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	2017-04-27 13:29 -0700
Message-ID	<D527A2C3.A2094%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <op.yzcwtzq0js98qf@red.lan> <D52769CF.A2003%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yzc9p9dxjs98qf@red.lan> <D5278C08.A2060%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yzddqcs3js98qf@red.lan>

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/27/17, 12:57 PM, in article op.yzddqcs3js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:

... 
>>> I have an i5-3570K in my 3 year old desktop.
>>> 
>> Mazel tov!
>> 
>>> I know that the i5 range goes from about half that speed to about double
>>> that speed.  Not giving the exact model of the i5 in the Imac specs is
>>> absurd.
>> 
>> Given that they tell you the specs most would want, what is your concern? Do
>> you just want to know the number for your own level of comfort?
> 
> So I know how powerful it is.

Just looking at the specs will not tell you that, but as shown Apple gives
you all the relevant specs you have mentioned that you want.

You want to whine. So far I have been humoring you but as shown you just
made up nonsense claims you cannot back and which are contrary to the data.
You lie to get attention. Only so much attention I will keep giving you
unless you actually put better effort into your trolling.

> It could be twice as fast as my desktop, or half as fast.

Correct: depends on the task, what desktop you have, what OS, etc.

> That's a big range!

Well, you may have to actually think about what you want to know if it is
worth you to get a new computer.

> It's like saying "this car has a 2 litre engine" - not enough information to
> tell how fast it is.

You can look up benchmark comparisons if you like.

>>> Are Apple doing what they usually do and dumbing things down for their low
>>> intelligence market?  Or perhaps they just like conning people by leaving
>>> things out and just writing he GHz.
>> 
>> They give more than that, as I discuss, above. In fact, you have not
>> mentioned a spec they leave out that you care about, nor have you shown any
>> price comparison to back your claim of twice the price.
>> 
>> Bottom line: you are looking for things to whine about and making things up
>> when you cannot find real issues. Fine. As long as we have that
>> understanding of what your game is I am likely to play along for a bit more.
> 
> No, you're accepting a vague processor speed, then looking up a list of i5s to
> find which one it probably is.

I showed you the only existing one that fits the specs. And noted Apple gave
me all the relevant info. Knowing the Intel designation offered no more
information.

> Apple need to simply state what processor is in it.

I do not need my hand held as much as you. As I showed, if I care what the
Intel designation is I can figure it out very easily. There are, of course,
even easier methods where others have done the work I did, but I wanted to
show you HOW to figure things out on your own.

> Every single other computer manufacturer does so.

I welcome support for that claim. But even if so, is your whine just that
Apple is not holding your hand in ways you like and others do? If that means
a lot to you then do not buy from Apple. I have no issue with that.

Personally I care a LOT more about how well a system will work for me than
if the OEM gives me data that offers me little to no benefit, but to each
their own.

> I would guess they do it to avoid comparisons being possible.

The specs you talk about do not give you what you want. You are, at best,
pretending to just be completely ignorant about computers.

-- 
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. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-26 23:24 +0100
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-26 18:29 -0400
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 00:28 +0100
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-26 18:35 -0700
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> - 2017-04-26 21:57 -0400
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 14:51 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 09:07 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 19:33 +0100
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 11:58 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 21:01 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 13:18 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 21:55 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 14:05 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 22:11 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 14:20 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Alogsa <alogsa.cursos@alogsalogistica.com> - 2017-04-29 09:43 +0000
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-26 22:41 -0400
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-27 08:14 -0500
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-27 09:28 -0400
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-27 10:14 -0400
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. mail.m2n Anonymous <mix@mail.m2n.works> - 2017-04-27 23:03 +0800
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 10:11 -0700
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> - 2017-04-27 12:00 -0400
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 10:12 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. mail.m2n Anonymous <mix@mail.m2n.works> - 2017-04-28 03:18 +0800
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-26 16:52 -0700
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 14:52 +0100
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 09:26 -0700
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 19:31 +0100
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 11:52 -0700
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 20:57 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 13:29 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 21:59 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 14:07 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 22:55 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 15:00 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 23:05 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 15:17 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-27 23:39 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 15:46 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-28 00:01 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-27 20:13 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 17:35 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-28 11:44 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 10:08 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-28 18:13 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 11:03 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-28 21:21 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2017-04-28 15:34 -0500
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 14:29 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-28 19:20 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2017-04-28 18:37 -0500
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 14:25 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Charlie <pipedroner3@kismet45.org> - 2017-04-28 13:15 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2017-04-28 12:28 -0500
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 10:56 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Anonymous <mix@mail.killinit.pw> - 2017-04-28 18:40 +0300
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-28 17:19 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 21:41 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 19:02 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 22:58 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 20:13 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 23:21 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 20:23 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 00:12 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-27 21:25 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-28 09:20 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 09:30 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-28 09:56 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 09:22 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 09:24 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 14:57 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 12:09 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-04-28 14:22 -0500
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 12:25 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-28 09:26 -0700
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-26 16:36 -0700

csiph-web