Membership Ranks: Why is there a 65832?

themadchemist · Jun 18, 2004

Having just risen to the ranks of 65832, I'm wondering why it's there. It is used if you have posts between 1500 and 1504, with 1505 signifying your rise to 68000.

Therefore, it seems silly to even have it, wouldn't one agree? Right now, I'm the only person falling in this narrow range on the entire site. That sort of suggests that that membership level is a little bit silly.

edit: see! it's been 10 minutes since I originally posted this, and I'm already at the next membership level. pointless and silly, I tell you! Pointless and silly!

Mr. Anderson · Jun 18, 2004

looks like your not there now....

why ask why - its kind of interesting that its so narrow, only shows up once in a great while - a rarity

D

bousozoku · Jun 18, 2004

Mr. Anderson said:
looks like your not there now....

why ask why - its kind of interesting that its so narrow, only shows up once in a great while - a rarity

D

As was that processor.

themadchemist · Jun 18, 2004

Mr. Anderson said:
looks like your not there now....

why ask why - its kind of interesting that its so narrow, only shows up once in a great while - a rarity

D

Yes, D, those fifteen minutes were a special time...

You're probably right, it's a nice little oddity.

Grimace · Jun 19, 2004

They are beating around saying that the "levels" correspond to processors - that processor had a short life.

themadchemist · Jun 19, 2004

carletonmusic said:
They are beating around saying that the "levels" correspond to processors - that processor had a short life.

Right. When I realized this, the joke became funny.

jsw · Jun 19, 2004

Dumb - possibly truly dumb - question:

Where might I find the list which correlates number-of-posts to processor-used-by-Apple?

themadchemist · Jun 19, 2004

jsw said:
Dumb - possibly truly dumb - question:

Where might I find the list which correlates number-of-posts to processor-used-by-Apple?

Not a dumb question at all. Plenty of people start entire threads asking that question. Here's the link:

MacRumors "Status"

Freg3000 · Jun 19, 2004

Newbie = 0 - 29 posts
Member => 30 posts
Regular => 100 posts
6502 => 500 posts
65816 => 1000 posts
65832 => 1500 posts
68000 => 1505 posts
68010 => 2000 posts
68020 => 2005 posts
68030 => 3000? posts
68040 => 4000? posts
601 => 5000?+ posts

Edit: One minute too slow.....just as usual.

jsw · Jun 19, 2004

themadchemist said:
MacRumors "Status"

Thank you.

It might be nice to add this to the FAQ area, should arn have the time and inclination. It can be deduced by sorting the Member List by post count, but that's a wee bit of an effort....

szark · Jun 19, 2004

Newbie = 0 - 29 posts
Member => 30 posts
Regular => 100 posts
6502 => 500 posts
65816 => 1000 posts
65832 => 1500 posts
68000 => 1505 posts
68010 => 2000 posts
68020 => 2005 posts
68030 => 2500 posts
68040 => 3000 posts
601 => 5000 posts

Fixed that for you.

We don't know if arn programmed any other levels, but jelloshotsrule is currently over 7000 and is still a 601.

macsrus · Jun 19, 2004

szark said:
Newbie = 0 - 29 posts
Member => 30 posts
Regular => 100 posts
6502 => 500 posts
65816 => 1000 posts
65832 => 1500 posts
68000 => 1505 posts
68010 => 2000 posts
68020 => 2005 posts
68030 => 2500 posts
68040 => 3000 posts
601 => 5000 posts

Fixed that for you.

We don't know if arn programmed any other levels, but jelloshotsrule is currently over 7000 and is still a 601.

Thanks for the info..... I was wondering too

ratspg · Jun 20, 2004

hah

if i was active i would get somewhere... ive been on these forums for a couple years and i don't post too often yet

lol

CmdrLaForge · Jun 21, 2004

Hi

is there any easy way to see who posted the most and who second and so on. I remember the stats from Doctor Q a while ago. Would be interesing to see an update on those.

Cheers

crenz · Jun 21, 2004

I appreciate the humour... it's a nice little gesture for those that know the history of Apple.

themadchemist · Jun 21, 2004

crenz said:
I appreciate the humour... it's a nice little gesture for those that know the history of Apple.

yeah, for some reason, I didn't remember the short lifespan of the 65832. One someone pointed it out, it was quite funny, in a nerdy kind of way.

