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

Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #145582

Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits

From Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups uk.comp.sys.mac
Subject Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits
Date 2020-07-19 12:06 +0000
Message-ID <hnirabFib41U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <170720201934264663%nospam@nospam.invalid> <hnf83tFpam2U2@mid.individual.net> <180720200435579360%nospam@nospam.invalid> <hng39hF95gU3@mid.individual.net> <190720200755266213%nospam@nospam.invalid>

Show all headers | View raw

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <hng39hF95gU3@mid.individual.net>, Snit
> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>>>>> x86 emulation on apple silicon is already quite good, and that's
>>>>>>>>> running on a 2 year old chip never designed to be used in a mac.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I do have concerns about how well it will work -- though to be fair the
>>>>>>>> recent version of Parallels have not been great with Windows. Do not
>>>>>>>> know what the issue is, but it SLOW.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> parallels is not emulating anything.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Correct.
>>>>> 
>>>>> therefore irrelevant to the discussion about x86 emulation on apple
>>>>> silicon, so why bring it up?
>>>> 
>>>> I accept you fail to see the relevance of IF Windows ran slow now on the
>>>> Intel Macs, at least in a VM, why this would make the need for it seem
>>>> less. Maybe at some point you will figure that out.
>> 
>> And you ignored what I said to play victim. Not really interested in 
>> your personal challenges, at least when you try to blame others for them.
> 
> twisting and trolling. 

I agree you are doing so. Can you please stop?


> that is *not* what happened and you know it.
> 
> not only did i *not* ignore what you said, but i specifically told you
> what you said was not relevant whatsoever.
> 
> you don't like being told you're wrong, so instead of admitting your
> error and learning something for a change, you resort to attacks,
> making you a hypocrite as well.

Here you try to speak for me. Tsk tsk. 

>>> maybe at some point you'll stop twisting things, although that's
>>> unlikely.
>>> 
>>> maybe at some point you will also figure out that parallels and rosetta
>>> 2 have nothing to do with each other, therefore a comparison is
>>> meaningless, something which should be very obvious, but in your case,
>>> it is not, so instead of admitting you don't understand and learning
>>> from those who do, you resort to attacks instead.
>> 
>> It has already been established you failed to see the relevance. Not 
>> sure why you want to harp on that.

And you still fail to see the relevance. Ok. 

> it could not have been established since there is nothing to establish.
> 
> parallels is *not* relevant to rosetta 2. full stop. 
> 
> they are two *totally* wildly different things, something which is
> obvious to everyone except you.

You are still lost. OK. 

> what *has* been established is that you are wrong and stubbornly refuse
> to admit your error, so you resort to lies and attacks, as you normally
> do.

What do you even think I was wrong about? Are you merely using an insult
bot?

>>>> In any case, that IF seems to not be true, at least based on comments
>>>> from Jaimie Vandenbergh.
>>>> 
>>>>>> And it STILL is slow. Linux is not.
>>>>> 
>>>>> that's something you're doing wrong and not parallels itself.
>>>> 
>>>> I suspect SOMEONE could give a less helpful and insightful response, but
>>>> I am not sure who. Do you know of anyone? Wait. Never mind... I prefer
>>>> useful responses.
>> 
>> I am happy you did not even try to find anyone who gives less useful 
>> responses than you did. Thank you.

You still failed. 

> more of your twisting, trolling and attacks.
> 



-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks
and ignore the message time and time again.

Back to uk.comp.sys.mac | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-06-29 20:07 +0100
  Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-06-29 16:04 -0400
    Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-06-29 21:51 +0100
      Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-06-29 17:08 -0400
  Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Chris Ridd <chrisridd@mac.com> - 2020-06-30 12:23 +0100
    Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Sak Wathanasin <sw@nan.co.uk> - 2020-07-14 09:14 -0700
      Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-14 16:38 +0000
        Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Sak Wathanasin <sw@nan.co.uk> - 2020-07-17 06:24 -0700
          Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-07-17 14:33 +0100
            Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-07-17 15:23 +0100
            Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 10:25 -0400
              Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-07-17 15:31 +0100
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 11:08 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Ian McCall <ian@eruvia.org> - 2020-07-17 16:18 +0100
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 11:39 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Alan B <alanrichardbarker@nospamgmail.com.here> - 2020-07-17 15:23 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 11:39 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Alan B <alanrichardbarker@nospamgmail.com.here> - 2020-07-18 06:18 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-18 04:35 -0400
              Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-17 15:22 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 18:46 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-17 16:00 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-17 23:13 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-17 20:18 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Chris Ridd <chrisridd@mac.com> - 2020-07-18 10:45 +0100
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-18 09:49 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 04:02 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-18 12:10 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 11:42 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 11:46 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-18 19:14 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 15:48 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 23:04 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-19 08:42 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-19 08:49 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-19 15:39 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-19 23:16 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-19 16:28 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 04:01 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-18 12:11 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 11:47 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Sak Wathanasin <sw@nan.co.uk> - 2020-07-20 02:36 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-20 10:33 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-17 19:34 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-17 20:20 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-18 04:35 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-18 04:04 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-19 07:55 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-19 12:06 +0000
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-20 09:21 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-20 10:35 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-21 11:23 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-21 08:50 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-19 14:51 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-20 09:21 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-20 10:30 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-21 11:23 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-21 08:46 -0700
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-22 08:39 -0400
                Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-22 13:40 -0700
            Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2020-07-17 17:23 +0100
          Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2020-07-17 21:18 +0100
            Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Sak Wathanasin <sw@nan.co.uk> - 2020-07-20 02:37 -0700
              Re: Early Geekbench results for ARM dev kits Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2020-07-20 11:51 +0000

csiph-web