Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #96109 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-28 20:20 -0400 |
| Last post | 2016-10-30 15:12 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 122 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-28 20:20 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-10-29 15:10 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 13:34 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 13:42 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-29 14:28 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-29 14:44 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-29 15:12 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 14:50 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> - 2016-11-06 07:29 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-11-07 09:14 +1300
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-07 02:30 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> - 2016-11-07 10:11 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-10-30 15:57 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 12:37 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2016-10-31 08:50 +1300
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 17:04 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-10-31 16:08 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lloyd Parsons <email@domain.com> - 2016-10-31 11:39 -0500
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-31 17:50 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-11-01 16:26 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 16:44 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-11-02 15:47 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-02 19:15 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2016-10-29 09:55 -0600
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 12:00 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-29 13:03 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 13:06 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-10-29 15:17 -0500
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2016-10-29 17:12 -0600
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 10:40 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-10-30 11:59 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 12:39 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 20:15 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 17:19 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 21:42 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 17:54 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 22:03 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 18:27 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 22:41 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-30 18:44 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 23:13 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-30 18:08 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-30 20:46 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-31 01:57 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-31 17:48 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-31 18:17 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-31 20:01 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-01 00:19 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 16:33 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-01 17:28 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-01 21:59 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 18:11 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-02 02:49 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-02 18:53 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-03 00:45 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-03 01:38 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-03 16:48 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-04 18:04 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 10:43 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-05 15:07 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 11:24 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-05 15:30 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 11:37 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-06 07:09 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-03 00:25 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 13:48 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-05 14:16 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-05 18:40 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 15:59 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-05 20:26 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-05 17:13 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-06 07:13 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-31 23:45 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-01 04:10 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 16:37 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-01 05:31 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 16:37 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-01 00:45 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 16:36 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-01 18:06 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-02 10:10 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-02 18:21 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-02 15:36 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2016-11-03 14:17 +1300
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-03 01:35 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-02 18:59 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-02 16:07 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-02 19:26 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-03 00:46 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-03 16:45 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-04 00:01 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-03 20:58 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-04 01:12 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-05 11:43 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-11-02 02:46 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-02 18:52 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-03 00:25 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-11-03 17:04 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-03 21:18 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-11-04 06:42 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-30 20:43 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-31 00:48 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-30 20:40 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-31 00:46 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-31 01:55 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-10-30 17:37 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-30 20:08 +0000
