If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
On 7/4/2017 12:07 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/4/2017 5:16 AM, David B. wrote: A lot of folk die BEFORE they get to be 80 years of age. I lost another one of my boater friends just yesterday after a year long battle with cancer. I don't NEED a new iMac ..... but I'll get one after this year's boating season! ;-) I have three months to go, until I reach 80. I figure that since more people die before they reach 80, than between 80 and 100, statistically, my chances of reaching 100 are pretty good. Since the bucket in my list has sprung a leak, I plan to see how many items in there I will use as many as I can. should read. I plan to use as many items from my bucket list, as quickly as I can, while taking the time to enjoy each. -- PeterN |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
On 04-Jul-17 5:16 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/4/2017 12:07 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/4/2017 5:16 AM, David B. wrote: A lot of folk die BEFORE they get to be 80 years of age. I lost another one of my boater friends just yesterday after a year long battle with cancer. I don't NEED a new iMac ..... but I'll get one after this year's boating season! ;-) I have three months to go, until I reach 80. I figure that since more people die before they reach 80, than between 80 and 100, statistically, my chances of reaching 100 are pretty good. Since the bucket in my list has sprung a leak, I plan to see how many items in there I will use as many as I can. should read. I plan to use as many items from my bucket list, as quickly as I can, while taking the time to enjoy each. *GOOD LUCK*, PeterN :-) -- I hope you make it to that magical age of 80! |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 21:48:05 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On Jul 3, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote (in ): On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 16:42:04 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 3, 2017, Eric Stevens wrote (in ): On Sun, 02 Jul 2017 21:57:52 -0700, Savageduck wrote: When I get my 5K iMac I will let you know. Are you waiting for the new model? No. The model I want is available now. I am not looking at the iMac Pro which is only going to be available at the end of the year. What I am doing is prioritizing my spending, and rationalizing my actual need in my head. I am trying to avoid acquisition for acquisition’s sake. To do that I have to take into account that I actually have an iMac which does everything I ask of it now. The primary reason I have for buying the new iMac is to get my greedy hands on it.My major consideration is the age of my current set up. The iMac is a mid-2010, and eventually it is going to age out of the OS update window. I prefer to preempt that by buying the replacement within the next six months, perhaps earlier. To do that configured the way I want it, I would be spending $2800-$3000. Once I have the new iMac, it wouldn’t actually be doing anything different to what I am doing now, except, presumably faster. The same thing could be said for my R2880. The prints I get out of that printer are superb. It would be nice, but pointless to upgrade to something new, especially considering that I am not running a production print house. Then there are a few lenses I have my eye on, and those might come first. I know the feeling. A friend of mine who has driven second hand Hond Legends (AKA Acura RL) for years has lashed out and bought a highly spec'd http://tinyurl.com/tejs3w3 His excuse was that he was coming up to the age of 80 and he was running out of time to yield to desire ... Nice! A new car is another thing I have thought of, and can’t quite pull the trigger on. My E350 has 46K trouble free miles on the clock. When I was working I ran up 180K-220K before trading for new. I went in today to have the tires rotated and rebalanced, and the wheel alignment checked, and the guy who runs the shop told me it was 28,000km since last had them done and that it was 4 years ago. 7,000km (4,200m) per year but when I was working it was +20,000km/yr. The last car I sold before I retired had 190,000km on the clock and was still going like a rocket. Retiring is definitely an economic change in many respects. My biological clock is running a little behind you, and your friend with me at 68+. So, by this time next year my mortgage will be paid off, and I will have a little extra spending power, then we shall see what develops. Your E350 still has a long time to go, but I expect you will outlast it. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
"David B."
