to use
>>
>> I find them harder to use. They hide everything from the user, treating the
>> user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower
>> intelligence level.
>
> In usability tests, in general people find them easier. Your view and mine are
> not the big picture.

ROFL, usability tests. That would be "jobs for the boys".

>>> and often a better UI
>>> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).
>>
>> All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows
>> millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.
>
> Part of it is they are making the Mac look like the phone... but the phone is
> restrained from size and more in ways that the desktop is not.

I even hate all the instructable websites saying "click or tap". FFS just call it a click!

[Commander Kinsey]

>>>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>>>> sure) but it is
>>>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>>>
>>>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>>>
>>> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
>>> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
>>> hard.
>>
>> Not possible, they're just another chip maker.
>
> Being smaller and having more control they are able to be more nimble. And
> they do not hold onto the past as much as MS does.

Being smaller hey have less resources for research.

Clinging onto the past allows compatibility. Your photoshop broke remember?

>>>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>>>> even add additional memory.
>>>>
>>>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>>>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>>>
>>> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.
>>
>> Not that much difference.
>
> Not sure it would be possible to fit RAM sockets into the MacBook Air and keep
> it so small and light.

A laptop is not meant to be as small as a tablet.

>>> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
>>> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
>>> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
>>> chip).
>>
>> More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.
>
> It would be slower... but you can move things around.

??

>>>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>>>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>>>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>>>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>>>
>>> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
>>> casual user.
>>
>> The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be
>> abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if
>> I wanted.
>
> If you run a lot of apps at the same time, or some huge app, perhaps. My
> current system has 8 GB. It is usually just fine with that. Occasionally I
> wish I had 16.

Try 4GB.

>>>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>>>> chip
>>>>
>>>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>>>
>>> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.
>>
>> All Apples are prohibitively expensive.
>
> In cost comparisons they tend to do well. This is comparing Windows machines
> that are configured to include everything you get... and the reality is you
> cannot NOT get stuff on the Mac you do not want. So there is a bit of fiddling
> to get those comparisons.

Then the comparisons are unfair.

>>> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.
>>
>> I assumed that was for space.
>
> No. It is less distance to get to the RAM.
>
>>
>> So how much RAM do they have in there?
>
> You can get different amounts.

Can you get 128GB as I stated below?

[Snit]

On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:38 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.184csckxmvhs6z@ryzen>:

>
>
>>>>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>>>>> sure) but it is
>>>>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>>>>
>>>>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>>>>
>>>> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
>>>> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
>>>> hard.
>>>
>>> Not possible, they're just another chip maker.
>>
>> Being smaller and having more control they are able to be more nimble. And
>> they do not hold onto the past as much as MS does.
>
> Being smaller hey have less resources for research.

They have massive money... and are sometimes referred to as the tech
industries R&D department. They, of course, copy others... but far more often
other companies copy them.

> Clinging onto the past allows compatibility. Your photoshop broke remember?

Right... there are downsides to moving forward quickly. There are also
benefits.

>
>>>>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>>>>> even add additional memory.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>>>>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>>>>
>>>> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.
>>>
>>> Not that much difference.
>>
>> Not sure it would be possible to fit RAM sockets into the MacBook Air and keep
>> it so small and light.
>
> A laptop is not meant to be as small as a tablet.

But it is meant to be small and light. But Apple has for years worked to keep
iMacs super thin. WHY?

>
>>>> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
>>>> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
>>>> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
>>>> chip).
>>>
>>> More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.
>>
>> It would be slower... but you can move things around.
>
> ??

Memory would be slower... but what you are using could be moved to the faster
memory.

>
>>>>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>>>>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>>>>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>>>>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>>>>
>>>> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
>>>> casual user.
>>>
>>> The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be
>>> abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if
>>> I wanted.
>>
>> If you run a lot of apps at the same time, or some huge app, perhaps. My
>> current system has 8 GB. It is usually just fine with that. Occasionally I
>> wish I had 16.
>
> Try 4GB.

No thanks.

>
>>>>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>>>>> chip
>>>>>
>>>>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.
>>>
>>> All Apples are prohibitively expensive.
>>
>> In cost comparisons they tend to do well. This is comparing Windows machines
>> that are configured to include everything you get... and the reality is you
>> cannot NOT get stuff on the Mac you do not want. So there is a bit of fiddling
>> to get those comparisons.
>
> Then the comparisons are unfair.

You can opt out of things on Windows machines... but apples to apples, so to
speak, Macs do well.

>
>>>> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.
>>>
>>> I assumed that was for space.
>>
>> No. It is less distance to get to the RAM.
>>
>>>
>>> So how much RAM do they have in there?
>>
>> You can get different amounts.
>
> Can you get 128GB as I stated below?

Yes. I think so anyway.

>
>>> I can't believe there would be space for the 128GB I can put on my motherboard.
>>
>>

[Snit]

On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:31 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.184cr5zfmvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 16:49:53 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 22, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.16za7lb6mvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>>>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>>>>
>>>> They make excellent products.
>>>
>>> No better than many others. And the others are compatible.
>>
>> Yet they have higher customer satisfaction scores,
>
> Those stupid enough to buy Apple are easily conned.

You have a hard time understanding others have different tastes and needs.

>
>> lower dead on arrival rates, greater return purchases, etc.
>
> At the cost of stupidly priced products.

Better ROI. Or it at least used to be.

>
> And what are you comparing them with? Unlike Apples, the competition is 100s
> of companies.

Right... so not really fair to say ANY company. Compare Apple with one OEM.

>
>>>> Screens second to none.
>>>
>>> No better than many others.
>>
>> What other systems come with ones that are as good or better?
>
> You buy a monitor with a system? Do you buy your washing machine with the
> microwave?

My system has a monitor. Actually two.

>
>>>> OSs
>>>
>>> There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I
>>> sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> Plural, and names ending with S also look daft. "The girls' clothes." "Jesus'
> followers."

Agreed.

>
>>>> which allow for more interactivity between apps.
>>>
>>> They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.
>>
>> They have solutions that serve me better than other solutions.
>
> You have OCD, you concentrate on silly little things of no use to anyone.

You are incorrect. I do have an atypical anxiety disorder... but that is not
relevant.

>
>>>> Generally easier to use
>>>
>>> I find them harder to use. They hide everything from the user, treating the
>>> user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower
>>> intelligence level.
>>
>> In usability tests, in general people find them easier. Your view and mine are
>> not the big picture.
>
> ROFL, usability tests. That would be "jobs for the boys".

This is another example where more knowledge shows you broader info to better
make choices.

>
>>>> and often a better UI
>>>> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).
>>>
>>> All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows
>>> millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.
>>
>> Part of it is they are making the Mac look like the phone... but the phone is
>> restrained from size and more in ways that the desktop is not.
>
> I even hate all the instructable websites saying "click or tap". FFS just call
> it a click!

