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

>>>>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>>>>
>>>> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
>>>> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.
>>>
>>> So your claim is that you don't see a small object, which--for many of
>>> its use cases--should be concealed, proves that they're being bought but
>>> not used?
>>>
>>> Really?
>>>
>>> Look up the definition of "anecdotal".
>>
>> OK, but why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>
>Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>
>Yes or no.
>
>Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>
>Yes or no.
>
>Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>
>Yes or no.

Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.

--
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:

>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>> finite.
>>>
>>> That's not what you said.
>>>
>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>
>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>> options for such are limited.
>
>And around the circle we go!
>
>You claimed that Apple was "quirky" because their "hardware options are
>finite.".
>
>But that is true of EVERY maker of personal computers.

It's true of the number of quarks in the universe, too.

--
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 2024-12-10 14:31, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>>>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>>>>>
>>>>> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
>>>>> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.
>>>>
>>>> So your claim is that you don't see a small object, which--for many of
>>>> its use cases--should be concealed, proves that they're being bought but
>>>> not used?
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> Look up the definition of "anecdotal".
>>>
>>> OK, but why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>
>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>
>> Yes or no.
>>
>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>
>> Yes or no.
>>
>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>
>> Yes or no.
>
>
> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>

Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.

"the public" can't have things they think are valuable.

Got it.

On 2024-12-10 14:24, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)
>>>
>>> Mach's derivatives are the basis of the operating system kernel in GNU
>>> Hurd and of Apple's XNU kernel used in macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and
>>> watchOS.
>> And XNU therefore isn't Mach and Mach is NOT the kernel that Apple uses.
>
>
> Uh huh.
>
>
>> So the answer is to the question, "Does Apple have its own kernel?"...
>>
>> ...is:
>>
>> Yes. Apple uses a kernel called XNU that they developed from Mach and
>> other sources with huge amounts of their own work as well.
>>
>> Now, here's a question for you:
>>
>> Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>
>
> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did. Why did
> Gates hire Cutler? Why did Apple wish they could've?
>

Why SHOULD they build it from scratch.

And Microsoft hired Cutler, because THEY didn't want to start from
scratch...

....because Cutler had been one of the technical product leads on VMS...

....which Windows NT internally very much resembles.

<https://everything2.com/title/The+similarities+between+VMS+and+Windows+NT>

On 2024-12-10 14:34, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>>> finite.
>>>>
>>>> That's not what you said.
>>>>
>>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>>
>>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>>
>>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>>> options for such are limited.
>>
>> And around the circle we go!
>>
>> You claimed that Apple was "quirky" because their "hardware options are
>> finite.".
>>
>> But that is true of EVERY maker of personal computers.
>
>
> It's true of the number of quarks in the universe, too.
Avoiding the fact that you can't call Apple "quirky" for having finite
hardware options...

....without saying the same about every other personal computer maker.

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

>>>> why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>>
>>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>>
>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>>
>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>>
>>> Yes or no.
>>
>> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
>> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>
>Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.
>
>"the public" can't have things they think are valuable.
>
>Got it.

My "elitism", eh? Not Apple's? What is the end game, here? How will
the value of all these AirTags be realized?

--
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:

>>> Apple uses a kernel called XNU that they developed from Mach and
>>> other sources with huge amounts of their own work as well.
>>>
>>> Now, here's a question for you:
>>>
>>> Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>>
>> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did. Why did
>> Gates hire Cutler? Why did Apple wish they could've?
>
>Why SHOULD they build it from scratch.

*That* is the question, believe it or not.

>And Microsoft hired Cutler, because THEY didn't want to start from
>scratch...
>
>...because Cutler had been one of the technical product leads on VMS...
>
>...which Windows NT internally very much resembles.
>
><https://everything2.com/title/The+similarities+between+VMS+and+Windows+NT>

Uh huh. But Cutler did start from scratch, emulating what he did
before, emulating what anyone would do, it's like the discovery of
ketamine, they didn't really invent or design it, they *found* it.

