Re: Camera JPEG engines

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

  1. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b16d87$0$10785$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    > and don't have the time for frivolous activities?


    who said anything about frivolous activities?

    they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.

    > > a lot of people like to travel in comfort and/or get work done, which
    > > is why some will *pay* for f/j rather than chance an upgrade.
    > >

    > So, what is you point? getting work done <> videos.


    who said anything about videos?

    they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.

    > > business travelers are almost always on their laptops, with or without
    > > wifi, and when

    >
    > Depends on why they travel.


    yes it does. apparently you are ignorant about what others do. or just
    ignorant in general.

    > I used to continually review my files, not
    > all of which were digitized. When I was preparing for a negotiation,
    > every detail was planned in advance. Tony Coo[er knows exactly hat I mean.


    not everyone does the same thing as you or tony did. certainly you must
    realize that.

    a lot of people require the internet to do their work.

    > > there's wifi they can communicate with the rest of the
    > > company which is usually very important. they don't normally play
    > > games, but even ceos are entitled to relax a bit now and then.

    >
    >
    > So! I'm in favor of motherhood and apple pie, too. What does that have
    > to do with whatever point you are trying to make? Nobody here is sure
    > what that is.
    > BTW you have no told us how much this sometimes unreliable and
    > frustratingly slow WiFi connection costs.


    if you learned to read before posting, then you'd have seen where i
    told you how to find pricing. hint, it's on the gogo site.
    nospam, Nov 25, 2012
    1. Advertising

  2. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > The extra ground cost is valid for anyone traveling from here to
    > Rockford. The extra time is valid for them, also. That route flys
    > three days a week, every week, so there are evidently a few other
    > people.


    not enough to have a daily flight.

    what if someone wants to go on one of the 4 days they don't fly?
    they're out of luck. so much for allegiant.

    > Speaking of naive people, you ignore the ground costs, ground time,
    > and extra air and ground time.


    wrong once again.
    nospam, Nov 25, 2012
    1. Advertising

  3. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > I had to kinda chuckle at nospam's comment about keeping in touch 24/7
    > with mobile devices. There were times I *welcomed* not being able to
    > keep in touch. A 3-hour flight gave me 3 hours of thinking time,
    > making the occasional note, that was uninterrupted. It was amazing
    > how the people back at the office could solve problems and handle
    > things on their own if they couldn't reach me. And, they probably got
    > more done without me calling them.


    wow i haven't heard that line in years. when cellphones first came out,
    the luddites would say they didn't want one because they didn't want to
    be disturbed. what they neglected to notice was that there's an off
    button. plus, you have to turn off phones on a plane anyway.

    the reality is that internet connectivity is quickly becoming a
    necessity for society.

    > Any manager who thinks the business can't survive if he's not
    > constantly in touch has an exaggerated sense of self-importance.


    twisting things again, i see.

    nobody said the business can't survive.
    nospam, Nov 25, 2012
  4. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:04:39 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> I had to kinda chuckle at nospam's comment about keeping in touch 24/7
    >> with mobile devices. There were times I *welcomed* not being able to
    >> keep in touch. A 3-hour flight gave me 3 hours of thinking time,
    >> making the occasional note, that was uninterrupted. It was amazing
    >> how the people back at the office could solve problems and handle
    >> things on their own if they couldn't reach me. And, they probably got
    >> more done without me calling them.

    >
    >wow i haven't heard that line in years. when cellphones first came out,
    >the luddites would say they didn't want one because they didn't want to
    >be disturbed. what they neglected to notice was that there's an off
    >button. plus, you have to turn off phones on a plane anyway.


    I understand your position. I really do. Three hours of actual
    non-device-enhanced thinking would overload your system and set your
    head to spinning like Rosemary's Baby.

    Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    business foundation you now operate in?


