[Arny Krueger]

"david correia" wrote in message
...

Dealing with facts with you is like herding cats.

Back at you, Macfanboy.

First of all, you spelled my name wrong.

Whine, whine, whine.

Second, I said only one model Macbook is made of plastic, the remainder
are made from a solid piece of aluminum. You disagreed.

Wrong. I'd call it a lie but that would presume potentially missing reading
comprehension on your part, whatever-your-name-is.

Facts are a stubborn thing:

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html


You said *milled*, and that page says "machined". A simple fact that seem
to run and hide from.

Besides, I could hold a basic metal working class and inform you about the
difference between milling and drilling. Besdies, using a milling machine
to clean up a stamping is not antying like milling something out of a solid
piece of aluminum billet. One of the big clues you missed is that the
"solid piece of aluminum" that they machine the part out of is far thnner
than the finished piece.

Third of all, you said that Apple stamps their aluminum Macbooks, it
doesn't machine them. Which of course is bs.

Actually, I said no such thing.

What I said is:

"Now about that word "machined". Machined can mean the use of any
metal-working machine from a milling machine to a punch press. They are
all standard metal-working machines, right?"

I can see why you are so frustrated, whatever your name is: You can't read
simple English and what you know about metal working wouldn't cover the head
of a pin.

What is there about being a Macfanboy that ruins the brain?

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Stephen

[Neil Gould]

Arny Krueger wrote:

What is there about being a Macfanboy that ruins the brain?

I think you have that backwards, Arny. It is Apple's excellent marketing
strategy that selects a population of users that is unaffected by facts.
Brilliant, IMO.

--
Neil

[John Williamson]

Arny Krueger wrote:

Here's exactly what you (David Correia) said:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html

The words "polycarbonate unibody" seem to be there, and you have yet to
support your claim that the aluminum frame is *milled*.

yada, yada, yada.

Arny, "Polycarbonate unibody" refers only to the basic Macbook.
Aluminium is used for all the others according to the page you are
quoting. A video linked to a little way along the chain of marketing
links shows an aluminium ingot being turned into flat strip, which is
then cut to size and milled on a CNC milling machine. They don't show an
intermediate stamping operation, and the video seems to show a flat
strip being milled to its final form. Now, unless you are claiming that
Apple are provably lying in their promotional videos, then STFU, please.

Now, can we all just admit a Mac is just as much a computer as a PC (And
vice versa) and they can both be used to produce great sound, and get on
with life? The most important component of *any* musical instrument or
production is the soggy bit between the operators' ears, and that's not
going to change anytime soon. It's the buyer's money, and they have the
right to buy whatever they wish. I prefer PCs, but I know a lot of
people who prefer Macs. And iPhones over Windows Mobile or Android
phones and vice versa. I prefer Nokia phones, though.

Rant over......
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Steve King]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Trevor" wrote:

"david correia" wrote in message
...
Not at all. There are far better computers than PC clones OR
anything
Apple
has ever built!


Far better? That's a laugh. Have you ever seen the inside of a
Mac
Pro???

So you've never seen inside anything but toys, no surprise I
guess.


Wow, the best you got is calling a Mac Pro a toy ...

Compared to these:

http://www.panasonic.com/business/to...ducts.asp#/31:

http://www.cyberchron.com/pdf_files/...RL-5100-CF.pdf

http://www.cyberchron.com/pdf_files/...rt/crl5200.pdf

http://i.dell.com/sites/content/shar...ocuments/Dell-
Lat
itude-Rugged-Lineup-SalesAid-v12.pdf

http://content.dell.com/us/en/fedgov...ed-solutions.a
spx

http://www.industcomputing.com/Press...essRelease.pdf

http://laptops.alege.net/Pelican-MIL...-Notebook.html

Yeah.

You think an 8 pound Panasonic Toughbook is far better than a Macbook?
For what, going to war?

Your mistake here is claiming that all Toughbooks weigh 8 pounds. The
point
is that if one follows up on your claims for superior durability, that
superior durability is a just a figment of your imagination.

It is really hard to convince true believers that there is more to the
world
than their own little hobby horse segment of it.

And that second one on your list weighs 15 lbs. Sounds great. Looks
like
something from the moon landing in 1969.

I'm afraid to look at the others.

What you should be afraid of is the false claims you made about all
current
Macbooks are milled from a solid billet of aluminum. Never were. Apple
says
so.

Here's exactly what you said:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html

The words "polycarbonate unibody" seem to be there, and you have yet to
support your claim that the aluminum frame is *milled*.

yada, yada, yada.

David and Arny.... you both have way too much time on your hands;-)
However, from a PC guy, me, a G5 case is a thing of beauty. Short of
dropping it from a third story window as a regular habit I don't see much
added value in that. Now, if one only replaced computers every twenty years
or so, that case would be a strong factor in my buying decision. Otherwise,
you guys are debating religion IMO.

