Upcoming G5, G6, G7

[spikey]

nice try at flaming me joeyj.
Im really starting to get the feeling you are john123 in disquise.

"> And it looks like

No, you [hope] the apollo is `out the window', for reasons unbeknownst to
those who don't smoke as much crack as you apparently do. "

i didnt realise i smoked more crack than the next Mr average.
You are right i do hope the appollo is out the window, but im not the only one who wants that.



""it is a 64-bit processor". <-- how much simpler does it have to be? "

I was reffering to the relationship between the supposed 32 bit and the 64bit G5, there have been articles on 2 different versions of the G5. Apparently this one contradicts it.
I have woken up to the fact it is probably 64bit, its just you cant interprite my post without setting out wanting to flame me.



As for the appollo being out the window, the guy was so excited about the G5 and G6 it seemed as though he had forgotten the current situation for apple.
It was a comment on his writing style not what he actually said.


Nice try at breaking down my post joey, but you shouldnt set out with the intention to flame. It will only cloud your judjement.
Maybe you should read my post properly next time you f***ing blind s**t.

 

[joey j]

>nice try at flaming me joeyj.
Im really starting to get the feeling you are john123 in disquise.

erm, no, i'm not john123.


>>No, you [hope] the apollo is `out the window', for reasons unbeknownst
to those who don't smoke as much crack as you apparently do. "

>i didnt realise i smoked more crack than the next Mr average.

I never asserted that you smoked more crack than an average person ("next
Mr average"). People ("those") who don't smoke as much crack as you aren't
necessarily (colloquially speaking) `Mr averages'.

i.e. { `Mr average'(s) } is a set of people distinct from the set of those
who smoke more crack than you, { those-who-smoke-more-crack-than-spikey }.
[ we could shorten this for convenience to { TWSMCTS }, or even { +CS }
... etc. ]

The two groups do not necessarily overlap. Hence, you cannot invoke a
comparison to set { `Mr average'(s) } as the two do not have the same (or
even remotely similar) set of members.


>You are right i do hope the appollo is out the window, but im not the
only one who wants that.

And who else sides with you? And on what basis do you (plural or singular)
support the removal of the Apollo from Apple's processor lineup?


>>""it is a 64-bit processor". <-- how much simpler does it have to be? "

>I was reffering to the relationship between the supposed 32 bit and the
64bit G5,

spikey> "It doesnt say much about the supposed 64bit G5."

[meanwhile, the _whole_article_ "is about the supposed 64bit G5"]

MOSR article> "it is a 64-bit processor".

Where is this `relationship' between the two referred to? Rather, you
didn't read the article (hence my quoting it), you assumed the G5 (in the
incarnation that MOSR would be interested in, the desktop version) was a
32-bit processor.


> there have been articles on 2 different versions of the G5.

That's rather vacuous. The only appreciable difference between the two is
their address space.


>Apparently this one contradicts it.

In which way? And how is this contradiction `apparent'?


>I have woken up to the fact it is probably 64bit,

Or, if you read the post, you wouldn't be confused. Not that the term
`64-bit' _hasn't_ been bandied about ad infinitum amongst the various
camps (intel [ia-64, itanium, mckinley,], amd [claw||sledgehammer], moto
[64-bit G5], ibm [POWER series]...)


> its just you cant interprite my post without setting out wanting to flame me.

I didn't set out to flame you.


>As for the appollo being out the window, the guy was so excited about the
G5 and G6 it seemed as though he had forgotten the current situation for apple.
It was a comment on his writing style not what he actually said.

Hardly.

spikey> "And it looks like the G4 apollo is out of the window"

MOSR article> "possibly offering 7460 ... at the low end in the
professional models... in two configurations"

It is by now clearly obvious that you have asserted ("and it looks
like...") the precise opposite to the article. You said the apollo "is
out of the window", the article says, on the contrary, that Apple could
possibly be "offering 7460".

From this clear contradiction, I took your comment, then, to be a flight
of fantasy, hence my assertion "No, you [hope] the apollo `is out of the
window'".


>Nice try at breaking down my post joey, but you shouldnt set out with the
intention to flame. It will only cloud your judjement.

1) I did not "set out with the intention to flame"; the `crack' reference
was (intended to be) partly a subtle reference to your 7460 slip, and
partly a reference to the other thread where I present the case of the
7460 in the imac.

2) Precisely how could my judgement be clouded if I speak from the facts?


>Maybe you should read my post properly next time you f***ing blind s**t.

Rather, you should learn to 1) read articles which you reply to, _before_
replying to them, and 2) learn to spot contradictions prior to submission,
such as your obvious slip above regarding the 7460 being `out of the
window' when, on the contrary, the article asserts it being a possible
plan for the Pro models.

Once again, the irony in your comment is that you can't read other
people's posts (7460 slip above...) "properly". Or at all, but I'll grant
you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[spikey]

I never asserted that you smoked more crack than an "average person ("next
Mr average"). People ("those") who don't smoke as much crack as you aren't
necessarily (colloquially speaking) `Mr averages'.

i.e. { `Mr average'(s) } is a set of people distinct from the set of those
who smoke more crack than you, { those-who-smoke-more-crack-than-spikey }.
[ we could shorten this for convenience to { TWSMCTS }, or even { +CS }
... etc. ]

The two groups do not necessarily overlap. Hence, you cannot invoke a
comparison to set { `Mr average'(s) } as the two do not have the same (or
even remotely similar) set of members. "


Well thats all very well d**khead, but i didnt mean Mr avergae in that context. God damn you are so self obsessed.
By saying Mr average i was imlying that i am nothing special , i am just the same as an average person.
Stop trying to act all clever joey, it doesnt suit you, you are stupid. Everyone knows that you just use intellectual dialog to try and make yourself seem intelligent, it doesnt fool any of us joey. We have seen it all beofre with john. Why dont you just stick to phrases you actually understand f**khead, then atleast you wont make a fool of yourself each time you post on this forum.


