My New Hobby (XKCD Style)

[Mr.Numbers]

OP, you do realize you have managed to derail your own threadsnip

Pretty much find myself agreeing with this post. I like my Mac for general use, but can use windows for strategy games if I feel the need. I suppose if someone were so inclined they could highlight the myriad of faults that PCs have associated with them by doing something similar in PC world. Blue screens of death, random crashing, windows in general, in fact I had an anti-virus that once tried to remove windows from my machine.

In short, Mac V PC is an argument on par with Xbox 360 V PS3, tired, overdone, and generally boring.

It's not a mac vs. PC argument though, but a thread about entertaining acts of petty revenge and stupid hobbies. Read my other posts after this one. I cannot stress this enough Mac users, I have nothing against you, just the company itself for ripping off my developer.

How... immature.

I on the other hand love making penis jokes.

just figure I'd put your first and last sentences next to each other. Also what I posted covers all aspects of your post, which in itself a derailment as this is not what is being discussed. Please read other posts than just the first one.

I personally loved the Subway person

ALSO

WOOOT 2 PAGES??!! XD

 

[Da Orky Man]

http://apcmag.com/15_reasons_macs_are_still_better_than_windows.htm

This list is so desperate it even makes the point of Macs having "less blinking lights".

 

[thiosk]

And even if you look past that, calories isn't something you measure with kilocalories. It should say "energy (kcal)", or even better, "energy (J)".

Dietary calories are kilocalories; it actually makes more sense to do it this way than to say that your half cup of hagen daaz has a quarter million calories. (or 1.5 million joules)

 

[TsunamiWombat]

I paid 1,800 for an upper middle/lower upper PC and even that was probably astronomically overpriced, 3,000 for a mac what is this I don't even

 

[Llil]

And even if you look past that, calories isn't something you measure with kilocalories. It should say "energy (kcal)", or even better, "energy (J)".

Dietary calories are kilocalories; it actually makes more sense to do it this way than to say that your half cup of hagen daaz has a quarter million calories. (or 1.5 million joules)

No, it doesn't. But even if it did, the whole chart is still inconsistent. If the second column says "calories (kcal)", then the first one should say "grams (g)" instead of "fat (g)". Fat is the thing measured in grams, energy is the thing measured in kilocalories.

 

[Monsterfurby]

Much better, install a hacked version of MacOS on a windows machine. Sit in Starbucks. Enjoy performance, laugh at Mac users.

(to Mac users: All in good fun, no offense intended )

 

[Stilkon]

That is hilarious. I previously disliked Macs for their crappy keyboards. Guess I've found a more legitimate excuse.

 

[Amgeo]

My hobby:

Whenever somebody tries to sell me something by opening with "Hello, I'm with X company and-" I say "Oh, well, good for you" in a really interested voice and hang up.

 

[Mr.Numbers]

http://apcmag.com/15_reasons_macs_are_still_better_than_windows.htm

This list is so desperate it even makes the point of Macs having "less blinking lights".

Actually most of the things on this list I can think of as things that Windows has and does better, or are flat out reasons to not by a Mac.

Hell 10 and 8 contradict each other, and 12 is only true for the fact that not even virus writers SUPPORT mac...Until now. And they're so used to that sphere of protection that the really simple phishers targeting Macs are having HUGE success because of a Macs Naivety.

BUT

This is not a Mac Vs PC thread, so please...Start a new one for that?

I would post in it, I swear

 

[Benito Zamora]

Oh hey, another macs suck thread.

Well, all I can say is that seems rather immature. I'm all for trolling people, but trolling a company because you're a tad peeved at them for whatever infinitesimal you have.

 

[Rabish Bini]

Oh hey, another macs suck thread.

Well, all I can say is that seems rather immature. I'm all for trolling people, but trolling a company because you're a tad peeved at them for whatever infinitesimal you have.

God damnit, this is not a 'Mac sucks' thread. Read the first post again, this time very carefully.

 

[Benito Zamora]

I read it. I concur with my previous statement.

