Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #117807 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-27 03:56 +0000 |
| Last post | 2018-08-27 19:24 +0000 |
| Articles | 16 on this page of 76 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 03:56 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 04:04 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-27 08:09 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-27 11:33 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 16:12 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-27 11:03 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-27 14:19 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 19:24 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-27 13:24 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-27 16:34 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 22:24 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2018-08-27 22:03 +0100
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-27 14:10 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-27 14:27 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-27 17:53 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 22:24 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 01:52 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 02:02 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-29 23:06 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 04:41 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-30 00:55 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 12:22 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2018-08-27 22:52 +0100
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-27 15:00 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 22:24 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-28 07:18 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-28 23:16 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-28 20:34 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 12:56 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 13:30 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-29 08:29 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-29 11:41 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 16:04 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 16:16 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 16:05 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-29 10:45 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-29 14:09 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2018-08-29 18:52 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 22:01 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 22:01 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 23:02 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-03 04:01 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 12:49 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-30 09:36 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-31 01:53 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-30 22:57 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-31 12:45 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 16:12 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-27 10:52 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-27 13:59 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 22:08 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-29 15:13 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-29 22:58 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-29 19:32 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 02:48 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-29 20:02 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 04:15 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-29 21:26 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 04:43 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-29 21:54 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 12:22 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-30 08:44 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) BK@Onramp.net - 2018-08-30 11:03 -0500
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-30 09:09 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) BK@Onramp.net - 2018-08-30 12:47 -0500
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-31 01:59 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-30 19:10 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-31 01:55 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-30 19:08 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-31 02:46 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> - 2018-08-30 20:11 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2018-08-29 18:18 -0700
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 02:29 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-29 23:06 -0400
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-30 04:15 +0000
Re: Moto X4 on Sale at Newegg for $199.99 ($100 off). Closest Android Phone to an iPhone 8 (non-plus) Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> - 2018-08-27 19:24 +0000
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 12:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm8nho$79m$2@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117903 |
On 29 Aug 2018 21:54:31 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: > It's not my job to hunt from link to link for YOUR support for YOUR claims. And yet, you flatly deny data the link contains without even clicking it! *Alan Baker proves he has the mentality of a child every time he posts.*
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 08:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pm93d9$46i$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #117906 |
