On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 08:13:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international
> news).
> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about
> the amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.

There were other factors like immigration but Scholz's brilliant policies
got him a vote of no confidence and the government failed. February will
be interesting.

On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I
>>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap.
>>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe
>>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same
>>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their
>>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to
>>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn
>>>>>> to live without computers at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that
>>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer
>>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how
>>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing
>>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most
>>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by
>>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their
>>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop
>>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe.
>>>
>>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking,
>>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia.
>>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical
>>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much
>>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as
>>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of
>>> power to play a game every hour.
>>
>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news).
>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the
>> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>
> If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at
> the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you
> buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine
> plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North
> America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here.

Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue.
(Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in
Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that
case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop
charging — of any kind).

>> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need
>> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs
>> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD
>> CPU).
>>
>> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or
>> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will
>> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.)
>
> ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I
> would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64
> PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens
> sooner, all the better.

I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not
fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many
times now) I'm not a game player.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>
>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>
>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to Apple.
>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-assed on
>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their fortune
>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from x86-64.
>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble catching up to
>>> what Apple is doing.
>>
>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that require the
>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games hold no
>> interest for me.
>
> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice OS to
> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it is in
> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well on the
> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people realize,
> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.

For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012 screenwriting
application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last week. Trelby
is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and Python
installed on the old Mac (2015).

As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to exit its
terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window stays there
until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed really, it's
minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to two
finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap on "quit"
to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" — done.

I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating with
other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it — not be
constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:19, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:29, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 17:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 08:49:22 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and
>>>>>>>>> therefore improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit
>>>>>>>>> it or not, people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a
>>>>>>>>> whole day's work on a single charge and which won't increase
>>>>>>>>> electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only with ARM-native code, of which there is precious little, with no sign
>>>>>> of the situation improving.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is part of why I am suggesting that anyone interested in using an
>>>>> ARM-equipped machine shouldn't hold their breath that Microsoft will do
>>>>> a decent job and simply go straight to Apple. I am very much interested
>>>>> in ARM machines which is why the next laptop is likely to be an Apple.
>>>>
>>>> But only if they play Windows video games?
>>>
>>> I'm getting to a point where the only thing I want to play is NHL, and
>>> that game is console-only. I don't have the time or energy to play those
>>> 3D games anymore.
>>
>> My kids have game consoles, but still want to play Windows video games. They
>> occasionally try to get me interested in some of them — but I guess I'm just
>> too old. The last video game I was fairly good at was Pong. About all I play
>> on my computer is Solitaire or Mahjong, and Pinochle on the smartphone.
>
> The appeal of playing a game on the PC is the ability to play anywhere
> through a laptop. If they're trying to do it on their desktop, I don't
> see the benefit except for greater graphics than what a console can
> handle. I actually find that fairly ridiculous since both the PS5 and
> the Xbox Series X plays games natively in 4k. I'm not sure why a gamer
> would need more than that.

"Anywhere" for these kids is basically at home. They have an older brother
who uses a gaming laptop (not nearly into games as much as they are), but
they kind of feel "sorry" for him — like he's got an inferior experience.

> There is also the benefit of games being cheaper on the PC since you're
> not stuck to one marketplace. After all, if Steam is selling your title
> for $50 but you can get it at the Epic Game Store for $25, why wouldn't
> you?

I guess I can see that point.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

Le 2024-12-17 à 15:30, RonB a écrit :
> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I
>>>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap.
>>>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe
>>>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same
>>>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their
>>>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to
>>>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn
>>>>>>> to live without computers at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that
>>>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer
>>>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how
>>>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing
>>>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most
>>>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by
>>>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their
>>>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop
>>>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe.
>>>>
>>>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking,
>>>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia.
>>>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical
>>>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much
>>>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as
>>>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of
>>>> power to play a game every hour.
>>>
>>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news).
>>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the
>>> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>>
>> If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at
>> the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you
>> buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine
>> plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North
>> America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here.
>
> Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue.
> (Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in
> Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that
> case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop
> charging — of any kind).

Only as long as whatever work you do doesn't depend on you having a
computer.