"And who else sides with you? And on what basis do you (plural or singular)
support the removal of the Apollo from Apple's processor lineup? "

I forget his name, it was on the other hardware thread that we debated on. Not only that i know a hell of alot of friends who hate motorola and do not want to see the appollo.
I dont want the appollo because i dont want motorola to make any products for apple. they ahve made too many blunders.


there is more to a relationship between processors than which goes where in a hierarchy. You look at software compatibility, software versions, supposed pricing etc etc.
Why dont you criticise what i comment on when you KNOW somehting about macs, you clearly just use any excuse to criticise what i write. It doesnt work f***head, i know you are thick just because of that. You have nothing TO criticise, you are cr*p at it, those are the reasons why you talk sh**. You know nothing.



"> there have been articles on 2 different versions of the G5.

That's rather vacuous. The only appreciable difference between the two is
their address space. "

And if you would know something at all about address size it can mean all the difference, when it comes to sofware compatibility, performance performance difference, marketing strategy.
If you actually look at what follows on from changing a part of a processor f***face you ill notice that even the littlest change can make al the difference.


">I have woken up to the fact it is probably 64bit,

Or, if you read the post, you wouldn't be confused. Not that the term
`64-bit' _hasn't_ been bandied about ad infinitum amongst the various
camps (intel [ia-64, itanium, mckinley,], amd [claw||sledgehammer], moto
[64-bit G5], ibm [POWER series]...)"

LOL, god damn your thick. why dont you just shut your f***ing face?
you make a fool of yourself, sh**head.
You havent got any criticism so you just make somthing up about me.
LOL, you are so pathetic. You dont even have the intelligence to back up your own statement, you just make a new one up, add a few fancy words and expect us to buy it.




"> its just you cant interprite my post without setting out wanting to flame me.

I didn't set out to flame you. "

You did, and you are sh*t at it.





" It is by now clearly obvious that you have asserted ("and it looks
like...") the precise opposite to the article. You said the apollo "is
out of the window", the article says, on the contrary, that Apple could
possibly be "offering 7460".

From this clear contradiction, I took your comment, then, to be a flight
of fantasy, hence my assertion "No, you [hope] the apollo `is out of the
window'". "



wrong again d**khead, you cant take in the fact that you are wrong. Which is sad because thats all you are.
Infact you are so stuck up you cant even take in an explanation of whay you misinterprited a part of my post. You are stupid, just give up justifying what you said. And stop telling me what i have said and meant, because it doesnt work, people know you are grabbing for something that isnt there f***head so why dont you just admit that you are wrong. Every1 knows it, every1 has accepted it apart form you, you lead such a sad life you have to delude yourself from the truth, lol, you are such a little w**ker



"Rather, you should learn to 1) read articles which you reply to, _before_
replying to them, and 2) learn to spot contradictions prior to submission,
such as your obvious slip above regarding the 7460 being `out of the
window' when, on the contrary, the article asserts it being a possible
plan for the Pro models.

Once again, the irony in your comment is that you can't read other
people's posts (7460 slip above...) "properly". Or at all, but I'll grant
you the benefit of the doubt."



Wow still deluding yourself joey?
Your such a f**king fag**t.
I cant read posts properly???
LOL, thats alot coming from a little f**khead like you who cant accept that you are wrong so you TELL me what i meant in my post.

Your just a F***ing little sh*t joey, you are a pathetic sack of sh*t, you talk sh*t you think sh*t hence why you are just a malevolent little sack of sh*t.


Let me spell it out to you.

YOU ARE PATHETIC.

 

[joey j]

>Well thats all very well d**khead, but i didnt mean Mr avergae in that
context.

Do you usually make comments outside of the context in which they're
intended? (is that even possible?) Let's say someone asked you how their
hair looked and you said that it looked horrible, and upon asking you why,
you replied that you were speaking in the context of their cat or dog's
horrendously matted fur or something. Do you really do that?


> God damn you are so self obsessed. By saying Mr average i was
imlying that i am nothing special , i am just the same as an average
person. Stop trying to act all clever joey, it doesnt suit you, you are
stupid.

May I remind you that this `stupid' person managed to rebut your posts
point by point. If this poster is stupid, then what does that make the
person whom he rebutted?


> Everyone knows that you just use intellectual dialog to try and
make yourself seem intelligent,

I hardly think that rebutting your points counts as using `intellectual
dialog' to `make [myself] seem more intelligent'.


> it doesnt fool any of us joey.

So now you assert that you have many people on your side. A
usenet-inspired trick which I will describe in further detail below.


> We have seen it all beofre with john. Why dont you just stick to phrases
you actually understand f**khead,

I wouldn't use phrases which I didn't understand. Which phrases are these specifically?


>then atleast you wont make a fool of yourself each time you post on this forum.

I do? By replying to you?


>>"And who else sides with you? And on what basis do you (plural or
singular) support the removal of the Apollo from Apple's processor
lineup? "

>I forget his name, it was on the other hardware thread that we debated
on. Not only that i know a hell of alot of friends who hate motorola and
do not want to see the appollo.

... then apple can contract fabrication to IBM or some other company, once
the paperwork with motorola expires. Why is that such a big deal?


> I dont want the appollo because i dont want motorola to make any
products for apple. they ahve made too many blunders.

You once again demonstrate that you cannot distinguish between motorola's
elegant load/store processor architecture and the somewhat laggard fabs
from which they emerge.

"they [have] made too many blunders". The blunder in question is clearly
Motorola's inability to gain sufficient yields on high-clockspeed G4s (NOT
motorola's engineers, as you imply, for reasons which you have not yet
explained), the solution to which is more advanced fabrication facilities.



>there is more to a relationship between processors than which goes where
in a hierarchy. You look at software compatibility, software versions,
supposed pricing etc etc. Why dont you criticise what i comment on when
you KNOW somehting about macs, you clearly just use any excuse to
criticise what i write.

If you can't cope with having the flaws of your argument pointed out, I
suggest you not voice your opinion, lest fresh flaws be revealed.


> It doesnt work f***head, i know you are thick just because of that. You
have nothing TO criticise, you are cr*p at it, those are the reasons why
you talk sh**.

Rebutting you is to "talk sh**" now? I haven't done anything but rebut
your points, hence it must be this rebutting which causes your
aggravation. However, I can't see anything particularly aggrieving about
1) my replies specifically or 2) my method of replying [point-by-point].


> You know nothing.