Steve King

Steve King

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 06:21:55 -0500, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

Stephen

Bloody hell, I'm shocked. That is no way to build a product. I'm quite
appalled by the wastefulness of it. I have a product in production at
the moment that uses a waveguide bandpass filter at 30GHz. Early
prototypes were machined, then once the design was final it was tooled
for casting (for the cost of twenty machined samples). The tolerance
on the cast parts at 10 microns is slightly better than that of the
machined parts. It is always so, and Apples approach makes no sense
for that reason. They are badly in need of a production engineering
department to sort them out.

Utterly ridiculous. The fact that they see this as a "feature" speaks
volumes about how out of touch they are.

d

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess what's
gonna happen? ;-)

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:37:38 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess what's
gonna happen? ;-)


Do what I did, get rid of Qicktime and use Quicktime Alternative?...

d

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess what's
gonna happen? ;-)

Maybe you'll take Pearce's word for it.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Here's exactly what you (David Correia) said:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html

The words "polycarbonate unibody" seem to be there, and you have yet to
support your claim that the aluminum frame is *milled*.

yada, yada, yada.

Arny, "Polycarbonate unibody" refers only to the basic Macbook.

Yup, they apply their best engineering for the lowest-cost and presumably
highest volume product. That is just good business practice.

Aluminium is used for all the others according to the page you are
quoting. A video linked to a little way along the chain of marketing links
shows an aluminium ingot being turned into flat strip, which is then cut
to size and milled on a CNC milling machine.

Here's a helpful little hint - all flat strip aluminum starts out as an
aluminum ingot. Even the flat strip they use to make pop cans.

I can, with complete accuracy say that pop cans are extruded from aluminum
strip. I can also say with complete accuracy that their tops are machined.

So here's your question for the day. What's the difference between the
production of pop cans and the production of MacIntosh laptop cases? ;-)

They don't show an intermediate stamping operation,

They also provide no claim that they show every production step.

and the video seems to show a flat strip being milled to its final form.

The stills I've seen show a flat strip that is far thinner than the final
product. Some of their explanitory text mentions extruding...

Now, unless you are claiming that Apple are provably lying in their
promotional videos, then STFU, please.

So you haven't noticed that the aluminum strip they start out with is far
thinner than the final product?

LOL!

There's no lying here, just *information management*.

A scary factioid is that people are building high end audio disc players by
milling the cases, which are far thicker than a laptop, out of solid
billlets for real.

Apparently not even Apple is that stupid!

[Arny Krueger]

"Steve King" wrote in message
...
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"david correia" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Trevor" wrote:

"david correia" wrote in message
...
Not at all. There are far better computers than PC clones OR
anything
Apple
has ever built!


Far better? That's a laugh. Have you ever seen the inside of a
Mac
Pro???

So you've never seen inside anything but toys, no surprise I
guess.


Wow, the best you got is calling a Mac Pro a toy ...

Compared to these:

http://www.panasonic.com/business/to...ducts.asp#/31:

http://www.cyberchron.com/pdf_files/...RL-5100-CF.pdf

http://www.cyberchron.com/pdf_files/...rt/crl5200.pdf

http://i.dell.com/sites/content/shar...ocuments/Dell-
Lat
itude-Rugged-Lineup-SalesAid-v12.pdf

http://content.dell.com/us/en/fedgov...ed-solutions.a
spx

http://www.industcomputing.com/Press...essRelease.pdf

http://laptops.alege.net/Pelican-MIL...-Notebook.html

Yeah.

You think an 8 pound Panasonic Toughbook is far better than a
Macbook?
For what, going to war?

Your mistake here is claiming that all Toughbooks weigh 8 pounds. The
point
is that if one follows up on your claims for superior durability, that
superior durability is a just a figment of your imagination.

It is really hard to convince true believers that there is more to the
world
than their own little hobby horse segment of it.

And that second one on your list weighs 15 lbs. Sounds great. Looks
like
something from the moon landing in 1969.

I'm afraid to look at the others.

What you should be afraid of is the false claims you made about all
current
Macbooks are milled from a solid billet of aluminum. Never were. Apple
says
so.

Here's exactly what you said:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html

The words "polycarbonate unibody" seem to be there, and you have yet to
support your claim that the aluminum frame is *milled*.

yada, yada, yada.

David and Arny.... you both have way too much time on your hands;-)
However, from a PC guy, me, a G5 case is a thing of beauty. Short of
dropping it from a third story window as a regular habit I don't see much
added value in that. Now, if one only replaced computers every twenty
years or so, that case would be a strong factor in my buying decision.
Otherwise, you guys are debating religion IMO.

Steve King

If you count my posts, there aint a lot of time into this from my viewpoint.

Pulling the chains of MacBigots is just fun!
Steve King

[Arny Krueger]

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

What is there about being a Macfanboy that ruins the brain?

I think you have that backwards, Arny. It is Apple's excellent marketing
strategy that selects a population of users that is unaffected by facts.
Brilliant, IMO.