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Nov 25, 2012
  5. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    > before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    > business foundation you now operate in?


    once again, you think because you don't need it, nobody else does, and
    then you have the gall to accuse me of forcing my views upon others
    when you're doing exactly that!

    technology makes people more productive. why are you so against it?

    nobody (other than you) wants to go back to the dark ages, where adding
    machines, typewriters, paper filing, etc. were the norm.

    if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    there's a need for it. it's not just planes.

    you're stuck in the past.
    nospam, Nov 25, 2012
  6. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/24/2012 11:44 PM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:59:21 -0500, PeterN


    <snip>


    > I had to kinda chuckle at nospam's comment about keeping in touch 24/7
    > with mobile devices. There were times I *welcomed* not being able to
    > keep in touch. A 3-hour flight gave me 3 hours of thinking time,
    > making the occasional note, that was uninterrupted. It was amazing
    > how the people back at the office could solve problems and handle
    > things on their own if they couldn't reach me. And, they probably got
    > more done without me calling them.
    >
    > Any manager who thinks the business can't survive if he's not
    > constantly in touch has an exaggerated sense of self-importance.
    >


    And any employee above the clerical level, who can't survive without
    manager for three hours, probably exceeded his skill level.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 25, 2012
  7. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/24/2012 11:51 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b16d87$0$10785$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    >> and don't have the time for frivolous activities?

    >
    > who said anything about frivolous activities?


    You

    >
    > they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.
    >
    >>> a lot of people like to travel in comfort and/or get work done, which
    >>> is why some will *pay* for f/j rather than chance an upgrade.
    >>>

    >> So, what is you point? getting work done <> videos.

    >
    > who said anything about videos?
    >
    > they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.


    You made the YouTube comment.
    >
    >>> business travelers are almost always on their laptops, with or without
    >>> wifi, and when

    >>
    >> Depends on why they travel.

    >
    > yes it does. apparently you are ignorant about what others do. or just
    > ignorant in general.


    I'm ignorant enough to know you are full of shit.

    >
    >> I used to continually review my files, not
    >> all of which were digitized. When I was preparing for a negotiation,
    >> every detail was planned in advance. Tony Coo[er knows exactly hat I mean.

    >
    > not everyone does the same thing as you or tony did. certainly you must
    > realize that.


    I know that's why Tony was successful; my clients paid me a lot of
    money; and I turned away work because I was too busy.

    >
    > a lot of people require the internet to do their work.
    >


    Then why would a slow connection have value to them. It seems to me that
    a slow connection would be frustrating and counterproductive.

    >>> there's wifi they can communicate with the rest of the
    >>> company which is usually very important. they don't normally play
    >>> games, but even ceos are entitled to relax a bit now and then.

    >>
    >>
    >> So! I'm in favor of motherhood and apple pie, too. What does that have
    >> to do with whatever point you are trying to make? Nobody here is sure
    >> what that is.
    >> BTW you have no told us how much this sometimes unreliable and
    >> frustratingly slow WiFi connection costs.

    >
    > if you learned to read before posting, then you'd have seen where i
    > told you how to find pricing. hint, it's on the gogo site.
    >

    You still didn't tell us what actual percentage of US daily flights is
    equipped with WiFi. You seem to ignore that completely, while you have
    the balls to call me ignorant. Deal with the e facts.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 25, 2012
  8. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 10:52:24 -0800, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    >> before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    >> business foundation you now operate in?

    >
    >once again, you think because you don't need it, nobody else does, and
    >then you have the gall to accuse me of forcing my views upon others
    >when you're doing exactly that!


    Where am I imposing my views on other people? I use all kinds of
    modern technology including mobile devices. Certain things fit my
    current needs.

    I use modern technology where it suits me, though. Just because I'm
    able to do something doesn't mean I want to. I suppose I could tweet
    or twitter or whatever that is, but I choose not to. I have no
    problem with others doing it.

    >
    >technology makes people more productive. why are you so against it?
    >
    >nobody (other than you) wants to go back to the dark ages, where adding
    >machines, typewriters, paper filing, etc. were the norm.
    >
    >if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    >others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    >offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    >stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    >there's a need for it. it's not just planes.


    Where have I said I don't want internet connectivity? It's a stupid
    thing for you to say since we are corresponding using internet
    connectivity. You think I connect to newsgroups using a crystal and a
    cat's whisker?

    Show me one post in which I've suggested that others do as I do in
    anything.

    I do believe in using modern technology, but not in being used by it.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Nov 25, 2012
  9. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/25/2012 1:52 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <>, tony cooper
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    >> before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    >> business foundation you now operate in?

    >
    > once again, you think because you don't need it, nobody else does, and
    > then you have the gall to accuse me of forcing my views upon others
    > when you're doing exactly that!
    >
    > technology makes people more productive. why are you so against it?
    >
    > nobody (other than you) wants to go back to the dark ages, where adding
    > machines, typewriters, paper filing, etc. were the norm.
    >
    > if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    > others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    > offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    > stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    > there's a need for it. it's not just planes.


