• Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Posts: 12027 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > I never said I was going to serve you with anything Andreas, so I haven't failed.

    You made a claim and didn't back it up when called out on it. That's what I call a failure to provide evidence. Whether you failed deliberately or not is another matter.

    > It's all in your head

    No, your claim about ARM11 outperforming e300c4 is right here in this thread for everybody to read:

    "the PPC camp would probably put forward the 5121e, and the ARM camp could choose from, say, the i.MX51, i.MX53, Tegra 1 or Tegra 2. All of those ARM chips performs much better than the PPC"

    As you know, it's the "Tegra 1" part of your claim I've been objecting to. Tegra 1 has an ARM11 core and clocks up to 800 MHz, MPC5121e has an e300c4 core and clocks up to 400 MHz. So it's your claim that 800 MHz ARM11 "performs much better than" 400 MHz e300c4. I can't see why that claim should be in my head when in fact it's in what you wrote.

    > I really wish you would keep it there.

    I really wish you'd keep your nonsense claims wherever they are prior to you spouting them out in public.

    > Your brains incapability to follow a discussion at large, and
    > comprehend the essence of it, is notorious

    The essence of a discussion (if there is such thing by default at all) is determined by the essences of the statements that discussion is compound of. You made several dubious statements on the topic of ARM in this thread, which I listed there:

    https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7675&start=92 (last part)

    So far, you chose to not address my objections and questions regarding those statements.

    > all the time you seem to stumble and fall on the words a discussion is made of

    Words are what constitute the meaning of a proposition for its recipient. You wrote "Tegra 1" but didn't mean to write "Tegra 1"? Your problem, not mine. It could have been easy for you to retract the "Tegra 1" part of your claim and I'd have been fine by it, but you chose not to retract it. You're the only one responsible for your choices.

    > with the result of you completely missing out on the discussion itself.

    No, I understand the "discussion itself" very well. But that doesn't mean I won't address what I believe are lies or false statements or ask questions regarding what I believe are dubious statements, be they part or not of what you think the "essence" is.

    > You have showed this behavior in practically all threads you
    > have taken part in, and this one as well.

    That's true. Whenever I see something on the message boards I'm active on which I think is a lie, a false statement or a dubious statement I feel free to address it either by outright correcting it (often with links) or by asking questions.

    > If your Asperger brain can't identify a pattern it can handle and process

    Huh? I *can* identify, handle and process the "Tegra 1" part of your claim. That's the reason I objected to it. Or what alleged "pattern" do you refer to regarding your "performs much better than" claim?

    > it tries to recompute it into a pattern it *can* handle and process

    Huh? I didn't "recompute" anything. Your claim that Tegra 1 "performs much better than" MPC5121e is written by you as clear as it could be. Substituting "Tegra 1" by "ARM11" and "5121e" by "e300c4" was done by me in order to abstract from the whole SoC to the part delivering the core performance. The clock frequencies were mentioned by me to point at the maximum core frequencies the Tegra 1 and the MPC5121e can operate at (to make a fair assessment and not compare to a lowly clocked 400 MHz Tegra 1 for instance). So where did I "recompute" anything?

    > then you will start discussing *this* instead of what was *really* being discussed...

    If you don't want things being discussed then don't mention them. In particular: If you don't want your performance claims regarding Tegra 1 (in comparison to MPC5121e) being discussed then don't make them in the first place. Simple.

    > yet another thread derails! Yet again!

    You're the one derailing it. Performance comparison between Tegra 1 and MPC5121e is well within the scope of this thread's topic I'd say (else your original attempt at comparing them would have been off-topic already). Your discussion of my "Asperger brain" and my posting habits is definitely not. (Btw, what do "yet another" and "yet again" refer to specifically?)

    > The ironic thing is that when people simply stops replying to your posts,
    > you probably feel like you have "won" the discussion

    If someone makes a certain claim and I ask for evidence regarding this claim but this someone won't address this request I'm inclined to believe he has no such evidence but pulled the claim from his behind. There's nothing ironic about that.

    > and that you are right in your claims.

    Huh? It's *your* claim that Tegra 1 "performs much better than" MPC5121e, not mine. I didn't even claim the opposite but just asked you for evidence to back up your claim.

    > I actually think all this (and you as a character as well) is highly amusing

    I'm glad to be able to bring some joy into your life :-)
  • »26.05.11 - 16:46