Re: Mains leads

T i m <news@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 00:38:30 +0000, usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Woody)
wrote:

T i m <news@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 22:06:45 +0000, usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Woody)
wrote:

<general snippage where we seem to agree or agree to disagree at
least>

Good plan.

Possibly appologies in advance, I took one of my pets down to the vet
this morning to have it put to sleep, so I could be oversensitive at the
moment, but I shall try not to be. (ie, I tend to reply linearly,
whereas I don't know what I am going to say until I get there).

But 'the words' are what makes voice recognition work Woody, it's also
the intonation, context, spirit, motive's etc that make up the real
meaning.

Clearly, but in the context of written communication you have to put
more effort in to try and get across the intonation as you can't put
that in text.

Trust me, I do try. But because 'it's me' and I know how I'm often
(miss)taken here that often means spelling out everything every simple
thing just_to make sure (or potentially reduce the risk of) stuff
being read into.

OK, I can admit that with you people are probably more likely to see an
agenda as you often seem to have one, but that is probably unavoidable.

, you know I'm not very good with
arguments and dealing with folk who selectively snip and quote (not
you particularly here) but you still react / respond (or not) to some
of the things I say (or don't)?

Of course I react to some of the things you say - that is how it works.
I don't tend to react to things you don't say.

Ok, now there's a good example of me not knowing how to take *you*. I
could read that as you being literal and / or patronizing, but I'll
take it (because I like to give you the benefit of the doubt) as just
some dry humor? How did I do?

Not well, it was neither a dry sense of humor or patronizing. It was
more confused. A conversation is a reaction to what people say, there
isn't another way for it to be.

In your interpretation Woody. Ok, I'm not saying I may not have said
it in an ambiguous way that allowed for miss interpretation (and given
my history here, not all of which of my doing) but you can't possibly
know what I actually think in my head about something?

Of course I can't know what you are thinking in your head. I can only go
on what you write. We can all only go on what people write, unless we
have spent time with the person and can work out a meaning.

But you can and do cut some folk a load of slack when *they* say
something that is true and critical of Macs.

Indeed.

I say something even
bordering on negative and I'm often jumped on?

If you say something negative when you normally say something positive,
people tend to listen to what you are saying. When you mostly say
something negative, people assume you are ranting again.

The tenth time you yell 'fire' in a cinima, people aren't going to pay
any attention are they.

Indeed they may not, but you would really have to sit and talk her for
a while to understand who / what she is.

Obviously. But even if I did I wouldn't know everything. People can be
different for different audiences. I know My parents didn't know all my
motivations, and I doubt anyone elses do.
There are a lot of things you don't tell your parents, however close to
them you are.

True, but aren't there words and character. If someone said our
daughter had (intentionally) stolen something, or punched a smaller
person or knocked over an old person or hurt and animal I would know
they were lying.

Would you? So you would not even entertain the possibility that these
things could be true?

If someone said the same of my daughter, I would assume they were lying,
but I would want to look into it just in case, because it could happen.

Certainly with stealing stuff, I have known some kids who were
wonderfully well behaved and good in every way, who then got caught
shoplifting.
I am not for one mintue sugesting your daughter is, but even the most
perfect person goes of the rails sometimes.

I sure did, and you didn't get more perfect than me :-)

Your first question didn't contain anything other than a straight
unloaded question. That is why I read the rest of the thread.
The ones with the loading I don't tend to follow.

Understood. However (and don't get me wrong here, I know this is a Mac
group) don't you also read comments from people about PC's (or
Sparcstations) where you know it's basically untrue but choose to
just_let_it_lay?

Not often, no. Do a search through google groups and you will see that I
don't. OK, if it is the usual 'windows smells of puss' stuff, then you
can't argue with that, but the other stuff, I will argue, or correct.

" like I mentioned
before in_this_instance / location the Macs seem to be (or have been
till this latest batch of iMacs anyway) the least ready or predictable
machines on the campus"

(Fact)

If it is a fact, why does it say 'seem to be'?

Poor turn of phrase maybe? I was saying it as an observation of fact,
my best understanding but likely to be fact.

Maybe a turn of phrase, but you really cant have 'likely to be a fact'.

(Fact. Now, this could be down to numerous factors (as I don't need to
explain to you) like, the PC's could all be re-installed every night
and the Mac's not tended to since they were installed 5 years ago. I
didn't feel I had a need to explain myself because to interpret what I
actually said as bad I would have to be in the mind of the reader not
the writer.