Point well taken!

One might have thought that when Apple went over to the Intel side, that
people would notice that a Mac has become just another PC clone, running an
OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support of all even
vaguely mainstream software platforms.

[Arny Krueger]

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:37:38 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are
milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong,
instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for
this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the
absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess
what's
gonna happen? ;-)


Do what I did, get rid of Qicktime and use Quicktime Alternative?...

The Apple web site won't play this video with Quicktime Alternative. It
keeps asking me to overlay it with the genuine, slightly brain dead product.

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are
milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong,
instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either
cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow
of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for
this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with
a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the
absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess
what's
gonna happen? ;-)

Maybe you'll take Pearce's word for it.

If you read my response, I'm well ahead of that.

I have QT loaded, just not the latest-greatest version direct from Apple.

Not even MS is this provincial.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:53:56 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:37:38 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:42:35 -0400, david correia
wrote:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are
milled
from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong,
instead
of
picking at details and distorting the truth.


http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html



If Apple made their bodies by machining them from solid, they would
not still be in business today. I haven't seen the inside of a Mac
Book, but I would be prepared to put money on them being either cast
(injection moulded) or stamped.

Solid aluminum is extruded, then "goes through nine separate milling
operations." There's a video:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html

What you don't realize is that stamping generally involves cold flow of
metal AKA extruding.

FYI, most aluminum that is stamped is solid aluminum.

Furthermore, neither the word mill nor any forms of it appear on the
cited
page. The word "machined" does.

Second time I've had to correct a Mac fanboy in just this thread for
this
rather glaring error.

Apparently there's something about being head-over-heels in love with a
Mac
that impacts one's ability to read and comprehend simple words like
*machine*. ;-)

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the
absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess
what's
gonna happen? ;-)


Do what I did, get rid of Qicktime and use Quicktime Alternative?...

The Apple web site won't play this video with Quicktime Alternative. It
keeps asking me to overlay it with the genuine, slightly brain dead product.


Really? Mine is perfectly happy with it.

d

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Here's exactly what you (David Correia) said:

"All* Macbooks today, except for the older white model, are milled from
a solid piece of aluminum. "

Correa, if you were a man you'd admit that you were wrong, instead of
picking at details and distorting the truth.

http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html

The words "polycarbonate unibody" seem to be there, and you have yet to
support your claim that the aluminum frame is *milled*.

yada, yada, yada.

Arny, "Polycarbonate unibody" refers only to the basic Macbook.

Yup, they apply their best engineering for the lowest-cost and presumably
highest volume product. That is just good business practice.

Aluminium is used for all the others according to the page you are
quoting. A video linked to a little way along the chain of marketing links
shows an aluminium ingot being turned into flat strip, which is then cut
to size and milled on a CNC milling machine.

Here's a helpful little hint - all flat strip aluminum starts out as an
aluminum ingot. Even the flat strip they use to make pop cans.

I can, with complete accuracy say that pop cans are extruded from aluminum
strip. I can also say with complete accuracy that their tops are machined.

So here's your question for the day. What's the difference between the
production of pop cans and the production of MacIntosh laptop cases? ;-)

You didn't claim pop cans aren't milled.

Stephen

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

ARnie writes:
Somehow, I'm far more impressed with the titanium frame and shock
mounted hard drive in even just the commercial grade Toughbooks.
Obviously, you can't get that trendy-thin look with any kind of
effective shock mounting, so it is reasonable to expect that Apple
will never go there.


That's so true with most of this stuff. IF you really wanna protect it get a Pelican or Anvil case for the stupid thing, but then ya can't use it inside the case. oh well.

IF you break it you'll buy a new one.

grumble. DOn't get me started.




The Boss version of the Roland sound CAnvas comes to mind.
Cheesy construction, would've done better as a rack mount
module.

Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[John Williamson]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
Arny, "Polycarbonate unibody" refers only to the basic Macbook.

Yup, they apply their best engineering for the lowest-cost and presumably
highest volume product. That is just good business practice.

Whether it's the "best engineering" depends on what's in the case
protecting the innards and how thick the polycarbonate is. I use 4mm
thick polycarbonate sheet for windows which will resist airgun pellets
from a reasonable distance. Make it 8mm thick, it'll stop a .22 bullet,
depnding on range. Make it thicker still, it'll stop a .45 from speaking
distance. If you want to make a cheap case, then moulding polycarbonate
just thick enough to withstand normal use is a trivial process. ABS or
glass filled composites just need to be slightly thicker, which,
depending on the raw material costs, might be cheaper. It needn't be any
less durable than the polycarbonate. Depending on the design, the
aluminium may not be more durable, either.

Aluminium is used for all the others according to the page you are
quoting. A video linked to a little way along the chain of marketing links
shows an aluminium ingot being turned into flat strip, which is then cut
to size and milled on a CNC milling machine.