I would prefer that... but also know there are lots of folks who would be
confused. Not everyone is technically savvy.

[Peeler]

On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 21:42:24 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> You have a hard time understanding others have different tastes and needs.

You sick senile shithead have a hard time understanding that you are playing
the troll's game. But no surprise, you ARE that "constantly running toilet"
that loves to hear itself gurgling.

[Peeler]

On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 21:39:51 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> They have massive money... and are sometimes referred to as the tech
> industries R&D department. They, of course, copy others... but far more often
> other companies copy them.

Will you finally keep your sick shit out of these ngs, you "constantly
running toilet"?

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 17:53:19 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:36:02 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.180a2ctcmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>>>>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>>>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>>>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>>>>
>>>>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>>>>
>>>> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.
>>>
>>> For you or for others?
>>
>> For nobody.
>
> Where is the poll to support this?

Common sense.

>>>>>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>>>>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>>>>>> removing useful things.
>>>>>
>>>>> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
>>>>> front-most. That is absurd.
>>>>
>>>> Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you
>>>> could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere
>>>> to it.
>>>
>>> Better than the big transparent mess they used to have. That was madness.
>>
>> Transparent looks nice.
>
> Space wasting nonsense. But they have moved on from it.

Not sure exactly what you're referring to, but my taskbar is transparent, I like it. Can't see the bits not in use.

>> All I want is the foreground app to be obviously different.
>
> I want that as well... and modern macOS does not do it as well as older
> versions. Wish it did.

Why do designers take a working system and redesign it? Why don't company executives stop paying designers when the design is finished?

>>>>> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
>>>>> up directories in their web browser,
>>>>
>>>> Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.
>>>
>>> If you are on whatever.com/FAQ/some_topic/sub_topic. Something like that.
>>
>> Are you talking about the old days of FTP? Web pages tend to have pages, not
>> lists of files.
>
> They still tend to be organized in the background. But I will agree that going
> up a directory sometimes leads to errors and that could confuse people.

No idea what you're talking about. There has never been an ability to go up a directory on a webpage unless it has no html and is just a list of files. Of course you can take a bit off the URL....

>>>>> and have made some settings harder to
>>>>> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.
>>>>
>>>> I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone?
>>>> One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a
>>>> dishwasher?
>>>
>>> Has Windows even made it to one set of settings. They had two competing
>>> systems to set settings for some time. It was loony.
>>
>> They continue with this. It does make sense. You choose one or the other.
>
> But not all things are in both. It is madness.

All things are in control panel, I use it. Newbies use settings as it's simpler and only has commonly used stuff, no clutter to confuse.

>> Control panel gives you everything, it always has. Settings is for the dopey
>> folk, ex-Apple users probably, who can't handle too many settings at once, it
>> just provides the simple ones like change your wallpaper or make the screen go
>> off after x minutes. It omits things like power down the hard disk and fine
>> tune PCI Express speed vs power consumption.
>
> Completely insane to have two different systems to set settings. If you want
> to make things less "discoverable" have an advanced tab where needed.

That would irritate me. Currently I can go to control panel and not have to keep clicking advanced.

>>>>> On the iPhone there is a
>>>>> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
>>>>> Mac.
>>>>
>>>> On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them!
>>>
>>> Same on macOS by default... though I have mine showing.
>>
>> At least you can change it. I see Linux is at it too.
>
> Can you not change it on Windows? It is easy on macOS... but NOT the default.

No it is not changeable on windows, many people are very very angry. Nobody has managed to even change it by 3rd party program or registry edit.

[Commander Kinsey]

>>>>>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>>>>>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>>>>>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>>>>>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>>>>>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>>>>>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>>>>>
>>>>> That is broken!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>>>>>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>>>>>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
>>>>> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).
>>>>
>>>> What is searchlight?
>>>
>>> Apple's Find feature. Works well... though not perfectly.
>>
>> I don't understand why any search function isn't 100% reliable.
>
> It is generally reliable... but sometimes fails at being almost instantaneous.
> My having external drives it has to wake up slows it down at times but I get
> that.

You're lucky. Windows usually fails to find files right in front of it. I had to install a 3rd party program.

>>>>>>> I do like their
>>>>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>>>>> taken away from me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>>>>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>>>>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>>>>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>>>>> the like).
>>>>
>>>> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.
>>>
>>> Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).
>>
>> Firstly, dragging from a web browser is up to the web browser and VLC. I tried
>> it and it works with some browsers but not others.
>
> Works with multiple browsers and VLC... but also just from anywhere. See a
> URL... drag it. Can be in the text of a message here or in an email. Does not
> matter.

Some browsers must not support dragging links off them.

>> Secondly, why not put an adblocker in your web browser like I do? Saves you
>> even dragging. And where are you dragging it to? Do you open VLC first?
>
> Just drag it to the icon in the dock.

I don't have icons there, that's a horrid way to do things. My apps are started from the start menu. I don't want running programs and aliases in the same place, its confusing.

>>> Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.
>>
>> But does that drag the image or the link?
>
> Image.
>
>> The computer doesn't know what you meant.
>
> I want the image. That is why I am dragging an image.
>
>> I just copy and paste in that instance. Dragging is very old fashioned
>
> Drag and Drop and is newer than Copy and Paste.

It's inconvenient unless you have multiple monitors and one app open in each. Easier to copy, switch app, paste.

>> , I remember having to do that on the very old Macs when you couldn't copy/cut
>> and paste files. You had to get both windows open at once first, very clumsy.
>>
>>>>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>>>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>>>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
>>>> things yourself, you'll never find them.
>>>
>>> Ever use an hour glass?
>>
>> You mean a physical one? For timing eggs? I fail to see the relevance.
>
> The sand moves itself.

But it has only one place to go. A computer can't possibly know where I want files put.

[Snit]

On Sep 8, 2023 at 3:30:28 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2ay4s2dbmvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 17:53:19 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:36:02 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.180a2ctcmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>
>>>>>>> Sometimes it's even used twice!
>>>>>>> "I see that that was the right choice to make" has precisely the same meaning
>>>>>>> as "I see that was the right choice to make.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The language is being used for emphasis.
>>>>>
>>>>> It emphasizes nothing in the example above.
>>>>
>>>> For you or for others?
>>>
>>> For nobody.
>>
>> Where is the poll to support this?
>
> Common sense.

How is that different from your intuition? And why should someone else's view
of "common sense", or their intuition, not count just as much as yours?

>
>>>>>>>> Each has pros and cons... but for my use Apple is *generally* ahead. Their UI
>>>>>>>> advantage is, I think, eroding... and that bothers me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All interfaces are going backwards. They're breaking simple things, they're
>>>>>>> removing useful things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And in the case of macOS they make it harder to tell which window is the
>>>>>> front-most. That is absurd.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with windows, the frontmost titlebar used to be much darker. And you
>>>>> could choose the two colours aswell. You still can, but most apps don't adhere
>>>>> to it.
>>>>
>>>> Better than the big transparent mess they used to have. That was madness.
>>>
>>> Transparent looks nice.
>>
>> Space wasting nonsense. But they have moved on from it.
>
> Not sure exactly what you're referring to, but my taskbar is transparent, I
> like it. Can't see the bits not in use.

