Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10
Subject	Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.
Date	2017-04-28 12:09 -0700
Message-ID	<D528E180.A2258%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(22 earlier) <oduava$mk7$1@dont-email.me> <wkHMA.8505$4a5.939@fx01.iad> <odvfv8$67p$1@dont-email.me> <D528BAD9.A21E7%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <oe034d$c5g$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/28/17, 11:57 AM, in article oe034d$c5g$1@dont-email.me, "Jonathan N.
Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> On 4/28/17, 6:30 AM, in article odvfv8$67p$1@dont-email.me, "Jonathan N.
>> Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
> 
>>> That was my point. With Apple you pay a premium price for mid-range
>>> hardware, that cannot be really upgraded, repaired, extended. Limited
>>> range of options. But hey, what ever floats your boat, but saying they
>>> are equivalent is contrary to facts.
>> 
>> When you compare COMPARABLE systems Macs tend to be competitive. That does
>> not mean you cannot get a PC for less money -- you have more customization
>> options and can *not* get the things you do not want or need.
> 
> Whoa, wait a minute! Compare COMPARABLE systems?

Yes. And really have someone else do it... like I showed here:

    <http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/prices>

Those are now outdated but I have been hearing these claims for a VERY long
time but, overall, the evidence does not back it.

For COMPARABLE systems Apple is pretty close to the price of other OEMs.

> For the same money I has MORE system not less. Double monitors helps with my
> workflow. Yes my video card play games better but being able add faster and
> larger drives really improves is a boon. Oops sorry I don't have IR. By why
> would I, got BlueTooth or WiFi a much better near field access.

Already responded to. Multiple times.

>> And, of course, there are pros and cons to each beyond that. If you are a
>> gamer then a Mac is likely a lousy choice. For general desktop computing the
>> Mac often has more streamlined workflows and fewer glitches (which is not to
>> say none).
> 
> Not that I noticed. The iMac at the library seems to have a glitchy
> nVidia chipset video. If it were a real desktop I would be able to swap
> out for a little as $30 as I did with some subpar Compaqs. The $500
> Ubuntu desktop I build for a friend runs circles around the Mac mini
> that she had foisted on her, (long story, she doing a collaborative
> project with a colleague that is a mac fanboy).

Why not focus on some tasks. Here is one that was brought up by someone else
in COLA recently: 

    <https://youtu.be/mqiaPeY1YaI>

I did leave out showing how you can select a word or phrase, say "Head of
Household" and easily do a Google search. Would love to see how you
presumably better system handles these types of tasks better. And that is
with all software that comes with the Mac (other than the free Adobe product
I show).

But you will not.

Maybe you can find other tasks your system handles better? I have worked
with many others with Linux users. Here (the second one being similar to the
above):

* Getting a WayBackArchive page and getting images of all links, the
HTML validation and CSS validation from W3.org, and a active link to
the archive page, as I did here (does not have to look the exact same,
of course):
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/sandman/sandman-archive.pdf>.

* Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com
(Owl is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is
one: <https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF
had selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients
and the like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so
well that he and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked.

* Starting with a spreadsheet 3D chart, have it be animated, including
with the top range expanding as needed and a color change with the
bar. More details here: <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/bar512>
(also shows Owl's solution). Marek tried but gave up and tried on a
competing system. And still failed.

* Do a search for a number of names (or other terms) and each letter
of the alphabet to see what the common searches are for each letter.
My results are here: <https://youtu.be/QmUPMhiyIKE>. Owl also
presented a solution for Linux but never demonstrated it working.
Peter Köhlmann failed to recognize it as a repetitive / scripting
challenge and thought it was about special search results per OS.
Weird.

* Make a video with an image appears to stay still even as the video
bounces some, and have the image disappear in a come-and-go fashion
sort of like seen on Doctor Who, and add multiple layers of sound. My
end result here: <https://youtu.be/jYqMGjGiqHg>.

I can show others but that is a good start I think. Surely your better
system allows you to do those things much better, right?

-- 
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