cmaier
Apr 19, 10:46 PM
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
Chupa Chupa
Mar 22, 01:06 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Except the biggest spec is missing from it: compatible with the Apple App Store. Sorry, specs are not the end all and be all of device popularity. What good are specs if few developers write the device?
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Except the biggest spec is missing from it: compatible with the Apple App Store. Sorry, specs are not the end all and be all of device popularity. What good are specs if few developers write the device?
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
skunk
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Who said I supported Bush? He's not conservative enough for me.Hell, the Pope's not conservative enough for you.
I know a lot about alcoholism and codependence because my mother is a nurse who specialized in treating alcoholics and other drug addicts and in counseling them. You don't help an alcoholic by protecting him from the consequences of his actions. The protection can help him make even bigger mistakes. I've seen that happen in many families I know of that include alcoholics. I also know about entitled welfare recipients who abuse social programs by demanding too much from social programs, by getting it, and by defrauding them. I saw the entitlement firsthand when a relative of mine was a landlord who rented houses to welfare recipients. Welfare recipients ruined a house, my relative kept the security deposit, and then the family got the Department of Social Services to put them into a house for twice the rent my relative charged. But the family still had the nerve to complain that my relative had overcharged it.Ah, how I've missed the heartwarming, anecdotal and utterly irrelevant evidence you bring to a topic.
I know a lot about alcoholism and codependence because my mother is a nurse who specialized in treating alcoholics and other drug addicts and in counseling them. You don't help an alcoholic by protecting him from the consequences of his actions. The protection can help him make even bigger mistakes. I've seen that happen in many families I know of that include alcoholics. I also know about entitled welfare recipients who abuse social programs by demanding too much from social programs, by getting it, and by defrauding them. I saw the entitlement firsthand when a relative of mine was a landlord who rented houses to welfare recipients. Welfare recipients ruined a house, my relative kept the security deposit, and then the family got the Department of Social Services to put them into a house for twice the rent my relative charged. But the family still had the nerve to complain that my relative had overcharged it.Ah, how I've missed the heartwarming, anecdotal and utterly irrelevant evidence you bring to a topic.
maelstromr
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 10, 07:07 PM
I finished the Sebastien Loeb Challenge. It was incredible.
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
nagromme
Aug 25, 03:22 PM
It would be a shame to Apple toss aside its consistent record of having the industry's best support.
But it takes more than a few weeks of anonymous "uptick" to indicate such a dire turn of events.
Now, if such a thing did come to pass, I welcome every complaint and flame Apple can get: feedback is what gets them back on track.
And it's a shame about the discussion staff--seems like an odd move from where I'm standing.
But it takes more than a few weeks of anonymous "uptick" to indicate such a dire turn of events.
Now, if such a thing did come to pass, I welcome every complaint and flame Apple can get: feedback is what gets them back on track.
And it's a shame about the discussion staff--seems like an odd move from where I'm standing.
fivepoint
Apr 28, 09:50 AM
Imagine that, three responses which utterly fail to refute let alone dispute my clear and truthful argument. Instead, they leave snide remarks. No substance WHATSOEVER. :)
Al Coholic
Apr 27, 09:42 AM
And Tea Party members :DYou do know that Al "the accidental politician" Franken was at the forefront of this right?
Unless that loon switched ideologies I don't think he even drinks tea.
Unless that loon switched ideologies I don't think he even drinks tea.
Macky-Mac
Apr 27, 02:39 PM
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
do you even know who generated the PDF? Perhaps the state of Hawaii set up an editable blank form for their use?
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
do you even know who generated the PDF? Perhaps the state of Hawaii set up an editable blank form for their use?
shamino
Jul 22, 12:06 PM
I'm just curious about your post. Why would anyone in their right mind maintain a website for a product/company that no longer exists? Seems like a big waste of time and resources. I can see doing something similar for archival purposes, but that link leads to a complete website that has the appearance that it is still active.