The windows took up tons of space with the "chrome". Uselessly. I get not
going the full other direction of NO visible border. That makes it harder to
see where to resize. But the huge borders were silly.

>
>>> All I want is the foreground app to be obviously different.
>>
>> I want that as well... and modern macOS does not do it as well as older
>> versions. Wish it did.
>
> Why do designers take a working system and redesign it? Why don't company
> executives stop paying designers when the design is finished?

New features require new UI... and they want to keep it "fresh". To some
extent I am glad they do... the original macOS had those nasty pinstripes I
never liked.

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/puma-on-ibook-jpg.761986/

YUCK!

>
>>>>>> And they have taken away the ability to easily go
>>>>>> up directories in their web browser,
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure why you're looking through directories in a web browser.
>>>>
>>>> If you are on whatever.com/FAQ/some_topic/sub_topic. Something like that.
>>>
>>> Are you talking about the old days of FTP? Web pages tend to have pages, not
>>> lists of files.
>>
>> They still tend to be organized in the background. But I will agree that going
>> up a directory sometimes leads to errors and that could confuse people.
>
> No idea what you're talking about. There has never been an ability to go up a
> directory on a webpage unless it has no html and is just a list of files. Of
> course you can take a bit off the URL....

No ability *on Windows*. You used to be able to on Macs. Just like you can in
the file browser. I get why they removed it... it does lead to errors too
often.

>
>>>>>> and have made some settings harder to
>>>>>> see. They want to make it more like the iPhone.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see this bullshit in Windows too. Why make a computer look like a phone?
>>>>> One has a keyboard and a much bigger screen! What next, make a car look like a
>>>>> dishwasher?
>>>>
>>>> Has Windows even made it to one set of settings. They had two competing
>>>> systems to set settings for some time. It was loony.
>>>
>>> They continue with this. It does make sense. You choose one or the other.
>>
>> But not all things are in both. It is madness.
>
> All things are in control panel, I use it. Newbies use settings as it's
> simpler and only has commonly used stuff, no clutter to confuse.

Two overlapping / competing systems to do the same thing. It is like Linux. No
thanks. I mean I get a little widget with common controls, as you have on
phones... but Windows has that, too!

>
>>> Control panel gives you everything, it always has. Settings is for the dopey
>>> folk, ex-Apple users probably, who can't handle too many settings at once, it
>>> just provides the simple ones like change your wallpaper or make the screen go
>>> off after x minutes. It omits things like power down the hard disk and fine
>>> tune PCI Express speed vs power consumption.
>>
>> Completely insane to have two different systems to set settings. If you want
>> to make things less "discoverable" have an advanced tab where needed.
>
> That would irritate me. Currently I can go to control panel and not have to
> keep clicking advanced.

In the Windows Control Panel you often have to go to "Advanced" and then
"Advanced" again. It is madness. Here, an experiment: On Windows act as if you
want to change the page file size. Spoiler:

https://jmp.sh/3hHJZl1G

You have to select "Advanced" twice. Why?

>
>>>>>> On the iPhone there is a
>>>>>> reason to have things more hidden -- limited space -- but it is stupid on the
>>>>>> Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>> On windows, the scrollbars autohide and you can't stop them!
>>>>
>>>> Same on macOS by default... though I have mine showing.
>>>
>>> At least you can change it. I see Linux is at it too.
>>
>> Can you not change it on Windows? It is easy on macOS... but NOT the default.
>
> No it is not changeable on windows, many people are very very angry. Nobody
> has managed to even change it by 3rd party program or registry edit.

OK, that one is easy on macOS:

https://jmp.sh/ODwu8vum

You can set scroll bar options easily.

[Snit]

On Sep 8, 2023 at 3:30:32 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2ay4s60tmvhs6z@ryzen>:

>>>>>>> The second one indicates perhaps they believe we're all thick and it has to
>>>>>>> get simple enough for a 6 year old to use, but the first one can only mean
>>>>>>> thicko useless inadequately mentally fitted programmers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An example: In the few most recent versions of Windows, the search function
>>>>>>> simply doesn't work. Quite often you search for "Jim" in a folder of receipts,
>>>>>>> and I can easily see there are five files right in front of me with Jim in the
>>>>>>> filename, yet it says "no results found".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is broken!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Millions of people complaining on forums, no solution found. Yet in DOS....
>>>>>>> "dir Jim*.*" finds them all 100% of the time. Why is this? How can they break
>>>>>>> such a simple function, then fail to repair it in the next several years!?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My guess: they are trying to copy Apple's Searchlight feature and getting it
>>>>>> wrong (not that Searchlight works flawlessly).
>>>>>
>>>>> What is searchlight?
>>>>
>>>> Apple's Find feature. Works well... though not perfectly.
>>>
>>> I don't understand why any search function isn't 100% reliable.
>>
>> It is generally reliable... but sometimes fails at being almost instantaneous.
>> My having external drives it has to wake up slows it down at times but I get
>> that.
>
> You're lucky. Windows usually fails to find files right in front of it. I had
> to install a 3rd party program.

Spotlight is not perfect but it is pretty darn good.

>
>>>>>>>> I do like their
>>>>>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>>>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>>>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>>>>>> taken away from me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>>>>>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>>>>>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>>>>>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>>>>>> the like).
>>>>>
>>>>> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.
>>>>
>>>> Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).
>>>
>>> Firstly, dragging from a web browser is up to the web browser and VLC. I tried
>>> it and it works with some browsers but not others.
>>
>> Works with multiple browsers and VLC... but also just from anywhere. See a
>> URL... drag it. Can be in the text of a message here or in an email. Does not
>> matter.
>
> Some browsers must not support dragging links off them.

Works in Safari, Chrome, FireFox, Edge, and others I have played with.

>
>>> Secondly, why not put an adblocker in your web browser like I do? Saves you
>>> even dragging. And where are you dragging it to? Do you open VLC first?
>>
>> Just drag it to the icon in the dock.
>
> I don't have icons there, that's a horrid way to do things. My apps are
> started from the start menu. I don't want running programs and aliases in the

> same place, it's confusing.

Why would icons to launch apps confuse you? But regardless, easy to just drag
a URL to the VLC icon and play the YT video.

>
>>>> Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.
>>>
>>> But does that drag the image or the link?
>>
>> Image.
>>
>>> The computer doesn't know what you meant.
>>
>> I want the image. That is why I am dragging an image.
>>
>>> I just copy and paste in that instance. Dragging is very old fashioned
>>
>> Drag and Drop and is newer than Copy and Paste.
>
> It's inconvenient unless you have multiple monitors and one app open in each.
> Easier to copy, switch app, paste.

