On 2022-03-17 8:45 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> You're doing it again.
>
> Don't fall for the bullshit and I won't tell you that you fell for it.
> Or, at least if you do fall for the bullshit, don't post it here.
>
> Apple has _never_ made a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
> Apple can't.
>
> All Apple can do is propaganda.
> Never forget Apple's R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech.
>
> Not a single similar company spends _less_ than does Apple in R&D.
> Nor more in marketing propaganda.
>
> TSMC SILICON! *TSMC SILICON!* TSMC SILICON! (big deal, everyone uses TSMC).
> ARM TECHNOLOGY! *ARM TECHNOLOGY!* ARM TECHNOLOGY! (wow, big deal there
> too).
>
> Apple spent more to buy Qualcomm's modem than my entire phone cost.
> And even then, Apple can't figure out how to _integrate_ that bought modem.
> Meanwhile, almost every smartphone manufacture figured it out long ago.
>
> And don't get me started on Apple CPUs that are so unstable that Apple
> becomes _desperate_ to secretly throttle them (and backdate release notes).

Don't you mean "TSMC CPUs" there?

>
> Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
> Hell, Apple can't even design their own GPU for Christ's sake.

Chris wrote:

> arguing with himself

Notice all the iKooks like Chris have no _adult_ response to the facts.

On 2022-03-17 6:45 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> arguing with himself
>
> Notice all the iKooks like Chris have no _adult_ response to the facts.

You've received facts, Arlen...

....you've just chosen to lie about that.

In message <t10ofb$6jp$1@dont-email.me> Alan laughing at Arlen <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> You've received facts, Arlen...

Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
life? Please, think of that image first.

--
7-Up? What happened to Ups 1-6?

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> arguing with himself
>
> Notice all the iKooks like Chris have no _adult_ response to the facts.

Let us know when you find some.

Also how's that carpenter getting on with his kitchen unit in your house?

In article <t0vnav$q0n$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> > Sandman:
> > A simple "yes" would have sufficed.
>
> The details are that iKooks fall for the Apple bullshit propaganda.
> The details are that Apple CPUs are all bullshit propaganda and no
> R&D.

> Apple spends _more_ on touting that it's "*TSMC SILICON*!!!!*
> than in actual design (considering it's all ARM technology).

> Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups falls for mothership propaganda.
> Only those on the child-like Apple newsgroups fall for the
> propaganda.

> Apple spends _less_ in R&D than any high tech company on this
> planet. And more in advertising their propaganda than any other
> company on earth.

> You fall for it. Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups touts *INTEL
> INSIDE!* like you do.

Again, a simple "yes" would have sufficed, even if your looney toons diatribe
above serves the same purpose.

--
Sandman

In message <t11dej$83o$1@dont-email.me> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let us know when you find some.

Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
life? Please, think of that image first.

--
'They've given us the answers,' he [Carrot] said. 'Perhaps we can
find out what the questions should have been.' --Feet of Clay

In message <sandman-cad0274893cb606a97bed8b0e013926c@individual.net> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote:
> Again, a simple "yes" would have sufficed, even if your looney toons diatribe
> above serves the same purpose.

Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
life? Please, think of that image first.

--
"You're an elf and you're going to wear panties like an elf."

Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
> In message <t11dej$83o$1@dont-email.me> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Let us know when you find some.
>
> Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
> chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
> the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
> life? Please, think of that image first.

What goes on in your head is not my responsibility ;)