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2016-10-30 15:03 -0600
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2016-10-31 16:24 -0600
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-29 13:03 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-10-30 08:49 +1300
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-10-29 15:11 -0500
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2016-10-29 16:28 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2016-10-29 13:54 -0700
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-10-29 23:40 -0500
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2016-10-30 09:29 -0400
Re: New Mac Keyboard with Touchbar? Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> - 2016-10-30 15:12 +0000
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 16:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <prqdnfRTMapbY4XFnZ2dnUU7-UfNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96287 |
On 2016-11-01 12:26, Doc O'Leary wrote: > For your reference, records indicate that > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >> I used to program real time systems and that included a lot of serial >> data transfer in real time to specified performance requirements >> including response from the controller. Latency? Microseconds from >> receipt of each command. Non issue. > > You can claim that all you want, but I’m not seeing any existing > devices that back up that type of interaction. All I see are a lot > of devices that push data in one direction. All I’m asking is for Bluetooth and USB are equal bandwidth in each direction though not all implementations use such. [1] A simple example is my disk toasters that hold two drives each and communicate via USB 3. I can read from one while writing to the other on the order of 100 MB/s - with encryption/decryption piled on. So transport is not an issue at all. The Bluetooth case is narrower - indeed edge case at 25 Mb/s - but with basic compression it becomes quite feasible with room to spare. That aside, I think someone (nospam) mentioned that the Touch Bar uses its own ARM processor. So in that case a lot of the touch related processing would be done there, not in the Mac. Whatever latencies there may be due to interface (and I'm not agreeing there would be) would be eliminated there. > you to point to something that can be bought today that operates with > a low latency two-way communication that would be necessary for a > device like the Touch Bar. Latency is defined by the device, not the transport. In the Touch Bar, for example, there is an ARM processor. That's not going to contribute to latency of any user observable kind - quite the opposite. > >> Indeed, one real time USB application has been on Macs for a very long >> time: Bluetooth. It is linked to the CPU via USB and does >> bi-directional real time work without issue at high bandwidths and >> negligible latency. > > Again, I don’t see any such things on the market. Point me to any > example of something I can use that will demonstrate real-time > feedback between touch devices over Bluetooth. Nothing comes to mind. But the device, by its nature, can handle it quite well. Moreso if there is pre-processing on the device end (ARM). > >>>> See above. Using external HD's is one example. >>> >>> Nope. Not even close. >> >> Sure it is. That's a busy interface with a lot of back and forth for >> each block written or read. Do it bi directionally and you have >> intermixed data and commands flying in each direction. Piece of cake. > > Far from parity. Your hand waving is too much. Either point to > real world examples or we’re done here. See above[1]. > >> Time will tell. > > Time has told me first. We’re close like that. You’re welcome to > wait until it gets around to telling you personally. Bombast. The above is actually quite simple stuff. But then I've implemented such for various real time systems where it counted and had to perform to spec. Often with little wiggle room. These days there's plenty of wiggle room. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 17:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <011120161726147034%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #96312 |
In article <prqdnfRTMapbY4XFnZ2dnUU7-UfNnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > > That aside, I think someone (nospam) mentioned that the Touch Bar uses > its own ARM processor. So in that case a lot of the touch related > processing would be done there, not in the Mac. Whatever latencies > there may be due to interface (and I'm not agreeing there would be) > would be eliminated there. not only is it an arm processor, but it's running a stripped down version of watch os.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Doc O'Leary <droleary@2015usenet1.subsume.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-02 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nvd1pm$jc3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #96312 |
For your reference, records indicate that Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > On 2016-11-01 12:26, Doc O'Leary wrote: > > For your reference, records indicate that > > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > > > >> I used to program real time systems and that included a lot of serial > >> data transfer in real time to specified performance requirements > >> including response from the controller. Latency? Microseconds from > >> receipt of each command. Non issue. > > > > You can claim that all you want, but I’m not seeing any existing > > devices that back up that type of interaction. All I see are a lot > > of devices that push data in one direction. All I’m asking is for > > Bluetooth and USB are equal bandwidth in each direction though not all > implementations use such. Blah blah blah. I’m still waiting to hear about an *existing* USB device that functions like the Touch Bar would. *Real* things, not your idle speculation regarding the specifications. > [1] A simple example is my disk toasters that hold two drives each and > communicate via USB 3. I can read from one while writing to the other > on the order of 100 MB/s - with encryption/decryption piled on. So > transport is not an issue at all. This again? You’re just not getting it. Disks are not *interactive* in the same way that a input/output device would be. And I’m not even saying that USB *can’t* do it, I’m just saying that it is telling that you keep bringing up these *nonsense* examples instead of something that can be shown to operate similar to the Touch Bar. > Latency is defined by the device, not the transport. And we’re done here. Good bye. -- "Also . . . I can kill you with my brain." River Tam, Trash, Firefly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-02 19:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <qv2dndiP4Knp7ofFnZ2dnUU7-dvNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96342 |