Easier for you. OK. But that is not everyone's experience. I use both
depending on which is easier for me. But I like choice... one of the reasons I
like macOS.

>
>>> , I remember having to do that on the very old Macs when you couldn't copy/cut
>>> and paste files. You had to get both windows open at once first, very clumsy.
>>>
>>>>>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>>>>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>>>>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
>>>>> things yourself, you'll never find them.
>>>>
>>>> Ever use an hour glass?
>>>
>>> You mean a physical one? For timing eggs? I fail to see the relevance.
>>
>> The sand moves itself.
>
> But it has only one place to go. A computer can't possibly know where I want
> files put.

No matter what system you have to tell it... except for installs, I guess. And
then Windows has files get splattered everywhere (far more than macOS).

But when syncing... the files go where they are... just on the other system.
It is interesting you do not trust Windows to do even fairly simple things.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 17:58:22 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:12:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.18z9zclimvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
>>>>> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.
>>>>
>>>> Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many
>>>> pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and
>>>> more expensive.
>>>
>>> It would bump the price up.
>>
>> Apple shit already costs a fortune, the fanboys wouldn't notice.
>
> I notice price.

Then why the hell do you buy Apple?

>> Oh but wait, they don't want their gullible customers to upgrade, they want

>> them to buy a new machine.
>
> The inability to upgrade RAM *is* an issue for me.

Yet you still use Apple. You could make a Hackintosh....

>>>> Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3
>>>> years?
>>>
>>> Macs tend to be in service longer than PCs. Not sure where you got the idea
>>> otherwise. Those who do a lot of upgrading on their PCs tend to use them even
>>> longer, but that is a fairly small slice of the market.
>>
>> The fanboys all want the latest Iphone etc. The rest of us replace the phone
>> when it breaks.
>
> Again my data is outdated, but at least used to be people held onto Macs a lot
> longer than people held onto Windows PCs.

Because they couldn't afford a new one!

>>>> Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had
>>>> some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.
>>>>
>>>>> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?
>>>>
>>>> Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same
>>>> applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either
>>>> Mac or Linux missing.
>>>
>>> But no actual device you can name?
>>
>> Just look some up, I'm not doing your homework for you. I already know they
>> exist.
>
> If you think of any to back your point I would like to hear of them.

Stop being so lazy.

>>>>>>>>>> And anyway, most computers are not made by one company. This computer has an
>>>>>>>>>> Intel CPU, and AMD graphics card, an MSI motherboard, a corsair power supply,
>>>>>>>>>> crucial memory, and a western digital NVME. You see PC users get to choose
>>>>>>>>>> what they prefer. Apple users make do with Apple's opinion of what they should
>>>>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are pros and cons to that. Sure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, only cons. Freedom of choice is the ultimate requirement in anything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and ones that are in many ways well ahead of what Intel and AMD offer?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've just told you they aren't ahead. They're all coming up with new things
>>>>>>>>>> all the time. Sometimes one leapfrogs the other.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right now it is pretty well accepted that Apple is ahead. Even Intel clearly
>>>>>>>>> knows that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And tomorrow it will be pretty well accepted Apple is behind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pick a date. I mean it will happen at some time -- but the M3 is likely coming
>>>>>>> out soon. Apple is quite a bit ahead for now. What other PC maker left the
>>>>>>> others in the dust like this for more than year?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of them. Go and look back in history.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would love examples.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not doing your homework for you.
>>>
>>> So just your feelings. OK.
>>
>> No, just not prepared to waste my time educating you. I know what I know from
>> what I've seen over the years, to find it online is a lot of effort.
>
> You have your intuition / feelings. OK.

Knowledge and experience. Until we both get a bluetooth implant, I cannot transfer it. Just don't get the Apple one, it'll be incompatible with everyone else. Seriously, I can't believe they did that! And I can't believe it doesn't lose them customers!

>>>>>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>>>>>> example?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everywhere.
>>>>>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>>>>>> raining".
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a different connotative meaning.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday
>>>> English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?
>>>
>>> It is not an uncommon word.
>>
>> Yes it is. Go check on google ngram.
>
> https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=connotative&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3&case_insensitive=true

I looked up the meaning and can't understand the meaning! WTF does this mean?
"The connotative meaning of a word includes the feelings and ideas that people may connect with that word."

>>> Yes, I did that to you on purpose. LOL!
>>
>> You have installed the sentience trait chip?
>
> Not an uncommon. :)

Actually they're hard to come by.

[Snit]

On Sep 8, 2023 at 5:11:44 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2ay9hui5mvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 17:58:22 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 1, 2023 at 9:12:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.18z9zclimvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -- but it is an annoying limit. Would be good if they had a way to add
>>>>>> additional memory even if on using it things slowed down a bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Presumably the chips with only onboard RAM don't have anywhere near as many
>>>>> pins. Adding connections to the outside world for RAM would make it bigger and
>>>>> more expensive.
>>>>
>>>> It would bump the price up.
>>>
>>> Apple shit already costs a fortune, the fanboys wouldn't notice.
>>
>> I notice price.
>
> Then why the hell do you buy Apple?

Nothing serves me better for a lower price.

>
>>> Oh but wait, they don't want their gullible customers to upgrade, they want
>>> them to buy a new machine.
>>
>> The inability to upgrade RAM *is* an issue for me.
>
> Yet you still use Apple. You could make a Hackintosh....

Can you even make a Hackintosh that works like a modern Mac?

>
>>>>> Do Mac users still have the crazy idea computer should be replaced every 3
>>>>> years?
>>>>
>>>> Macs tend to be in service longer than PCs. Not sure where you got the idea
>>>> otherwise. Those who do a lot of upgrading on their PCs tend to use them even
>>>> longer, but that is a fairly small slice of the market.
>>>
>>> The fanboys all want the latest Iphone etc. The rest of us replace the phone
>>> when it breaks.
>>
>> Again my data is outdated, but at least used to be people held onto Macs a lot
>> longer than people held onto Windows PCs.
>
> Because they couldn't afford a new one!

And they did not have to be replaced.

>
>>>>> Mind you when I worked in a university, there were 15 year old Macs. We had
>>>>> some classics still running as a word processors and printing things in 2000.
>>>>>
>>>>>> But with external hardware, were you thinking of anything specific?
>>>>>
>>>>> Everything. There's always the "does it have a Mac driver" question. Same
>>>>> applies to Linux. Half the stuff I've bought, I see Windows drivers but either
>>>>> Mac or Linux missing.
>>>>
>>>> But no actual device you can name?
>>>
>>> Just look some up, I'm not doing your homework for you. I already know they
>>> exist.
>>
>> If you think of any to back your point I would like to hear of them.
>
> Stop being so lazy.

LOL! You made a claim and cannot back it... but want me to do YOUR work. No
thanks.