>>> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need
>>> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs
>>> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD
>>> CPU).
>>>
>>> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or
>>> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will
>>> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.)
>>
>> ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I
>> would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64
>> PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens
>> sooner, all the better.
>
> I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not
> fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many
> times now) I'm not a game player.

ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. As the
Apple processors have shown, they're a lot more powerful than x86-64
processors on single-core applications. They're only worse on multi-core
and even then, not by much. ARM basically allows people to have
performance like they currently have but through much less battery power.

--
CrudeSausage

Le 2024-12-17 à 15:45, RonB a écrit :
> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>>
>>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to Apple.
>>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-assed on
>>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their fortune
>>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from x86-64.
>>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble catching up to
>>>> what Apple is doing.
>>>
>>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that require the
>>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games hold no
>>> interest for me.
>>
>> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
>> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice OS to
>> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it is in
>> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well on the
>> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people realize,
>> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.
>
> For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012 screenwriting
> application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last week. Trelby
> is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and Python
> installed on the old Mac (2015).
>
> As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to exit its
> terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window stays there
> until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed really, it's
> minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to two
> finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap on "quit"
> to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" — done.
>
> I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating with
> other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it — not be
> constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.

I have to admit that I'm not a fan of how the MacOS doesn't close
applications when you click on the red dot in the corner. To be fair
though, this is a practise that other operating systems have borrowed
because there is no real need to terminate an application and reacquire
that memory at a time when there is no shortage of memory on most
hardware. Keeping the application dormant so that it can be restored
more quickly seems to be preferred which is why most Windows
applications and a good number of Linux ones close to the tray rather
than closing entirely.

--
CrudeSausage

On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance.

Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that
<https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>.
And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too.

On 2024-12-17, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 08:19:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> My kids have game consoles, but still want to play Windows video games.
>> They occasionally try to get me interested in some of them — but I guess
>> I'm just too old. The last video game I was fairly good at was Pong.
>> About all I play on my computer is Solitaire or Mahjong, and Pinochle on
>> the smartphone.
>
> I made the mistake of opening Mahjongg and got hooked. I like the Debian/
> Ubuntu version better than KMahjongg on the Fedora box.
>
> There seems to be a AARP online version with leaderboards but I haven't
> played it.

I like the KMahjongg version (but I don't know if I've tried the Ubuntu
version). I always play the "Well" board configuration. I think I've beaten
it three or four times total — maybe five times. Not a lot.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-17, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 08:13:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international
>> news).
>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about
>> the amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>
> There were other factors like immigration but Scholz's brilliant policies
> got him a vote of no confidence and the government failed. February will
> be interesting.

That Scholz always looks like he's confused. I think Trudeau in Canada
might be in trouble as well (also constantly confused).

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:30, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I
>>>>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap.
>>>>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe
>>>>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same
>>>>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their
>>>>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to
>>>>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn
>>>>>>>> to live without computers at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that
>>>>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer
>>>>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how
>>>>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing
>>>>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most
>>>>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by
>>>>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their
>>>>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop
>>>>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe.
>>>>>
>>>>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking,
>>>>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia.
>>>>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical
>>>>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much
>>>>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as
>>>>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of
>>>>> power to play a game every hour.
>>>>
>>>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>>>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news).
>>>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the
>>>> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>>>
>>> If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at
>>> the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you
>>> buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine
>>> plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North
>>> America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here.
>>
>> Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue.
>> (Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in
>> Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that
>> case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop
>> charging — of any kind).
>
> Only as long as whatever work you do doesn't depend on you having a
> computer.
>
>>>> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need
>>>> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs
>>>> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD
>>>> CPU).
>>>>
>>>> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or
>>>> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will
>>>> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.)
>>>
>>> ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I
>>> would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64
>>> PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens
>>> sooner, all the better.
>>
>> I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not
>> fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many
>> times now) I'm not a game player.
>
> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. As the
> Apple processors have shown, they're a lot more powerful than x86-64
> processors on single-core applications. They're only worse on multi-core
> and even then, not by much. ARM basically allows people to have
> performance like they currently have but through much less battery power.

I'll watch and see what happens. I don't anticipate getting an ARM laptop
(or desktop) in the near future — but then I don't anticipate buying any new
computers at all in the next ten years (or so).

