Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly 
in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And 
Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their 
top of the world machines.

So, you join the discussion, you want to learn more. You ask how many 
ounces of copper their PCB is built with, where their capacitors and 
MOSFETs are made, what's their technology and so on.

Here's the kind of answers you receive:

Jolly says:

"You're an idiot", but doesn't seem to notice his reference proves your 
point: Japanese capacitors never had problems.

William Clark says:

"it is just your IQ that is a fake"

Streater says:

"silly boy"

George Kerby compares my mother to a sow.

And so on.

But, about the heart of the matter, the quality of hardware that Apple 
provides, not a single word, though Jolly pretends Apple uses 
counterfeit parts:

"Be sure to replace all of the capacitors of similar make on the
motherboard - not just the ones that show signs of failure right now -
because it's likely they are all counterfeit and will fail prematurely!"

Isn't this amazing? Not one single answer that makes sense. Tim Streater 
even goes as far as to explain that he'd rather buy a Mac that he can't 
upgrade to USB 3 and has just enough space for one (1) HD because he 
hasn't got enough room in his house!

Man! Are money and brains ever getting tight for the elite in the US! I 
wonder how the lower class fares, you know people with no brains. Can 
they read, can they talk? If Mac users are the elite, I see problems 
ahead for the US (As this is where Macs are more popular.)

Arrivederci!

In article <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly 
> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US.

ITEM: I'm not in the US.

> That's a given. And Maccies like their Macs so much that
> they just luv to talk about their top of the world machines.

Do we? Looks more like it's you, not us. And even if we did, why would 
that be so surprising. This is a Mac ng.

> So, you join the discussion, you want to learn more. You ask how many 
> ounces of copper their PCB is built with, where their capacitors and 
> MOSFETs are made, what's their technology and so on.

Why should 99% of us give a  monkey's about answers to questions like 
this? Doubtless there may be some Mac users who agonise about such 
things, but again, its just you.

> But, about the heart of the matter, the quality of hardware that Apple 
> provides, not a single word, though Jolly pretends Apple uses 
> counterfeit parts:

The "quality of hardware" is good enough that I don't experience 
failures. That's all I need to know. I've been using Macs since about 
1990 both privately and professionally and haven't experienced any 
hardware issues.

And the main issue is in fact the quality of the software - OS X.

> Isn't this amazing? Not one single answer that makes sense. Tim Streater 
> even goes as far as to explain that he'd rather buy a Mac that he can't 
> upgrade to USB 3 and has just enough space for one (1) HD because he 
> hasn't got enough room in his house!

Again, I don't give a monkey's about USB3 either, so, unlike you, I 
don't obsess about it. And expanding the disk space is easy, while still 
keeping the energy footprint low.

Look George, we know you're angry and jealous because you made a 
can't-see-past-the-end-of-my-nose decision and bought a PC. You then 
realised how limited your software options were and chose the least-bad 
choice, Linux, to run on it. Well tough - it's not our fault. So stop 
standing outside the party and lobbing empty beer cans over the wall, OK?

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <timstreater-E1CCFF.20494430082010@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:

> In article <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> 
> > Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly 
> > in this country so reputed for its culture, the US.
> 
> ITEM: I'm not in the US.

ITEM: You are responding to a known troll. This is generally 
discouraged, and thought to be a bad idea.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> But, about the heart of the matter, the quality of hardware that Apple 
> provides, not a single word, though Jolly pretends Apple uses 
> counterfeit parts:

"Counterfeit" might not be a completely accurate term, but it's 
pretty close.  There was a bad case of failed indusrial espionage, 
where one capacitor producer's forumula was stolen while it was still 
in development stage.  Several companies ended up with the stolen 
formula and used it to produce millions of capacitors.  Dell and HP all 
bought and used them in their hardware. 

My eMac had them.  It started to fail after 18 months.  Its logic board 
was replaced under an extended warranty program.  This was no design 
fault of Apple's.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

On 8/30/10 1:35 PM, in article i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org, "Tim
Okergit" <to@notme.com> wrote:

> Mac users are the "cr�me the la cr�me" of today's intellectuals, mainly
> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And
> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their
> top of the world machines.
> 
> So, you join the discussion, you want to learn more. You ask how many
> ounces of copper their PCB is built with, where their capacitors and
> MOSFETs are made, what's their technology and so on.
> 
> Here's the kind of answers you receive:
> 
> Jolly says:
> 
> "You're an idiot", but doesn't seem to notice his reference proves your
> point: Japanese capacitors never had problems.
> 
> William Clark says:
> 
> "it is just your IQ that is a fake"
> 
> Streater says:
> 
> "silly boy"
> 
> George Kerby compares my mother to a sow.
> 
That is the ADSS kicking in again, mon idiot:

I stated: "I hear your mother calling, Priam"

And then I gave the URL of a woman 'calling pigs' in a contest.

So, by you thinking and stating that I "compared your mother to a sow"
absolutely illustrates your inability to reason coherently.

Sad to be your sorry ass...