Too much work for you to back your claim... so you want me to.

You have little knowledge and apparently basically no experience of the
M-series of chips... or with Macs in general.

You refer to your unsupported guesses as "common sense"... but that is not
convincing.

>
>>>>>>>>> Notice I didn't add the pointless word "that". Why do people insert it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are questioning why that-clauses exist? Or just why it is used in that
>>>>>>>> example?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everywhere.
>>>>>>> "I see that it's raining" has precisely the same meaning as "I see it's
>>>>>>> raining".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a different connotative meaning.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not going to bother looking up connotative. Try speaking in everyday
>>>>> English. Are you deliberately trying to sound clever?
>>>>
>>>> It is not an uncommon word.
>>>
>>> Yes it is. Go check on google ngram.
>>
>> https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=connotative&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3&case_insensitive=true
>
> I looked up the meaning and can't understand the meaning! WTF does this mean?
> "The connotative meaning of a word includes the feelings and ideas that people
> may connect with that word."

That is a pretty clear definition. What part is challenging for you?

>
>>>> Yes, I did that to you on purpose. LOL!
>>>
>>> You have installed the sentience trait chip?
>>
>> Not an uncommon. :)
>
> Actually they're hard to come by.

I have three.

[%]

see why people dislike you bragging about what you have , i have for so
i don't care myself

[Peeler]

On Fri, 08 Sep 2023 23:02:29 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> How is that different from your intuition? And why should someone else's view
> of "common sense", or their intuition, not count just as much as yours?

Keep your stinking senile TROLLSHIT out of these ngs, you endlessly gurgling
stinking senile human toilet!

[Peeler]

On Fri, 08 Sep 2023 23:06:27 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> Spotlight is not perfect but it is pretty darn good.

As good as you two filthy trolls are good at trolling? I doubt it! <BG>

--
Some facts about the trolling senile shithead:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html

[Peeler]

On Sat, 09 Sep 2023 00:17:28 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> Nothing serves me better for a lower price.

Why, how much money does he get for letting you suck him off? I always
thought he allowed you to do it for free.

[Snit]

On Sep 8, 2023 at 6:37:41 PM MST, "%" wrote
<VKecna3Qhvz4UWb5...@giganews.com>:

I just lost two of them.

[%]

i got all of them now

[Snit]

On Sep 11, 2023 at 2:10:19 PM MST, "%" wrote
<DlKdnd4XR-mmH2L5...@giganews.com>:

You are bragging.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 22:39:51 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:38 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.184csckxmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>>>>>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>>>>>> sure) but it is
>>>>>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
>>>>> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
>>>>> hard.
>>>>
>>>> Not possible, they're just another chip maker.
>>>
>>> Being smaller and having more control they are able to be more nimble. And
>>> they do not hold onto the past as much as MS does.
>>
>> Being smaller hey have less resources for research.
>
> They have massive money... and are sometimes referred to as the tech
> industries R&D department. They, of course, copy others... but far more often
> other companies copy them.

They have a lot of money from the gullible who pay double what the product is worth.

>> Clinging onto the past allows compatibility. Your photoshop broke remember?
>
> Right... there are downsides to moving forward quickly. There are also
> benefits.

No benefits. I've even seen adapters on Ebay to convert Apple proprietary bullshit so normal USB. What is this lightning crap?

>>>>>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>>>>>> even add additional memory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>>>>>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>>>>>
>>>>> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.
>>>>
>>>> Not that much difference.
>>>
>>> Not sure it would be possible to fit RAM sockets into the MacBook Air and keep
>>> it so small and light.
>>
>> A laptop is not meant to be as small as a tablet.
>
> But it is meant to be small and light. But Apple has for years worked to keep
> iMacs super thin. WHY?

For obsessed fanboys with weak arms.

>>>>> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
>>>>> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
>>>>> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
>>>>> chip).
>>>>
>>>> More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.
>>>
>>> It would be slower... but you can move things around.
>>
>> ??
>
> Memory would be slower... but what you are using could be moved to the faster
> memory.

Indeed, This is done by Intel and AMD already. Except they go for even faster RAM but less of it. For almost all situations, programs run off the super fast cache memory. Some of the large datasets I use for science stuff tend to access slow main RAM a lot though. Which I notice in this machine as it has 3 memory sticks. I should buy a 4th so they operate in pairs at double the speed, but I'm saving up for land.

>>>>>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>>>>>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>>>>>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>>>>>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
>>>>> casual user.
>>>>
>>>> The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be
>>>> abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if
>>>> I wanted.
>>>
>>> If you run a lot of apps at the same time, or some huge app, perhaps. My
>>> current system has 8 GB. It is usually just fine with that. Occasionally I
>>> wish I had 16.
>>
>> Try 4GB.
>
> No thanks.

I have a 5GB and a 6GB machine. They can scan asteroids.

>>>>>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>>>>>> chip
>>>>>>
>>>>>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.
>>>>
>>>> All Apples are prohibitively expensive.
>>>
>>> In cost comparisons they tend to do well. This is comparing Windows machines
>>> that are configured to include everything you get... and the reality is you
>>> cannot NOT get stuff on the Mac you do not want. So there is a bit of fiddling
>>> to get those comparisons.
>>
>> Then the comparisons are unfair.
>
> You can opt out of things on Windows machines... but apples to apples, so to
> speak, Macs do well.

I get choice, you do not, you have to buy ripoff versions with stuff you'll never touch.

>>>>> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.
>>>>
>>>> I assumed that was for space.
>>>
>>> No. It is less distance to get to the RAM.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So how much RAM do they have in there?
>>>
>>> You can get different amounts.
>>
>> Can you get 128GB as I stated below?
>
> Yes. I think so anyway.

What device are we discussing?

[Snit]

On Sep 12, 2023 at 10:44:10 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2a63jwa7mvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 22:39:51 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:38 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.184csckxmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>
>>>>>>>> But sure, they might be ahead in many areas (and behind in others, to be
>>>>>>>> sure) but it is
>>>>>>>> not like they are 20 years ahead of the competition in, say, chip design.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt they're more than 6 months.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most estimates are several years ahead. Though that was when the M1 came
>>>>>> out... and they are not going as fast as they wanted and others are working
>>>>>> hard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not possible, they're just another chip maker.
>>>>
>>>> Being smaller and having more control they are able to be more nimble. And
>>>> they do not hold onto the past as much as MS does.
>>>
>>> Being smaller hey have less resources for research.
>>
>> They have massive money... and are sometimes referred to as the tech
>> industries R&D department. They, of course, copy others... but far more often
>> other companies copy them.
>
> They have a lot of money from the gullible who pay double what the product is
> worth.

Point me to a product that would serve me better than my Mac at less cost...
and BACK that claim. Explain how it would do better. Or even as well. Not
conjecture. Not guessing. EVIDENCE.