A stunning indictment against you, given that I have been able to rebut
all of your points. If (as you assert) it follows from this (it
doesn't) that I "know nothing", then what does that say regarding you?


>And if you would know something at all about address size

You don't know what address space is, do you?


> it can mean all the difference, when it comes to sofware compatibility,

The G5 supports 32-bit addressing. Not surprising; in any case most 64-bit
versions of architectures are backwardly compatible with their 32-bit
incarnations.


> performance difference, marketing strategy.

`Marketing strategy'. Ah yes. As if the consumer (or even most pros) care
whether their processor addresses 4GB of ram or 2^64 bytes worth of the
stuff. Now tell me, since when has address space been a marketing strategy
of processor companies? It's only just coming to prominence now; you
mention it as if it were an ingrained tactic of processor marketing.

(32-bit address lookups [for backward-compat] by a 64-bit processor do not
exact an appreciable "performance difference".)


> If you actually look at what follows on from changing a part of a
processor f***face you ill notice that even the littlest change can make
al the difference.

Make all the difference to what? That's an vague statement which says
nothing.


>>>I have woken up to the fact it is probably 64bit,

>>Or, if you read the post, you wouldn't be confused. Not that the term
`64-bit' _hasn't_ been bandied about ad infinitum amongst the various
camps (intel [ia-64, itanium, mckinley,], amd [claw||sledgehammer], moto
[64-bit G5], ibm [POWER series]...)

>LOL, god damn your thick. why dont you just shut your f***ing face?
you make a fool of yourself, sh**head.
You havent got any criticism so you just make somthing up about me.

I made up the fact that you didn't read the post?


>LOL, you are so pathetic. You dont even have the intelligence to back up
your own statement, you just make a new one up, add a few fancy words and
expect us to buy it.

I've already justified repeatedly where you erred.


>>It is by now clearly obvious that you have asserted ("and it looks
like...") the precise opposite to the article. You said the apollo "is
out of the window", the article says, on the contrary, that Apple could
possibly be "offering 7460".

>>From this clear contradiction, I took your comment, then, to be a flight
of fantasy, hence my assertion "No, you [hope] the apollo `is out of the
window'".

>wrong again d**khead, you cant take in the fact that you are wrong.

It looks perfectly clear to me. You asserted that the apollo was `out of
the window' when the article said the opposite. How was that interpretation wrong?


> Which is sad because thats all you are. Infact you are so stuck up you
cant even take in an explanation of whay you misinterprited a part of my
post.

You continually assert that I misinterpret your posts. Where? Give me one
misinterpretation of mine and its correct interpretation. I can't see your
`explanation' anywhere.


>You are stupid, just give up justifying what you said. And stop telling
me what i have said and meant, because it doesnt work, people know you are

Another thing I learned from usenet was that when people invoke the
apparent opinion of others ("people know you are...") they're usually beat
in a debate, and are trying to foment a mass of opinion against you (by
asserting that everyone else is against the other) in the (apparent) hope
that the fear hopefully generated will cause the poster in question to
back down (safety-in-numbers, i suppose). It doesn't work.


>grabbing for something that isnt there f***head so why dont you just
admit that you are wrong. Every1 knows it, every1 has accepted it apart
form you,

Once again we have that classic usenet parry of asserting that (put
simply) `everyone's against you so you must be wrong'. This has an added
twist however -- that everyone has accepted this apart from me.


> you lead such a sad life

And precisely what do you know about my life?


> you have to delude yourself from the truth,

And what truth would this be? That you don't like people replying to you
point-by-point? That a strong case can be made both for the G4 and against
the G3 in the imac?


> lol, you are such a little w**ker

This can stand for itself.


>Wow still deluding yourself joey?
Your such a f**king fag**t.
I cant read posts properly???

No, you can't, apparently; else you wouldn't contradict what the post
says. Need I repeat precisely what contradiction I'm referring to?


>LOL, thats alot coming from a little f**khead like you who cant accept
that you are wrong

Wrong regarding what, precisely? I'm still in the dark as to what I'm
wrong about.


> so you TELL me what i meant in my post.

Hardly. You asserted that the 7460 was `out of the window', the article
said that the 7460 was still in consideration. I don't believe this at all
to be `[me telling you what you meant in your post]'.


>Your just a F***ing little sh*t joey, you are a pathetic sack of sh*t,
you talk sh*t you think sh*t hence why you are just a malevolent little
sack of sh*t.

This was quite amusing this rant. I've never heard `malevolent' used in
concert with `sack of sh*t'. Usually one using the first term is too
eloquent to use the next, and those using the latter aren't of sufficient
eloquence to use the former. You are an exception, in at least this case.


>Let me spell it out to you.

>YOU ARE PATHETIC.

And there's still not a point of yours I couldn't rise to. Does that make
me pathetic?

 

[Kela]

Who the **** is Joey J? I have a feeling it is John123 as well. Do me a favor and leave, youre presence is superflous.

 

[Catfish_Man]

Multicored

Only a few of the rumors have said that the G5 is multicored, most have said that it's single cored.. A dual core G5 would be cool though.

 

[AlphaTech]

G5 color(s)

I will be looking to see what Apple decides to do for the case color on the G5. I very much hope that they do something different right away to make the G5 stand out from the G4 croud. Even if they offer a couple of G4's at the time the G5 is released, they should do something different. Otherwise, you won't know you have the G5 you ordered until you power it up, and hope that someone on the production line didn't mess it up on you.

peace

 

[rekras]

the leak from apple said that the case design will not change, god damnit i hope that isnt true. im sick of the case design they need something new, espicially to complement the g5's incredible power.

 

[AlphaTech]

I hope that leak is wrong....

Maybe we should start contacting Apple people and make case color/design suggestions. Just a thought, since customer feedback made changes to important things like the keyboard and mouse from the earlier G4's to the current ones.

Something else they really should do is increase the speeds of the cd-rw drives. QPS has announced a 32x burner that should be out before the end of the year. Apple should at least put 16x burners in the boxes, to make them comparable to the pc's out there. Considering we are paying the premium for the best system on the planet, we should also get fast burners in them.

Any serious work I do is on a Mac, the pc in the corner is ONLY for games (those not, or not yet, available for the Mac).

 

[joey j]

Kela> Who the **** is Joey J?