Mon, 03 Jul 2017 20:27:07 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: Excellent answers, 'nospam'. :-) For a clueless idiot like you, sure. You don't understand what either of us are writing about. And, like i've written before, you'll high five anybody who writes anything you perceve as negative about me or something I wrote. [g] Even if they're so far off base, they aren't even in the same ballpark. Example. You know I service macs, I've shown you a pic of the guts of one I did a component changeout on. ROFL! -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php "The knack to flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
nospam
Sun, 02 Jul 2017 01:49:10 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: not a single reputable site will insult users. It must be nice to live in your universe. Do you offer tours? See below if you want to get an idea of how much you're being ****ed over. Btw, the Acer below is considerably more upgradable if you wanted to do so. The all in one mac, due to it's very design/case/etc, isn't. who cares. what matters is getting actual work done, not opening up the box and poking around inside. I care. I doubt I'm the only one. Other than swapping out the HD and adding more ram, that is. With the Acer, I can add another hard drive, internally; no swap required. As well as the ram, the video card, the sound card, etc etc etc. I can't changeout the sound card or video card on the mac. I'm stuck with what it has. Thanks so much Apple. I can't add an additional video card to the apple for quad display or coin mining, either. I can with the Acer. And, if I wanted to mine coins, I'd want more GPUS and the better CPU working together for faster coin mining results. The apple won't lemme do that. there's much more to life than mining bitcoins. Who said anything about bitcoins specifically? I didn't. Or, do you think that's the only digital currency? And, it was just an example. Point is, for less money, I get a faster machine that has upgradability. Unlike the mac you claimed was 'better' the prices of apple products are competitive for similar specs, often *less* expensive. We're discussing Apple computers, specifically. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If so, please provide url(s)... there are plenty of comparisons and more every day. I'll try again. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If yes, provide url(s). Seems like a simple request to me. apple did *much* more than give it a new video panel. Er, no, no they didn't... But, as I said, this isn't a fair comparison. Especially when you consider that it's an all in one, and not just a display that can be connected to other computers...Unlike the Dell you picked for price comparison purposes..Which is a bit pricey, considering other options... it doesn't matter whether it's an all in one or not. Yes it does. what matters is having comparable specs. The mac falls short there. As I already stated. https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac I'm assuming you picked the Dell because of it's high price, and, made no effort to see what other companies were offering theirs for. i picked the dell because both the dell and the 5k imac used the *same* lcd panel internally. *ALOT* of companies use the same panels! Do you really think there's a ****ton of panel manufacturers out there? Newsflash, there isn't! So, I did it for you: https://www.amazon.com/HP-J3G14A8-AB...nitor/dp/B00VO 85RY6 Thats a commercial grade one, too. no it isn't. 'commercial grade' is meaningless and that's not in the same class as what's in an imac, which is a dci-p3 wide gamut display that's also nearly twice as bright. Er, it is infact a commercial grade monitor. And, it's not a meaningless claim or statement. You clearly know nothing about this... CPU, twice the ram, twice the HD space...If compared to the prior two Apple Imacs with 5k retina otherwise, HD space is the same, ram isn't, and cpu is lacking on the Apple. The apple is using an i5. The acer is using an i7 with a higher clock frequency before 'turbo boost' again wrong. The specs are from Apples website, accurate at the time of my original post on this subject. -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php Warning: Do not attempt to stop chainsaw with testicles. |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
nospam
Sun, 02 Jul 2017 01:49:08 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: In article XnsA783B1E3E49FHT1@z2EEd70JefktzJb64TMQebUU311gP5 hrG.npCmT206Xn5lh .90b6 e2Gl51, Diesel wrote: you don't understand what it is you're reading, mostly because you don't use macs and don't understand how they work, and based on your posts, you are an apple-hating troll. Partially correct. I don't like macs, would prefer not to use macs, but, I'm not an Apple hating troll, and, I do understand how they work. based on what you've written, you haven't any clue whatsoever about how macs work (or anything else apple makes). everything you've said is nothing more than ignorant apple-bashing trolling. While I do find your comment rather amusing, is there a particular reason you've decided to respond to a post written in May? It's July... in the wild means propagates on its own. Technically, that isn't what it means. As a former virus writer who has stuff that went ITW, I'll defer to your assumptions concerning the term. Hell, why not. You have far more credibility concerning it that I ever would. /sarcasm. [snip] It was trolling bull**** with no urls to support your claims, despite having been asked to provide them. -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php A life lived in fear is half a life lived. |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
In article
dp9ZlJL643r91C2r8o, Diesel wrote: you don't understand what it is you're reading, mostly because you don't use macs and don't understand how they work, and based on your posts, you are an apple-hating troll. Partially correct. I don't like macs, would prefer not to use macs, but, I'm not an Apple hating troll, and, I do understand how they work. based on what you've written, you haven't any clue whatsoever about how macs work (or anything else apple makes). everything you've said is nothing more than ignorant apple-bashing trolling. While I do find your comment rather amusing, is there a particular reason you've decided to respond to a post written in May? It's July... they were in the queue and i'm catching up with older posts. i have more important things to do than try to educate an ignorant closed-minded troll, but i did want to correct your numerous mistakes for the benefit of others. in the wild means propagates on its own. Technically, that isn't what it means. As a former virus writer who has stuff that went ITW, I'll defer to your assumptions concerning the term. Hell, why not. You have far more credibility concerning it that I ever would. /sarcasm. i'm using the industry standard definitions, not what some wannabe script kiddie thinks. https://us.norton.com/internetsecuri...computer-virus. html A computer virus, much like a flu virus, is designed to spread from host to host and has the ability to replicate itself. regardless of whatever definition you want to use, there is no self-propagating malware on a mac and the chances of that are so close to zero that it can be considered to be zero. wannacry and petya affected *millions* of pcs and millions more are still vulnerable. the number of affected macs was *zero*. 0. none. tl;dr macs are *far* more secure than windows can ever hope to be. |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
In article
p9ZlJL643r91C2r8o, Diesel wrote: not a single reputable site will insult users. It must be nice to live in your universe. Do you offer tours? it's called the real world and no tours are offered by anyone. See below if you want to get an idea of how much you're being ****ed over. Btw, the Acer below is considerably more upgradable if you wanted to do so. The all in one mac, due to it's very design/case/etc, isn't. who cares. what matters is getting actual work done, not opening up the box and poking around inside. I care. I doubt I'm the only one. not the only one, but one of the few. people buy computers to do actual work *not* to open it up and swap parts, something totally lost on you. it's like cars. most people just want to get to where they're going, not open the hood and replace parts just for the hell of it. Other than swapping out the HD and adding more ram, that is. With the Acer, I can add another hard drive, internally; no swap required. As well as the ram, the video card, the sound card, etc etc etc. I can't changeout the sound card or video card on the mac. I'm stuck with what it has. Thanks so much Apple. I can't add an additional video card to the apple for quad display or coin mining, either. I can with the Acer. And, if I wanted to mine coins, I'd want more GPUS and the better CPU working together for faster coin mining results. The apple won't lemme do that. there's much more to life than mining bitcoins. Who said anything about bitcoins specifically? I didn't. Or, do you think that's the only digital currency? And, it was just an example. it doesn't matter which coin it is. there's much more to life than mining whichever cryptocurrency is the latest fad (and that's all it is). if you think you're going to get rich that way, you're in for a very big and unpleasant surprise. Point is, for less money, I get a faster machine that has upgradability. Unlike the mac you claimed was 'better' better depends on the task. there is no single computer that is better at everything. a system optimized for cryptocurrency is not ideal for other tasks, such as editing photos or writing school papers. what makes something better is how well it does the tasks someone needs to do, not what the number on the box says or how many parts you can stuff inside. pick the best tool for the job. you're also incorrectly assuming that the only thing that matters are hardware specs, completely ignoring software. even the most tricked out pc can't do things a mac can do. the prices of apple products are competitive for similar specs, often *less* expensive. We're discussing Apple computers, specifically. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If so, please provide url(s)... there are plenty of comparisons and more every day. I'll try again. it's best you don't, because you will fail even worse than you already have. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If yes, provide url(s). Seems like a simple request to me. what part of *all* is not clear? *every* site that does a fair and unbiased comparison (i.e., reputable) will not only find that macs and pcs with similar specs cost about the same, but in many cases, the mac is *less* expensive. when a pc computer costs less, it's because its specs are less. apple doesn't bother with bottom tier products, so there's a lot of cheap crap on the pc side. https://www.recode.net/2016/10/20/13337652/mac-ibm-business-cheaper Big Blue released data on Wednesday showing that it saves anywhere from $265 to $535 over a four-year period for each employee who uses a Mac over a PC. .... The company, which began letting workers choose Macs or PCs last year, says it has found PCs drive twice as many support calls as Macs and that IBMers are now ³overwhelmingly² opting for Macs: 73 percent of IBM employees say they want their next computer to be a Mac. more examples - the microsoft surface studio costs quite a bit more than an imac, with the only real difference being that it pivots and has touch, except that it includes a slow 5400 rpm laptop drive (versus pci-e nvme ssd on the imac) and also lacks thunderbolt and usb-c. the microsoft surface laptop also costs more than a similar spec macbook pro, but also lacks usb-c and thunderbolt and is *impossible* to open without destroying it. apple did *much* more than give it a new video panel. Er, no, no they didn't... oh yes they did. you can't just swap in a 5k display in place of a 2k display and expect everything to work properly, no matter what platform it is. apple had to design several custom components for the retina 5k imac because the technology to drive a display of that resolution from a single video source did not exist at the time. the dell 5k display required *two* displayport cables because a single displayport link was incapable of driving it, along with a high end video card, which means it was both expensive and a complete cluster****. just about every product apple makes has custom apple-designed components. in fact, apple has over 10,000 engineers designing a wide variety of custom chips, well beyond what's available to a run of the mill pc. But, as I said, this isn't a fair comparison. Especially when you consider that it's an all in one, and not just a display that can be connected to other computers...Unlike the Dell you picked for price comparison purposes..Which is a bit pricey, considering other options... it doesn't matter whether it's an all in one or not. Yes it does. no it doesn't. what matters is having comparable specs. The mac falls short there. As I already stated. no it definitely doesn't, and you're also fixated on solely hardware specs, which means very little in the grand scheme of things. even the most tricked out pc can't do many of the things even a low end mac can do. again, pick the best tool for the job. https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac I'm assuming you picked the Dell because of it's high price, and, made no effort to see what other companies were offering theirs for. i picked the dell because both the dell and the 5k imac used the *same* lcd panel internally. *ALOT* of companies use the same panels! Do you really think there's a ****ton of panel manufacturers out there? Newsflash, there isn't! whoooooosh. you snipped the links that show you to be wrong. here they are again: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2467511,00.asp And with the UltraSharp 27 Ultra HD 5K monitor expected to retail for a cool $2,500, you may just need Santa to foot the bill for any add-ons. http://www.pcworld.com/article/28447...tor-price-afte r-apple-launches-new-imac.html ...Dell, which has announced but not yet shipped its UltraSharp 5K monitor, says it will cut its price, in the wake of Apple¹s latest 27-inch iMac hitting the market. .... For $2,499.99, Apple is throwing an entire computing platform into its 27-inch iMac with Retina 5K Display. Dell¹s UltraSharp 27 is only a monitor and the company may have had to drop its price to attract buyers, Colegrove said. what you're also unaware of is that apple has first dibs at the panels, with dell getting the leftovers. apple gets the cream of the crop. So, I did it for you: https://www.amazon.com/HP-J3G14A8-AB.../dp/B00VO85RY6 Thats a commercial grade one, too. no it isn't. 'commercial grade' is meaningless and that's not in the same class as what's in an imac, which is a dci-p3 wide gamut display that's also nearly twice as bright. Er, it is infact a commercial grade monitor. And, it's not a meaningless claim or statement. You clearly know nothing about this... *far* more than you do. commercial grade means nothing. it's fluff words. it also doesn't matter since that hp display has been discontinued. when it was new, it sold for $1300, which was a little less than dell's display, but not by a whole lot. it wasn't as good and still didn't include a computer. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9870/h...-aiming-for-mo re-pixels But at CES 2015, HP announced the HP Z27q monitor, which takes a step back on gamut and manageability, but takes two steps forward with resolution...The HP Z27q is one of a handful of 5K displays on the market now, and HP came in with a pretty low launch price of $1300. comparing the clearance price of a discontinued product to a new and current product shows just how disingenuous you are and the lengths you will go to try and support the myth that macs are more expensive. that hp display and what's in the imac have many differences. first of all, the retina imac has a wide gamut dcip-p3 display that's also nearly twice as bright as the hp display. the hp display used displayport 1.2, which *can't* support 5k on a single link. that means it needed *two* displayport cables to support 5k, along with a video card capable of driving it, a cost you're conveniently forgetting to include. then there's the software compatibility issues and that it's a complete cluster****. a retina 5k imac starts at $1799, without a tangled mess of cables. it just works. out of the box, the user is getting real work done. that's a difference of $400, and there's no way anyone can get a computer anywhere near as capable as what's in the base level retina imac with dual displayport output that's capable of driving the hp display for $400. CPU, twice the ram, twice the HD space...If compared to the prior two Apple Imacs with 5k retina otherwise, HD space is the same, ram isn't, and cpu is lacking on the Apple. The apple is using an i5. The acer is using an i7 with a higher clock frequency before 'turbo boost' again wrong. The specs are from Apples website, accurate at the time of my original post on this subject. bull**** they were. not only are you full of ****, but now you're flat out lying. at the time of your original post, there was a 4 ghz i7 retina 5k imac, which was updated just *two* *weeks* *later* to a 4.2 ghz i7 (along with many other changes). you further claimed that all retina 5k imacs are core i5: In article XnsA7841A9453C1AHT1@z2EEd70JefktzJb64TMQebUU311gP 5hrG.npCmT206Xn5lh.90b 6e2Gl51, Diesel wrote: i7 (all retina imacs are i5) CPU, twice the ram, twice the HD space... that too is absolutely wrong. the very first retina imac 5k back in 2014 was either a 3.5 ghz core i5 or 4 ghz core i7, so even *then* it had a higher clock speed. the first core i7 imac was released in 2009, shortly after the i7 chip itself was released. why would a retina imac *not* have an i7 when the standard imac did all along? you haven't a clue. you're also ignoring all of the other specs that an imac has, such as thunderbolt 3 and usb-c 3.1 gen 2. |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
nospam
Thu, 06 Jul 2017 16:44:36 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: In article dp9ZlJL643r91C2r8 o, Diesel wrote: you don't understand what it is you're reading, mostly because you don't use macs and don't understand how they work, and based on your posts, you are an apple-hating troll. Partially correct. I don't like macs, would prefer not to use macs, but, I'm not an Apple hating troll, and, I do understand how they work. based on what you've written, you haven't any clue whatsoever about how macs work (or anything else apple makes). everything you've said is nothing more than ignorant apple-bashing trolling. While I do find your comment rather amusing, is there a particular reason you've decided to respond to a post written in May? It's July... they were in the queue and i'm catching up with older posts. Sure you are... i have more important things to do than try to educate an ignorant closed-minded troll, but i did want to correct your numerous mistakes for the benefit of others. ROFL. Okay. in the wild means propagates on its own. Technically, that isn't what it means. As a former virus writer who has stuff that went ITW, I'll defer to your assumptions concerning the term. Hell, why not. You have far more credibility concerning it that I ever would. /sarcasm. i'm using the industry standard definitions, not what some wannabe script kiddie thinks. I'm not a wannabe script kiddie, but, thanks for the label. It only further demonstrates your ignorance of the subject, and, what you think you know about me or the knowledge I possess. https://us.norton.com/internetsecuri...is-a-computer- virus. html A computer virus, much like a flu virus, is designed to spread from host to host and has the ability to replicate itself. I'm well aware of the definition of a computer virus, thanks. I've actually written a few, back in the day. Not scripts, mind you, but actual executable based infection. regardless of whatever definition you want to use, there is no self-propagating malware on a mac and the chances of that are so close to zero that it can be considered to be zero. A virus isn't the only item that propogates into the wild. wannacry and petya affected *millions* of pcs and millions more are still vulnerable. the number of affected macs was *zero*. 0. none. It wasn't intended for macs. tl;dr macs are *far* more secure than windows can ever hope to be. You seem a bit more than confused on this subject. Macs weren't targeted due to the extremely low target base. Not enough of you exist in positions where real harm can be caused. If your usage was anywhere near that of Windows, various malware authors would take more interest in you. As you only serve a niche market though, you're of little to no consequence and the malware code base reflects that. Despite the forgetful userbase you do have, itw malware (viruses are a subset, actually) does exist for your platform. Don't ignorantly assume you're more secure because of your tiny userbase. You aren't. -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php A man who turns green has eschewed protein. |
#180
|
|||
|
|||
Where I keep my spare cats.
nospam
Thu, 06 Jul 2017 16:44:38 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: people buy computers to do actual work *not* to open it up and swap parts, something totally lost on you. Nothing lost on me. You defend what is essentially a niche market intended for the types of users that require hand holding. More so than that of Windows users. there's much more to life than mining whichever cryptocurrency is the latest fad (and that's all it is). if you think you're going to get rich that way, you're in for a very big and unpleasant surprise. Rich? No, but, depending on the coins you're dealing in, it's not chump change either. One coin could buy you a new mac, if you wanted to waste that kind of money on it. Point is, for less money, I get a faster machine that has upgradability. Unlike the mac you claimed was 'better' better depends on the task. Indeed. there is no single computer that is better at everything. I never claimed otherwise. a system optimized for cryptocurrency is not ideal for other tasks, such as editing photos or writing school papers. You're showing gross ignorance of the subject again. I think you'd find editing photos on a mining rig to be quite responsive. Writing papers could be done too, but, a total waste of good hardware in doing so. what makes something better is how well it does the tasks someone needs to do, not what the number on the box says or how many parts you can stuff inside. Part specs matter. Not to you, obviously, but to those of us who aren't simply end users tied to a particular name, it does. you're also incorrectly assuming that the only thing that matters are hardware specs, completely ignoring software. even the most tricked out pc can't do things a mac can do. Which things, specifically? Cite examples. the prices of apple products are competitive for similar specs, often *less* expensive. We're discussing Apple computers, specifically. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If so, please provide url(s)... there are plenty of comparisons and more every day. I'll try again. it's best you don't, because you will fail even worse than you already have. Despite your efforts to spin, I'm not the one who's fallen on my arse in this subject. Do you have any reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as an equivalent PC? If yes, provide url(s). Seems like a simple request to me. what part of *all* is not clear? Urls then? *every* site that does a fair and unbiased comparison (i.e., reputable) will not only find that macs and pcs with similar specs cost about the same, but in many cases, the mac is *less* expensive. Urls then? when a pc computer costs less, it's because its specs are less. I already demonstrated in the post from May that your statement wasn't accurate. At the time of my post, Apple had weaker machines that cost more than the PC I forked specs of...And, it wasn't even a high end PC. just about every product apple makes has custom apple-designed components. in fact, apple has over 10,000 engineers designing a wide variety of custom chips, well beyond what's available to a run of the mill pc. Propreitary, closed source, so Apple and Apple alone can fleece you for whatever amount they deem appropriate. I think if we took a head count of all the PC engineers, it would grossly exceed the amount Apple has. PC technologies are so good, Apple is going with Intel processors, in lieu of their own. no it definitely doesn't, and you're also fixated on solely hardware specs, which means very little in the grand scheme of things. It means quite a bit more than you're willing to admit, actually. even the most tricked out pc can't do many of the things even a low end mac can do. Examples? you snipped the links that show you to be wrong. here they are again: Let's not even begin with link snipping accusations. I left a few in my post from May with cost figures. You didn't include any of it. what you're also unaware of is that apple has first dibs at the panels, with dell getting the leftovers. apple gets the cream of the crop. Do you have any urls to support your claim? Er, it is infact a commercial grade monitor. And, it's not a meaningless claim or statement. You clearly know nothing about this... *far* more than you do. I doubt it. But, I'm willing to find out one way or the other. commercial grade means nothing. it's fluff words. No, heh, it isn't either. The specs are from Apples website, accurate at the time of my original post on this subject. bull**** they were. not only are you full of ****, but now you're flat out lying. I provided the links so anyone could check for themselves. You've neglected to include them. From apple.com no less. you haven't a clue. Heh, it's you who has no clue. -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php And with the guts of the last priest, let us strangle the last king. --Denis Diderot |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THE 20D JUST LOVES CATS! | annika1980.com | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | June 4th 07 06:56 AM |
Famous cats...... | William Graham | 35mm Photo Equipment | 24 | May 29th 07 08:20 AM |
Cats and flash | Roger (K8RI) | Digital SLR Cameras | 20 | November 7th 06 08:14 AM |
Storing Spare CF cards next to Spare Battery | Ken | Digital Photography | 5 | July 5th 06 08:58 PM |
Cats Eye... (D70) | Seymore | Digital Photography | 0 | December 23rd 04 05:42 PM |