Keep in mind that while I am outdated on Windows, I have used it for years and
am quite familiar with it. And am back to using Windows more than I have been
in some time.

>>> Clinging onto the past allows compatibility. Your photoshop broke remember?
>>
>> Right... there are downsides to moving forward quickly. There are also
>> benefits.
>
> No benefits.

Pease support this claim.

> I've even seen adapters on Ebay to convert Apple proprietary bullshit so
> normal USB. What is this lightning crap?

You speak of Apple and yet do not know what Lightening is. Interesting.

>
>>>>>>>> Ah, I was thinking peripherals and the like. Yeah, with modern Macs you cannot
>>>>>>>> even add additional memory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is beyond a joke. Not just Apple though, in laptops, some PC makers don't
>>>>>>> provide RAM sockets (for size?).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Size and weight. And for laptops I get it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not that much difference.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure it would be possible to fit RAM sockets into the MacBook Air and keep
>>>> it so small and light.
>>>
>>> A laptop is not meant to be as small as a tablet.
>>
>> But it is meant to be small and light. But Apple has for years worked to keep
>> iMacs super thin. WHY?
>
> For obsessed fanboys with weak arms.

Please support this claim.

>
>>>>>> For a desktop it is silly. Even if
>>>>>> on iMacs and Mac Minis it was a slower pool than the one built into the CPU,
>>>>>> no reason to not add it (unless there is some technical reason based on the
>>>>>> chip).
>>>>>
>>>>> More pins and therefore great cost to access external RAM.
>>>>
>>>> It would be slower... but you can move things around.
>>>
>>> ??
>>
>> Memory would be slower... but what you are using could be moved to the faster
>> memory.
>
> Indeed, This is done by Intel and AMD already.

How much memory do they have on their system on a chip designs?

Oh.

They do not have that.

> Except they go for even faster RAM but less of it. For almost all situations,
> programs run off the super fast cache memory. Some of the large datasets I use
> for science stuff tend to access slow main RAM a lot though. Which I notice in
> this machine as it has 3 memory sticks. I should buy a 4th so they operate in
> pairs at double the speed, but I'm saving up for land.
>
>>>>>>> My Aunt bought one only a year ago with FOUR GB of memory! FOUR! And no
>>>>>>> option to add more. It wasn't fast enough to run the OS and one program. She
>>>>>>> took it back very angrily to the shop and bought one online at my
>>>>>>> recommendation with I think 8GB upgradeable to 32.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even the low end (for Apple) Macs come with enough to run a system well for a
>>>>>> casual user.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "minimum" and even "recommended" amount of RAM for anything I find to be
>>>>> abysmal. This PC (and three others) have 96GB RAM. I could up them to 128GB if
>>>>> I wanted.
>>>>
>>>> If you run a lot of apps at the same time, or some huge app, perhaps. My
>>>> current system has 8 GB. It is usually just fine with that. Occasionally I
>>>> wish I had 16.
>>>
>>> Try 4GB.
>>
>> No thanks.
>
> I have a 5GB and a 6GB machine. They can scan asteroids.

OK. Not sure if scanning asteroids is something one would expect to have heavy
memory usage.

>
>>>>>>>> I get some of the reasons why -- it is all on one
>>>>>>>> chip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RAM on the CPU? Dafuq? Sounds fucking expensive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope. The M series computers are not super expensive.
>>>>>
>>>>> All Apples are prohibitively expensive.
>>>>
>>>> In cost comparisons they tend to do well. This is comparing Windows machines
>>>> that are configured to include everything you get... and the reality is you
>>>> cannot NOT get stuff on the Mac you do not want. So there is a bit of fiddling
>>>> to get those comparisons.
>>>
>>> Then the comparisons are unfair.
>>
>> You can opt out of things on Windows machines... but apples to apples, so to
>> speak, Macs do well.
>
> I get choice, you do not, you have to buy ripoff versions with stuff you'll
> never touch.

You incorrectly assume your view of choice is somehow superior. I am not
interested in such unsupported nonsense. And your ripoff versions claim is
gibberish.

There are tradeoffs. I am happy with my choice. You are happy with yours. I do
not get the religious OS wars. Unlike you I am not a religious person.

>
>>>>>> It allows things to be much faster. Your phone likely has the same idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> I assumed that was for space.
>>>>
>>>> No. It is less distance to get to the RAM.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So how much RAM do they have in there?
>>>>
>>>> You can get different amounts.
>>>
>>> Can you get 128GB as I stated below?
>>
>> Yes. I think so anyway.
>
> What device are we discussing?

Phones.

>
>>>>> I can't believe there would be space for the 128GB I can put on my motherboard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>

[Peeler]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 06:02:54 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> Keep in mind that while I am outdated on Windows,

Just let's keep in mind that HE is an unwashed smelly troll and wanker
...and YOU are a incontinent smelly troll-feeding asshole, Shit the Git!

[Keppi]

In article <HpeMM.211$nV4d...@fx35.iad>,
trol...@valid.invalid says...

>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 06:02:54 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and
> troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
> again:
>
> > Keep in mind that while I am outdated on Windows,
>
> Just let's keep in mind that HE is an unwashed smelly troll and wanker
> ...and YOU are a incontinent smelly troll-feeding asshole, Shit the Git!

whats a wanker?

[Commander Kinsey]

>>>>> OSs
>>>>
>>>> There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I
>>>> sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>
>> Plural, and names ending with S also look daft. "The girls' clothes." "Jesus'
>> followers."
>
> Agreed.

Where do you stand on floating point operations (speed of processing)?

I think technically, FLOPs is plural of floating point operation, so it's ho much work needs to be done in a given task. FLOPS (change the case of the S) is now floating point operations per second, so speed.

Same problem with Mb/sec and MB/s. Technically the B is bytes and the b is bits, vastly different speeds, but so many programs use the wrong one.

>>>>> which allow for more interactivity between apps.
>>>>
>>>> They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.
>>>
>>> They have solutions that serve me better than other solutions.
>>
>> You have OCD, you concentrate on silly little things of no use to anyone.
>
> You are incorrect. I do have an atypical anxiety disorder... but that is not
> relevant.

You also have OCD, you focus on little unimportant things. I can accept "x is probably true", you cannot, you need conclusive proof of everything.

>>>>> Generally easier to use
>>>>
>>>> I find them harder to use. They hide everything from the user, treating the
>>>> user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower
>>>> intelligence level.
>>>
>>> In usability tests, in general people find them easier. Your view and mine are
>>> not the big picture.
>>
>> ROFL, usability tests. That would be "jobs for the boys".
>
> This is another example where more knowledge shows you broader info to better
> make choices.

Unnecessary knowledge. Use gut instinct.