    Yup! Nothing like having a face to face over a meal, while surfing and
    checking your email. Sure adds a lot to business productivity. If not a
    business meal, it enhances your social standing, by telling your dining
    partner{s} that the Internet is more important than they are. I guess I
    am just being ignorant by saying that.


    >
    > you're stuck in the past.
    >



    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 25, 2012
  10. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    > >> before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    > >> business foundation you now operate in?

    > >
    > >once again, you think because you don't need it, nobody else does, and
    > >then you have the gall to accuse me of forcing my views upon others
    > >when you're doing exactly that!

    >
    > Where am I imposing my views on other people? I use all kinds of
    > modern technology including mobile devices. Certain things fit my
    > current needs.


    then why are you rambling on about the choices of others?

    people use products and services that fit their current needs, which
    aren't the same as what you want or need.

    if someone wants wifi on a plane, so what? they don't have to justify
    it to you or anyone else.

    > I use modern technology where it suits me, though. Just because I'm
    > able to do something doesn't mean I want to. I suppose I could tweet
    > or twitter or whatever that is, but I choose not to. I have no
    > problem with others doing it.


    then what are you going on about being away from the internet for 3
    hours?

    again, if someone wants to get online from a plane, so what? that's
    their choice, not yours.

    > >technology makes people more productive. why are you so against it?
    > >
    > >nobody (other than you) wants to go back to the dark ages, where adding
    > >machines, typewriters, paper filing, etc. were the norm.
    > >
    > >if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    > >others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    > >offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    > >stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    > >there's a need for it. it's not just planes.

    >
    > Where have I said I don't want internet connectivity? It's a stupid
    > thing for you to say since we are corresponding using internet
    > connectivity. You think I connect to newsgroups using a crystal and a
    > cat's whisker?
    >
    > Show me one post in which I've suggested that others do as I do in
    > anything.


    here:
    > >> Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    > >> before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    > >> business foundation you now operate in?


    you're dismissing 24/7 connectivity, which for some people is what they
    need to do their work. or maybe they just like to pass the time online,
    especially when on a plane.

    if someone wants to be connected while on a flight, what difference
    could that possible matter to you?

    > I do believe in using modern technology, but not in being used by it.


    bullshit.
    nospam, Nov 26, 2012
  11. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b27ba4$0$10760$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > > if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    > > others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    > > offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    > > stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    > > there's a need for it. it's not just planes.

    >
    > Yup! Nothing like having a face to face over a meal, while surfing and
    > checking your email. Sure adds a lot to business productivity. If not a
    > business meal, it enhances your social standing, by telling your dining
    > partner{s} that the Internet is more important than they are.


    twisting what i said again.

    just because something can be misused does not mean it is always
    misused. and who are you to say whether it's misused or not?

    plenty of people used to bring paper documents to meals and discuss
    them too.

    > I guess I
    > am just being ignorant by saying that.


    yep, you sure are.
    nospam, Nov 26, 2012
  12. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b26f6a$0$10770$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > >> Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    > >> and don't have the time for frivolous activities?

    > >
    > > who said anything about frivolous activities?

    >
    > You


    wrong.

    you are once again lying about what i said.

    all i said was wifi on a plane.

    *you* decided that wifi on a plane meant that whatever some unknown
    person was doing had to be frivolous, despite the fact you have
    absolutely no idea what it is they're doing online.

    furthermore, what is frivolous to you might not be frivolous to them.

    who the hell are you to decide what is important to someone else?

    > > they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.
    > >
    > >>> a lot of people like to travel in comfort and/or get work done, which
    > >>> is why some will *pay* for f/j rather than chance an upgrade.
    > >>>
    > >> So, what is you point? getting work done <> videos.

    > >
    > > who said anything about videos?
    > >
    > > they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.

    >
    > You made the YouTube comment.


    there are more than just business travelers on a plane.

    leisure travelers might want to watch youtube.

    business travelers generally work, but they're entitled to take a break
    too. it's also possible that their work involves youtube, requiring
    them to use it.

    if you can't figure that much out, then you're stupider than i thought.

    > >>> business travelers are almost always on their laptops, with or without
    > >>> wifi, and when
    > >>
    > >> Depends on why they travel.

    > >
    > > yes it does. apparently you are ignorant about what others do. or just
    > > ignorant in general.

