On 2024-11-25 09:29, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:aj25kj1mjp2b0j8f90o5vkgol3nc85s9ir@4ax.com...
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> you claimed:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'You're a sucker if you use Apple's crap hardware and software.'
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'll ask again.
>>>>
>>>> OK, well, you're paying a premium price for junk software.  Is that
>>>> clear enough?
>>>
>>> You haven't yet explained WHY it is "junk software".
>>>
>>> That much is entirely clear.
>>
>>
>> It's a toy, it's not serious,
>
> So how many high end professionals find your system to be a "must have"?
>
>> I mean you have very specific
>> applications for macOS that are large, e.g. video editing, but not
>> everyone does these things.
>
> I see, so unless it's something EVERYONE uses.. then it's junk software..
>
> In which metric Windows is FAR better than Linux.
>
>
>
>> For the average personal-computer user,
>> it's just wasted potential,
>
> Windows
>
>> you have this nice hardware running
>> inferior software, it's powered by Unix to be sure, and has that
>> potential within it, but most never realize that.
>
> EVERY modern OS has Unix as it's base.
>
> Windows is powered by Unix.
No. To be accurate, Windows is NOT powered by Unix.

As far as the roots of the OS that began as Windows NT, and which is now
Windows 11, it is mostly closely related to VMS. This is hardly
surprising, as Microsoft hired Dave Cutler away from DEC to be lead
architect on Windows NT.

Dave Cutler is on record as having a particular disdain for Unix, BTW.

On 2024-11-25 03:18, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>> He couldn't future-proof his video system.
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>
>>> Are you really so surprised that the CPU's integrated video wouldn't
>>> do well, with 4K? It seems obvious that it'd help to have a discreet
>>> video card, I didn't need an expensive one, it's not a big deal. I'm
>>> glad to spend a little, to get a lot of mileage.
>>
>> /I'm/ not...
>>
>> ...but apparently you were.
>
>
> No I wasn't surprised, and I handled it, I bought an inexpensive card.
> Big F'ing deal.
If you hadn't been surprised, you have bought the card from the beginning.

On 2024-11-25 05:59, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>>>> the braggadocio on having to go manually set up a capability
>>>> that mainstream OS users already have, and take for granted.
>>>>
>>>> To use an automotive analogy, its like he's bragging that he upgraded
>>>> his carb to have automatic choke ... not realizing that everyone else
>>>> looks at them, thinking: "there's still cars which have a manual choke?"
>>>
>>> I can't imagine how lazy people are, to pay so much for Apple's and
>>> higher-end OEMs' offerings.
>>
>> Some are buying for the actual high-end performance. We've already seen
>> how your claimed "high-end" PC isn't really so high end after all:
>>
>> your CPU & Storage benchmarks are literally half of the Apple Studio
>> that you've tried to compare your system against,
>
>
> I wasn't trying to compare the benchmarks. I was comparing realized
> value. My computer's beginning to age, and yet because I'm running
> Linux, this has no meaning to me. It might as well still be brand
> new. Same thing with my Galaxy S21 phone, it's still as good as new
> to me, I don't miss gimmicky features that an S24 would offer.
>
>
>> plus yesterday you revealed that you've already replaced the original
>> video controller because it couldn't handle a single 4K display, whereas
>> the Mac Studio you've been using to compare yourself to can handle five.
>
>
> I didn't have a "video controller", why do you keep saying that? It
> was just the CPU's video, which was great for 1080p, not for 4K. Big
> whoop, the cheap card I got is fine since I don't game.

The fact that it was integrated into the motherboard doesn't make it any
less a video controller, doofus.

You really aren't very 1337 if you don't understand that fact.

On 2024-11-26 05:32, Joel wrote:
>> Trailing edge of technology, which you've already paid to replace. Good
>> lifecycle management plan there! /s
>
> That is all nonsense, I liked the i5-10400 without regard to it
> containing basic video, that was something convenient for my old
> monitor, that I had to replace it with a card was no biggie.

The i5 processors don't "contain basic video" in any way shape or form.

Are you sure you know ANYTHING about how computers work?