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:45, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to Apple.
>>>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-assed on
>>>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their fortune
>>>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from x86-64.
>>>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble catching up to
>>>>> what Apple is doing.
>>>>
>>>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that require the
>>>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games hold no
>>>> interest for me.
>>>
>>> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
>>> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice OS to
>>> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it is in
>>> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well on the
>>> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people realize,
>>> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.
>>
>> For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012 screenwriting
>> application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last week. Trelby
>> is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and Python
>> installed on the old Mac (2015).
>>
>> As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to exit its
>> terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window stays there
>> until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed really, it's
>> minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to two
>> finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap on "quit"
>> to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" — done.
>>
>> I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating with
>> other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it — not be
>> constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.
>
> I have to admit that I'm not a fan of how the MacOS doesn't close
> applications when you click on the red dot in the corner. To be fair
> though, this is a practise that other operating systems have borrowed
> because there is no real need to terminate an application and reacquire
> that memory at a time when there is no shortage of memory on most
> hardware. Keeping the application dormant so that it can be restored
> more quickly seems to be preferred which is why most Windows
> applications and a good number of Linux ones close to the tray rather
> than closing entirely.

My "real need" is that, when I close an application I want it closed.
Period. If I ran into Linux desktops that worked this way, I wouldn't use
them. As for the amount of time it takes to open an application vs the time
it takes to "unminimize it," it's inconsequential (at least with the
applications I use). The only time I want to minimize applications (instead
of closing them) is when I'm still doing something in the minimized
application. That doesn't happen often. But when I do that on my Mac, I use
the minimize button.

And then it comes down to, what's the point of having a minimize button if
the quit button just minimizes. It seems like someone is confused.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

Le 2024-12-18 à 01:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance.
>
> Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that
> <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>.
> And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too.

Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively on
ARM and whichever hasn't been converted runs almost as well as the
native stuff. The PC side has a ton of promises that it will deliver
something better in the future than what Apple sells _today_. Those
promises don't produce the hope in me that they did twenty years ago
because I've been disappointed a number of times.

--
CrudeSausage

Le 2024-12-18 à 06:05, RonB a écrit :
> On 2024-12-17, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 08:13:12 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>
>>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international
>>> news).
>>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about
>>> the amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>>
>> There were other factors like immigration but Scholz's brilliant policies
>> got him a vote of no confidence and the government failed. February will
>> be interesting.
>
> That Scholz always looks like he's confused. I think Trudeau in Canada
> might be in trouble as well (also constantly confused).

The media here is strongly suggesting that Trudeau will resign. They are
saying that there are too many factors around him pushing him in that
direction and that a January election is very likely. Of course, they
are underestimating Trudeau's self-awareness and therefore his knowledge
of how useless he is to the world if he loses the ultimate job. He has
no knowledge of law, he has shown himself to be incompetent on the
economic front and there is no greater example of a complete lack of
leadership. He would also be unwilling to move up the ladder of the
education system if he wanted to use the one degree he does have since
he was once heading the country. In other words, if he steps down, he
loses the Prime Minister's salary as well as the taxpayer-funded piggy
bank he's been using for personal matters. Plus, how is he supposed to
live without access to a private jet to see all his friends around the
world?!

That faggot is going to hold onto power for dear life. He will have to
be forcibly removed from office when he loses the election he will be
forced to call at the end of 2025. Even when he loses and the
Conservatives get a majority, he will try something to keep himself in
power. He is that much of a tyrant.

