MS's support logic

On 8/18/14 4:58 PM, John wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 19:50:18 -0400, Justin
wrote:

On 8/13/14, 5:39 AM, John wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 18:40:31 -0400, Justin
wrote:

On 8/8/14, 2:01 PM, pjp wrote:

snip

Get a Mac, you won't have to worry about malware or viruses. It's a
simple fact.

Also a lie.

I was not then saying that the *poster* was deliberately lying, just
that this is an untruth told by Apple and its supporters so often that
it has become a cultural cliché used by millions unthinkingly. It is
nonetheless a lie.

I'm not so sure you're correct here, John. No offense intended, but
I've never seen anything from Apple that claims they are malware proof.
In fact, over the 5.5 years I've owned this Mac, I've received OS
patches a couple of times where Apple clearly stated the patch fixed
some type of malware vulnerability.

And no computer company, Apple or MS, can prevent a salesman from
misstating, even lieing, about malware protection.

And definitely no way to prevent the ignorant users of computers from
spreading bogus information.

I guess its caveat emptor.


snip

--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.6.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

| I think you do have a point,
| though. I know many people who have switched to Macs,
| for two basic reasons: 1) It's fashionable. 2) They don't
| want to deal with security. They're mainly younger
| people who simply don't want to fret about risks to
| security and privacy.
|
| Their phones and computers are
| shopping/entertainment/social devices.
|
| I think you have to apply this across the age spectrum, not just the
| younger generation.

To some extent, but in my own experience it's been a
trend with younger people, probably in part because
young people simply crave peer feedback more than
older people do. Mac use grew in the 00s from about 2%
to more like 7% of people online. (Though I'm not certain
about the *precise* accuracy of those numbers.)
While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
hassle of being careful.

I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
there's a trend there.

On 8/22/14 8:57 PM, Mayayana wrote:
| I think you do have a point,
| though. I know many people who have switched to Macs,
| for two basic reasons: 1) It's fashionable. 2) They don't
| want to deal with security. They're mainly younger
| people who simply don't want to fret about risks to
| security and privacy.
|
| Their phones and computers are
| shopping/entertainment/social devices.
|
| I think you have to apply this across the age spectrum, not just the
| younger generation.

To some extent, but in my own experience it's been a
trend with younger people, probably in part because
young people simply crave peer feedback more than
older people do. Mac use grew in the 00s from about 2%
to more like 7% of people online. (Though I'm not certain
about the *precise* accuracy of those numbers.)

I don't really trust any of these numbers, just look at them as a
general indicator of what's happening.

When it comes to Mac computers, I do wish I knew more about their
current top of the line product. I have to ask "Why?", since most
"power" software seems to exist for Windows, not OS X.

While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
hassle of being careful.

In this case, doesn't convenience = ease of use?

I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
there's a trend there.

Group texting... What's that? How does it work? As you can obviously
tell, I do zip with social media things. I have an early smartphone,
came out before netbooks, but cell phones don't work where I live, no
signal.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.6.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

Ken Springer wrote:
On 8/22/14 8:57 PM, Mayayana wrote:
| I think you do have a point,
| though. I know many people who have switched to Macs,
| for two basic reasons: 1) It's fashionable. 2) They don't
| want to deal with security. They're mainly younger
| people who simply don't want to fret about risks to
| security and privacy.
|
| Their phones and computers are
| shopping/entertainment/social devices.
|
| I think you have to apply this across the age spectrum, not just the
| younger generation.

To some extent, but in my own experience it's been a
trend with younger people, probably in part because
young people simply crave peer feedback more than
older people do. Mac use grew in the 00s from about 2%
to more like 7% of people online. (Though I'm not certain
about the *precise* accuracy of those numbers.)

I don't really trust any of these numbers, just look at them as a
general indicator of what's happening.

When it comes to Mac computers, I do wish I knew more about their
current top of the line product. I have to ask "Why?", since most
"power" software seems to exist for Windows, not OS X.

While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
hassle of being careful.

In this case, doesn't convenience = ease of use?

I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
there's a trend there.

Group texting... What's that? How does it work? As you can obviously
tell, I do zip with social media things. I have an early smartphone,
came out before netbooks, but cell phones don't work where I live, no
signal.