>>>>> and often a better UI
>>>>> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).
>>>>
>>>> All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows
>>>> millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.
>>>
>>> Part of it is they are making the Mac look like the phone... but the phone is
>>> restrained from size and more in ways that the desktop is not.
>>
>> I even hate all the instructable websites saying "click or tap". FFS just call
>> it a click!
>
> I would prefer that... but also know there are lots of folks who would be
> confused. Not everyone is technically savvy.

People would fail to understand "click this button" on a phone? Surely click is a common enough word. You don't have to be precise - there are probably several words to turn on a lightswitch. Press, flick, ....

[Commander Kinsey]

On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 22:42:24 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:31 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> <op.184cr5zfmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 16:49:53 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 22, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>> <op.16za7lb6mvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>>>>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>>>>>
>>>>> They make excellent products.
>>>>
>>>> No better than many others. And the others are compatible.
>>>
>>> Yet they have higher customer satisfaction scores,
>>
>> Those stupid enough to buy Apple are easily conned.
>
> You have a hard time understanding others have different tastes and needs.

I understand some people have lower intelligence, doesn't mean I have to accept them as human beings.

>>> lower dead on arrival rates, greater return purchases, etc.
>>
>> At the cost of stupidly priced products.
>
> Better ROI. Or it at least used to be.

The Republic of Ireland is nothing to do with it.

And an Apple product is not twice as good or lasts twice as long, so it's not worth paying twice as much.

You also have to consider when you're paying the money. For example over it's lifetime an electric car will save you £x in petrol. But it costs you £x more to buy. And you've paid that money upfront, so they're utterly pointless.

>> And what are you comparing them with? Unlike Apples, the competition is 100s
>> of companies.
>
> Right... so not really fair to say ANY company. Compare Apple with one OEM.

Why? When I choose to buy an Android phone or a Windows PC, I have the choice of many competing companies. You don't.

>>>>> Screens second to none.
>>>>
>>>> No better than many others.
>>>
>>> What other systems come with ones that are as good or better?
>>
>> You buy a monitor with a system? Do you buy your washing machine with the
>> microwave?
>
> My system has a monitor. Actually two.

So does mine, but they weren't bought at the same time, just as I didn't buy my curtains and carpets at the same time and they're not joined together.

[Snit]

On Sep 13, 2023 at 5:40:43 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2a8j5501mvhs6z@ryzen>:

> On Thu, 03 Aug 2023 22:42:24 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 3, 2023 at 2:03:31 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>> <op.184cr5zfmvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>
>>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 16:49:53 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 22, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>> <op.16za7lb6mvhs6z@ryzen>:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:15:31 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 30, 2023 at 9:47:51 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
>>>>>> <op.15rnl...@ryzen.home>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 05:52:48 +0100, Snit <brock.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a reason Apple tends to have very high rates of returning customers
>>>>>>>> and in the price range they sell in they have a high market share.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you going to tell us that reason?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They make excellent products.
>>>>>
>>>>> No better than many others. And the others are compatible.
>>>>
>>>> Yet they have higher customer satisfaction scores,
>>>
>>> Those stupid enough to buy Apple are easily conned.
>>
>> You have a hard time understanding others have different tastes and needs.
>
> I understand some people have lower intelligence, doesn't mean I have to
> accept them as human beings.

You do not have to be a decent human. Sure.

>
>>>> lower dead on arrival rates, greater return purchases, etc.
>>>
>>> At the cost of stupidly priced products.
>>
>> Better ROI. Or it at least used to be.
>
> The Republic of Ireland is nothing to do with it.

:)

>
> And an Apple product is not twice as good or lasts twice as long, so it's not
> worth paying twice as much.

https://www.jamf.com/blog/total-cost-of-ownership-mac-versus-pc-in-the-enterprise/

https://tools.totaleconomicimpact.com/go/apple/TEI//docs/TEI-of-Mac-in-Enterprise.pdf

>
> You also have to consider when you're paying the money. For example over its
> lifetime an electric car will save you =A3x in petrol. But it costs you =A3x

> more to buy. And you've paid that money upfront, so they're utterly pointless.

You have been shown evidence Macs are cheaper. Do you have counter evidence,
or just a religious belief?

>
>>> And what are you comparing them with? Unlike Apples, the competition is 100s
>>> of companies.
>>
>> Right... so not really fair to say ANY company. Compare Apple with one OEM.
>
> Why?

To compare one choice vs. another, and not one choice vs. many. That is more
honest.

> When I choose to buy an Android phone or a Windows PC, I have the choice of
> many competing companies. You don't.

We each have the SAME number of choices... the same choices, in fact. There
are a bunch of companies selling competing products. I do not care if many of
them are selling similar things. If I go to the store to buy peach jam, and I
happen to pick a peach-jalapeno, that does not mean the other choices were not
there!

>
>>>>>> Screens second to none.
>>>>>
>>>>> No better than many others.
>>>>
>>>> What other systems come with ones that are as good or better?
>>>
>>> You buy a monitor with a system? Do you buy your washing machine with the
>>> microwave?
>>
>> My system has a monitor. Actually two.
>
> So does mine, but they weren't bought at the same time, just as I didn't buy
> my curtains and carpets at the same time and they're not joined together.

I did not buy my monitors at the same time as I did my system. I have
repeatedly considered getting an iMac though -- less desk usage and an amazing
monitor. Still, there are pros and cons.

[Snit]

On Sep 13, 2023 at 5:40:35 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
<op.2a8j5xzqmvhs6z@ryzen>:

>>>>>> OSs
>>>>>
>>>>> There really should be a better way of writing things like that. OSes? I
>>>>> sometimes see OS's which grates my nerves.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> Plural, and names ending with S also look daft. "The girls' clothes." "Jesus'
>>> followers."
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> Where do you stand on floating point operations (speed of processing)?

I personally am a lot slower than any CPU.

> I think technically, FLOPs is plural of floating point operation, so it's ho
> much work needs to be done in a given task. FLOPS (change the case of the S)
> is now floating point operations per second, so speed.
>
> Same problem with Mb/sec and MB/s. Technically the B is bytes and the b is
> bits, vastly different speeds, but so many programs use the wrong one.

I have seen that.

>
>>>>>> which allow for more interactivity between apps.
>>>>>
>>>>> They invented a solution for which there is no known problem.
>>>>
>>>> They have solutions that serve me better than other solutions.
>>>
>>> You have OCD, you concentrate on silly little things of no use to anyone.
>>
>> You are incorrect. I do have an atypical anxiety disorder... but that is not
>> relevant.
>
> You also have OCD,

This is incorrect... and shows you know little of the subject. And of
diagnosis.

> you focus on little unimportant things.

I focus on evidence over your religion.

> I can accept "x is probably true", you cannot, you need conclusive proof of
> everything.

Please show support for this.