    >
    > I'm ignorant enough to know you are full of shit.


    no, you are just plain ignorant and a liar who twists what i say.

    > >> I used to continually review my files, not
    > >> all of which were digitized. When I was preparing for a negotiation,
    > >> every detail was planned in advance. Tony Coo[er knows exactly hat I mean.

    > >
    > > not everyone does the same thing as you or tony did. certainly you must
    > > realize that.

    >
    > I know that's why Tony was successful; my clients paid me a lot of
    > money; and I turned away work because I was too busy.


    that's nice. it also has nothing to do with this discussion.

    the reality is that these days, people want internet connectivity
    wherever they go. it's expected, which is why a lot of places offer it,
    including airlines.

    > > a lot of people require the internet to do their work.

    >
    > Then why would a slow connection have value to them. It seems to me that
    > a slow connection would be frustrating and counterproductive.


    it's only slow if a lot of people are doing bandwidth intensive things.
    that can happen, but it's not always the case. it can also happen with
    cable or dsl too.

    in any event, it's fast enough for most things and it's certainly
    better than nothing. you certainly don't need a fast connection to send
    and receive email.

    > >>> there's wifi they can communicate with the rest of the
    > >>> company which is usually very important. they don't normally play
    > >>> games, but even ceos are entitled to relax a bit now and then.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> So! I'm in favor of motherhood and apple pie, too. What does that have
    > >> to do with whatever point you are trying to make? Nobody here is sure
    > >> what that is.
    > >> BTW you have no told us how much this sometimes unreliable and
    > >> frustratingly slow WiFi connection costs.

    > >
    > > if you learned to read before posting, then you'd have seen where i
    > > told you how to find pricing. hint, it's on the gogo site.

    >
    > You still didn't tell us what actual percentage of US daily flights is
    > equipped with WiFi. You seem to ignore that completely, while you have
    > the balls to call me ignorant. Deal with the e facts.


    the major airlines, including american, delta, united and us airways,
    have most of their domestic fleet equipped, if not their entire
    domestic fleet, which means it's highly likely and in many cases
    guaranteed that a flight will have wifi.

    on the other hand, for those who fly on smaller airlines, including the
    budget airlines, then they won't be getting wifi (or much else,
    including drinks), but that represents a minority of passengers because
    those airlines are small and carry fewer pax.
    nospam, Nov 26, 2012
  13. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <2012112514015946231-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    > Damn! I better lube the beads on my abacus, my calculating has been
    > slowing down recently.


    you should lube an abacus once every 2 years or every 20,000
    calculations.

    what lube are you using? have you tried some of the newer synthetics? i
    heard that not only do they last longer, but it even increases
    accuracy.
    nospam, Nov 26, 2012
  14. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/25/2012 5:01 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-11-25 10:52:24 -0800, nospam <> said:
    >
    >> In article <>, tony cooper
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Do you ever wonder how those of us who owned or worked for businesses
    >>> before mobile devices allowed 24/7 connectivity managed to create the
    >>> business foundation you now operate in?

    >>
    >> once again, you think because you don't need it, nobody else does, and
    >> then you have the gall to accuse me of forcing my views upon others
    >> when you're doing exactly that!
    >>
    >> technology makes people more productive. why are you so against it?
    >>
    >> nobody (other than you) wants to go back to the dark ages, where adding
    >> machines, typewriters, paper filing, etc. were the norm.
    >>
    >> if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    >> others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    >> offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    >> stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    >> there's a need for it. it's not just planes.
    >>
    >> you're stuck in the past.

    >
    > Damn! I better lube the beads on my abacus, my calculating has been
    > slowing down recently.
    >
    >


    Now that's funny. I used to have an abacus sitting right on top of my
    computer. (I said it would be used in case of power failure. I actually
    learned ho to use it, but probably could not use one today.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 27, 2012
  15. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/25/2012 10:08 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b27ba4$0$10760$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>> if you don't want internet connectivity, that's fine, but don't tell
    >>> others how to run their businesses or their lives. wifi is not just
    >>> offered, but expected at all sorts of places, including restaurants,
    >>> stores, auto repair shops and even highway rest areas. obviously
    >>> there's a need for it. it's not just planes.

    >>
    >> Yup! Nothing like having a face to face over a meal, while surfing and
    >> checking your email. Sure adds a lot to business productivity. If not a
    >> business meal, it enhances your social standing, by telling your dining
    >> partner{s} that the Internet is more important than they are.