--
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 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-12-10 13:17, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>>>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>>>>> line is usable.
>>>>> And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's try this one question at a time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>
>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>
>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>
>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>
>>> Yes or no.
>>
>>
>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>> finite.
>>
>
> That's not what you said.
>
> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>
> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?

Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.

1. Morphs his claims.
2. Poor reading comprehension.
3. Poor vocabulary skills.
4. lack of logic skills.
5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
etc.

--
pothead

All about snit read below. Links courtesy of Ron:

Example of Snit trolling in real time:

<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.linux.advocacy/c/biFilzgCcVg/m/eUcNGw6lP7UJ>

All about the snit troll:

<https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html>

On 2024-12-10 15:03, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Apple uses a kernel called XNU that they developed from Mach and
>>>> other sources with huge amounts of their own work as well.
>>>>
>>>> Now, here's a question for you:
>>>>
>>>> Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>>>
>>> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did. Why did
>>> Gates hire Cutler? Why did Apple wish they could've?
>>
>> Why SHOULD they build it from scratch.
>
>
> *That* is the question, believe it or not.

One you're not answering...

>
>
>> And Microsoft hired Cutler, because THEY didn't want to start from
>> scratch...
>>
>> ...because Cutler had been one of the technical product leads on VMS...
>>
>> ...which Windows NT internally very much resembles.
>>
>> <https://everything2.com/title/The+similarities+between+VMS+and+Windows+NT>
>
>
> Uh huh. But Cutler did start from scratch, emulating what he did
> before, emulating what anyone would do, it's like the discovery of
> ketamine, they didn't really invent or design it, they *found* it.
"emulating what he did before" is NOT starting from scratch.

On 2024-12-10 15:00, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>>>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
>>> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>>
>> Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.
>>
>> "the public" can't have things they think are valuable.
>>
>> Got it.
>
>
> My "elitism", eh? Not Apple's? What is the end game, here? How will
> the value of all these AirTags be realized?

In belongings not lost, but found.

In belongings not stolen and gone, but recovered.

The "end game" for Apple is selling something many, many, MANY people
find useful.

And yes: YOUR elitism.

According to you, "the public" can't have anything worth the expense of
safeguarding.

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

>>>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>>>> finite.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not what you said.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>>>
>>>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>>>> options for such are limited.
>>>
>>> And around the circle we go!
>>>
>>> You claimed that Apple was "quirky" because their "hardware options are
>>> finite.".
>>>
>>> But that is true of EVERY maker of personal computers.
>>
>> It's true of the number of quarks in the universe, too.
>Avoiding the fact that you can't call Apple "quirky" for having finite
>hardware options...
>
>...without saying the same about every other personal computer maker.

Does Dell having 100 options to Apple's 10 equate?

--
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.

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>> what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>
>Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.
>
>1. Morphs his claims.
>2. Poor reading comprehension.
>3. Poor vocabulary skills.
>4. lack of logic skills.
>5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
>etc.

Idiot.

--
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 2024-12-10 15:33, Joel wrote:
> pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>> Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.
>>
>> 1. Morphs his claims.
>> 2. Poor reading comprehension.
>> 3. Poor vocabulary skills.
>> 4. lack of logic skills.
>> 5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
>> etc.
>
>
> Idiot.
>

For correctly identifying your MO?

On 2024-12-10 15:06, pothead wrote:
> On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-10 13:17, Joel wrote:
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>>>>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>>>>>> line is usable.
>>>>>> And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's try this one question at a time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>
>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>
>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>
>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>> finite.
>>>
>>
>> That's not what you said.
>>
>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>
>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>
> Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.
>
> 1. Morphs his claims.
> 2. Poor reading comprehension.
> 3. Poor vocabulary skills.
> 4. lack of logic skills.
> 5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
> etc.
>
>

I don't disagree...

....but the "flavour" of this latest troll is unique.

