Replies

Lots of hot air ....

Any facts to back up your bloat? Anything?

I carefully explained that EVERY cycle burns power. I explained Memory Thrash to the level that even you comprehend it, no; scratch that. You went on to prove that you don't.

All you have done, is attack the messenger - on some presumed 'arrogance' that you are projecting.

I never said I was in the IT field - that's YOU projecting. I'm an engineer - I'm a lead on one of the teams that designs what makes these devices work.

But, what would I know .... obviously you know better ... so, please present some facts. Share what you know, it should take maybe an entire paragraph.

The argument you made, is about what Flash is about and how CPU intensive the software is, and it’s irrelevant. With the multi-core CPUs coming into existence, it may not matter much to the consumer who is not as “IT literate” as you or me.

God, I hope you are an intern. If not, take your diploma back to your college and demand your money back. Every cycle burns power - and a quad-core burns MORE energy per clock cycle than single core. Transistors burn energy - it's what they do. The whole point of making an ASIC (look it up) is to reduce power consumption. Apple uses the ARM processor, coupled with PowerVR graphics to build a custom ASIC. Now, why in the world would they do a thing like that? Hint: 10+ hrs batter life on a charge.

I tire of trying to teach an ignoramous who refuses to learn. Educate yourself, learn some facts and when you know SOMETHING, let me know.

I took the time to point out the S-I-N features, because you are using those tactics - and like a Libtard, you respond using those tactics. Present some facts, some rationale - Don't attack me, defend your statements (there's a difference - hint: facts are involved).

Golly gee, guy, get over yourself already!

So, where did I get the idea that you were in the IT field? Well, the discussion concerned Windows 8 and by extension, tablets and a few things "Microsoft", and then, you went and wrote the following in one of your posts:

Golly, maybe because I work in the industry? Maybe because I know what Windows does, how it behaves, how it uses resources.

Without being specific, how was anyone to know that you meant the "engineering" side of things and not as in "software engineering"? So, why not try to be a better communicator next time?

Lots of hot air ....

Any facts to back up your bloat? Anything?

So, what the heck are you talking about? Hot air? Where? Bloat? Where? You need to clarify your statements and questions, otherwise, you're going to be popping a vein or two with your argumentative rhetoric. Take a couple of chill pills and see the doctor in the morning.

I carefully explained that EVERY cycle burns power. I explained Memory Thrash to the level that even you comprehend it, no; scratch that. You went on to prove that you don't.

Like president Reagan famously said: "There you go again!".

Look, you're seeing demons where there aren't any.

Why are you so defensive and rude? There is no need for that, so, simmer down.

I never argued against your assertions about Flash and about CPU cycles burning or not burning power. It's only logical that that is the case. So, why are you arguing about a non-issue?

I also remember explaining to you that I'm not a hardware person, but, that I still needed to understand some of the technology in order to be able to develop and take advantage of how it works. That's not so difficult to understand, is it?

All you have done, is attack the messenger - on some presumed 'arrogance' that you are projecting.

Being called arrogant should not be something that comes as a surprise to you. I'm pretty sure that with your attitude, it's come up more than once in your life.

I never said I was in the IT field - that's YOU projecting. I'm an engineer - I'm a lead on one of the teams that designs what makes these devices work.

Well, making that statement I quoted in the beginning of this response, would lead someone to believe that you were/are in the IT field. Be clear next time. It's the right thing to do with your "college" communications skills.

But, why even indicate that you're on a team that helps design what makes those gadgets work, if you're not trying to gain some sort of advantage in the discussion?

So what part of what you've said so far, demonstrates that you have exclusive knowledge about how Windows 8 will operate and what features it's going to contain? Do you know for a fact that it's going to do contain Flash? If not, which other media software will it have? If you don't know, then you're arguing just for arguments sake with no real information to back up your assertions.

Just to clear it up for you again, I'm not arguing against your credentials or your experience; I'm arguing about what you really know about the issue at hand, that being Windows 8's features and software capabilities.

But, what would I know ....

That's the question I keep asking you, and you can't seem to come up with the answers regarding what you know about Windows 8 features and software.

obviously you know better ...so, please present some facts. Share what you know, it should take maybe an entire paragraph.