    >
    > twisting what i said again.
    >
    > just because something can be misused does not mean it is always
    > misused. and who are you to say whether it's misused or not?
    >
    > plenty of people used to bring paper documents to meals and discuss
    > them too.
    >
    >> I guess I
    >> am just being ignorant by saying that.

    >
    > yep, you sure are.
    >

    My life is fulfilled now that you are educating me.
    I see you are still avoiding answering my question. Your avoidance is
    glaring.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 27, 2012
  16. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/25/2012 10:08 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b26f6a$0$10770$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>> Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    >>>> and don't have the time for frivolous activities?
    >>>
    >>> who said anything about frivolous activities?

    >>
    >> You

    >
    > wrong.
    >
    > you are once again lying about what i said.


    It's there for anyone to read.
    stop your avoidance.
    It was you who first mentioned using WiFi on a plane to look at YouTube,
    not me.
    >
    > all i said was wifi on a plane.
    >
    > *you* decided that wifi on a plane meant that whatever some unknown
    > person was doing had to be frivolous, despite the fact you have
    > absolutely no idea what it is they're doing online.
    >

    It's there for anyone to read.
    stop your avoidance.
    It was you who first mentioned using WiFi on a plane to look at YouTube,
    not me.
    >



    > furthermore, what is frivolous to you might not be frivolous to them.


    Agreed. but, I never said you should not do it. I did say that in the
    event I was paying somebody to fly on my business, I would dictate the
    terms.

    >
    > who the hell are you to decide what is important to someone else?


    Just where did I dictate anything to anyone?

    >
    >>> they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.
    >>>
    >>>>> a lot of people like to travel in comfort and/or get work done, which
    >>>>> is why some will *pay* for f/j rather than chance an upgrade.
    >>>>>
    >>>> So, what is you point? getting work done <> videos.
    >>>
    >>> who said anything about videos?
    >>>
    >>> they work while connected to the internet. that's the whole *point*.

    >>
    >> You made the YouTube comment.

    >
    > there are more than just business travelers on a plane.
    >


    So!
    > leisure travelers might want to watch youtube.
    >


    So they can. But if it slows down an Internet connection, the business
    user will become impatient with the slow connection.

    > business travelers generally work, but they're entitled to take a break
    > too. it's also possible that their work involves youtube, requiring
    > them to use it.


    I understand that completely. But, read the intonation of YOUR
    statement. My daughter has produced and directed commercials on cruise
    ships. It sounds glamorous, but it was hard and tension filled work. In
    my work days, my travel sounded good, but I was drained and exhausted,
    on the way home.


    >
    > if you can't figure that much out, then you're stupider than i thought.
    >


    I must be to think you can engage in a rational discussion.
    I obviously was wrong.

    >>>>> business travelers are almost always on their laptops, with or without
    >>>>> wifi, and when
    >>>>
    >>>> Depends on why they travel.
    >>>
    >>> yes it does. apparently you are ignorant about what others do. or just
    >>> ignorant in general.

    >>
    >> I'm ignorant enough to know you are full of shit.

    >
    > no, you are just plain ignorant and a liar who twists what i say.


    I simply understand English and the implication of words. (Something I
    have been paid very well to do.)

    >
    >>>> I used to continually review my files, not
    >>>> all of which were digitized. When I was preparing for a negotiation,
    >>>> every detail was planned in advance. Tony Coo[er knows exactly hat I mean.
    >>>
    >>> not everyone does the same thing as you or tony did. certainly you must
    >>> realize that.

    >>
    >> I know that's why Tony was successful; my clients paid me a lot of
    >> money; and I turned away work because I was too busy.

    >
    > that's nice. it also has nothing to do with this discussion.


    There are many ways to skin a cat. Please stop acting like an ass. But
    then again, you may not be acting.

    >
    > the reality is that these days, people want internet connectivity
    > wherever they go. it's expected, which is why a lot of places offer it,
    > including airlines.
    >

    So. Whats your point? In 25 words or less.

    >>> a lot of people require the internet to do their work.

    >>
    >> Then why would a slow connection have value to them. It seems to me that
    >> a slow connection would be frustrating and counterproductive.