On 2024-11-25 09:49, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9757kjp8pi1klqhk7didm6jdhgo3juutdn@4ax.com...
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/24/24 3:21 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-11-24 11:39, Joel wrote:
>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I paid less to get high-end gear.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please remind me: just what's the specs of this claimed "high-
>>>>>>>>>> end" gear?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have a Gigabyte AORUS motherboard, not some no-name junk that
>>>>>>>>> you'd
>>>>>>>>> get in a prefab box on Newegg for a hot price, ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, doesn't mean much to me:  what's its salient characteristics
>>>>>>>> which relate to it being "high-end"?  For example, is it PCI5 or 4?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's meant for elite gaming systems, I wanted it for the
>>>>>>> expandability, bragging rights, reliability over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bragging rights?  I certainly hope you're not saying that you paid
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> for a name(!).
>>>>>
>>>>> The motherboard is more relevant to overall quality than a lot of
>>>>> people might realize.  It's not paying for a name, it's paying for
>>>>> durability and quality.
>>>>
>>>> You're the one who literally said:
>>>> "bragging rights".
>>>
>>> While also snipping a whole bunch of other objective metrics.
>>>
>>> Gosh, it musta been another "accident"...
>>>
>>> ...instead of a tacit admission through avoidance that he knows that he
>>> can't support his assertion that he made a rational product decision.
>>
>>
>> Incorrect.  I don't care about benchmarks.
>
> Translation: I don’t care if it's fast or slow...
>
>
>>  I care about having a
>> modern, reliable, functional system.
>
> Which can be dirt slow as long as it looks good....

Don't forget "bragging rights"!

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>>>> He couldn't future-proof his video system.
>>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Are you really so surprised that the CPU's integrated video wouldn't
>>>> do well, with 4K? It seems obvious that it'd help to have a discreet
>>>> video card, I didn't need an expensive one, it's not a big deal. I'm
>>>> glad to spend a little, to get a lot of mileage.
>>>
>>> /I'm/ not...
>>>
>>> ...but apparently you were.
>>
>> No I wasn't surprised, and I handled it, I bought an inexpensive card.
>> Big F'ing deal.
>If you hadn't been surprised, you have bought the card from the beginning.

That's idiotic, are you so bamboozled and brainwashed by Apple that
you don't understand modifying a real, assembled desktop machine, you
fucking moron? I thought, as chrisv blindly asserted, that the CPU
would work fine, when it didn't, I did an upgrade with a discrete
card, which made a large difference. It also gave me a second video
port, which allows me to use my TV as a monitor, too. What a
travesty, huh? Derp.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>On 2024-11-25 05:59, Joel wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>
>>> plus yesterday you revealed that you've already replaced the original
>>> video controller because it couldn't handle a single 4K display, whereas
>>> the Mac Studio you've been using to compare yourself to can handle five.
>>
>> I didn't have a "video controller", why do you keep saying that? It
>> was just the CPU's video, which was great for 1080p, not for 4K. Big
>> whoop, the cheap card I got is fine since I don't game.
>
>The fact that it was integrated into the motherboard doesn't make it any
>less a video controller, doofus.
>
>You really aren't very 1337 if you don't understand that fact.

It was integrated into the CPU, it's still there, I could put a third
monitor on, I guess, and utilize it along with the NVIDIA card, but
then again I could also buy a Mac like your dumb ass - to speak of
things I will not be doing.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>> Trailing edge of technology, which you've already paid to replace. Good
>>> lifecycle management plan there! /s
>>
>> That is all nonsense, I liked the i5-10400 without regard to it
>> containing basic video, that was something convenient for my old
>> monitor, that I had to replace it with a card was no biggie.
>
>The i5 processors don't "contain basic video" in any way shape or form.
>
>Are you sure you know ANYTHING about how computers work?

Was that supposed to be anything but word salad?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-11-26 14:51, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> He couldn't future-proof his video system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you really so surprised that the CPU's integrated video wouldn't
>>>>> do well, with 4K? It seems obvious that it'd help to have a discreet
>>>>> video card, I didn't need an expensive one, it's not a big deal. I'm
>>>>> glad to spend a little, to get a lot of mileage.
>>>>
>>>> /I'm/ not...
>>>>
>>>> ...but apparently you were.
>>>
>>> No I wasn't surprised, and I handled it, I bought an inexpensive card.
>>> Big F'ing deal.
>> If you hadn't been surprised, you have bought the card from the beginning.
>
>
> That's idiotic, are you so bamboozled and brainwashed by Apple that
> you don't understand modifying a real, assembled desktop machine, you
> fucking moron? I thought, as chrisv blindly asserted, that the CPU
> would work fine, when it didn't, I did an upgrade with a discrete
> card, which made a large difference. It also gave me a second video
> port, which allows me to use my TV as a monitor, too. What a
> travesty, huh? Derp.
I understand it fine.