 

[thiosk]

And even if you look past that, calories isn't something you measure with kilocalories. It should say "energy (kcal)", or even better, "energy (J)".

Dietary calories are kilocalories; it actually makes more sense to do it this way than to say that your half cup of hagen daaz has a quarter million calories. (or 1.5 million joules)

No, it doesn't. But even if it did, the whole chart is still inconsistent. If the second column says "calories (kcal)", then the first one should say "grams (g)" instead of "fat (g)". Fat is the thing measured in grams, energy is the thing measured in kilocalories.

What? You are rather unclear with what you're on about. Its giving the information and putting the unit used in parentheses. Its not putting the thing in parentheses. Whats the point of "Grams (g): 37" on a chart? It puts Fat (g): 37 which means the unit used to measure the fat was grams.

And its exactly the same for the "calories" which are Dietary Calories, the actual unit of which is kilocalories. Dietary Calories are a thing, here, but its a name thats been made up to make the numbers useful and because "kilocal" is a stupid name. Thing outside parentheses, unit inside parentheses. You really do quantify Dietary Calories by measuring the calories (4.18 joules) in the food, then divide by 1000 to get a Kilocalorie, which is in turn perfectly equivalent to 4180 joules or 4.18 kj. What you call it doesn't matter, the units all work out.

Are you annoyed that dietary calories are simplified "Calories" rather than some derivative of "food energy"? Or are you annoyed that a dietary calorie is defined as a kilocalorie so therefore it technically has itself in the parenthesies? Or are you annoyed that kilocalorie is not an SI unit?

 

[Leviathan_]

I prefer just uploading this one everywhere, OP.

 

[Mr.Numbers]

I read it. I concur with my previous statement.

Try reading every post I've made since?
Specifically the one directly above yours.

 

[MoDu]

http://apcmag.com/15_reasons_macs_are_still_better_than_windows.htm

This list is so desperate it even makes the point of Macs having "less blinking lights".

That list is awfull! Was expecting a few well made points and a few nonsense ones, but nothing there is worth reading. Not mention, mostly false:

Windows doesn't come full of bloatware, laptop manufacturers do that.


Sleep mode is unreliable in windows? Hell, it's excelent, I use it every day, especially on my tablet convertible laptop: I just open the screen and bam, ready to go. If battery is low, it wakes up just to hibernate.


"OS X + Windows is better than just Windows" - I agree, trouble is, if you can get both OS on the same hardware, why should you pay 3 times more for the same specs?

"Neat and contained system settings." - Ok, I stop here, this is even more ridiculous than the blinking lights.


Back on track, I respect Apple's way regarding software tighness and resulting OS stability, it offers something an open platform can' possibly offer.

But overpricing the same hardware, it just grinds my gears.

 

[Benito Zamora]

http://apcmag.com/15_reasons_macs_are_still_better_than_windows.htm

This list is so desperate it even makes the point of Macs having "less blinking lights".

Actually most of the things on this list I can think of as things that Windows has and does better, or are flat out reasons to not by a Mac.

Hell 10 and 8 contradict each other, and 12 is only true for the fact that not even virus writers SUPPORT mac...Until now. And they're so used to that sphere of protection that the really simple phishers targeting Macs are having HUGE success because of a Macs Naivety.

BUT

This is not a Mac Vs PC thread, so please...Start a new one for that?

I would post in it, I swear

You mean this one? Looks like a duck. Sounds like a duck. but you say it isn't one? MUST CLEARLY BE SO!

I didn't mean that your original intention was to make it a hate thread, however it has made itself that way, which was honestly inevitable. Even you comment here pretty much says macs suck. Stating it isn't an anti-mac thread afterward does not make it true.

 

[Pegghead]

Clever, reminds me of something I once saw no the web where some guy brought up a picture on all the ipads in an apple store of a woman saying "I wish my iphone was too big for my p[ocket and couldn't make phone calls".