On 2022-03-15, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2022-03-15 12:40 p.m., lew wrote:
>> On 2022-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-11 12:39 p.m., lew wrote:
>>>> On 2022-03-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>> And no one but a few kooks try to claim that these are anything but
>>>>> Apple's intellectual property.
>>>>>
>>>>> 'The Apple M1 Ultra is Apple's latest piece of bespoke silicon, and it's
>>>>> the most powerful M1 chip the company has ever made.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unveiled during the March 2022 Apple Event, the M1 Ultra is an
>>>>> incredibly powerful SoC (system-on-chip). It's basically two M1 Max
>>>>> chips paired together, using a heretofore "hidden feature" of the Max:
>>>>> special die-to-die interconnection tech that lets two Max chips work
>>>>> together for all-new heights of power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple calls this interconnection technology "UltraFusion", and it
>>>>> appears to be enabling Apple silicon to reach unprecedented levels of
>>>>> performance.'
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-m1-ultra-everything-we-know-so-far>
>>>>>
>>>>> 'We were expecting to see an all-new M2 chip unveiled early in 2022, not
>>>>> a new top-end M1 chip like the Ultra, but you won't catch me
>>>>> complaining; given that the M1 Max blew my expectations out of the water
>>>>> in 2021, the prospect of a new chip that's effectively twice as powerful
>>>>> is very exciting.'
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't matter. If apple's ios apps cannot get out of the sandbox,
>>>> then access/running speed is ZERO. A Ferrari, BMW, Rolls Royce, etc
>>>> are faster than my old Honda; but the faster cars cannot get to the
>>>> supermarket faster than me unless they break the law by ignoring
>>>> the traffic lights, stop signs & school zones as well as pedestrians &
>>>> bicyles.
>>>
>>> In what way does the OS sandboxing prevent an app from utilizing greater
>>> processor speeds and additional cores?
>>>
>>> Don't be afraid to speak in technical language.
>>
>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide; in fact the
>> "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>
> That wasn't the question I asked.

Read your question again. The OS sandboxing prevented the app
to utilize any speed to read the ipad user guide on the ipad. The
app had an app speed of ZERO because of sandboxing; if you
double the cpu speed, the app reading speed is still ZERO.

In article <t12ne1$enj$1@dont-email.me>, lew
<citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:

> >>>> Doesn't matter. If apple's ios apps cannot get out of the sandbox,
> >>>> then access/running speed is ZERO. A Ferrari, BMW, Rolls Royce, etc
> >>>> are faster than my old Honda; but the faster cars cannot get to the
> >>>> supermarket faster than me unless they break the law by ignoring
> >>>> the traffic lights, stop signs & school zones as well as pedestrians &
> >>>> bicyles.
> >>>
> >>> In what way does the OS sandboxing prevent an app from utilizing greater
> >>> processor speeds and additional cores?
> >>>
> >>> Don't be afraid to speak in technical language.
> >>
> >> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
> >> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
> >> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide; in fact the
> >> "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
> >> ipad is located on the ipad.
> >
> > That wasn't the question I asked.
>
> Read your question again. The OS sandboxing prevented the app
> to utilize any speed to read the ipad user guide on the ipad. The
> app had an app speed of ZERO because of sandboxing; if you
> double the cpu speed, the app reading speed is still ZERO.

sandboxing had nothing to do with what you claim happened.

On 2022-03-16, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
> In message <t0qq3a$ila$1@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide
>
> Makes sense, the user guide is in iBook format which is fine since the
> Books app is part of iOS so every iOS or iPadOS user has it.
>
>> in fact the "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>
> I cannot parse that.
>
>
The Books app has been considered junkier than iBooks. There is
reason why Marvin, MapleRead & FBReader is installed onto many
ipads for READing. The point is that a "faster" cpu does not matter
in all cases as an ebook reader is not able to see where the ebook
is residing for an app to use. Even my purchased explorer app is
not able to find the ipad user guide much less being able to read
the ebook "faster". The claims of PCMag & others that the ipad is
the best tablet device for reading is false; of course, some even say
that an e-ink reader is best for the eyes when reading.

There are many postings about the negative of being "locked into"
the Amazon envionment; but being locked into the apple ecology
is even worst as it also included hardware in the past & looks to
becoming the current & future with special chips in order for the apple
computer to 'see, recognize, connect & use' the device.

In message <t12o5u$enj$2@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-03-16, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>> In message <t0qq3a$ila$1@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide
>>
>> Makes sense, the user guide is in iBook format which is fine since the
>> Books app is part of iOS so every iOS or iPadOS user has it.
>>
>>> in fact the "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>>
>> I cannot parse that.
>>
>>
> The Books app has been considered junkier than iBooks. There is
> reason why Marvin, MapleRead & FBReader is installed onto many
> ipads for READing.

I've never seen any of those apps installed on any iPad. The only apps
I've ever seen people use for reading books are Libby (for library
books), Kindle (for amazon's shitty format), and Books (for epubs and
iBooks).

But that is not relevant, because for the iBooks format, only the Books
app can read those books. They are much improved ePub books with many
features that other ebook formats do not include.

> The point is that a "faster" cpu does not matter in all cases as an
> ebook reader is not able to see where the ebook is residing for an app
> to use.