On 8/30/10 2:49 PM, in article
timstreater-E1CCFF.20494430082010@news.individual.net, "Tim Streater"
<timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:

> In article <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> 
>> Mac users are the "cr�me the la cr�me" of today's intellectuals, mainly
>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US.
> 
> ITEM: I'm not in the US.
> 
>> That's a given. And Maccies like their Macs so much that
>> they just luv to talk about their top of the world machines.
> 
> Do we? Looks more like it's you, not us. And even if we did, why would
> that be so surprising. This is a Mac ng.
> 
>> So, you join the discussion, you want to learn more. You ask how many
>> ounces of copper their PCB is built with, where their capacitors and
>> MOSFETs are made, what's their technology and so on.
> 
> Why should 99% of us give a  monkey's about answers to questions like
> this? Doubtless there may be some Mac users who agonise about such
> things, but again, its just you.
> 
>> But, about the heart of the matter, the quality of hardware that Apple
>> provides, not a single word, though Jolly pretends Apple uses
>> counterfeit parts:
> 
> The "quality of hardware" is good enough that I don't experience
> failures. That's all I need to know. I've been using Macs since about
> 1990 both privately and professionally and haven't experienced any
> hardware issues.
> 
> And the main issue is in fact the quality of the software - OS X.
> 
>> Isn't this amazing? Not one single answer that makes sense. Tim Streater
>> even goes as far as to explain that he'd rather buy a Mac that he can't
>> upgrade to USB 3 and has just enough space for one (1) HD because he
>> hasn't got enough room in his house!
> 
> Again, I don't give a monkey's about USB3 either, so, unlike you, I
> don't obsess about it. And expanding the disk space is easy, while still
> keeping the energy footprint low.
> 
> Look George, we know you're angry and jealous because you made a
> can't-see-past-the-end-of-my-nose decision and bought a PC. You then
> realised how limited your software options were and chose the least-bad
> choice, Linux, to run on it. Well tough - it's not our fault. So stop
> standing outside the party and lobbing empty beer cans over the wall, OK?

"Ya talkin' to me?!? Well ya' gotta be talking to me because..."

Wrong thread, Tim.

On 08/30/2010 05:56 PM, Király wrote:

> This was no design fault of Apple's.

Absolutely not, but is this where Apple's responsibility should end.

As I already explained, one year ago, I had a computer built to my specs 
for $20 less than today's Mini. Globally, you can say it has twice the 
specs. So, obviously, Apple is charging you for top quality hardware. Do 
you really get the top-iest?

Had Apple dealt with a responsible company, the capacitors would have 
been made in Japan. Here, you have a lowest bidder motherboard 
manufacturer who gets its capacitors from a lowest bidder capacitor 
manufacturer who "lost the formula" and still provided the components as 
if he knew what he was doing. The mobo manufacturer never noticed 
anything wrong. He bought capacitors, he got capacitors.

Had everything worked out as planned, of course, Apple would have made a 
fortune selling you lowest bidder hardware at top quality price. But now 
that the scheme fails, who's footing the bill?

Dell, doesn't foot the bill either, you'll say. But I could have bought 
roughly the equivalent of my computer for $200 less. Dell charges for 
bottom quality hardware, and that's what you get. Sometimes it works 
well, sometimes it doesn't. If it doesn't, after the guarantee period, 
the user foots the bill.

But if Apple wants to play the lowest bidder game, either they should 
lower their prices by, at least, half, or they should back their product 
for any defect that is not due to normal wear or the user's negligence.

That's not what they do. Since Mac users don't complain, they appear to 
investors as Morons that can be milked whatever what. That's why with 
about 4% of market share worldwide -- I'm not talking about the US, here 
-- Apple has a market cap of 221.54B whereas Microsoft, even with  with 
many investments all over the place such as in Bing, and about 90% of 
market share for OS has 204.57B.

Hey, if PC users were caught in this kind of scheme, you'd hear them 
screaming, managing to get out of it. They don't pretend to be the 
elite, but they're not such fools.

On 08/30/2010 03:49 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
>
>> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals,
>> mainly in this country so reputed for its culture, the US.
>
> ITEM: I'm not in the US.

You mean that fools are not all in the US? I can believe this.

>> That's a given. And Maccies like their Macs so much that
>> they just luv to talk about their top of the world machines.
>
> Do we? Looks more like it's you, not us. And even if we did, why would
> that be so surprising. This is a Mac ng.

Maybe brag about being the happy few would be more exact than "brag 
about their machine". They certainly don't the way PC users do :)

>> So, you join the discussion, you want to learn more. You ask how many
>> ounces of copper their PCB is built with, where their capacitors and
>> MOSFETs are made, what's their technology and so on.
>
> Why should 99% of us give a monkey's about answers to questions like
> this?

They don't indeed. That's why they buy lowest bidder stuff at top 
quality hardware prices. What a nice occasion to be milked and then brag 
about the huge profits the Master makes!

>> But, about the heart of the matter, the quality of hardware that Apple
>> provides, not a single word, though Jolly pretends Apple uses
>> counterfeit parts:
>
> The "quality of hardware" is good enough that I don't experience
> failures.

 From what I read on this group and all over the net, you've been very 
lucky!

> And the main issue is in fact the quality of the software - OS X.

I must have heard this one about a 1000 times. Your so precious OS X is 
free software paid hundreds of millions to Job by Apple. With a Mach 
kernel, you're unsafe at any speed. Of course, virtual desktops are now 
named Spaces... Quite a gain!

>> Isn't this amazing? Not one single answer that makes sense. Tim
>> Streater even goes as far as to explain that he'd rather buy a Mac
>> that he can't upgrade to USB 3 and has just enough space for one (1)
>> HD because he hasn't got enough room in his house!
>
> Again, I don't give a monkey's about USB3 either, so, unlike you, I
> don't obsess about it.

You don't giev a shit about USB 3, about being limites to only one HD, 
two cores processors and so on. That's why Jobs loves you. And you glad 
Jobs loves you for your ignorance?

> Look George, we know you're angry and jealous because you made a
> can't-see-past-the-end-of-my-nose decision and bought a PC.

Until now you haven't given me one reason to be jealous.

Enough.

On 08/30/2010 04:47 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:

> ITEM: You are responding to a known troll.

And don't forget: whoever doesn't kiss Jobs's ass for being milked so 
nicely, is a troll.

In article <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly 
> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And 
> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their 
> top of the world machines.
> 

Snipped


It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.

On 2010-08-31, Deltic <nospam@nospam.com.au> wrote:

> It's "cr??me de la cr??me". Please get that correct in future.