On 2016-11-02 11:47, Doc O'Leary wrote: > For your reference, records indicate that > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >> On 2016-11-01 12:26, Doc O'Leary wrote: >>> For your reference, records indicate that >>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> I used to program real time systems and that included a lot of serial >>>> data transfer in real time to specified performance requirements >>>> including response from the controller. Latency? Microseconds from >>>> receipt of each command. Non issue. >>> >>> You can claim that all you want, but I’m not seeing any existing >>> devices that back up that type of interaction. All I see are a lot >>> of devices that push data in one direction. All I’m asking is for >> >> Bluetooth and USB are equal bandwidth in each direction though not all >> implementations use such. > > Blah blah blah. I’m still waiting to hear about an *existing* USB > device that functions like the Touch Bar would. *Real* things, not > your idle speculation regarding the specifications. Oh please. Such is not rocket science; the bandwidth is more than adequate; latency is not an issue. You're throwing obstacles like a seasoned Senator. Raises doubts with the ignorant and knowing snickers from the rest. Add to the mix that on the MBP they're using an ARM processor to handle "that" end of things, and your objections are silly to the point of absurdity. > >> [1] A simple example is my disk toasters that hold two drives each and >> communicate via USB 3. I can read from one while writing to the other >> on the order of 100 MB/s - with encryption/decryption piled on. So >> transport is not an issue at all. > > This again? You’re just not getting it. Disks are not *interactive* > in the same way that a input/output device would be. And I’m not > even saying that USB *can’t* do it, I’m just saying that it is > telling that you keep bringing up these *nonsense* examples instead > of something that can be shown to operate similar to the Touch Bar. Disks are not interactive? Holy shit! They are so fucking fast interactive (from machine to disk) that humans are really not welcome to get in the mix. > >> Latency is defined by the device, not the transport. > > And we’re done here. Good bye. Classic of you. If your worldview is not accepted you huff off. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 09:55 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1mvvjae.gd6s9g18ejs0oN%nmassello@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #96109 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > It just occurred to me that the new touch bar may eventually come to the > keyboard line from Apple - sort of makes sense if various apps begin to > provide support for the touch bar. I'm skeptical about the touch bar. It might turn out that it complicates the interface without adding enough benefit to make it worth the trouble. After the new wears off, a lot of users might find that they don't actually use it much more than they did the function keys. It adds a second place (along with the screen) to look and a third place (along with the keyboard and trackpad) to touch, and in an awkward compromise location for both activities. The presenters seemed to hunch over the MB when they were using the bar, a change of posture analogous to the awkwardness of moving the hand between keyboard and touchscreen when using a hybrid (pad/laptop). A better location might have been between the keyboard and the trackpad, but that also presents problems. For a desktop user with lots of screen space, an easier "touch bar" might be a context-sensitive bar that pops up at the bottom of the screen in response to a key press or trackpad gesture: no need to move eyes or hands from screen or pointing device. And of course Microsoft will advertise against it: "Why touch just a bar when you can touch the whole Surface?" Not a bad question.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 12:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <6IadnYkzx_ArWonFnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96155 |
On 2016-10-29 11:55, Neill Massello wrote: > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >> It just occurred to me that the new touch bar may eventually come to the >> keyboard line from Apple - sort of makes sense if various apps begin to >> provide support for the touch bar. > > I'm skeptical about the touch bar. It might turn out that it complicates > the interface without adding enough benefit to make it worth the > trouble. After the new wears off, a lot of users might find that they > don't actually use it much more than they did the function keys. I don't use the F keys all that much in the first place. > > It adds a second place (along with the screen) to look and a third place > (along with the keyboard and trackpad) to touch, and in an awkward > compromise location for both activities. The presenters seemed to hunch > over the MB when they were using the bar, a change of posture analogous > to the awkwardness of moving the hand between keyboard and touchscreen > when using a hybrid (pad/laptop). A better location might have been > between the keyboard and the trackpad, but that also presents problems. I agree with your analysis pretty much. That doesn't mean Apple won't try to foist it. > > For a desktop user with lots of screen space, an easier "touch bar" > might be a context-sensitive bar that pops up at the bottom of the > screen in response to a key press or trackpad gesture: no need to move > eyes or hands from screen or pointing device. > > And of course Microsoft will advertise against it: "Why touch just a bar > when you can touch the whole Surface?" Not a bad question. Classic -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 13:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <291020161303240480%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #96156 |