Need I answer to you? Or do all new entrants to this board pass muster
under your watchful eye?


> I have a feeling it is John123

I hate to break it to you, but I'm not. Why does everyone think that
because john and I have the same posting style? Hasn't it ever struck
anyone that with 2500+ registered users, there'd be at least one pair with
similar posting style?


>as well

Here we observe the emergence of clannishness: `you toucha mah brotha and
you toucha me'.


> Do me a favor and leave,

I'm not here to keep you happy; nor am I in the business of fulfilling others' wishes.


> youre presence is superflous.

More unsubstantiated invective. (has it struck you yet that only two
people [yourself and spikey] believe I'm a negative influence? [maybe SPG
too]... )

 

[joey j]

Re: Multicored

Catfish_Man> Only a few of the rumors have said that the G5 is multicored,
most have said that it's single cored.. A dual core G5 would be cool though.

I'd be greatly surprised if Apple released a non-single cored G5 in their
initial G5 launch. However if the G6 is late or Apple needs more
performance from the G5 for whatever reason, they could always release a
multi-cored version of it. The G5 design supposedly has an upper limit of
4.5-5 Ghz according to Motorola's roadmap. Even if this barrier is reached
Apple could nearly double performance by simply using double-cored
processors.

 

[Kethoticus]

re: G5s, MWSF2002, and MacRumors posters

Joey J, you do not offend me. Please continue to contribute to the conversations here. Spikey and others clearly have more going on in their lives than meets the eye, because nothing else justifies those ridiculous, "unconservative" rants. I for one find you to have thoughtful feedback. I do not agree with everything you say, but see no reason to fly off the handle like you just tried to rape my girl, either. And to your credit, you've responded to every ridiculous, childish, adolescent, out-of-control, profanity-laden rant of Spikey's like a total gentleman. Clearly you remain in control of both your senses and the situation. Clearly Spike loses both all too quickly.

Now as for the original post regarding G5-based Macs this upcoming January, something smells fishy to me. This is just TOO optimistic, and reminds me of all the wishful (read: unrealistic) talk of LCD iMacs last spring. Like MattB said, I'll believe in all of those things when they're officially announced. Now if I'm wrong, praise God. I'll be happy to eat my words. But currently, all I've gotten are a lot of so-called "sources" who can not be held accountable for their words. Doesn't exactly inspire me with sleep-depriving anticipation for next January.

 

[spikey]

well kela, joey is a little f**kface. Hes pretty thick. Thinks he knows alot.
And he tries to write in riddles to hide the lack of content in his posts. Remind you of any1?

 

[spikey]

"Spikey and others clearly have more going on in their lives than meets the eye, because nothing else justifies those ridiculous, "unconservative" rants. I for one find you to have thoughtful feedback. I do not agree with everything you say, but see no reason to fly off the handle like you just tried to rape my girl, either. And to your credit, you've responded to every ridiculous, childish, adolescent, out-of-control, profanity-laden rant of Spikey's like a total gentleman. Clearly you remain in control of both your senses and the situation. Clearly Spike loses both all too quickly. "

Well kethoticus/ taramasalata/ greek f**khead.
My obviously "immature" way of writing is way too common for you upper class people.
Why dont you just shut your f**king mouth d**khead.
At the very least i have content in my posts, you on the other hand talk sh**. you posts say nothing i havent already heard. Oooooh you respect joey, well go suck his d**k then. If he has one.
You dont see wat is written in my posts because you are a snob and you are afraid to see the language i use.
Your a rightwing f**khead, you do nothing and contribute nothing to these forums, why dont you just go away. you are no use to any1.

 

[spikey]

">as well

Here we observe the emergence of clannishness: `you toucha mah brotha and
you toucha me'. "

Here we observe joeys di**headness. The "im too good for you" attitude.
you have just proved to every1 what a tw*t you are.

 

[spikey]

"> youre presence is superflous.

More unsubstantiated invective. (has it struck you yet that only two
people [yourself and spikey] believe I'm a negative influence? [maybe SPG
too]... )"

Im proving what a tw*t you are, the people in here will realise the truth.
I did it to john and i am doing it to you.

 

[spikey]

">Well thats all very well d**khead, but i didnt mean Mr avergae in that
context.

Do you usually make comments outside of the context in which they're
intended? (is that even possible?) Let's say someone asked you how their
hair looked and you said that it looked horrible, and upon asking you why,
you replied that you were speaking in the context of their cat or dog's
horrendously matted fur or something. Do you really do that? "


"I dont make comments outside the context i intended di**head. You are a blind f*ck, you are stupid and you do not understand what context they are in..
Yet again this is an example of how joey always thinks he is right.

May I remind you that this `stupid' person managed to rebut your posts
point by point. If this poster is stupid, then what does that make the
person whom he rebutted? "

LOL, rebut my posts?
You missed the fact which i pointed out 3 times to you in my last post that the subject of our posts would lead it into a stalemate, it had nothing to do with the posts themselves.
Another example of how stupid you are.



"> Everyone knows that you just use intellectual dialog to try and
make yourself seem intelligent,

I hardly think that rebutting your points counts as using `intellectual
dialog' to `make [myself] seem more intelligent'. "

Nobody said it was the rebutting of posts, its the fact that you are a tw*t with nothing useful to say.



"> it doesnt fool any of us joey.

So now you assert that you have many people on your side. A
usenet-inspired trick which I will describe in further detail be"

No ********, thats 4/4 points of mine you do not understand.
It doesnt say anything about people on my side, it says you are thick and people know it.
This point of mine makes the other


">then atleast you wont make a fool of yourself each time you post on this forum.

I do? By replying to you? "

No, just by replying.

"
You once again demonstrate that you cannot distinguish between motorola's
elegant load/store processor architecture and the somewhat laggard fabs
from which they emerge.

"they [have] made too many blunders". The blunder in question is clearly
Motorola's inability to gain sufficient yields on high-clockspeed G4s (NOT
motorola's engineers, as you imply, for reasons which you have not yet
explained), the solution to which is more advanced fabrication facilities. "

God damn it your thick, i will say it again for you.
IBM had to help redesign the G4 to get it above 500mhz, hence demonstrating why it wasnt just the fab process but also the over complicated design of motos G4.


