Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #411797

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

From "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.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 20:57 +0100
Organization ~
Message-ID <op.yzddqcs3js98qf@red.lan> (permalink)
References (15 earlier) <D52680EB.A1F3D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yzcwtzq0js98qf@red.lan> <D52769CF.A2003%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yzc9p9dxjs98qf@red.lan> <D5278C08.A2060%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 19:52:40 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 4/27/17, 11:31 AM, in article op.yzc9p9dxjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>>>>> It is oh so hard to find!
>>>>>
>>>>>     <http://youtu.be/K2DP-eAyvxQ>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also MacTracker has lots of info.
>>>>
>>>> That gives the Ghz, not the model of i5.  There are many many i5s.
>>>
>>> Let's see:
>>>
>>> The first one is listed as a Dual Core i5 at 1.6 GHz using HD Graphics 6000.
>>> As far as I know that limits it to ONLY the Core i5-5250U.
>>>
>>> The second one is listed as a Quad Core i5 at 2.8 GHz using Intel Iris Pro
>>> Graphics 6200. As far as I know that limits it to ONLY the Core i5-5575R.
>>>
>>> The third one is listed as a Quad Core i5 at 3.1 GHz using Intel Iris Pro
>>> Graphics 6200. This does leave open the Core i5-5675C and the Core i5-5675R,
>>> but their primary difference is the socket. The other two use BGA so I think
>>> it is same to assume Apple is using the Core i5-5675R.
>>>
>>> Apple gives all the actual specs but does not list the specific model... but
>>
>>> it is not hard to find if, for some unknown reason, it actually matters to
>>> you to know not just what the computer you are getting has in it but what
>>> name Intel has designated it.
>>
>> 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.  It could be twice as fast as my desktop, or half as fast.  That's a big range!  It's like saying "this car has a 2 litre engine" - not enough information to tell how fast it is.

>> 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.  Apple need to simply state what processor is in it.  Every single other computer manufacturer does so.  I would guess they do it to avoid comparisons being possible.

-- 
If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be "meetings."

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | NextPrevious 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. 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. 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. "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