😉

On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-12-10 15:06, pothead wrote:
>> On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-12-10 13:17, Joel wrote:
>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>>>>>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>>>>>>> line is usable.
>>>>>>> And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's try this one question at a time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>> finite.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's not what you said.
>>>
>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>
>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>> Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.
>>
>> 1. Morphs his claims.
>> 2. Poor reading comprehension.
>> 3. Poor vocabulary skills.
>> 4. lack of logic skills.
>> 5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
>> etc.
>>
>>
>
> I don't disagree...
>
> ...but the "flavour" of this latest troll is unique.
>
> 😉
Agreed.
He's also smarter than snit although that's not saying much :)

--
pothead

All about snit read below. Links courtesy of Ron:

Example of Snit trolling in real time:

<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.linux.advocacy/c/biFilzgCcVg/m/eUcNGw6lP7UJ>

All about the snit troll:

<https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html>

On 12/10/24 4:23 PM, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-12-10 13:00, Joel wrote:
>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>> On 12/10/24 12:46 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/10/24 11:01 AM, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rise above Apple's AirTag scheme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are Tiles a "scheme"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know what that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>>>
>>>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>>>
>>>> Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>>>
>>> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
>>> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.
>>
>> So your claim is that you don't see a small object, which--for many of
>> its use cases--should be concealed, proves that they're being bought but
>> not used?
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> Look up the definition of "anecdotal".
>
>
> OK, but why are you around all these organized thieves with your
> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.

Golly, where did these "organized thieves" come from?
Where they hiding in grandma's kitchen cabinets? /s

-hh

On 12/10/24 6:09 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-12-10 15:00, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>>>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag?  It's weird.
>>>>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
>>>> get.  The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>>>
>>> Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.
>>>
>>> "the public" can't have things they think are valuable.
>>>
>>> Got it.
>>
>>
>> My "elitism", eh?  Not Apple's?  What is the end game, here?  How will
>> the value of all these AirTags be realized?
>
> In belongings not lost, but found.
>
> In belongings not stolen and gone, but recovered.

It is also completely up to the perspective consumer to decide if the
object to be tagged is worth the cost of the Tile/Airtag. Of course,
there's little preventing them from moving a tag around from item to
item, as one's needs change.

> The "end game" for Apple is selling something many, many, MANY people
> find useful.
>
> And yes: YOUR elitism.
>
> According to you, "the public" can't have anything worth the expense of
> safeguarding.

Wait until he realizes that LoJack costs $300/year.

-hh

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:na5hljlg8ljc3au1n7uuucrusk054djm0u@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> You stated that Apple was "quirky" because:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "But certainly the hardware options are finite."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The hardware options of EVERY COMPUTER MANUFACTURER are finite,
>>>>>> doofus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is Dell "quirky" because of that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is Asus or Acer?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, but if I want an ARM laptop from Dell, I can make it the way I
>>>>> want, not just pick Apple's storage options. I can also delete Win11
>>>>> and put Linux on it.
>>>> And that makes Apple "quirky", does it?
>>>>
>>>> Even Dell only offers a limited set of configurations. There might be
>>>> more configurations from them than from Apple, but that's a difference
>>>> only of DEGREE.
>>>
>>> No, it is not.
>>
>>Yes. It is precisely a difference of degree.
>>
>>Apple offers a variety of computers in a variety of configurations.
>>
>>Dell offers a variety of computers in a variety of configurations.
>>
>>Dell offers a greater variety, but that is precisely what a "difference
>>of degree" means.
>>
>>> Apple's laptops are actually pretty good, but it gets
>>> worse with the desktops, the iMacs especially, very poor, the
>>> minis/Studios are OK. But to get a simple Linux on ARM laptop, I'd go
>>> to Dell.
>>Which is not the point under discussion.
>>
>>You're supposed to be explaining how Apple is supposedly "quirky"
>>because their "hardware options are finite."
>
>
> I think we've established that Dell offers a broad range of options
> that Apple does not.

So your issue isn't with their products but rather you feel they should have
more options.