I always give you the benifit of the doubt. Sometimes (and no, not on
your OP) you are definately beyond 'reasonable doubt' though!

Yes, I accept that but seldom in my first post on anything.

Occasionly yes, but those posts don't tend to get replied to much.

The
'issue' comes in when people (often falsely) accuse me of having a
hidden agenda when it's often them not willing to see or accept my
post as_is or the truth?


So you are saying that you catagoricaly never have a hidden agenda or
post things to wind people up?

Ok, let's say someone has had a bad
experience with even a few PC's then they may assume from that all
PC's are bad when it's obvious from the worldwide daily use by
millions of people they aren't that broken.

no, for a lot of things they are functional.

I simply prefer PC's (for
all the reasons you particularly should know all too well by now)

I do - you elaborate on them quite often.

but
it's not me filling this newsgroup with 'My Mac is broken' posts?

yes, what with this being a place you go to when you have a problem with
your mac. You have of course seen the places you go when there are
problems with PCs.

The
Mac's that I own and or support *are* broken from my POV because they
simply aren't compatible with my external kit (or not out of the box
anyway) so that's sufficient. That's not to say they don't serve their
users well enough though.

Indeed. I can accept that point of view, so presumably you can also
accept that from that point of view of a lot of people here, PCs are
broken because they are not compatible with their software or equipment
and don't work like they would like them to?
And that here this is likely to be the more dominant point of view
because this is a mac group.

Then please try taking what I say at face value, not with some
pre-judged prejudice etc?

I do.

I don't think you do (or we wouldn't be having this conversation).

But earlier on you were saying not to take you at face value, but to
accept you didn't mean anything bad whatever you say?

<sigh> .. Does it always have to be black and white here Woody.

No, but there has to be some consistancy. If you say one thing and then
say 'you misunderstood me, that wasn't what I meant, you should accept
what I meant' and then the next moment say 'Why does there ahve to be
something else, I meant what I said' means it is hard to know which one
you are using.

With
respect it really sometimes feels I'm talking to some driods, chat
bots etc.

No, you are talking to real people who get confused if one minute you
say one thing and claim to mean another, and then the next minute you
say something else and say you didn't mean something else.

In the real world I'm a fairly chatty, easy going, pretty
laid back friendly helpful guy.

So am I, but communication is easier in the real word as you have tone,
body language, expression, emphasis. All the things you lose in text.

You don't even have the people whos only input to life is to tell you
that you spelled something wrong.

I've been trying to re-fit a pair of
wheels to my Honda CB250 for a couple of weeks now (so I can accompany
Jenny on her scooter on a bike rather than in the car) but I haven't
managed to do so. Why? Because I have been trying to sort everyone
else out first.

Same here. In fact I have recently had a big blowout about it and
decided to cancel christmas being outside these walls.

Fair enough. As you say, I can't possibly know either way. I was just
suggesting.

I understand Woody. It's just that everyone assumes that all 17 yr
olds are the same. This one happens to be bright, honest, loving,
strong, capable whist being (over) modest and under confident, a
perfectionist and doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Actually, with the exception of a lot of people in this road, most 17
year olds I meet are honest, loving, bright and under confident.

On the subject of suffering fools gladly I refer you to the Eddie izzard
sketch.

I can't 'argue' with someone who
thinks "Macs are great" (nor would want to). I can offer my experience
if someone suggests "All PC's lock up".

Although when said that is probably a generalisation (as PCs don't tend
to lock as such). All PCs that I have had dealings with (mine or others)
crash/bluescreen/restart/get so knackered you have to reset them.
I am sure there are some that don't, I just haven't seen them.

So I guess that's what forms your underlying preference for something
that (looking at all the threads on here) does much the same.

you interjected before the next sentance which says that.

i didn't say that OSX doesn't do its share of bad stuff, so that isn't
the point.
OK, it does it less often in my experience but it certainly does it. No,
my preference is based on what they are like when they are both working
properly.

Now in
my world PC's don't do as you suggest (I'm not saying they don't have
some issues but not those you mentioned)

So you have never had a PC bluescreen, crash, lock up or reset?
I find that impressive.

and Macs just don't do enough
or do it as easily as the PC's do. You seem to forgot I read much of
what is written here and do you realise how often one of the good,
knowledgeable Mac users posts 'This is broken' or 'How do I make that
work' or 'I've emailed Apple because this is now broken' or 'this
thing works with my PC but not my Mac' etc etc etc? I'm not posting
these things, it's Mac 'Fans' (to use the term respectfully) ...

