Re: Camera JPEG engines

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rob, Nov 19, 2012.

  1. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 4:55 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <>, David Dyer-Bennet
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>>> But the batteries aren't replaceable by the user yes.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> so what? it's not just apple. most ultrabooks are like that.
    >>>>
    >>>> Ah; I know people who have abandoned Apple over that, since the new
    >>>> extended batteries don't approach what they got with two batteries
    >>>> before.
    >>>
    >>> bullshit.
    >>>
    >>> the macbooks prior to the versions with internal batteries got about
    >>> 4-5 hours of runtime, compared with 7-10 on the newer models.

    >>
    >> That may be what the specs say, but I know what my friends say.

    >
    > then they either have a defective battery (it happens) or they're lying.
    >
    > the new macbooks get substantially longer battery life than the older
    > ones. this is easily measured, and has been in many, many reviews.
    >
    > furthermore, apple is very conservative on battery ratings. anandtech
    > got over 8 hours on a macbook that was rated at 7 hours. the ipad is
    > rated at 10 hours and many reviewers got 11 hours or more. that's a
    > *really* long time on a single charge.
    >
    > <http://www.anandtech.com/show/2783/apple-s-2009-macbook-pro-battery-lif
    > e-to-die-for/4>
    > Eight, freakin, hours. I couldn't believe it. In my lightest test,
    > the new 15-inch MacBook Pro lasted eight hours and eight minutes.
    > That's with the screen at half brightness (completely usable) and no
    > funny optimizations. The notebook is just playing music and surfing
    > through a lot of my old reviews. There's no way this could be right.
    > Maybe my test was too light?
    >
    > he then tested it with flash, which drains the battery faster, and
    > found the new model was almost *twice* as long as the old one:
    >
    > Six and a half hours, out of a 5.5 lbs notebook. For comparison, the
    > older MacBook Pro could only manage 3 hours and 17 minutes in the
    > same test. The new notebook lasted almost twice as long.
    > Mathematically, this doesn't make sense. There's only a 46% increase
    > in battery capacity, there shouldn¹t be a ~100% increase in battery
    > life...ever.
    > ...
    > The battery tests are repeatable however. I saw anywhere from a 50 -
    > 100% improvement in battery life over the old MacBook Pro. Given the
    > increase in battery capacity alone, you should see no less than a 46%
    > increase in battery life. Exactly what is accounting for the expanded
    > life above and beyond that, I'm not sure.
    >
    > Either way, Apple's 7 hour claim is well within reason. For light
    > workloads, even on WiFi, you can easily expect 6.5 - 8 hours out of
    > the new 15-inch MBP. As I write this article on that very system I'm
    > told that I have nearly 8.5 hours left on my charge. If you do a lot
    > of writing on your notebook, the new MBP is exactly what you'll want;
    > it will easily last you on a cross-country flight if you need to get
    > work done
    > ...
    > A quick search shows that even Dell's Studio 15 only offers a battery
    > rating of up to 5.5 hours. It looks like, once again, other notebook
    > makers will have to play catch up to Apple in this department.
    >
    >>>>> the result is longer battery run time and a thinner, lighter and more
    >>>>> reliable laptop. that is something that benefits users every day.
    >>>>
    >>>> Until their battery goes dead, either from use or age.
    >>>
    >>> which will likely be after the laptop is no longer particularly useful.
    >>> as i said, the battery will outlast the laptop (or other device).

    >>
    >> Never been my experience, and many friends have also talked about
    >> needing to replace laptop batteries mid-life.

    >
    > what is 'mid-life' ? 1-2 years? if so, it's likely under warranty and
    > replacement is free.
    >
    > and as i said, if you want to replace the battery, you either grab a
    > screwdriver or take it to the store and they do it while you wait, for
    > no additional cost. it's not a big deal.
    >
    > meanwhile, every day you use the laptop, you don't have to lug extra
    > batteries and the laptop is lighter and thinner and more reliable, all
    > things that make using it that much more pleasant, versus being able to
    > pop a battery out *once* in a few years.
    >
    >>> however, for those who insist on using older computers well past their
    >>> useful life and despite the fact that older computers won't be able to
    >>> run whatever software will then be current or have security updates
    >>> which puts the user at risk, they can still replace the battery and
    >>> keep using it anyway, or have the battery replaced if they can't handle
    >>> a screwdriver (or know someone who does). or they can just use the
    >>> laptop plugged in.

    >>
    >> The Thinkpad T60 I bought used and which my wife is still using is on
    >> its second battery, but it still gets OS upgrades from Microsoft, and
    >> could run at least two generations newer OS if there were any reason we
    >> wanted to (dunno about 8, but it could definitely run Windows 7).

    >
    > are you talking about xp?
    >
    >> Maybe if you've got money drooling constantly out some bodily orifice
    >> beyond your control you would replace your laptop every couple of years,
    >> but I'd rather drink more good wine or something.

    >
    > who said every couple of years?
    >
    > the battery in macbooks are rated at *five* years. most people will
    > replace their computer well before that.
    >
    > look back at laptops from 2007 or so. many of those won't run vista or
    > win7 (or *really* poorly, if they can at all), so anyone wanting to run
    > modern software that requires vista or 7 will be buying a new laptop.
    >
    > and you are not surprisingly ignoring that apple isn't the only one who
    > is doing this. most ultrabooks have internal batteries and many
    > smartphones (not just the iphone) have internal batteries, as do many
    > other consumer products, such as bluetooth headsets. like it or not,
    > that's what users want. most users (95 % as per npd) do *not* buy spare
    > batteries. it's silly to cater to the remaining 5%.
    >
    >>>>> plus, flash cards are very reliable and i'm not particularly worried
    >>>>> about data loss if i didn't have anywhere to copy it. sometimes i take
    >>>>> just the camera and a bunch of cards and copy them when i get home.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, not THAT bad a risk. Certainly less risky than unexposed film --
    >>>> the difference being that I had *no choice* about the film not being
    >>>> backed up. (And in fact wedding photographers went to huge amounts of
    >>>> trouble to get shots on multiple rolls and to send those rolls to the
    >>>> lab on different days so they couldn't all be lost in one equipment
    >>>> failure.)
    >>>
    >>> when i shot film, the lab i used offered $100 if they botched a roll of
    >>> film. that won't replace lost photos, but it's a *lot* better than
    >>> giving someone a free roll of film which is what most places offered.
    >>> it is also a vote of confidence that they won't screw up, and they
    >>> didn't.

    >>
    >> Notice I said "wedding photographers". A wedding photographer can
    >> potentially get hit with a suit requiring them to rent the venue again,
    >> decorate, it, get the flowers, bring all the family and guests back
    >> paying transport, hotel, and food, and reshoot the whole thing. $100 a
    >> roll doesn't go very far at all towards that kind of cost.

    >
    > it won't, but it goes farther than a $10 roll of film does that most
    > labs would give you (which costs them even less). in other words,
    > you're trusting your precious photos to a $5 guarantee.
    >
    > as i said, it's a vote of confidence. the lab wouldn't offer $100 if
    > they were careless, which is a *lot* more than most labs did.
    >



    When did
    apple start allowing Flash on the iPad?
    <http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/>
    Of course the article could not possibly be a phoney.
    Sheesh!

