Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Re: Apple putting Intel CPUs inside

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Apple putting Intel CPUs inside

 
 
Bystander
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Bret <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 22:39:00 +1200, Bystander
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, RJ <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article <e05ksk$d9t$(E-Mail Removed)>, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)lid
> >> says...
> >> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >> > RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > In article <e04brg$1vn$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> >> > > says...
> >> >
> >> > .
> >> > .
> >> > .
> >> >
> >> > > > The fact that Mac OSX is entirely Unix,
> >> > >
> >> > > No it's not.
> >> >
> >> > Well, yes it is.
> >>
> >> Well no, because Apple's proprietary parts of the Mac OSX, obviously,
> >> are not Unix.

> >
> >Oh right -- so a computer running Unix and any other software isn't
> >entirely Unix. Yeah, that's it. I get it.
> >
> >And Windows XP isn't all Windows, because it's Win2K plus XP bits, or
> >Knoppix isn't really all Linux because it's got Knoppix-y bits added ...
> >but I digress.
> >
> >What was the point of this lame yes-it-is no-it's-not stuff? Did you
> >have anything relevant or useful to say about the subject at hand? Do
> >you even recall what that was?

>
> He was trying to educate you, I don't suppose anyone else will bother
> now.


<PLONK>

Goodness, that was quick...
--
Bystander
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2006
Bystander wrote:

> <PLONK>
>
> Goodness, that was quick...


Ok, so who's this Bystander guy? One of our resident nymshifters?
--
~Shaun~


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2006
In article <e05qvf$oh7$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
says...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, RJ <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> > In article <e05ksk$d9t$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > says...
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <e04brg$1vn$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > > > says...
> > >
> > > .
> > > .
> > > .
> > >
> > > > > The fact that Mac OSX is entirely Unix,
> > > >
> > > > No it's not.
> > >
> > > Well, yes it is.

> >
> > Well no, because Apple's proprietary parts of the Mac OSX, obviously,
> > are not Unix.

>
> Oh right -- so a computer running Unix and any other software isn't
> entirely Unix. Yeah, that's it. I get it.


Yes because that is an absolutely true statment

>
> And Windows XP isn't all Windows, because it's Win2K plus XP bits,


BullCrap!!!!

It is all Windows, Cretin. Different versions but so what.

> What was the point of this lame yes-it-is no-it's-not stuff? Did you
> have anything relevant or useful to say about the subject at hand? Do
> you even recall what that was?


Dont blame me for your infantile temper tantrums
Moron



 
Reply With Quote
 
Bret
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2006
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:47:28 +1200, "~misfit~"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Bystander wrote:
>
>> <PLONK>
>>
>> Goodness, that was quick...

>
>Ok, so who's this Bystander guy? One of our resident nymshifters?


I was going to accuse him of that, he smells familiar
 
Reply With Quote
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2006
Bret wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:47:28 +1200, "~misfit~"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Bystander wrote:
>>
>>> <PLONK>
>>>
>>> Goodness, that was quick...

>>
>> Ok, so who's this Bystander guy? One of our resident nymshifters?

>
> I was going to accuse him of that, he smells familiar


He does indeed. I just don't get the whole nymshifting thing. If you're an
asshole the least you can do is embrace your personality and accept
yourself. Running away from ones self never works and, basically, that's all
nymshifting is. An attempt to escape the consequences of one's own actions,
ones own personallity. Sad really.
--
~Shaun~


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bystander
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <e05qvf$oh7$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> says...
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, RJ <(E-Mail Removed)>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <e05ksk$d9t$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > > says...
> > > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > > RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <e04brg$1vn$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > > > (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > > > > says...
> > > >
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > > > The fact that Mac OSX is entirely Unix,
> > > > >
> > > > > No it's not.
> > > >
> > > > Well, yes it is.
> > >
> > > Well no, because Apple's proprietary parts of the Mac OSX, obviously,
> > > are not Unix.

> >
> > Oh right -- so a computer running Unix and any other software isn't
> > entirely Unix. Yeah, that's it. I get it.

>
> Yes because that is an absolutely true statment
>
> >
> > And Windows XP isn't all Windows, because it's Win2K plus XP bits,

>
> BullCrap!!!!
>
> It is all Windows, Cretin. Different versions but so what.
>


And equally, OSX is all Unix, okay? Running a Unix user interface
program called 'Finder', which users can ignore if they want to (but
none of them ever do). Umm, drongo.


> > What was the point of this lame yes-it-is no-it's-not stuff? Did you
> > have anything relevant or useful to say about the subject at hand? Do
> > you even recall what that was?

>
> Dont blame me for your infantile temper tantrums
> Moron
>


"Infantile temper tantrums"? Good Lord.

Your PC-boy ignorance hasn't even exasperated me, much less removed my
ability to punctuate.
--
Bystander
 
Reply With Quote
 
RJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2006
In article <e0c11b$99a$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
says...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > In article <e05qvf$oh7$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > says...
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, RJ <(E-Mail Removed)>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <e05ksk$d9t$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > > > says...
> > > > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > > > RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <e04brg$1vn$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > > > > (E-Mail Removed)lid
> > > > > > says...
> > > > >
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > >
> > > > > > > The fact that Mac OSX is entirely Unix,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No it's not.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, yes it is.
> > > >
> > > > Well no, because Apple's proprietary parts of the Mac OSX, obviously,
> > > > are not Unix.
> > >
> > > Oh right -- so a computer running Unix and any other software isn't
> > > entirely Unix. Yeah, that's it. I get it.

> >
> > Yes because that is an absolutely true statment
> >
> > >
> > > And Windows XP isn't all Windows, because it's Win2K plus XP bits,

> >
> > BullCrap!!!!
> >
> > It is all Windows, Cretin. Different versions but so what.
> >

>
> And equally, OSX is all Unix, okay? Running a Unix user interface
> program called 'Finder', which users can ignore if they want to (but
> none of them ever do). Umm, drongo. \


Utter bul,lcrap moron
Finder is a proprietry application
It is NOT part of Unix

 
Reply With Quote
 
whoisthis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-31-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
RJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


> > And equally, OSX is all Unix, okay? Running a Unix user interface
> > program called 'Finder', which users can ignore if they want to (but
> > none of them ever do). Umm, drongo. \

>
> Utter bul,lcrap moron
> Finder is a proprietry application
> It is NOT part of Unix
>


Umm, the fact it is proprietry means zero.

Fact, OSX is built on BSD
Fact, the finder is an application that runs on top of BSD in exactly
the same way that KDE runs on top of linux.

So lets leave nit picky semantics alone and accept that when you talk
about linux you simply accept that Firefox is a linux application, its
not PART of the linux however it does not stop the OS the application is
running on being any less linux than it would be running grep in a BASH
shell.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel Core 2 Quad CPUs Comparison Ian Front Page News 0 05-05-2008 06:44 PM
Intel Core 2 Duo and Athlon 64 X2 CPUs: which runs cooler? Jimmy Dean Computer Support 4 04-21-2007 06:16 AM
Comparing 2 exact cpus? (Intel 820d) & benchmarking question jeff@msn.com Computer Support 3 04-04-2006 08:45 AM
Apple punished for adopting the foul Intel CPUs Rich DVD Video 0 02-18-2006 01:13 AM



Advertisments