--
CrudeSausage

Le 2024-12-18 à 06:09, RonB a écrit :
> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:30, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I
>>>>>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap.
>>>>>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe
>>>>>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same
>>>>>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their
>>>>>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to
>>>>>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn
>>>>>>>>> to live without computers at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that
>>>>>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer
>>>>>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how
>>>>>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing
>>>>>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most
>>>>>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by
>>>>>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their
>>>>>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop
>>>>>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking,
>>>>>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia.
>>>>>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical
>>>>>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much
>>>>>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as
>>>>>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of
>>>>>> power to play a game every hour.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting
>>>>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news).
>>>>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the
>>>>> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop.
>>>>
>>>> If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at
>>>> the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you
>>>> buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine
>>>> plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North
>>>> America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here.
>>>
>>> Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue.
>>> (Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in
>>> Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that
>>> case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop
>>> charging — of any kind).
>>
>> Only as long as whatever work you do doesn't depend on you having a
>> computer.
>>
>>>>> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need
>>>>> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs
>>>>> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD
>>>>> CPU).
>>>>>
>>>>> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or
>>>>> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will
>>>>> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.)
>>>>
>>>> ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I
>>>> would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64
>>>> PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens
>>>> sooner, all the better.
>>>
>>> I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not
>>> fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many
>>> times now) I'm not a game player.
>>
>> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. As the
>> Apple processors have shown, they're a lot more powerful than x86-64
>> processors on single-core applications. They're only worse on multi-core
>> and even then, not by much. ARM basically allows people to have
>> performance like they currently have but through much less battery power.
>
> I'll watch and see what happens. I don't anticipate getting an ARM laptop
> (or desktop) in the near future — but then I don't anticipate buying any new
> computers at all in the next ten years (or so).

I'm trying to hold onto the one I have for as long as possible too, but
I know that it's just a matter of time before the keyboard's keys stop
working as they should and the parts to fix issue stop being available.
When that happens, I'll have no choice but to get another one.

--
CrudeSausage

Le 2024-12-18 à 06:20, RonB a écrit :
> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:45, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore
>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not,
>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work
>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to Apple.
>>>>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>>>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-assed on
>>>>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their fortune
>>>>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from x86-64.
>>>>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble catching up to
>>>>>> what Apple is doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that require the
>>>>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games hold no
>>>>> interest for me.
>>>>
>>>> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
>>>> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice OS to
>>>> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it is in
>>>> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well on the
>>>> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people realize,
>>>> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.
>>>
>>> For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012 screenwriting
>>> application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last week. Trelby
>>> is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and Python
>>> installed on the old Mac (2015).
>>>
>>> As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to exit its
>>> terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window stays there
>>> until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed really, it's
>>> minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to two
>>> finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap on "quit"
>>> to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" — done.
>>>
>>> I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating with
>>> other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it — not be
>>> constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.
>>
>> I have to admit that I'm not a fan of how the MacOS doesn't close
>> applications when you click on the red dot in the corner. To be fair
>> though, this is a practise that other operating systems have borrowed
>> because there is no real need to terminate an application and reacquire
>> that memory at a time when there is no shortage of memory on most
>> hardware. Keeping the application dormant so that it can be restored
>> more quickly seems to be preferred which is why most Windows
>> applications and a good number of Linux ones close to the tray rather
>> than closing entirely.
>
> My "real need" is that, when I close an application I want it closed.
> Period. If I ran into Linux desktops that worked this way, I wouldn't use
> them. As for the amount of time it takes to open an application vs the time
> it takes to "unminimize it," it's inconsequential (at least with the
> applications I use). The only time I want to minimize applications (instead
> of closing them) is when I'm still doing something in the minimized
> application. That doesn't happen often. But when I do that on my Mac, I use
> the minimize button.
>
> And then it comes down to, what's the point of having a minimize button if
> the quit button just minimizes. It seems like someone is confused.

I have to admit that minimize becomes useless if close just removes the
window but keeps it running in memory. I imagine that there used to be a
speed benefit to minimizing rather than closing, but it doesn't seem to
be there anymore. Either way, the interface doesn't bother me as much as
it does you.

--
CrudeSausage

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:09:06 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I'll watch and see what happens. I don't anticipate getting an ARM
> laptop (or desktop) in the near future — but then I don't anticipate
> buying any new computers at all in the next ten years (or so).

Go head and spurge. Get a Raspberry Pi 5 and you too can have a ARM
desktop. When I cycle through the KVM switch the R Pi looks a lot like the
Fedora or Ubuntu box without some of the cruft. It has Chromium, Firefox,
and VS Code like the others, as well as Thonny and Mu. No mahjongg though.

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:05:41 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> That Scholz always looks like he's confused. I think Trudeau in Canada
> might be in trouble as well (also constantly confused).