Or as Del would say, the "creme de la menthe".

Ian

-- 
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/

On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly
>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And
>> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their
>> top of the world machines.
>>
>
> Snipped
>
>
> It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.

I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you 
should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read this 
for years.

"UTF-8 can represent every character in the Unicode character set, but 
unlike them it has the special property of being backwards-compatible 
with ASCII. For this reason, it is steadily becoming the dominant 
character encoding for files, e-mail, web pages,[1][2] and software that 
manipulates textual information."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utf-8

Now, I know that Apple has been trying to monopolize the printing 
industry by imposing their own fonts but I thought they'd come back to 
their senses. Maybe not...

Oops! I just checked Jolly's and your headers. Your Macs don't even 
indicate the charset. How can you expect things to work write? Stop 
telling people to get things right when your are really totally wrong.

Have fun! And stop believing Macs are the center of the universe. A pile 
of crap will never be the center of the universe.

On 08/30/2010 04:47 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<timstreater-E1CCFF.20494430082010@news.individual.net>,
>   Tim Streater<timstreater@waitrose.com>  wrote:
>
>> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly
>>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US.

Hey! Macs can't even quote messages correctly. It's "crème de la créme", 
Jolly, not "*the* la crème".

Shit I wouldn't want to be a Mac user. Problems with charsets, problem 
with quoting, problems with capacitors, cooling systems, monitors, etc. 
Where does it end?

In article <i5jskj$3o2$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> Shit I wouldn't want to be a Mac user. Problems with charsets, problem 
> with quoting, problems with capacitors, cooling systems, monitors, etc. 
> Where does it end?

It never started, trollboy.  You're to the Mac like Fred Phelps is to gays 
or Stormfront is to humanity.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On 08/30/2010 08:40 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:

So, Király, tell me, do you find it normal to get the same lowest bidder 
"no recipe" capacitors as Dell users and have to pick up the pieces once 
it fails?

Why does Jobs get twice the money whatever happens?

In article <i5jvlk$q6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> Why does Jobs get twice the money whatever happens?

That just drives you nuts, doesn't it?

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

In article <i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you 
> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read this 
> for years.

You should change the encoding of your outgoing messages because when other 
people write it, it comes out perfectly here.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On 8/31/10   PDT 5:08 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<i5jvlk$q6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> Why does Jobs get twice the money whatever happens?
>
> That just drives you nuts, doesn't it?

And when he's already insane with jealousy. Or crazy with too much time 
on his hands. Or........

-- 
john mcwilliams

On 08/31/2010 08:08 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<i5jvlk$q6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:

>> Why does Jobs get twice the money whatever happens?

> That just drives you nuts, doesn't it?

Why should it? I'm not sending a red cent to Steve Jobs. It's Mac users 
who should get infuriated The no so funny thing is that those loonies 
are not.

We'll have to study this aspect further, I believe.

Tim Okergit wrote:

> Why should it? I'm not sending a red cent to Steve Jobs. 

Priam,

You should. The poor chap can't afford food and is starving. Have tyou
seen how thin he is ? He needs YOUR help.

You could do like other NGOs. Just send money, and in recognition, you
get a picture of a starved Steve Jobs, half naked and barefoot in his
tribal village, bush flies over his face, standing next to his mudd hutt
and looking very hungry.



OR, you could do something far more productive: You buy an Apple product
such as an Ipod. You not only help feed Steve Jobs, but also get a fully
functional device to listen to music.

And when you buy an Apple product, not only do you help feed Steve Jobs,
but you also help feed 1.3 million Foxconn employees in Asia. So Apple
ends up being a far more efficient NGO helping feed people around the world.


:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

(And yes, BBC reported some time ago that Foxconn has 1.3 million
employees in China/Taiwan. This is a HUGE corporation. In fairness, not
all of them work to build Apple branded products, many also build HP ,
Dell etc products.

In article <i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
> > In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly
> >> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And
> >> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their
> >> top of the world machines.
> >>
> >
> > Snipped
> >
> >
> > It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.
> 
> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you 
> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read this 
> for years.

You said, according to Deltic, "crème the la crème" and he was 
pointing out that it is not "the" but "de".

-- 
dorayme

In article <i5k9m2$kmk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 08/31/2010 08:08 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<i5jvlk$q6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> 
> >> Why does Jobs get twice the money whatever happens?
> 
> > That just drives you nuts, doesn't it?
> 
> Why should it? 

It's very obvious it upsets you. : )

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

In article <i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
> > In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly
                               ^^^
> >> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And
> >> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their
> >> top of the world machines.
> >>
> >
> > Snipped
> >
> >
> > It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.
                 ^^
> 
> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you 
> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read this 
> for years.

Maybe you should read what you wrote and then re-read the correction.

-- 
Tom Stiller

PGP fingerprint =  5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3  7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF

On 09/01/2010 06:55 AM, Tom Stiller wrote:
> In article<i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
>>> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>    Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's intellectuals, mainly
>                                 ^^^
>>>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given. And
>>>> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about their
>>>> top of the world machines.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Snipped
>>>
>>>
>>> It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.
>                   ^^
>>
>> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you
>> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read this
>> for years.
>
> Maybe you should read what you wrote and then re-read the correction.

Good advice! It seems I had a slip of the keyboard. If it hadn't been 
for the wrong character encoding from Deltic, I would have got the point 
sooner I suppose.

I just checked Tim Streater and George Kerby's posts and there is no 
endocing problem. So, it's not a Mac problem, it's the posters', amongst 
which Jolly the Expert.

Thanks to you and Dorayme.