And jsw--I agree. Considering the number of people who ask about this, it should be in the FAQ. Hopefully, arn will get around to it. It's not a big deal, but might be useful to some new people.

szark · Jun 22, 2004

CmdrLaForge said:
Hi

is there any easy way to see who posted the most and who second and so on. I remember the stats from Doctor Q a while ago. Would be interesing to see an update on those.

Cheers

Click on "Members List" in the menu bar above, then click on "Posts" to sort by the number of posts.

Winston Smith · Jun 23, 2004

With some really high posters it seems time for newer processors to be added.
MacRumors could make 3Ghz before IBM then.

~Shard~ · Jun 26, 2004

szark said:
We don't know if arn programmed any other levels, but jelloshotsrule is currently over 7000 and is still a 601.

7000? Big deal - check out Mr. Anderson!

I'd love to have Arn take away his title just for a minute so we could see what he would be ranked... He'd have to be a G3 or a G4 without a doubt!

~Shard~ · Jun 26, 2004

And yes, the short "member status life" of the 65832 is indicative of the short life the actual processor had in the history of Apple's machines, as is the case with the 68010. I think it's actuallly quite clever and thorough of Arn+team to set things up this way.

~Shard~ · Jun 26, 2004

Winston Smith said:
With some really high posters it seems time for newer processors to be added.
MacRumors could make 3Ghz before IBM then.

That's not exactly how it would work - the member rankings are based on processor architectures, not speeds. So technically, the only new rankings after 601 could be G3, G4 and G5 (regardless of if you're talking about a 1.6 GHz G5 or a 3 GHz G5). Arn would just have to set ther post counts high so that it would take members ages to actually achieve those levels.

cb911 · Jul 1, 2004

if i ever got to a rare number title like that, i'd probably have to stop posting for a couple of months, or spread out those 4 or 5 crucial posts so i could keep the rare title.

ah... i just checked how many posts i'm at now... looks like i've way gone past my chance at having 68000

oh well, not too many ranks left for me now.

and i'm also at 3.4 posts a day, and i don't remember posting that many in a day for quite a while. kind of scary thinking about how many hours i've spent here in some days.

themadchemist · Jul 2, 2004

~Shard~ said:
That's not exactly how it would work - the member rankings are based on processor architectures, not speeds. So technically, the only new rankings after 601 could be G3, G4 and G5 (regardless of if you're talking about a 1.6 GHz G5 or a 3 GHz G5). Arn would just have to set ther post counts high so that it would take members ages to actually achieve those levels.

You're forgetting the 603, 603e, 604, and 604e...Not to mention the fact that if you referred to the GX families by their actual processor id number, then you'd get a few for each family. The most recent example would be that G5's could be 970's or 970FX's.

~Shard~ · Jul 2, 2004

themadchemist said:
You're forgetting the 603, 603e, 604, and 604e...Not to mention the fact that if you referred to the GX families by their actual processor id number, then you'd get a few for each family. The most recent example would be that G5's could be 970's or 970FX's.

Ah, details, details...

It's a moot point right now anyway, as I'll have to be posting for a couple more years before I get close to those ranks. My life is too busy to be sitting on these forums posting 10-20 messages a day!

dernhelm · Jul 2, 2004

themadchemist said:
You're forgetting the 603, 603e, 604, and 604e...Not to mention the fact that if you referred to the GX families by their actual processor id number, then you'd get a few for each family. The most recent example would be that G5's could be 970's or 970FX's.

You are exactly right. I vote that they should be added. I do more browsing then posting, so I'll never be much higher then regular probably - but I always did wonder why I never saw anyone higher than 601; which was first put into a mac, what almost a decade ago? I don't remember exactly when, but I bought one when it was first announced - a 6100/60AV. Finally retired it last year.

Membership Ranks: Why is there a 65832?

macrumors 68030

Moderator emeritus

Moderator emeritus

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68040

macrumors 68030

Moderator emeritus

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68000

Moderator emeritus

macrumors 68030

macrumors 6502

macrumors 68020

macrumors 601

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68030

macrumors regular

macrumors P6

macrumors P6

macrumors P6

macrumors 601

macrumors 68030

macrumors P6

macrumors 68000

Our Staff