Mutti Merkel left him a bag of shit and he wasn't the right person to
handle it. Besides he was the oldest chancellor in 50 years at the ripe
old age of 63. (ironic reference to the US preference for geriatric
cases)

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:03:33 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> I like the KMahjongg version (but I don't know if I've tried the Ubuntu
> version). I always play the "Well" board configuration. I think I've
> beaten it three or four times total — maybe five times. Not a lot.

That would take some getting used to. The 'Difficult' on Ubuntu is about
the same as the 'Default' on Fedora. The perspective is enough different
that I missed play since the tile didn't look playable,

I'd also have to experiment with the tile selection. The hint showed
several matches where the patterns weren't the same. I beat the Ubuntu
version fairly regularly. I'm not sure if all layouts are supposed to have
a solution. There are times when you have three of the same tiles exposed,
which two to remove?

On 12/18/24 9:20 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> Le 2024-12-18 à 06:20, RonB a écrit :
>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:45, RonB a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use
>>>>>>>>>>> and therefore
>>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it
>>>>>>>>>>> or not,
>>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole
>>>>>>>>>>> day's work
>>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to Apple.
>>>>>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>>>>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-
>>>>>>> assed on
>>>>>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their
>>>>>>> fortune
>>>>>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from
>>>>>>> x86-64.
>>>>>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble
>>>>>>> catching up to
>>>>>>> what Apple is doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that
>>>>>> require the
>>>>>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games
>>>>>> hold no
>>>>>> interest for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
>>>>> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice
>>>>> OS to
>>>>> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it
>>>>> is in
>>>>> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well on
>>>>> the
>>>>> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people realize,
>>>>> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.
>>>>
>>>> For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012
>>>> screenwriting
>>>> application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last
>>>> week. Trelby
>>>> is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and
>>>> Python
>>>> installed on the old Mac (2015).
>>>>
>>>> As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to
>>>> exit its
>>>> terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window
>>>> stays there
>>>> until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed
>>>> really, it's
>>>> minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to two
>>>> finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap
>>>> on "quit"
>>>> to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" —
>>>> done.
>>>>
>>>> I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating
>>>> with
>>>> other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it —
>>>> not be
>>>> constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.
>>>
>>> I have to admit that I'm not a fan of how the MacOS doesn't close
>>> applications when you click on the red dot in the corner. To be fair
>>> though, this is a practise that other operating systems have borrowed
>>> because there is no real need to terminate an application and reacquire
>>> that memory at a time when there is no shortage of memory on most
>>> hardware. Keeping the application dormant so that it can be restored
>>> more quickly seems to be preferred which is why most Windows
>>> applications and a good number of Linux ones close to the tray rather
>>> than closing entirely.
>>
>> My "real need" is that, when I close an application I want it closed.
>> Period. If I ran into Linux desktops that worked this way, I wouldn't use
>> them. As for the amount of time it takes to open an application vs the
>> time
>> it takes to "unminimize it," it's inconsequential (at least with the
>> applications I use). The only time I want to minimize applications
>> (instead
>> of closing them) is when I'm still doing something in the minimized
>> application. That doesn't happen often. But when I do that on my Mac,
>> I use the minimize button.
>>
>> And then it comes down to, what's the point of having a minimize
>> button if
>> the quit button just minimizes. It seems like someone is confused.
>
> I have to admit that minimize becomes useless if close just removes the
> window but keeps it running in memory. I imagine that there used to be a
> speed benefit to minimizing rather than closing, but it doesn't seem to
> be there anymore. Either way, the interface doesn't bother me as much as
> it does you.

Allowing Apps to remain in the background was the method years ago to
'speed things up' for switching between them...probably goes back as far
as the Multifinder (classic Mac OS 5, circa 1987).

But these days, both Windows & MacOS have the design philosophy that
closing a document window doesn't necessarily quit the App, because one
is likely to be just ending one's work session with Documents Set A and
will be opening up Document Set B. As such, if one really intends to
quit the App, invoke/use ^Q. Thus, this seems more of a PEBKAC.