In article <6IadnYkzx_ArWonFnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >> It just occurred to me that the new touch bar may eventually come to the > >> keyboard line from Apple - sort of makes sense if various apps begin to > >> provide support for the touch bar. > > > > I'm skeptical about the touch bar. It might turn out that it complicates > > the interface without adding enough benefit to make it worth the > > trouble. After the new wears off, a lot of users might find that they > > don't actually use it much more than they did the function keys. > > I don't use the F keys all that much in the first place. that's because most apps do not support function keys and also because the default is for them configured to adjust brightness/volume (which you more than likely do).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 13:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <o4adnc5MtKW_SonFnZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96161 |
On 2016-10-29 13:03, nospam wrote: > In article <6IadnYkzx_ArWonFnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne > <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >>>> It just occurred to me that the new touch bar may eventually come to the >>>> keyboard line from Apple - sort of makes sense if various apps begin to >>>> provide support for the touch bar. >>> >>> I'm skeptical about the touch bar. It might turn out that it complicates >>> the interface without adding enough benefit to make it worth the >>> trouble. After the new wears off, a lot of users might find that they >>> don't actually use it much more than they did the function keys. >> >> I don't use the F keys all that much in the first place. > > that's because most apps do not support function keys and also because > the default is for them configured to adjust brightness/volume (which > you more than likely do). Not much at all actually. I never adjust brightness once it's set. I adjust volume using the dedicated volume control (prior keyboard and this new keyboard) - same for mute. At work I don't use audio often but tend to use the volume slider at the top when I do. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 15:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nv303t$vbo$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #96156 |
> On 2016-10-29 11:55, Neill Massello wrote: >> >> And of course Microsoft will advertise against it: "Why touch just a bar >> when you can touch the whole Surface?" Not a bad question. I've long wanted a full computer with both touch screen and normal keyboard. But NOT Surface--I've already tried out my sister's. And if I have to endure Windows to get it, I can't accept later than Win 7 or earlier than Win 2000. The offerings from Motion Computing and from Modbook weren't too bad, but the former is Windows and the on-screen keyboard of the latter SUCKED.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-29 17:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1mvw3gm.u7l0d31pdg2rjN%nmassello@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #96156 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > I don't use the F keys all that much in the first place. The touch bar does improve the fn keys by removing the need to remember which key does what in which application. (Way back when, apps like WordPerfect shipped with long cards that fit around the function key row on the old "Saratoga" keyboards.) But there's still a location problem. For commonly used commands, I suspect that it will still be easier to use standard keys with modifiers than to use the touch bar. And it won't be that much harder to roll your own key combos than to customize the touch bar. For the less commonly used commands, menus, palettes, or "button bars" will suffice, as they have for years. The one thing that the touch bar adds, rather than improving an existing function, is multi-touch controls. As the Photoshop demo showed, being able to manipulate two variables simultaneously could be a big deal for some users. For others, the touch bar will be more useful than the old fn keys, but not such a big deal -- a nice feature that the MB Pro comes with, but not a reason to rush out and buy one. The more interesting question: is this the first step in a long Apple geek toward a Mac with a full touchscreen?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 10:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vqCdndIZSrLTm4vFnZ2dnUU7-aXNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96190 |
On 2016-10-29 19:12, Neill Massello wrote: > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >> I don't use the F keys all that much in the first place. > > The touch bar does improve the fn keys by removing the need to remember > which key does what in which application. (Way back when, apps like > WordPerfect shipped with long cards that fit around the function key row > on the old "Saratoga" keyboards.) But there's still a location problem. > For commonly used commands, I suspect that it will still be easier to > use standard keys with modifiers than to use the touch bar. And it won't > be that much harder to roll your own key combos than to customize the > touch bar. For the less commonly used commands, menus, palettes, or > "button bars" will suffice, as they have for years. I used to make my own cardboard strips for some apps, games and my own programs that used the f keys. > > The one thing that the touch bar adds, rather than improving an existing > function, is multi-touch controls. As the Photoshop demo showed, being > able to manipulate two variables simultaneously could be a big deal for > some users. For others, the touch bar will be more useful than the old > fn keys, but not such a big deal -- a nice feature that the MB Pro comes > with, but not a reason to rush out and buy one. The thing here is that a lot of photo pros I know do not use laptops - or if they do, the clamshell is rarely open - it's connected to a larger screen (or 2). So bringing this functionality to a Mac keyboard is "needed" for a good chunk of the market to take advantage of features created by app makers and/or customization by users. > The more interesting question: is this the first step in a long Apple > geek toward a Mac with a full touchscreen? As iOS app development results in increasing on-screen work and as functions from one OS cross to the other (both ways) there will be that day when Apple go touch screen for macOS. But probably not on laptops or desktops. (or on laptops, but not desktops). I believe at one point that not only will macOS be on ARM processors but also will be hosted on iPad Pro style devices with optional keyboards and pointing devices including touch. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Davoud <star@sky.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 11:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <301020161159405514%star@sky.net> |