That sentence started off seeming like it was going to make sense, but
nope.

> Even my purchased explorer app is not able to find the ipad user guide

Your... what the fuck are you talking about?

> much less being able to read the ebook "faster". The claims of PCMag
> & others that the ipad is the best tablet device for reading is false;

No, it is not. I've been using my iPad for reading since I first got an
iPad, even though I own multiple kindles. The iPad is much better, and
continues to be better.

> There are many postings about the negative of being "locked into"
> the Amazon envionment; but being locked into the apple ecology
> is even worst as it also included hardware in the past & looks to
> becoming the current & future with special chips in order for the apple
> computer to 'see, recognize, connect & use' the device.

I think you either need to stop taking drugs, or take more drugs.

--
"Making music should not be left to the professionals." - Michelle
Shocked

On 2022-03-18 12:44 p.m., lew wrote:
> On 2022-03-15, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-03-15 12:40 p.m., lew wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-03-11 12:39 p.m., lew wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-03-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>> And no one but a few kooks try to claim that these are anything but
>>>>>> Apple's intellectual property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'The Apple M1 Ultra is Apple's latest piece of bespoke silicon, and it's
>>>>>> the most powerful M1 chip the company has ever made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unveiled during the March 2022 Apple Event, the M1 Ultra is an
>>>>>> incredibly powerful SoC (system-on-chip). It's basically two M1 Max
>>>>>> chips paired together, using a heretofore "hidden feature" of the Max:
>>>>>> special die-to-die interconnection tech that lets two Max chips work
>>>>>> together for all-new heights of power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple calls this interconnection technology "UltraFusion", and it
>>>>>> appears to be enabling Apple silicon to reach unprecedented levels of
>>>>>> performance.'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-m1-ultra-everything-we-know-so-far>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'We were expecting to see an all-new M2 chip unveiled early in 2022, not
>>>>>> a new top-end M1 chip like the Ultra, but you won't catch me
>>>>>> complaining; given that the M1 Max blew my expectations out of the water
>>>>>> in 2021, the prospect of a new chip that's effectively twice as powerful
>>>>>> is very exciting.'
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter. If apple's ios apps cannot get out of the sandbox,
>>>>> then access/running speed is ZERO. A Ferrari, BMW, Rolls Royce, etc
>>>>> are faster than my old Honda; but the faster cars cannot get to the
>>>>> supermarket faster than me unless they break the law by ignoring
>>>>> the traffic lights, stop signs & school zones as well as pedestrians &
>>>>> bicyles.
>>>>
>>>> In what way does the OS sandboxing prevent an app from utilizing greater
>>>> processor speeds and additional cores?
>>>>
>>>> Don't be afraid to speak in technical language.
>>>
>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide; in fact the
>>> "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>>
>> That wasn't the question I asked.
>
> Read your question again. The OS sandboxing prevented the app
> to utilize any speed to read the ipad user guide on the ipad. The
> app had an app speed of ZERO because of sandboxing; if you
> double the cpu speed, the app reading speed is still ZERO.

Sorry, but that's nonsense.

The app wasn't the correct app for the file you downloaded.

In article <t12ssv$u12$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> >>>
> >>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
> >>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
> >>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide; in fact the
> >>> "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
> >>> ipad is located on the ipad.
> >>
> >> That wasn't the question I asked.
> >
> > Read your question again. The OS sandboxing prevented the app
> > to utilize any speed to read the ipad user guide on the ipad. The
> > app had an app speed of ZERO because of sandboxing; if you
> > double the cpu speed, the app reading speed is still ZERO.
>
> Sorry, but that's nonsense.
>
> The app wasn't the correct app for the file you downloaded.

it should have been able to read it. the problem is he is blaming apple
for his own mistakes.