-hh

Le 2024-12-18 à 16:27, -hh a écrit :
> On 12/18/24 9:20 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> Le 2024-12-18 à 06:20, RonB a écrit :
>>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 15:45, RonB a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:15, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:28, RonB a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 17:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:56:30 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use
>>>>>>>>>>>> and therefore
>>>>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit
>>>>>>>>>>>> it or not,
>>>>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole
>>>>>>>>>>>> day's work
>>>>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure. But Windows can never give it to them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It can and it already does on Snapdragon offerings.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apparently only "sort of."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which is part of why I recommended that ARM enthusiasts go to
>>>>>>>> Apple.
>>>>>>>> Only Apple actually follows through on their radical decisions.
>>>>>>>> Microsoft will announce something on Monday, do something half-
>>>>>>>> assed on
>>>>>>>> Tuesday and abandon the project altogether on Wednesday. Their
>>>>>>>> fortune
>>>>>>>> comes from the fact that people are reluctant to move away from
>>>>>>>> x86-64.
>>>>>>>> If and once they do, Microsoft will have a lot of trouble
>>>>>>>> catching up to
>>>>>>>> what Apple is doing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I get that. But does Apple run these high-end video games that
>>>>>>> require the
>>>>>>> powerful (watt-gobbling) GPUs? I don't know, these video games
>>>>>>> hold no
>>>>>>> interest for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a community of Apple users getting their Mx machines to run
>>>>>> today's games in the same way Linux users try to get their choice
>>>>>> OS to
>>>>>> play them. For what it's worth, it's a lot easier in Linux than it
>>>>>> is in
>>>>>> MacOS. A game developed specifically for Macs will run very well
>>>>>> on the
>>>>>> hardware because it is indeed a lot more powerful than people
>>>>>> realize,
>>>>>> but those titles are very few and are likely to remain so.
>>>>>
>>>>> For me Macs are too limited. But I actually got Trelby (a 2012
>>>>> screenwriting
>>>>> application with recent updates) to work on my MacBook Air last
>>>>> week. Trelby
>>>>> is based on Python. What took forever, though, was getting Brew and
>>>>> Python
>>>>> installed on the old Mac (2015).
>>>>>
>>>>> As for Mac OS's "normal" mode, I just don't like it all. I try to
>>>>> exit its
>>>>> terminal by typing "exit" it does exit (sort of), but the window
>>>>> stays there
>>>>> until I close it with the trackpad. But it's still not closed
>>>>> really, it's
>>>>> minimized (even though I chose close, not minimize). I then have to
>>>>> two
>>>>> finger click on the application in the dock, navigate down and tap
>>>>> on "quit"
>>>>> to finally get the damn thing to go away. In Linux I type "exit" —
>>>>> done.
>>>>>
>>>>> I get it that Mac is good at certain things (mostly for integrating
>>>>> with
>>>>> other Apple crap) but I want to use an OS the way I want to use it
>>>>> — not be
>>>>> constrained by an OS that thinks it's your nanny.
>>>>
>>>> I have to admit that I'm not a fan of how the MacOS doesn't close
>>>> applications when you click on the red dot in the corner. To be fair
>>>> though, this is a practise that other operating systems have borrowed
>>>> because there is no real need to terminate an application and reacquire
>>>> that memory at a time when there is no shortage of memory on most
>>>> hardware. Keeping the application dormant so that it can be restored
>>>> more quickly seems to be preferred which is why most Windows
>>>> applications and a good number of Linux ones close to the tray rather
>>>> than closing entirely.
>>>
>>> My "real need" is that, when I close an application I want it closed.
>>> Period. If I ran into Linux desktops that worked this way, I wouldn't
>>> use
>>> them. As for the amount of time it takes to open an application vs
>>> the time
>>> it takes to "unminimize it," it's inconsequential (at least with the
>>> applications I use). The only time I want to minimize applications
>>> (instead
>>> of closing them) is when I'm still doing something in the minimized
>>> application. That doesn't happen often. But when I do that on my Mac,
>>> I use the minimize button.
>>>
>>> And then it comes down to, what's the point of having a minimize
>>> button if
>>> the quit button just minimizes. It seems like someone is confused.
>>
>> I have to admit that minimize becomes useless if close just removes
>> the window but keeps it running in memory. I imagine that there used
>> to be a speed benefit to minimizing rather than closing, but it
>> doesn't seem to be there anymore. Either way, the interface doesn't
>> bother me as much as it does you.
>
> Allowing Apps to remain in the background was the method years ago to
> 'speed things up' for switching between them...probably goes back as far
> as the Multifinder (classic Mac OS 5, circa 1987).
>
> But these days, both Windows & MacOS have the design philosophy that
> closing a document window doesn't necessarily quit the App, because one
> is likely to be just ending one's work session with Documents Set A and
> will be opening up Document Set B.  As such, if one really intends to
> quit the App, invoke/use ^Q.  Thus, this seems more of a PEBKAC.