    >
    > it's only slow if a lot of people are doing bandwidth intensive things.
    > that can happen, but it's not always the case. it can also happen with
    > cable or dsl too.
    >
    > in any event, it's fast enough for most things and it's certainly
    > better than nothing. you certainly don't need a fast connection to send
    > and receive email.
    >


    And the email can't wait for an hour or two? It's called parsing your
    work. You do those things that don't require an Internet connection,
    when there is none available. And you use it when it becomes available.
    Are you telling me that you never sent an email you wished you could
    have withdrawn?



    >>>>> there's wifi they can communicate with the rest of the
    >>>>> company which is usually very important. they don't normally play
    >>>>> games, but even ceos are entitled to relax a bit now and then.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So! I'm in favor of motherhood and apple pie, too. What does that have
    >>>> to do with whatever point you are trying to make? Nobody here is sure
    >>>> what that is.
    >>>> BTW you have no told us how much this sometimes unreliable and
    >>>> frustratingly slow WiFi connection costs.
    >>>
    >>> if you learned to read before posting, then you'd have seen where i
    >>> told you how to find pricing. hint, it's on the gogo site.

    >>
    >> You still didn't tell us what actual percentage of US daily flights is
    >> equipped with WiFi. You seem to ignore that completely, while you have
    >> the balls to call me ignorant. Deal with the e facts.

    >
    > the major airlines, including american, delta, united and us airways,
    > have most of their domestic fleet equipped, if not their entire
    > domestic fleet, which means it's highly likely and in many cases
    > guaranteed that a flight will have wifi.
    >
    > on the other hand, for those who fly on smaller airlines, including the
    > budget airlines, then they won't be getting wifi (or much else,
    > including drinks), but that represents a minority of passengers because
    > those airlines are small and carry fewer pax.
    >

    So what is the actual percentage, according to you? I have not seen a
    specific percentage. All I hear is a lot of doubletalk and bullshit. Hey
    man, don't try to bullshit me. I've been to a dance or two in my life.


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 27, 2012
  17. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b415e9$0$10837$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > >>>> Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    > >>>> and don't have the time for frivolous activities?
    > >>>
    > >>> who said anything about frivolous activities?
    > >>
    > >> You

    > >
    > > wrong.
    > >
    > > you are once again lying about what i said.

    >
    > It's there for anyone to read.
    > stop your avoidance.
    > It was you who first mentioned using WiFi on a plane to look at YouTube,
    > not me.


    and it was you who is intentionally taking it out of context and
    distorting what i said.

    i never said a business traveler would spend their time watching
    youtube or other frivolous activities.

    > So they can. But if it slows down an Internet connection, the business
    > user will become impatient with the slow connection.


    depends what he's doing and the available bandwidth. if the business
    traveler is sending an email, he likely won't even notice if others are
    watching youtube.

    > And the email can't wait for an hour or two?


    it could be 6-7 hours, even longer.

    > It's called parsing your
    > work. You do those things that don't require an Internet connection,
    > when there is none available. And you use it when it becomes available.


    for some people, their work can only be done on the internet.

    > Are you telling me that you never sent an email you wished you could
    > have withdrawn?


    irrelevant. that can happen anywhere.

    > So what is the actual percentage, according to you? I have not seen a
    > specific percentage. All I hear is a lot of doubletalk and bullshit. Hey
    > man, don't try to bullshit me. I've been to a dance or two in my life.


    the percentage of wifi equipped planes out of all planes flying is
    irrelevant.

    what matters is how many wifi equipped planes are in a given airline's
    fleet, and more importantly, on a given route.

    if someone wants wifi, they can pick an airline that offers it and be
    virtually guaranteed of having it (short of mechanical issues).
    nospam, Nov 29, 2012
  18. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/29/2012 5:31 AM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b415e9$0$10837$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>>> Are you aware that some business travelers actually work on the plane,
    >>>>>> and don't have the time for frivolous activities?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> who said anything about frivolous activities?
    >>>>
    >>>> You
    >>>
    >>> wrong.
    >>>
    >>> you are once again lying about what i said.

    >>
    >> It's there for anyone to read.
    >> stop your avoidance.
    >> It was you who first mentioned using WiFi on a plane to look at YouTube,
    >> not me.

    >
    > and it was you who is intentionally taking it out of context and
    > distorting what i said.
    >
    > i never said a business traveler would spend their time watching
    > youtube or other frivolous activities.


    Oh?

    >
    >> So they can. But if it slows down an Internet connection, the business
    >> user will become impatient with the slow connection.