On 9/1/10   PDT 12:55 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 06:55 AM, Tom Stiller wrote:
>> In article<i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
>>>> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mac users are the "cr=C3=83=C2=A8me the la cr=C3=83=C2=A8me" of tod=
ay's
>>>>> intellectuals, mainly
>> ^^^
>>>>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given.=

>>>>> And
>>>>> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about th=
eir
>>>>> top of the world machines.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Snipped
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's "cr=C3=83=C2=A8me de la cr=C3=83=C2=A8me". Please get that corr=
ect in future.
>> ^^
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr =C3=83 =C2=A8 me. =
Maybe you
>>> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read t=
his
>>> for years.
>>
>> Maybe you should read what you wrote and then re-read the correction.
>
> Good advice! It seems I had a slip of the keyboard. If it hadn't been
> for the wrong character encoding from Deltic, I would have got the poin=
t
> sooner I suppose.
>
> I just checked Tim Streater and George Kerby's posts and there is no
> endocing problem. So, it's not a Mac problem, it's the posters', amongs=
t
> which Jolly the Expert.
>
> Thanks to you and Dorayme.

Vous =EAtes la cr=E8me de la cr=E8me. Je ne suis pas la m=EAme. Tante pis=
=2E

Jus' 'sperimentin'.

--=20
john mcwilliams

In article <i5mkl0$9g1$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

> Vous �tes la cr�me de la cr�me. Je ne suis pas la m�me. Tante pis.

Looks fine here.

-- 
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

On 2010-09-01 18:59:48 -0400, Michelle Steiner said:

> In article <i5mkl0$9g1$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> Vous �tes la cr�me de la cr�me. Je ne suis pas la m�me. Tante pis.
> 
> Looks fine here.

and here.

On 9/1/10   PDT 4:22 PM, A Non E Mouse wrote:
> On 2010-09-01 18:59:48 -0400, Michelle Steiner said:
>
>> In article <i5mkl0$9g1$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Vous =EAtes la cr=E8me de la cr=E8me. Je ne suis pas la m=EAme. Tante=
 pis.
>>
>> Looks fine here.
>
> and here.

Merci, folks, bow-coo... I've long ignored using the built in accents,=20
why I dunno. Lazy, prolly.

--=20
john mcwilliams

On 09/01/2010 06:38 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
> On 9/1/10  PDT 12:55 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>> On 09/01/2010 06:55 AM, Tom Stiller wrote:
>>> In article<i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
>>>>> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mac users are the "crème the la crème" of today's
>>>>>> intellectuals, mainly
>>> ^^^
>>>>>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a given.
>>>>>> And
>>>>>> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> top of the world machines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Snipped
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's "crème de la crème". Please get that correct in future.
>>> ^^
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr à ¨ me. Maybe you
>>>> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read
>>>> this
>>>> for years.
>>>
>>> Maybe you should read what you wrote and then re-read the correction.
>>
>> Good advice! It seems I had a slip of the keyboard. If it hadn't been
>> for the wrong character encoding from Deltic, I would have got the point
>> sooner I suppose.
>>
>> I just checked Tim Streater and George Kerby's posts and there is no
>> endocing problem. So, it's not a Mac problem, it's the posters', amongst
>> which Jolly the Expert.
>>
>> Thanks to you and Dorayme.
>
> Vous �tes la cr�me de la cr�me. Je ne suis pas la m�me. Tante pis.
>
> Jus' 'sperimentin'.

Lokks fien here too but mayeb you should try 'sperimenting' with 
something else than charset=windows-1252.

I suggest UTF-8.

On 9/1/10   PDT 4:38 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 06:38 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
>> On 9/1/10 PDT 12:55 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>>> On 09/01/2010 06:55 AM, Tom Stiller wrote:
>>>> In article<i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 08/31/2010 03:26 PM, Deltic wrote:
>>>>>> In article<i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>>> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mac users are the "cr=C3=83=C2=A8me the la cr=C3=83=C2=A8me" of t=
oday's
>>>>>>> intellectuals, mainly
>>>> ^^^
>>>>>>> in this country so reputed for its culture, the US. That's a give=
n.
>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>> Maccies like their Macs so much that they just luv to talk about
>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>> top of the world machines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Snipped
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's "cr=C3=83=C2=A8me de la cr=C3=83=C2=A8me". Please get that co=
rrect in future.
>>>> ^^
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure how Macs read this, but here, it's cr =C3=83 =C2=A8 me=
=2E Maybe you
>>>>> should try setting your fonts to UTF-8. Windows and Linux have read=

>>>>> this
>>>>> for years.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should read what you wrote and then re-read the correction=
=2E
>>>
>>> Good advice! It seems I had a slip of the keyboard. If it hadn't been=

>>> for the wrong character encoding from Deltic, I would have got the po=
int
>>> sooner I suppose.
>>>
>>> I just checked Tim Streater and George Kerby's posts and there is no
>>> endocing problem. So, it's not a Mac problem, it's the posters', amon=
gst
>>> which Jolly the Expert.
>>>
>>> Thanks to you and Dorayme.
>>
>> Vous =EAtes la cr=E8me de la cr=E8me. Je ne suis pas la m=EAme. Tante =
pis.
>>
>> Jus' 'sperimentin'.
>
> Lokks fien here too but mayeb you should try 'sperimenting' with
> something else than charset=3Dwindows-1252.
>
> I suggest UTF-8.
>

Nah, not unless you give a good reason or two.

text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1; format=3Dflowed has been bery, bery goo=
d=20
to me.....

--=20
lsmft

I know that you believe you understood what you think I said, but I'm=20
not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

On 09/01/2010 07:41 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
> On 9/1/10  PDT 4:38 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:

>> I suggest UTF-8.
>>
>
> Nah, not unless you give a good reason or two.
>
> text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed has been bery, bery good
> to me.....