B.... S......

I never claimed to know better than you or anyone else about what Windows 8 will be like. I don't know any better than the next guy, and all that I can do is to speculate as much as the next guy, including you. The only thing I did was to challenge you on the information you had about Windows 8.

And, haven't you noticed that you haven't made any more sense than I have, and the size of a paragraph, or a number of paragraphs, isn't going to change the huge lack of facts in your posts? Arguing about how ARM or CPUs or memory chew up energy is not what this discussion was about.

God, I hope you are an intern.

Nope, not an intern. And, it's interesting how you like to throw out your backhanded type of insults while not liking it when somebody retaliates in kind towards you.

I'm an architect and an idea person, on the application side of things. I doubt that you could even come close to the types of things that I've been involved with in my career.

If I can get my project/application going, I'm going to need the same kind of idea and application architect person that I've been. I would even hire someone as disagreeable as you seem to be, as long as he can get the job done, and I wouldn't hold the argumentative spirit against you. I know how to overlook some negatives to achieve a bigger purpose.

If not, take your diploma back to your college and demand your money back.

Sounds like you're a beginner in life. Look, the biggest lessons in life are learned in the real world, and that includes most of what one needs to know in their professions. Most of what I know didn't come from some classroom. You seem to be still stuck in a college environment mindset.

Every cycle burns power - and a quad-core burns MORE energy per clock cycle than single core. Transistors burn energy - it's what they do. The whole point of making an ASIC (look it up) is to reduce power consumption. Apple uses the ARM processor, coupled with PowerVR graphics to build a custom ASIC. Now, why in the world would they do a thing like that? Hint: 10+ hrs batter life on a charge.

I keep telling you that the direction of your argument is irrelevant to the original discussion. As a developer and a software/application architect, the only thing I care about is how to take advantage of the features in the hardware and software in order to create a great user experience. If a gadget or computer cannot make it past the discerning hands-on experience from technical reviewers and perhaps some beta testers, then chances are that, that gadget or computer won't be made available to the masses until the problems are corrected. I might read about the shortcomings of a smartphone or a tablet or a computer, but, chances are that I won't be having to make my application compatible with what's not going to reach the market. So, basically, to me, the argument is a moot one for me on the hardware or engineering side. But, when it comes to Windows 8, and the commitment that Microsoft has made towards its creation and the supported feature-set, I would have to take that platform into consideration. That is why it would be "interesting" to know what it is that you know regarding Windows 8. So, again, what is it that you know?

I tire of trying to teach an ignoramous who refuses to learn. Educate yourself, learn some facts and when you know SOMETHING, let me know.

Would you mind if I called you an idiot?

You obviously like to launch insults at others, so, I'm pretty sure you won't mind me retaliating by calling you an idiot.

Like I said, it's the last resort of someone who is losing an argument and can't think of any other way than to insult and yell.

Let me reiterate. I'm not an engineer in the hardware side, but I do software engineering in the application side of things. And, like I mentioned in my prior post, I worked with the larger computers, including the mainframes and the massively parallel platforms for huge transaction processing applications. In that area, I'm pretty sure that I'm a lot more experienced than you.

I took the time to point out the S-I-N features, because you are using those tactics - and like a Libtard, you respond using those tactics.

You are so dense that you can't even recognize that the "SIN" features are more aptly applicable to your type of argumentative tactics.

Present some facts, some rationale -

I kept asking you, over and over again, to present your facts regarding the topic of the discussion, and you've failed over and over again. As such, you are the one without the facts and the rational arguments.

Tell you what...

Once you present your "real" facts regarding what features Windows 8 will contain, and how those features are going "fail" the platform, then I'll concede the argument to you. But, it better contain the real facts and what will actually be within the feature-set of Windows 8. Comprende?

Don't attack me, defend your statements (there's a difference - hint: facts are involved).

I'm not the one that made "your" allegations about how Windows 8 will fail because of the technology within it. As such, the burden is on your side to present your set of facts and then to match them with your inside knowledge about what Microsoft has divulged to you. Is that too hard to comprehend? Should I have to make it clearer for you.

Hasta la vista.