On 2018-08-30 5:22 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On 29 Aug 2018 21:54:31 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: > >> It's not my job to hunt from link to link for YOUR support for YOUR claims. > > And yet, you flatly deny data the link contains without even clicking it! No. I neither confirm nor deny anything. What I stand by is that it is not MY job to go looking for YOUR support. Present it here. You claim Apple admitted something: YOU quote it here AND provide a direct link. > > *Alan Baker proves he has the mentality of a child every time he posts.* >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BK@Onramp.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 11:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ma5goddnj7r23sia4b4iseuees8j4592ev@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #117909 |
On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 08:44:43 -0700, Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> wrote: >On 2018-08-30 5:22 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: >> On 29 Aug 2018 21:54:31 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: >> >>> It's not my job to hunt from link to link for YOUR support for YOUR claims. >> >> And yet, you flatly deny data the link contains without even clicking it! > >No. I neither confirm nor deny anything. > >What I stand by is that it is not MY job to go looking for YOUR support. > >Present it here. > >You claim Apple admitted something: YOU quote it here AND provide a >direct link. He can't...or won't. It's easier for him to SAY he gave a link so that he doesn't have to show it. >> >> *Alan Baker proves he has the mentality of a child every time he posts.* I've known Alan for at least 20 years and can say without doubt that his mentality is not childish. Yours? Manifestly so. >>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 09:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pm94sa$7dv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #117910 |
On 2018-08-30 9:03 AM, BK@Onramp.net wrote: > On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 08:44:43 -0700, Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> wrote: > >> On 2018-08-30 5:22 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: >>> On 29 Aug 2018 21:54:31 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: >>> >>>> It's not my job to hunt from link to link for YOUR support for YOUR claims. >>> >>> And yet, you flatly deny data the link contains without even clicking it! >> >> No. I neither confirm nor deny anything. >> >> What I stand by is that it is not MY job to go looking for YOUR support. >> >> Present it here. >> >> You claim Apple admitted something: YOU quote it here AND provide a >> direct link. > > He can't...or won't. It's easier for him to SAY he gave a link so > that he doesn't have to show it. > >>> >>> *Alan Baker proves he has the mentality of a child every time he posts.* > > I've known Alan for at least 20 years and can say without doubt that > his mentality is not childish. Thanks, Bobby. Has it really been 20 years? I guess it's pretty close. :-) > > Yours? Manifestly so. He's a tedious twit, and I mostly ignore him, but some times I just can't stop myself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BK@Onramp.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 12:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dbbgodl7l020chbad82d9801c7631m58ug@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #117911 |
On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 09:09:47 -0700, Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> wrote: >On 2018-08-30 9:03 AM, BK@Onramp.net wrote: >> On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 08:44:43 -0700, Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> wrote: >> >>> On 2018-08-30 5:22 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: >>>> On 29 Aug 2018 21:54:31 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: >>>> >>>>> It's not my job to hunt from link to link for YOUR support for YOUR claims. >>>> >>>> And yet, you flatly deny data the link contains without even clicking it! >>> >>> No. I neither confirm nor deny anything. >>> >>> What I stand by is that it is not MY job to go looking for YOUR support. >>> >>> Present it here. >>> >>> You claim Apple admitted something: YOU quote it here AND provide a >>> direct link. >> >> He can't...or won't. It's easier for him to SAY he gave a link so >> that he doesn't have to show it. >> >>>> >>>> *Alan Baker proves he has the mentality of a child every time he posts.* >> >> I've known Alan for at least 20 years and can say without doubt that >> his mentality is not childish. > >Thanks, Bobby. Has it really been 20 years? I guess it's pretty close. :-) > >> >> Yours? Manifestly so. > >He's a tedious twit, and I mostly ignore him, but some times I just >can't stop myself. I kill filed him some time ago.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-31 01:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pma7db$li4$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117913 |
On 30 Aug 2018 10:47:09 GMT, BK@Onramp.net wrote: > I kill filed him some time ago. The absolute *beauty* of you killfiling me, is that I never have to read what you write, which we long ago proved has *never* once added even a single iota of on-topic value to *any* thread, ever ... in your entire life! You're _that_ dumb, BK@ONRAmp. It's remarkable, actually, that a human can be as dumb as you consistently prove yourself to be - and still survive. Please continue to killfile me - so that neither I - nor anyone else - has to be subjected to your idiotic drivel. The canonical half-dozen Apple Apologists are (in this order): 1. nospam 2. Jolly Roger 3. Lewis 4. *BK@OnRamp* 5. Alan Baker 6. Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 19:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pma81a$1sgo$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #117918 |