If UTF-8 was adopted, we could have 107,000 characters at our disposal 
without adding overhead to any original character encoding. IOW, if the 
standard was adopted, we could get rid of character encoding.

8859-1 was OK in good old days and still does the job, but enen 8859 
needs different version for wuropean languages:

8859-15 AND 8859-1 for Western
8859-10 Nordic
8859-7 Greek
8859-8-1 Hebrew
8859-3 South European
Etc.

Beside all those people, UTF-8 may be used by Russians, Tamouls, 
Japanese, Chinese, etc. with all the characters for currencies and so
on.

As I already noted, you don't use 8859-1:

Path: 
eternal-september.org!mx03.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: *John McWilliams* <jpmcw@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Discussing with the Mac elite...
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:41:12 -0700
Organization: Sept. all the time
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <i5moao$pud$1@news.eternal-september.org>
References: <i5gtkj$5mk$1@news.eternal-september.org> 
<nospam-34D2BC.05261801092010@freenews.ozemail.com.au> 
<i5jscv$2nq$1@news.eternal-september.org> 
<tom_stiller-C28005.06555701092010@news.individual.net> 
<i5mb1p$ret$1@news.eternal-september.org> 
<i5mkl0$9g1$1@news.eternal-september.org> 
<i5mo3u$d07$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; *charset=windows-1252*; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

windows-1252 is a Microsoft charset.

More on UTF-8 and Unicode from Wikipedia:

UTF-8 (8-bit Unicode Transformation Format) is a variable-length 
character encoding for Unicode. Like UTF-16 and UTF-32, UTF-8 can 
represent every character in the Unicode character set, but unlike them 
it has the special property of being backwards-compatible with ASCII. 
For this reason, it is steadily becoming the dominant character encoding 
for files, e-mail, web pages,[1][2] and software that manipulates 
textual information.

UTF-8 encodes each character (code point) in 1 to 4 octets (8-bit 
bytes). The first 128 characters of the Unicode character set (which 
correspond directly to the ASCII) use a single octet with the same 
binary value as in ASCII.

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) requires all Internet 
protocols to identify the encoding used for character data, and the 
supported character encodings must include UTF-8.[3] The Internet Mail 
Consortium (IMC) recommends that all e-mail programs be able to display 
and create mail using UTF-8.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utf-8

Unicode is a computing industry standard for the consistent 
representation and handling of text expressed in most of the world's 
writing systems. Developed in conjunction with the Universal Character 
Set standard and published in book form as The Unicode Standard, the 
latest version of Unicode consists of a repertoire of more than 107,000 
characters covering 90 scripts, a set of code charts for visual 
reference, an encoding methodology and set of standard character 
encodings, an enumeration of character properties such as upper and 
lower case, a set of reference data computer files, and a number of 
related items, such as character properties, rules for normalization, 
decomposition, collation, rendering, and bidirectional display order 
(for the correct display of text containing both right-to-left scripts, 
such as Arabic or Hebrew, and left-to-right scripts).[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode

If you select UTF-8 for reception charset, you might encounter some 
problems with 8859-1. I'm not sure why. Maybe it has to do with the 
servers being used to deal with 8859-1.

But if the emssage is written in UTF-8, both UTF-8, of course, and 
8859-1 have no problem.

So, for the time being, you might have to use 8859-1 for reception.

Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2010 08:40 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
> 
> So, Kir�ly, tell me, do you find it normal to get the same lowest bidder 
> "no recipe" capacitors as Dell users and have to pick up the pieces once 
> it fails?

How do you know the ones Apple bought were the lowest bidder?  Maybe 
they were from the highest bidder.  Several capacitor manufacturers 
ended up with and used the bad formula, and it isn't even clear that 
all of them acquired the bad formula in bad faith.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

On 9/2/10   PDT 11:13 AM, Tim Okergit wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 07:41 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
>> On 9/1/10 PDT 4:38 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>
>>> I suggest UTF-8.
>>>
>>
>> Nah, not unless you give a good reason or two.
>>
>> text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed has been bery, bery good
>> to me.....
>
> If UTF-8 was adopted, we could have 107,000 characters at our disposal
> without adding overhead to any original character encoding. IOW, if the
> standard was adopted, we could get rid of character encoding.
>
> 8859-1 was OK in good old days and still does the job, but enen 8859
> needs different version for wuropean languages:
>
> 8859-15 AND 8859-1 for Western
> 8859-10 Nordic
> 8859-7 Greek
> 8859-8-1 Hebrew
> 8859-3 South European
> Etc.
>
> Beside all those people, UTF-8 may be used by Russians, Tamouls,
> Japanese, Chinese, etc. with all the characters for currencies and so
> on.
>
> As I already noted, you don't use 8859-1:

Interesting: In replies off your posts, we do indeed find:
'text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed',
but my reply off Michelle's post, for example, it is the 8859-1.


-- 
John McWilliams

On 09/03/2010 01:36 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
> On 9/2/10  PDT 11:13 AM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>> On 09/01/2010 07:41 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
>>> On 9/1/10 PDT 4:38 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>>
>>>> I suggest UTF-8.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nah, not unless you give a good reason or two.
>>>
>>> text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed has been bery, bery good
>>> to me.....
>>
>> If UTF-8 was adopted, we could have 107,000 characters at our disposal
>> without adding overhead to any original character encoding. IOW, if the
>> standard was adopted, we could get rid of character encoding.
>>
>> 8859-1 was OK in good old days and still does the job, but enen 8859
>> needs different version for wuropean languages:
>>
>> 8859-15 AND 8859-1 for Western
>> 8859-10 Nordic
>> 8859-7 Greek
>> 8859-8-1 Hebrew
>> 8859-3 South European
>> Etc.
>>
>> Beside all those people, UTF-8 may be used by Russians, Tamouls,
>> Japanese, Chinese, etc. with all the characters for currencies and so
>> on.
>>
>> As I already noted, you don't use 8859-1:
>
> Interesting: In replies off your posts, we do indeed find:
> 'text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed',
> but my reply off Michelle's post, for example, it is the 8859-1.