Their top of the line is the Mac Pro. I suppose the
unconventional physical arrangement (a cylinder) would
bring back memories of the iCube (which was also unconventional).
Meant to annoy when you want to add expansion cards, and
have to do everything with Thunderbolt as a bus expansion.

There are two models, but the description here suggests
there are other processors that can be installed. It's a single
socket machine, but takes more than one processor at build time.

http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

2.7GHz 12-core processor with 30MB L3 cache --- the max

I think that would be the 2697. LGA2011 with quad channel memory controller.
The Xeon version has ECC capability.

http://ark.intel.com/products/75283/..._70-GHz?q=2697

Which costs $2618.00. And has 2.5 times the cache of
some of the desktop processors.

That doesn't mean the processor is all that wonderful, because
when they contain more than about 4C/8T, they start to
starve a bit. For example, a 6C/12T, instead of being 50% faster
than the four core, is only 35% faster.

There aren't going to be that many programs that
can profit from 12 cores and 24 threads. Normally,
such a monster processor would be used for a server,
run Exchange, a few databases and so on. For a desktop,
you might not be able to drive it hard enough to justify
the purchase price.

With the dual AMD video cards, it would make a dandy
Bitcoin Miner. For when you can trust one of those
companies that sells custom chip based Miner boxes.

*******

"OS X Mavericks version 10.9

Includes iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, ... iTunes, ...
"

So you could do some multimedia on it.

Paul

Mayayana wrote:


I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
there's a trend there.



There might be some value in reading between the lines of those responses.

The former (16yr) usage could be indicative of what she and her friends
do and have been doing based on what others were doing in previous years.

The latter representative of her friends and with a desire to be
different than slightly older teens.

Throw in the unwritten, which is becoming more common, teens may not
want their parents to be aware of their own and friends FB activity.

Is there a trend? I'd look at that from the perspective that social
media is an infant technology that will continue to evolve driven by
three necessary operatives - value, perception, and the ability monetize
- with long term survival inevitably determined by those same items seen
in a positive light....and any trend or perception of a trend at this
stage has limited data to substantiate any predictive direction.

One might say the jury is still out...imo, the jury to decide has yet to
be chosen.


--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps

On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:36:21 -0400, Justin wrote:

I stopped reading here. This is why techies shouldn't run businesses.

Fortunately few do.

| I have to ask "Why?", since most
| "power" software seems to exist for Windows, not OS X.

Macs were never aimed at business. So business
doesn't use them. So there's no market for business
software. Theirs is a "consumer" market. Microsoft
is just the opposite. They bend over backward to give
businesses what they want: longterm backward
compatibility; easy programming tools for custom,
in-house software; a system designed for corporate use.
Microsoft doesn't even make a version of Windows for
SOHo use. There's really just one version: A corporate
workstation OS that can be controlled remotely by
company IT people. The Registry, IE, file permissions,
extensive scripting options.... all are designed so that
company IT can override employee settings and easily
manage a large number of networked machines.

|
| While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
| people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
| people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
| They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
| they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
| hassle of being careful.
|
| In this case, doesn't convenience = ease of use?
|
Only insofar as ease of use means being able to get
away with ignoring security. The young people I knew
who switched to Macs were used to Windows. They
didn't have a problem with usability. They just had the
impression (partially true) that the growing concern of
online security was a hassle that they could simply
leave behind if they got a Mac. They wanted to download
songs illegally without getting malware. Word on the
street was that Macs would let them do that.

| I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
| friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
| year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
| parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
| gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
| a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
| to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
| there's a trend there.
|
| Group texting... What's that? How does it work? As you can obviously
| tell, I do zip with social media things. I have an early smartphone,
| came out before netbooks, but cell phones don't work where I live, no
| signal.
|
I probably know less than you, but I do like to
follow trends, out of a "sociological" interest. And
I think I have you beat: I don't use Facebook or Twitter
or even webmail. I've no tablet, no laptop, and my
$10 Tracphone only gets used on an occasional
basis. There are several reasons that I don't
want to use a cellphone, with cost and privacy
being high on the list. But perhaps the biggest reason
is just that I enjoy the luxury of time and space. I
don't want to go for a solitary walk in the woods and
be interruptible by someone who collapses space to
ask me whether I took the meat down from the freezer,
or whether I'd like to donate to the sleazy fundraising
company posing as a local fireman. I like for each space
to have its own qualities. And I worry about the
disconnection from physicality that smart phones
engender. Cellphone addicts are simply not where
they are.