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 23, 2012
    #81
    1. Advertising

  2. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50aff447$0$10807$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > >> i can't remember a flight in the past year or two that *didn't* have
    > >> wifi. before that it was most of the time, but that was when they were
    > >> installing the hardware.
    > >>
    > >> there are over 1500 planes that currently have wifi, including on air
    > >> canada, airtran, alaska airlines, american airlines, delta, frontier,
    > >> united, us airways and virgin america.
    > >>
    > >> <http://www.gogoair.com/gogo/cms/airlines.do>

    > >
    > > Oh, I see them advertising it; I just don't see it on the actual planes
    > > I fly.
    > >
    > > I didn't see it back 2005-2008 flying out to California every month,
    > > either, but maybe that was too early. (I have a theory it might happen
    > > more on longer flights.)
    > >

    > Another accurate statement from nospam. with over 3,00 planes flying in
    > the US during the day, the chances of getting one with WiFi is less than
    > 50%. I wonder if that percentage is "very likely."


    math fail. over 1500 planes with wifi versus over 3000 total is about
    50%. it could be 49% just as easily as it can be 51%, and more planes
    are getting wifi every day (it's about 8 hours to install).

    more importantly, many of those 3000 flights are international routes
    where wifi is not offered (and pax know this in advance) or puddle
    jumpers where you're only in the air for 30-60 minutes and it's
    pointless to offer wifi. i mentioned both, which you are conveniently
    ignoring.

    > And of course, the service is free, courtesy of the airline. Perhaps
    > nospam, our frequent flyer, can tell use the cost. i'm confident that
    > information is right at his fingertips.


    i didn't mention cost at all, only that it's offered.

    if you want to know cost, go to gogo's site. they list all of the
    plans. there are also the occasional promo codes for discounts.
    sometimes it's a few dollars and sometimes it's even free.

    if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.
     
    nospam, Nov 23, 2012
    #82
    1. Advertising

  3. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50aff57f$0$10811$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > When did
    > apple start allowing Flash on the iPad?
    > <http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/>
    > Of course the article could not possibly be a phoney.
    > Sheesh!


    learn to read before spewing stupid comments.

    nowhere did the article i quoted nor did i say anything about ipads
    running flash.

    do you just make this stuff up or what?
     
    nospam, Nov 23, 2012
    #83
  4. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:28:17 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    >soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.


    I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    reasonable charge is determined.

    I'm not sure if there is much of an advantage in being able to reserve
    a seat position unless you have bladder problems and need an aisle
    seat. A reserved seat may put you next to a squalling infant, a man
    with a severe body odor problem, or some prat who is compiling a
    market survey report on his Macbook. You can pick the location, but
    not your seatmates.

    Personally, if I'm booking a flight, I pick the airline that gets me
    from where I am to where I want to go in the least amount of time,
    connections, and trouble getting to the airport.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Nov 23, 2012
    #84
  5. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    > >soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.

    >
    > I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    > wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    > reasonable charge is determined.


    no, your wife is picking a cheap ass airline that nickel and dimes
    customers.

    it costs an airline nothing to offer standard amenities such as seat
    selection, printing your own boarding pass, etc. it's a customer
    hostile policy. also, allegiant has several inches less legroom than
    many other airlines, making for a less comfortable flight, except
    perhaps, for midgets.

    it's like how banks charge for using an atm, when it's actually saving
    them money.

    maybe you don't mind being treated like shit when you fly. others do
    not like it and won't put up with it. airlines like allegiant and
    spirit are getting a lot of backlash for those policies.

    > I'm not sure if there is much of an advantage in being able to reserve
    > a seat position unless you have bladder problems and need an aisle
    > seat. A reserved seat may put you next to a squalling infant, a man
    > with a severe body odor problem, or some prat who is compiling a
    > market survey report on his Macbook. You can pick the location, but
    > not your seatmates.


    location matters, as do individual seats.

    seats toward the front are generally quieter than seats towards the
    rear plus you get off the plane quicker which may matter for tight
    connections. window seats forward of the wing usually have a better
    view than ones over the wing or behind it. sometimes window seats
    aren't even windows, it's solid metal for structural members of the
    fuselage, or you get delightful view *of the engine* and nothing more
    (plus the noise since you're next to it).

    exit rows offer the most legroom outside of the f/j cabins, but the
    seats may not recline. exit rows can also be colder because of the exit
    door and the seat cushions aren't usually as comfortable. some planes
    have economy+ or equivalent, which has additional legroom, without the
    drawbacks of the exit rows.

    not all seats have seat power, which matters to those with battery
    hungry devices. bulkhead seats generally have no underseat storage,
    which may be an inconvenience especially if the overhead bins fill by
    the time you board. nobody wants middle seats unless they're a family
    taking the entire row.

    for premium cabins, being able to choose which seat can mean the
    difference in first and last choice in meals, and for the main cabin,
    you might not get any choice way in the back because they ran out, plus
    it's that much later that they get to you.

    planes also vary in seat configuration. a solo traveler might want the
    1 seat side and get both a window and an aisle at the same time. three
    people traveling together will likely want a 3 seat side not the 2 seat
    side and split up. good luck to the poor soul who is in the middle of a
    5 seat row, but a family of 5 might prefer that.

    picking left or right side of the plane can matter depending if you
    want the sun in your face (even in an aisle seat), depending on
    direction of travel and time of day. which side can also matter if you
    want to see a particular sight along the way.

    so yes, seat selection absolutely does matter.

    > Personally, if I'm booking a flight, I pick the airline that gets me
    > from where I am to where I want to go in the least amount of time,
    > connections, and trouble getting to the airport.


    comfort isn't even a consideration? why am i not surprised.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #85
  6. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:54:56 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    >> >soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.

    >>
    >> I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    >> wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    >> reasonable charge is determined.

    >
    >no, your wife is picking a cheap ass airline that nickel and dimes
    >customers.


    She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.

    If she had picked a different airline, she would have flown out of ORL
    instead of SFB. More cost to get there and back to our house. She
    would have had to either rent a car from Chicago to Rockford or take
    the bus. More cost, more time. The schedule was convenient.

    >it costs an airline nothing to offer standard amenities such as seat
    >selection, printing your own boarding pass, etc. it's a customer
    >hostile policy. also, allegiant has several inches less legroom than
    >many other airlines, making for a less comfortable flight, except
    >perhaps, for midgets.


    Damn close. My wife is barely over 5'.

    Wifi costs the airline pennies per passenger, but many charge for
    wifi.

    >maybe you don't mind being treated like shit when you fly. others do
    >not like it and won't put up with it. airlines like allegiant and
    >spirit are getting a lot of backlash for those policies.


    Treated like shit? The flight crew were pleasant.
    >
    >> I'm not sure if there is much of an advantage in being able to reserve
    >> a seat position unless you have bladder problems and need an aisle
    >> seat. A reserved seat may put you next to a squalling infant, a man
    >> with a severe body odor problem, or some prat who is compiling a
    >> market survey report on his Macbook. You can pick the location, but
    >> not your seatmates.

    >
    >location matters, as do individual seats.