Path: 
eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: *Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org>
Subject: Re: Apple special event
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:20:42 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Path: 
eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: *John McWilliams* <jpmcw@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.ipad,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Apple special event
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:29:38 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Here you answer to UTF-8 with UTF-8, not 8850-1

I'll have to let you sort that out.

On 09/02/2010 10:16 PM, Kir�ly wrote:
> Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>> On 08/30/2010 08:40 PM, Tim Okergit wrote:
>>
>> So, Kir�ly, tell me, do you find it normal to get the same lowest bidder
>> "no recipe" capacitors as Dell users and have to pick up the pieces once
>> it fails?
>
> How do you know the ones Apple bought were the lowest bidder?  Maybe
> they were from the highest bidder.

It's rather unlikely that a highest bidder modo manufacturer would buy 
Taiwanese capacitors. Unless they played the Apple game of buying cheap 
selling high, of course. But I'm sure Apple's technicians know better.

> Several capacitor manufacturers
> ended up with and used the bad formula, and it isn't even clear that
> all of them acquired the bad formula in bad faith.

Who said that? It was just

"In one case, the reason for the manufacture of faulty electrolytic 
capacitors was *industrial espionage gone wrong*: several Taiwanese 
electrolyte manufacturers began using a stolen formula that was 
incomplete, and lacked ingredients needed to produce a stable capacitor."

Most probably you believe highest bidders deal with part providers who 
rely on industrial espionage instead of having a precise idea of what 
they're doing. That's how you end up with Mac Crap quality.

In article <i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> the Apple game of buying cheap 
> selling high

What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very 
good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for 
many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the 
test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and 
things have changed?

-- 
dorayme

In article <dorayme-D93A22.18164404092010@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article <i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> 
> > the Apple game of buying cheap 
> > selling high
> 
> What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very 
> good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for 
> many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the 
> test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and 
> things have changed?

You're talking to a well known troll.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

On 09/04/2010 04:16 AM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> the Apple game of buying cheap
>> selling high
>
> What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very
> good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for
> many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the
> test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and
> things have changed?

You mean you never had a leaking G5? Never a cheap Taiwanese capacitor 
plagued e/iMac? Never a yellow pissed Lucky Goldstar 27" monitor? 
Never... the list goes on.

Ooooooooooooooooooooh, what a lucky man he wa_as!

On 09/04/2010 09:27 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<dorayme-D93A22.18164404092010@news.albasani.net>,
>   dorayme<dorayme@optusnet.com.au>  wrote:
>
>> In article<i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> the Apple game of buying cheap
>>> selling high
>>
>> What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very
>> good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for
>> many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the
>> test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and
>> things have changed?
>
> You're talking to a well known troll.

It's inderstood that whoever doesn't kiss Jobs' ass for being milked so 
nicely, is a troll. But even you answer my messages, Jolly, because the 
truth has a strenght that can't be ignored.

You're paying horrendously high price for Dell type hardware and the 
guarantee is not a bit better.

1984 brainwashing is doing its Jobs.

In article <i5u6gs$vk0$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 09/04/2010 04:16 AM, dorayme wrote:
> > In article<i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> the Apple game of buying cheap
> >> selling high
> >
> > What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very
> > good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for
> > many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the
> > test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and
> > things have changed?
> 
> You mean you never had a leaking G5? Never a cheap Taiwanese capacitor 
> plagued e/iMac? Never a yellow pissed Lucky Goldstar 27" monitor? 
> Never... the list goes on.
> 
> Ooooooooooooooooooooh, what a lucky man he wa_as!

I don't know about him, but I've never had any of those either.  Always 
superb equipment from Apple with the best OS for the desktop.

-- 
Lloyd

On 2010-09-04, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:

> I don't know about him, but I've never had any of those either.  
> Always superb equipment from Apple with the best OS for the desktop.

And last year Apple trounced the competition in a PC industry customer 
satisfaction survey [1]. But Mr Okergit doesn't care about facts and 
anyway he is off topic - this group is for "Discussions of Macintosh 
system software" - not that he cares because as we all know he is a 
troll suffering from an unhealthy obsession with Steve Jobs.

Ian

[1] <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10222213-37.html>

-- 
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/

In article <i5u6gs$vk0$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 09/04/2010 04:16 AM, dorayme wrote:
> > In article<i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> the Apple game of buying cheap
> >> selling high
> >
> > What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very
> > good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for
> > many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the
> > test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and
> > things have changed?
> 
> You mean you never had a leaking G5? Never a cheap Taiwanese capacitor 
> plagued e/iMac? Never a yellow pissed Lucky Goldstar 27" monitor? 
> Never... the list goes on.
> 

Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped 
the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear 
out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.

I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of. 
Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's 
Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an 
imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s), 
throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I 
had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got 
the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the 
tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails. 

If there were any stray capacitors playing up, the rest of the 
machine bits were sure compensating for them. Team work you see! 
A Mac is a progressive socialist structure where the machine 
itself looks after its own. It is not a collection of 
over-self-important individual components like with a Windows 
machine. When I ran my special program on a Win box, I could hear 
disputes among the components, the results were crazy and the 
silly thing thought the Gambler was right! What a loser!