I'm not clear about what group texting is. That
was my term. I asked the parents what the 13 year
old was doing instead of Facebook. They weren't
entirely sure. But from what I could gather it sounded
like the kids are living by their phones. Even if they're,
say, all around the same table at a birthday party,
they're also texting each other! Since kids that age
like to always be with friends, I'm speculating that
the reason they don't use Facebook is because they
don't perceive any break in contact. They don't need
to check their friends' pages because they're in a
nearly unbroken conversation with all of them.

(Technical note: Is it possible to actually text to a
designated meeting place, like the way this newsgroup
works, so that a teen clique could have an ongoing
group "conference call"? I don't know. I've never texted
or IMed.)

| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.

I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.
This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.

Mayayana wrote:
| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.

I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.
This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.



I bought the first Mac for $5000 with an external "hard drive" that you
could put a diskette into, legal size printer and backpack. I sold it
for $6000 in Venezuela. This was in 84 and compared to today's machines,
it sure didn't do much, although it would probably be worth more now to
collectors.

--
A

On 8/23/14 8:36 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| I have to ask "Why?", since most
| "power" software seems to exist for Windows, not OS X.

Macs were never aimed at business. So business
doesn't use them. So there's no market for business
software.

Of this, I'm not so sure. Way, way back, Macs ruled the desktop
publishing market. MS machines simply did not have the graphic
abilities. And apparently, there are still business related software
available. AutoCad still has Mac versions, although I don't know more
than that about AutoCad's offerings other than that.

So there may be more of a business market out there than either of us
realize. Apple still has and supports OS X Server.

Theirs is a "consumer" market.

The majority of their market is consumer these days, no argument there.
They seem to have caught MS totally off guard here, and I'm not that
sure MS is truly catching up. They just have alternatives. Didn't MS
give up on Zune? And Android is giving Apple a run for their money, I
think.

Microsoft
is just the opposite. They bend over backward to give
businesses what they want: longterm backward
compatibility; easy programming tools for custom,
in-house software; a system designed for corporate use.
Microsoft doesn't even make a version of Windows for
SOHo use. There's really just one version: A corporate
workstation OS that can be controlled remotely by
company IT people. The Registry, IE, file permissions,
extensive scripting options.... all are designed so that
company IT can override employee settings and easily
manage a large number of networked machines.

I wonder if MS was surprised at how much work customer support turned
into when consumers started using their OS, but didn't have the
knowledge of an IT person.

And now, they seem to be moving towards Apple's "walled garden"
approach, as it's sometimes called. Perhaps to decrease MS's customer
service workload.

Wouldn't a Home version vs. an Ultimate version (Win7 for example)
somewhat classify as a version for consumers and a version for pros?

|
| While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
| people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
| people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
| They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
| they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
| hassle of being careful.
|
| In this case, doesn't convenience = ease of use?
|
Only insofar as ease of use means being able to get
away with ignoring security. The young people I knew
who switched to Macs were used to Windows. They
didn't have a problem with usability.

Were they switching to computers or devices? iPhone and Ipad, in this
case. Interfaces initially were quite different, although Apple seems
to be moving the UI's of each to be more closely the same. Mountain
Lion has the "Launchpad", and if I use it, the desktop looks like an iPad.

They just had the
impression (partially true) that the growing concern of
online security was a hassle that they could simply
leave behind if they got a Mac. They wanted to download
songs illegally without getting malware. Word on the
street was that Macs would let them do that.

Some of that may be attributable to the fact Apple had devices MS did
not, i.e. iPhones. And portability was more important to them than
power and software.

| I heard something intriguing recently, though. Some
| friends have two teenage girls -- 13 and 16. The 16
| year old uses Facebook a lot. The 13 year old tells her
| parents that "no one uses Facebook". From what I can
| gather, she and her friends use group texting to create
| a sense of always being together, so that there's no need
| to check up on each others' news. I'm curious whether
| there's a trend there.
|
| Group texting... What's that? How does it work? As you can obviously
| tell, I do zip with social media things. I have an early smartphone,
| came out before netbooks, but cell phones don't work where I live, no
| signal.
|
I probably know less than you, but I do like to
follow trends, out of a "sociological" interest. And
I think I have you beat: I don't use Facebook or Twitter
or even webmail.