    >
    > depends what he's doing and the available bandwidth. if the business
    > traveler is sending an email, he likely won't even notice if others are
    > watching youtube.


    Six or seven hours on email? Must be a very important traveler.
    Important enough to have his own plane.


    >
    >> And the email can't wait for an hour or two?

    >
    > it could be 6-7 hours, even longer.
    >
    >> It's called parsing your
    >> work. You do those things that don't require an Internet connection,
    >> when there is none available. And you use it when it becomes available.

    >
    > for some people, their work can only be done on the internet.
    >
    >> Are you telling me that you never sent an email you wished you could
    >> have withdrawn?

    >
    > irrelevant. that can happen anywhere.


    So since we agree it can happen anywhere, you must agree that a delay in
    sending can be a good thing.

    >
    >> So what is the actual percentage, according to you? I have not seen a
    >> specific percentage. All I hear is a lot of doubletalk and bullshit. Hey
    >> man, don't try to bullshit me. I've been to a dance or two in my life.

    >
    > the percentage of wifi equipped planes out of all planes flying is
    > irrelevant.
    >
    > what matters is how many wifi equipped planes are in a given airline's
    > fleet, and more importantly, on a given route.
    >
    > if someone wants wifi, they can pick an airline that offers it and be
    > virtually guaranteed of having it (short of mechanical issues).
    >

    It is quite relevant to YOUR point.
    Your words say, "plus, taking a laptop on board means you can use it on
    the plane during the flight, which is very likely to have wifi."

    And when I questioned your use of the term; :very likely." you tried to
    perform all kinds of dances, to avoid answering the question. Obviously,
    you cannot explain, or you used it in an intellectually dishonest fashion.

    You don't seem to understand that i am not against WiFi on planes. I
    cannot understand your obsession with it. Perhaps if you were more
    specific and honest in your logic, we would understand your point.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 29, 2012
  19. Rob

    PeterN Guest

    On 11/29/2012 6:47 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <50b7a588$0$10803$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Six or seven hours on email? Must be a very important traveler.
    >> Important enough to have his own plane.

    >
    > not 6-7 hours on email.
    >
    > it's 6-7 hours (or more) without wifi, plus additional pre-departure
    > and post-arrival times. if the person is making a connection or there
    > are flight delays, it could be even longer.


    I didn't realize the extent of that potential tragedy, which makes in
    flight an absolute necessity.
    Reality alert.


    >
    >> You don't seem to understand that i am not against WiFi on planes. I
    >> cannot understand your obsession with it. Perhaps if you were more
    >> specific and honest in your logic, we would understand your point.

    >
    > it's not an obsession and there's nothing dishonest.
    >
    > having wifi is useful on a long flight for a wide variety of reasons.
    >
    > the fact you can't understand that is not my problem.
    >


    I am not obsessed, dammit! I am not obsessed, dammit! I am not obsessed,
    dammit! I am not obsessed, dammit! ......

    You snip pertinent information, and still have not answered my question.
    But, OTOH, you have indeed answered it.

    BTW I am basically retired. You are not, you sure seem have a lot of
    time to read and answer the news groups. But that's not my problem.
    Thankfully, you don't work for me, or any business in which I am, or
    have been involved.


    BYE.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Nov 29, 2012
  20. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <50b7a588$0$10803$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    > Six or seven hours on email? Must be a very important traveler.
    > Important enough to have his own plane.


    not 6-7 hours on email.

    it's 6-7 hours (or more) without wifi, plus additional pre-departure
    and post-arrival times. if the person is making a connection or there
    are flight delays, it could be even longer.

    > You don't seem to understand that i am not against WiFi on planes. I
    > cannot understand your obsession with it. Perhaps if you were more
    > specific and honest in your logic, we would understand your point.


    it's not an obsession and there's nothing dishonest.

    having wifi is useful on a long flight for a wide variety of reasons.

    the fact you can't understand that is not my problem.
    nospam, Nov 29, 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:
    904
    David Harrison
    Aug 20, 2004
  2. ray

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    ray, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    214
    Gordon Freeman
    Nov 19, 2012
  3. tony cooper

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    tony cooper, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    306
    Chris Malcolm
    Dec 9, 2012
  4. David Taylor

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    David Taylor, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    211
    David Taylor
    Nov 19, 2012
  5. Martin Brown

    Re: Camera JPEG engines

    Martin Brown, Nov 19, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    233
    Chris Malcolm
    Nov 29, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page