-- 
dorayme

On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<i5u6gs$vk0$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 09/04/2010 04:16 AM, dorayme wrote:
>>> In article<i5shae$u7f$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>    Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> the Apple game of buying cheap
>>>> selling high
>>>
>>> What is going on here? Apple has a pretty good record of very
>>> good quality hardware. At least, that has been my impression for
>>> many years. Not just good design but stuff that lasts, that's the
>>> test isn't it? Perhaps all my stuff is not modern enough and
>>> things have changed?
>>
>> You mean you never had a leaking G5? Never a cheap Taiwanese capacitor
>> plagued e/iMac? Never a yellow pissed Lucky Goldstar 27" monitor?
>> Never... the list goes on.
>>
>
> Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
> the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
> out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
>
> I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.

Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very 
inefficient javascript code on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it 
didn't crash your Mac!

> If there were any stray capacitors playing up, the rest of the
> machine bits were sure compensating for them. Team work you see!
> A Mac is a progressive socialist structure where the machine
> itself looks after its own. It is not a collection of
> over-self-important individual components like with a Windows
> machine. When I ran my special program on a Win box, I could hear
> disputes among the components, the results were crazy and the
> silly thing thought the Gambler was right! What a loser!

Man, on a PC running Linux, you open Calculator and ask 1 + 1 = x
and sometimes it says 3. One wonders how this cheap free software can 
run the New-York Stock Exchange.

BSD X rules, even... -- what was that Apple crapware that you had on 
your Mac at the time? -- is better than Linux, mainly with a Mach 
kernel. (I'm sure if BSD had known their software would be used with the 
Mach kernel, and by Apple! they would have made their license more 
restrictive.)

Yup, great crapware all along! And sooo solid hardware! A friend of mine 
bought a Mac just before you did, around 1998 - 2000. Man, the fun he 
had! He was back to the store very second week. Apple finally replaced 
the computer and the new one didn't work any better.

If it doesn't work, you just scrap the thing, it means it is through its 
useful life. Great, great hardware! Look at it crunching numbers at the 
Gambler's Fallacy game!

Ok, I know you're just kidding, but one must not forget that the dunces 
here turn dead serious when another Mac user expresses an opinion about 
the Mac. They take everything at face value.

On 09/04/2010 03:49 PM, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> I've never had any of those either.  Always
> superb equipment from Apple with the best OS for the desktop.

Then, I suggest you buy Dell hardware. Sometimes it works, sometimes it 
doesn't. It all depends if the capacitors' stolen formula is correct or not.

In article <i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
....
> > Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
> > the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
> > out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
> >
> > I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> > Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> > Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> > imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> > throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> > had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> > the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> > tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
> 
> Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very 
> inefficient javascript code on this page:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
> 
> Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it 
> didn't crash your Mac!
> 
 
er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not 
*javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That 
would not even crash a Winbox! <g>

-- 
dorayme

In article <dorayme-6C2A0C.10554706092010@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article <i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
> ...
> > > Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
> > > the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
> > > out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
> > >
> > > I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> > > Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> > > Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> > > imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> > > throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> > > had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> > > the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> > > tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very 
> > inefficient javascript code on this page:
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
> > 
> > Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it 
> > didn't crash your Mac!
>  
> er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not 
> *javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That 
> would not even crash a Winbox! <g>

So, in short, it could be said that our resident Okie is not an expert 
in *anything at all*.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article 
<timstreater-8D7F5C.10014606092010@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:

> In article <dorayme-6C2A0C.10554706092010@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > In article <i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >  Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > ...
> > > > Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
> > > > the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
> > > > out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
> > > >
> > > > I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> > > > Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> > > > Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> > > > imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> > > > throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> > > > had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> > > > the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> > > > tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very 
> > > inefficient javascript code on this page:
> > > 
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
> > > 
> > > Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it 
> > > didn't crash your Mac!
> >  
> > er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not 
> > *javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That 
> > would not even crash a Winbox! <g>
> 
> So, in short, it could be said that our resident Okie is not an expert 
> in *anything at all*.

Well, we can't quite conclude this. In fact, to do so might even 
be to commit *the* or *a variation of* The Gambler's Fallacy. 

Lets say pred="oakie has no expertise on this occasion". And, an 
admittedly simplifying assumption, given any field and any person 
about whom little is known, there is a 50% chance that he has 
*some* as opposed to *no* expertise in that field. 

The argument, presumably, is that

On (date inserted) Oakie pred
On (date inserted) Oakie pred
On (date inserted) Oakie pred
....

Therefore 

Oakie has no expertise on any occasion

With the simplifying assumption, not that unreasonable mind you, 
this is The Gambler's Fallacy.

-- 
dorayme

On 09/05/2010 08:55 PM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
> ...
>>> Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
>>> the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
>>> out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
>>>
>>> I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
>>> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
>>> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
>>> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
>>> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
>>> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
>>> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
>>> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very
>> inefficient javascript code on this page:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
>>
>> Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it
>> didn't crash your Mac!
>>
>
> er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not
> *javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That
> would not even crash a Winbox!<g>

I'll never trust Wikipedia again! What a bunch of jokers :). Here's what 
we're looking for:

http://hadm.sph.sc.edu/courses/J716/a01/stat.html

Look for: Law of Large Numbers Example

Of course, it didn't crash my computer. So I went to Youtube and watched 
a HD video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=DiUGr1PvxYE&vq=hd720#t=47

Didn't crash, I then added a movie on my TV with smplayer. Not a single 
frame missed on both videos. Still below 80% usage. Too bad I don't have 
a database to compile or something...

In article <i63qoe$qto$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 09/05/2010 08:55 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > In article<i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > ...
> >>> Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
> >>> the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
> >>> out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
> >>>
> >>> I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> >>> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> >>> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> >>> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> >>> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> >>> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> >>> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> >>> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very
> >> inefficient javascript code on this page:
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
> >>
> >> Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it
> >> didn't crash your Mac!
> >>
> >
> > er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not
> > *javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That
> > would not even crash a Winbox!<g>
> 
> I'll never trust Wikipedia again! What a bunch of jokers :). Here's what 
> we're looking for:
> 
> http://...
> 
> Look for: Law of Large Numbers Example
> 
> Of course, it didn't crash my computer. ...
> 
> Didn't crash, I then ...