On 2022-03-18 19:44:02 +0000, lew said:
> On 2022-03-15, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-03-15 12:40 p.m., lew wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-03-11 12:39 p.m., lew wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-03-08, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>> And no one but a few kooks try to claim that these are anything but
>>>>>> Apple's intellectual property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'The Apple M1 Ultra is Apple's latest piece of bespoke silicon, and
>>>>>> it's the most powerful M1 chip the company has ever made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unveiled during the March 2022 Apple Event, the M1 Ultra is an
>>>>>> incredibly powerful SoC (system-on-chip). It's basically two M1 Max
>>>>>> chips paired together, using a heretofore "hidden feature" of the Max:
>>>>>> special die-to-die interconnection tech that lets two Max chips work
>>>>>> together for all-new heights of power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple calls this interconnection technology "UltraFusion", and it
>>>>>> appears to be enabling Apple silicon to reach unprecedented levels of
>>>>>> performance.'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-m1-ultra-everything-we-know-so-far>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'We were expecting to see an all-new M2 chip unveiled early in 2022,
>>>>>> not a new top-end M1 chip like the Ultra, but you won't catch me
>>>>>> complaining; given that the M1 Max blew my expectations out of the
>>>>>> water in 2021, the prospect of a new chip that's effectively twice as
>>>>>> powerful is very exciting.'
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter. If apple's ios apps cannot get out of the sandbox,
>>>>> then access/running speed is ZERO. A Ferrari, BMW, Rolls Royce, etc
>>>>> are faster than my old Honda; but the faster cars cannot get to the
>>>>> supermarket faster than me unless they break the law by ignoring
>>>>> the traffic lights, stop signs & school zones as well as pedestrians &
>>>>> bicyles.
>>>>
>>>> In what way does the OS sandboxing prevent an app from utilizing greater
>>>> processor speeds and additional cores?
>>>>
>>>> Don't be afraid to speak in technical language.
>>>
>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide; in fact the
>>> "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>>
>> That wasn't the question I asked.
>
> Read your question again. The OS sandboxing prevented the app
> to utilize any speed to read the ipad user guide on the ipad. The
> app had an app speed of ZERO because of sandboxing; if you
> double the cpu speed, the app reading speed is still ZERO.

An app that doesn't "know where the ipad is located on the ipad" isn't
worth using anyway. :-p

On 2022-03-18, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
> In message <t12o5u$enj$2@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-03-16, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>> In message <t0qq3a$ila$1@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide
>>>
>>> Makes sense, the user guide is in iBook format which is fine since the
>>> Books app is part of iOS so every iOS or iPadOS user has it.
>>>
>>>> in fact the "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>>>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>>>
>>> I cannot parse that.
>>>
>>>
>> The Books app has been considered junkier than iBooks. There is
>> reason why Marvin, MapleRead & FBReader is installed onto many
>> ipads for READing.
>
> I've never seen any of those apps installed on any iPad. The only apps
> I've ever seen people use for reading books are Libby (for library
> books), Kindle (for amazon's shitty format), and Books (for epubs and
> iBooks).
>
> But that is not relevant, because for the iBooks format, only the Books
> app can read those books. They are much improved ePub books with many
> features that other ebook formats do not include.
>
>> The point is that a "faster" cpu does not matter in all cases as an
>> ebook reader is not able to see where the ebook is residing for an app
>> to use.
>
> That sentence started off seeming like it was going to make sense, but
> nope.
>
>> Even my purchased explorer app is not able to find the ipad user guide
>
> Your... what the fuck are you talking about?
>
>> much less being able to read the ebook "faster". The claims of PCMag
>> & others that the ipad is the best tablet device for reading is false;
>
> No, it is not. I've been using my iPad for reading since I first got an
> iPad, even though I own multiple kindles. The iPad is much better, and
> continues to be better.
>
>> There are many postings about the negative of being "locked into"
>> the Amazon envionment; but being locked into the apple ecology
>> is even worst as it also included hardware in the past & looks to
>> becoming the current & future with special chips in order for the apple
>> computer to 'see, recognize, connect & use' the device.
>
> I think you either need to stop taking drugs, or take more drugs.
>
>
Narrow minded. You should check on the Mobileread forum about
apps for reading on an ipad by people who do lots of reading. You
probably don't even use Calibre to keep track of your books. The
books purchased from apple is not a "special" format but just the
open epub format with apple's own DRM.

Insults are the only option you can communicate? guess that is
what apple fanatics can do aside being very NARROW MINDED.

end of talk

In article <t17lgq$8f7$1@dont-email.me>, lew
<citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:

> >>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
> >>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
> >>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide

....