    Matters to whom? You can pre-choose a seat and be next to some obese
    woman eating cheese and farting and behind a squalling infant with a
    dirty diaper. Or, you can walk down the aisle and pick a seat next to
    some quiet adult.

    >seats toward the front are generally quieter than seats towards the
    >rear plus you get off the plane quicker which may matter for tight
    >connections.


    The flight, as I said, was a direct non-stop.

    >window seats forward of the wing usually have a better
    >view than ones over the wing or behind it. sometimes window seats
    >aren't even windows, it's solid metal for structural members of the
    >fuselage, or you get delightful view *of the engine* and nothing more
    >(plus the noise since you're next to it).


    A view? I thought you were a frequent flyer and airborne laptop
    preference survey taker. You think the view for the first few minutes
    and the last few minutes of a flight is exciting? Are you six
    years-old? Orlando to Rockford doesn't fly over the Grand Canyon, you
    know. I held a private pilot's license for years. I know what the
    top of a cloud looks like.
    >
    >exit rows offer the most legroom outside of the f/j cabins, but the
    >seats may not recline. exit rows can also be colder because of the exit
    >door and the seat cushions aren't usually as comfortable. some planes
    >have economy+ or equivalent, which has additional legroom, without the
    >drawbacks of the exit rows.


    Jeez, what a whiner.

    >not all seats have seat power, which matters to those with battery
    >hungry devices.


    My wife read a (real) book on both flight legs. Books don't need
    batteries.

    >bulkhead seats generally have no underseat storage,
    >which may be an inconvenience especially if the overhead bins fill by
    >the time you board. nobody wants middle seats unless they're a family
    >taking the entire row.
    >
    >for premium cabins, being able to choose which seat can mean the
    >difference in first and last choice in meals, and for the main cabin,
    >you might not get any choice way in the back because they ran out, plus
    >it's that much later that they get to you.
    >
    >planes also vary in seat configuration. a solo traveler might want the
    >1 seat side and get both a window and an aisle at the same time. three
    >people traveling together will likely want a 3 seat side not the 2 seat
    >side and split up. good luck to the poor soul who is in the middle of a
    >5 seat row, but a family of 5 might prefer that.
    >
    >picking left or right side of the plane can matter depending if you
    >want the sun in your face (even in an aisle seat), depending on
    >direction of travel and time of day. which side can also matter if you
    >want to see a particular sight along the way.
    >
    >so yes, seat selection absolutely does matter.


    We've flown to Europe several times, to Mexico, to Central America, to
    Africa once, and to several Caribbean destinations. I used to belong
    to all those clubs when I was flying a few times a month on business.
    I've still got Admirals Club and the Eastern club luggage tags on some
    old suitcases. Maybe a Delta one, too.

    I've had a seat problem once: on a trip I took by myself to
    Luxembourg I took Icelandic Air because it was incredibly cheap. On
    the return, we stopped in Reykjavik where that obese, cheese-eating,
    farting lady plopped down in the seat beside me. She wasn't on the
    flight from Luxembourg to Reykjavik; she was Reykjavik to NYC.

    I suppose it could be worse. I could select a seat and find you next
    to me and have to listen to you bitch about everything and natter on
    about Apple D Sub Connectors not being overpriced.

    >> Personally, if I'm booking a flight, I pick the airline that gets me
    >> from where I am to where I want to go in the least amount of time,
    >> connections, and trouble getting to the airport.

    >
    >comfort isn't even a consideration? why am i not surprised.


    We're not whiners like you. You're all about the petty shit. We get
    on board, sit down, and read a book. The only discomfort, other than
    the mob going through the metal detectors, is now having to get to
    the airport ridiculously early and sit in those Departure area
    uncomfortable seats. I liked the old days when I could run into the
    airport minutes before my flight.

    I've never timed it, but unless you're flying coast-to-coast, I
    suspect you spend more time getting to the airport and in the airport
    than you do in the air. Certainly, if you have to change planes and
    add the additional in the airport time.





    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Nov 24, 2012
    #86
  7. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 5:28 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50aff447$0$10807$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>> i can't remember a flight in the past year or two that *didn't* have
    >>>> wifi. before that it was most of the time, but that was when they were
    >>>> installing the hardware.
    >>>>
    >>>> there are over 1500 planes that currently have wifi, including on air
    >>>> canada, airtran, alaska airlines, american airlines, delta, frontier,
    >>>> united, us airways and virgin america.
    >>>>
    >>>> <http://www.gogoair.com/gogo/cms/airlines.do>
    >>>
    >>> Oh, I see them advertising it; I just don't see it on the actual planes
    >>> I fly.
    >>>
    >>> I didn't see it back 2005-2008 flying out to California every month,
    >>> either, but maybe that was too early. (I have a theory it might happen
    >>> more on longer flights.)
    >>>

    >> Another accurate statement from nospam. with over 3,00 planes flying in
    >> the US during the day, the chances of getting one with WiFi is less than
    >> 50%. I wonder if that percentage is "very likely."

    >
    > math fail. over 1500 planes with wifi versus over 3000 total is about
    > 50%. it could be 49% just as easily as it can be 51%, and more planes
    > are getting wifi every day (it's about 8 hours to install).
    >
    > more importantly, many of those 3000 flights are international routes
    > where wifi is not offered (and pax know this in advance) or puddle
    > jumpers where you're only in the air for 30-60 minutes and it's
    > pointless to offer wifi. i mentioned both, which you are conveniently
    > ignoring.
    >
    >> And of course, the service is free, courtesy of the airline. Perhaps
    >> nospam, our frequent flyer, can tell use the cost. i'm confident that
    >> information is right at his fingertips.

    >
    > i didn't mention cost at all, only that it's offered.
    >
    > if you want to know cost, go to gogo's site. they list all of the
    > plans. there are also the occasional promo codes for discounts.
    > sometimes it's a few dollars and sometimes it's even free.
    >
    > if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    > soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.
    >


    According to YOUR cite, the number equals 1,500. That means not greater
    than 1,500. I gave the number of DOMESTIC FLIGHTS, ONLY. Check the
    meaning of your words, AND ASSUME ARGUENDO that 70% of the domestic
    flights have WiFi, which they do not, then there is a 30% chance of
    catching a flight without WiFi. I do not consider only a 70% chance of
    success to be: "very likely." Maybe you do, but then again maybe you're
    the person who keeps casinos in business by betting a single throw 7. Do
    you think your chance of winning if you just make that bet is "very
    likely." FYI house advantage on that bet is 16.9% Compare 16.9 with 30.
    Not very likely you will win.


    As to cost, I am not a wealthy as you. Therefore, if I had to pay $20
    for a gallon of gas, for me it would be the same as no gas being
    available. (I fully expect you will not understand that analogy.)


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #87
  8. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 5:28 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50aff57f$0$10811$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> When did
    >> apple start allowing Flash on the iPad?
    >> <http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/>
    >> Of course the article could not possibly be a phoney.
    >> Sheesh!

    >
    > learn to read before spewing stupid comments.
    >
    > nowhere did the article i quoted nor did i say anything about ipads
    > running flash.
    >
    > do you just make this stuff up or what?
    >


    Uh Huh!