No need to look for anything really. A programme that loops 
through countless possible results of the effect of a random 
number should not even begin to crash a machine. I get the 
impression that you are talking crashing a lot because of searing 
experiences on Winboxes. These experiences have put you in a sort 
of post-traumatic stress state, you are all hyped up to be 
nervous. When you buy a Mac, it is like the bell has gone and it 
is unseemingly to go on punching. Now now, Tim, relax. Things are 
calmer with Macs. <g>

-- 
dorayme

On 09/06/2010 07:11 PM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<i63qoe$qto$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2010 08:55 PM, dorayme wrote:
>>> In article<i60nau$649$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>    Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 09/04/2010 07:12 PM, dorayme wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>> Because my older Macs were so reliable hardware-wise, I skipped
>>>>> the e-mac and G5 range, the older machines simply would not wear
>>>>> out. Even today I still use for work a 2002 G4 QS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
>>>>> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
>>>>> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
>>>>> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
>>>>> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
>>>>> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
>>>>> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
>>>>> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer and I had to rely on very
>>>> inefficient javascript code on this page:
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
>>>>
>>>> Result? It hardly shows any difference in the CPU usage. I'm glad it
>>>> didn't crash your Mac!
>>>>
>>>
>>> er... if you look carefully again at that wiki page, that is not
>>> *javascript* but *an animated gif*! Only about 50k I reckon. That
>>> would not even crash a Winbox!<g>
>>
>> I'll never trust Wikipedia again! What a bunch of jokers :). Here's what
>> we're looking for:
>>
>> http://...
>>
>> Look for: Law of Large Numbers Example
>>
>> Of course, it didn't crash my computer. ...
>>
>> Didn't crash, I then ...
>
>
> No need to look for anything really. A programme that loops
> through countless possible results of the effect of a random
> number should not even begin to crash a machine. I get the
> impression that you are talking crashing a lot because of searing
> experiences on Winboxes. These experiences have put you in a sort
> of post-traumatic stress state, you are all hyped up to be
> nervous. When you buy a Mac, it is like the bell has gone and it
> is unseemingly to go on punching. Now now, Tim, relax. Things are
> calmer with Macs.<g>

You wrote:

"I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.

"If there were any stray capacitors playing up, the rest of the
machine bits were sure compensating for them."

What is the usual effect of stray capacitors? Usually, they crash the 
computer or, at at leas,t alter its normal behaviour.

It wrote, "didn't crash", and "Not a single frame missed on both 
videos". I wonder who's experiencing "searing experiences" :) for 
discussing this matter.

My computer runs the same OS as the NYSE and it crashes just as often, 
which is never. :)

EOT

In article <i63tra$9mv$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> You wrote:
> 
> "I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
> 
> "If there were any stray capacitors playing up, the rest of the
> machine bits were sure compensating for them."
> 
> What is the usual effect of stray capacitors? Usually, they crash the 
> computer or, at at leas,t alter its normal behaviour.

OK, Tim. Did I really write that fine sentence about the rest of 
the machine compensating? That is the key! On a PC, it's every 
capacitor and other component for itself. Sort of trad Republican 
politics. In a Mac, all the bits watch out for each other, sort 
of more socialist, more small village. If one component fails, 
the others either compensate for it or at least try to cover it 
up. In short, a Mac is more purely intelligent *as a whole*. 
Perhaps you are not seeing the forest for the trees? <g>

-- 
dorayme

On 09/06/2010 08:50 PM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<i63tra$9mv$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Tim Okergit<to@notme.com>  wrote:
>
>> You wrote:
>>
>> "I worked them night and day, I tried everything I could think of.
>> Once I made a program in Basic to analyse if the Gambler's
>> Fallacy was really a fallacy by having the machines toss an
>> imaginary penny billions of times when I was not at my desk(s),
>> throw up stats etc, and the machine not only did not get bored (I
>> had speakers on to detect any groaning or yawning) but never got
>> the slightest bit tired of demonstrating that the more the
>> tosses, the closer to 50:50 were the heads and the tails.
>>
>> "If there were any stray capacitors playing up, the rest of the
>> machine bits were sure compensating for them."
>>
>> What is the usual effect of stray capacitors? Usually, they crash the
>> computer or, at at leas,t alter its normal behaviour.
>
> OK, Tim. Did I really write that fine sentence about the rest of
> the machine compensating? That is the key! On a PC, it's every
> capacitor and other component for itself. Sort of trad Republican
> politics. In a Mac, all the bits watch out for each other, sort
> of more socialist, more small village. If one component fails,
> the others either compensate for it or at least try to cover it
> up. In short, a Mac is more purely intelligent *as a whole*.
> Perhaps you are not seeing the forest for the trees?<g>

Yes, yes. Macs are republican socialist small villages. A capacitor on 
the mobo fails, another takes over. That's why Apple never had to set up 
a replacement program like Dell did... or did they too?

Bye!

In article <i64fvf$mql$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Tim Okergit <to@notme.com> wrote:

> On 09/06/2010 08:50 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > In article<i63tra$9mv$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >
....
> > ...On a PC, it's every
> > capacitor and other component for itself. Sort of trad Republican
> > politics. In a Mac, all the bits watch out for each other, sort
> > of more socialist, more small village. If one component fails,
> > the others either compensate for it or at least try to cover it
> > up. In short, a Mac is more purely intelligent *as a whole*.
> > Perhaps you are not seeing the forest for the trees?<g>
> 
> Yes, yes. Macs are republican socialist small villages. 

No, that would be a sort of oxymoron. If you wanna troll about, 
can we please have some standards?

-- 
dorayme