I'm not a fan of close minimizing to the taskbar but I can live with
close minimizing to the system tray. If I had little RAM and the
operating system behaved this way, I'd be pretty pissed but we all have
way more RAM than our operating systems will even need for the kinds of
tasks we do.

I know that vallor needs 128GB and 192 cores to calculate the
probability that he'll ever see his dick again but most of us don't need
that much power.

--
CrudeSausage

On 12/18/24 1:43 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:05:41 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> That Scholz always looks like he's confused. I think Trudeau in Canada
>> might be in trouble as well (also constantly confused).
>
> Mutti Merkel left him a bag of shit and he wasn't the right person to
> handle it. Besides he was the oldest chancellor in 50 years at the ripe
> old age of 63. (ironic reference to the US preference for geriatric
> cases)

63? He looks like 83. I guess beer does that to them.

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:50:15 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

> Le 2024-12-18 à 01:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
>
>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:01:02 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance.
>>
>> Fujitsu’s chips are proof of that
>> <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/fujitsu-flaunts-144-core-monaka-cpu-2nm-and-5nm-chiplets-soic-and-cowos-packaging>.
>> And without the upgradeability limitations of Apple, too.
>
> Except that Apple already has a ton of the software running natively on
> ARM ...

Sure, if Apple stuff is sufficient for you. Linux stuff runs natively
on ARM and a bunch of other architectures, as well.

On 18 Dec 2024 20:17:42 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> That would take some getting used to. The 'Difficult' on Ubuntu is about
> the same as the 'Default' on Fedora. The perspective is enough different
> that I missed play since the tile didn't look playable,

Follow up: I beat the Default twice. I still don't know what's up with the
tiles that look like flowers where what matches isn't the same. I have to
click on them and see if it goes.

On 2024-12-18, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:03:33 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> I like the KMahjongg version (but I don't know if I've tried the Ubuntu
>> version). I always play the "Well" board configuration. I think I've
>> beaten it three or four times total — maybe five times. Not a lot.
>
> That would take some getting used to. The 'Difficult' on Ubuntu is about
> the same as the 'Default' on Fedora. The perspective is enough different
> that I missed play since the tile didn't look playable,
>
> I'd also have to experiment with the tile selection. The hint showed
> several matches where the patterns weren't the same. I beat the Ubuntu
> version fairly regularly. I'm not sure if all layouts are supposed to have
> a solution. There are times when you have three of the same tiles exposed,
> which two to remove?

I'm guessing you can always win (as they let your re-run the latest puzzle,
which I never do) — but you would have to very lucky.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 12/18/24 2:17 PM, rbowman wrote:
> I'd also have to experiment with the tile selection. The hint showed
> several matches where the patterns weren't the same. I beat the Ubuntu
> version fairly regularly. I'm not sure if all layouts are supposed to have
> a solution. There are times when you have three of the same tiles exposed,
> which two to remove?

I tried that game about 10 or 12 years back. Found it quite childish.

Why I tried it? Cause some new girl in the warehouse said she spent
hours each day at home playing it, and I wanted to get an idea what she
was and where I could use her in that job.

Those peaple play backgammon too. Part of it _must_ be chance cause
they're Penis X grade people after all.

But play chess, and everything is in your control. You lose, you really
lose. You win, you really win :) I still use my 45 year old Radio Shack
chessboard. Chess enthusiast friends are all gone. When in the mood, I
try yet one more time to beat its level 7. I've never been able to.
Level 6 is the highest I ever could beat it, like 10% of the time.

Level 7 is so impossible to beat that I'm thinking its scale of 1 to 9
is not even logarithmic. I wish I knew how they determined it in the
codes. If it was logarithmic, then on the average about one time in 100
tries I would be able to beat it in level 7. But I have tried a few
thousand times since I was in my 20s, in that level, without one win.

My own play level is pretty good and I still play a couple times a week,
cause who knows :)