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #88
  9. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 8:54 PM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:54:56 -0800, nospam <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>, tony cooper
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>> if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    >>>> soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.
    >>>
    >>> I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    >>> wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    >>> reasonable charge is determined.

    >>
    >> no, your wife is picking a cheap ass airline that nickel and dimes
    >> customers.

    >
    > She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    > destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    > airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.
    >
    > If she had picked a different airline, she would have flown out of ORL
    > instead of SFB. More cost to get there and back to our house. She
    > would have had to either rent a car from Chicago to Rockford or take
    > the bus. More cost, more time. The schedule was convenient.
    >
    >> it costs an airline nothing to offer standard amenities such as seat
    >> selection, printing your own boarding pass, etc. it's a customer
    >> hostile policy. also, allegiant has several inches less legroom than
    >> many other airlines, making for a less comfortable flight, except
    >> perhaps, for midgets.

    >
    > Damn close. My wife is barely over 5'.
    >
    > Wifi costs the airline pennies per passenger, but many charge for
    > wifi.
    >
    >> maybe you don't mind being treated like shit when you fly. others do
    >> not like it and won't put up with it. airlines like allegiant and
    >> spirit are getting a lot of backlash for those policies.

    >
    > Treated like shit? The flight crew were pleasant.
    >>
    >>> I'm not sure if there is much of an advantage in being able to reserve
    >>> a seat position unless you have bladder problems and need an aisle
    >>> seat. A reserved seat may put you next to a squalling infant, a man
    >>> with a severe body odor problem, or some prat who is compiling a
    >>> market survey report on his Macbook. You can pick the location, but
    >>> not your seatmates.

    >>
    >> location matters, as do individual seats.

    >
    > Matters to whom? You can pre-choose a seat and be next to some obese
    > woman eating cheese and farting and behind a squalling infant with a
    > dirty diaper. Or, you can walk down the aisle and pick a seat next to
    > some quiet adult.
    >
    >> seats toward the front are generally quieter than seats towards the
    >> rear plus you get off the plane quicker which may matter for tight
    >> connections.

    >
    > The flight, as I said, was a direct non-stop.
    >
    >> window seats forward of the wing usually have a better
    >> view than ones over the wing or behind it. sometimes window seats
    >> aren't even windows, it's solid metal for structural members of the
    >> fuselage, or you get delightful view *of the engine* and nothing more
    >> (plus the noise since you're next to it).

    >
    > A view? I thought you were a frequent flyer and airborne laptop
    > preference survey taker. You think the view for the first few minutes
    > and the last few minutes of a flight is exciting? Are you six
    > years-old? Orlando to Rockford doesn't fly over the Grand Canyon, you
    > know. I held a private pilot's license for years. I know what the
    > top of a cloud looks like.
    >>
    >> exit rows offer the most legroom outside of the f/j cabins, but the
    >> seats may not recline. exit rows can also be colder because of the exit
    >> door and the seat cushions aren't usually as comfortable. some planes
    >> have economy+ or equivalent, which has additional legroom, without the
    >> drawbacks of the exit rows.

    >
    > Jeez, what a whiner.
    >
    >> not all seats have seat power, which matters to those with battery
    >> hungry devices.

    >
    > My wife read a (real) book on both flight legs. Books don't need
    > batteries.


    I thought he said his batteries last for hours. Certainly longer than
    any transcontinental flight.

    >
    >> bulkhead seats generally have no underseat storage,
    >> which may be an inconvenience especially if the overhead bins fill by
    >> the time you board. nobody wants middle seats unless they're a family
    >> taking the entire row.
    >>
    >> for premium cabins, being able to choose which seat can mean the
    >> difference in first and last choice in meals, and for the main cabin,
    >> you might not get any choice way in the back because they ran out, plus
    >> it's that much later that they get to you.
    >>
    >> planes also vary in seat configuration. a solo traveler might want the
    >> 1 seat side and get both a window and an aisle at the same time. three
    >> people traveling together will likely want a 3 seat side not the 2 seat
    >> side and split up. good luck to the poor soul who is in the middle of a
    >> 5 seat row, but a family of 5 might prefer that.
    >>
    >> picking left or right side of the plane can matter depending if you
    >> want the sun in your face (even in an aisle seat), depending on
    >> direction of travel and time of day. which side can also matter if you
    >> want to see a particular sight along the way.
    >>
    >> so yes, seat selection absolutely does matter.

    >
    > We've flown to Europe several times, to Mexico, to Central America, to
    > Africa once, and to several Caribbean destinations. I used to belong
    > to all those clubs when I was flying a few times a month on business.
    > I've still got Admirals Club and the Eastern club luggage tags on some
    > old suitcases. Maybe a Delta one, too.
    >
    > I've had a seat problem once: on a trip I took by myself to
    > Luxembourg I took Icelandic Air because it was incredibly cheap. On
    > the return, we stopped in Reykjavik where that obese, cheese-eating,
    > farting lady plopped down in the seat beside me. She wasn't on the
    > flight from Luxembourg to Reykjavik; she was Reykjavik to NYC.


    That's worse than sitting next to a screaming kid. Enough of us
    complained that the mother was warned that she would be moved to the
    back of the plane if the disturbance continued. She managed to keep the
    kid under control for the rest of the flight.
    >
    > I suppose it could be worse. I could select a seat and find you next
    > to me and have to listen to you bitch about everything and natter on
    > about Apple D Sub Connectors not being overpriced.
    >
    >>> Personally, if I'm booking a flight, I pick the airline that gets me
    >>> from where I am to where I want to go in the least amount of time,
    >>> connections, and trouble getting to the airport.

    >>
    >> comfort isn't even a consideration? why am i not surprised.

    >
    > We're not whiners like you. You're all about the petty shit. We get
    > on board, sit down, and read a book. The only discomfort, other than
    > the mob going through the metal detectors, is now having to get to
    > the airport ridiculously early and sit in those Departure area
    > uncomfortable seats. I liked the old days when I could run into the
    > airport minutes before my flight.
    >
    > I've never timed it, but unless you're flying coast-to-coast, I
    > suspect you spend more time getting to the airport and in the airport
    > than you do in the air. Certainly, if you have to change planes and
    > add the additional in the airport time.
    >


    He can recharge his iPad, or laptop, while waiting for the connecting
    flight.
    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #89
  10. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> >if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    > >> >soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.
    > >>
    > >> I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    > >> wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    > >> reasonable charge is determined.

    > >
    > >no, your wife is picking a cheap ass airline that nickel and dimes
    > >customers.

    >
    > She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    > destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    > airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.


    nor do i. i buy tickets on the better airlines who include all the
    usual stuff *without* any extra fees.

    i heard of a new scam recently - fuel surcharges. you buy your ticket,
    but if the price of fuel goes up between the time you buy it and when
    you are supposed to leave, they charge you *more* when it comes time to
    actually fly.

    > If she had picked a different airline, she would have flown out of ORL
    > instead of SFB. More cost to get there and back to our house. She
    > would have had to either rent a car from Chicago to Rockford or take
    > the bus. More cost, more time. The schedule was convenient.


    great, so it worked out for you. meanwhile millions of others fly from
    other airports. you aren't the only person in this world who flies.