> >> There are many postings about the negative of being "locked into"
> >> the Amazon envionment; but being locked into the apple ecology
> >> is even worst as it also included hardware in the past & looks to
> >> becoming the current & future with special chips in order for the apple
> >> computer to 'see, recognize, connect & use' the device.
> >
> > I think you either need to stop taking drugs, or take more drugs.
> >
> >
> Narrow minded. You should check on the Mobileread forum about
> apps for reading on an ipad by people who do lots of reading. You
> probably don't even use Calibre to keep track of your books. The
> books purchased from apple is not a "special" format but just the
> open epub format

which means they're readable by any app that can read epub, including
mobileread.

> with apple's own DRM.

the ipad user guide does not have drm.

In message <t17lgq$8f7$1@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-03-18, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>> In message <t12o5u$enj$2@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-16, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>> In message <t0qq3a$ila$1@dont-email.me> lew <citrustwosac@google.mailer.company.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> I downloaded the ipad user guide from apple store.
>>>>> The "speed increase" did not let me use my app of choice,
>>>>> MapleReader SE, to read the ipad user guide
>>>>
>>>> Makes sense, the user guide is in iBook format which is fine since the
>>>> Books app is part of iOS so every iOS or iPadOS user has it.
>>>>
>>>>> in fact the "faster" cpu did not let me even access or know where the
>>>>> ipad is located on the ipad.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot parse that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The Books app has been considered junkier than iBooks. There is
>>> reason why Marvin, MapleRead & FBReader is installed onto many
>>> ipads for READing.
>>
>> I've never seen any of those apps installed on any iPad. The only apps
>> I've ever seen people use for reading books are Libby (for library
>> books), Kindle (for amazon's shitty format), and Books (for epubs and
>> iBooks).
>>
>> But that is not relevant, because for the iBooks format, only the Books
>> app can read those books. They are much improved ePub books with many
>> features that other ebook formats do not include.
>>
>>> The point is that a "faster" cpu does not matter in all cases as an
>>> ebook reader is not able to see where the ebook is residing for an app
>>> to use.
>>
>> That sentence started off seeming like it was going to make sense, but
>> nope.
>>
>>> Even my purchased explorer app is not able to find the ipad user guide
>>
>> Your... what the fuck are you talking about?
>>
>>> much less being able to read the ebook "faster". The claims of PCMag
>>> & others that the ipad is the best tablet device for reading is false;
>>
>> No, it is not. I've been using my iPad for reading since I first got an
>> iPad, even though I own multiple kindles. The iPad is much better, and
>> continues to be better.
>>
>>> There are many postings about the negative of being "locked into"
>>> the Amazon envionment; but being locked into the apple ecology
>>> is even worst as it also included hardware in the past & looks to
>>> becoming the current & future with special chips in order for the apple
>>> computer to 'see, recognize, connect & use' the device.
>>
>> I think you either need to stop taking drugs, or take more drugs.
>>
>>
> Narrow minded. You should check on the Mobileread forum about
> apps for reading on an ipad by people who do lots of reading.

I read a lot of books ( 63 so far this year). I belong to several groups
with people who read just as much as I do. Some of them like Kindles,
more of them like Kobos, but most use iPads.

> probably don't even use Calibre to keep track of your books. The
> books purchased from apple is not a "special" format but just the
> open epub format with apple's own DRM.

You are very confused. The Books apps supports PDF, ePub, ePub with DRM,
MP3, AAC, Audible, and iBooks format. iBooks format is a highly enhanced
ePub format that supports many features that ePub does not.

<https://itunespartner.apple.com/books/articles/book-formats-2708>
|| Created in iBooks Author and specifically designed for Apple devices,
|| Multi-Touch books (.ibooks) provide numerous possibilities to
|| interact with the reader through photo galleries, videos, interactive
|| diagrams, 3D objects, quizzes, and more. Multi-Touch books are
|| designed to create immersive and memorable experiences with
|| textbooks, cookbooks, history books, and picture books in ways not
|| possible in print texts..

> end of talk

Yeah, I am not surprised you want to wallow in your willful ignorance.

--
"If I were willing to change my morals for convenience or financial
gain, we wouldn't be arguing, because I'd already *be* a
Republican." -- Wil Shipley

Sandman wrote:

> Again, a simple "yes" would have sufficed

The fact remains *Apple has never built a best-in-class SOC* in its history.

Even more to the point, Apple's CPUs easily qualify for _worst_ in class
(given they don't last a year before they become so unstable they need to
secretly be throttled or they turn off at the moment they're most needed).

