Where I keep my spare cats.

On Jul 23, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/23/2017 3:05 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

the only limit was for *computers*.

the reality is that the majority of users only needs to authorize one
computer, the one which hosts their music library and from which they
sync their ipods.

Realistically, the restrictions creates a problem. Several years ago my
daughter gave me an iPod, about half filled with some of my favorite
music. The source for the music was my music collection, consisting of
some irreplaceable recordings, including original Louis Armstrong,
Toscanini, Caruso, Lanza, three different versions of Wagner's first,
etc. The original computer that she used is long gone. I would like to
transfer the music to my iPhone, and add new music. Apple has told me
that it can't be done. I'm sure there is a way. The suggestions on some
of the Internet forums has not been very helpful. Realistically, the
reality is that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others who have
needs similar to mine.

iAmazing does a pretty good job of accessing files, music, and everything
else in my iOS devices.
You should be able to back up all your music files to your Win10 desktop, and
then transfer to your iPhone. That is not the typical Mac way of doing
things, but has been a workable solution.
https://imazing.com

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 7/23/2017 8:38 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


the reality is that the majority of users only needs to authorize one
computer, the one which hosts their music library and from which they
sync their ipods.

Realistically, the restrictions creates a problem. Several years ago my
daughter gave me an iPod, about half filled with some of my favorite
music. The source for the music was my music collection, consisting of
some irreplaceable recordings, including original Louis Armstrong,
Toscanini, Caruso, Lanza, three different versions of Wagner's first,
etc. The original computer that she used is long gone.I would like to
transfer the music to my iPhone, and add new music. Apple has told me
that it can't be done. I'm sure there is a way.

of course it can be done.

just copy the music off one of the backups you made before getting rid
of the computer. very easy.

since the music is supposedly irreplaceable, you would certainly have
made *multiple* backups. after all, it's irreplaceable. so you say.

The suggestions on some
of the Internet forums has not been very helpful.

then you didn't look very hard. it's very easy to copy music off an
ipod.

Realistically, the
reality is that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

realistically, i know *far* more about it than you do.

Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others who have
needs similar to mine.

not many, but those that do are only in that situation because of their
own mistakes, that being not having backups.

you ****ed up. simple as that.

try to learn from your mistakes rather than argue.

WTF do backups have to do with it. Do learn to read.

--
PeterN

On 7/23/2017 8:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 23, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/23/2017 3:05 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

the only limit was for *computers*.

the reality is that the majority of users only needs to authorize one
computer, the one which hosts their music library and from which they
sync their ipods.

Realistically, the restrictions creates a problem. Several years ago my
daughter gave me an iPod, about half filled with some of my favorite
music. The source for the music was my music collection, consisting of
some irreplaceable recordings, including original Louis Armstrong,
Toscanini, Caruso, Lanza, three different versions of Wagner's first,
etc. The original computer that she used is long gone. I would like to
transfer the music to my iPhone, and add new music. Apple has told me
that it can't be done. I'm sure there is a way. The suggestions on some
of the Internet forums has not been very helpful. Realistically, the
reality is that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others who have
needs similar to mine.

iAmazing does a pretty good job of accessing files, music, and everything
else in my iOS devices.
You should be able to back up all your music files to your Win10 desktop, and
then transfer to your iPhone. That is not the typical Mac way of doing
things, but has been a workable solution.
https://imazing.com


Thanks. I really would like to expand the collection and add new
acquisitions so I can listen in my car.
I will try it.

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others who have
needs similar to mine.

not many, but those that do are only in that situation because of their
own mistakes, that being not having backups.

you ****ed up. simple as that.

try to learn from your mistakes rather than argue.

WTF do backups have to do with it. Do learn to read.

everything.

if you had a backup, you'd not be in this situation.

you brought it on yourself.

On 7/23/2017 9:09 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others who have
needs similar to mine.

not many, but those that do are only in that situation because of their
own mistakes, that being not having backups.

you ****ed up. simple as that.

try to learn from your mistakes rather than argue.

WTF do backups have to do with it. Do learn to read.

everything.

if you had a backup, you'd not be in this situation.

you brought it on yourself.


Sorry, I mentioned something Apple did that adversely affected me, and
your knee jerk defense kicked in.


--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


WTF do backups have to do with it. Do learn to read.

everything.

if you had a backup, you'd not be in this situation.

you brought it on yourself.

Sorry, I mentioned something Apple did that adversely affected me, and
your knee jerk defense kicked in.

apple didn't do anything to affect you in any way.

you had *one* copy of something you claim to be irreplaceable. you did
not have any backups, at all. that's a contradiction.

despite that, it's trivial to copy the music off the *lone* copy you do
have.

you still refuse to learn a lesson too.

nospam
Sun, 23 Jul 2017
19:05:20 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

Apple used DRM and was restrictive in doing so. A claim that's
supported by facts.

nope.

the *actual* facts, which you repeatedly ignore, is that apple's
drm was the least restrictive of any drm at the time, so much so
that it was invisible to the end user unless they were up to no
good.

Those are not facts, those are your personal opinions on the matter.
Opinions which are jaded because you worship the ground jobs walked
on...And call anyone who doesn't an apple hater, even if they
aren't.

apple even used an industry standard format, as opposed to what
microsoft did (they too had drm), with their protected wmv.

