news

Re: Next Lightroomrequires ...

Sandman
SubjectRe: Next Lightroomrequires 64bit
FromSandman
Date01/31/2015 07:23 (01/31/2015 07:23)
Message-ID<sandman-35f37454da9ea47c241396b1bb5ef47f@individual.net>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
Followsnospam
FollowupsTony Cooper (1h & 40m)
nospam (19h & 52m) > Sandman

In article <300120151923419725%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam wrote:

Sandman
I *WONDERED* what happened to your browser. I did *NOT* "blame" neither you nor your browser.

You were an asshole without a valid reason.

nospam
nope. i always have a valid reason to be an asshole :)

Not this time. Many times you do, when people are being rude to you. But this time I wasn't and you responded by being a complete ass.

Sandman
The only data we have suggest that up to 12% of W7 users may be on 32 bit. I don't know how reliable that data is, and no other stats site I found have the W7 versions separated, unfortunately.

nospam: it's completely irrelevant.

Incorrect.

nospam
it's not relevant no matter how much you argue otherwise.

It is not irrelevant no matter how much you protest.

Sandman
nospam: nothing that matters or adobe wouldn't have done it.

You keep saying that, based on no data what so ever. So more hot air from you.

nospam
it's common sense.

I.e. you have no data, only empty claims, like I said.

Sandman
nospam: the number of people who run win7 on older 32 bit hardware is very low, particularly adobe users, close enough to zero to be considered zero.

Based on no actual data, of course, just assumption.

nospam: it's not an assumption.

Since you have presented no data, it is an assumption by definition.

Present data and make it more than an assumption.

nospam
ask microsoft. this is well known.

I.e. you have no data to support your position, like I said. Only hot air.

Sandman
nospam: then why did you cite them?

Because it's the only data I *could* find. No other site seems to separate them. And while not relevant to the general PC population, it's at least indicative to some extent.

nospam: it's not indicative at all.

Incorrect.

nospam
nope.

Incorrect.

Sandman
nospam: you did a quickie search and pick the first result, one which is totally irrelevant.

Incorrect. I am an Adobe user and a Steam user. I am not the only one, logically.

nospam
you're in a minority.

Another claim from you without data to support it. You're up to what, ten of those claims in this thread alone?

i didn't say there's *no* overlap.

"Totally irrelevant" suggests there is no overlap. "Not very relevant" might be a more apt description for your position. You keep making explicit claims you can't back up.

Sandman
nospam: that's how you end up at shitty restaurants. you find a link that says some restaurant is good, oblivious to it being a shill review and not surprisingly, it turns out to be not great.

your research skills suck.

And yours is non-existant. You have yet to find a good restaurant or better data on W7 64 bit usage.

nospam
i have *zero* problems finding excellent restaurants.

You have thus far been 100% unable to do so in that area.

here's a hint: you don't just put in 'good restaurants' into a search engine and hope to get useful results.

Yes, you have been 100% unsuccessful to outline a research method that would find good restaurants in that area. I know.

Sandman
nospam: steam customers and adobe customers are *worlds* different. there is likely to be very little overlap in the two.

More hot air and no data from you.

nospam
prove that steam customer usage is identical to adobe.

I would, if I had claimed they were. As it is, I haven't.

oh right, there is no such proof.

Just as there is no proof that they are "*worlds* different", which is more hot air from you.

Sandman
nospam: adobe knows *exactly* what their customer base is far better than you or anyone else does and they would not drop 32 bit support if it made a difference. it doesn't.

it's a complete non-issue.

A claim from you based on exactly no data.

nospam
it's common sense.

Again, no data. What you call "common sense" is irrelevant to the explicit claim that requires data to support it.

why the hell would adobe shoot themselves in the foot? the may not be perfect, but they're not that stupid.

No one has claimed they would shoot themselves in the foot.

you, however, is a different story.

Yes, I work with facts, support and substantiation for my claims, and I don't make explicit claims I can't support. That's your department.

-- Sandman

Tony Cooper (1h & 40m)
nospam (19h & 52m) > Sandman

Thread