">there is more to a relationship between processors than which goes where
in a hierarchy. You look at software compatibility, software versions,
supposed pricing etc etc. Why dont you criticise what i comment on when
you KNOW somehting about macs, you clearly just use any excuse to
criticise what i write.

If you can't cope with having the flaws of your argument pointed out, I
suggest you not voice your opinion, lest fresh flaws be revealed. "

Strange that seeing as i pointed out the flaws in your criticism, and yet yopu cant point out the ones in mine.
Again demonstrating what a self obsessed **** you are.




"> It doesnt work f***head, i know you are thick just because of that. You
have nothing TO criticise, you are cr*p at it, those are the reasons why
you talk sh**.

Rebutting you is to "talk sh**" now? I haven't done anything but rebut
your points, hence it must be this rebutting which causes your
aggravation. However, I can't see anything particularly aggrieving about
1) my replies specifically or 2) my method of replying [point-by-point]. "


the aggreviating thing ******** is that you never accept you are wrong.
You do nothing to my posts, you just keep saying how you "rebut" them when just by saying that you are infact doing nothing of the sort.
You are just a waste of this forum.
You talk ****, ofcourse you cant see anything aggreviating, you are an egotistical tw*t.



"> performance difference, marketing strategy.

`Marketing strategy'. Ah yes. As if the consumer (or even most pros) care
whether their processor addresses 4GB of ram or 2^64 bytes worth of the
stuff. Now tell me, since when has address space been a marketing strategy
of processor companies? It's only just coming to prominence now; you
mention it as if it were an ingrained tactic of processor marketing.

(32-bit address lookups [for backward-compat] by a 64-bit processor do not
exact an appreciable "performance difference".) "

Never di**head, the PC boom coincided with processors being 32bit, and they ahve been since, only now have they started to change to 64, so ofcourse any1 hasnt cared before about it. God damn think before you open your mouth.
the only part of computing that has a prominent, constantly changing address space has been the console market. Dont you remember the N64 64bit advertising? or are you really just too thick to notice. F**king hell its plain and simple, no marketing yet because there hasnt been a big change yet. Do you understand now d**khead?



"|>LOL, god damn your thick. why dont you just shut your f***ing face?
you make a fool of yourself, sh**head.
You havent got any criticism so you just make somthing up about me.

I made up the fact that you didn't read the post? "

YES, do i really have to make it that simple for you? or are you just acting like a little sh*t.




">LOL, you are so pathetic. You dont even have the intelligence to back up
your own statement, you just make a new one up, add a few fancy words and
expect us to buy it.

I've already justified repeatedly where you erred. "

you havent repeated anything, infact you havent said anything, you just make up somehting about me not reading a post. Go home joey, your just a little fool.





">wrong again d**khead, you cant take in the fact that you are wrong.

It looks perfectly clear to me. You asserted that the apollo was `out of
the window' when the article said the opposite. How was that interpretation wrong? "

Because thats not what i implied. God damn this is the 3rd time i have repeated this to you. Take it in this time. it isnt hard.
I was commentig on his writing style, the fact that he was too excited about the future, and not concentrating on the present.
god damn, you are just digging a hole, dont you get bored of not understanding anything?




"You continually assert that I misinterpret your posts. Where? Give me one
misinterpretation of mine and its correct interpretation. I can't see your
`explanation' anywhere. "


ABOVE ABOVE ABOVE. Read the last COMMENT.
God damn, why dont you just give up trying to understand, your snobby education is being matched and passed by a guy that went to a communtiy college in a red light district.



"Another thing I learned from usenet was that when people invoke the
apparent opinion of others ("people know you are...") they're usually beat
in a debate, and are trying to foment a mass of opinion against you (by
asserting that everyone else is against the other) in the (apparent) hope
that the fear hopefully generated will cause the poster in question to
back down (safety-in-numbers, i suppose). It doesn't work. "


now your in denial of the fact that people before have noticed the empty space that is your posts, they have noticed that you hide the lack of content with big words.
your just a little kid, you arent intelligent, you are thick.
And you just still cant takr in the fact that you are wrong.





">grabbing for something that isnt there f***head so why dont you just
admit that you are wrong. Every1 knows it, every1 has accepted it apart
form you,

Once again we have that classic usenet parry of asserting that (put
simply) `everyone's against you so you must be wrong'. This has an added
twist however -- that everyone has accepted this apart from me. "

Once again you use a pathetic excuse to hide the fact that you WERE WRONG, just accept it. Your a little ******** that isnt welcome her by any1, so you might aswell just admit now and then that you are wrong.
What a stuck up snob.



"> you lead such a sad life

And precisely what do you know about my life? "

I know that you cant admit that you are wrong.




"> you have to delude yourself from the truth,

And what truth would this be? That you don't like people replying to you
point-by-point? That a strong case can be made both for the G4 and against
the G3 in the imac? "

No, the truth is that you cant take the fact you are wrong, as i have said many times before only for you to give another little excuse to make people think otherwise- as demonstarted above.
This is a debate forum, i come here to debate.
You on the other hand always think you are right and cant debate because you cant take the fact that you are wrong.
You are just a little sh*t.



">Wow still deluding yourself joey?
Your such a f**king fag**t.
I cant read posts properly???

No, you can't, apparently; else you wouldn't contradict what the post
says. Need I repeat precisely what contradiction I'm referring to? "

LOL, and now you have just demonstrated to everyone how you always think you are right. Cant you take that fact you are wrong?
Dont you think i contradict your posts because you ARE wrong?





">LOL, thats alot coming from a little f**khead like you who cant accept
that you are wrong

Wrong regarding what, precisely? I'm still in the dark as to what I'm
wrong about. "

Try reading above. If its possible for you.




"> so you TELL me what i meant in my post.

Hardly. You asserted that the 7460 was `out of the window', the article
said that the 7460 was still in consideration. I don't believe this at all
to be `[me telling you what you meant in your post]'."

I didnt assert this if you would read my posts. I implied that it was in the shadow of future cpus.
Why dont you just stop saying the same thing over and over and start realising you are wrong.