    > >it costs an airline nothing to offer standard amenities such as seat
    > >selection, printing your own boarding pass, etc. it's a customer
    > >hostile policy. also, allegiant has several inches less legroom than
    > >many other airlines, making for a less comfortable flight, except
    > >perhaps, for midgets.

    >
    > Damn close. My wife is barely over 5'.


    put her in an overhead bin.

    > Wifi costs the airline pennies per passenger, but many charge for
    > wifi.


    drinks cost the airline pennies per passenger but allegiant charges for
    it, along with seat selection ($0), printing boarding passes at home
    ($0), etc. some of those even save the airline money, yet they charge
    for it.

    > >maybe you don't mind being treated like shit when you fly. others do
    > >not like it and won't put up with it. airlines like allegiant and
    > >spirit are getting a lot of backlash for those policies.

    >
    > Treated like shit? The flight crew were pleasant.


    you said you've never flown allegiant.

    changing your story, again?

    > >> I'm not sure if there is much of an advantage in being able to reserve
    > >> a seat position unless you have bladder problems and need an aisle
    > >> seat. A reserved seat may put you next to a squalling infant, a man
    > >> with a severe body odor problem, or some prat who is compiling a
    > >> market survey report on his Macbook. You can pick the location, but
    > >> not your seatmates.

    > >
    > >location matters, as do individual seats.

    >
    > Matters to whom?


    it matters to the vast majority of those who fly.

    there are sites that rate the seats so you know what you're going to
    find before you get there and there are even sites that let you set
    alerts so you can find out when a better seat becomes available.

    almost all airlines offer seat selection, because customers want to
    preselect their seats. families want to sit together. business
    travelers want to talk business during the flight. most don't want luck
    of the draw and be stuck in a middle or split up.

    > You can pre-choose a seat and be next to some obese
    > woman eating cheese and farting and behind a squalling infant with a
    > dirty diaper.


    or you can be next to a manager in a company and make a business deal.
    or next to a someone famous. or next to someone interesting to talk to
    for a few hours. i've had all of those happen.

    > Or, you can walk down the aisle and pick a seat next to
    > some quiet adult.


    you can do that on any airline if there's a seat available, and the f/a
    will reseat you if there isn't and there's really a problem.

    you can also swap seats if the other person is amenable to it, which
    they usually are so two people traveling together can sit together.

    > >seats toward the front are generally quieter than seats towards the
    > >rear plus you get off the plane quicker which may matter for tight
    > >connections.

    >
    > The flight, as I said, was a direct non-stop.


    connections aren't always to other flights. it could be to ground
    transport which runs infrequently.

    some shuttles run every hour, sometimes every 2 or 3 hours for more
    distant locations. a couple of minutes can sometimes make a big
    difference, and after a long flight, an extra hour or two can seem like
    eternity. you could also miss the last shuttle of the night. then it's
    spend the night at the airport or pay exorbitant fees for a taxi.

    maybe you don't mind standing in line or waiting for a shuttle, but
    normal people want to get to where they're going without any additional
    delays.

    > >window seats forward of the wing usually have a better
    > >view than ones over the wing or behind it. sometimes window seats
    > >aren't even windows, it's solid metal for structural members of the
    > >fuselage, or you get delightful view *of the engine* and nothing more
    > >(plus the noise since you're next to it).

    >
    > A view? I thought you were a frequent flyer and airborne laptop
    > preference survey taker. You think the view for the first few minutes
    > and the last few minutes of a flight is exciting? Are you six
    > years-old? Orlando to Rockford doesn't fly over the Grand Canyon, you
    > know. I held a private pilot's license for years. I know what the
    > top of a cloud looks like.


    there you go twisting things again. i never said anything about what my
    seat preferences were.

    i only said that different seats have different features. someone who
    wants a view is not going to be happy over the wing. someone who wants
    to sleep is not going to be happy sitting near the bathroom or galley
    because of the noise. it's really very simple.

    also, the grand canyon isn't the only cool thing to see. a friend of
    mine was on a flight when mount st. helens erupted about 8 years ago.
    the pilot made a special detour and flew so that *both* sides of the
    plane could see it. bummer for those in the aisles though.

    > >exit rows offer the most legroom outside of the f/j cabins, but the
    > >seats may not recline. exit rows can also be colder because of the exit
    > >door and the seat cushions aren't usually as comfortable. some planes
    > >have economy+ or equivalent, which has additional legroom, without the
    > >drawbacks of the exit rows.

    >
    > Jeez, what a whiner.


    who are you talking about? certainly not me, since i'm not whining.

    i'm describing the differences between different seats. that's all.
    different people prefer different things.

    you are as usual, trying to turn it into something else.

    > >not all seats have seat power, which matters to those with battery
    > >hungry devices.

    >
    > My wife read a (real) book on both flight legs. Books don't need
    > batteries.


    ebooks are very real (and will one day be the only option), ipads last
    longer than anywhere allegiant flies (as well as most other airlines)
    and a kindle will last even longer than that (weeks), but a kindle
    lacks the ability to do other stuff like play games, watch movies, web
    surf, etc. also, many flights have seat power so there isn't a need for
    batteries anyway. even on a transpac flight, you'll probably want to
    sleep and eat, which means an ipad will last for the entire flight, no
    seat power required.

    > >bulkhead seats generally have no underseat storage,
    > >which may be an inconvenience especially if the overhead bins fill by
    > >the time you board. nobody wants middle seats unless they're a family
    > >taking the entire row.
    > >
    > >for premium cabins, being able to choose which seat can mean the
    > >difference in first and last choice in meals, and for the main cabin,
    > >you might not get any choice way in the back because they ran out, plus
    > >it's that much later that they get to you.
    > >
    > >planes also vary in seat configuration. a solo traveler might want the
    > >1 seat side and get both a window and an aisle at the same time. three
    > >people traveling together will likely want a 3 seat side not the 2 seat
    > >side and split up. good luck to the poor soul who is in the middle of a
    > >5 seat row, but a family of 5 might prefer that.
    > >
    > >picking left or right side of the plane can matter depending if you
    > >want the sun in your face (even in an aisle seat), depending on
    > >direction of travel and time of day. which side can also matter if you
    > >want to see a particular sight along the way.
    > >
    > >so yes, seat selection absolutely does matter.

    >
    > We've flown to Europe several times, to Mexico, to Central America, to
    > Africa once, and to several Caribbean destinations. I used to belong
    > to all those clubs when I was flying a few times a month on business.
    > I've still got Admirals Club and the Eastern club luggage tags on some
    > old suitcases. Maybe a Delta one, too.


    luggage tags won't let you into the clubs. you need a membership, a day
    pass or an f/j ticket (and not upgraded either).

    > I've had a seat problem once: on a trip I took by myself to
    > Luxembourg I took Icelandic Air because it was incredibly cheap. On
    > the return, we stopped in Reykjavik where that obese, cheese-eating,
    > farting lady plopped down in the seat beside me. She wasn't on the
    > flight from Luxembourg to Reykjavik; she was Reykjavik to NYC.


    once. oh no.

    i once got upgraded to f because of an extremely overweight person. you
    may have heard how some airlines want to charge double for fat people
    who use two seats. this guy took up 3 seats - the entire row. the f/a
    noticed i stopped just before the row and asked me if i was seated
    there. i said yes, and she said come with me and put me in f. i had a
    delicious breakfast and a very comfortable seat.