Here's a helpful little hint - all flat strip aluminum starts out as an
aluminum ingot. Even the flat strip they use to make pop cans.

Well, duh! Slaps forehead

Even my car body started as aluminium ingots over forty years ago.
What's that got to do with Apple? I was summarising the video for you,
and you've admitted in this thread that you can't view it yourself, and
have no intention of installing software to let you do so.

I can, with complete accuracy say that pop cans are extruded from aluminum
strip. I can also say with complete accuracy that their tops are machined.

So here's your question for the day. What's the difference between the
production of pop cans and the production of MacIntosh laptop cases? ;-)

A lot, and if you don't know, you *really* need to study some production
engineering. However, as you probably don't know.....

For the aluminium cans, starting from the ingot, aluminium is extruded
into a bar, then rolled into a wide strip with a precisely controlled
thickness, and then after heat treatment, the body of the can is die
formed from the strip. While the body is being formed in this way, the
top is formed from a slightly thicker strip, using a die which forms the
lip to seal onto the body, the domed shape and the thin outline that
lets you open it using the tab. The tab is formed from thicker strip,
and "riveted" to the top, using a preformed dimple in the top, which
then is formed to hold the top and the tab together, all of which, after
filling, is then folded at the seam to make a gasproof seal with the can
body. As one stage in the process, the interior is normally coated with
plastic to protect both the metal and the contents. It's actually a very
precise process.

The Mac Unibody, according to Apple's video, starts as an ingot, which
is extruded to be a bar of the required size, which is then processed by
a number of machines, at least one of which is a CNC milling machine.
Tolerances are probably more generous than for the can.

Is that clear enough? I may have missed the odd step somewhere, as all
the above was from memory.

They don't show an intermediate stamping operation,

They also provide no claim that they show every production step.

True, and that's the only thing you've got right so far.

and the video seems to show a flat strip being milled to its final form.

The stills I've seen show a flat strip that is far thinner than the final
product. Some of their explanitory text mentions extruding...

You have, of course, measured these strips? Details matter.

Now, unless you are claiming that Apple are provably lying in their
promotional videos, then STFU, please.

So you haven't noticed that the aluminum strip they start out with is far
thinner than the final product?

So you *can* prove that Apple are lying?

On the video I've seen, the thickness of the bar can't be determined
with any accuracy, and as you haven't measured the parts, you don't know
either. I can show the same part being almost any size I want it to be,
just using the editing software that came with my twenty dollar digital
camera, or even by positioning the camera appropriately. The same
applies to video.

However, if you look closely at pictures of the finished product, you
will see, if your eyes and brain are working, that the keyboard area of
a Macbook is, in fact, made up of two pieces of metal, as is the screen
surround, so your point about the thickness is irrelevant anyway. If you
don't believe me, go into your local Apple shop and look closely at a
couple of their machines. The upper metal layer has the keytops in it,
the lower layer has the PCB and sockets mounted in it.

LOL!

Indeed. :-)

There's no lying here, just *information management*.

And mis-interpretation.

A scary factioid is that people are building high end audio disc players by
milling the cases, which are far thicker than a laptop, out of solid
billlets for real.

Irrelevant here, but depending on the production run, that may be the
cheapest way to do the job. Dies for injection moulding and stamping of
metal are expensive to make and cheap to use, while CNC drills and
milling machines cost relatively very little to set up, but cost more to
use. The sweet spot for costs depends entirely on the production run and
the machining required, bearing in mind that stamped or cast parts will
also need machining, as things like screw threads and shaped slots in
the side of recesses can't be formed that way. Marketing also comes into it.

Then again, to isolate a CD or DVD mechanism from vibrations, I'd not
want to use metal on its own, and would prefer a slightly resilient
mounting for the drive, or, as a minimum, isolating feet for the whole unit.

Apparently not even Apple is that stupid!

I'm sure the accountants have had their say, even at Apple......

Don't let your unreasoning hatred of Apple cloud your judgment.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Steve King]

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
Arny, "Polycarbonate unibody" refers only to the basic Macbook.

Yup, they apply their best engineering for the lowest-cost and presumably
highest volume product. That is just good business practice.

Whether it's the "best engineering" depends on what's in the case
protecting the innards and how thick the polycarbonate is. I use 4mm thick
polycarbonate sheet for windows which will resist airgun pellets from a
reasonable distance. Make it 8mm thick, it'll stop a .22 bullet, depnding
on range. Make it thicker still, it'll stop a .45 from speaking distance.
If you want to make a cheap case, then moulding polycarbonate just thick
enough to withstand normal use is a trivial process. ABS or glass filled
composites just need to be slightly thicker, which, depending on the raw
material costs, might be cheaper. It needn't be any less durable than the
polycarbonate. Depending on the design, the aluminium may not be more
durable, either.

Aluminium is used for all the others according to the page you are
quoting. A video linked to a little way along the chain of marketing
links shows an aluminium ingot being turned into flat strip, which is
then cut to size and milled on a CNC milling machine.

Here's a helpful little hint - all flat strip aluminum starts out as an
aluminum ingot. Even the flat strip they use to make pop cans.

Well, duh! Slaps forehead

Even my car body started as aluminium ingots over forty years ago. What's
that got to do with Apple? I was summarising the video for you, and you've
admitted in this thread that you can't view it yourself, and have no
intention of installing software to let you do so.

I can, with complete accuracy say that pop cans are extruded from
aluminum strip. I can also say with complete accuracy that their tops are
machined.

So here's your question for the day. What's the difference between the
production of pop cans and the production of MacIntosh laptop cases? ;-)

A lot, and if you don't know, you *really* need to study some production
engineering. However, as you probably don't know.....

For the aluminium cans, starting from the ingot, aluminium is extruded
into a bar, then rolled into a wide strip with a precisely controlled
thickness, and then after heat treatment, the body of the can is die
formed from the strip. While the body is being formed in this way, the top
is formed from a slightly thicker strip, using a die which forms the lip
to seal onto the body, the domed shape and the thin outline that lets you
open it using the tab. The tab is formed from thicker strip, and "riveted"
to the top, using a preformed dimple in the top, which then is formed to
hold the top and the tab together, all of which, after filling, is then
folded at the seam to make a gasproof seal with the can body. As one stage
in the process, the interior is normally coated with plastic to protect
both the metal and the contents. It's actually a very precise process.

The Mac Unibody, according to Apple's video, starts as an ingot, which is
extruded to be a bar of the required size, which is then processed by a
number of machines, at least one of which is a CNC milling machine.
Tolerances are probably more generous than for the can.

Is that clear enough? I may have missed the odd step somewhere, as all the
above was from memory.

They don't show an intermediate stamping operation,

They also provide no claim that they show every production step.

True, and that's the only thing you've got right so far.

and the video seems to show a flat strip being milled to its final
form.

The stills I've seen show a flat strip that is far thinner than the final
product. Some of their explanitory text mentions extruding...

You have, of course, measured these strips? Details matter.

Now, unless you are claiming that Apple are provably lying in their
promotional videos, then STFU, please.

So you haven't noticed that the aluminum strip they start out with is far
thinner than the final product?

So you *can* prove that Apple are lying?

On the video I've seen, the thickness of the bar can't be determined with
any accuracy, and as you haven't measured the parts, you don't know
either. I can show the same part being almost any size I want it to be,
just using the editing software that came with my twenty dollar digital
camera, or even by positioning the camera appropriately. The same applies
to video.

However, if you look closely at pictures of the finished product, you will
see, if your eyes and brain are working, that the keyboard area of a
Macbook is, in fact, made up of two pieces of metal, as is the screen
surround, so your point about the thickness is irrelevant anyway. If you
don't believe me, go into your local Apple shop and look closely at a
couple of their machines. The upper metal layer has the keytops in it, the
lower layer has the PCB and sockets mounted in it.

LOL!

Indeed. :-)

There's no lying here, just *information management*.

And mis-interpretation.

A scary factioid is that people are building high end audio disc players
by milling the cases, which are far thicker than a laptop, out of solid
billlets for real.

Irrelevant here, but depending on the production run, that may be the
cheapest way to do the job. Dies for injection moulding and stamping of
metal are expensive to make and cheap to use, while CNC drills and milling
machines cost relatively very little to set up, but cost more to use. The
sweet spot for costs depends entirely on the production run and the
machining required, bearing in mind that stamped or cast parts will also
need machining, as things like screw threads and shaped slots in the side
of recesses can't be formed that way. Marketing also comes into it.

Then again, to isolate a CD or DVD mechanism from vibrations, I'd not want
to use metal on its own, and would prefer a slightly resilient mounting
for the drive, or, as a minimum, isolating feet for the whole unit.

Apparently not even Apple is that stupid!

I'm sure the accountants have had their say, even at Apple......

Don't let your unreasoning hatred of Apple cloud your judgment.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

You realize, John, that Arny has no interest whatsoever in truth. He just
likes to yank people's chain. That's how he gets his kicks. Of course,
there is real information in the replies he gets, which I enjoy reading.

Steve King

[Frank Stearns]

"Arny Krueger" writes:


"MiNe 109" wrote in message

snips

Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the absolutely
latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite. Guess what's
gonna happen? ;-)

IMO, Quicktime is a virus (on the same order of many aspects of MS OS's). QT really
screwed up one of my boxes; swore I'd never allow it on any machine here again.

YMMV.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Trevor]

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Now, can we all just admit a Mac is just as much a computer as a PC (And
vice versa) and they can both be used to produce great sound,

Not in dispute for most of us.


The most important component of *any* musical instrument or production is
the soggy bit between the operators' ears, and that's not going to change
anytime soon. It's the buyer's money, and they have the right to buy
whatever they wish.


Also not in dispute.


I prefer PCs, but I know a lot of people who prefer Macs. And iPhones over
Windows Mobile or Android phones and vice versa. I prefer Nokia phones,
though.

I only hate the way Apple charges twice as much and then tries to lock you
out from doing anything they don't want you to do, like buying apps and
music from THEIR web sites, and using their periphererals that are changed
often to deliberately not work with older models.
(especially iPods and iPhones)

But hey, MANY people are happy with that sales model, so good luck to Apple
and their bank account.

It's also interesting to note that some people here are still using 15YO
programs on their PC's every day (as am I) I'd like to see you do that on a
Mac without some effort. So many of us got a good laugh when the Apple
afficianado's who once proclaimed to the world how much better their
Motorola CPU was, had to eat humble pie when Apple switched to Intel :-)
But as I previously said, and as you also say "It's the buyer's money, and
they have the right to buy whatever they wish."
When they claim that their "precision aluminium unibody" makes their PC
worth twice as much, I do have to laugh though!


Trevor.

[Trevor]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
So here's your question for the day. What's the difference between the
production of pop cans and the production of MacIntosh laptop cases? ;-)

You didn't claim pop cans aren't milled.

So there we have it, a pop can is as high tech as a MacBook then :-)

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Somehow, I'm far more impressed with the titanium frame and shock mounted
hard drive in even just the commercial grade Toughbooks. Obviously, you
can't get that trendy-thin look with any kind of effective shock mounting,
so it is reasonable to expect that Apple will never go there.

Right, I know which I prefer, but each to their own.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Watch the video.

Funny thing about that. The video will only play if I install the
absolutely latest-greatest Quicktime, which breaks my video editing suite.
Guess what's gonna happen? ;-)

Yeah Quicktime (and Adobe flash) are kept well away from my computers too!

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

What is there about being a Macfanboy that ruins the brain?

I think you have that backwards, Arny. It is Apple's excellent marketing
strategy that selects a population of users that is unaffected by facts.
Brilliant, IMO.

Absolutely, who wouldn't want their profits for selling the same things over
and over to the same people. I was not surprised when people went out and
bought an iPad2 less than a year after buying the original iPad. (and still
no USB port)
I only wish I had that much money to waste :-(

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

One might have thought that when Apple went over to the Intel side, that
people would notice that a Mac has become just another PC clone, running
an OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support of all
even vaguely mainstream software platforms.

If you thought that, then you just don't get human nature.

Trevor.

[John Williamson]

Steve King wrote:
Snip to save wear on the PgDn key

You realize, John, that Arny has no interest whatsoever in truth.

Which is why I often wonder whether to bother replying to him.

He just
likes to yank people's chain. That's how he gets his kicks. Of course,
there is real information in the replies he gets, which I enjoy reading.

So he does have a use, then? Grin

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Neil Gould]

Trevor wrote:
"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

What is there about being a Macfanboy that ruins the brain?

I think you have that backwards, Arny. It is Apple's excellent
marketing strategy that selects a population of users that is
unaffected by facts. Brilliant, IMO.

Absolutely, who wouldn't want their profits for selling the same
things over and over to the same people. I was not surprised when
people went out and bought an iPad2 less than a year after buying the
original iPad. (and still no USB port)
I only wish I had that much money to waste :-(

Trevor.

USB ports aren't all that important to folks that find the iPad attractive.
The analogies that seem to apply to these two product groups are that PCs
are generalized tools, configurable for various purposes by the end user,
while Apple products are appliances that do the things they're built to do
well, but little or nothing else, not unlike kitchen appliances, where one
can collect a large number of specialized gadgets that conveniently do a
particular task, but take up space most of the time. There is a small
population Apple product users that like to "jailbreak" them to try to
expand their usefulness, but almost always with consequences that impact
their original convenience.

PC folks may prefer to have the basic kitchen tools and fewer specialized
appliances. I'm not so sure that it is a matter of how much money one has to
spend, since those basic tools can be pretty pricey. ;-)

--
Neil

[Arny Krueger]

"Steve King" wrote in message
...

You realize, John, that Arny has no interest whatsoever in truth.

Yup, that's how some people deal with people who post uncomfortable truths,
lie about *them*

He just likes to yank people's chain.

With the caveat that this is often possible while sticking to the truth.

[Arny Krueger]

"Trevor" wrote in message
u...

It's also interesting to note that some people here are still using 15YO
programs on their PC's every day (as am I)

Hmm, Cool Edit Pro - that is now over a decade old, right?

I'd like to see you do that on a Mac without some effort. So many of us
got a good laugh when the Apple afficianado's who once proclaimed to the
world how much better their Motorola CPU was, had to eat humble pie when
Apple switched to Intel :-)

It is possible that the Motorola CPU was the moral equivalent of Betamax
video recordings. It was truely superior at one point, but it fell off the
market anyway.


But as I previously said, and as you also say "It's the buyer's money, and
they have the right to buy whatever they wish."
When they claim that their "precision aluminium unibody" makes their PC
worth twice as much, I do have to laugh though!