"This was quite amusing this rant. I've never heard `malevolent' used in
concert with `sack of sh*t'. Usually one using the first term is too
eloquent to use the next, and those using the latter aren't of sufficient
eloquence to use the former. You are an exception, in at least this case. "

im glad you find it funny. the truth is hard to deal with for you. you write pathetic things, because you are just pathetic.
F***ing sad bastard, go get a life.






">YOU ARE PATHETIC.

And there's still not a point of yours I couldn't rise to. Does that make
me pathetic?"

Why i expected you to understand i dont know.

You are just a pathetic little cumbucket.
just shut your mouth.

 

[joey j]

> well kela, joey is a little f**kface.

An informed, edifying argument, much similar to the others which flow so
profusely from your erudite capacity of English.


> Hes pretty thick. Thinks he knows alot.

You're quite bitter now, aren't you? Another comment standing testament to
your personality.


>And he tries to write in riddles

It would appear I was successful, although I wasn't consciously writing in
riddles. I was (and still am) writing in English, which you probably know
better than me seeing as I'm not English, unlike you.


> to hide the lack of content in his posts.

It would appear that you haven't read any of my justifications for my
points and hope to win this argument by appealing to sensibilities of
debate (`don't favour the guy who presents an argument devoid of content')
by asserting that my posts `lack ... content' when they clearly don't.


> Remind you of any1?

You still think I'm john, don't you...


> Well kethoticus/ taramasalata/ greek f**khead.

You do realise your civilisation was founded by those of Mediterranean origin, don't you?
Of course, I'd best point out that there's nothing wrong with being Greek,
in fact, I'd rather be Greek than English; Greek food has taste.


> My obviously "immature" way of writing is way too common for you upper class people.

You presuppose that Kethoticus is "upper class", or that there is
something wrong with being of the upper class.


> Why dont you just shut your f**king mouth d**khead.
> At the very least i have content in my posts,

This is excellent - I liked this one for obvious reasons. It would appear
as if I'm going to leave many of your comments to stand for themselves,
like Ozymandias' trunkless legs of stone, with their author having much
the same attitude as Ozymandias himself.


> you on the other hand talk sh**. you posts say nothing i havent already
heard.

Is that why you find it so hard to reply with any sort of forceful argument?


> Oooooh you respect joey, well go suck his d**k then. If he has one.

Informed, erudite, etc.


> You dont see wat is written in my posts because you are a snob and you
are afraid to see the language i use.

Spikey, you confirm the image most people have where I live that those of
English descent are uncultured and vulgar, and you display the trait of
blaming everything on the `upper class' [very English]...


> Your a rightwing f**khead,

... and the politically right of centre [again, very English]. You do
remember that Ancient Greece was the home of democracy, do you not?


> you do nothing and contribute nothing to these forums,

... indeed, when he could be contributing abuse, like you ...



>>>as well

>> Here we observe the emergence of clannishness: `you toucha mah brotha and you toucha me'. "

> Here we observe joeys di**headness. The "im too good for you" attitude.

Hardly; it is a piece of social analysis I learned on usenet, teacher of
all things worth learning. I fail to see how pointing out clannishness
exposes an `"im too good for you" attitude'. Spewing invective again, are we?


> you have just proved to every1 what a tw*t you are.

I propose a vote on which one of spikey and myself is the more repulsive `tw*t'.


>>> youre presence is superflous.

>> More unsubstantiated invective. (has it struck you yet that only two
people [yourself and spikey] believe I'm a negative influence? [maybe SPG
too]... )"

> Im proving what a tw*t you are,

Nearly. You're *deluding yourself into believing* that you're "proving
what a tw*t" I am.


> the people in here will realise the truth.

Ah, because Spikey is the valiant guardian of truth and fairness, holding
back a tide of, erm "tw*t"-ishness on my behalf. Correct?


> I did it to john and i am doing it to you.

Rather, you're flattering yourself by deluding yourself into believing
that you're informing everyone here such as they will "realise the truth".

 

[spikey]

"> well kela, joey is a little f**kface.

An informed, edifying argument, much similar to the others which flow so
profusely from your erudite capacity of English. "

As opposed to you who just talks sh*t..
Again this demonstrates his snobbyness of people who use different language to him


"> Hes pretty thick. Thinks he knows alot.

You're quite bitter now, aren't you? Another comment standing testament to
your personality. "

A classic case of denial.





">And he tries to write in riddles

It would appear I was successful, although I wasn't consciously writing in
riddles. I was (and still am) writing in English, which you probably know
better than me seeing as I'm not English, unlike you.


> to hide the lack of content in his posts.

It would appear that you haven't read any of my justifications for my
points and hope to win this argument by appealing to sensibilities of
debate (`don't favour the guy who presents an argument devoid of content')
by asserting that my posts `lack ... content' when they clearly don't. "

appear you were succesful?
You call people realising you are thick succesful?
Well im glad you got the effect you wanted.




"> Remind you of any1?

You still think I'm john, don't you... "

whats the difference, you both suck.




"> Well kethoticus/ taramasalata/ greek f**khead.

You do realise your civilisation was founded by those of Mediterranean origin, don't you?
Of course, I'd best point out that there's nothing wrong with being Greek,
in fact, I'd rather be Greek than English; Greek food has taste. "

You think i give a sh*t?
English food is great, you obviously have never had chicken tikka or chicken korma. What a snob, you are so deprived. But dont worry, one day you will realise you are a pr*ck, you have obviously no idea about english food, otherwise you would not have said that. you know nothing about english culture.
you suck, you are a f***ing canadian.




"> My obviously "immature" way of writing is way too common for you upper class people.

You presuppose that Kethoticus is "upper class", or that there is
something wrong with being of the upper class. "

there is if you have those attitudes.







"> you on the other hand talk sh**. you posts say nothing i havent already
heard.

Is that why you find it so hard to reply with any sort of forceful argument? "

any forceful argument?, there wasnt anything for me to comment on in your post fu**head. What do you expect me to say?




"> Oooooh you respect joey, well go suck his d**k then. If he has one.

Informed, erudite, etc. "

And you say i dont have any "forceful argument", wow you sure can talk.





"> You dont see wat is written in my posts because you are a snob and you
are afraid to see the language i use.

Spikey, you confirm the image most people have where I live that those of
English descent are uncultured and vulgar, and you display the trait of
blaming everything on the `upper class' [very English]..."