    > I suppose it could be worse. I could select a seat and find you next
    > to me and have to listen to you bitch about everything and natter on
    > about Apple D Sub Connectors not being overpriced.


    more idiocy. i've had some very interesting conversations with people,
    almost none of which were about computers. one guy was a photographer
    and we showed each other our favourite photos.

    > >> Personally, if I'm booking a flight, I pick the airline that gets me
    > >> from where I am to where I want to go in the least amount of time,
    > >> connections, and trouble getting to the airport.

    > >
    > >comfort isn't even a consideration? why am i not surprised.

    >
    > We're not whiners like you.


    i'm not whining.

    you are once again, trying to turn it into an ad hominem attack, since
    you have *nothing* else to do.

    > You're all about the petty shit. We get
    > on board, sit down, and read a book.


    that's nice.

    > The only discomfort, other than
    > the mob going through the metal detectors, is now having to get to
    > the airport ridiculously early and sit in those Departure area
    > uncomfortable seats. I liked the old days when I could run into the
    > airport minutes before my flight.


    ridiculously early?

    i get there about the same time i've always gotten there, about an hour
    or so before the flight. that hasn't changed in years.

    there is a bit more idiocy now at the checkpoint than before but it's
    not that hard to minimize it (or avoid it entirely).

    > I've never timed it, but unless you're flying coast-to-coast, I
    > suspect you spend more time getting to the airport and in the airport
    > than you do in the air. Certainly, if you have to change planes and
    > add the additional in the airport time.


    wrong again.

    it takes me anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour to get to or from an
    airport, depending on which airport.

    not only that but spending time in airports doesn't bother me. i can
    usually get online and do work, or post to usenet.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #90
  11. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b030f0$0$10820$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > According to YOUR cite, the number equals 1,500. That means not greater
    > than 1,500.


    that number is not live. there is no indication how up to date that
    number actually is. in other words, it's an approximation. check it
    again next week and see if it changes. i'm betting it won't.

    from the same page,
    Gogo is coming to more aircraft and routes almost every day.

    > I gave the number of DOMESTIC FLIGHTS, ONLY. Check the
    > meaning of your words, AND ASSUME ARGUENDO that 70% of the domestic
    > flights have WiFi, which they do not, then there is a 30% chance of
    > catching a flight without WiFi. I do not consider only a 70% chance of
    > success to be: "very likely." Maybe you do, but then again maybe you're
    > the person who keeps casinos in business by betting a single throw 7. Do
    > you think your chance of winning if you just make that bet is "very
    > likely." FYI house advantage on that bet is 16.9% Compare 16.9 with 30.
    > Not very likely you will win.


    the mistake you're making is that all flights have an equal probability.

    someone flying transcon or midcon is not going to be on a crj or dh7,
    ever. they'll be on mainline planes, so the fact that there is no wifi
    on a crj or dh7 makes no difference to them. that cuts the 3000 to a
    much smaller number.

    pick an airline listed on the gogo page and it's *very* likely you'll
    have wifi on board.

    some of those airlines have it installed on their *entire* fleet, which
    means you *will* have wifi, short of an equipment failure.

    pick an airline not listed on the gogo page and it's guaranteed you
    won't have wifi (other than wn who uses row44).

    all of which is easy enough to do before booking a flight.

    > As to cost, I am not a wealthy as you. Therefore, if I had to pay $20
    > for a gallon of gas, for me it would be the same as no gas being
    > available. (I fully expect you will not understand that analogy.)


    more idiocy.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #91
  12. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b0312c$0$10820$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > >> When did
    > >> apple start allowing Flash on the iPad?
    > >> <http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/>
    > >> Of course the article could not possibly be a phoney.
    > >> Sheesh!

    > >
    > > learn to read before spewing stupid comments.
    > >
    > > nowhere did the article i quoted nor did i say anything about ipads
    > > running flash.
    > >
    > > do you just make this stuff up or what?
    > >

    >
    > Uh Huh!


    at least you admit you make it up.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #92
  13. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b03537$0$10762$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > He can recharge his iPad, or laptop, while waiting for the connecting
    > flight.


    don't need to.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #93
  14. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 19:56:49 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> >if tony's wife flies on an airline that charges to pick a seat or for a
    >> >> >soda, then paying for wifi is no big deal.
    >> >>
    >> >> I guess that's a compliment to my wife since you are saying that my
    >> >> wife's choice of airlines is the standard by which what is a
    >> >> reasonable charge is determined.
    >> >
    >> >no, your wife is picking a cheap ass airline that nickel and dimes

    > >customers.



    >> She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    >> destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    >> airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.

    >
    >nor do i. i buy tickets on the better airlines who include all the
    >usual stuff *without* any extra fees.


    I didn't put a lot of time into checking this, but you got me
    thinking. Allegiant Orlando to Rockford (non-stop) is $89 plus $35 for
    the first bag checked. According to this:
    http://tinyurl.com/brjazua , the least expensive ticket Orlando to
    Chicago is $229 with United *and* United charges $25 for the first
    bag. Then, there'd be the transportation charges to Rockford.

    I think even you could figure out which is the better deal.

    >> If she had picked a different airline, she would have flown out of ORL
    >> instead of SFB. More cost to get there and back to our house. She
    >> would have had to either rent a car from Chicago to Rockford or take
    >> the bus. More cost, more time. The schedule was convenient.

    >
    >great, so it worked out for you. meanwhile millions of others fly from
    >other airports. you aren't the only person in this world who flies.


    But you are addressing *my* choice.

    >> >maybe you don't mind being treated like shit when you fly. others do
    >> >not like it and won't put up with it. airlines like allegiant and
    >> >spirit are getting a lot of backlash for those policies.

    >>
    >> Treated like shit? The flight crew were pleasant.

    >
    >you said you've never flown allegiant.


    I haven't. My wife shares her experiences with me.

    >> >location matters, as do individual seats.

    >>
    >> Matters to whom?

    >
    >it matters to the vast majority of those who fly.


    We aren't talking about the majority of flyers. We're talking about
    the choice of airline to fly from here to Rockford.

    >there are sites that rate the seats


    They tell you who's sitting next to you?

    >almost all airlines offer seat selection, because customers want to
    >preselect their seats. families want to sit together. business
    >travelers want to talk business during the flight. most don't want luck
    >of the draw and be stuck in a middle or split up.


    This is about my wife's flight to Rockford and my choice of airline.

    >i'm describing the differences between different seats. that's all.
    >different people prefer different things.
    >
    >you are as usual, trying to turn it into something else.


    My comments were about *one* thing: the choice of airline to go from
    here to Rockford, and that choice was Allegiant. You've rambled on
    about everything from shuttle service to volcanos, and you say *I* am
    turning the discussion into something else?
    >>
    >> We've flown to Europe several times, to Mexico, to Central America, to
    >> Africa once, and to several Caribbean destinations. I used to belong
    >> to all those clubs when I was flying a few times a month on business.
    >> I've still got Admirals Club and the Eastern club luggage tags on some
    >> old suitcases. Maybe a Delta one, too.