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
RedTomato
Aug 11, 12:28 PM
My bets are that it will be either with Nokia or with HTC.
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
bigmc6000
Jul 14, 03:14 PM
Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?
Weight is one - ever try picking up something that's top heavy? It's rather awkward to carry/pickup and makes it much more likely to tip. Another reason being the cord would likely be hanging down from said spot - while this seems ok it's really not good for the wires inside - ideally it would only have sweeping curves in the line as opposed to what happens with havinga plug so high. I'm conflicted about the heat issue as there are pro's and con's to both configs so I'll stick with awkward weight distribution as the key limiting factor.
Weight is one - ever try picking up something that's top heavy? It's rather awkward to carry/pickup and makes it much more likely to tip. Another reason being the cord would likely be hanging down from said spot - while this seems ok it's really not good for the wires inside - ideally it would only have sweeping curves in the line as opposed to what happens with havinga plug so high. I'm conflicted about the heat issue as there are pro's and con's to both configs so I'll stick with awkward weight distribution as the key limiting factor.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 05:04 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
RebootD
Mar 31, 04:44 PM
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
tripjammer
Mar 22, 12:51 PM
The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 05:43 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
H. Flower
Apr 11, 02:32 PM
For the past three years, Apple's decisions in the professional market have been a bag of fail.
Anyone else starting to get a sinking feeling?
Anyone else starting to get a sinking feeling?
brianus
Sep 14, 12:56 PM
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
uv23
Jul 31, 12:07 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
BRLawyer
Aug 27, 02:56 AM
You are talking crap. It is only about industrial quality. Nothing else.
There are simply too many individual issues with the new MB and MBP here, and I do not want to repeat them. Mostly hardware, but some are related to using OSX and MSOS. You can read, so do that.
APPLE has been 'second to none' in the eyes of APPLE users, compared to who? I think MAC OS is fantastic, but it does not mean, that all those who switch now to APPLE have to accept hardware lemons to get this OS... Absolutely no excuse for over 25% crap products delivered to the customers...
Everybody knows that APPLE could have had a 40+ market share, but decided not to license out. We all would be happier now, but JOBS decided against that years back. So now we are talking about a less than 5% market share... JUst do your math: If they had a 40% share WW, we would hear millions screaming about their lemons...
It seems there's too much luck involved when buying an APPLE product right now.
When they finally get their QC act together I will gladly buy their product.
Cheers, and no hard feelings.
No hard feelings indeed, but please show me numbers and facts, not anecdotal evidence of some dozens/hundreds of people (as compared to millions of purchasers). I will take your point when you do that, thanks very much. And really, to say that 25% of Apple products are lemons is to be, at very least, extremely glib.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
There are simply too many individual issues with the new MB and MBP here, and I do not want to repeat them. Mostly hardware, but some are related to using OSX and MSOS. You can read, so do that.
APPLE has been 'second to none' in the eyes of APPLE users, compared to who? I think MAC OS is fantastic, but it does not mean, that all those who switch now to APPLE have to accept hardware lemons to get this OS... Absolutely no excuse for over 25% crap products delivered to the customers...
Everybody knows that APPLE could have had a 40+ market share, but decided not to license out. We all would be happier now, but JOBS decided against that years back. So now we are talking about a less than 5% market share... JUst do your math: If they had a 40% share WW, we would hear millions screaming about their lemons...
It seems there's too much luck involved when buying an APPLE product right now.
When they finally get their QC act together I will gladly buy their product.
Cheers, and no hard feelings.
No hard feelings indeed, but please show me numbers and facts, not anecdotal evidence of some dozens/hundreds of people (as compared to millions of purchasers). I will take your point when you do that, thanks very much. And really, to say that 25% of Apple products are lemons is to be, at very least, extremely glib.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Onimusha370
Mar 22, 01:04 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
AppleJustWorks
Aug 26, 09:56 AM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
shartypants
Mar 22, 03:35 PM
copy cats. Same price for a piece of crap, no thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment