f



Choices, choices, choices

The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
to stop the silliness.

Choices, we all have to make them.  Even more fundamentally, we are
making choices every moment.  By reading this post, you are making a
choice.  The brand of computer and the software you are using are also
choices.  Every aspect of your life that led to the present moment is
the consequence of past choices.  Choice is even more certain than
death and taxes, those after all also represent choices we make.
(Yes, death is a choice, at least as long as you are alive.)

If choices are so basic, then how do we make them?  The process is not
simple.  Each choice we make is a complex decision with many possible
alternatives.  In most cases, out of all the possibilities we only get
to take one.  How do we sort through those and choose that one that is
"best"?

In economics we teach a simple decision model that has enormous power
to explain how humans make decisions.  It rests on a few common sense
assumptions:  1) we are rational, that is we decide based on what we
regard is the best for us at that moment; 2) diminishing returns
apply, that is the more we have of something, the less we enjoy one
more unit of that item per fixed unit of time; 3) we make decisions on
the margin, that is we consider what one additional unit of something
is worth; 4) resources (time and income) are limited.

Though not part of the model, we know that the values upon which
choices are made are different for different people.  We also know
that those values can change over time as we assimilate new
information and experiences. 

(Rich and poor alike, we all have the same problems.  Bill Gates and
Steve Jobs may be richer than me, and their range of choice may be
much wider, but at the end of the day they nonetheless have to make
choices.  Besides, even if they have more money, they still don't have
more time.  I find that to be very satisfying to ponder)

Based on those assumptions it is trivially easy to show that the
optimum set of decisions result when we choose to allocate time and
money so that every dollar of income and every second of time is spent
so as to equalize the marginal amount of satisfaction receive from
every one of those dollars and seconds.  This is also a  logically
simple result - if any one choice gives us more satisfaction on the
margin than any other choice we could increase satisfaction by buying
or doing less of something and more of the choice with a higher
marginal value.

If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."  The
values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
explains why the arguments get so heated - the values placed on the
differences are very different for different people, and we do not
like it when people try to tell us what our values "should" be.

In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
a computer, and more.  Furthermore, I have worked with Windows since
version 3.0, and I know how to use the OS and Windows-based programs.
Since Windows 2000 came out the stability and hardware compatibility
have both improved significantly.  In other words, Windows works in my
personal situation.  But it is certainly not the only choice I could
make.

When I look at the Mac I see a machine that would take significant
amounts of time to master, and can also cost as much as 3x a Windows
machine that would do the same job for me.  I know, I once owned an
iMac for 6 months, so I speak from experience.

So for me the decision is easy.  I can have a machine that will do all
the work I need from a computer, do it reliably and efficiently, and
at a cost that is much less than a Mac.  That decision frees up
significant amounts of my limited income to do other things with.  

(Even if the Mac were the same price as a Windows machine I might also
stick with Windows rather spend time to learn another OS. For me,
Linux, with its complexity and hardware/software compatibility issues,
is not even worth considering.  Besides, in my situation Windows is,
like Linux, freeware.)

Mac fans, at least in my perception, come from a very different set of
underlying values and life experiences.  I do not know what those
values are, or why they are what they are, but I have to acknowledge
that they are valid.  

When people like Joe Ragosta attack values that have led to a decision
that is different from the one they have made it does seem to upset
us.  Apparently price is not important to Joe when it come to
computers.  Nor is the fact that the Mac does take considerable time
to master (not the easy stuff - to master all the nuances).  By not
acknowledging that the values of others are valid Joe is invading a
very personal space, and questioning things that most people regard as
sacred.  Basically he is saying that HIS values are more valid than
others, and that he wants to impose those values on you.  Truthfully
now, don't you find that a bit objectionable?

So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
kind of world would it be without those differences?

Tom 
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 1:47:53 PM
comp.sys.mac.advocacy 34242 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

86 Replies
830 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 48

In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
> to stop the silliness.
MANY, MANY WORDS SNIPPED
> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
> kind of world would it be without those differences?
> 
> Tom 

Cripes.  This is a man with way too much time on his hands.

-- 
Cheers,

Bob S
0
Bob_S (487)
4/18/2005 1:57:58 PM
In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]

> 
> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question

Good. Now go away. 

> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> real value to its users.  

No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
the Mac.

AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 2:01:30 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:57:58 GMT, Bob S <Bob_S@NoSpam.Com> wrote:

>In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
>> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
>> to stop the silliness.
>MANY, MANY WORDS SNIPPED
>> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
>> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
>> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
>> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
>> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
>> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
>> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
>> kind of world would it be without those differences?
>> 
>> Tom 
>
>Cripes.  This is a man with way too much time on his hands.

Retirement is a wonderful thing, it does change the amount of time you
have to play.

Tom

0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 2:04:15 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:01:30 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]

Joey, everything we do is rationalization.  You seem to regard think
that everything is absolute.  It's not.  Have a great day.

Tom

>
>> 
>> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
>> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
>
>Good. Now go away. 
>
>> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
>> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
>> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
>> real value to its users.  
>
>No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
>use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
>the Mac.
>
>AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
>you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.

0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 2:06:18 PM
In article <9kf7611ljkr6amoeu34e32omr71ae4nl5b@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:01:30 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]
> 
> Joey, everything we do is rationalization.  You seem to regard think
> that everything is absolute.  It's not.  Have a great day.
> 
> Tom
> 
> >
> >> 
> >> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> >> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> >
> >Good. Now go away. 
> >
> >> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> >> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> >> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> >> real value to its users.  
> >
> >No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
> >use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
> >the Mac.
> >
> >AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
> >you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.

I noticed that you haven't responded to any of the content of my post. 
Why is that?
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 2:10:51 PM
>Why is that? 

Seen Tom's new boat?

www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg

0
imouttahere (3635)
4/18/2005 2:20:18 PM
In article <1113834018.871451.271810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
 imouttahere@mac.com wrote:

> >Why is that? 
> 
> Seen Tom's new boat?
> 
> www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg

I don't think so.

Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
boat probably looks more like:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00005C0Y7/ref=dp_product-image-o
nly_0/103-2942795-0291832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=585496&s=imaginarium
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 2:43:13 PM
Tom Elam wrote:
> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
> to stop the silliness.
> 
> Choices, we all have to make them.  Even more fundamentally, we are
> making choices every moment.  By reading this post, you are making a
> choice.  The brand of computer and the software you are using are also
> choices.  Every aspect of your life that led to the present moment is
> the consequence of past choices.  Choice is even more certain than
> death and taxes, those after all also represent choices we make.
> (Yes, death is a choice, at least as long as you are alive.)
> 
> If choices are so basic, then how do we make them?  The process is not
> simple.  Each choice we make is a complex decision with many possible
> alternatives.  In most cases, out of all the possibilities we only get
> to take one.  How do we sort through those and choose that one that is
> "best"?
> 
> In economics we teach a simple decision model that has enormous power
> to explain how humans make decisions.  It rests on a few common sense
> assumptions:  1) we are rational, that is we decide based on what we
> regard is the best for us at that moment; 2) diminishing returns
> apply, that is the more we have of something, the less we enjoy one
> more unit of that item per fixed unit of time; 3) we make decisions on
> the margin, that is we consider what one additional unit of something
> is worth; 4) resources (time and income) are limited.
> 
> Though not part of the model, we know that the values upon which
> choices are made are different for different people.  We also know
> that those values can change over time as we assimilate new
> information and experiences. 
> 
> (Rich and poor alike, we all have the same problems.  Bill Gates and
> Steve Jobs may be richer than me, and their range of choice may be
> much wider, but at the end of the day they nonetheless have to make
> choices.  Besides, even if they have more money, they still don't have
> more time.  I find that to be very satisfying to ponder)
> 
> Based on those assumptions it is trivially easy to show that the
> optimum set of decisions result when we choose to allocate time and
> money so that every dollar of income and every second of time is spent
> so as to equalize the marginal amount of satisfaction receive from
> every one of those dollars and seconds.  This is also a  logically
> simple result - if any one choice gives us more satisfaction on the
> margin than any other choice we could increase satisfaction by buying
> or doing less of something and more of the choice with a higher
> marginal value.
> 
> If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
> decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
> complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."  The
> values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
> personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
> explains why the arguments get so heated - the values placed on the
> differences are very different for different people, and we do not
> like it when people try to tell us what our values "should" be.
> 
> In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
> a computer, and more.  Furthermore, I have worked with Windows since
> version 3.0, and I know how to use the OS and Windows-based programs.
> Since Windows 2000 came out the stability and hardware compatibility
> have both improved significantly.  In other words, Windows works in my
> personal situation.  But it is certainly not the only choice I could
> make.
> 
> When I look at the Mac I see a machine that would take significant
> amounts of time to master, and can also cost as much as 3x a Windows
> machine that would do the same job for me.  I know, I once owned an
> iMac for 6 months, so I speak from experience.
> 
> So for me the decision is easy.  I can have a machine that will do all
> the work I need from a computer, do it reliably and efficiently, and
> at a cost that is much less than a Mac.  That decision frees up
> significant amounts of my limited income to do other things with.  
> 
> (Even if the Mac were the same price as a Windows machine I might also
> stick with Windows rather spend time to learn another OS. For me,
> Linux, with its complexity and hardware/software compatibility issues,
> is not even worth considering.  Besides, in my situation Windows is,
> like Linux, freeware.)
> 
> Mac fans, at least in my perception, come from a very different set of
> underlying values and life experiences.  I do not know what those
> values are, or why they are what they are, but I have to acknowledge
> that they are valid.  
> 
> When people like Joe Ragosta attack values that have led to a decision
> that is different from the one they have made it does seem to upset
> us.  Apparently price is not important to Joe when it come to
> computers.  Nor is the fact that the Mac does take considerable time
> to master (not the easy stuff - to master all the nuances).  By not
> acknowledging that the values of others are valid Joe is invading a
> very personal space, and questioning things that most people regard as
> sacred.  Basically he is saying that HIS values are more valid than
> others, and that he wants to impose those values on you.  Truthfully
> now, don't you find that a bit objectionable?
> 
> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
> kind of world would it be without those differences?
> 
> Tom 

Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/18/2005 3:35:49 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:43:13 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>I don't think so.
>
>Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
>boat probably looks more like:

Typical Mac user attitude.  If you cannot attack the decision, attack
the decision maker.  Weak, weak, response.  Pitiful, really.

Just goes to  show; my argument is airtight, the logic is impeccable,
and the critics have nothing to add.

Tom
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 3:36:12 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:01:30 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]
>
>> 
>> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
>> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
>
>Good. Now go away. 
>
>> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
>> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
>> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
>> real value to its users.  
>
>No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
>use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
>the Mac.

Good for them.  If they want to spend the extra money for something
that, within their framework of personal values, gives them
satisfaction, then this is exactly what they should do.  The fact that
I don't want to spend that money for something I don't want is also
OK.

>
>AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
>you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.

You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.

So Joe, take your pompous, Mac-loving at any cost attitude, and shove
it where the sun don't shine

<deep breath> That felt good.

Tom
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 3:45:32 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:


>
>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>
>Nicolas

It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
deflect the argument.

T~
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 3:49:45 PM
In article <hvk761tin11r8p1g6op26ktd87j5ci0p27@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:01:30 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]
> >
> >> 
> >> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> >> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> >
> >Good. Now go away. 
> >
> >> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> >> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> >> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> >> real value to its users.  
> >
> >No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
> >use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
> >the Mac.
> 
> Good for them.  If they want to spend the extra money for something
> that, within their framework of personal values, gives them
> satisfaction, then this is exactly what they should do.  The fact that
> I don't want to spend that money for something I don't want is also
> OK.
> 
> >
> >AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
> >you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
> 
> You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
> as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
> subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
> do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
> things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
> is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.

Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
which completely negates your allegation.

> 
> So Joe, take your pompous, Mac-loving at any cost attitude, and shove
> it where the sun don't shine

I see you've given up even pretending to be ratianal.

> 
> <deep breath> That felt good.

Making yourself look stupid makes you feel good? Whatever.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 3:51:07 PM
In article <krk76115hvq2iu0ndup91uv6rebsoqlvrm@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:43:13 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >I don't think so.
> >
> >Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
> >boat probably looks more like:
> 
> Typical Mac user attitude.  If you cannot attack the decision, attack
> the decision maker.  Weak, weak, response.  Pitiful, really.
> 
> Just goes to  show; my argument is airtight, the logic is impeccable,
> and the critics have nothing to add.

ROTFLMAO.

Then your job is done. Go away.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 3:51:37 PM
In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >
> >Nicolas
> 
> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.

No one's attacked your personal value paradigm.

You came to comp.sys.mac.advocacy to repeatedly post prices for the 
computer that you like and taunted Mac users with it. You insist that 
we're overpaying for our computers. 

Seems to me that YOU are the one not respecting the values of others 
here.

> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> deflect the argument.

Then why are you doing that?
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 4:00:40 PM
I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product, it 
is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why he 
uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????

"Tom Elam" <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote in message 
news:md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com...
> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
> to stop the silliness.
>
> Choices, we all have to make them.  Even more fundamentally, we are
> making choices every moment.  By reading this post, you are making a
> choice.  The brand of computer and the software you are using are also
> choices.  Every aspect of your life that led to the present moment is
> the consequence of past choices.  Choice is even more certain than
> death and taxes, those after all also represent choices we make.
> (Yes, death is a choice, at least as long as you are alive.)
>
> If choices are so basic, then how do we make them?  The process is not
> simple.  Each choice we make is a complex decision with many possible
> alternatives.  In most cases, out of all the possibilities we only get
> to take one.  How do we sort through those and choose that one that is
> "best"?
>
> In economics we teach a simple decision model that has enormous power
> to explain how humans make decisions.  It rests on a few common sense
> assumptions:  1) we are rational, that is we decide based on what we
> regard is the best for us at that moment; 2) diminishing returns
> apply, that is the more we have of something, the less we enjoy one
> more unit of that item per fixed unit of time; 3) we make decisions on
> the margin, that is we consider what one additional unit of something
> is worth; 4) resources (time and income) are limited.
>
> Though not part of the model, we know that the values upon which
> choices are made are different for different people.  We also know
> that those values can change over time as we assimilate new
> information and experiences.
>
> (Rich and poor alike, we all have the same problems.  Bill Gates and
> Steve Jobs may be richer than me, and their range of choice may be
> much wider, but at the end of the day they nonetheless have to make
> choices.  Besides, even if they have more money, they still don't have
> more time.  I find that to be very satisfying to ponder)
>
> Based on those assumptions it is trivially easy to show that the
> optimum set of decisions result when we choose to allocate time and
> money so that every dollar of income and every second of time is spent
> so as to equalize the marginal amount of satisfaction receive from
> every one of those dollars and seconds.  This is also a  logically
> simple result - if any one choice gives us more satisfaction on the
> margin than any other choice we could increase satisfaction by buying
> or doing less of something and more of the choice with a higher
> marginal value.
>
> If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
> decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
> complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."  The
> values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
> personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
> explains why the arguments get so heated - the values placed on the
> differences are very different for different people, and we do not
> like it when people try to tell us what our values "should" be.
>
> In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
> a computer, and more.  Furthermore, I have worked with Windows since
> version 3.0, and I know how to use the OS and Windows-based programs.
> Since Windows 2000 came out the stability and hardware compatibility
> have both improved significantly.  In other words, Windows works in my
> personal situation.  But it is certainly not the only choice I could
> make.
>
> When I look at the Mac I see a machine that would take significant
> amounts of time to master, and can also cost as much as 3x a Windows
> machine that would do the same job for me.  I know, I once owned an
> iMac for 6 months, so I speak from experience.
>
> So for me the decision is easy.  I can have a machine that will do all
> the work I need from a computer, do it reliably and efficiently, and
> at a cost that is much less than a Mac.  That decision frees up
> significant amounts of my limited income to do other things with.
>
> (Even if the Mac were the same price as a Windows machine I might also
> stick with Windows rather spend time to learn another OS. For me,
> Linux, with its complexity and hardware/software compatibility issues,
> is not even worth considering.  Besides, in my situation Windows is,
> like Linux, freeware.)
>
> Mac fans, at least in my perception, come from a very different set of
> underlying values and life experiences.  I do not know what those
> values are, or why they are what they are, but I have to acknowledge
> that they are valid.
>
> When people like Joe Ragosta attack values that have led to a decision
> that is different from the one they have made it does seem to upset
> us.  Apparently price is not important to Joe when it come to
> computers.  Nor is the fact that the Mac does take considerable time
> to master (not the easy stuff - to master all the nuances).  By not
> acknowledging that the values of others are valid Joe is invading a
> very personal space, and questioning things that most people regard as
> sacred.  Basically he is saying that HIS values are more valid than
> others, and that he wants to impose those values on you.  Truthfully
> now, don't you find that a bit objectionable?
>
> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
> kind of world would it be without those differences?
>
> Tom 


0
anzio515 (34)
4/18/2005 4:12:06 PM
Yes Tom,
I'm retired also.  When people ask my brother how I'm doing he says "great, 
he's retired in Florida and has a lot of fun "Trolling"".  It's amusing how 
a few simple words get so many Peckerheads going.  Keep layin out the bait.

"Tom Elam" <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote in message 
news:mhf7611rsdsioeocmsqhh0i3jqtn0slpf7@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:57:58 GMT, Bob S <Bob_S@NoSpam.Com> wrote:
>
>>In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
>> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
>>> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
>>> to stop the silliness.
>>MANY, MANY WORDS SNIPPED
>>> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
>>> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
>>> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
>>> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
>>> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
>>> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
>>> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
>>> kind of world would it be without those differences?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>
>>Cripes.  This is a man with way too much time on his hands.
>
> Retirement is a wonderful thing, it does change the amount of time you
> have to play.
>
> Tom
> 


0
anzio515 (34)
4/18/2005 4:15:35 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
wrote:

>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product, it 
>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why he 
>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????

True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.

Tom 
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 4:26:09 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:51:07 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:


>> >AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
>> >you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
>> 
>> You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
>> as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
>> subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
>> do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
>> things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
>> is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.
>
>Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
>about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
>around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
>claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
>which completely negates your allegation.
>
>> 
So Joe, do you deny this exchange between you  and  imouttahere?

In article <1113834018.871451.271810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
@mac.com wrote:

> >Why is that? 
> 
> Seen Tom's new boat?
> 
> www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg

I don't think so.

Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
boat probably looks more like:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00005C0Y7/ref=dp_product-image-o
nly_0/103-2942795-0291832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=585496&s=imaginarium

Tom
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 4:29:29 PM
In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >
> >Nicolas
> 
> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.


LOL! That's right, Tom, *you're* the victim here... you were tracked 
down and shot between the eyes:)

> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> facts in front of their face, 


Facts like people will pay more for a system they deem superior?

> and resort to personal attacks to
> deflect the argument.
> 
> T~

Look below, you'll see your positive acknowledgment of decisions based 
on perceived value and the satisfaction derived from that value:


"If they want to spend the extra money for something
that, within their framework of personal values, gives them
satisfaction, then this is exactly what they should do."

You also wrote this:

"Typical Mac user attitude.  If you cannot attack the decision, attack
the decision maker.  Weak, weak, response.  Pitiful, really."

Being that you're obviously in csma to attack the decisions of those 
that purchased a Mac, I'd love to hear how you propose to attack  
decisions you see as being derived from the satisfaction based on the 
framework of one's personal values without attacking the decision maker.

-- 
"What makes you think I am interested in "winning" a discussion?" - Snit

Steve
0
noone3 (3603)
4/18/2005 4:37:12 PM
> Being that you're obviously in csma to attack the decisions of those 
> that purchased a Mac, I'd love to hear how you propose to attack  
> decisions you see as being derived from the satisfaction based on the 
> framework of one's personal values without attacking the decision
maker.

Do you ever do anything but troll and attack people?

0
yobo_obyo (111)
4/18/2005 4:53:46 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
wrote:

>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
product,
it 
>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
he 
>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????

>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.

If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
would be to ask why and see if you agree.

0
yobo_obyo (111)
4/18/2005 5:03:23 PM
> I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product,
it

> is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
he

> uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????

Have you asked how they are better?  Have you used one to judge for
yourself?

0
yobo_obyo (111)
4/18/2005 5:06:04 PM
In article 
<36cabc2ceb787ae458931bab068464a5@localhost.talkaboutmac.com>,
 "Yobo_Obyo" <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product,
> it
> 
> > is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
> he
> 
> > uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
> 
> Have you asked how they are better?  Have you used one to judge for
> yourself?

Shut up, Snit.

-- 
"What makes you think I am interested in "winning" a discussion?" - Snit

Steve
0
noone3 (3603)
4/18/2005 5:07:50 PM
In article <70o7619jr3vqu5hp8jnmcj911qor2mn61p@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:51:07 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> 
> >> >AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
> >> >you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
> >> 
> >> You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
> >> as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
> >> subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
> >> do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
> >> things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
> >> is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.
> >
> >Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
> >about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
> >around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
> >claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
> >which completely negates your allegation.
> >
> >> 
> So Joe, do you deny this exchange between you  and  imouttahere?
> 
> In article <1113834018.871451.271810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> @mac.com wrote:
> 
> > >Why is that? 
> > 
> > Seen Tom's new boat?
> > 
> > www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
> boat probably looks more like:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00005C0Y7/ref=dp_product-image-o
> nly_0/103-2942795-0291832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=585496&s=imaginarium
> 
> Tom

Of course I don't deny it.

If you're going to spend all your time posting cheapo systems that are 
supposed to impress me, it's entirely within my rights to make fun of 
you.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/18/2005 5:37:17 PM
in article md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com, Tom Elam at
tom_elam@earthlink.net wrote on 4/18/05 6:47 AM:

> The battle has raged for years, inside the sacred virtual halls of
> CSMA and beyond, over who has the best computer platform.  It's time
> to stop the silliness.

What about people who come here asking for the pros and cons of each
platform in order to make a purchase decision?  People are spending lots of
money to buy something that they'll spend lots of time with.  I don't think
the issue itself is silly, but if you do (no offense) but why are you here?
 
[snip]
> If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
> decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
> complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."  The
> values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
> personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
> explains why the arguments get so heated - the values placed on the
> differences are very different for different people, and we do not
> like it when people try to tell us what our values "should" be.

I totally agree.  We see this here all the time, and to be honest it's a
hard trap not to fall into when advocating pretty much anything.
 
> In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
> a computer, and more.  Furthermore, I have worked with Windows since
> version 3.0, and I know how to use the OS and Windows-based programs.
> Since Windows 2000 came out the stability and hardware compatibility
> have both improved significantly.  In other words, Windows works in my
> personal situation.  But it is certainly not the only choice I could
> make.
> 
> When I look at the Mac I see a machine that would take significant
> amounts of time to master, and can also cost as much as 3x a Windows
> machine that would do the same job for me.  I know, I once owned an
> iMac for 6 months, so I speak from experience.

While this may be true, and I can't argue against what you wrote without
further information, it stands as a generic argument without context.  IOW
would any person or most people find the above to be true for themselves?
When put in that context, I would disagree...both with the 3x cost and with
what I think you're implying in that the Mac would take more time to master
than Windows.
 
> So for me the decision is easy.  I can have a machine that will do all
> the work I need from a computer, do it reliably and efficiently, and
> at a cost that is much less than a Mac.  That decision frees up
> significant amounts of my limited income to do other things with.
[snip]
> 
> Mac fans, at least in my perception, come from a very different set of
> underlying values and life experiences.  I do not know what those
> values are, or why they are what they are, but I have to acknowledge
> that they are valid.

Yep, and without understanding the context of your decisions, it seems
likely your decision was valid.  However, a generic "PCs cost lest than Macs
and can allow you to do the same things just as easily" is something that I
would argue is not always, and even not usually true.

While your decision may be valid, I've witnessed far too many friends,
co-workers, family members, and customers/clients who made the similar
decision and witnessed numerous problems they encountered, inability to do
what would be easy on the Mac, and ultimately spend far more money over time
compared to people I know in similar situations who purchased Macs.

> When people like Joe Ragosta attack values that have led to a decision
> that is different from the one they have made it does seem to upset
> us.  Apparently price is not important to Joe when it come to
> computers.  Nor is the fact that the Mac does take considerable time
> to master (not the easy stuff - to master all the nuances).  By not
> acknowledging that the values of others are valid Joe is invading a
> very personal space, and questioning things that most people regard as
> sacred.  Basically he is saying that HIS values are more valid than
> others, and that he wants to impose those values on you.  Truthfully
> now, don't you find that a bit objectionable?

I can't speak for Joe, but I can say here that you made the assumption that
a Mac would cost more and again, it appears that you are implying the Mac
would take more time to master.

My experience has come from both being a Mac and PC user from the beginning,
and having a lot of involvement with consulting and observing many people
switching from one to the other.

What I'm getting at here is that it's one thing to say people have different
values and say for some people (gamers for example) PCs are better, but it's
another thing to point out specific values and assign one platform as the
better choice when those decisions are debatable...such as 3x cost and
master-ability.

For me, PCs are infinitely cheaper...I've always gotten them for free, and
always paid for my Macs (except for some loaners).  However the
master-ability for Macs is so much greater for me, that the value of that
makes it worth spending the money on the Mac.  For others, like my brother,
he bought a Mac mini because it was *CHEAPER* than buying a PC and upon
buying it discovered that despite having knowledge of PCs, he found the Mac
easier to use...especially for what he wanted (iLife stuff...audio, video,
photos).

> So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
> a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
> that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
> should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
> including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
> real value to its users.  We should all celebrate the fact that there
> are available to us real choices based on real differences.   What
> kind of world would it be without those differences?

I can't explain or even understand why Windows advocates are here, but for
Maccies, there are a couple of top reasons that seem to come to mind:
1) Many Maccies truly love the platform and/or the company.  I know a lot of
people think this is totally bizarre and point out that computers are just
tools.  However, what these people are missing is that Mac users who *love*
the platform, are most often love what the Mac enables them to do.  Imagine
the reaction if we could make a list of everything doable on a Mac, and then
go back in time and tell us that there was a device that would enable us to
do these things.  While the same things are doable on a PC, we Maccies most
often find the results inferior and the process far more arduous.

2) Our preference for the Mac over PCs is so great and the prospect of not
being able to use a Mac is so unappealing that we desire a forum for which
to express the reasons why we don't want to be confronted with our choice
being removed.  As Mac market share grows, I would expect more Mac advocates
to come in here...but many of us will leave as there is no longer the fear
that we may be without our Mac in the future.  As it stands now, there is
long term Mac viability, but there is still the issue of going to work
somewhere and having an IT department dictate that you'll have a PC.

Then again, with all the circus shenanigans going on here (even in this
thread) I do have to consider what the point is of being here.  For the most
part, what I get out of it is venting about all the issues I have with using
PCs (as I use one daily), and the occasional news or recommendation that has
some value.

0
OhNoSpam2 (107)
4/18/2005 5:37:43 PM
Yes,
I don't see any difference - I've posted that before.  I have a couple of 
Mac Head relatives who force the Apple /IBM issue down my throat at every 
opportunity.  I wonder why.  Do they believe in safety in numbers.  They 
also stupidly say " IBM "stole" the operating system from Apple". What 
Bullshit.

"Yobo_Obyo" <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:36cabc2ceb787ae458931bab068464a5@localhost.talkaboutmac.com...
>> I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product,
> it
>
>> is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
> he
>
>> uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>
> Have you asked how they are better?  Have you used one to judge for
> yourself?
> 


0
anzio515 (34)
4/18/2005 5:57:10 PM
PS:

they also get a glazed look in their eyes when my "shitty IBM' machine can 
do ANYTHING that their Macs can do.


"balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:FrS8e.80399$f%4.66529@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Yes,
> I don't see any difference - I've posted that before.  I have a couple of 
> Mac Head relatives who force the Apple /IBM issue down my throat at every 
> opportunity.  I wonder why.  Do they believe in safety in numbers.  They 
> also stupidly say " IBM "stole" the operating system from Apple". What 
> Bullshit.
>
> "Yobo_Obyo" <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:36cabc2ceb787ae458931bab068464a5@localhost.talkaboutmac.com...
>>> I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a product,
>> it
>>
>>> is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
>> he
>>
>>> uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>>
>> Have you asked how they are better?  Have you used one to judge for
>> yourself?
>>
>
> 


0
anzio515 (34)
4/18/2005 6:05:57 PM
In article <TzS8e.80432$f%4.15368@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
 "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com> wrote:

> PS:
> 
> they also get a glazed look in their eyes when my "shitty IBM' machine can 
> do ANYTHING that their Macs can do.

Let's see your IBM do 100+ tracks on Digital Performer or run Altiverb.

-- 
"What makes you think I am interested in "winning" a discussion?" - Snit

Steve
0
noone3 (3603)
4/18/2005 6:20:06 PM
In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >
> >Nicolas
> 
> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> deflect the argument.
> 
> T~

But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the 
other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't 
generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers. 

OTOH, you, edwin, slade and a few others go far out of your way to come 
to this ng just to bash Macs.

That's a subtlety that isn't so obsecure as to be lost on even you.

-- 
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
 expecting that he will get nothing in return!"
0
jpolaski4 (3157)
4/18/2005 6:28:01 PM
Jim Polaski wrote:
> In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> > >
> > >Nicolas
> >
> > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
paradigm.
> > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> > deflect the argument.
> >
> > T~
>
> But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.

Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.

> It's not the
> other way around by any stretch of your imagination.

Unless you feel like being honest.   Maccie Wintel bashers don't limit
themselves to the Usenet groups, they carry their 'war' to the general
press too.

> Mac users don't
> generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of
computers.

That just about nullifies any chance you had of being accused of
honesty...

> OTOH, you, edwin, slade and a few others go far out of your way to
come
> to this ng just to bash Macs.

We go far out of our way?   All that's required is subscribing to a
Usenet group with our news reader client.   How did you get here, by
pushing a boulder with your nose?   I ask for information only.

> That's a subtlety that isn't so obsecure as to be lost on even you.

The slow-witted Jim Polaski needs something explained to him for the
umpteenth time:  some of us (like me) started out having a Mac, and
switched to the PC, but stayed in the group.  Others were brought to
this group by the cross-posting MacTrolls you deny the existence of.

0
thorne25 (21019)
4/18/2005 6:44:48 PM
Edwin wrote:
> Jim Polaski wrote:
> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> > > >
> > > >Nicolas
> > >
> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> paradigm.
> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to
acknowledge
> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> > > deflect the argument.
> > >
> > > T~
> >
> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
>
> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
>
> > It's not the
> > other way around by any stretch of your imagination.
>
> Unless you feel like being honest.   Maccie Wintel bashers don't
limit
> themselves to the Usenet groups, they carry their 'war' to the
general
> press too.

Examples? And, don't Windroid Mac bashers do the same thing?
>
> > Mac users don't
> > generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of
> computers.
>
> That just about nullifies any chance you had of being accused of
> honesty...

Can you give examples that prove him wrong? To do so, it seems you
would have to point out threads that were initiated by a Maccie in a
windows ng, or where a Maccie added a Windows ng to an existing thread.
It doesn't seem like it should count to have a Maccie reply to a thread
that is already cross-posted to Windows newsgroups.

BTW, I will admit that Oxford does troll the linux newsgroups, and he
has been asked not to do so, by Maccies. Any examples of Maccies who
troll the Windows newsgroups?
>
> > OTOH, you, edwin, slade and a few others go far out of your way to
> come
> > to this ng just to bash Macs.
>
> We go far out of our way?   All that's required is subscribing to a
> Usenet group with our news reader client.   How did you get here, by
> pushing a boulder with your nose?   I ask for information only.
>
> > That's a subtlety that isn't so obsecure as to be lost on even you.
>
> The slow-witted Jim Polaski needs something explained to him for the
> umpteenth time:  some of us (like me) started out having a Mac, and
> switched to the PC, but stayed in the group.  Others were brought to
> this group by the cross-posting MacTrolls you deny the existence of.

So, give examples. 

--
Dave Fritzinger

0
dfritzin (3022)
4/18/2005 7:18:52 PM
Tom Elam wrote:

> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.

And just what is that?

>Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> deflect the argument.

Yes, that can indeed be frustrating.


FWIW, in trying to sort out your personal value paradigm as it relates
here, I've gone back to your original post in this thread:

"In economics we teach a simple decision model that has enormous power
to explain how humans make decisions.  It rests on a few common sense
assumptions:  1) we are rational...

Simple models belie complex questions.  For example, there's also the
aspect as to how the decision is presented, as it relates to potential
risk aversion:

http://www.bized.ac.uk/learn/economics/nobel/2002.htm

BTW, please note that this states:

"We make our judgements based on incomplete analysis of the situation
because we have incomplete knowledge."

As an example of incomplete knowledge, we've seen within the past
fortnight the lack of good metrics on Total Cost of Ownership (TCO),
which trashes all claims of "PC's are cheaper" being quantitatively
verifyable, but yet the claim is made again and again...or more
accurately, we get a claim that is really only HALF of what's needed
(eg, a claim of just its  purchase cost instead of the estimated
lifecycle cost).


"If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."

True.  FWIW, I assume that your "today" includes all of the legacy
factors that invariably contribute their piece:  you mention this
yourself with your opinions about potentially having to re-learn the OS
(eg, you have an installed legacy investment in a particular OS that is
contributing to the value determination).

"The values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
explains why the arguments get so heated..."

Actually, that's only a half (maybe a third) of the underlying problem.
 People tend to be very resistant to the results of objective bottom-up
analysis.   For example, I've participated in professional working
groups where a room full of subject matter experts discuss the
pro's/con's of specific characteristics and come to a concensis vote
(using one of those electronic voting systems - - I forget the actual
product name) to say if A is more important than B, etc, etc...a full,
long day of professional-grade interactive priority ranking of specific
characteristics.

At the end of the day, the "black box" does the math (which is actually
quite simple) and spits out the team's overall priority ranking based
on all of their low-level, detailed, in-the-weeds, no-kiddin work.
Upon seeing the results, half the team promptly declared that it is
"WRONG".

In other words, their detailed rankings were individually objective,
but when summarized, since it failed to match their preconceived
notions of what the conclusion _should_ have been, so they tried to
change their votes so that the tool's output would "validate" their
preconceived notions instead of force them to confront them.

The analogy here is that we can unfortunately expect to have extremist
claims on individual weighting factors as an attempt to slant the
comparison in a fashion that is considered "more favorable" for that
particular individual, so as to justify their predetermined conclusion.
 For example, we've seen this at times with the costs claimed for a DIY
assembly, which have often been listed as exactly -zero- dollars.


"In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
a computer, and more."

Same here, as does a Mac or a Linux box.  But it doesn't explain why I
prefer Filet Mignon with a Stella over Purina Dog Chow and a Falstaff
for satisfying my 'basic nutritional needs' :-)


-hh

0
4/18/2005 9:10:25 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
<yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
>product,
>it 
>>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
>he 
>>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>
>>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
>>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
>>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
>>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
>>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
>
>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
>would be to ask why and see if you agree.


I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 11:28:31 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:20:06 -0600, Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>In article <TzS8e.80432$f%4.15368@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
> "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> PS:
>> 
>> they also get a glazed look in their eyes when my "shitty IBM' machine can 
>> do ANYTHING that their Macs can do.
>
>Let's see your IBM do 100+ tracks on Digital Performer or run Altiverb.

Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).


0
tom_elam (3218)
4/18/2005 11:29:54 PM
>Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).

Why the stipulation, Tommy? If Flightsoft is perfectly usable on a G5,
then you argument is totally fucked, other than 'PCs is de cheapest'
which we already know.

0
imouttahere (3635)
4/19/2005 12:38:57 AM
In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
> <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
> >product,
> >it 
> >>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
> >he 
> >>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
> >
> >>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
> >>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
> >>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
> >>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
> >>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
> >
> >If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
> >would be to ask why and see if you agree.
> 
> 
> I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
> overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.

You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the 
house when she dumped you.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 1:00:51 AM
In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
 "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> Jim Polaski wrote:
> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> > > >
> > > >Nicolas
> > >
> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> paradigm.
> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> > > deflect the argument.
> > >
> > > T~
> >
> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
> 
> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.

Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his "personal 
value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.

<snip>

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
0
alangbaker (17682)
4/19/2005 8:18:28 AM
Tom Elam wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>>
>>Nicolas
> 
> 
> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.

That's because he has no values. The Holy Church of Jobs (TM) is devoid 
of a value system.


> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> deflect the argument.

AFAIC, it's the hypocrisy and the double speak that is so Ragosta.
Noticed how absolute and intransigent he is even with fellow Mac users? 
It's pathetic.

Nicolas


> 
> T~
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 10:14:51 AM
TravelinMan wrote:
> In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>>>
>>>Nicolas
>>
>>It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> 
> 
> No one's attacked your personal value paradigm.
> 
> You came to comp.sys.mac.advocacy to repeatedly post prices for the 
> computer that you like and taunted Mac users with it. You insist that 
> we're overpaying for our computers. 
> 
> Seems to me that YOU are the one not respecting the values of others 
> here.
> 
> 
>>Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>>facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>>deflect the argument.
> 
> 
> Then why are you doing that?


Attacking? He was merely expressing his point of view. He has a lot more 
class than you'll ever have, Ragosta.

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 10:17:14 AM
TravelinMan wrote:
> In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
>><yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
>>>
>>>product,
>>>it 
>>>
>>>>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
>>>
>>>he 
>>>
>>>>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>>>
>>>>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
>>>>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
>>>>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
>>>>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
>>>>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
>>>
>>>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
>>>would be to ask why and see if you agree.
>>
>>
>>I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
>>overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
> 
> 
> You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the 
> house when she dumped you.

I'm surprised you're even married, given your attitude and tendencies to 
attack others character, such as with what you just posted.
Your spouse must be very patient or she's screwing around behind your back.

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 10:27:58 AM
NashtOn wrote:
> I'm surprised you're even married, given your attitude and tendencies
to
> attack others character, such as with what you just posted.
> Your spouse must be very patient or she's screwing around behind your
back.

You are one piece of work, Nicky, one piece of work.

And you consider yourself a Christian. Feh.

0
imouttahere (3635)
4/19/2005 10:46:09 AM
TravelinMan wrote:
> In article <hvk761tin11r8p1g6op26ktd87j5ci0p27@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:01:30 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <md9761trr060urdi33i5hfg5ufsl0cbqcv@4ax.com>,
>>>Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip of Tommy's self-rationalization]
>>>
>>>
>>>>So Maccies, go forth and spend you time and income as you see fit.  If
>>>>a buying a Mac is worth the extra money to you, no one should question
>>>
>>>Good. Now go away. 
>>>
>>>
>>>>that.  Nor should you feel the need to justify your decision.  Neither
>>>>should you question the fact that the Windows PC has its advantages,
>>>>including a much lower initial cost, and that Windows is delivering
>>>>real value to its users.  
>>>
>>>No Mac user I know ever denied that. After all, most Mac users have to 
>>>use Windows at least some of the time. Many of us buy both - yet prefer 
>>>the Mac.
>>
>>Good for them.  If they want to spend the extra money for something
>>that, within their framework of personal values, gives them
>>satisfaction, then this is exactly what they should do.  The fact that
>>I don't want to spend that money for something I don't want is also
>>OK.
>>
>>
>>>AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
>>>you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
>>
>>You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
>>as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
>>subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
>>do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
>>things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
>>is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.
> 
> 
> Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
> about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
> around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
> claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
> which completely negates your allegation.

So the Ragosta believes that it's not what you say, it's where you say it.
He believes that he can belittle Windows users, as long as it's within 
the confines of csma.
And nobody goes around arbitrarily (sic) attacking the Mac, it's your 
stupidity most are trying, with little effort, to expound.


> 
> 
>>So Joe, take your pompous, Mac-loving at any cost attitude, and shove
>>it where the sun don't shine
> 
> 
> I see you've given up even pretending to be ratianal.

Quite the comeback, fanboi.

> 
> 
>><deep breath> That felt good.
> 
> 
> Making yourself look stupid makes you feel good? Whatever.

The irony.

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 10:49:35 AM
TravelinMan wrote:
> In article <70o7619jr3vqu5hp8jnmcj911qor2mn61p@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:51:07 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
>>>>>you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
>>>>
>>>>You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
>>>>as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
>>>>subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
>>>>do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
>>>>things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
>>>>is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.
>>>
>>>Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
>>>about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
>>>around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
>>>claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
>>>which completely negates your allegation.
>>>
>>>
>>So Joe, do you deny this exchange between you  and  imouttahere?
>>
>>In article <1113834018.871451.271810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>@mac.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Why is that? 
>>>
>>>Seen Tom's new boat?
>>>
>>>www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg
>>
>>I don't think so.
>>
>>Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
>>boat probably looks more like:
>>
>>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00005C0Y7/ref=dp_product-image-o
>>nly_0/103-2942795-0291832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=585496&s=imaginarium
>>
>>Tom
> 
> 
> Of course I don't deny it.
> 
> If you're going to spend all your time posting cheapo systems that are 
> supposed to impress me, it's entirely within my rights to make fun of 
> you.

It's entirely within your rights to expose your fanaticism also, which 
you accomplish with flair.

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 11:01:31 AM
imouttahere@mac.com wrote:
> NashtOn wrote:
> 
>>I'm surprised you're even married, given your attitude and tendencies
> 
> to
> 
>>attack others character, such as with what you just posted.
>>Your spouse must be very patient or she's screwing around behind your
> 
> back.
> 
> You are one piece of work, Nicky, one piece of work.
> 
> And you consider yourself a Christian. Feh.
> 

What does my poking fun at Ragosta have to do with my religious views?

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 11:03:12 AM
In article <fy59e.16568$Ln.766020@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:

> TravelinMan wrote:
> > In article <70o7619jr3vqu5hp8jnmcj911qor2mn61p@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:51:07 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>AND, you'll notice that Mac users aren't over in COMA spreading FUD like 
> >>>>>you and your Windroid buddies are doing here.
> >>>>
> >>>>You, Joe, are the king of FUD.  When you stop assaulting Windows users
> >>>>as cheap, irresponsible, know-nothings I'll go away.  Within the
> >>>>subset of tasks I need done my computer can do anything that yours can
> >>>>do.  Yours may do things this one will not, and mine will do a few
> >>>>things yours will not, and that is OK.  In fact it is more than OK, it
> >>>>is totally irrelevant to the point at hand.
> >>>
> >>>Except for one thing - I don't go to a Windows advocacy group to talk 
> >>>about the Mac or slam Windows users. Even here, I don't arbitrarily go 
> >>>around calling Windows users 'cheap, irresponsible know-nothings' as you 
> >>>claimed. In fact, I've repeatedly said that Mac users also use Windows - 
> >>>which completely negates your allegation.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>So Joe, do you deny this exchange between you  and  imouttahere?
> >>
> >>In article <1113834018.871451.271810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >>@mac.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Why is that? 
> >>>
> >>>Seen Tom's new boat?
> >>>
> >>>www.fishinfrenzy.com/idx.troll.jpg
> >>
> >>I don't think so.
> >>
> >>Given how he keeps bragging that he can't afford a real computer, his 
> >>boat probably looks more like:
> >>
> >>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00005C0Y7/ref=dp_product-image-o
> >>nly_0/103-2942795-0291832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=585496&s=imaginarium
> >>
> >>Tom
> > 
> > 
> > Of course I don't deny it.
> > 
> > If you're going to spend all your time posting cheapo systems that are 
> > supposed to impress me, it's entirely within my rights to make fun of 
> > you.
> 
> It's entirely within your rights to expose your fanaticism also, which 
> you accomplish with flair.

You're the fanatic around here. You have some kind of fixation with me 
that makes you stalk me all the time.

> 
> Nicolas

Not to mention that you're too busy stalking to learn to use a 
newsreader.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 11:28:58 AM
Tom replies to Yobo's comment of:
>>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to
do
>>would be to ask why and see if you agree.
>
> I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
> overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.


FWIW, just which model (& year) was your experience from, Tom?

Afterall, all manufacturers go through cycles where their products
aren't necessarily the best, or even reasonably "good".

Even Honda.


/S/ from a former Honda Civic owner,


-hh

0
4/19/2005 11:59:46 AM
SLURP< SLURP< SLURP the sounds of SUCKERFISH.
"NashtOn" <nana@na.ca> wrote in message 
news:O259e.16549$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> TravelinMan wrote:
>> In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
>>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
>>><yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
>>>>
>>>>product,
>>>>it
>>>>>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user 
>>>>>>why
>>>>
>>>>he
>>>>>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>>>>
>>>>>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
>>>>>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
>>>>>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
>>>>>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
>>>>>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
>>>>
>>>>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
>>>>would be to ask why and see if you agree.
>>>
>>>
>>>I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
>>>overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
>>
>>
>> You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the house 
>> when she dumped you.
>
> I'm surprised you're even married, given your attitude and tendencies to 
> attack others character, such as with what you just posted.
> Your spouse must be very patient or she's screwing around behind your 
> back.
>
> Nicolas 


0
anzio515 (34)
4/19/2005 1:27:04 PM
In article <vS49e.16545$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:

> Tom Elam wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >>
> >>Nicolas
> > 
> > 
> > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> 
> That's because he has no values. 

You mean Nasty values - like accusing someone's wife who you've never 
even met of cheating on her husband?

Or maybe you mean Mayor values - like accusing someone of abusing his 
daughter?

You Windiots sure have a strange concept of 'values'.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 1:34:18 PM
In article <O259e.16549$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:

> TravelinMan wrote:
> > In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
> >><yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
> >>>
> >>>product,
> >>>it 
> >>>
> >>>>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
> >>>
> >>>he 
> >>>
> >>>>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
> >>>
> >>>>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
> >>>>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
> >>>>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
> >>>>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
> >>>>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
> >>>
> >>>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
> >>>would be to ask why and see if you agree.
> >>
> >>
> >>I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
> >>overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
> > 
> > 
> > You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the 
> > house when she dumped you.
> 
> I'm surprised you're even married, given your attitude and tendencies to 
> attack others character, such as with what you just posted.
> Your spouse must be very patient or she's screwing around behind your back.

That's pretty funny - coming from a person who says _I_ don't have any 
values or class.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 1:35:01 PM
In article <KU49e.16547$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:

> TravelinMan wrote:
> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >>>
> >>>Nicolas
> >>
> >>It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> > 
> > 
> > No one's attacked your personal value paradigm.
> > 
> > You came to comp.sys.mac.advocacy to repeatedly post prices for the 
> > computer that you like and taunted Mac users with it. You insist that 
> > we're overpaying for our computers. 
> > 
> > Seems to me that YOU are the one not respecting the values of others 
> > here.
> > 
> > 
> >>Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> >>facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >>deflect the argument.
> > 
> > 
> > Then why are you doing that?
> 
> 
> Attacking? He was merely expressing his point of view. He has a lot more 
> class than you'll ever have, Ragosta.

You mean class like you accusing my wife of messing around?
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 1:35:33 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:00:51 -0500, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
>> <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
>> >product,
>> >it 
>> >>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
>> >he 
>> >>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
>> >
>> >>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
>> >>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
>> >>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
>> >>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
>> >>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
>> >
>> >If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
>> >would be to ask why and see if you agree.
>> 
>> 
>> I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
>> overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
>
>You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the 
>house when she dumped you.

A) I dumped her, but not for another one, nor was infidelity involved
on either side for that matter.  The rest is none of your business.

B) She got the Mac because I hated it, I took my beloved Compaq
laptop.  So much for "every PC user who tries a Mac is a convert."

C) She never figured out how to use a Mac.  She eventually sold it on
eBay and bought a Compaq desktop machine.  So much for "ease of use."

Tom
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 3:00:26 PM
On 19 Apr 2005 04:59:46 -0700, "-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote:

>Tom replies to Yobo's comment of:
>>>If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to
>do
>>>would be to ask why and see if you agree.
>>
>> I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
>> overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
>
>
>FWIW, just which model (& year) was your experience from, Tom?
>
>Afterall, all manufacturers go through cycles where their products
>aren't necessarily the best, or even reasonably "good".
>
>Even Honda.
>
>
>/S/ from a former Honda Civic owner,
>
>
>-hh

It was a 2000 Granite iMac running OS 9.?.  I bought it from the Apple
online store.  Right out of the box it froze up the first day.  I
don't think it ever ran more than a week without a lockup.  Tried it
all - new ram, replaced the logic board, reloaded the OS more times
than I like to admit, and nothing helped.  Apple, of course, would not
take it back.  Finally I gave up and sold it for about 40% of the
original cost.  I hope you can understand why I am a bit bitter.


0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 3:05:20 PM
On 18 Apr 2005 17:38:57 -0700, imouttahere@mac.com wrote:

>>Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).
>
>Why the stipulation, Tommy? If Flightsoft is perfectly usable on a G5,
>then you argument is totally fucked, other than 'PCs is de cheapest'
>which we already know.

Because Virtual PC is an expensive way to run the best OS in the world
- Windows XP.  Both packages have no Mac version.

 
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 3:07:14 PM
Tom Elam wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2005 17:38:57 -0700, imouttahere@mac.com wrote:
> 
> 
>>>Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).
>>
>>Why the stipulation, Tommy? If Flightsoft is perfectly usable on a G5,
>>then you argument is totally fucked, other than 'PCs is de cheapest'
>>which we already know.
> 
> 
> Because Virtual PC is an expensive way to run the best OS in the world
> - Windows XP.  Both packages have no Mac version.
> 
>  

If XP is the best OS in the world, we are in a lot of trouble!
0
4/19/2005 3:16:40 PM
In article <417a611jk1tvh87uq5hfi39f18qulioo3m@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:00:51 -0500, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <big861pve8jbm55hgkernssjpnq1roe1lb@4ax.com>,
> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:23 -0400, "Yobo_Obyo"
> >> <yobo_obyo@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:12:06 -0400, "balleyhoo" <anzio515@aol.com>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>>I have found that many people feel that if they spend more on a
> >> >product,
> >> >it 
> >> >>>is automatically better.  I have found that when you ask a Mac user why
> >> >he 
> >> >>>uses a Mac they almost always say "cause there better"????
> >> >
> >> >>True, and that's because it's what they are used to using.  I like
> >> >>Honda automobiles, I have driven their products since 1989 (with a
> >> >>brief lapse owning a red Mustang) and I love them, in part because I
> >> >>have so much good experience with that brand.  But not everybody
> >> >>shares that opinion, else we would all drive Hondas.
> >> >
> >> >If everyone who uses a Mac says they are better the correct thing to do
> >> >would be to ask why and see if you agree.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> I did, I bought one, used it for 6 months, and found it to be an
> >> overpriced, unstable, piece of junk.  So not EVERY Mac user agrees.
> >
> >You're just mad because your wife got the only good computer in the 
> >house when she dumped you.
> 
> A) I dumped her, but not for another one, nor was infidelity involved
> on either side for that matter.  The rest is none of your business.

I never said it was. 

> 
> B) She got the Mac because I hated it, I took my beloved Compaq
> laptop.  So much for "every PC user who tries a Mac is a convert."
> 
> C) She never figured out how to use a Mac.  She eventually sold it on
> eBay and bought a Compaq desktop machine.  So much for "ease of use."

Hmmm. In your other post, you said 'Finally I gave up and sold it for 
about 40% of the original cost."

So who actually sold it - you or her? And why can't you keep your story 
straight?
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 3:20:23 PM
In article <417a611jk1tvh87uq5hfi39f18qulioo3m@4ax.com>, 
tom_elam@earthlink.net says...
> B) She got the Mac because I hated it, I took my beloved Compaq
> laptop.  So much for "every PC user who tries a Mac is a convert."

A bit of a diversion from the "wife slinging contest" but I know
somebody that worked for Motorola a few years ago, and was forced
to use a Mac desktop (pre-OS X) and a Mac notebook, after working
on the "PC" side of the industry for about 15 years prior to 
joining Motorola.  Absolutely despised the mac (both of them), and
was constantly having trouble getting it to do "trivial" things 
that were easy on the PC.  Probably more due to it being "different"
than the PC way than impossible, but whatever the reason, it was
obviously very frustrating, as I heard about it almost every time
we had a discussion for several years.

Although that wasn't the reason for quitting, this person was
greatly relieved to not have to use the mac after going to another
job where they used PCs again.

I suspect the story might be different now, as OS X seems to be a
huge step forward from where the Mac was prior to its release.

-- 
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"Making it hard to do stupid things often makes it hard
 to do smart ones too." -- Andrew Koenig
0
randyhoward (4848)
4/19/2005 4:22:34 PM
In article <qi7a61plv4mk6jvvfialt04ad6b02d0kv0@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On 18 Apr 2005 17:38:57 -0700, imouttahere@mac.com wrote:
> 
> >>Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).
> >
> >Why the stipulation, Tommy? If Flightsoft is perfectly usable on a G5,
> >then you argument is totally fucked, other than 'PCs is de cheapest'
> >which we already know.
> 
> Because Virtual PC is an expensive way to run the best OS in the world
> - Windows XP.  Both packages have no Mac version.
> 
>  

Pretty lame argument for a thread entitled "Choices, choices, choices".

-- 
"What makes you think I am interested in "winning" a discussion?" - Snit

Steve
0
noone3 (3603)
4/19/2005 4:31:41 PM
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:20:23 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>> A) I dumped her, but not for another one, nor was infidelity involved
>> on either side for that matter.  The rest is none of your business.
>
>I never said it was. 
>
>> 
>> B) She got the Mac because I hated it, I took my beloved Compaq
>> laptop.  So much for "every PC user who tries a Mac is a convert."
>> 
>> C) She never figured out how to use a Mac.  She eventually sold it on
>> eBay and bought a Compaq desktop machine.  So much for "ease of use."
>
>Hmmm. In your other post, you said 'Finally I gave up and sold it for 
>about 40% of the original cost."
>
>So who actually sold it - you or her? And why can't you keep your story 
>straight?

She made the decision to sell it, I put it on eBay for her and boxed
it up when it sold.  We were actually both involved, but she made the
decision.  Thus the confusion - both statements are correct.


0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 4:47:40 PM
In article <noone-3B282C.10314119042005@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

> In article <qi7a61plv4mk6jvvfialt04ad6b02d0kv0@4ax.com>,
>  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > On 18 Apr 2005 17:38:57 -0700, imouttahere@mac.com wrote:
> > 
> > >>Let's see your Mac run Flightsoft or MapViewer (without Virtual PC).
> > >
> > >Why the stipulation, Tommy? If Flightsoft is perfectly usable on a G5,
> > >then you argument is totally fucked, other than 'PCs is de cheapest'
> > >which we already know.
> > 
> > Because Virtual PC is an expensive way to run the best OS in the world
> > - Windows XP.  Both packages have no Mac version.
> > 
> >  
> 
> Pretty lame argument for a thread entitled "Choices, choices, choices".

What did you expect?  After all, Elam is an anagram for lame.
0
nomail18 (305)
4/19/2005 4:47:45 PM
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:34:18 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
wrote:

>In article <vS49e.16545$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>
>> Tom Elam wrote:
>> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> >>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >>
>> >>Nicolas
>> > 
>> > 
>> > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
>> 
>> That's because he has no values. 
>
>You mean Nasty values - like accusing someone's wife who you've never 
>even met of cheating on her husband?
>
>Or maybe you mean Mayor values - like accusing someone of abusing his 
>daughter?
>
>You Windiots sure have a strange concept of 'values'.

Again, notice the deflection of argument back to the accuser, with no
real answers. Ragosta, you are one more dysfunctional piece of work.
0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 4:51:32 PM
On 18 Apr 2005 14:10:25 -0700, "-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote:

WOW, a really well thought out response.  How refreshing.  Thank you.

>Tom Elam wrote:
>
>> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
>
>And just what is that?

It does not matter - except to say that it is unique.

>
>>Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> deflect the argument.
>
>Yes, that can indeed be frustrating.
>
>
>FWIW, in trying to sort out your personal value paradigm as it relates
>here, I've gone back to your original post in this thread:
>
>"In economics we teach a simple decision model that has enormous power
>to explain how humans make decisions.  It rests on a few common sense
>assumptions:  1) we are rational...
>
>Simple models belie complex questions.  For example, there's also the
>aspect as to how the decision is presented, as it relates to potential
>risk aversion:
>
>http://www.bized.ac.uk/learn/economics/nobel/2002.htm
>
>BTW, please note that this states:
>
>"We make our judgements based on incomplete analysis of the situation
>because we have incomplete knowledge."

Always, but we cannot possibly know everything.  We have to decide,
based on what we know at a moment in time.  The theory merely says
that rational people, given the current state of knowledge, will make
the choice that they consider best.  There is even the theory of
"rational ignorance".  This states that we cannot be expected to
gather all the evidence for every decision, there simply is not enough
time.  How many times have you voted for candidates without knowing
everything about their positions on every issue that might affect you?
We do this all the time.

>
>As an example of incomplete knowledge, we've seen within the past
>fortnight the lack of good metrics on Total Cost of Ownership (TCO),
>which trashes all claims of "PC's are cheaper" being quantitatively
>verifyable, but yet the claim is made again and again...or more
>accurately, we get a claim that is really only HALF of what's needed
>(eg, a claim of just its  purchase cost instead of the estimated
>lifecycle cost).
>
>
>"If we apply the economic decision model to the choice of computer the
>decision turns out to be not a simple "which is best" but a much more
>complex "which is best for me in the situation I face today."

True, but what is the cost of acquiring all the information versus the
need to make a decision now?  In a sense we ARE optimizing the total
cost IF you include the cost of the additional information.

>
>True.  FWIW, I assume that your "today" includes all of the legacy
>factors that invariably contribute their piece:  you mention this
>yourself with your opinions about potentially having to re-learn the OS
>(eg, you have an installed legacy investment in a particular OS that is
>contributing to the value determination).

Bingo.  If I had grown up using Macs I can see where the Windows
system might be a bit daunting.  Based on my attempt to master Mac OS
9 I can tell you that it is not always as easy as the advocates make
it out to be.

>
>"The values upon which that decision will be determined are intensely
>personal, and not subject to review by a 3rd party referee.  That
>explains why the arguments get so heated..."
>
>Actually, that's only a half (maybe a third) of the underlying problem.
> People tend to be very resistant to the results of objective bottom-up
>analysis.   For example, I've participated in professional working
>groups where a room full of subject matter experts discuss the
>pro's/con's of specific characteristics and come to a concensis vote
>(using one of those electronic voting systems - - I forget the actual
>product name) to say if A is more important than B, etc, etc...a full,
>long day of professional-grade interactive priority ranking of specific
>characteristics.
>
>At the end of the day, the "black box" does the math (which is actually
>quite simple) and spits out the team's overall priority ranking based
>on all of their low-level, detailed, in-the-weeds, no-kiddin work.
>Upon seeing the results, half the team promptly declared that it is
>"WRONG".
>
>In other words, their detailed rankings were individually objective,
>but when summarized, since it failed to match their preconceived
>notions of what the conclusion _should_ have been, so they tried to
>change their votes so that the tool's output would "validate" their
>preconceived notions instead of force them to confront them.
>
>The analogy here is that we can unfortunately expect to have extremist
>claims on individual weighting factors as an attempt to slant the
>comparison in a fashion that is considered "more favorable" for that
>particular individual, so as to justify their predetermined conclusion.
> For example, we've seen this at times with the costs claimed for a DIY
>assembly, which have often been listed as exactly -zero- dollars.
>

Another BINGO

>
>"In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I need from
>a computer, and more."
>
>Same here, as does a Mac or a Linux box.  But it doesn't explain why I
>prefer Filet Mignon with a Stella over Purina Dog Chow and a Falstaff
>for satisfying my 'basic nutritional needs' :-)

Actually it does.  But I think you already know that.

>
>
>-hh

0
tom_elam (3218)
4/19/2005 5:22:00 PM
Nicky, why are you stalking TravelinMan? It is very unseemly.

LOL!
--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI

0
dfritzin (3022)
4/19/2005 5:32:50 PM
In article <vlda61l7jjr0jsv5meh960e2j77t3ufgtg@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:34:18 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@spamfree.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <vS49e.16545$Ln.765295@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> > NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> Tom Elam wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> >>Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> >>
> >> >>Nicolas
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> >> 
> >> That's because he has no values. 
> >
> >You mean Nasty values - like accusing someone's wife who you've never 
> >even met of cheating on her husband?
> >
> >Or maybe you mean Mayor values - like accusing someone of abusing his 
> >daughter?
> >
> >You Windiots sure have a strange concept of 'values'.
> 
> Again, notice the deflection of argument back to the accuser, with no
> real answers. Ragosta, you are one more dysfunctional piece of work.

Answers to what? I don't see any questions.

All I see is that you're whining about people attacking your personal 
value paradigm - while forgetting to mention that if you stopped posting 
here, no one would bother with you AND that you're the one attacking 
other peoples' values.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 6:02:06 PM
In article <1113931970.389107.81470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
 dfritzin@hotmail.com wrote:

> Nicky, why are you stalking TravelinMan? It is very unseemly.
> 
> LOL!
> --

It's his way of showing how much class he has.
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 6:02:22 PM
In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
 "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> Jim Polaski wrote:
> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> > > >
> > > >Nicolas
> > >
> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> paradigm.
> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> > > deflect the argument.
> > >
> > > T~
> >
> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
> 
> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
> 
> > It's not the
> > other way around by any stretch of your imagination.
> 
> Unless you feel like being honest.   Maccie Wintel bashers don't limit
> themselves to the Usenet groups, they carry their 'war' to the general
> press too.

They do respond when idiots like you make comments in some place where 
there is a feedback section and they pontificate on how horrible Macs 
are with wrong, FUD laced posts that deserve retort. You know, like the 
crap you post all the time

> 
> > Mac users don't
> > generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of
> computers.
> 
> That just about nullifies any chance you had of being accused of
> honesty...

Because I (and other mac users) don't go to Win NG's and bash windows, 
I'm not honest.
That's a great one even for you...
> 
> > OTOH, you, edwin, slade and a few others go far out of your way to
> come
> > to this ng just to bash Macs.
> 
> We go far out of our way?   All that's required is subscribing to a
> Usenet group with our news reader client.   How did you get here, by
> pushing a boulder with your nose?   I ask for information only.

I looked for "Macintosh" ng's but I suppose you may have done the same 
but the motivations are hardly the same.

> 
> > That's a subtlety that isn't so obsecure as to be lost on even you.
> 
> The slow-witted Jim Polaski needs something explained to him for the
> umpteenth time:  some of us (like me) started out having a Mac, and
> switched to the PC, but stayed in the group.  Others were brought to
> this group by the cross-posting MacTrolls you deny the existence of.
> 

then since you don't have a Mac, you really have no reason to be here.

Just like slade, the mayor of nowhere and nothing to name two...

Go look for your cave or rock...it's time you need your hibernation.

-- 
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
 expecting that he will get nothing in return!"
0
jpolaski4 (3157)
4/19/2005 9:01:22 PM
TravelinMan wrote:
> In article <1113931970.389107.81470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>  dfritzin@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
>>Nicky, why are you stalking TravelinMan? It is very unseemly.
>>
>>LOL!
>>--
> 
> 
> It's his way of showing how much class he has.

Whats the matter Ragosta, can't take a joke?

lol

Nicolas
0
nana (1985)
4/19/2005 9:25:11 PM
Nicky, you haven't answered my question. Why are you stalking
TravelinMan? 

--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI

0
dfritzin (3022)
4/19/2005 9:33:06 PM
In article <XGe9e.16834$Ln.777254@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:

> TravelinMan wrote:
> > In article <1113931970.389107.81470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >  dfritzin@hotmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Nicky, why are you stalking TravelinMan? It is very unseemly.
> >>
> >>LOL!
> >>--
> > 
> > 
> > It's his way of showing how much class he has.
> 
> Whats the matter Ragosta, can't take a joke?
> 
> lol
> 
> Nicolas

Sorry, that's not a joke - at least not for any rational person.

What happened to you pretending you had class? And why are you still 
stalking me? And why can't you learn to use a newsreader?
0
Nowhere (5224)
4/19/2005 9:51:06 PM
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
<jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:

>In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >
>> >Nicolas
>> 
>> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
>> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> deflect the argument.
>> 
>> T~
>
>But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the 
>other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't 
>generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers. 

Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.  The facts are
friendly, go with the facts and see where they lead you.

>
>OTOH, you, edwin, slade and a few others go far out of your way to come 
>to this ng just to bash Macs.
>
>That's a subtlety that isn't so obsecure as to be lost on even you.

0
tom_elam (3218)
4/20/2005 1:43:06 PM


On 4/20/05 8:43 AM, in article b0nc615aokor974kq8viptpe1ne8ms23so@4ax.com,
"Tom Elam" <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
> <jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:
> 
>> In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>>>> 
>>>> Nicolas
>>> 
>>> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
>>> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>>> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>>> deflect the argument.
>>> 
>>> T~
>> 
>> But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the
>> other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't
>> generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers.
> 
> Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
> that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.  The facts are
> friendly, go with the facts and see where they lead you.
> 
No you didn't quite do that, but the write-up was interesting and a fair
look, I thought.

As to why people buy Windows over Mac, there are lots of reasons and not all
of them are because windows is better.

Marketing at the store level is skewed because for the consumer, the
salesperson they see probably has little if any experience or training on
both systems, so the consumer seldom gets enough information to make an
informed decision.

There is also the misperception that all macs are overpriced, when that is
not necessarily true.

0
4/20/2005 2:48:49 PM
In article <b0nc615aokor974kq8viptpe1ne8ms23so@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
> <jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:
> 
> >In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >
> >> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> >
> >> >Nicolas
> >> 
> >> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> >> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> >> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >> deflect the argument.
> >> 
> >> T~
> >
> >But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the 
> >other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't 
> >generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers. 
> 
> Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
> that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.

No you don't. Mainly you just troll about how cheap Dells are. Besides, 
Windows machines don't really have any advantages over Macs unless you 
consider viruses, trojan horses, and other Malware to be advantages.

-- 
George Graves
------------------
A sports car makes the journey more fun than the destination.

0
gmgravesnos (8642)
4/20/2005 6:04:43 PM
In article <BE8BD601.15E29%lloydparsons@mac.com>,
 Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:

> On 4/20/05 8:43 AM, in article b0nc615aokor974kq8viptpe1ne8ms23so@4ax.com,
> "Tom Elam" <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
> > <jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >>>> 
> >>>> Nicolas
> >>> 
> >>> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> >>> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> >>> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >>> deflect the argument.
> >>> 
> >>> T~
> >> 
> >> But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the
> >> other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't
> >> generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers.
> > 
> > Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
> > that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.  The facts are
> > friendly, go with the facts and see where they lead you.
> > 
> No you didn't quite do that, but the write-up was interesting and a fair
> look, I thought.
> 
> As to why people buy Windows over Mac, there are lots of reasons and not all
> of them are because windows is better.

None of them is "because Windows is better". All of them are because the 
average consumer doesn't know shit from Shinola, and buys what everybody 
else buys. The modern world runs on perception, not reality. Don't 
believe me? Look at gasoline prices. Gasoline is cheaper today, in 
adjusted dollars, than it has ever been IN HISTORY and people spend less 
of their income on gasoline today than ever before, yet, fueled by the 
media, people are whining about the price of gas as never before. It's 
perception. Everybody has a Windows machine, ergo Windows must be the 
best. That's the perception. The reality is that everybody has a Windows 
machine because everybody has a Windows machine.

-- 
George Graves
------------------
A sports car makes the journey more fun than the destination.

0
gmgravesnos (8642)
4/20/2005 6:12:28 PM
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:04:43 GMT, George Graves
<gmgravesnos@pacbell.net> wrote:

>In article <b0nc615aokor974kq8viptpe1ne8ms23so@4ax.com>,
> Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
>> <jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> >
>> >> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >> >
>> >> >Nicolas
>> >> 
>> >> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
>> >> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>> >> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> >> deflect the argument.
>> >> 
>> >> T~
>> >
>> >But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the 
>> >other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't 
>> >generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers. 
>> 
>> Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
>> that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.
>
>No you don't. Mainly you just troll about how cheap Dells are. Besides, 
>Windows machines don't really have any advantages over Macs unless you 
>consider viruses, trojan horses, and other Malware to be advantages.

Windows machines have

Much lower initial cost
Wider choice of hardware brands
Wider choice of hardware devices
Substantially more software choice
Run more games, better
No annual OS renewal fee
Higher performance CPU (no need for 2 processors)
More compatible with the majority of others' machines

etc.

It really galls you, doesn't it?

0
tom_elam (3218)
4/20/2005 6:18:15 PM
Nice, hh.

Where does the value of supporting an alternative to the Micorsoft
collective come in?

Wouldn't it suck if Micorsoft was the SOLE choice for operating systems
and associated APIs?

You'd think Tom would thank us Mac users for fighting the good fight in
keeping Micorsoft (more) honest.

But no, it's a nearly incessant stream of abuse and insult from the
guy. In our own ng no less.

0
imouttahere (3635)
4/20/2005 6:37:58 PM
In article <3t6d61tufit5ql9jp3b903ombipqk4qk3f@4ax.com>,
 Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:04:43 GMT, George Graves
> <gmgravesnos@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> >In article <b0nc615aokor974kq8viptpe1ne8ms23so@4ax.com>,
> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:28:01 -0500, Jim Polaski
> >> <jpolaski@NOSPMync.net> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >> > Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Nicolas
> >> >> 
> >> >> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value paradigm.
> >> >> Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> >> >> facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >> >> deflect the argument.
> >> >> 
> >> >> T~
> >> >
> >> >But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs. It's not the 
> >> >other way around by any stretch of your imagination. Mac users don't 
> >> >generally go to a Win/intel/amd ng and bash their choice of computers. 
> >> 
> >> Mainly I point out that Windows machines have advantages over Macs
> >> that lead 90+% of consumer buyers to choose Windows.
> >
> >No you don't. Mainly you just troll about how cheap Dells are. Besides, 
> >Windows machines don't really have any advantages over Macs unless you 
> >consider viruses, trojan horses, and other Malware to be advantages.
> 
> Windows machines have
> 
> Much lower initial cost
> Wider choice of hardware brands
> Wider choice of hardware devices
> Substantially more software choice
> Run more games, better
> No annual OS renewal fee
> Higher performance CPU (no need for 2 processors)
> More compatible with the majority of others' machines
> 
> etc.
> 
> It really galls you, doesn't it?

No, it doesn't "gall" me in the least, because most of the things you 
mention above (with the exception of games - which is only an advantage 
if one plays games) are either not advantages or are irrelevant.

For instance,  the "lower initial cost" is not only irrelevant, it's not 
even true. At $499, a Mini Mac is cheap enough for anyone to own and the 
cheapest PCs aren't THAT much cheaper in price, but much cheaper in 
build quality.

All three "Wider Choice" arguments are irrelevant if there's enough of 
both hardware and software to meet the needs of the consumer. For 99.9% 
of the users out there, the Mac has more than enough of both.

I'll give you games (yawn!). Were I a gamer, I'd have a Windows machine 
too - the fastest I could afford. But the cheap PC you tout in one line 
of your flawed missive, above, is not the great gaming box that you tout 
as running games better a few lines down. They are at opposite ends of 
the PC scale.

I don't really know what you mean by annual OS renewal fee. If by that 
you mean that Apple improves it's OS more often than M$ does, you're 
right. I consider that an advantage, however. XP has flaws that M$ has 
NEVER addressed since the day it shipped, and likely won't address until 
Longhorn takes its place sometime in the far, distant future. Meanwhile 
I get a new OS next week. Oh, and if I didn't want Tiger, Panther would 
continue to work just fine, thank you so very much.

I don't agree that a P-IV's higher clock rate is any indicator of 
performance. I know how processors work, and I know that Intel chips 
NEED the higher clock rate because of their pipeline architecture, not 
because it makes their processors faster. 

As for being "more compatible", that might have been a compelling 
argument 5 years ago, but today, I'll think that you will find Macs to 
be far more compatible with other platforms than Windows is. Windows is 
compatible with Windows and the others be damned. If there is any 
compatibility between Windows and other platforms, its because those 
other platforms worked hard to "play nice" with Windows. All of my 
clients, for instance, have Windows machines (may the gods help them). I 
use a Mac. I deliver work to them that seamlessly integrates with their 
Windows boxes. They don't even know (in some cases) that I created the 
work on a Mac. "Nice PowerPoint presentation" they say, not knowing that 
I used Keynote, not PowerPoint. "I like the use of the Visio elements 
too." Again, not knowing that I used Omnigraffle Pro, not Visio or that 
the nice CAD drawing in the document was done with CADintosh, not 
AutoCAD LT. 

Sorry, Tom. The compatibility argument doesn't fly. In fact, none of 
your arguments is compelling in the least. Better try again, or more to 
the point, just admit that you're trolling and move on.

-- 
George Graves
------------------
A sports car makes the journey more fun than the destination.

0
gmgravesnos (8642)
4/20/2005 7:05:13 PM
On 20 Apr 2005 11:37:58 -0700, imouttahere@mac.com wrote:

>Nice, hh.
>
>Where does the value of supporting an alternative to the Micorsoft
>collective come in?
>
>Wouldn't it suck if Micorsoft was the SOLE choice for operating systems
>and associated APIs?

That would be a total disaster.

>
>You'd think Tom would thank us Mac users for fighting the good fight in
>keeping Micorsoft (more) honest.

Amen, I wish he would too.  All Windroids know that a little
competition is good for even Microsoft.

>
>But no, it's a nearly incessant stream of abuse and insult from the
>guy. In our own ng no less.

My observation is that he is just trying to balance the scales a
little.


0
tom_elam (3218)
4/20/2005 11:57:21 PM
Tom Elam wrote:

> Windows machines have
> 
> Much lower initial cost
Um... not if you consider the included software and the quality of same.

> Wider choice of hardware brands
True
> Wider choice of hardware devices
True, though most users will never buy any of them and those most 
commonly purchased will generally work with a Mac. (with the exception 
of MP3 players and the like)
> Substantially more software choice
True, I suppose, but the signal to noise ratio is outrageous.
> Run more games, better
True, but once beyond college age, this isn't nearly so much an issue.
> No annual OS renewal fee
Excuse me?  I'm not even sure what the hell this is supposed to mean... 
  Considering it's been 3 years since the last version of Windows was 
released.  I'd gladly pay for a newer, better version of Windows if it 
existed, just like I'll pay for the next version of Mac OS X (assuming 
it runs on my hardware and gives some real advantage over what I have).
> Higher performance CPU (no need for 2 processors)
There's just too much gray area here.  The definition of "Higher 
performance" is open to debate in the real world.  Sure, it wins in most 
of the benchmarks, but Benchmarks are just numbers.  Real world use is 
what counts.  I'll call this one a draw.
> More compatible with the majority of others' machines
More compatible in what way?  I run Office on my PCs and on my Mac.  I 
exchange files between them all the time.  I can't run a Windows program 
on my Mac, but to me, that really doesn't matter. (yes, I know about 
virtual PC, yawn)
> 
> etc.
> 
> It really galls you, doesn't it?
> 
0
4/21/2005 1:14:17 AM
In article <J7D9e.1707$cZ4.619@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>,
 Tim Harbison <coldwarrior@nospam.ameritech.net> wrote:

> Tom Elam wrote:
> 
> > Windows machines have
> > 
> > Much lower initial cost
> Um... not if you consider the included software and the quality of same.
> 
> > Wider choice of hardware brands
> True
> > Wider choice of hardware devices
> True, though most users will never buy any of them and those most 
> commonly purchased will generally work with a Mac. (with the exception 
> of MP3 players and the like)
> > Substantially more software choice
> True, I suppose, but the signal to noise ratio is outrageous.
> > Run more games, better
> True, but once beyond college age, this isn't nearly so much an issue.
> > No annual OS renewal fee
> Excuse me?  I'm not even sure what the hell this is supposed to mean... 
>   Considering it's been 3 years since the last version of Windows was 
> released.  I'd gladly pay for a newer, better version of Windows if it 
> existed, just like I'll pay for the next version of Mac OS X (assuming 
> it runs on my hardware and gives some real advantage over what I have).
> > Higher performance CPU (no need for 2 processors)
> There's just too much gray area here.  The definition of "Higher 
> performance" is open to debate in the real world.  Sure, it wins in most 
> of the benchmarks, but Benchmarks are just numbers.  Real world use is 
> what counts.  I'll call this one a draw.
> > More compatible with the majority of others' machines
> More compatible in what way?  I run Office on my PCs and on my Mac.  I 
> exchange files between them all the time.  I can't run a Windows program 
> on my Mac, but to me, that really doesn't matter. (yes, I know about 
> virtual PC, yawn)
> > 
> > etc.
> > 
> > It really galls you, doesn't it?
> > 

Essentially what I said.

-- 
George Graves
------------------
A sports car makes the journey more fun than the destination.

0
gmgravesnos (8642)
4/21/2005 1:53:38 AM
Tom Elam wrote:
>
> WOW, a really well thought out response.  How refreshing.  Thank you.

Any newsgroup is only as good as what you (we) put into it.


> >> It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
paradigm.
> >
> >And just what is that?
>
> It does not matter - except to say that it is unique.

Sorry, but because you volunteered it as a point, it cannot not matter.
 For otherwise, you're purposefully being self-contradictory, which
means that you're self-destructing your own credibility.  Yep, a
Catch-22.


> >"We make our judgements based on incomplete analysis of the
situation
> >because we have incomplete knowledge."
>
> Always, but we cannot possibly know everything.  We have to decide,
> based on what we know at a moment in time.  The theory merely says
> that rational people, given the current state of knowledge, will make
> the choice that they consider best.

....which also includes an assessment on data availability, and if the
principle of diminishing returns applies.


> There is even the theory of "rational ignorance".

True, but it fails to explain the behavior of purposeful blindness:
this is the genesis of our Trolls on factors such as "initial price"
which is knowingly choosing to ignore the far more rational lifecycle
comparison.


> True, but what is the cost of acquiring all the information versus
the
> need to make a decision now?  In a sense we ARE optimizing the total
> cost IF you include the cost of the additional information.

It is interesting to hear proponency in that more choices in hardware
vendors is a good thing, since there has been research that has shown
that excessive choices actually decreases consumer happiness.

YMMV, but I'd speculate its partially because the additional
information burden for having the same marketplace awareness:  since
the time required becomes infinite, there is the consumer perception
that he knows less, so therefore he becomes less convinced that he's
made the optimal decision.


> > (eg, you have an installed legacy investment in a particular
> > OS that is contributing to the value determination).
>
> Bingo.  If I had grown up using Macs I can see where the Windows
> system might be a bit daunting.  Based on my attempt to master Mac OS
> 9 I can tell you that it is not always as easy as the advocates make
> it out to be.

I can't explain why you personally had such a hard problem coping.  If
anything, I would suggest that no matter what you choose to use in the
future, since the future will not be the same as today, broadening your
experience base (even if you were unsuccessful) will help you with
coping with future Windows OS revisions, since it is inevitable that
they will be different than what they are today.  And at the very, very
least, you at least have a cue that your ability to adapat to changes
in GUI interface may very well be a skill you are not at all good
at...afterall, if you know your weaknesses, you can minimize being
victimized by them.


I do know that some people have marketedly better/worse visualization
abilities, plus prior experience can also be a factor:  not necessarily
in using one specific OS GUI, but rather, having used various OS's
and/or OS revisions over a period of time.  For example, I've used
every Windows OS revision except for v1 and every Mac OS revision
except for v1 & v2.  As such, new revisions of both are "derivatives"
of what I've seen/used in the past.

Nevertheless, I personally find Windows OS revisions to be the
cognitively harder OS to reacclimate to, even though I spend
significantly more hours per week on Windows than on Mac OS.  And since
I have had professional training and experience in Human Factors
design, I am inclned to attribute my observations to aspects of the
underlying architecture of the OS and conclude that my personal
preference does have an actual rational basis in HF Engineering.


> > For example, we've seen this at times with the costs claimed for a
DIY
> > assembly, which have often been listed as exactly -zero- dollars.
>
> Another BINGO

If you wish to take the next logical step, it is that you will decide
to stop being "part of the problem" in terms of promulgating known
half-truths, such as the lame "lower initial cost", and "no annual OS
fee".


> >"In my own case I find that Windows machines do everything I
> >need from a computer, and more."
> >
> >Same here, as does a Mac or a Linux box.  But it doesn't explain why
I
> >prefer Filet Mignon with a Stella over Purina Dog Chow and a
Falstaff
> >for satisfying my 'basic nutritional needs' :-)
>
> Actually it does.  But I think you already know that.

Sure:  the lesson is that when its a toy, the only thing that matters
is for you to buy what makes you happy, for no one else's opinion
matters.

....no matter how loudly the sheep bleat that they're very uncomfortable
with you not being bothered to be part of their herd...


-hh

0
4/21/2005 3:00:11 AM
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
> In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> Jim Polaski wrote:
>> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> > > >
>> > > >Nicolas
>> > >
>> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
>> paradigm.
>> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
>> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> > > deflect the argument.
>> > >
>> > > T~
>> >
>> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
>>
>> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
>
> Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his "personal
> value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.

He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws in 
Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom personally. 
Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."

If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism of it 
as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health assistance. 
I say that in all seriousness. 


0
thorne25 (21019)
4/25/2005 12:39:31 PM
In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
 "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
> > In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Nicolas
> >> > >
> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> >> paradigm.
> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge
> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >> > > deflect the argument.
> >> > >
> >> > > T~
> >> >
> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
> >>
> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
> >
> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his "personal
> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
> 
> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws in 
> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom personally. 
> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."
> 
> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism of it 
> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health assistance. 
> I say that in all seriousness. 

LOL

He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
0
alangbaker (17682)
4/25/2005 8:00:08 PM
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
news:alangbaker-980EA6.13000825042005@news.telus.net...
> In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
>> > In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
>> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >Nicolas
>> >> > >
>> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
>> >> paradigm.
>> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to 
>> >> > > acknowledge
>> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> >> > > deflect the argument.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > T~
>> >> >
>> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
>> >>
>> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
>> >
>> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his "personal
>> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
>>
>> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws in
>> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom 
>> personally.
>> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."
>>
>> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism of 
>> it
>> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health 
>> assistance.
>> I say that in all seriousness.
>
> LOL
>
> He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.

No he's not.  He's talking about people who attack him personally to avoid 
facing facts.  He said nothing about criticism of his choices. 


0
thorne25 (21019)
4/25/2005 9:29:27 PM
In article <426d6138$0$79460$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
 "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
> news:alangbaker-980EA6.13000825042005@news.telus.net...
> > In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
> >> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
> >> > In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
> >> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >Nicolas
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> >> >> paradigm.
> >> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to 
> >> >> > > acknowledge
> >> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >> >> > > deflect the argument.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > T~
> >> >> >
> >> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
> >> >>
> >> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
> >> >
> >> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his "personal
> >> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
> >>
> >> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws in
> >> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom 
> >> personally.
> >> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."
> >>
> >> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism of 
> >> it
> >> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health 
> >> assistance.
> >> I say that in all seriousness.
> >
> > LOL
> >
> > He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.
> 
> No he's not.  He's talking about people who attack him personally to avoid 
> facing facts.  He said nothing about criticism of his choices. 

Let's see if that's what he says...

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
0
alangbaker (17682)
4/25/2005 10:31:56 PM
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
news:alangbaker-758886.15315625042005@news.telus.net...
> In article <426d6138$0$79460$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:alangbaker-980EA6.13000825042005@news.telus.net...
>> > In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
>> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
>> >> > In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
>> >> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >Nicolas
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
>> >> >> paradigm.
>> >> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to
>> >> >> > > acknowledge
>> >> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
>> >> >> > > deflect the argument.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > T~
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
>> >> >
>> >> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his 
>> >> > "personal
>> >> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
>> >>
>> >> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws 
>> >> in
>> >> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom
>> >> personally.
>> >> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."
>> >>
>> >> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism 
>> >> of
>> >> it
>> >> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health
>> >> assistance.
>> >> I say that in all seriousness.
>> >
>> > LOL
>> >
>> > He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.
>>
>> No he's not.  He's talking about people who attack him personally to 
>> avoid
>> facing facts.  He said nothing about criticism of his choices.
>
> Let's see if that's what he says...

You mean see if he says it again?   He already said that above. 


0
thorne25 (21019)
4/25/2005 11:33:27 PM
In article <426d7e47$0$79463$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
 "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
> news:alangbaker-758886.15315625042005@news.telus.net...
> > In article <426d6138$0$79460$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
> >> news:alangbaker-980EA6.13000825042005@news.telus.net...
> >> > In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
> >> >> > In article <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
> >> >> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
> >> >> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> wrote:
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >Nicolas
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
> >> >> >> paradigm.
> >> >> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to
> >> >> >> > > acknowledge
> >> >> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to
> >> >> >> > > deflect the argument.
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > T~
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his 
> >> >> > "personal
> >> >> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
> >> >>
> >> >> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out flaws 
> >> >> in
> >> >> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom
> >> >> personally.
> >> >> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to others."
> >> >>
> >> >> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider criticism 
> >> >> of
> >> >> it
> >> >> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health
> >> >> assistance.
> >> >> I say that in all seriousness.
> >> >
> >> > LOL
> >> >
> >> > He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.
> >>
> >> No he's not.  He's talking about people who attack him personally to 
> >> avoid
> >> facing facts.  He said nothing about criticism of his choices.
> >
> > Let's see if that's what he says...
> 
> You mean see if he says it again?   He already said that above. 

No. He said "attacks my personal value paradigm". Whatever what you want 
to spin it, that is not an attack of *him* but an attack of his 
*opinions* as to what has value.

-- 
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
0
alangbaker (17682)
4/25/2005 11:39:09 PM
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message 
news:alangbaker-D6C031.16390825042005@news.telus.net...
> In article <426d7e47$0$79463$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:alangbaker-758886.15315625042005@news.telus.net...
>> > In article <426d6138$0$79460$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
>> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:alangbaker-980EA6.13000825042005@news.telus.net...
>> >> > In article <7y5be.498$6z3.66@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
>> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:alangbaker-78B300.01182719042005@news.telus.net...
>> >> >> > In article 
>> >> >> > <1113849888.821423.240660@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Jim Polaski wrote:
>> >> >> >> > In article <cil7619rik21bgduqh9u15al1m5jm6kk2l@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> >> >  Tom Elam <tom_elam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:49 GMT, NashtOn <nana@na.ca> 
>> >> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > >Well put, Tom but why bother with the Mac fanboi?
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > >Nicolas
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > It really bothers me when someone attacks my personal value
>> >> >> >> paradigm.
>> >> >> >> > > Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to
>> >> >> >> > > acknowledge
>> >> >> >> > > facts in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks 
>> >> >> >> > > to
>> >> >> >> > > deflect the argument.
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > T~
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > But tommie, you're the one who comes here and attacks Macs.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Nothing wrong with that... that's why this group exists.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Fine, but he doesn't get to bitch about people attacking his
>> >> >> > "personal
>> >> >> > value paradigm", when he is doing the same to others.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> He's not "doing the same thing to others."   Tom is pointing out 
>> >> >> flaws
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> Apple and in the Mac.   In response, Maccies are attacking Tom
>> >> >> personally.
>> >> >> Don't make it worse with the lie that he's "doing the same to 
>> >> >> others."
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If your Mac is such a part of your psyche that you consider 
>> >> >> criticism
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> it
>> >> >> as a personal attack, you really need professional mental health
>> >> >> assistance.
>> >> >> I say that in all seriousness.
>> >> >
>> >> > LOL
>> >> >
>> >> > He's talking precisely about people who criticize his *choices*.
>> >>
>> >> No he's not.  He's talking about people who attack him personally to
>> >> avoid
>> >> facing facts.  He said nothing about criticism of his choices.
>> >
>> > Let's see if that's what he says...
>>
>> You mean see if he says it again?   He already said that above.
>
> No. He said "attacks my personal value paradigm".

Not his choices.

> Whatever what you want
> to spin it, that is not an attack of *him* but an attack of his
> *opinions* as to what has value.

An attack on his personal values is an attack on him, and unlike Maccies, 
he's not talking about the computer he bought.

You also keep omitting this:

"Moreover, it bothers me even more when people refuse to acknowledge facts 
in front of their face, and resort to personal attacks to deflect the 
argument."

What special brand of insanity caused you to ignore the above statement? 


0
thorne25 (21019)
4/26/2005 2:25:26 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Choices, choices, choices ...
Lectoribus Salutem, I was directed to this forum from comp.arch by one of your regulars, Joe Seigh, because of the following question: Given that you want to have a RA*S* (i.e., Reliable, Available and *Scalable* OS), how would you perform the following task on a ~100 CPU SMP machine: "Measure the number of instances of <some> kernel event" 1. You create a system wide single counter protected by a single system wide lock to keep track of the occurences of said event. 2. You create a processor-local counter of said event, and, in case you want to summarize system wide, sum the counters in the user space application and present them to the user. Please, discuss. Note that I'm not a regular of your newsgroup, so it's advisable to cc me if you have an answer different from the obvious .... -- Toon Moene - e-mail: toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phone: +31 346 214290 Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html A maintainer of GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/ > 2. You create a processor-local counter of said event, and, in case > you want to summarize system wide, sum the counters in the user > space application and present them to the user. This would be one way to go. The contention on a single system wide lock would be very bad. If the counter is small enough to be modified by atomic ops.....

Time for me to upgrade... Choices, choices, choices??
Hi there all you tech heads. I am after advice from "those in the know" about a box upgrade that I'm considering. Having being through this once before (and fluffing it with a 733 P3 just after P4 release) and missing any opportunity to make a meaningful (cpu only) upgrade. I "NEED" to spend as little as possible on my initial upgrade of Case, m/b, cpu (low budget), 512mb ddr & hdd. I have a reasonable appreciation of the value of higher fsb, P4 hyper threading and 64 bit 754 XP's, but don't have much of an idea as to the comparative value of the 462 XP's 400fsb, particularly as relates to P4 hyper threading and the likelihood of continuing production of faster (compatible architecture) cpu's that might be supported by my new m/b. i.e.... I understand the risk of architecture redundancy if I get it wrong and am trying to weigh the risk against the savings in cost for the three different options. Search and cost comparisons of local supply options for m/bs that support the potential advances of the three options (together with a desire to get 'off board graphics') are limiting me to low speed cpu's around 1600 - 2000 with lower fsb. This will be my most meaningful upgrade (other than graphics, sound and ram), and I would like to be in the hunt for a 3300+ + upgrade (if available). I guess my question is simply..... are 462 XP's with dual channel cpu's competitive enough (in your collective opinions) with ...

[News] The Choice of Having No Choice
Microsoft's Ballmer preaches gospel of the rich client ,----[ Quote ] | With Microsoft and Intel we are the holy trinity - Jerry Sanders III, | ex-CEO of AMD | | [...] | | Microsoft is a rich server and Intel and AMD are rich clients. The | rest of us are unlikely to be enriched by their "innovations" | because pretty soon if you want to buy a PC you're going to be | practically forced to buy one with Vista, and with dual cores, | quadruple cores and the rest, simply because the vendors, the | distribution chain, the ISVs and the ODMs are all firmly pledged | to keep thei...

Choices$Write,Choices$Path
From Justin >Choices$Write is, generally, set once. Together with Choices$Path it >provides your configuration settings. If they're changed together (or even >independently) then your application won't see the files it saw before, >but it also should be robust and just use the new area. It might not be a >common operation, but you support it because your program is resillient to >such changes. > >[snip] > >> By using a primary Choices variable Myprog$Choices, the user could >> drag the choices destination to RAM or Memphis or set it to default >> Choices$Write. > >No. You read from Choices:<path> and you write to <Choices$Write>.<path>, >and that's the end of the story, pretty much. You absolutely should not >have a single variable pointing to the configuration. A single >variable does not allow you to differentiate between the place that you >read from, and the place that you write to. The two may be different. The >read area may be read only. The read area may be the default >configuration, and the write area is the user-specific configuration. > >You do it that way and everything works for everyone. There are no >special cases where one applications chooses to do it differently because >the author thought they were so special that the rules didn't apply to >them. If you are that special, you make damned sure that you ...