I wasn't discussing MS. You seem to continually want to discuss them
though. Let's just save time there. I too think their a POS company
and have for a very very long time. Going back to my childhood, I
suspect. They seriously damaged future PC sales when they released
windows 8/8.1 and went in for the kill with Windows 10. They are
shooting themselves in the foot, imho, and I wish they'd just shoot
themselves in the head and get it over with.

You couldn't just copy drm tracks to all the devices you
wanted at one time.

you could copy to unlimited ipods and burn unlimited audio cds,
so yes.

No decryption key, no playback. itunes wouldn't give the key to
an unlimited number of ipods. Would have defeated drm had it done
so. Or, not bothered using public/private crypto in the first
place.

except that's *exactly* how it worked.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM...610E66A46.html

iTunes Keys on the iPod Any number of iPods can be used with an
authorized computer running iTunes. Once an iPod is connected, it
downloads all the user keys from iTunes so it can unlock and play
any protected tracks. If that copy of iTunes is authorized to play
songs from multiple accounts, all of the accounts' user keys are
uploaded.

The iPod makes no decisions about which tracks it can play, it
simply is given user keys for all the songs it contains by iTunes.

If iTunes has songs in its library, but lacks the keys to play
them--from another account, or on a deauthorized computer that has
dumped its keys--it will simply not copy the protected songs to the
iPod.

There is no way unplayable protected songs can be copied to the iPod
without the user keys to play them, because iTunes will not let this
happen. This again delegates the burden of DRM to iTunes, making the
iPod simpler.

That also explains why users can't dock a single iPod with different
users’ iTunes and suck up all their music; the only option available
is to replace the music on the iPod with the music from the new
iTunes library.

Since iTunes manages all the music on an iPod, there is no way to
sync an iPod with multiple iTunes libraries; the iPod simply wasn’t
given the intelligence to mange multiple libraries.

With iTunes 7 however, Apple added the ability for an iPod
registered with an iTunes account to sync purchased songs with any
of the five machines authorized by that account. Each copy of iTunes
can update the user keys on the iPod and add new purchased tracks,
ensuring that the iPod can play all the music copied to it.

you are wrong again.

See above.

https://www.apple.com/asia/support/i...torial/aciTune
sPc_t 16.html
You can also download your purchased music to an unlimited
number of iPod devices to take your songs on the road. You can
add the music you purchased from the iTunes Music Store to any
of your playlists. And you can even burn your purchased music to
a CD.

You can *now* you meant to say. Originally though, I couldn't take
an ipod to a friends house and just copy his entire library to mine
without trashing what I already had: That also explains why users
can't dock a single iPod with different users’ iTunes and suck up
all their music; the only option available is to replace the music
on the iPod with the music from the new iTunes library.

DRM prevented me from doing that. As DRM doesn't apply anymore, the
second url you provided applies, now but, it didn't then. When DRM
was enforced. It would *replace* what I already had with the music
from the other machine. it didn't let me keep what I had an add
their music collection to my ipod.

While I find your attempt to confuse would be readers with the past
vs the present to be rather amusing, it is a bit on the childish
side and I don't think many people here are young enough to fall for
the deception. I admit, I could be wrong...David Brooks was able to
dupe some for a period of time, and, he's quite obvious most of the
time. I was surprised to see Savageduck claiming he was a
good/decent guy when nothing online supports such a conclusion,
but..it's possible he wised up and realized what a pos David Brooks
actually is.

https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php




it's so well established that google prohibits using windows
internally unless it's absolutely required.

I could care less what googles personal business operation rules
are in their own IT departments. It's a moot point, anyway.

it's not moot at all and the only reason you don't care is because
it shows you to be wrong.

I'm glad you think you can read minds. I don't know who encouraged
such horse**** thinking, but they should be soundly smacked upside
the head multiple times for misleading you in such a way.

You're writing from your arsehole on a subject you have no
personal, first hand knowledge of. That's called 'pretending'
You're attempting to claim knowledge that you do not have. And
attempting to bull**** others into thinking you're some kind of
authority on the subject, with not a single line of malicious
code to your name. Quite a feat you've set out for yourself. You
have a better chance of winning a mega lottery, each time you
play, ten times in a row.

insults means you have nothing.

I made no effort to insult you. I stated facts. That might seem
insulting to someone who's pretending to be something they aren't,
but it doesn't meet the definition of the word insult. I have a bit
more than nothing on the subject of malware. I have first hand
knowledge as a published and internationally recognized malware
author who had entire families of his work ITW for long periods of
time. Some of which are still considered ITW despite them being
nearly two decades or more old now. I have insider knowledge from
both sides of the fence, because I was there, in the game, not
sitting on the sidelines.

you have *no* knowledge of what i've done or haven't done.

I do, actually. Your own words/comments, inaccurate statements tell
me things about you without you realizing you have.

i've been in the industry for *years*, having written a *lot* of
mac and ios software, including for some rather well known
companies, along with writing some windows, unix, mainframe and
mini software. i am *very* familiar with the internals of mac os
and ios.

What specifically is your point here? I've worked for some big name
companies myself. Some of my copyrighted code is still used by some
big name companies going back decades. Is this another attempt at a
****ing contest? As far as your statement that your very familiar with the internals of mac, I tend to disagree because
you previously claimed the optionrom exploitability was patched and no longer poses any threat. Which is a partially true statement, but, not
entirely true.