Not so much. LOL I created a Facebook account to see what all the
hubbub was about. Found the idea useless to me. Initially only one
piece of information was valid so I could create the account, then I
changed that piece of info. But I haven't used it for anything, and all
the relatives that wanted me to have given up.

But, there are the positives (maybe?), looked how social media changed
Egypt and Russia.

I've no tablet, no laptop, and my
$10 Tracphone only gets used on an occasional
basis.

I bought a tablet as a superKindle, as I've got lots of digitize books I
need to peruse for historical information. So I can load them on the
tablet, sit in the easy chair anywhere and read them. Plus jot down
pieces of info that can be transferred to the computer when I get home.

I use my netbook (no laptop) for email on the road, and streaming
Pandora into the sound system when I'm home.

And my smartphone is now just a cell phone, I'm no longer paying for all
the data downloads, etc., that it's capable of. I could easily use a
Tracphone also, just have never gone that far.

There are several reasons that I don't
want to use a cellphone, with cost and privacy
being high on the list. But perhaps the biggest reason
is just that I enjoy the luxury of time and space. I
don't want to go for a solitary walk in the woods and
be interruptible by someone who collapses space to
ask me whether I took the meat down from the freezer,
or whether I'd like to donate to the sleazy fundraising
company posing as a local fireman. I like for each space
to have its own qualities. And I worry about the
disconnection from physicality that smart phones
engender. Cellphone addicts are simply not where
they are.

I rarely give out my cell number, as it's unreliable at home. But there
was a time when it was my only phone, and there are circumstances these
days where that's appropriate.

But the addiction to the phones isn't limited to the younger generation,
either. :-(

I'm not clear about what group texting is. That
was my term. I asked the parents what the 13 year
old was doing instead of Facebook. They weren't
entirely sure. But from what I could gather it sounded
like the kids are living by their phones. Even if they're,
say, all around the same table at a birthday party,
they're also texting each other! Since kids that age
like to always be with friends, I'm speculating that
the reason they don't use Facebook is because they
don't perceive any break in contact. They don't need
to check their friends' pages because they're in a
nearly unbroken conversation with all of them.

Addiction is the right word. Maybe even lemmings fits. LOL

(Technical note: Is it possible to actually text to a
designated meeting place, like the way this newsgroup
works, so that a teen clique could have an ongoing
group "conference call"? I don't know. I've never texted
or IMed.)

Using instant messaging software, you could keep an open conference call
going all the time. That would be about the same. I don't think that
actual texting features would work that way. But, I don't text either.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.6.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On 2014-08-23, Mayayana wrote:
| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.




I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.

It might have.
Researching researching on hypothetical potential value takes
more interest than I have.

This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.


My son, his fiancee, and many of their friends have Macs, iPhones,
iPads, iPods...
Those devices cooperate very well with each other.
That is their interest in that matter.

But, my son needed a Windows laptop to run a type of automotive
diagnostic software, so he has that too.

And, he has a Windows gaming PC.

His interest in Linux makes me think he looks like the milkman.

--
An effective way to deal with predators is to taste terrible.

| Didn't MS give up on Zune?

And Kin. And SPOT watches. And Hailstorm. And
Passport. And Windows Live. And Active Desktop.
All their gimmicks fail. With any luck they'll also give
up on Metro and Surface and Windows phones. But
I expect they're thinking, at this point, that services
and targetted ads are no longer just a clever idea
but a real necessity. So they'll go down fighting.

| Wouldn't a Home version vs. an Ultimate version (Win7 for example)
| somewhat classify as a version for consumers and a version for pros?
|

Those are just marketing gimmicks, with extra functionality
added or removed. For instance, I don't think the home version
has the Group Policy Editor, for controlling user permissions
and settings. On the other hand, that's just a front-end for
Registry settings to make sys admin work easier. I think Pro
Windows now also has disk encryption options that Home
doesn't have. Things like that. But under the hood it's all just
one system, designed for corporate use. (There's no reason to
have Administrators and users on a SOHo system, after all.)