Why they should have that you have not yet stated.. but I'm sure you will
correct that oversight.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:v58hlj1dr87r0nb557bm86guchkam0qd8s@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Apple's laptops are actually pretty good, but it gets
>>>>> worse with the desktops, the iMacs especially, very poor, the
>>>>> minis/Studios are OK. But to get a simple Linux on ARM laptop, I'd go
>>>>> to Dell.
>>>> Which is not the point under discussion.
>>>>
>>>> You're supposed to be explaining how Apple is supposedly "quirky"
>>>> because their "hardware options are finite."
>>>
>>> I think we've established that Dell offers a broad range of options
>>> that Apple does not.
>>We've established that makers of personal computers offer options.
>>
>>And the only difference between Dell and Apple is one of degree.
>>
>>So you agree that Dell's "hardware options are finite" and therefore...
>>
>>...that they, too, are "quirky".
>
>
> False. Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
> line is usable.

pleth·o·ra
/'pleTH?r?/
noun
1.
a large or excessive amount of (something).

I'm sure sure how that automatically makes Dell superior or Apple inferior.
Meanwhile, I note your ONLY objection is you think Apple should offer more
options.. otherwise, absolutely no issues with the hardware

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:lcahlj9gqq3i2tn8vh594or3tmm3haevp0@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>> line is usable.
>>And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>
>>Let's try this one question at a time.
>>
>>Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>
>>Yes or no.
>
>
> Everything is finite except God.

We'll take that as a yes.

So all you have is a difference of degree as Alan points out, which is
hardly the failing you seem to assert it is.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0tbhljlp44167h3vbfaghpv3a9c9hleffq@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>>>> line is usable.
>>>> And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>>>
>>>> Let's try this one question at a time.
>>>>
>>>> Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>
>>You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>
>>But that's still a "yes", so:
>>
>>Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>their "hardware options are finite."?
>>
>>Yes or no.
>
>
> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
> finite.

So you are now denying this as the justification for your claim.

Which takes us back to the beginning with you attempting to explain what it
is that is "quirky"

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:l7fhljpebkiqsiggkiea52a8fse06b6cp2@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>
>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>
>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>
>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>> finite.
>>
>>That's not what you said.
>>
>>What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>
>>So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>
>
> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
> options for such are limited.

So? Are you telling us your cell phone is "quirky"?

Further having an O/S matched to hardware means the incompatibilities and
other issues are basically eliminated. The OS can be optimized for the
hardware and the hardware can be optimized for the software.

I don't see how either of those are a significant down side to someone
looking to increased performance and higher reliability.

Heck, I bet if you had an apple system you would never have had the issue
with your monitor requiring you to buy additional hardware to correct.

Seems like the computer that is "quirky" is yours.. as it has compatibility
issues.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vjaeok$15arv$1@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 14:14, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>> finite.
>>>
>>> That's not what you said.
>>>
>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>
>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>>
>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>> options for such are limited.
>>
>
> And around the circle we go!
>
> You claimed that Apple was "quirky" because their "hardware options are
> finite.".
>
> But that is true of EVERY maker of personal computers.

actually, you could carry that further.. it would be true of ALL personal
computers as there are only a limited number of options out there thus your
options are finite.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kbghljhdm8vrk799rio2ec3fa2h458j1fu@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>>> finite.
>>>>
>>>> That's not what you said.
>>>>
>>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>>
>>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>>
>>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>>> options for such are limited.
>>
>>And around the circle we go!
>>
>>You claimed that Apple was "quirky" because their "hardware options are
>>finite.".
>>
>>But that is true of EVERY maker of personal computers.
>
>
> It's true of the number of quarks in the universe, too.

So you admit your term is meaningless.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:usjhljlu5io5li1h2v8sqgtg76b7is0p49@4ax.com...
> pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>>On 2024-12-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>>Joel is sounding more and more like snit with every post he makes.
>>
>>1. Morphs his claims.
>>2. Poor reading comprehension.
>>3. Poor vocabulary skills.
>>4. lack of logic skills.
>>5. Making claims he can't back up with specifics.
>>etc.
>
>
> Idiot.

good point you are an idiot just like snit.