OTH, PC's have never been patched!? against optionroms, infact,
they're encouraged and sometimes a very useful thing to support.
Lojack for example wouldn't be able to function on systems that
didn't support optionroms. Varioous expansion cards with their own
bios routines also wouldn't work so well. A specific controller card
I have wouldn't be able to function if the system didn't allow
optionroms. Despite the fact I don't actually have anything
connected to the card anymore, because it's so yesteryear it's not
even funny, it's still present on this machine and would still
function in the event I actually connected an IDE based HD to it.

if anyone is pretending, it's *you*, who repeatedly insists you
know more about apple and their products than apple does.

I'm not the one who's pretending here and telling whoppers like 'AV
creates malware to boost sales' (paraphrased) that would certainly
be you.

you're nothing more than a poseur, and a ****ty one at that.

insults mean you have nothing. But, we both know you don't, already.


my personal favourite is when a mac anti-malware utility
quarantined the virtual memory swap files. needless to say,
that didn't end well. the level of stupidity for that to even
happen, nevermind get past testing, is mind boggling.

I can see how that might have happened, but, that's because I
understand what's involved in the creation and detection of
malware, from first hand experience...

the only reason it happened is because it was written by
incompetent morons and not tested before release.

Heh. As I wrote above, the more you write, the more I learn about
you. Specifically, the more I learn about what you don't know
anything about first hand. You give yourself away without realizing
you are. Back in the day, I used to take advantage of that level of
stupidity. But, I'm retired from blackhat these days.

Case in point here, you don't know a damn thing about what's
involved in antimalware/antivirus creation or whats involved in
definitions/signatures/engine design, etc etc etc. Nor do you seem
to know much of anything about the testing methodologies in play or
that you can't possibly test for every what if scenario out there,
either. You're quick to blame the authors going so far as to call
them incompetent morons when they make a big goof, but..
writing/support av/am isn't like writing a standalone application
that doesn't need to be able to play nice with a wide variety of
hardware and software.

Yes, by all means, continue discussions with me so that I may learn
more about your knowledge level, or, in this case, lack there of.
You're so arrogant, you just can't help yourself here.

worse, some anti-malware companies have actually written
their own malware and released it, then bragged that they
were first to 'detect' it.

Heh, that's actually a common myth. I'm surprised someone of
your supposed stature actually bought it. even for a second.
Well, not really, but...

actually, it's a fact, not a myth.

It's a myth. The fact you actually believe it, does speak
volumes.

it's not a myth. once again, i personally *know* several people
who were involved.

And I call bull****. Straight up, bull****. The links you provided
previously don't even support the claim you tried to make when you
shared them. Not one little bit, infact.

AV companies do NOT create malware in the hopes of being the first
to detect something in an effort to boost their sales or their
ratings with joe public or the competition. That's NOT how it works.

just because you haven't heard about it doesn't mean it never
happened.

Bull**** again. I already told you, I was on a first/last name basis
with many big players in the av/am scene while being an active vxer.
If what you wrote was ever true (and it wasn't, not ever. Zvi Netiv
and Doren Rosenthal do not count, if that's the 'people' you know)
and it isn't, I would know about it. Hell, I might have been in on
it directly or indirectly via one of the groups I ran with.

there's a lot you don't know.

That could be said for any of us on any number of subjects.

With that said though, Malware is a subject I know like the back of
my hand. And I've got the reputation and track record to prove it.
Urls nearly twenty years old now still exist, discussing my work.
And that's just a tiny piece of the stuff I've written since
learning to write software, at a very young (single digit) age.

I've been on a computer of some kind long before they were cool or
most people had a single one let alone a LAN in their homes.

I'm not some digital age kiddo you're trying to talk down to. On the
subject of Malware and many other aspects of IT, the only thing
you'll gain from your talking down attitude is bitchslapped into the
middle of next week with my superior first hand real world
knowledge on the subject as compared to yours.

As you once stated, nothing beats real world experience. And, you're
right about that. For better or worse, nothing does.


--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

We'll use a signal I have tried and found far-reaching and easy to yell. Waa-hoo! --Zane Grey, The Last of the Plainsmen

nospam
Sun, 16 Jul 2017
20:23:51 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

what makes someone productive is the entire workflow, best in
class apps and overall user experience as well as optimizing for
the actual bottlenecks (not what you think they are).

that's why users are *far* more productive using photoshop versus
the gimp on exactly the same hardware, even your liquid cooled
monstrosity. it's also why users are more productive using
mac/windows versus linux.

You seem to have a hard time keeping up with comparable items here.

it's the *software* that matters, not the hardware specs.

I think you grossly underestimate how much the two have in common.
If what you said was true in all cases, and, not as ambiguous as
your bad for doing, we wouldn't need anything past the 286.

Again, you demonstrate gross ignorance on what a mining rig is,
what hardware is present, and, how it works. Photoshop is childs
play to a mining rig. A waste of good hardware, infact.

i know what a mining rig is and what hardware it involves and it's
the *wrong* hardware for photoshop.