>
>>>>>> Generally easier to use
>>>>>
>>>>> I find them harder to use. They hide everything from the user, treating the
>>>>> user like they're 6. Maybe that's why they do well in America, with the lower
>>>>> intelligence level.
>>>>
>>>> In usability tests, in general people find them easier. Your view and mine are
>>>> not the big picture.
>>>
>>> ROFL, usability tests. That would be "jobs for the boys".
>>
>> This is another example where more knowledge shows you broader info to better
>> make choices.
>
> Unnecessary knowledge. Use gut instinct.

You have no desire to be accurate. And you are OK with that. Fine. But you are
also in a conversation where you are trying to convince... and you emotion is
not convincing, at least to me.

>
>>>>>> and often a better UI
>>>>>> (though they are losing it on this one to some extent).
>>>>>
>>>>> All UIs are going downhill it's ridiculous. Even when a quick google shows
>>>>> millions complaining they still continue to fuck things up.
>>>>
>>>> Part of it is they are making the Mac look like the phone... but the phone is
>>>> restrained from size and more in ways that the desktop is not.
>>>
>>> I even hate all the instructable websites saying "click or tap". FFS just call
>>> it a click!
>>
>> I would prefer that... but also know there are lots of folks who would be
>> confused. Not everyone is technically savvy.
>
> People would fail to understand "click this button" on a phone?

Likely.

> Surely click is a common enough word.

Commonality and use of the proper word are different. "Love" is a common word.
Would you use that?

> You don't have to be precise - there are probably several words to turn on a
> lightswitch. Press, flick, ....

[Peeler]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 04:45:42 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> I personally am a lot slower than any CPU.

I doubt it. But what I'm sure of is that you are an endlessly gurgling,
trolling and troll-feeding senile human toilet!

[Peeler]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 04:41:22 GMT, Shit the git, the senile troll and

troll-feeding senile asshole, ALSO trolling as David Brooks, blathered
again:

> You do not have to be a decent human. Sure.

Well, you are a case in point, you endlessly gurgling stinky human toilet!

[Commander Kinsey]

https://youtu.be/K6KbEnGnymk

Watch his right hand.

[Commander Kinsey]

Searching is such a simple thing, they should both be 100%. Works in DOS....

>>>>>>>>> I do like their
>>>>>>>>> automation options, their relative good use of consistency, and how they let
>>>>>>>>> me focus on the task and not the tool better than Windows does (though I am
>>>>>>>>> also outdated on Windows, so maybe Windows 10/11 has improved).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's just your mindset. I hate that sort of focus. I don't want anything
>>>>>>>> taken away from me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I said nothing of taking anything away. The idea is if I want to move
>>>>>>> something from one place to another, on macOS the drag and drop works better
>>>>>>> (though not perfectly). If I want to have a feature added to an app I might be
>>>>>>> able to add it to the right click (like adding Urban Dictionary searches and
>>>>>>> the like).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Give an example of a drag and drop you might do which is better on a Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>> Drag a YouTube link to VLC to open the video there (no ads).
>>>>
>>>> Firstly, dragging from a web browser is up to the web browser and VLC. I tried
>>>> it and it works with some browsers but not others.
>>>
>>> Works with multiple browsers and VLC... but also just from anywhere. See a
>>> URL... drag it. Can be in the text of a message here or in an email. Does not
>>> matter.
>>
>> Some browsers must not support dragging links off them.
>
> Works in Safari, Chrome, FireFox, Edge, and others I have played with.

It's a gimmick, I can see no use for it. Why are Mac users obsessed with dragging? It's actually fucking useless unless you have at least two monitors.

So much easier to just copy and paste. Something Apple was very late in picking up for files.

>>>> Secondly, why not put an adblocker in your web browser like I do? Saves you
>>>> even dragging. And where are you dragging it to? Do you open VLC first?
>>>
>>> Just drag it to the icon in the dock.
>>
>> I don't have icons there, that's a horrid way to do things. My apps are
>> started from the start menu. I don't want running programs and aliases in the
>> same place, it's confusing.
>
> Why would icons to launch apps confuse you?

Because they look almost the same as the running ones. Running is substantially different to not running, so shouldn't look similar or be in the same place. The plate you're eating your food off is not in the same place you store them in the cupboard.

>>>>> Drag an image from a web browser to a word processor document.
>>>>
>>>> But does that drag the image or the link?
>>>
>>> Image.
>>>
>>>> The computer doesn't know what you meant.
>>>
>>> I want the image. That is why I am dragging an image.
>>>
>>>> I just copy and paste in that instance. Dragging is very old fashioned
>>>
>>> Drag and Drop and is newer than Copy and Paste.
>>
>> It's inconvenient unless you have multiple monitors and one app open in each.
>> Easier to copy, switch app, paste.
>
> Easier for you. OK. But that is not everyone's experience. I use both
> depending on which is easier for me. But I like choice... one of the reasons I
> like macOS.

I hate it primarily because it looks like a kid's toy.

>>>> , I remember having to do that on the very old Macs when you couldn't copy/cut
>>>> and paste files. You had to get both windows open at once first, very clumsy.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> For example I never ever use synch systems. I save my file where I know it
>>>>>>>> is. I don't want to trust it probably got duplicated to some other place I'm
>>>>>>>> not sure of and will probably appear in a similar place on another machine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have learned to not trust you machine to work for you. That is telling.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't trust my best friend to do a synch in real life. If you don't move
>>>>>> things yourself, you'll never find them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever use an hour glass?
>>>>
>>>> You mean a physical one? For timing eggs? I fail to see the relevance.
>>>
>>> The sand moves itself.
>>
>> But it has only one place to go. A computer can't possibly know where I want
>> files put.
>
> No matter what system you have to tell it... except for installs, I guess.

What?

> And then Windows has files get splattered everywhere (far more than macOS).

Up to the programmer of the app. I've got plenty which stay inside their own folder. But a lot have this crazy multi user everyone has their own preferences idea. It got insane at the school I worked at. Every user who logged onto a machine got their profile downloaded onto the machine from the server. When there's 1000 kids in the school, the desktop disks got full pretty damn quick. It had no limiter to delete them either. They were only caches really.

> But when syncing... the files go where they are... just on the other system.
> It is interesting you do not trust Windows to do even fairly simple things.

I don't trust anything. And I don't want them in the same place. Why on earth would the folder tree be anything like the same on my phone and my desktop?

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Commander Kinsey wrote:

>>>> Works with multiple browsers and VLC... but also just from anywhere.
>>>> See a URL... drag it. Can be in the text of a message here or in an email.
>>>> Does not matter.
>>>
>>> Some browsers must not support dragging links off them.
>>
>> Works in Safari, Chrome, FireFox, Edge, and others I have played with.
>
> It's a gimmick, I can see no use for it.  Why are Mac users obsessed
> with dragging?  It's actually fucking useless unless you have at least
> two monitors.

I regularly drag links from my Firefox to drop them in a folder where
the link is relevant. It's easy, and I can edit the name of the link
without changing its target.

> So much easier to just copy and paste.

How could I get the same result with copy-paste?

--
Bertel, Denmark