OT: Is any choice harder than no choice?
Recently a poster claimed that 'Adding a second choice makes it "harder for a consumer to choose'. " Does anyone have any scientific evidence to back that up? Short term memory is linked to decision making, and it is known that a human can have around 3-4 things in short term memory at a given time, so it seems to me that adding choice to the mixture would not make it harder. I have referenced plenty of links to studies that seemingly back this up (although to what extent is under dispute). So does anyone have any actual quotes or links to back up that a single choice is hard...

logic of limiting choices and forcing choices
Hi, I just can not find the set based sql approach to the following application logic: I have a table of choices with id and text, say: 1 coffee 2 tea 3 water 4 juice Now some users have restrictions, for example user 1 is disallowed coffeine. Some Users are forced one choice - user 2 is only allowed water, so there is another type of restriction. This would yield table choicerestrictions (userid, choiceid, tor): 1 2 exclude 1 2 exclude 2 3 force Is this a known application pattern I can read about somewhere? How could I get a result set in one select? This would be far better than doing it in the application. Table design: the force entry in choicerestrictions would be equivalent to exclude choices 1,2 and 4. I prefer a force entry, because it states the logic, and is better when you insert 5 milk into choices. Thanks for your comments. /Str. M. Strobel wrote: > I just can not find the set based sql approach to the following > application logic: > > I have a table of choices with id and text, say: > 1 coffee > 2 tea > 3 water > 4 juice > > Now some users have restrictions, for example user 1 is > disallowed coffeine. Some Users are forced one choice - user 2 is > only allowed water, so there is another type of restriction. > > This would yield table choicerestrictions (userid, choiceid, tor): > 1 2 exclude > 1 2 exclude > 2 3 force > > Is this a known applic...

Choice
I don't know where to take a good also objective answer...so I ask it here... I use linux for years, big fun... I use it for office, multimedia, and some c++ small projects... office for economical studies multimedia like writing dvd and playing xvids after having transcoded the dvds Games.Yes in Linux. BUT. I saw OpenSolaris. Can it do it? Better than linux in performance? I start to hate the performance of modern distros like, fedora or...mandriva...either they won't work or they work with all the -g in gcc and various misworks.Not to mention the libxxx problem......

What are my choices?
I'm in the middle of building a database in access 2002 for a client of mine. I just wanted to know what my choices were to make this database accessable from multiple clients at once. His network is a windows 2000 domain with about 8 workstations that will use this database. I read about an MDE file, but I when i tried to make it froze up my system. What are my choices? ricky@rickybell.com (InDeSkize) wrote in message news:<22935d4a.0405271156.75bbb5ca@posting.google.com>... > I'm in the middle of building a database in access 2002 for a client > of mine. I just wanted to know what my choices were to make this > database accessable from multiple clients at once. > > His network is a windows 2000 domain with about 8 workstations that > will use this database. > > I read about an MDE file, but I when i tried to make it froze up my > system. > > What are my choices? Hello Ricky, One of the ways that seems to be the best is to set up two mdb files. 1. Front End (Loaded onto users computers. 2. Back End (Loaded onto the network with the Front End linked to it.) The Front End has the queries, forms, reports, macros and modules. The Back End has the tables only. This way, if an update is needed for, say another report is needed, only the front end has to be updated and copied over the older version without any data loss. One other thing, the Front End, after develeopent, can be made in...

Few Choices
I installed Tiger on my iBook 800 mHz G3 while the iBook was in Target Mode (it has no DVD drive). During the installation process, i was only given two choices "Custom" install or "Upgrade." What's with that? I thought I would have "Archive & Install" and the other choices. Was there a problem happening? Ideas? ...

[News] GNU/Linux as the Choice for Those Who Love Choice
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Windows: Choice But No Choice ,----[ Quote ] | In the area of window managers Linux users | are completely and totally spoiled rotten. We | constantly debate the merits of one desktop | environment/window manager over another. We | argue over what programs are better than | others, what versions of those programs we | like over another and getting in world class | pissing contests all the while crying about | what we wish they would do better or | differently. I wish Windows users had this | problem, but they don't. Why? Because the...

What are my choices?
I'm in the middle of building a database in access 2002 for a client of mine. I just wanted to know what my choices were to make this database accessable from multiple clients at once. His network is a windows 2000 domain with about 8 workstations that will use this database. I read about an MDE file, but I when i tried to make it froze up my system. What are my choices? The first and most important this is to split the front-end and the back-end of the database: Simplefied Concept: back-end (BE) = tables, design does not change front-end (FE) = everything else (code, forms, queries,...

My choice..
Hi I'm a Korean.. I strongly recommend a Toshiba Laptop - Tecra series. That is a so good, powerful, and pretty... *^_^* ... You will have a great contentment. good luck!! ...

selecting a subset of choices based on a first choice
Hello, I having trouble finding information on what I would like to do in Access probably because I do not know the right keywords. I am designing a that uses genus and species of plants in two of the fields (names genus and species). Since there is a limited number of species for a given genus, I would like the second field on the form have only the values that match that genus. For example, if my table looks like this: genus1, species1 genus1, species2 genus1, species3 genus2, species4 I would like to make it possible that if you select genus1, the next fields pull down menu would onl...

Choices
I am new to freeBSD. What should I consider using for web server work, 4.x or 5.x. What are the advantages of on over the other? Thanks Deke wrote: > I am new to freeBSD. What should I consider using for web server work, > 4.x or 5.x. What are the advantages of on over the other? Choose 5.3. If you find that something doesn't work (ie. the hardware doesn't work, or some software don't work), then try 4.10. 4.x is the "old technology" stable branch. Everything that works there is good and stable. 5.x is the "new technology" branch. This means that there are a some things in it that you won't find in 4.x. Things like drivers, new filesystems (ufs2, devfs). Good luck! -- Torfinn Ingolfsen, Norway Deke <Deke@nospam.com> writes: > I am new to freeBSD. What should I consider using for web server work, > 4.x or 5.x. What are the advantages of on over the other? > > Thanks For a server I would suggest 4.x, unless your hardware/application requires features from the 5 branch, but you should be thinking of upgrading to 5.x in the next 1-2 years -- Justin Murdock ...

Choices !!
Hi, I have a JVC mini DV camcorder, and I like to be able to edit the footage on my pc a bit - add a few transitions, titles etc....... I like to burn the footage to a VCD with menus etc..... (my DVD player doesnt play SVCDs) Sometimes I may want to burn onto DVD -R or DVD-RAM....... With this in mind, what are the best settings to have Video Studio 7 setup to ? Should the PROJECT SETTINGS be set to AVI, 25fps, before I start ? Then when I capture, should I capture in DV format ? or MPEG, or AVI ? Am I right in thinking that I should try and capture in the format b...

Choices
I mentioned humans as echoing machines. The following is an addition to that thought. In the process from input to output we have choices. Choice 1: absorption Choice 2: reflection With choice 1 something might change. With choice 2 nothing changes. Of course those processes are mingled. I'm interested in the changes. Example: input is a signal that says make zero one. Absorption: a zero changes to one or a one remains a one Reflection: a zero remains a zero. In addition I recall the echo where a one becomes a zero. Important is the notion of resistence. If a dumb machine just chan...

Browser choice should also extend to OS choice
Browser choice should also extend to OS choice ---------------------------------------------- The EU has ruled that its citizens should have browser choice because micoshaft had behaved as an illegal monopoly, and that choice quickly allowed many other browsers to go mainstream. The same is overdue for OS. Micoshaft has illegally twisted suppliers in Taiwan to restrict choice of OS preload. What used to be plentiful cheap netbooks with Linux has been replaced with ugly slow booting windummy OSen on machines that cannot properly run that OSen. Linux on the other hand can. So the EU are still...

c++ as choice for long term application choice.
Have a application (custom written for a vetical market) which has been developed in VB over the last several years. Now that MS has done what MS does best and is to relegated VB to the twilight zone in feb of 08 I have decided to rewrite in another language. The application is constatnly being upgraded with new features and I would like to find someting that would have long term support, if such is possible. Never would have thought MS would "disregard" VB. How about VC++. ? It would need to be somewhat on par with VB as far as the features and capabilities of VB. Any thoughts fro...

Choice
In the grocery store there are many, many kinds of cheese... I have tried several but many I have not and I have little interest in them. I do, however, sometimes make my own cheese. I just had a snack with some of my home made cream cheese. It was excellent. Choice. Grocery stores also have many kinds of pancake mix. I do not believe I have ever bought any of them, though I have had others pancakes made from them. I make my own. Started by - for the most part - following recipes. Then I made my own recipe... one very different from any other I have seen. I shared it with others... m...

Quiz in VB
Can anyone please give me some clues on how to track the right answers in multiple-choice type questions (using checkbox) and single-choice questions (rdio buttons) and also how to store the right answer value in the db? Much appreciated kadmazid@hotmail.com (Mohammed Mazid) wrote in message news:<7cfd7b4a.0402140837.5a8f9570@posting.google.com>... > Can anyone please give me some clues on how to track the right answers > in multiple-choice type questions (using checkbox) and single-choice > questions (rdio buttons) and also how to store the right answer value > in the db? ...

Still More Mac advocacy-PCMag chooses MBP as Editor's choice
I know, PC Magazine is actually a Maccie magazine... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2279376,00.asp -- Dave Fritzinger Honolulu, HI On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:13:27 -1000, David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> wrote: >I know, PC Magazine is actually a Maccie magazine... ....until such time as it says something positive about a Microsoft product when it will switch to being a bought and paid for Microsoft mouthpiece with every employee having to check his inbox every morning for his marching orders from Ballmer. > >http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2279376,00.asp In article <1gm9349h859948rn8c5q3h30k39so3tu92@4ax.com>, Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:13:27 -1000, David Fritzinger > <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> wrote: > > >I know, PC Magazine is actually a Maccie magazine... > > ...until such time as it says something positive about a Microsoft > product when it will switch to being a bought and paid for Microsoft > mouthpiece with every employee having to check his inbox every morning > for his marching orders from Ballmer. > > > >http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2279376,00.asp I do believe the Mayor is getting a bit touchy... -- Dave Fritzinger Honolulu, HI On Wed, 21 May 2008 16:44:05 -1000, David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote: >In article <1gm9349h859948rn8c5q3h30k39so3tu92@4ax.com>, > Mayo...

Choice of DHCP-server? Is the "IOS-one" a good choice?
Have a need for a DHCP server. Is the IOS-one a good choice? The arguments for is: - Easy management and logging - HA, if the IOS-box is protected with UPS etc - No more boxes/computers Reasons why not: - possible security risks(eg IOS DHCP on main router in network) ?? - lack of functionality (option 82 etc)? - etc? I am not an expert on DHCP solutions so what du you reckon? /Fred "Fred" <Xfrecarlen@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:HLKBb.37586$mU6.133488@newsb.telia.net... > Reasons why not: > - possible security risks(eg IOS DHCP on main router in network) ??...

[c.d.o.s][Long...] SHMMNI choice affect SHMMAX choice?
People, I've been asked to document how a DBA should set values of some Linux kernel parameters. This is an easy task since it is a topic covered in the Oracle installation documents. While writing my document, my curiosity triggered some simple questions. What is the purpose of SHMMNI? If I set SHMMNI to a larger value, can I lower SHMMAX to a value to support a given SGA? I found this description of SHMMNI via google: SHMMNI sets the maximum number of shared memory segments which can be allocated at any one time. The above description suggests that I can carve up my shared memory...

Can Choice components respond to keyboard input like HTML Choice components?
Users expect Choice components to respond to keyboard input similarly to HTML Choice components. This keyboard-responsiveness is not coded into standard Java Choice components. One would expect that adding appropriate listeners and events could produce the HTML-like functionality, but this does not appear to work. At http://segal.org/java/ChoiceKey2/index.html is a small working applet with full source code to demonstrate this problem. The desired behavior occurs with neither the Sun JVM nor the Microsoft JVM; each departs from user expectations in different ways. Is there some way to do ...

Web resources about - Choices, choices, choices - comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Choice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... style . The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation , footnoting , or external linking . Choice ...

Thermomix under fire over safety issues as owners and Choice speak out
Thermomix owners - and ex-owners - have spoken in support of a West Australian woman who suffered second-degree burns after her appliance apparently ...

Thermomix under fire over safety issues as owners and Choice speak out
Thermomix owners - and ex-owners - have spoken in support of a West Australian woman who suffered second-degree burns after her appliance apparently ...

Mitt Romney’s Improvident Choice
Mitt Romney’s Improvident Choice

Rabobank Announces True Made Foods as the FoodBytes! Brooklyn People’s Choice Award Winner
Rabobank, the world&rsquo;s premier food &amp;amp; agribusiness bank, has announced that True Made Foods has won the FoodBytes! Brooklyn People&rsquo; ...

New Illinois AD had no choice but to make change his first day
Washington Post New Illinois AD had no choice but to make change his first day CBSSports.com On his first day on the job at Illinois, Josh ...

Republicans face tough choices
Republicans desperate to stop Donald Trump from capturing the party's presidential nomination are wrestling with whether to unite behind Ted ...

The Latest: Hit back or walk away _ choice for Trump rivals
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on the 2016 presidential campaign, with voters in five states getting their say Saturday in nominating contests ...

A False Choice: How Films Can And Should Have Both Talent And Diversity
However white the feature-length Oscars are, the shorts category is much more diverse.

This week in the war on workers: 'School choice' is not the hot issue Republicans claim
... companies and organizations that manage charter schools to release to parents and the public how they spend taxpayer money. “School choice” ...

Resources last updated: 3/8/2016 6:55:21 AM