I think thanks to having to use a search engine since mining rigs
came up you know more about them than you did prior to that
discussion, sure. But, if you think I believe you have any first
hand knowledge of them, you have me confused for the idiot sitting
in your chair.

you've haven't used photoshop much (or at all) nor do you
understand what its bottlenecks are. that much is clear.

Actually, what's clear is you've been writing from your arsehole for
a considerable amount of time now, and, I was foolish enough to take
the bait and engage you. Even when you moved goalposts, quoted
seriously out of date articles, etc, I still continued responding.

I think though, I'll let you have the last word and you can continue
with your charade of being uber intelligent in things I.T.

You're contradicting yourself and demonstrating (again) that you
really don't know how the machine in front of you actually works
'under the hood'. You seem to think a varient of UNIX (which is
what mac runs) is completely isolated from the cute GUI mac has.
That's simply, not the case.

it's not a 'varient' of unix nor is there any contradiction.

Yes, actually, it is.

mac os is certified unix and it's *much* more than a 'cute gui' on
top of unix.

I was generalizing, but, in all reality, it's a skinned UNIX. Apple
style. Intended for MAC, obviously. But, I thought cute gui seemed
more fitting and less 'technical'

unlike you, i know *very* well what goes on under the hood of a
mac.

So you keep saying, and then contradict your own statements later
on, in the same post. Mind boggling. Truth be told, your need for
bull****ting is giving me a migraine.

mac apps are not unix apps. they don't use unix apis.

I didn't say they did...

A closed source, proprietary varient, I might add.

it's less closed and less proprietary than windows.

A matter of personal opinion there.

*only* the stuff apple added *on* *top* *of* unix is what's
closed. the unix part is open source.

MacOS itself is NOT open source. Some Apple apps are, certainly.
Their idea of giving back I suppose, but, the good stuff, heh, no,
most certainly not.

not that it matters, since an open source os doesn't improve user
productivity. users want to get work done and want the best apps
to do it, not modify the os.

You really should stop making assumptions on what you think users
want. Different users want different things. It's why we have so
many different options available. Mac, PC, software packages, OSes,
etc. Don't you understand that?

a generic unix box is stuck with ****ty unix apps, and a vm
doesn't count. no graphic artist would ever run photoshop or
linux in a vm on top of unix.

Those lines are nothing more than your own, tainted, personal
opinion.

it's verifiable fact.

No, it isn't. It's an opinion. Do you know the difference between an
opinion and a fact?

photoshop is mac/windows only, not unix.

And this has what to do with the price of tea in china? Do you feel
all users have a need for Photoshop? And, mac runs a varient of
Unix, so you can't very well claim it's not unix outright.


running photoshop in a vm or using wine are not viable options.

It's been awhile, but last time I checked, Photoshop wasn't fully
operational under Wine. Wine was never intended to run Photoshop,
anyway. So I fail to see the comparison there. It would be like
expecting a honda civic to tow a trailer loaded with heavy
machinery. It's not intended/designed for that, so, one shouldn't
have such expectations that it would, for very long.

A VM OTH is expected to run the host OS and every app supported by
the host (unless it's written with some very funky code), including
Photoshop. So, other than your personal opinion, why is running
photoshop under VM not an option?

that means unix users are stuck with crap like the gimp, which is
so far behind photoshop it's actually sad how bad it is.

Photoshop is a single application that not everyone has any use
for...Photoshop has how many years on gimp in development? It's not
exactly a fair comparison here. But, you don't seem to be known for
trying to play on a level field, anyhow.

not only is the gimp *much* slower on the same hardware, but it
*still* lacks many key features photoshop has had for 20+ years,
and based on the gimp's roadmap, it won't ever get them.

Is the old photoshop vs gimp comparison the best you can do to
defend your weak opinion that unix users only have access to ****ty
apps? You're a UNIX user too..Yet, you don't have ****ty apps on your
mac, do you?

macs have thunderbolt which must be included in any comparison.

you don't get to ignore specs that a mac has that other systems
do not.

I didn't ignore it, I stated that it's just not as popular as you
seem to think on the PC platform. Which is why Intel changed
their policy concerning royalties. They'd like to make it more
common by having more manufactuers of PC components adopt it. It
seems to be going very slow, considering how long it's been
available. Intel obviously shares the same opinion, why else
would they forgo royalties in an effort to increase it's
adoption.

popularity does not matter.

Tell that to the creators of Betamax. They had a superior system
than that of VHS. And, that's just one measily example. Many more
exist. Popularity plays a very big role in hardware adoption. You
have to be able to justify supporting the technology. If nobody
cares about it other than mac users, then it's a no go essentially
for the PC world. Again, seeing as how long it's been out, it's
looking like a stalled project on the PC side.

the fact is that thunderbolt exists, it's widely used in the
industry (not just apple), macs have had it standard for years and
it *cannot* be ignored when making a comparison.

Macs have done their own thing for years, it's what makes them macs.
And the fact mac has it standard doesn't mean anything to a PC user.
Especially when said brand new PC doesn't support it, out of the
box. One could acquire an expansion card to add it, but, why bother
if you have nothing to connect to it? It's like the firewire port on
one of my laptops I have here. I've yet to plug a single device into
it. What's the point? Maybe somebody else with the same make/model
has a use for it, but, I don't. I have a couple of hd enclosures
that could use it, sure, but they also support usb. So, why would I
even bother with the firewire port? The enclosure is going to be a
bottleneck depending on the type of drive I place into it, which
defeats the purpose of the firewire connection. And, hell, let's
face it, everything under the sun these days is USB friendly.