| In reply to | #96200 |
Alan Browne: > The thing here is that a lot of photo pros I know do not use laptops - > or if they do, the clamshell is rarely open - it's connected to a larger > screen (or 2). So bringing this functionality to a Mac keyboard is > "needed" for a good chunk of the market to take advantage of features > created by app makers and/or customization by users. Those that I know and those that I see in instructional videos (Kelby, Adorama, Mark Wallace) use MacBook Pro's and sometimes iMacs in the studio or MBP's on location. When it comes to post-processing they generally move to the iMac. The idea in all cases is to keep it simple in order to "focus" on the photography, not the computer. The fewer adapters and dongles required for tethering and connecting backup drives, the better. And the key to that would be legacy ports. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 12:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <7ICdnfHlzNnBv4vFnZ2dnUU7-INQAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96206 |
On 2016-10-30 11:59, Davoud wrote: > Alan Browne: >> The thing here is that a lot of photo pros I know do not use laptops - >> or if they do, the clamshell is rarely open - it's connected to a larger >> screen (or 2). So bringing this functionality to a Mac keyboard is >> "needed" for a good chunk of the market to take advantage of features >> created by app makers and/or customization by users. > > Those that I know and those that I see in instructional videos (Kelby, > Adorama, Mark Wallace) use MacBook Pro's and sometimes iMacs in the > studio or MBP's on location. When it comes to post-processing they > generally move to the iMac. The idea in all cases is to keep it simple > in order to "focus" on the photography, not the computer. The fewer > adapters and dongles required for tethering and connecting backup > drives, the better. And the key to that would be legacy ports. A key reason for processing work on an iMac is the much larger display. You can spread windows out from an app or many apps where best for the user. A 13 or 15" screen can't hold a candle to a 27" when it comes to being a productive power user. Thus, even those who use a laptop as their work machine usually have it pumping out to a larger display or 2. Most audio/photo/video pros, even using iMacs, do not keep work product on the Mac but on external drives. Usually in several copies. They may or may not copy the work product to the system disk for the processing session. If they do, they cleanup after delivery to the end client. For that Thunderbolt is great. Using an adaptor to onboard the raw camera/audio product is not going to cause anyone too much heartburn. Indeed I have to do that now via an ancient USB 2 adaptor as my camera uses CF cards. IMO the idiocy of slimness as a prime design goal has led to a smaller battery and therefore the _justification_ of a 16 GB RAM limit to save power[1]. While 16 GB is more than adequate for a lot of tasks, including Photoshop - for video work with many layers and segments it is shallow. If one needs a VM in there, then things will get cramped in a hurry. The MBP is turning into a powerful travel-light device at the expense of no longer being the power tool that the "Pro" label usually meant. [1] “To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and wouldn’t be efficient enough for a notebook.” -Schiller replying to a MacRumours reader's request. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 20:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7n2m8F4md8U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #96210 |
On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > > IMO the idiocy of slimness as a prime design goal has led to a smaller > battery and therefore the _justification_ of a 16 GB RAM limit to save > power[1]. While 16 GB is more than adequate for a lot of tasks, > including Photoshop - for video work with many layers and segments it is > shallow. If one needs a VM in there, then things will get cramped in a > hurry. The MBP is turning into a powerful travel-light device at the > expense of no longer being the power tool that the "Pro" label usually > meant. > > [1] “To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this > time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and > wouldn’t be efficient enough for a notebook.” -Schiller replying to a > MacRumours reader's request. Naturally, there are many factors (weight, form factor, and energy consumption are obvious candidates, but there are others too) that likely played into the decision. The simplistic view that the only goal that matters to Apple is the thinness of the product is naive at best. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 17:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <wrmdnZqhKI55_ovFnZ2dnUU7-KGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96218 |
On 2016-10-30 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >> >> IMO the idiocy of slimness as a prime design goal has led to a smaller >> battery and therefore the _justification_ of a 16 GB RAM limit to save >> power[1]. While 16 GB is more than adequate for a lot of tasks, >> including Photoshop - for video work with many layers and segments it is >> shallow. If one needs a VM in there, then things will get cramped in a >> hurry. The MBP is turning into a powerful travel-light device at the >> expense of no longer being the power tool that the "Pro" label usually >> meant. >> >> [1] “To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this >> time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and >> wouldn’t be efficient enough for a notebook.” -Schiller replying to a >> MacRumours reader's request. > > Naturally, there are many factors (weight, form factor, and energy > consumption are obvious candidates, but there are others too) that > likely played into the decision. The simplistic view that the only goal > that matters to Apple is the thinness of the product is naive at best. Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody would complain and then 32 GB would be available for those who want it. Just hope they're protecting the boards from flexing as the cases become thinner and consequently less rigid. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 21:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7n7r2F63qfU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #96224 |