    >
    >luggage tags won't let you into the clubs. you need a membership, a day
    >pass or an f/j ticket (and not upgraded either).


    Are you really this dumb? The tags were give-aways by the airlines.
    I may still have my Eastern Ionosphere Club card, but it won't get me
    in anywhere now.

    >> The only discomfort, other than
    >> the mob going through the metal detectors, is now having to get to
    >> the airport ridiculously early and sit in those Departure area
    >> uncomfortable seats. I liked the old days when I could run into the
    >> airport minutes before my flight.

    >
    >ridiculously early?
    >
    >i get there about the same time i've always gotten there, about an hour
    >or so before the flight. that hasn't changed in years.


    An hour's ridiculously early.

    >> I've never timed it, but unless you're flying coast-to-coast, I
    >> suspect you spend more time getting to the airport and in the airport
    >> than you do in the air. Certainly, if you have to change planes and
    >> add the additional in the airport time.

    >
    >wrong again.
    >
    >it takes me anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour to get to or from an
    >airport, depending on which airport.


    Add the hour you arrive early and that's still longer than many
    flights.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Nov 24, 2012
    #94
  15. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    > >> destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    > >> airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.

    > >
    > >nor do i. i buy tickets on the better airlines who include all the
    > >usual stuff *without* any extra fees.

    >
    > I didn't put a lot of time into checking this,


    i can see that.

    > but you got me
    > thinking.


    not a whole lot.

    > Allegiant Orlando to Rockford (non-stop) is $89 plus $35 for
    > the first bag checked. According to this:
    > http://tinyurl.com/brjazua , the least expensive ticket Orlando to
    > Chicago is $229 with United *and* United charges $25 for the first
    > bag. Then, there'd be the transportation charges to Rockford.


    first of all, that doesn't mean much. prices and availability change
    all the time, and it even changed from when you posted to now.

    i'm seeing $218 on ua (not $229) and $158 on nk. i'm also finding a lot
    of availability for $157 for jan 10-15th, 2013, as well as a few dates
    further out.

    however, for anything in or near the last half of december, the fares
    go up a *lot*. for the dates you picked, a lot of the cheapest fare
    buckets are already 0.

    also, not everyone is subject to bag fees. some credit cards offer free
    bags as a perk, and elite flyers don't pay for bags at all. that won't
    work on allegiant though.

    anyway, $158 is just 33 dollars more, before you add in the additional
    fees for beverages (soda/juice, not wine/liquor), checking in, printing
    boarding passes, etc. plus there's the hassle of having to pay for
    every little thing. personally, i just assume pay one price and get all
    that stuff included and not need to get my credit card out every time i
    want a refill.

    > I think even you could figure out which is the better deal.


    better is not necessarily cheapest.

    > >> >location matters, as do individual seats.
    > >>
    > >> Matters to whom?

    > >
    > >it matters to the vast majority of those who fly.

    >
    > We aren't talking about the majority of flyers. We're talking about
    > the choice of airline to fly from here to Rockford.


    you were.

    seat selection may not matter to *you* or your wife but it matters to
    the vast majority of flyers today. that's why almost all airlines offer
    seat selection. it's what customers want.

    > >there are sites that rate the seats

    >
    > They tell you who's sitting next to you?


    no but they tell you if a seat sucks or not. it's actually very useful.

    > >almost all airlines offer seat selection, because customers want to
    > >preselect their seats. families want to sit together. business
    > >travelers want to talk business during the flight. most don't want luck
    > >of the draw and be stuck in a middle or split up.

    >
    > This is about my wife's flight to Rockford and my choice of airline.


    no, it's about seat selection in general.

    > >i'm describing the differences between different seats. that's all.
    > >different people prefer different things.
    > >
    > >you are as usual, trying to turn it into something else.

    >
    > My comments were about *one* thing: the choice of airline to go from
    > here to Rockford, and that choice was Allegiant. You've rambled on
    > about everything from shuttle service to volcanos, and you say *I* am
    > turning the discussion into something else?


    i never said anything about any particular flight until you brought up
    allegiant, which is when i said that they're a cheap airline that
    charges for every little thing. normal airlines don't do that shit.

    > >> We've flown to Europe several times, to Mexico, to Central America, to
    > >> Africa once, and to several Caribbean destinations. I used to belong
    > >> to all those clubs when I was flying a few times a month on business.
    > >> I've still got Admirals Club and the Eastern club luggage tags on some
    > >> old suitcases. Maybe a Delta one, too.

    > >
    > >luggage tags won't let you into the clubs. you need a membership, a day
    > >pass or an f/j ticket (and not upgraded either).

    >
    > Are you really this dumb? The tags were give-aways by the airlines.
    > I may still have my Eastern Ionosphere Club card, but it won't get me
    > in anywhere now.


    the only dumb person is you.

    sure, they give away luggage tags. i have a bunch of them. they look
    nice. that's about it.

    luggage tags will *not* let you into an airline club. not even remotely
    close. you'd be laughed at for even trying.

    to get into an airline club you need either a paid membership, be a
    guest of a paid member, have a courtesy invite, have a day pass ($), or
    fly on an eligible fare that offers admission (e.g., international
    f/j).

    they won't even *look* at your luggage tag.

    > >> The only discomfort, other than
    > >> the mob going through the metal detectors, is now having to get to
    > >> the airport ridiculously early and sit in those Departure area
    > >> uncomfortable seats. I liked the old days when I could run into the
    > >> airport minutes before my flight.

    > >
    > >ridiculously early?
    > >
    > >i get there about the same time i've always gotten there, about an hour
    > >or so before the flight. that hasn't changed in years.

    >
    > An hour's ridiculously early.


    not at all. it's just enough time to get through security and then
    leisurely walk to the gate (and at some airports that can be quite a
    walk), maybe stopping for something to eat or get a newspaper along the
    way, without feeling rushed. boarding generally begins 30 minutes
    prior, so you really have 30 minutes to do all that, which is usually
    just right.

    getting there 2-3 hours early, which is what the airlines suggest, is
    ridiculously early.

    > >> I've never timed it, but unless you're flying coast-to-coast, I
    > >> suspect you spend more time getting to the airport and in the airport
    > >> than you do in the air. Certainly, if you have to change planes and
    > >> add the additional in the airport time.

    > >
    > >wrong again.
    > >
    > >it takes me anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour to get to or from an
    > >airport, depending on which airport.

    >
    > Add the hour you arrive early and that's still longer than many
    > flights.


    none that i regularly fly.

    in the past five years, almost all of my flights (several hundred) were
    3-4 hours. only *one* was 30 minutes, maybe 8-10 flights were 90 min or
    so, and probably a dozen or so were 5-7 hours.
     
    nospam, Nov 24, 2012
    #95
  16. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 10:56 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b030f0$0$10820$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> According to YOUR cite, the number equals 1,500. That means not greater
    >> than 1,500.

    >
    > that number is not live. there is no indication how up to date that
    > number actually is. in other words, it's an approximation. check it
    > again next week and see if it changes. i'm betting it won't.


    then why cit it, if it has no relevance?



    >
    > from the same page,
    > Gogo is coming to more aircraft and routes almost every day.