Even the brand new cell phone I just bought is USB friendly, but,
doesn't know (or care) what firewire, thunderbolt etc are.

windows is closed source, while much of macos is open
source.

Er, no, not much of Macos is open source. Some apps created by
Apple are open source, but, MacOS itself most certainly is not
open source. Neither is the hardware Apple creates to run it.

far more of apple's software is open source than microsoft,
some of which is used by apple's own competitors, including
android.

You stated that much of MacOS was open source, and, that's not
the case, it's never been the case. The only way to have a good
look around is to break copyright/patent laws as you do so. I
wasn't comparing Apple to microsoft, I was correcting your
erroneous statement concerning what is/what isn't 'open source'

as usual, absolutely wrong.

https://opensource.apple.com

Funny, you claim to know so much about Macs, but little about the OS
vs applications...

I don't see any source code to MacOSX present for download via your
link...

https://opensource.apple.com/source/

Or there. Do you understand what opensource actually is? Where can I
download full source code to MacOSX legally then? fork url.

Windows is one operating system an individual can choose to
run on his/her PC. PC gives people options, including the OS
you want to run on it. This is because the PC hardware
architecture is open source. Not closed, not proprietary like
Apple. Apple has always liked doing their own thing in their
own way. And charging insane (imo) amounts for the shiny case.

nonsense.

The last two lines are my own personal opinion, otherwise, the
rest is factual and not simply my own opinion.

all of it is nonsense. every single word.

Umm. You obviously know little to nothing about the PC world...

apple is more standards compliant than microsoft and macs can run
a number of operating systems (not that anyone cares, it's either
mac os or windows).

It's not either MacOS or Windows...I only have one machine here that
runs Windows natively.

prices are competitive and macs are the *only* platform that
can run mac, windows *and* unix.

http://emulators.com/

emulation means the host system *can't* run it, it has to emulate
it. you just proved my point.

Actually, I discredited what you wrote.

if it wasn't for mac os being free, there never would have
been a free upgrade to windows 10 for the first year.

MacOS isn't completely free.

yes it is. mac os is completely free.

ROFL, only if you meet the requirements. Hence, conditions.
Otherwise, it's NOT free.

it's free. period.

Not according to Apples own website it isn't. Link provided
previously. Conditions apply. So, it's not free 'period'

You really think Microsoft pushed Win**** 10 on people for
'free' because Apple released a 'free' upgrade with
limitations? Not hardly.

yes hardly.

ROFL. Umm, you're wrong. MS wants everybody using the SAME
version of windows. It's *easier* for them from a suppport pov if
that happened. One code base, instead of several others with
differences. Much less headache, for them.

every company wants their user base to be using the same version
of their products, not just microsoft.

Well, no, actually they don't. That depends on the products and
company. I wouldn't want home users running enterprise versions of
my things. That would generate excessive tech support calls. not to
mention emails, etc. A ****ing nightmare to be honest. Some products
are intended to be managed by an IT staff, not a home user.

You clearly aren't quite the coder? you claimed to
be if you don't understand that.

insults means you have nothing.

Nice try, but, I didn't insult you.

I think if we took a head
count of all the PC engineers, it would grossly exceed the
amount Apple has.

you're confusing quantity with quality.

That's nothing more than a personal opinion. One of which I
don't share or have any real interest in debating with you.

it's not an opinion.

You really should consult with a dictionary.

says the person who writes 'varient' and 'paultry'.

Oh typo/spelling lames. You're so witty! Did you use a dictionary and refresh
yourself on the difference between opinion and fact yet?

apple's chip design team is one of the best in the business.

Another opinion.

nope. it's fact. what apple has done, particularly in the past 5
years or so, is nothing short of impressive. everyone else is
trying to catch-up.

And yet, another opinion. You do understand the subtle (heh)
differences between an opinion vs fact, right?

in less than a decade, apple's own processors are matching
intel in benchmarks, and in some cases, exceeding it.

Some specific processors intended for very specific roles. We're
not talking about desktop cpus here, though. Different design
purpose n all.

nope. what's in ios devices are desktop class processors, which
match or exceed intel's cpus.

*sigh* I should have provided a link to explain what a desktop
processor is in the context we're discussing them. I suppose you'll
tell me there's no difference between a mobile/desktop cpu next, eh?

Apple doesn't make PCs. They make Apple products. Although the
term actually stands for Personal Computer, when an individual
hears the word PC, they aren't thinking about Apple. According to
you, they're thinking about Microsoft. Technically, the coco
series, the commodores, the amigas, original Apples, etc, are all
'PC's, but, nobody thinks of them that way these days. Micro
computers really, but, why split hairs at this point...

steve ballmer considers an *ipad* and other tablets a pc, and that
was when he was still running microsoft, before he got fired for
doing a ****ty job.

Thanks for proving my point.

You really have a deep hatred for Microsoft, don't you?

Likewise, a real desktop/tower can do things the Ios devices
aren't able to do...What's your specific point here?

pick the best tool for the job.

That isn't what you wrote. You said the ios was comparable to a pc.
I asked how, you responded rather ambiguously that it could do
things a PC couldn't. I don't disagree with that, but, I tend to
disagree with the comparable to a PC outright claim. In what ways is
it comparable to a desktop/tower?

do try to keep up.

insults mean you have nothing.

there will also be windows systems with arm cpus, which have
already been demoed and expected by year's end.

Will be? Try, already exists and have for several years now. MS
Surface RT is a fine example of that, actually. But, it's not the
only one...

windows rt is dead and completely different than whats coming,
which is something which has not been done before.

*yawn* I've heard that before. Right up there with 'new and
improved' if it's new, how it is improved? If it's improved, how is
it new...

Yes, you are. We've gone from x86/amd64 to Arm cpus in this
discussion. What else would you call it? You seem to think ARM
chips are 'new' as well. They are RISC processors, which isn't
'new'...Unless you think the 1980s is just around the corner.

intel chips aren't 'new' either. they're actually *older* than
arm.

Yes, and? Point is, the technology ARM you're touting so much has
been around a long time.

and if you think arm of the 1980s is the same as apple's current
64 bit arm chips, you're even more ignorant than i thought.

I didn't claim that. What I wrote was that the technology isn't
'new'; some improvements and changes are, and I'd ****ing damn well
expect them to be in 2017, but, entirely new it's not.

you're also unaware that arm was originally co-founded by apple:

Incorrect assumption on your part. I'm well aware of the original
companies behind the processor technology.

but why let facts get in the way of your babble.

I was about to say the same thing about your nonsense, but, you beat
me to it.

Did you skim the article? The ARM processor is using emulation.
It's *not* a native instruction set to that CPU. And contrary to
claims, emulation does slow down the process. Additional steps
are required to do it.

no additional steps for the user and the speed impact won't be
noticed in most cases. for common tasks such as email, the
computer is waiting on the user.

Oh for ****s sake...that's not what I meant by speed impact and you
can't really be that stupid. You're trying to dance around the
claims in the article as it matters in the real world. Email is ONE
part of what will be asked of those cpus. And you damn well know
this. Especially if they're being touted as a replacement for your
desktop.

tablets and phones are just another type of computer, optimized
for different purposes than a desktop/laptop.

different purposes, I agree. outright replacement? Not hardly.

for many people, a mobile device is their only computer, and
they do more with it than you do on your liquid cooled system.

LOL. I doubt that.

doubt it all you want, but it's true.

No, it isn't. It's another of your personal opinions stated as a
fact when it isn't.

they're not tiny nor are they a gadget, the battery life is
comparable to most laptops (if not better) and their lifespan
is no different than any other computer.

They are disposable devices.. for a reason.

nonsense. they're no more disposable than any other tech device.

Bull****. Cell phones, tablets, etc are disposable. When the battery
won't charge reliably anymore, you toss the entire device in the
trash (especially if it's Apple; they don't want you replacing the
battery easily in those devices) and get another one. Crack the
screen? You could replace it, but, most people won't bother. They'll
toss it in the trash and get another one; usually via some extended
warranty they bought. The trashed 'junk' winds up in China where
it's recycled for good parts and those parts are resold all over the
place in their little shops and some much larger ones. Especially
Apple products. You should checkout wimp.com sometime and see this
guy source all the pieces/parts he needs to build himself another
Apple phone. They go into some detail about how the parts wind up in
his hands. They come from phones Americans and other countries throw
away.

nothing lasts forever.

Nobody every said it did. But, when you go out of your way to make
something as simple as changing a dead battery pack out for a new
one a royal pain in the ass, you're intentionally designing a life
expectancy limit in your device. Why should something be tossed
simply because one component has failed? A component that should and
could be made easily replaceable.

Do you know how many free ipods I get on a routine basis because the
battery finally **** on it? There's nothing wrong with it aside from
a dead battery pack. If I take the time to replace it (and I have,
many times) I got another portable audio player, for free. When it
would have been tossed into the trash instead. I give them away to
people I know locally who want them once I repair them. I don't even
charge for the battery pack I bought, new. I even load it up on as
much music as it can hold based on what I know the user likes for
music. I don't charge them for that either. Heh. DRM free, high
quality mp3s, no less.

many people are doing real work on mobile devices, some of
which is not possible on a desktop/laptop.

You aren't running a full blown copy of Autocad 2018 on a
'mobile' device. I'd say that is one example of 'real work'

autocad is not the only example of real work.

I didn't say it was, but, it's one great example. As is Maya. You
won't be running a full blown copy of it on your mobile device
either. You might try mining for bitcoins specifically, maybe, but,
your device really isn't upto it. And your battery source would hate
you for it in short order.

I could continue with real work examples that are better suited for
a desktop/tower, but, what's the point. The right tool for the job,
right? Incidently though, I'm curious.. what exactly do you call
real world work that can be done on a mobile but cannot be done on a
desktop/tower/laptop? Can you cite any specific software packages
and/or scenarios?

none of them are apple specific applications.

You might want to review your list...

since you snipped the list, here it is again:
easy migration, target disk mode, target display mode on
select models, handoff & continuity, airdrop, quicklook,
universal clipboard, touchid, applepay, touchbar, secure element,
unix under the hood, cocoa, metal, multitouch gestures,
forcetouch trackpad, wide gamut display, messages/calls with any
device, versioning, local facial & scene recognition,
differential privacy, machine learning, time machine, snapshots,
higher user productivity, lower cost of ownership and higher
resale value.

those are *features*, not applications.

You may want to take a closer look at those 'features'

And with emulation, a PC can
run many of them.. so...

given that none were apps, no it can't, and many of those features
require hardware not available on a pc *and* software support.

Again, you might wanna take a closer look at your list. Other than
lack of physical hardware to run the software itself on, emulation
can do partial list of what you provided.

sometimes it's a mac, sometimes it's a pc, sometimes it's a
smartphone and sometimes it's a tablet. sometimes it's a
combination. sometimes it's none of those.

Again, I don't disagree with that.

apparently you do, because you continue to make up ****.

I'm not the one making up ****. I leave that to you. I think the
best one so far is that av makes malware. It's an old myth, so you
can't even get credit for originality.

So you don't have any way for anyone else to verify your claim
then?

if you actually worked in the industry you'd learn what
*really* goes on, not what you read about in a google search.

So you don't have any way for anyone else to verify your claim
then?

work in the industry and you'll get all the verification you want
and a whole lot more.

So that's a no to my question then, eh? As, I do work in the
industry and I've been unable to verify your claims, so far.

you don't want to learn anything. you're ignorant as can be.

ROFL. I'm very ignorant on a wide variety of subjects, as are you,
as is everyone else. However, I do learn new things every single
day. Otherwise, there'd be no point in existing.

although anecdotal, i've had far more problems with enterprise
class routers/switches than i have with consumer grade stuff.

I find myself wondering how much of that might be attributed to
your own mistakes/lack of understanding of the product vs an
actual failure/design flaw with the product. Granted, I wasn't
there when the issues took place and don't know what you did to
try to resolve them, but going by your posts, and only your posts
in the limited time I've know of your existance, it does make me
wonder if the failure was with you, not the product.

insults means you have nothing.

You should consult a dictionary for the definition to the word
insult after you check the definitions to fact and opinion.

the problems were *hardware* failures (more than one). my consumer
stuff is rock solid.

I only have your word to go by on that. As I said, I wasn't there,
and, you've provided no specific information. I don't value your
word as all that credible after you made the claim that av creates
malware, if it helps.

moving the goalposts again. now you're trying to claim that
commercial grade is specific to a manufacturer??

I made no attempt to move anything. I disagreed with your comment
that specs on commercial grade are worse than consumer grade,
though. As, it makes no sense to me. You might want to consider
taking a refresher course in reading comprehension while you're
examining that dictionary though. You seem to be reading things I
didn't actually write.

the hp display *you* mentioned, which *you* claim is 'commercial
grade', has *worse* specs than the display in the retina 5k imac,
which *you* claim is not commercial grade, but by your own
definition, it is.

Ahh, I see where your confusion lies with my previous comment. I
wasn't discussing a monitor specifically when I wrote my statement.
Infact, I didn't list any specific device, tool, appliance, etc. You
assumed I did, evidently. Well, that's what you get for making
assumptions.

I last looked at Apple.com in May, when I wrote the post.
Whatever new products they've added since then wouldn't
obviously, be included in my comparison.

apple didn't add any new products. all they did was bump up the
specs of the existing products.

Okay, so, as I said, I visited the page in May, whatever they've
done since then I wouldn't have first hand knowledge of. Duh. So,
you can stop accusing me of lying anytime, then. As, I wasn't.

what other conclusion is there? the specs are clear as can be.

Are you having trouble reading what I wrote?

either you lied about what you claim to have seen you're just
incredibly stupid, and since you insist you're not lying, there's
only one other conclusion.

Neither. See above. read slowly.

you were wrong then, you're wrong now and you refuse to admit
being wrong despite it being explained to you numerous times.

I went by what I viewed on apple.com. As I explained, several times
now. I seriously doubt my script blocker removed any references to
i7 machines when I browsed the page. I didn't see any i7 boxes. If I
had, I would have checked for comparable PC to those offerings as I
did what what I did see available.


there was an i7 configuration in may. just admit you're wrong.

I'm not wrong in what I viewed on apple.coms website in May. I
provided the links I used where I got the information as well as the
system specifications, etc. I did the same thing with the pc
comparisons I made. I did not see any i7 Apple machines when I
visited the site. As I wrote above, if I did see one, I would have
found a comparable PC based system with the same, if not, better
processor as what Apple offered at the time I visited their page.

If I had to do more digging or click more links to see more Apple
machines, that's the fault of apples poor website design; they
should have been included on the same page as the machines I did
view.

a i7 retina imac (which do exist, despite your claims
otherwise), is an additional $300, bringing the price to $2099.

I didn't see any i7 imac in May on Apple.com.

then you didn't look very hard. or at all.

Obviously, I did look. I didn't pull the Apple specs out of my
asshole that I shared here.

bump the specs does *not* mean add a new processor configuration.

Actually, it could. In the PC world, it certainly does. PC
mainboards can typically support more than one specific type of CPU.
So you don't have to have the latest greatest cpu right away, you
can opt for the lesser one and purchase the cpu by itself to be
installed later, if you so desire. I realize you probably can't do
that with Apple products, but, thats on Apple. They don't really
want you doing much upgrading. Especially with the All in ones.

it means bump up the clock speed, increase the capacity/speed of
the ssd, etc. of *existing* configurations.

Are you going to overclock the existing cpu to bring up the clock
speed, or, changeout the cpu for one that runs at a higher speed,
natively? I'm not a big fan of overclocking myself. Or, did you
throttle the cpu clock speed back and decide to bring it to the rate
it was originally designed to run and increase cost to consumer for
that 'higher' clock speed? The latter seems shady to me. Almost
dishonest.

once again, there has been an i7 configuration for the retina imac
since 2014 and the standard imac since 2009.

That's great. But, it wasn't shown on the page with the other
computers I was looking at. I didn't make any effort to continue
exploring apples site beyond that, mind you, but, I figured, if you
want me to buy one of your machines, you're going to show me some
nice ones on the same page as the others. Or, atleast an easy to see
link pointing to them.

The mac isn't easily upgraded. You most likely can bump up the
ram and single internal hd, but, otherwise, you won't be adding
additional cards to it's mainboard for more features. The PC,
oth, will happily accept new cards, more ram, bigger HD (multiple
HDs internally infact), etc.

few people care.

I think you underestimate the amount of people who do purchase
machines with the intention of adding more goodies, later on.

It's not a one size fits all situation. As you seem to think.

laptops greatly outsell desktops and have for years, so clearly
upgrading is not a concern.

Upgrading is still a concern and your comparison here is flawed for
several reasons. One of which is portability.

the microsoft windows laptop can't even be opened without
destroying it. everything is soldered, glued or otherwise locked
down.

Here we go again with bashing microsoft. Would it be fair to say
you're a Microsoft hater? Not dislike mind you, but actually hate?

and as for upgrading, try adding a 10 gig-e nic to a windows
laptop.

It's called an external device. Typically plugs into a USB port,
but, other expansion options exist depending on laptop manufacturer.
You may not achieve full bandwidth though, due to the interface
between the computer and external device. Or, you could just shop
around for a laptop that already has it, built in.

for a mac (laptop or desktop, doesn't matter), connect it with a
cable. no need to even open the computer.

Well, for the PC, if it doesn't already support it, you can easily
add it:


http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...?EdpNo=9745843


--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

1200 bps used to seem so fast

PeterN news Mon, 24 Jul 2017 00:21:36 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

On 7/23/2017 3:05 PM, nospam wrote:

snip


the only limit was for *computers*.

the reality is that the majority of users only needs to authorize
one computer, the one which hosts their music library and from
which they sync their ipods.

Realistically, the restrictions creates a problem. Several years
ago my daughter gave me an iPod, about half filled with some of my
favorite music. The source for the music was my music collection,
consisting of some irreplaceable recordings, including original
Louis Armstrong, Toscanini, Caruso, Lanza, three different
versions of Wagner's first, etc. The original computer that she
used is long gone. I would like to transfer the music to my
iPhone, and add new music. Apple has told me that it can't be
done. I'm sure there is a way. The suggestions on some of the
Internet forums has not been very helpful. Realistically, the
reality is that you don't know what the hell you are talking
about. Don't give me that bull about "most." There are many others
who have needs similar to mine.

Indeed. DRM is a real ****er isn't it. No decryption key, no tunes.
Praise be to Apple for screwing you and countless others like you
over, two ways from sunday. /sarcasm off. I meant no offense to you
Peter, you've called him out and that brings a smile to my face.

five is actually rather generous. most people don't even own five
computers.

Irrelevant.

I don't know where this person comes up with most either.. I know
quite a few people with more than five computers in their homes.
Actual computers in the desktop/tower/laptop sense. More if you
include the cells, tablets, etc.




--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

And with the guts of the last priest, let us strangle the last king.
--Denis Diderot

PeterN news Mon, 24 Jul 2017 01:03:26 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

On 7/23/2017 8:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 23, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/23/2017 3:05 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

the only limit was for *computers*.

the reality is that the majority of users only needs to
authorize one computer, the one which hosts their music library
and from which they sync their ipods.

Realistically, the restrictions creates a problem. Several years
ago my daughter gave me an iPod, about half filled with some of
my favorite music. The source for the music was my music
collection, consisting of some irreplaceable recordings,
including original Louis Armstrong, Toscanini, Caruso, Lanza,
three different versions of Wagner's first, etc. The original
computer that she used is long gone. I would like to transfer
the music to my iPhone, and add new music. Apple has told me
that it can't be done. I'm sure there is a way. The suggestions
on some of the Internet forums has not been very helpful.
Realistically, the reality is that you don't know what the hell
you are talking about. Don't give me that bull about "most."
There are many others who have needs similar to mine.

iAmazing does a pretty good job of accessing files, music, and
everything else in my iOS devices.
You should be able to back up all your music files to your Win10
desktop, and then transfer to your iPhone. That is not the
typical Mac way of doing things, but has been a workable
solution. https://imazing.com


Thanks. I really would like to expand the collection and add new
acquisitions so I can listen in my car.
I will try it.


Please let us know if it works or doesn't for you. I'm suspecting
that the DRM (which is why Apple probably told you no) is going to be
a problem, but, I admit, I could very well be wrong.


--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?