Hell, Apple can't even design a modem... nor integrated it into the SOC.
(Everyone can do that - except Apple.)
--
The reason is Apple is all MARKETING and the lowest R&D in all of high tech.

On 2022-03-21 2:21 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Sandman wrote:
>
>> Again, a simple "yes" would have sufficed
>
> The fact remains *Apple has never built a best-in-class SOC* in its
> history.

If by "built" you mean "constructed in their own factory"...

....you're right.

But if you mean that they haven't designed their own SOC...

....you're utterly wrong.

>
> Even more to the point, Apple's CPUs easily qualify for _worst_ in class
> (given they don't last a year before they become so unstable they need to
> secretly be throttled or they turn off at the moment they're most needed).

Sorry, but that's just more bullshit.

>
> Hell, Apple can't even design a modem... nor integrated it into the SOC.
> (Everyone can do that - except Apple.)

On 3/21/22 2:21 PM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Sandman wrote:
>
>> Again, a simple "yes" would have sufficed
>
> The fact remains *Apple has never built a best-in-class SOC* in its
> history.
>
> Even more to the point, Apple's CPUs easily qualify for _worst_ in class
> (given they don't last a year before they become so unstable they need to
> secretly be throttled or they turn off at the moment they're most needed).
>
> Hell, Apple can't even design a modem... nor integrated it into the SOC.
> (Everyone can do that - except Apple.)

Another technically incompetent individual obviously.

John wrote:

> Another technically incompetent individual obviously.

And yet, the fact remains you can't name even a _single_ Apple smartphone
SOC that is best in class. Not even one. In the entire history of Apple.

HINT: An SOC that must be secretly throttled happens to be _worst_ in class.

Hell, Apple can't even design a modem IC. Nor a competitive smartphone GPU.

Nor even integrate an _existing_ modem IC they bought for $190/iPhone from
Qualcomm.

Why?
I don't know why.

I do know that Apple R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech.
And the highest marketing.

That's likely why.
Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D.

Apple MARKETING even has to lie about the M1 to generate any buzz.
And Apple lies about "TSMC Silicon" (big deal - everyone uses TSMC).

All Marketing.
Almost no R&D.

That's Apple.

On 2022-03-21 8:15 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> John wrote:
>
>> Another technically incompetent individual obviously.
>
> And yet, the fact remains you can't name even a _single_ Apple smartphone
> SOC that is best in class. Not even one. In the entire history of Apple.

'Apple’s A13 and A14 chips beat Qualcomm’s flagship Snapdragon 888 in
first benchmarks'

<https://9to5mac.com/2020/12/18/apple-a13-14-snapdragon-888/>

>
> HINT: An SOC that must be secretly throttled happens to be _worst_ in
> class.
>
> Hell, Apple can't even design a modem IC. Nor a competitive smartphone GPU.
>
> Nor even integrate an _existing_ modem IC they bought for $190/iPhone from
> Qualcomm.
>
> Why?
> I don't know why.
>
> I do know that Apple R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech.
> And the highest marketing.
>
> That's likely why.
> Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D.

Apple spends more on R&D than all but a handful of companies.

>
> Apple MARKETING even has to lie about the M1 to generate any buzz.
> And Apple lies about "TSMC Silicon" (big deal - everyone uses TSMC).
>
> All Marketing.
> Almost no R&D.
>
> That's Apple.

<https://www.techcenturion.com/smartphone-processors-ranking>

Apple is first.

In article <t1bf0o$1u49$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> > John:

> > Another technically incompetent individual obviously.

>

> And yet, the fact remains you can't name even a _single_ Apple

> smartphone SOC that is best in class. Not even one. In the entire

> history of Apple.

> HINT: An SOC that must be secretly throttled happens to be _worst_

> in class.

> Hell, Apple can't even design a modem IC. Nor a competitive

> smartphone GPU.

> Nor even integrate an _existing_ modem IC they bought for

> $190/iPhone from Qualcomm.

> Why?

> I don't know why.

> I do know that Apple R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech.

> And the highest marketing.

> That's likely why.

> Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D.

> Apple MARKETING even has to lie about the M1 to generate any buzz.

> And Apple lies about "TSMC Silicon" (big deal - everyone uses TSMC).

> All Marketing.

> Almost no R&D.

> That's Apple.

Ah, this is the "Most Ignorant Olympics"? You're in the lead! Congratulations!

--
Sandman