Even an OEM Windows Home PC usually comes
with services presets intended for a corporate workstation
and a networked computer, even though many of those services
are risky and may never be needed.

| |
| | While lots of baby boomers use Macs, it was younger
| | people who I saw switching to Macs, at least among
| | people I know. And much of the reason was convenience.
| | They wanted to download music and software, use Facebook...
| | they wanted a highly interactive Internet without the
| | hassle of being careful.
| |
| | In this case, doesn't convenience = ease of use?
| |
| Only insofar as ease of use means being able to get
| away with ignoring security. The young people I knew
| who switched to Macs were used to Windows. They
| didn't have a problem with usability.
|
| Were they switching to computers or devices?

I'm talking computers. People who were using Windows
were switching to Macs.

| They just had the
| impression (partially true) that the growing concern of
| online security was a hassle that they could simply
| leave behind if they got a Mac. They wanted to download
| songs illegally without getting malware. Word on the
| street was that Macs would let them do that.
|
| Some of that may be attributable to the fact Apple had devices MS did
| not, i.e. iPhones. And portability was more important to them than
| power and software.
|

That's not what they told me. This pretty much predates
the ubiquity of iPhones. What I was hearing was specifically
fear of malware.

| I bought a tablet as a superKindle, as I've got lots of digitize books I
| need to peruse for historical information. So I can load them on the
| tablet, sit in the easy chair anywhere and read them.

That's the one use I can see for a tablet. We had a
Kindle given to us that I "jailbroke" to read TXT and PDF,
but it just didn't work. The screen was small and dim.
A PDF with pages wouldn't allow me to scroll within the
page, so I had to view a big page squeezed into a tiny
window.

When they get good enough to read any format clearly,
with a price of $30, that might be worth it to me. I have
long non-fiction PDF and occasional long news articles that
I'd prefer to read away from the computer.

On 2014-08-23, A wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.

I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.
This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.



I bought the first Mac for $5000 with an external "hard drive" that you
could put a diskette into, legal size printer and backpack. I sold it
for $6000 in Venezuela. This was in 84 and compared to today's machines,
it sure didn't do much, although it would probably be worth more now to
collectors.


What was in the backpack that was worth $4000?

--
An effective way to deal with predators is to taste terrible.

Darth_Hideous wrote:
On 2014-08-23, A wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.

I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.
This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.



I bought the first Mac for $5000 with an external "hard drive" that you
could put a diskette into, legal size printer and backpack. I sold it
for $6000 in Venezuela. This was in 84 and compared to today's machines,
it sure didn't do much, although it would probably be worth more now to
collectors.


What was in the backpack that was worth $4000?


I don't have the receipt anymore but I also had a keyboard and a mouse.
The backpack was not that expensive but your knew that, didn't you?

--
A

On 2014-08-23, A wrote:
Darth_Hideous wrote:
On 2014-08-23, A wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
| I'm still waiting for an explanation of maintenance.
| I don't do any maintenance.
|
| I wipe the spittle from my screen.
| Vacuum up the cheetos, stuff like that.
|

I think that's a Linux-only requirement. We Windows
and Mac people are somewhat more dignified.

I got a kick out of your Mac resale value chart. I'm
assuming, though, that it went with a webpage
somewhere that indicates when "then" and "now"
are.
This is actually the first time I've heard of Mac
people thinking in terms of resale value. I didn't
know there was a market for resale. But given their
cost and limited repairability, I guess that makes sense.



I bought the first Mac for $5000 with an external "hard drive" that you
could put a diskette into, legal size printer and backpack. I sold it
for $6000 in Venezuela. This was in 84 and compared to today's machines,
it sure didn't do much, although it would probably be worth more now to
collectors.


What was in the backpack that was worth $4000?


I don't have the receipt anymore but I also had a keyboard and a mouse.
The backpack was not that expensive but your knew that, didn't you?


I figured Venezuela,backpack,smuggling.
I watch TV you know.
Sometimes.

--
An effective way to deal with predators is to taste terrible.