On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > On 2016-10-30 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote: >> On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >>> >>> IMO the idiocy of slimness as a prime design goal has led to a smaller >>> battery and therefore the _justification_ of a 16 GB RAM limit to save >>> power[1]. While 16 GB is more than adequate for a lot of tasks, >>> including Photoshop - for video work with many layers and segments it is >>> shallow. If one needs a VM in there, then things will get cramped in a >>> hurry. The MBP is turning into a powerful travel-light device at the >>> expense of no longer being the power tool that the "Pro" label usually >>> meant. >>> >>> [1] “To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this >>> time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and >>> wouldn’t be efficient enough for a notebook.” -Schiller replying to a >>> MacRumours reader's request. >> >> Naturally, there are many factors (weight, form factor, and energy >> consumption are obvious candidates, but there are others too) that >> likely played into the decision. The simplistic view that the only goal >> that matters to Apple is the thinness of the product is naive at best. > > Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and > an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody > would complain I'll posit a significant number of Apple's customers actually do want lighter and thinner devices. They would likely complain. Others might complain for other reasons. Expecting Apple to please everyone is a losing proposition. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 17:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5L6dndmlf7af8YvFnZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96229 |
On 2016-10-30 17:42, Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >> Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and >> an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody >> would complain > > I'll posit a significant number of Apple's customers actually do want > lighter and thinner devices. They would likely complain. Others might > complain for other reasons. Expecting Apple to please everyone is a > losing proposition. Had the MBP been thick enough to accommodate a battery that would permit adequate run time with 32 GB RAM it would not have affected "that significant number" of people at all. Doubling the memory ≠ doubling the battery volume and even less overall additional thickness to the case. If they'd remove the "Pro" moniker then I wouldn't even be writing. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 22:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7n929F63qfU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #96232 |
On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > On 2016-10-30 17:42, Jolly Roger wrote: >> On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > >>> Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and >>> an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody >>> would complain >> >> I'll posit a significant number of Apple's customers actually do want >> lighter and thinner devices. They would likely complain. Others might >> complain for other reasons. Expecting Apple to please everyone is a >> losing proposition. > > Had the MBP been thick enough to accommodate a battery that would permit > adequate run time with 32 GB RAM it would not have affected "that > significant number" of people at all. > > Doubling the memory ≠ doubling the battery volume and even less overall > additional thickness to the case. Yes, I realize you think you know better than everyone at Apple. I'm just not inclined to believe you. : ) -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 18:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2NKdnWxt1a157ovFnZ2dnUU7-fednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #96234 |
On 2016-10-30 18:03, Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >> On 2016-10-30 17:42, Jolly Roger wrote: >>> On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >> >>>> Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and >>>> an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody >>>> would complain >>> >>> I'll posit a significant number of Apple's customers actually do want >>> lighter and thinner devices. They would likely complain. Others might >>> complain for other reasons. Expecting Apple to please everyone is a >>> losing proposition. >> >> Had the MBP been thick enough to accommodate a battery that would permit >> adequate run time with 32 GB RAM it would not have affected "that >> significant number" of people at all. >> >> Doubling the memory ≠ doubling the battery volume and even less overall >> additional thickness to the case. > > Yes, I realize you think you know better than everyone at Apple. I'm > just not inclined to believe you. : ) As you like - of course you snipped out the main point. Call this anything except an MBP and I'll applaud its lightness and thinness and niceness and goodness all sorts of other esses. -- She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics. -Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-30 22:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7nb8qF6v51U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #96236 |
On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: > On 2016-10-30 18:03, Jolly Roger wrote: >> On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >>> On 2016-10-30 17:42, Jolly Roger wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote: >>> >>>>> Yet, there it is. Form defeats function. Result: smaller battery and >>>>> an imposed limit on memory size. If the MBP had been thicker nobody >>>>> would complain >>>> >>>> I'll posit a significant number of Apple's customers actually do want >>>> lighter and thinner devices. They would likely complain. Others might >>>> complain for other reasons. Expecting Apple to please everyone is a >>>> losing proposition. >>> >>> Had the MBP been thick enough to accommodate a battery that would permit >>> adequate run time with 32 GB RAM it would not have affected "that >>> significant number" of people at all. >>> >>> Doubling the memory ≠ doubling the battery volume and even less overall >>> additional thickness to the case. >> >> Yes, I realize you think you know better than everyone at Apple. I'm >> just not inclined to believe you. : ) > > As you like - of course you snipped out the main point. Call this > anything except an MBP and I'll applaud its lightness and thinness and > niceness and goodness all sorts of other esses. Have fun with that. I'm under no illusion my personal desires should override what Apple decides to name their products. And I couldn't care less about product names anyhow, since I purchased based on other specifications. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web