Well face it, the image you give of the upper class isnt something to repect.
You like prving my points dont you? thats a lovely stereotype you just let us in on, stereotypes....how very upper class.

 

[spikey]

Maybe you should just give up talking at all, you contradict yourself.

It isnt hard to notice a ****, thats why we all notice you.
Just give up speaking, your a little sh*t in constant denial of the fact that you are wrong.
You are such a waste of space.

 

[joey j]

joey j>Do you really do that?

[so given this question]...


spikey> Yet again this is an example of how joey always thinks he is right.

... would I have needed to ask it if i always think that I'm right?


>LOL, rebut my posts? You missed the fact which i pointed out 3 times to
you in my last post that the subject of our posts would lead it into a
stalemate, it had nothing to do with the posts themselves. Another
example of how stupid you are.

I didn't miss that; on the contrary, it was your form of weaseling out.


>>I hardly think that rebutting your points counts as using `intellectual
dialog' to `make [myself] seem more intelligent'.

>Nobody said it was the rebutting of posts,

There's nothing else I've done here to possibly upset you, so I concluded
that it was my rebutting of your posts which led to your claim of my using
`intellectual dialog' to `make [myself] seem more intelligent'.


> its the fact that you are a tw*t with nothing useful to say.

On the contrary, I defended the inclusion of the 7460 in the imac.


>>> it doesnt fool any of us joey.

>>So now you assert that you have many people on your side. A
usenet-inspired trick which I will describe in further detail be

>No ********, thats 4/4 points of mine you do not understand.
It doesnt say anything about people on my side,

"any of us" <----- by using the first-person plural you assert that you
have others on your side.


>>>You once`again demonstrate that you cannot distinguish between
motorola's elegant load/store processor architecture and the somewhat
laggard fabs from which they emerge.

>>"they [have] made too many blunders". The blunder in question is clearly
Motorola's inability to gain sufficient yields on high-clockspeed G4s (NOT
motorola's engineers, as you imply, for reasons which you have not yet
explained), the solution to which is more advanced fabrication facilities. "

>God damn it your thick, i will say it again for you. IBM had to help
redesign the G4 to get it above 500mhz,

No, they didn't.


> hence demonstrating why it wasnt just the fab process but also the over
complicated design of motos G4.

Granted, the G4 may even be more complex a processor than even the G5;
however, given that all architectures have limits as to their clockspeed,
I hence attribute the vast bulk of the blame to Motorola's fabrication.


>>If you can't cope with having the flaws of your argument pointed out, I
suggest you not voice your opinion, lest fresh flaws be revealed. "

>Strange that seeing as i pointed out the flaws in your criticism,

Where? I didn't see one. Maybe if you dig through the abuse you can find
it for me.


> and yet yopu cant point out the ones in mine.

I have, repeatedly.


>>> It doesnt work f***head, i know you are thick just because of that.
You have nothing TO criticise, you are cr*p at it, those are the reasons
why you talk sh**.

>>Rebutting you is to "talk sh**" now? I haven't done anything but rebut
your points, hence it must be this rebutting which causes your
aggravation. However, I can't see anything particularly aggrieving about
1) my replies specifically or 2) my method of replying [point-by-point].

>the aggreviating thing ******** is that you never accept you are wrong.

I don't need to; you never demonstrated any holes in my argument, hence I
have no reason to believe I am wrong.


> performance difference, marketing strategy.

>`Marketing strategy'. Ah yes. As if the consumer (or even most pros) care
whether their processor addresses 4GB of ram or 2^64 bytes worth of the
stuff. Now tell me, since when has address space been a marketing strategy
of processor companies? It's only just coming to prominence now; you
mention it as if it were an ingrained tactic of processor marketing.

(32-bit address lookups [for backward-compat] by a 64-bit processor do not
exact an appreciable "performance difference".) "


>Never di**head, the PC boom coincided with processors being 32bit,

... rather, you could argue to 8, 16 at least.


> and they ahve been since, only now have they started to change to 64,

... 64-bit consumer boxes? Not yet.


> so ofcourse any1 hasnt cared before about it. God damn think before you
open your mouth. the only part of computing that has a prominent,
constantly changing address space has been the console market. Dont you
remember the N64 64bit advertising? or are you really just too thick to
notice. F**king hell its plain and simple, no marketing yet because there
hasnt been a big change yet.

(essence of argument above: little/no change == no marketing)

On the contrary, computer marketers promote things which aren't a huge
improvement on the past (100 -> 133 MHz SDRAM comes to mind). This small
change resulted in great marketeering. You claim that the lack of
marketing is due to the lack of magnitude of the change. Hardly. Small
changes can thus result in large marketing brownie-points grabbing; what
makes you think that an invisible ISA transition will result in huge
marketing drives? Because you think that people bought into this `64-bit'
hoopla which you describe?


>>>You havent got any criticism so you just make somthing up about me.

>>I made up the fact that you didn't read the post? "

>YES,

So if you did in fact read the initial post of this thread, then how do
you explain your contradictory attitude to the article? You claimed the
7460 was `out of the window'; it clearly wasn't according to the article.
How did I make that up?


>>>wrong again d**khead, you cant take in the fact that you are wrong.

>>It looks perfectly clear to me. You asserted that the apollo was `out of
the window' when the article said the opposite. How was that interpretation wrong? "

>Because thats not what i implied. God damn this is the 3rd time i have
repeated this to you. Take it in this time. it isnt hard. I was commentig
on his writing style, the fact that he was too excited about the future,
and not concentrating on the present. god damn, you are just digging a
hole, dont you get bored of not understanding anything?

See above. `writing style' is a ruse.


>>"You continually assert that I misinterpret your posts. Where? Give me
one misinterpretation of mine and its correct interpretation. I can't see
your `explanation' anywhere. "

>ABOVE ABOVE ABOVE. Read the last COMMENT. God damn, why dont you just
give up trying to understand, your snobby education is being matched and
passed by a guy that went to a communtiy college in a red light district.

Did I have a snobby education? There you are, blaming the wealthy (which
I'm not) and the `right-wing' (which i'm not) again.