On 2018-08-30 6:59 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On 30 Aug 2018 10:47:09 GMT, BK@Onramp.net wrote: > >> I kill filed him some time ago. > > The absolute *beauty* of you killfiling me, is that I never have to read > what you write, which we long ago proved has *never* once added even a > single iota of on-topic value to *any* thread, ever ... in your entire > life! No. His killfiling you has literally no relationship to whether or not you "have to read" anything of his aside from the fact that you won't see any direct replies from him... ...because he won't make anyone. > > You're _that_ dumb, BK@ONRAmp. Says the guy who just said, "I never have to read what you write"... ...immediately after reading and replying to something he wrote! > > It's remarkable, actually, that a human can be as dumb as you consistently > prove yourself to be - and still survive. > > Please continue to killfile me - so that neither I - nor anyone else - has > to be subjected to your idiotic drivel. > > The canonical half-dozen Apple Apologists are (in this order): > 1. nospam > 2. Jolly Roger > 3. Lewis > 4. *BK@OnRamp* > 5. Alan Baker > 6. Savageduck >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-31 01:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pma77b$lb8$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117910 |
On 30 Aug 2018 09:03:36 GMT, BK@Onramp.net wrote: > I've known Alan for at least 20 years and can say without doubt that > his mentality is not childish. Hehhehheh .... A testimonial from BK@OnRamp supporting the genius of Alan Baker no less! Thanks for making my day. Two of the *dumbest* humans on the planet - backing each other up in their idiocy. I do very much appreciate the humor. Thanks!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 19:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pma7ti$1sgo$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #117917 |
On 2018-08-30 6:55 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On 30 Aug 2018 09:03:36 GMT, BK@Onramp.net wrote: > >> I've known Alan for at least 20 years and can say without doubt that >> his mentality is not childish. > > Hehhehheh .... > > A testimonial from BK@OnRamp supporting the genius of Alan Baker no less! You never can play it straight, can you? Where did he suggest I'm a genius? > > Thanks for making my day. > > Two of the *dumbest* humans on the planet - backing each other up in their > idiocy. > > I do very much appreciate the humor. > > Thanks! >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-31 02:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pmaa5p$qa4$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117919 |
On 30 Aug 2018 19:08:08 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: > Where did he suggest I'm a genius? You're so incomprehensibly stupid that you don't even get obvious sarcasm.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <nunya@ness.biz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 20:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pmabk8$1pf$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #117921 |
On 2018-08-30 7:46 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On 30 Aug 2018 19:08:08 GMT, Alan Baker wrote: > >> Where did he suggest I'm a genius? > > You're so incomprehensibly stupid that you don't even get obvious sarcasm. > No. I get that it's a ridiculous overreach... ...and that you clipped all the very salient rebuttals I made to the rest of your post. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-29 18:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pm7gkv$lv8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117880 |
On 8/29/2018 3:08 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On 27 Aug 2018 10:59:58 GMT, nospam wrote: > >>> The root cause of the throttling was not an aged battery, >> >> yes it very definitely was. > > Nospam yet again guesses wrong, and even denies what Apple publicly admits. The root cause was the PMIC. The most accurate and succinct explanation was over at <https://mjtsai.com/blog/2017/12/22/apple-confirms-that-it-throttles-iphones-with-degraded-batteries/>: "the battery isn’t able to maintain a high enough voltage for the PMIC to reliably be able to use as a source." For the iPhone 8, they redesigned the power management circuit and added a third PMIC. For phones already in the hands of users the user will have to periodically change the battery. Instead of getting three or four years out of battery, the user will be able to get one or two years. Not a terribly big deal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 02:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm7kqk$et0$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117885 |
On 29 Aug 2018 18:18:20 GMT, sms wrote:
> The root cause was the PMIC.
I understand that you're a logical educated adult, so we can reasonably
both agree and disagree on facts. (Facts being funny that way.)
I feel (as do others) that the "root cause" is fundamentally simply that
Apple didn't test their products in the real world since it appears even
Apple was horrified that their devices performed so poorly after about a
year of use in the real world.
In the thread I cited are references that back up that claim.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/BqxnrUlOkDA/-v-Ovh41AwAJ>
Here is a verbatim quote from that thread:
The Apple white paper called them "chemically aged", as does this article:
<http://bgr.com/2017/12/29/iphone-slowdown-scandal-apple-fix/
That article points out two very important facts that I have been
saying for years, and which are proven time and again by Apple - and
which both show up in spades for anyone with a logical brain for
facts in this battery fiasco.
1. Apple never tests any of their products in the real world
2. Apple makes the users do their testing for them
Specifically, what the article says, verbatim,
*"Apple is basically telling us that it's not testing iOS updates"*
... and ...
"*Apple had to wait for user feedback* to realize that the iPhone
slowdown,*which Apple caused*, is to blame for the poorer user
experience on older iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s devices."
