Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Subject	Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.
Date	2017-04-15 15:20 -0700
Message-ID	<D517EAD6.9F310%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(21 earlier) <150420171210307864%nospam@nospam.invalid> <D517A457.9F248%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <150420171350418541%nospam@nospam.invalid> <D517AFC7.9F260%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <150420171445154999%nospam@nospam.invalid>

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/15/17, 11:45 AM, in article 150420171445154999%nospam@nospam.invalid,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <D517AFC7.9F260%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit
> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Crashed or is busy? OK, Macs have horrid disk access speeds (those with
>>>>>> hard drives)
>>>>> 
>>>>> no they don't.
>>>> 
>>>> They have an outdated file system (which is going to change soon,
>>> 
>>> hfs+ is not in any way slow. benchmarks are consistent with the maximum
>>> data rate of the interface.
>> 
>> Would like to see those.
> 
> easily done with any disk benchmarking utility

I look forward to it! When you have them please share.

>> From what I understood it hit bottlenecks if you
>> had multiple processes / threads all working to read / write.
> 
> that is a separate issue.
 
The fact the file system handles this poorly is very much tied to the file
system. :)
 
>>>> FINALLY)
>>>> running of absurdly slow drives (5400 rpm).
>>> 
>>> those are also not slow, and can easily be replaced if desired.
>> 
>> That is very slow. Who else sells machines with drives that slow.
> 
> microsoft surface studio ships with a 5400 rpm drive.

Looking it up seems they do -- but tied to a SSD, similar to the Fusion
drives Apple uses (though not the same).
 
> plenty of other systems do.

Amy desktops?

>> Try a Mac
>> with a hard drive vs. one with a Flash drive. The speed difference is pretty
>> amazing.
> 
> that's not exclusive to macs.

Of course not. But what other system comes with a 5400 rpm drive (alone).

> ssd is faster no matter what the platform
> (unless a hard drive can saturate the interface).
> 
>>> that's not a limitation of the mac.
>> 
>> You can buy a higher end one with a faster drive or a Fusion drive or do it
>> after-market, but, yes, it is a weakness of the iMac line.
> 
> it's not a weakness at all.

The fact you can replace it does not make it not a weakness. Heck, the fact
you suggested such a fix demonstrates you know it IS a weakness.

>>>>>> But, sure, I have played with disk
>>>>>> light or things similar to it years ago... never found the need. Not used
>>>>>> it in years.
>>>>> 
>>>>> no need for that at all.
>>>> 
>>>> Or, at best, the situations where there is a need are very, very few.
>>> 
>>> as in none. 
>> 
>> There is certainly a market for those who want it. And their are Apple
>> supplied tools to show it (even Activity Monitor).
> 
> there is *constant* disk activity, for all sorts of reasons. it's
> meaningless. it offers no useful information.

So Apple added it to Activity Monitor for no reason? Of course not. And it
does show amount read / write per second.

Really comes down to YOU find no use of value in it. I am OK with that.

>>>>>> You can get a PC a *lot* cheaper than a Mac. I know people who have moved
>>>>>> to windows for the same reason.
>>>>> 
>>>>> you can, but its specs are much lower.
>>>>> 
>>>>> for similar specs, macs are competitively priced.
>>>> 
>>>> Agreed (though recent comparisons might show Apple behind... they have not
>>>> updated their desktop Macs in too long).
>>> 
>>> that's about to change.
>> 
>> I think Apple has been waiting for APFS to be ready for macOS... and now we
>> know there is even more to it with the Pro Macs.
> 
> a major part of the delay is due to intel's continued chip delays.
> 
> apfs could be another part and there may be other reasons.

Agreed.

>>> meanwhile, the macbook pros are well ahead of most of what's out there.
>>> 
>>> what other laptop has *four* 40 gigabit ports, one of the fastest ssds
>>> on any computer, a dci-p3 wide gamut display and touchid? none. that's
>>> what.
>> 
>> Could be. I am more focused on the iMac line (which I know is a small part
>> of the Mac line overall).
> 
> not could be. 
> 
> it *is*. the new macbook pros are *very* good.

Would love to see some comparisons from tech magazines and the like. Have
not kept up on those for years.


-- 
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.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 06:59 -0500
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-10 13:08 +0100
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-04-10 12:27 +0000
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 08:13 -0500
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-13 18:55 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-13 23:44 +0000
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-13 23:48 +0000
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 00:53 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 00:07 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 16:49 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 18:41 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:12 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 19:20 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:39 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 20:31 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:50 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:13 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:13 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:27 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:50 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:54 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:12 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:28 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:16 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 15:58 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 01:38 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 19:26 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:15 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:27 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:31 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:10 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:43 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:48 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:15 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:26 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:11 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:26 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:44 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:16 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:29 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:52 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:53 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:12 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:26 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:34 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:34 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 16:03 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:10 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 22:16 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 01:43 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:12 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:29 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:11 +0100
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-10 09:27 -0700
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-13 23:42 +0000
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 18:36 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 10:55 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 19:03 +0100
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 11:17 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 19:43 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 12:17 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 20:29 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-14 15:35 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 21:33 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-14 16:35 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 22:04 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 12:10 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-18 21:50 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-18 17:09 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 12:44 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 21:28 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 15:57 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-15 00:58 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 17:17 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 12:10 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-15 10:20 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 13:50 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-15 11:08 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 14:45 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-15 15:20 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-18 17:09 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-18 14:13 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 12:10 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-18 21:52 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-18 13:59 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-18 17:09 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Andreas Rutishauser <andreas@macandreas.ch> - 2017-04-15 08:06 +0200
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-14 15:35 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 21:30 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-14 16:35 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 22:05 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-14 21:21 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-14 23:48 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 17:25 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 20:37 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-17 12:45 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-15 02:20 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-15 09:03 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-15 13:51 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 23:06 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-17 22:11 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-19 01:35 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 23:05 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-17 22:12 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-19 01:33 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-15 12:10 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-19 18:53 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-14 17:20 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 20:35 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-17 12:46 -0700

csiph-web