But lately I've been stewing over an idea to set up a fake Facebook account, leave the account open on macs in Apple stores and later go home and observe the mentality of Mac users by seeing what passerby did with the open profile.

 

[Mr.Numbers]

http://apcmag.com/15_reasons_macs_are_still_better_than_windows.htm

This list is so desperate it even makes the point of Macs having "less blinking lights".

Actually most of the things on this list I can think of as things that Windows has and does better, or are flat out reasons to not by a Mac.

Hell 10 and 8 contradict each other, and 12 is only true for the fact that not even virus writers SUPPORT mac...Until now. And they're so used to that sphere of protection that the really simple phishers targeting Macs are having HUGE success because of a Macs Naivety.

BUT

This is not a Mac Vs PC thread, so please...Start a new one for that?

I would post in it, I swear

You mean this one? Looks like a duck. Sounds like a duck. but you say it isn't one? MUST CLEARLY BE SO!

I didn't mean that your original intention was to make it a hate thread, however it has made itself that way, which was honestly inevitable. Even you comment here pretty much says macs suck. Stating it isn't an anti-mac thread afterward does not make it true.

Ok this is officially half an anti mac thread.

Now are you happy?

No?
I am allowed to agree with a witty poster as well as make a separate opinion, these are not mutually exclusive things.

What would you like me to do then? People are enjoying this thread, a lot of clever links and jpgs are being thrown around and constructive arguments are being made that is educating a lot of people.

It is, in fact, a good thread at the moment that I will try to police accordingly.


I have noticed that everyone who is posting this sort of "Mac vs Pc arguments are old" message, are, however Mac users, who dislike being anti-mac'd. In which case: Just post about the other half of what this thread is about, don't try to drag down the thread because you disagree with the ideology. Justify your opinion, don't complain about everyone else's.

Anything else?

 

[Llil]

What? You are rather unclear with what you're on about. Its giving the information and putting the unit used in parentheses. Its not putting the thing in parentheses. Whats the point of "Grams (g): 37" on a chart? It puts Fat (g): 37 which means the unit used to measure the fat was grams.

And its exactly the same for the "calories" which are Dietary Calories, the actual unit of which is kilocalories. Dietary Calories are a thing, here, but its a name thats been made up to make the numbers useful and because "kilocal" is a stupid name. Thing outside parentheses, unit inside parentheses. You really do quantify Dietary Calories by measuring the calories (4.18 joules) in the food, then divide by 1000 to get a Kilocalorie, which is in turn perfectly equivalent to 4180 joules or 4.18 kj. What you call it doesn't matter, the units all work out.

Are you annoyed that dietary calories are simplified "Calories" rather than some derivative of "food energy"? Or are you annoyed that a dietary calorie is defined as a kilocalorie so therefore it technically has itself in the parenthesies? Or are you annoyed that kilocalorie is not an SI unit?

I'm sorry if I'm being unclear, I'll try to explain better.

The thing with "grams (g)" was, like you said, thing otside parenthesis, unit inside. But calorie isn't a thing, it's a unit. (I suppose if you used Calorie with uppercase C, it could kinda make sense, even though I think having a difference with Calorie and calorie is stupid.) But if one column says "thing (unit)" and the second one says "unit (unit)", well that makes no sense. So for consistency's sake I suggested "grams (g)" so it would follow the same format as "calories (kcal)", that is "unit (unit)".

And to answer what I'm annoyed about, three things:
1. A calorie shouldn't be a thing. Call it a dietary calorie if you will, but calorie is still a unit to measure energy.
2. People use calories and kilocalories as equivalent. Would you mix metres and kilometres? As in "my house is two metres from the shop", or "I'm 1.7 kilometres tall". I don't think so.
3. I'm not annoyed that calorie isn't an SI unit, but I am annoyed that it's used instead of a proper SI unit. If it was up to me, amount of energy would be shown in joules (or kilojoules, or megajoules...). It's the same thing with horsepower. One horsepower isn't even really the power of a horse. Use watts damnit. It's the use of stupid and obsolete units that gets on my nerves.