My point is that the PMIC may be the underlying hardware cause, as might be
the battery, or the overall design of the phone - but - the fact that Apple
had to secretly, drastically, and permanently throttle the CPU to less than
half after only about a year indicates that Apple (yet again) didn't bother
to test their products in the real world.
It's pretty clear from this experience that this is a fact.
*Apple does not test their products to actually work in the real world.*
> The most accurate and succinct explanation was over at
> <https://mjtsai.com/blog/2017/12/22/apple-confirms-that-it-throttles-iphones-with-degraded-batteries/>:
> "the battery isn┤ able to maintain a high enough voltage for the PMIC
> to reliably be able to use as a source."
Again, it's refreshing to be able to converse logically with an adult who
comprehends adult discourse.
Specifically since nospam has many times blamed Android for almost all of
the faults of the iPhones (he keeps trying to assert that it's "normal" for
a company to have to secretly, drastically, and permanently throttle a CPU
to less than half the claimed speeds after only about a year of use).
That article was informative in that it supported my position that the
overall design is bad and it was never tested in the real world so Apple
didn't realize their design was bad until it was too late. The article says
only a couple of sentences after the one above that:
*"the power delivery system was not designed sufficiently robust*
*enough to cope with such loads"*
While the Apple Apologists repeatedly screamed that Android was to blame
for all of Apple's design faults, the article clearly says otherwise:
*"This explanation might also be one of many factors as to why*
*flagship Android and other devices don┤ seem to exhibit this*
*issue, as they come with much _larger battery_ cells."*
> For the iPhone 8, they redesigned the power management circuit and added
> a third PMIC. For phones already in the hands of users the user will
> have to periodically change the battery. Instead of getting three or
> four years out of battery, the user will be able to get one or two
> years. Not a terribly big deal.
While I understand why you feel PMIC is the issue, remember that others say
that the problem would have been avoided if Apple simply *tested* the
phones in the real world before releasing them - and - the solution would
have been simple ... Put a bigger battery in!
But it also speaks to a really enormous problem with the iPhone: this $700
to $1,000-plus product, as designed, isn't able to function near its peak
after just a year of use. That should be unacceptable.
*"[Apple] could put _larger batteries_ in the iPhone in the first*
*place, so that they last longer before this kind of adjustment*
*needs to kick in.*
In the end, while the Apple Apologists blame Android for Apple having to
secretly, drastically, and permanently throttle CPUs to less than half the
original speeds after about a year of use, the real reason is clear.
*"the state of charge of a battery under otherwise normal conditions*
*should be taken into account during the design of a device*
*(Battery, SoC, PMIC, decoupling capacitors) and its operating*
*tolerances."*
Hence, any logical reasonable intelligent adult can choose between:
a. Poor design choices of Battery, SOC, PMIC, Caps, & tolerances, or,
b. Apple never tests their mobile devices in the real world
Pick one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-29 23:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <290820182306411750%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #117885 |
In article <pm7gkv$lv8$1@dont-email.me>, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote: > >>> The root cause of the throttling was not an aged battery, > >> > >> yes it very definitely was. > > > > Nospam yet again guesses wrong, and even denies what Apple publicly admits. > > The root cause was the PMIC. nope. > The most accurate and succinct explanation was over at > > <https://mjtsai.com/blog/2017/12/22/apple-confirms-that-it-throttles-iphones-w > ith-degraded-batteries/>: > "the battery isn¹t able to maintain a high enough voltage for the PMIC > to reliably be able to use as a source." keep reading: As batteries degrade over time and the cell impedance also rises also in function of the state of charge and temperature, the current flow becomes restricted and the cell is no longer able to satisfy the power requirement at a high enough operating voltage. in other words, the battery. apple's own statement clearly states it's the battery: Lithium-ion batteries become less capable of supplying peak current demands when in cold conditions, have a low battery charge or as they age over time, which can result in the device unexpectedly shutting down to protect its electronic components. unexpected shutdowns are *not* something users find acceptable, particularly with the risk of data loss. it's also not unique to apple. numerous android phones also randomly shut down, for the very same reason, including the nexus 6p, which being a large phone, had a hefty battery: <https://www.androidpolice.com/2017/05/26/amended-complaint-filed-ongoin g-nexus-6p-early-shutdown-bootloop-lawsuit/> ...But, for those that might not be aware, some Nexus 6P's have been experiencing bootloops, a situation in which the phone doesn't correctly start, but sits unresponsively on the startup animation. The other battery-related defect manifests itself as the phone suddenly shutting down long before the battery indicator would predict. ... LG recently extended warranty coverage for users suffering similar problems with the Nexus 5X. older batteries can't supply peak demands. > For the iPhone 8, they redesigned the power management circuit and added > a third PMIC. For phones already in the hands of users the user will > have to periodically change the battery. Instead of getting three or > four years out of battery, the user will be able to get one or two > years. Not a terribly big deal. also wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-30 04:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm7r10$p47$2@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117894 |
On 29 Aug 2018 20:06:41 GMT, nospam wrote: > it's also not unique to apple. numerous android phones also randomly > shut down, for the very same reason, including the nexus 6p, which > being a large phone, had a hefty battery: You always blame Android for Apple's lack of testing their products. Android batteries didn't cause Apple to secretly, drastically, and permanently throttle CPUs to less than half their original speeds after about a year. Only Apple has this problem. You try to claim that Android has this problem but no other manufacturer but Apple has had to *secretly*, *drastically*, and *permanently* throttle CPUs just because they didn't catch their design flaws because they didn't do any real world testing. This is a quote that you know about: <http://bgr.com/2017/12/29/iphone-slowdown-scandal-apple-fix/ *"Apple is basically telling us that it's not testing iOS updates"* ... and ... "*Apple had to wait for user feedback* to realize that the iPhone* *slowdown,*which Apple caused*, is to blame for the poorer user* *experience on older iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s devices."* Also, this quote from sms' cite: <https://mjtsai.com/blog/2017/12/22/apple-confirms-that-it-throttles-iphones-with-degraded-batteries/> *"the power delivery system was not designed sufficiently robust* *enough to cope with such loads"* *"This explanation might also be one of many factors as to why* *flagship Android and other devices don;t seem to exhibit this* *issue, as they come with much _larger battery_ cells."* And... *"[Apple] could put _larger batteries_ in the iPhone in the first* *place, so that they last longer before this kind of adjustment* *needs to kick in.* And... *"the state of charge of a battery under otherwise normal conditions* *should be taken into account during the design of a device* *(Battery, SoC, PMIC, decoupling capacitors) and its operating* *tolerances."* Hence, any logical reasonable intelligent adult can choose between: a. *Poor design choices of Battery, SOC, PMIC, Caps, & tolerances*, or, b. *Apple never tests their mobile devices in the real world* Pick one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 19:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1j5o$6e3$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #117827 |
On 27 Aug 2018 10:52:51 GMT, sms wrote: > Not everyone wants a phablet. My wife could have chosen an > iPhone Plus, instead of a non-Plus, from work, but didn't want a larger > phone. As you know, I give out about a half dozen or so phones a year as gifts to my relatives (they all come to me for phone advice) which is why I have plenty of Android and iOS devices on hand at any one time (although the iPhones tend to be kept longer than the Android devices as those recipients are far more brand loyal). For me, the phablet ($130 LG Stylo 3 Plus) is a good size for my tired old eyes, but as a gift to technically inclined boys, the Moto X4 you speak of seems to be a *great* competitor to the far less functional iPhone 8 (which costs about twice as much for about half as much hardware functionality). The RAM alone on the Moto X4 is up to double that of the less functional iPhone 8, and that's before we even begin to count that there is no app functionality on iOS that isn't already on Android while the amount of app functionality on Android literally makes iOS app functionality look downright primitive. The *only* advantage of the iPhone 8 over the Moto X seems to be the benchmark