I've done it.

And a low end Mac Mini supports up to THREE displays with 6K resolution
on two of them and one more with 5K resolution (if on Thunderbolt) or 4K
resolution (if on HDMI).

And that's for $600.

So, yeah: you paying more than you had to for a CPU with an integrated
GPU (yeah: I got that wrong in another post. Sorry) and then having to
pay for a discrete video card...

....that was a travesty of good sense.

:-)

On 2024-11-26 14:54, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Trailing edge of technology, which you've already paid to replace. Good
>>>> lifecycle management plan there! /s
>>>
>>> That is all nonsense, I liked the i5-10400 without regard to it
>>> containing basic video, that was something convenient for my old
>>> monitor, that I had to replace it with a card was no biggie.
>>
>> The i5 processors don't "contain basic video" in any way shape or form.
>>
>> Are you sure you know ANYTHING about how computers work?
>
>
> Was that supposed to be anything but word salad?
>

Yeah... ...I didn't look up the spec. Sorry.

But OTOH, you paid extra to get a CPU with integrated GPU that you then
needed to supersede with a video card.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>> If you hadn't been surprised, you have bought the card from the beginning.
>>
>> That's idiotic, are you so bamboozled and brainwashed by Apple that
>> you don't understand modifying a real, assembled desktop machine, you
>> fucking moron? I thought, as chrisv blindly asserted, that the CPU
>> would work fine, when it didn't, I did an upgrade with a discrete
>> card, which made a large difference. It also gave me a second video
>> port, which allows me to use my TV as a monitor, too. What a
>> travesty, huh? Derp.
>I understand it fine.
>
>I've done it.
>
>And a low end Mac Mini supports up to THREE displays with 6K resolution
>on two of them and one more with 5K resolution (if on Thunderbolt) or 4K
>resolution (if on HDMI).
>
>And that's for $600.
>
>So, yeah: you paying more than you had to for a CPU with an integrated
>GPU (yeah: I got that wrong in another post. Sorry) and then having to
>pay for a discrete video card...
>
>...that was a travesty of good sense.
>
>:-)

I always had the intention to install a video card if there were a
reason to. The 4K monitor gave me such a reason. I bought a
motherboard that gave me options. The notion that I could've bought
the CPU without integrated video is meaningless, trivial difference.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>>> I didn't have a "video controller", why do you keep saying that? It
>>>> was just the CPU's video, which was great for 1080p, not for 4K. Big
>>>> whoop, the cheap card I got is fine since I don't game.
>>>
>>> The fact that it was integrated into the motherboard doesn't make it any
>>> less a video controller, doofus.
>>>
>>> You really aren't very 1337 if you don't understand that fact.
>>
>> It was integrated into the CPU, it's still there, I could put a third
>> monitor on, I guess, and utilize it along with the NVIDIA card, but
>> then again I could also buy a Mac like your dumb ass - to speak of
>> things I will not be doing.
>If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>terms of video.
>
>:-)

With 256 GB storage? Heh.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-11-23 12:26, Joel wrote:

> It suggests that people have disposable income that they put toward
> Apple gear, incessantly, it's ridiculous how little storage you get by
> default with their devices, I had a 1 TB NVMe drive as a part, it's
> still going 3 1/2 years later, at the time the iMac or Mac mini
> would've had a small amount of storage, and still cost a lot. You're
> a sucker if you use Apple's crap hardware and software.
>

I realize this is a bit unfair, because the M4 Mac Mini just came out,
but...

Comparing CPU benchmarks to the i5-10400 in his 1337 Linux machine (and
looking at the M1 which was available in 2020 when his processor choice
came out and the M2 that was available when he built his system:

Single thread:

i5: 2,568 M4: 4,589 M2: 3,903 M1: 3,687

CPU Mark:

i5: 12,118 M4: 24,394 M2: 15,575 M1: 14,154

Even the M1 was faster than Joel's carefully researched choice.

The Mac Mini wasn't upgraded to M2 until after Joel built is "superior"
Linux machine, but...

....the M1 Mac Mini had support for 4K video OOTB and could run a 4K and
a 6K monitor simultaneously.

All for $700USD.

But I guess there wouldn't have been "bragging rights" with his 1337 crew.