>>"Another thing I learned from usenet was that when people invoke the
apparent opinion of others ("people know you are...") they're usually beat
in a debate, and are trying to foment a mass of opinion against you (by
asserting that everyone else is against the other) in the (apparent) hope
that the fear hopefully generated will cause the poster in question to
back down (safety-in-numbers, i suppose). It doesn't work. "

>now your in denial of the fact that people before have noticed the empty
space that is your posts, they have noticed that you hide the lack of
content with big words.

"apparent" "opinion" "suppose" "question" "asserting" "generated"
"hopefully". Are these examples of the words which annoy you so greatly?


> And you just still cant takr in the fact that you are wrong.

... I will - once you demonstrate it conclusively, rather than blow
smoke.



>>>Wow still deluding yourself joey? Your such a f**king fag**t. I cant
read posts properly???

>>No, you can't, apparently; else you wouldn't contradict what the post
says. Need I repeat precisely what contradiction I'm referring to? "

>LOL, and now you have just demonstrated to everyone how you always think
you are right.

Rather, you dodged the question of your contradiction. No, don't dodge the
point with this transparent `writing style' tripe.


> Cant you take that fact you are wrong? Dont you think i contradict your
posts because you ARE wrong?

If you do, you don't do it with any finesse.


>Try reading above. If its possible for you.

The irony is breathtaking. (Are the 7460s `still out the window' contrary
to the article?)


>>> so you TELL me what i meant in my post.

>>Hardly. You asserted that the 7460 was `out of the window', the article
said that the 7460 was still in consideration. I don't believe this at all
to be `[me telling you what you meant in your post]'."

>I didnt assert this

You did, which is why I take pains to quote those to whom I reply, to
eliminate false statements like yours above.


> you write pathetic things, because you are just pathetic. F***ing sad
bastard, go get a life.

("write pathetic things") Is this meant to be ironic?

 

[AlphaTech]

spikey and joey j... why don't you go someplace else for your pissing contest??? This is supposed to be a discussion area about MACrumors, not a bashing room.

I hope that I am not alone in my wish that you both refrain from such childish behavior.

If you don't have something constructive, or at least interesting, to post, then don't post anything.

 

[Kela]

OMG!!

Spikey! Oh MY GOD, Im starting to miss John123, atleast he would occasionally shut up. This guy seems to be the successor. Joey J do not get into a war you cant win. This forum is rigged and we have more people wantin you outta here. And change that sickenig handle.

Kela out

 

[joey j]

>>> well kela, joey is a little f**kface.

>>An informed, edifying argument, much similar to the others which flow so
profusely from your erudite capacity of English. "

>As opposed to you who just talks sh*t..

Another example of your self-delusion.


>Again this demonstrates his snobbyness of people who use different
language to him

No; it was a sarcastic comment which regarded the lack of meaningful
content in "well kela, joey is a little f**kface" rather than the words
themselves. Your attempt (to stir up woe-is-me puppy-dog sympathies by
falsely claiming I am criticising your command of English) has been noted.


>>> Well kethoticus/ taramasalata/ greek f**khead.

>>You do realise your civilisation was founded by those of Mediterranean
origin, don't you? Of course, I'd best point out that there's nothing
wrong with being Greek, in fact, I'd rather be Greek than English; Greek
food has taste.

>You think i give a sh*t?

You should know _something_ about who settled your country in the first
place, who invaded them, who invaded them next, where the invading tribes
were from (no, don't start with claims of intellectual snobbishness, it
won't work).


>English food is great, you obviously have never had chicken tikka or
chicken korma.

Do `tikka' and `korma' sound like English names to you? And please don't
mention tikka masala. YUCK. The english preoccupation with meat is odd to
say the least.


> What a snob, you are so deprived. But dont worry, one day you will
realise you are a pr*ck, you have obviously no idea about english food,

The Mediterraneans put the smack down on your `cuisine'.


> otherwise you would not have said that. you know nothing about english culture.

I know enough to dislike it.


>you suck, you are a f***ing canadian.

Further proof that you do not read the posts to which you reply. From
another thread (What's the possiblity of a Powerbook with Dual processor):

I was actually debating with myself whether or not to americanise (-ize?
) my spelling to mislead people into thinking that I was from North
America. I followed that rule religiously on usenet (the confusion came in
handy a couple of times for taking the moral high ground, people would
assume I was an "arrogant yank" or a "stupid canuck" or similar, i'd give
it to them then .


joey j just above> "mislead people into thinking that I was from North America".

spikey just above> "you are a f***ing canadian"


joey j just above> `people would assume I was ... a "stupid canuck"'

spikey just above> "you are a f***ing canadian"


You don't read very closely at all, do you?




>>> My obviously "immature" way of writing is way too common for you upper
class people.

>>You presuppose that Kethoticus is "upper class", or that there is
something wrong with being of the upper class. "

>there is if you have those attitudes.

That wasn't the issue. You presupposed that Kethoticus was of "upper
class". Where is your proof of this, or are you blowing smoke again?



>>> Oooooh you respect joey, well go suck his d**k then. If he has one.

>>Informed, erudite, etc.

>And you say i dont have any "forceful argument",

You don't.


> wow you sure can talk.

As for this suggestion of hypocrisy, my argument was well correlated by
your vulgar and unsubstantiated remarks; so yes, I indeed "can talk".


>>Spikey, you confirm the image most people have where I live that those
of English descent are uncultured and vulgar, and you display the trait of
blaming everything on the `upper class' [very English]...

>Well face it, the image you give of the upper class

Restraint?


> isnt something to repect.

Give up the upper-class ranting; you brought it up purely as a ruse, a
platform from which to bash others (that you are already comfortable
with). Where were any notions of the `upper class' discussed or otherwise
brought to light?


> stereotypes....how very upper class.

spikey above, somewhere> "the image you give of the upper class"

... lumping all the "upper class" together as if they all (each one of
'em) project "the image (I) give". This sounds awfully like a stereotype
to me.

 

[joey j]

Re: OMG!!

>we have more people wantin you outta here.

You scare me not. Didn't I already point out this classic usenet ruse?
You hope that by asserting a large number of people are against me, that
it will add legitimacy to your claims. It doesn't; the tactic doesn't
work.


> And change that sickenig handle.

Didn't I already say that I wasn't in the business of keeping you happy?