scores - which - are important - but - it's hard to compare since they're run on different operating systems - and - in the past - Apple has secretly, drastically, and permanently *halved* the CPU performance of its recent phones. So a key question to look up (which I haven't looked up) is whether Apple will halve the CPU performance of the iPhone 8 in about a year? If it does, then there is _nothing_ hardwarewise that the iPhone 8 has that isn't already in the Moto X4 and there is still plenty of hardware functionality in the Moto X that isn't in the iPhone 8 (nor in any iPhone ever built). > It will be interesting to see what the next iPhone generation has in > terms of screen sizes. When I give out gifts, I find out from the parents what the kids want, where most of the non technical girls want iPhones while the technical boys generally want whatever works best. The boys aren't necessarily against Apple equipment - they're just not so driven by fear and style as are the girls, in my experience. > Counting cores is meaningless, You need to look at actual > performance.The Stylo 3 Plus has a dismal Geekbench multicore result of > 2578, the iPhone 8 is at 10178. That said, I've never found the Stylo 3 > Plus to lag, but I don't play games that would use a lot of CPU power. I > also don't have full-encryption turned on, which is a big CPU drain. As you know, I have iOS and Android equipment, where my current iOS device is the $300 Costco WiFi-only 128GB iPad and my current Android device is the $130 LG Stylo 3 Plus. I find neither of them "lags". I don't run Spice simulations on them, nor do I use AutoCAD vector graphics CAD programs. I don't play silly games either. I use the phones for the typical stuff (talking, texting, emailing, videos, automatic call recording, automatic SMS texting, calendaring, minimal web browsing, mapping, traffic, routing, wifi debugging, cellular debugging, etc.), where I find the Android device far more functional overall with respect to software applications. I'm sure "gaming" stresses the device - but it's the last thing from my mind, and, I might add, I've asked the kids who get the phones as gifts, where the older ones (teens and up) do their gaming on desktops with NVidia graphics cards, and the youngish ones (elementary school) are the only ones "gaming" on the mobile devices. While CPU performance is always a "good thing", you have to remember that Apple secretly, drastically, and permanently *halved* the CPU performance of the iPhone 7 Plus I'm comparing my LG Stylo 3 Plus to ... where almost all the hardware on the LG was *better* than the iPhone other than the two important factors of CPU speed and RAM. So I agree that the CPU & RAM are important, but since Apple is going to permanently halve the iPhone 7 Plus CPU after about a year, then the iPhone 7 Plus benchmark scores are completely bogus. > Unlikely. If you look at the iPhone 8 design, the power section has been > significantly upgraded from the iPhone 7/6s/6, with the addition of > third PMIC > <http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/apple-iphone-8-teardown/#06> > > The root cause of the throttling was not an aged battery, but a new > battery did mitigate the issue. When doing power management design you > need to account for the reduced capacity of Li-Ion batteries as they age > and ensure that your power solution can deliver sufficient current even > from an older battery. I am well aware that the real problem with the current generation of iPhone is simply stated as a "defective design", which Apple tried to secretly mask by drastically and permanently throttling the CPU speeds such that all benchmark scores are bogus for the affected set of iPhones. If we had faith that Apple wasn't going to secretly, drastically, and permanently throttle the iPhone 8, then at least we can trust its benchmark scores to be about what you get after about a year of use. The problem with comparing benchmark scores is that they don't necessarily translate between operating systems - and - benchmarks aren't necessarily a good test of what the user actually does - but - it's likely the best we have. Hence, as logical sentient adults, we can hand the 5-core iPhone 8 a benchmark win on hardware (which is important) but we have to weigh that one factor against the fact that the hardware of the twice-as-expensive iPhone 8 appears to be inferior to all the other hardware features you noted in your spreadsheet. <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/HDI8moW_4Pw/fFqp2LudAQAJ> For the money you spend on the iPhone, you can get two better Android phones, it seems, not only based on hardware features alone but on software (where even a five year old Android phone has far more app functionality than any iPhone ever made).
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web