:-)

On 2024-11-26 15:28, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> I didn't have a "video controller", why do you keep saying that? It
>>>>> was just the CPU's video, which was great for 1080p, not for 4K. Big
>>>>> whoop, the cheap card I got is fine since I don't game.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that it was integrated into the motherboard doesn't make it any
>>>> less a video controller, doofus.
>>>>
>>>> You really aren't very 1337 if you don't understand that fact.
>>>
>>> It was integrated into the CPU, it's still there, I could put a third
>>> monitor on, I guess, and utilize it along with the NVIDIA card, but
>>> then again I could also buy a Mac like your dumb ass - to speak of
>>> things I will not be doing.
>> If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>> terms of video.
>>
>> :-)
>
>
> With 256 GB storage? Heh.
You get that you could increase that, right?

Way to miss the point!

On 2024-11-26 12:46, Joel wrote:
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Unless he's doing something graphically
>> intensive, Joel's 10th-gen i5 should have no trouble driving a 4k
>> monitor.
>
>
> To this day, I don't entirely know what the issue was, but Win11 had
> serious problems utilizing the i5-10400's video for 4K, with this Acer
> brand monitor. If I'd foreseen all the hassles it would give me, I
> wouldn't have bought it. Linux distros have had problems with it,
> too, even with the NVIDIA card, although my current Debian install
> handled it well.
>

Sounds like you didn't do your homework...

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>> If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>>> terms of video.
>>>
>>> :-)
>>
>> With 256 GB storage? Heh.
>You get that you could increase that, right?
>
>Way to miss the point!

OK, well, the Web site says to go from 256 GB to 1 TB is an extra
$400. So, what is your point, pray tell? So is going from 16 GB RAM
to 32 GB, BTW. So, $1400, not $600.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-11-26, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Trailing edge of technology, which you've already paid to replace. Good
>>>> lifecycle management plan there! /s
>>>
>>> That is all nonsense, I liked the i5-10400 without regard to it
>>> containing basic video, that was something convenient for my old
>>> monitor, that I had to replace it with a card was no biggie.
>>
>>The i5 processors don't "contain basic video" in any way shape or form.
>>
>>Are you sure you know ANYTHING about how computers work?
>
>
> Was that supposed to be anything but word salad?

It's clear to me.
However as a Kamala supporter Joel, you should be adept at deciphering word salad.

--
pothead

"Ding Dong The Witch Is Gone"
"Which Old Witch?"
"The Kamala Harris Witch. Of Course!"

On 2024-11-26 15:58, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>> If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>>>> terms of video.
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>
>>> With 256 GB storage? Heh.
>> You get that you could increase that, right?
>>
>> Way to miss the point!
>
>
> OK, well, the Web site says to go from 256 GB to 1 TB is an extra
> $400. So, what is your point, pray tell? So is going from 16 GB RAM
> to 32 GB, BTW. So, $1400, not $600.

Yup. And you get a much more capable system for only a little more than
you ended up paying; an insignificant amount over a reasonable system life.

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:

>> Was that supposed to be anything but word salad?
>
>It's clear to me.
>However as a Kamala supporter Joel, you should be adept at deciphering word salad.

I'll take Harris's manners of speech over Trump's rambling nonsense,
are you kidding? The fantasies he drooled out, at those rallies full
of uneducable crackers? What a farce.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-11-25 04:44, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> When I built the computer, the old monitor was still in use.
>>>>> Later, I bought a 4K monitor. The CPU's video handled it but barely,
>>>>> the NVIDIA card made it work more smoothly.
>>>>
>>>> And yet when you bought this PC in 2022 [it was 2021], you didn't anticipate the
>>>> likelihood of getting a 4K display to replace the 1080p when it died?
>>>
>>> What difference would that have made?
>>
>> Because buying a subsystem just once instead of buying it twice may
>> mean that you pay less overall: "Lifecyle cost management 101."
>
>
> The CPU's video is built into the CPU. It's still there right now, if
> I plug a DP cable into the motherboard's video port, but instead I use
> the discrete card, now.
>
>
>>>> Remind us again for just much money you have sunk into it already?
>>>
>>> The video card was around $100.
>>
>> Which gets added to the 2021 base system's price, bringing your total
>> invested lifecycle cost to date to be ... how much?
>
>
> No more or less than it's actually worth - which is the point. With
> Apple, I'd pay more up front, whether I needed it or not.
>
>
>>> 32 GB is about right, for my usage.
>>
>> Not today it isn't: it is still being underutilized at ~3 years system
>> age, which undermines your claimed argument of the value of moduarlity
>> for lower lifecycle costs. Looks like you were 5+ years too early in
>> spending money for RAM that you won't really need until after 2027.
>
>
> As my computer stays booted up, RAM use approaches the full quantity,
> including cache. I watch this in System Monitor.
>

So Linux is bad at memory management, is it?