And that's the point.

By most accounts Apple's most signicant cash flow is coming from ARM
SOC-based products. MacIntoshes produce an important revenue stream, but
the real action is elsewhere.

AFAIK, the ARM SOC's only technical advantage over the competitive Intel SOC
chips is that ARM SOC's are cheaper, and it is easier and cheaper to license
the ARM IP and imbed it in your own chips.

IOW, even Apple knows how to save a buck.

[Arny Krueger]

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

By most accounts Apple's most signicant cash flow is coming from ARM
SOC-based products. MacIntoshes produce an important revenue stream,
but the real action is elsewhere.

Hmm. Are iPads, iPhones, and iPods ARM SoC products?

Yes, as is the M-Audio Microtrak, the Sansa Clip & Fuze, a host of other
portable media players, and just about every modern cellphone.

Not only is the Microtrak based on the same dual CPU ARM as the original
iPod, the same company did the firmware.

I found indications
that ARM supplies components for Linux, Windows Mobile and Droid products,
but no mention of Apple products, and the iStuff is software-based.

ARM's larger business may be IP. Therefore, the SOC chips come from third
parties licensing ARM IP. One such company is Austra Microsystems. Another
player in the ARM sweepstakes is Nvidia.

http://daniel.haxx.se/sansa/ams.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture

[vdubreeze]

On Jun 2, 1:52*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:



One might have thought that when Apple went over to the Intel side, that
people would notice that a Mac has become just another PC clone, running an
OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support of all even
vaguely mainstream software platforms.


Because it isn't? : )

I could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less
power for the money. As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price. Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists. I don't care who makes fun of OSX. I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer
it to the clunkiness of Windows.

" an OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support
of all even vaguely mainstream software platforms." ? Doesn't
describe what I use.

[Arny Krueger]

"vdubreeze" wrote in message
...
On Jun 2, 1:52 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

One might have thought that when Apple went over to the Intel side, that
people would notice that a Mac has become just another PC clone, running
an
OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support of all
even
vaguely mainstream software platforms.

Because it isn't? : )

If you really believe that, then there must be an explanation.

I could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less
power for the money. As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price.

I understand blind hatred. Mac bigots accuse me of it. It is often very
hypocrtical of them to do so, but they really don't care about avoiding
looking that way in public.

Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists.

Yeah, it no doubt makes you feel so, so, so ordinary.

I don't care who makes fun of OSX. I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer
it to the clunkiness of Windows.

Yeah, you're not a Mac fanboy and Sarah Palin isn't a woman.

" an OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support
of all even vaguely mainstream software platforms." ? Doesn't
describe what I use.

[Trevor]

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
...
USB ports aren't all that important to folks that find the iPad
attractive.
The analogies that seem to apply to these two product groups are that PCs
are generalized tools, configurable for various purposes by the end user,
while Apple products are appliances that do the things they're built to do
well, but little or nothing else, not unlike kitchen appliances, where one
can collect a large number of specialized gadgets that conveniently do a
particular task, but take up space most of the time.

Which is fine if the gadget is small enough and cheap enough. Apple gadgets
may be small, but they aren't cheap IMO.


There is a small
population Apple product users that like to "jailbreak" them to try to
expand their usefulness, but almost always with consequences that impact
their original convenience.

Not to mention any warranty.


PC folks may prefer to have the basic kitchen tools and fewer specialized
appliances. I'm not so sure that it is a matter of how much money one has
to
spend, since those basic tools can be pretty pricey. ;-)

Just like a cooks knife, you can spend as little or as much as you want.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
It's also interesting to note that some people here are still using 15YO
programs on their PC's every day (as am I)

Hmm, Cool Edit Pro - that is now over a decade old, right?

Right, and someone said they are using Cool Edit 96, which would be 15
years. I don't use either myself, but do use other programs written pre
Windows 98. I also had one computer running Windows 98 until late last
year. I know others who still do. And you know what, that computer running
Windows 98 for over a decade *never* had the OS reinstalled (still the
original main hard drive), and had *very few* issues, unlike most of my
friends who seem to corrupt their computers every second week. And it even
had hundreds of software programs loaded and removed over the years. Of
course actually knowing what you are doing helps a lot IME.



It is possible that the Motorola CPU was the moral equivalent of Betamax
video recordings. It was truely superior at one point, but it fell off the
market anyway.

And for much the same reason, the difference was sufficiently small that
other factors like a wider variety of different machines and software, plus
pricing issues were more important to the average user. Eventually
development stops, and any claimed benefits disappear completely.


IOW, even Apple knows how to save a buck.

And how not to pass it on to consumers, and yet still sell heaps through
clever marketing. It's quite a valid business plan in such a capitalist
society. Their shareholders are very happy.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"vdubreeze" wrote in message
...
I could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less
power for the money. As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price. Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists. I don't care who makes fun of OSX. I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer
it to the clunkiness of Windows.


