Re: The Wintard Preoccupation with Price and Marketshare

"Steve Carroll" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
noone-6117A6.19384527072007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 7/27/07 6:38 PM:

It's what *you* believe to be a fact... I accept that you are of the opinion
that I'm wrong.

See below.

I accept that you are not *not* claiming I ignore features in the PC as I do
comparisons.

Uh... sure, Snit.

See below.

I accept that you no longer stand by that.

I accept that you cannot differentiate between a person saying there is a
chance of something being true and a person saying a thing *is* true... in
fact, I have no choice but to accept this as it is obviously the reality of
the situation.

See below.

You showed no understanding of the difference between teaching on an OS X
machine and teaching OS X itself.

I already said I mistakenly assumed you would be thorough and "teach" some
basic OS functions.

See below.

You are incorrect.

I'm am absolutely correct. When I asked you what your needs were in this
thread you said nothing about running OSX. Google already aided me in proving
that was the case.

See below.

Steve, I do believe you have given your best effort

I believe that you have confused your 'needs' with your 'wants'.

Someone with a professional life that revolves around technical work and
computer training can reasonably say they have a business *need* for a
relatively modern computer (newer than a G4 800). You can call such needs
"wants" if you like, Steve, but such semantic debates are simply of no
interest to me.

Above you snipped a whole lot - much of which is important to note, so I
have put it back in. This is where we stand on the questions I asked you.
You asked me no questions in return - despite my offer.

1) You stated: "You provided support when Macs were used as the
baseline". Can you offer support for this claim?

You claim to have supported this view but, since it is flat
out wrong, that is not possible. Furthermore, not even you
quote or link to your claimed attempts. At this point there
is no reason to think even you believe your claims.

2) Edwin claimed I ignore features of the PC in my comparisons.
You jumped in to agree but could not offer reasoned support.
Will you now?

You no longer claim to support Edwin in this. When I noted
your lack of standing by this you replied with a very
noncommittal "Uh... sure, Snit."

3) You claimed that the times when OS X or Windows are the
best computing option is true only for a ""'very, very' tiny
percentage" of people. What makes you think this... assuming
you are not losing context and talking about the many people
who do not use computers. Maybe you mean Linux... can you
explain what you meant?

You no longer stand by this. Maybe you just worded something
poorly? So far you will not explain... but when pushed you
ran to semantic games.

4) You have claimed to disagree that similarly configured Macs
and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same. I have
provided support in terms of both personal comparisons and
(more importantly) non-CSMA-initiated comparisons. Do you
have a *reason* for your disagreement, and if so, what is
it?

You repeatedly snipped this one and offered no comment. As
such there is no reason to think you still stand by your past
claims.

5) Your first story about why you asked me if my current Mac
could run OS X was that you thought my story might change
(it will when I get a new Mac!). You later changed your
story and claimed your question was rhetorical. Why did
you do this?

You have offered no explanation for your change of story and
have even repeatedly snipped the question.

6) When I talked about teaching "on OS X" you insisted I
must have meant teaching OS X itself. Can you explain
why you changed topics like that?

You repeatedly comment in ways completely consistent with
your not understanding the difference between teaching *on*
OS X and teaching OS X itself. You also claimed it was a
mistake to assume that I would cover basic OS functions as
one taught OS X - an irrelevant claim you made with no
logical basis.

7) If computer A is fast but cannot run OS X and computer
B is slow but can run OS X, do the two computers meet
the needs of someone who needs a fast computer that
can run OS X (and OS X software, of course!)

You went off topic and discussed your (incorrect) view of my
computing needs. You did not answer the question.

8) You accused me of saying PCs could not have "decent
memory" and run some common programs. Being that I
never said this, Steve, why did you make that
accusation?

You have not been able to explain the reason for making your
false accusation.

9) Why did you talk about lugging computers back and
forth to school and having to teach people in my
home?

You have not been able to offer an explanation for your
bizarre comments.

And a new one to add:

10)I said you were "simply not bright enough" to understand some
specific simple concepts. Sandman noted my "explicit insult"
and suggested I not make such comments. I agreed that I could
have worded my the facts you had shown about yourself in a
less derogatory and more specific way. You noted you were
glad I realized I "did not word things well" and claimed that
if I had I "could have stuffed this argument down my throat
very early on" Why would it matter how well I *insulted* you?
I am guessing you - again - did not understand what you read,
but I am open to reading what other explanation you might have.


--
? There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
? There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
? Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Wintard Preoccupation with Price and Marketshare
    ... "You provided support when Macs were used as the ... is no reason to think even you believe your claims. ... You have claimed to disagree that similarly configured Macs ... When I talked about teaching "on OS X" you insisted I ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: interesting
    ... Clifford Heath wrote: ... The reason that EE is being hit so ... > When you haven't got a support industry, ... wrt the non-repairability of electronics, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: David Owen
    ... > reasonable thing to support is something in which factor Y is never ... The actual reason was not gerrymandering but polarisation ... In safe seats, there's no power for the voters ...
    (uk.politics.electoral)
  • Re: Can the government fix what it has created?
    ... without justifiable cause or reason. ... that adults should support themselves and in most cases that means ... There is also an expectation that society will maintain ... the poverty trap in as much as you cannot lose CI or CW. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Apple Care.....
    ... with it on the phone 'cos it's outside of the 90 day technical support. ... You have _one year_ of support under the standard warranty. ... repair outside of the warranty and/or Apple Care period, ... Macs, now, Macs I'll buy. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)