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>>>> If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>>>>> terms of video.
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> With 256 GB storage? Heh.
>>> You get that you could increase that, right?
>>>
>>> Way to miss the point!
>>
>> OK, well, the Web site says to go from 256 GB to 1 TB is an extra
>> $400. So, what is your point, pray tell? So is going from 16 GB RAM
>> to 32 GB, BTW. So, $1400, not $600.
>
>Yup. And you get a much more capable system for only a little more than
>you ended up paying; an insignificant amount over a reasonable system life.

I paid under $1000, or so, not counting the software purchases, since
I ended up using Linux exclusively. And my CPU is virtually as good
as the M1, the benchmarks showed the difference isn't really
significant. Face it, Apple is a scam.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>On 2024-11-25 04:44, Joel wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> 32 GB [RAM] is about right, for my usage.
>>>
>>> Not today it isn't: it is still being underutilized at ~3 years system
>>> age, which undermines your claimed argument of the value of moduarlity
>>> for lower lifecycle costs. Looks like you were 5+ years too early in
>>> spending money for RAM that you won't really need until after 2027.
>>
>> As my computer stays booted up, RAM use approaches the full quantity,
>> including cache. I watch this in System Monitor.
>
>So Linux is bad at memory management, is it?

It's not a matter of managing it, it's a matter of using what's
available. I give the system enough to leave an insane amount of
stuff in cache. Maybe it's actually *Apple's* OS doing some kind of
trickery, to make its paltry offerings seem OK. Inquiring minds want
to know.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-11-26 16:42, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> If you bought a Mac Mini for $600 you'd get support for a lot more in
>>>>>> terms of video.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> With 256 GB storage? Heh.
>>>> You get that you could increase that, right?
>>>>
>>>> Way to miss the point!
>>>
>>> OK, well, the Web site says to go from 256 GB to 1 TB is an extra
>>> $400. So, what is your point, pray tell? So is going from 16 GB RAM
>>> to 32 GB, BTW. So, $1400, not $600.
>>
>> Yup. And you get a much more capable system for only a little more than
>> you ended up paying; an insignificant amount over a reasonable system life.
>
>
> I paid under $1000, or so, not counting the software purchases, since
> I ended up using Linux exclusively. And my CPU is virtually as good
> as the M1, the benchmarks showed the difference isn't really
> significant. Face it, Apple is a scam.
>

1. "Virtually as good isn't "as good".

2. You're using today's costs for the RAM expansion and drive expansion.

3. The whole system isn't near as good.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>>> to go from 256 GB to 1 TB is an extra
>>>> $400. So, what is your point, pray tell? So is going from 16 GB RAM
>>>> to 32 GB, BTW. So, $1400, not $600.
>>>
>>> Yup. And you get a much more capable system for only a little more than
>>> you ended up paying; an insignificant amount over a reasonable system life.
>>
>> I paid under $1000, or so, not counting the software purchases, since
>> I ended up using Linux exclusively. And my CPU is virtually as good
>> as the M1, the benchmarks showed the difference isn't really
>> significant. Face it, Apple is a scam.
>
>1. "Virtually as good isn't "as good".

<yawn>

>2. You're using today's costs for the RAM expansion and drive expansion.

No shit, I got 1 TB storage *in the first half of 2021*. For barely
over $100, for a quality model. How is Apple doing with that, *NOW*?
Derp.

>3. The whole system isn't near as good.

Bullshit.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 11/26/2024 4:16 PM, Joel wrote:
> pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>
>>> Was that supposed to be anything but word salad?
>>
>> It's clear to me.
>> However as a Kamala supporter Joel, you should be adept at deciphering word salad.
>
>
> I'll take Harris's manners of speech over Trump's rambling nonsense,
> are you kidding? The fantasies he drooled out, at those rallies full
> of uneducable crackers? What a farce.

Let's revisit what you think about those "fantasies" in six months. I'm
personally looking forward to reality shock for indoctrinated libtards.

As for the uneducable crackers, are you referring to the illiterate genZ
tranny 'tards, or the left-wing smart phone operators who can't even
pass 30, 60, or 90 day probationary hiring periods?