Of course. They break, and on here you will see more breakages as this
is a place people go to ask what to do when something breaks.

Maybe my new dell with vista will be wonderful.

Well, I guess if you and those people who use PC's as you do find then
as unreliable as you do then I doubt it very much.

Did I say I found them unreliable? I don't think I did.
I said 'All PCs that I have had dealings with (mine or others)
crash/bluescreen/restart/get so knackered you have to reset them'. I
don't recall saying that that made them unreliable and I never said it
happened all the time, just that it happens.
So you are saying it never happens?

The PC case can
never be the work of art that is a Mac case so that's bound to annoy
you before you even turn it on.

Now you are trying to force your 'my point of view is more valid as I
don't care what the case looks like' fanboi delusion thing on me.
Remember, I use PCs all the time, so you can cut that out.

Then the OS won't be as elegant, graceful

Of course it wont.

M&S hand crafted (< that was light hearted banter btw

I know.

so that will be another disappointment.

It wont be a dissapointment. I know what operating system it runs. Being
dissapointed means you expected something else.
There is of course the chance I could get dissapointed as this has Vista
home premium, and I have never used any of the 'Home' editions. It may
cause me problems because of user group management. I may have to take
my vista ultimate and put it there.
But then I may have another problem that I can't get Visual studio 2003
to work on it, and hence not visual XSLT, in which case vista will have
to go, and I will have to find another licenced XP from somewhere.

Then you might have to un-install
a load of shovelware

True, but I have to do that anyway, as it has a 250Gb sata disk, and I
have another one of those laying around, so I thought I might stripe
them together for speed.

One thing that is handy is that if you buy a PC with just the recovery
disks (which I assume this would be) you can get the install DVD for
£3.32

Which I might do anyway, as my copy of vista ultimate is on a recordable
DVD which probably wouldn't last as long as a pre printed one.

(another reason why I build my own PC's and why
you probably got yours half the price of a similar Mac (assuming such
existed?))

As you say, there are no similar macs. This is a athlon x64 X2 5600+
/2GB ram. It cost £300, but only because I upgraded from home basic to
home premium, and added photoshop elephants 6 to it (it was £10, seemed
good).

and then (although I don't think *you* generally bother
with this bit) have do download some (free) AV / Firewall etc.

I have some paid for AV, although mostly I dont bother. I don't tend to
use the internet much on the PC.

That obviously doesn't say that Macs dont do equally bad things. In my
experience less often (since OSX - before it was a lot more often) but
still obviously far too much.

Of course, and so it seems from the threads here (for some at least)
especially Leopard.

Most of the problems I have heard about with leopard are cosmetic
irritations. Certainly no problems here.

Again though, this is a place people go to for help. There are many more
places for PCs.

Here I am unaware of the OS (XP) not working same
with the small dealings I've had with Vista so far but then maybe I
don't ask as much or are as fussy as you guys (or (but that couldn't
be possible could it <g>) it does just work for most users)?

Sorry - didn't get what you meant there about XP and Vista.

It does work for most users, although most users do very little with
computers (and will eventually move on to something else)

Coo .. have I been pigeon holed! ;-)

No, I was talking about you pigeon holing what you call 'fanboys'.

I know, and you pigeon holing me. ;-)

I have never pigeon holed you - I wouldn't know where to put you!


--
Woody

www.alienrat.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Deer Apple
    ... on Vista because they didn't upgrade their PCs. ... I can't talk for 'most' Mac users, but every Mac user in my office ... seems to upgrade every two years like clockwork. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Deer Apple
    ... on Vista because they didn't upgrade their PCs. ... I can't talk for 'most' Mac users, but every Mac user in my office ... seems to upgrade every two years like clockwork. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: VISTA-no viruses in the wild
    ... not surpass or even has not surpassed Mac OS X in sales. ... say that there aren't many copies of Vista "in the wild" without also ... saying it sold millions less than Mac OS X? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Kernel Panic
    ... about 2 minutes of work lost). ... Vista can run that long if you manage it properly... ... Maybe Vista can be *made* to be that stable, but by default a Mac is as ... There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: VISTA on a mac?? Abysmal!!
    ... The more I hear of Vista the less impressed I am. ... I wonder if office:mac 2008 will have the ribbon). ... Mac and then run Vista in Parallels or whatever virtualization program seems ... There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)