    I would hardly expect them to say sales are shit. I have no idea how
    good, or bad their service is, not how much it costs. I remember making
    telephone calls using Aitfone. It was expensive, with terrible connectons.

    >
    >> I gave the number of DOMESTIC FLIGHTS, ONLY. Check the
    >> meaning of your words, AND ASSUME ARGUENDO that 70% of the domestic
    >> flights have WiFi, which they do not, then there is a 30% chance of
    >> catching a flight without WiFi. I do not consider only a 70% chance of
    >> success to be: "very likely." Maybe you do, but then again maybe you're
    >> the person who keeps casinos in business by betting a single throw 7. Do
    >> you think your chance of winning if you just make that bet is "very
    >> likely." FYI house advantage on that bet is 16.9% Compare 16.9 with 30.
    >> Not very likely you will win.

    >
    > the mistake you're making is that all flights have an equal probability.
    >


    Which is a valid assumption in the absence of skewing information. But
    that s not the point. When I travel, WiFi is NOT one of my criteria for
    selection of a flight. In my order, schedule, non-stop, travel comfort,
    cost. With the exceptions of the now defunct Grand Air, and Concorde,
    the best meals I have on a flight is when I bring my own food.

    BTW what is the actual percentage? Is a 10% failure rate "very likely?"

    > someone flying transcon or midcon is not going to be on a crj or dh7,
    > ever. they'll be on mainline planes, so the fact that there is no wifi
    > on a crj or dh7 makes no difference to them. that cuts the 3000 to a
    > much smaller number.
    >


    What is the number?


    > pick an airline listed on the gogo page and it's *very* likely you'll
    > have wifi on board.
    >
    > some of those airlines have it installed on their *entire* fleet, which
    > means you *will* have wifi, short of an equipment failure.
    >
    > pick an airline not listed on the gogo page and it's guaranteed you
    > won't have wifi (other than wn who uses row44).
    >
    > all of which is easy enough to do before booking a flight.


    As stated above,the purpose of any travel is to get some place, within a
    certain time frame. WiFi is NOT a driving force. Nor is it for most
    business travelers. (At least the ones who travel to accomplish
    something, not play games on OPM.

    >
    >> As to cost, I am not a wealthy as you. Therefore, if I had to pay $20
    >> for a gallon of gas, for me it would be the same as no gas being
    >> available. (I fully expect you will not understand that analogy.)

    >
    > more idiocy.

    Just carrying your point to its dry conclusion.

    >



    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #96
  17. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 10:56 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b0312c$0$10820$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>> When did
    >>>> apple start allowing Flash on the iPad?
    >>>> <http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/>
    >>>> Of course the article could not possibly be a phoney.
    >>>> Sheesh!
    >>>
    >>> learn to read before spewing stupid comments.
    >>>
    >>> nowhere did the article i quoted nor did i say anything about ipads
    >>> running flash.
    >>>
    >>> do you just make this stuff up or what?
    >>>

    >>
    >> Uh Huh!

    >
    > at least you admit you make it up.
    >


    read you omitted post, to which I responded. We all know you are a troll
    and I am playing with you.

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #97
  18. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/23/2012 10:57 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b03537$0$10762$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> He can recharge his iPad, or laptop, while waiting for the connecting
    >> flight.

    >
    > don't need to.
    >


    then why do you care about in=flight outlets?


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Nov 24, 2012
    #98
  19. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 22:07:03 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> She picked the most convenient airline from origination to
    >> >> destination. I don't even know if the cost was more than another
    >> >> airline. I don't pay attention to nickels and dimes.
    >> >
    >> >nor do i. i buy tickets on the better airlines who include all the
    >> >usual stuff *without* any extra fees.

    >>
    >> I didn't put a lot of time into checking this,

    >
    >i can see that.
    >
    >> but you got me
    >> thinking.

    >
    >not a whole lot.
    >
    >> Allegiant Orlando to Rockford (non-stop) is $89 plus $35 for
    >> the first bag checked. According to this:
    >> http://tinyurl.com/brjazua , the least expensive ticket Orlando to
    >> Chicago is $229 with United *and* United charges $25 for the first
    >> bag. Then, there'd be the transportation charges to Rockford.

    >
    >first of all, that doesn't mean much. prices and availability change
    >all the time, and it even changed from when you posted to now.
    >
    >i'm seeing $218 on ua (not $229) and $158 on nk. i'm also finding a lot
    >of availability for $157 for jan 10-15th, 2013, as well as a few dates
    >further out.


    "nk" is Spirit...one of the airlines you described earlier as a
    cheap-ass airline with extra charges.

    This discussion started over a comment I made about my wife using
    Allegiant to fly to Rockford for a funeral. You've now brought up
    ticket prices over a month away. You expect the deceased to be put on
    ice until ticket prices go down?

    >
    >however, for anything in or near the last half of december, the fares
    >go up a *lot*. for the dates you picked, a lot of the cheapest fare
    >buckets are already 0.


    I didn't pick a date. I just went to a Google and used the fares that
    came up.

    >also, not everyone is subject to bag fees. some credit cards offer free
    >bags as a perk, and elite flyers don't pay for bags at all. that won't
    >work on allegiant though.
    >
    >anyway, $158 is just 33 dollars more, before you add in the additional
    >fees for beverages (soda/juice, not wine/liquor), checking in, printing
    >boarding passes, etc. plus there's the hassle of having to pay for
    >every little thing. personally, i just assume pay one price and get all
    >that stuff included and not need to get my credit card out every time i
    >want a refill.


    What a phoney you are! Spirit, your $158 carrier, charges $25 for a
    carry-on bag and $20 for a checked bag *and* imposes an extra fee if
    the bags are not paid for at the time of booking the ticket and paid
    on check-in. And, those prices are higher if you aren't in their
    "Fare Club" which has a cost. And, the prices get ridiculously high
    if the flight is booked at the last minute. Like, for a funeral.

    They also have a laundry list of extra fees for customer-requested
    seat choice and for the size of the seat. Seat assignment is free if
    *they* assign the seat, and that can be next to the toilet. They also
    charge for snacks and soda/juice.

    You can't even find a good example of your point.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Nov 24, 2012
    #99
  20. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:05:44 -0500, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    >Which is a valid assumption in the absence of skewing information. But
    >that s not the point. When I travel, WiFi is NOT one of my criteria for
    >selection of a flight. In my order, schedule, non-stop, travel comfort,
    >cost.


    Yet, you criticized the choice of Allegiant when the choice was made
    for those reasons plus the location of the airport. What a phoney.

    >With the exceptions of the now defunct Grand Air, and Concorde,
    >the best meals I have on a flight is when I bring my own food.


    Ahh...you are one of those cheese-eating farters who bring their own
    lunch box on board.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Nov 24, 2012
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jude Barnes
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    970
    David Harrison
    Aug 20, 2004
  2. ray

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    ray, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    243
    Gordon Freeman
    Nov 19, 2012
  3. tony cooper

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    tony cooper, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    327
    Chris Malcolm
    Dec 9, 2012
  4. David Taylor

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    David Taylor, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    236
    David Taylor
    Nov 19, 2012
  5. Martin Brown

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    Martin Brown, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    256
    Chris Malcolm
    Nov 29, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page