Really sad for you if you sit staring at ANY OS for any length of time. I
prefer to get straight into the actual programs/applications which are
sufficiently the same in most cases that it's hard to tell what the computer
is. Now IF you claimed Apple screens were better than many of the cheap PC
ones, I'd totally agree with you, but I can afford to buy an even better
screen for my PC with the money I save not buying a Mac :-)

Trevor.

[vdubreeze]

On Jun 4, 6:39*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"vdubreeze" wrote in message

...
On Jun 2, 1:52 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

One might have thought that when Apple went over to the Intel side, that
people would notice that a Mac has become just another PC clone, running
an
OS that is probably the most limited in terms of device support of all
even
vaguely mainstream software platforms.
Because it isn't? *: )

If you really believe that, then there must be an explanation.

There is. It's called everyday use.


I could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less
power for the money. * As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price.


I understand blind hatred. Mac bigots accuse me of it. It is often very
hypocrtical of them to do so, but they really don't care about avoiding
looking that way in public.

?



Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists.

Yeah, it no doubt makes you feel so, so, so ordinary.

Not exactly. I work all day in front of both. I much prefer OSX for
getting things done. If you disagree, then fine. If you think OSX
and Macs are stupid junk for morons you don't have enough experience
with them.


I don't care who makes fun of OSX. *I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer
it to the clunkiness of Windows.

Yeah, you're not a Mac fanboy and Sarah Palin isn't a woman.


Like I said, I'm no fanboy. I sit in front of both for hours at a
time and when I'm on OSX I'm happier because it does things the way I
want it to. I own equipment of all makers and OS's. If that makes me
a fanboy you have a pretty low threshold for who qualifies as one, but
makes no difference to me. I don't own an iPad. You can retort with
all the foolish remarks you care to, but it only serves that you're
not really making any point except to offer up personal insults
instead of good opinion. I have many discussions with my pro
photography peers about the pitfalls of both Macs and PCs for
photographers and I learn a lot about both sides during them. This
is not like those. With posts like this one of yours I only learn
about personal insults, which is a shame because I know you're capable
of better. Don't be the one to start with the goofy jabs and then
complain about what the response is.

[vdubreeze]

On Jun 6, 1:20*am, "Trevor" wrote:
"vdubreeze" wrote in message

...I could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less

power for the money. * As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price. * Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists. * I don't care who makes fun of OSX. *I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer

it to the clunkiness of Windows.

Really sad for you if you sit staring at ANY OS for any length of time. I
prefer to get straight into the actual programs/applications which are
sufficiently the same in most cases that it's hard to tell what the computer
is. Now IF you claimed Apple screens were better than many of the cheap PC
ones, I'd totally agree with you, but I can afford to buy an even better
screen for my PC with the money I save not buying a Mac :-)

Trevor.


That's all true. And naturally I wasn't referring to sitting at the
OS and not the program. But it was all the years of unhappily doing
file management on Windows when I wished I was in the Finder that
formed most of my preferences, not any Apple Kool-Aid. While both
have their oddities, count me in as one whose annoyances at OSX are
far fewer than my annoyances with Windows.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
vdubreeze wrote:

On Jun 6, 1:20*am, "Trevor" wrote:
"vdubreeze" wrote in message

...I
could care less about the hardware argument, whether Macs are less

power for the money. * As long as I don't have to sit in front of any
version of Windows I'm satisfied paying the price. * Just doing the
mundane stuff on a great PC running Windows makes me want to slit my
wrists. * I don't care who makes fun of OSX. *I use them both and have
no problem proudly stating that I'm no fanboi but I simply way prefer

it to the clunkiness of Windows.

Really sad for you if you sit staring at ANY OS for any length of time. I
prefer to get straight into the actual programs/applications which are
sufficiently the same in most cases that it's hard to tell what the
computer
is. Now IF you claimed Apple screens were better than many of the cheap PC
ones, I'd totally agree with you, but I can afford to buy an even better
screen for my PC with the money I save not buying a Mac :-)

Trevor.


That's all true. And naturally I wasn't referring to sitting at the
OS and not the program. But it was all the years of unhappily doing
file management on Windows when I wished I was in the Finder that
formed most of my preferences, not any Apple Kool-Aid. While both
have their oddities, count me in as one whose annoyances at OSX are
far fewer than my annoyances with Windows.

Have you seen today's announcement about OSX Lion?

--
www.jennifermartinmusic.com

[vdubreeze]

On Jun 6, 11:13*pm, Jenn wrote:

Have you seen today's announcement about OSX Lion?



Jenn, to be honest very little about it is of interest to me. I don't
own any smartphones, and though I love my iPodTouch and refer to it
regularly I don't get any charge out of new social app developments or
anyone's music service. I'm just not much of a consumer. Guess I
just lost my "fanboy" status. : ) I am very interested in how 10.7
may speed up Aperture and other programs, and I'm especially
interested in the new Final Cut Pro X.