I have bought PC products in the past, before I switched to Macs. I emailed customer support at Dell and HP, both of which I have purchased laptops before. I told them that based on Microsoft's attack on Apple, that I wanted to be removed from their mailing lists and that I would never buy a PC from them again. If enough people do the same thing, I suspect that it will get Microsoft's attention.
As much as I like it, there is actually not much value placed in software from the part of Microsoft.
I agree with you here. Everyone does not buy Apple on the 'sexy' bit, although it certainly helps get people interested in walking through the store doors.
I am OK with Microsoft advertising like this, but there is something not right about not mentioning their software AT ALL in any of the ads. Where software is Apple's greatest strength!
It's as if MS has colluded with all the PC makers and said 'Leave this with us guys, we'll get your market-share back on track'.
The HP gets a pretty decent review here, because it is unbiased. It compares favorably with the Macbook.
Benchmarking could be done by installing Windows on the Macbook, but of course, you can't install OSX on a non-apple machine, which is not a plus to me.
However, Ubuntu or another Linux distro could be installed on both machines if you want to test with the best operating system available.
BTW, if it takes anybody two hours to find and install free software such as Openoffice and Avast, I would say they are stretching the truth if they call themselves technically inclined.
Get back to me when you can assemble your own machine for $300 and install your operating system on it.
"And while Giampaolo can upgrade to even more RAM, he can't upgrade his new system to use the faster DDR3 RAM specification used in the MacBook. That would make his system faster overall and allow it to take full advantage of the installed CPU's 1066MHz front side bus, which HP chose to cripple by pairing it with a 533MHz memory architecture to save money and deliver a cheap system for people who don't know what they're really buying as they shop at Fry's for good-sounding GB and MHz numbers rather than focusing on finding a computer that does the things they want it to do."
DDR2 533MHz memory runs at 1066MHz front side bus so his system is not crippled. Idiot.
Really though, to say that this guy picked this laptop because macs don't perform is silly. Whatever other anecdotal evidence people come up with, at least with Geekbench, the macs hold their own.
Now that Macs have Intel under the hood, the main differences come down to the supporting chipsets and the OS installed.
As has already been mentioned above, switching from Microsoft to Linux will give any PC a huge performance boost. The current version of Ubuntu (8.10) is extremely responsive on a 2002 vintage processor, and on a new quad core machine it absolutely flies.
It does disturb me that Microsoft spend so much on advertising, and yet comes out with such poor, misguided ads when - as proven in this thread - there are angles they could take to show how they have an advantage over Macs, but instead they put out this tripe that is only going to push more people into buying a Mac? Does Microsoft actually hire an ad agency, or does Steve Ballmer write it all himself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim chi
come on, i drive a prius ... i'm green. now give me what i want.
Good write up but you forgot to mention both of these ads are about students, meaning they qualify for 10% off which would erase the money this guy "saved" immediately.
Of course, with the scant money that he's saving (he could have bought the high end MacBook by matching Microsoft's money with his own $100), Giampaolo will now get to go shopping for software, where he can easily spend several hundred dollars just trying to match the features and usability of the free iLife and Mac OS X tools Apple bundles with the MacBook.
Giampaolo will also have to spend hours of his time installing and running antivirus and adware tools, and stay on the lookout for that Conficker computer worm that Microsoft is warning Windows PC users about on the front page of its corporate website.
I can see it now ?
Apple's next ad's give someone $1500.00 to buy the best laptop they can, and folks put in some of there own money to get a Mac!
Somehow in this commercial they say, Computer, PLUS software, PLUS headaches, PLUS viruses, PLUS Pop-ups, PLUS spy-ware - "Hell the Mac is A LOT LESS money!
The Mac runs Mac OS X. The Dell cannot. That's reason enough.
For many, aesthetics and the user experience DO count.
Yes, we can quibble about this or that spec, but ultimately, it's about running Mac OS X and the software designed to run on it, NOT about saving a few pennies up front. BTW, running Mac OS X DOES save me money in the long run.
Also, NEVER buy RAM from Apple.
Hell the Mac can run windows and the Dell can't One more reason to buy the Mac.
"Why not compare the HP, to the white MB that Apple still sells, that also has DDR2-667 MHz RAM and a 1066 MHz FSB? I'm not sure if that would benefit HP or Apple more, but it's not like HP isn't the only one pairing a new C2D with older DDR2."
Well it would lower the Mac price point for comparison purposes, even though the white Macbook would still have many advantages over the HP, including aesthetics, quality, superior OS, superior software, etc. But the point is that the ad portrays this ass clown as a technically savvy user, yet he fails to look beyond the most basic of specs and ignores a slew of important issues that make the HP a poor choice for his stated needs.
"And I'm not even sure how important DDR3 vs DDR2 in current laptops. Desktops with faster RAM and lower latencies may see more of a difference, but laptops are generally slower than desktops no matter what. "
If you're not sure how important DDR3 vs DDR2 is on laptops then perhaps you should withhold your comments until you educate yourself on the subject.
"Although the HP does have the Geforce 9600M, which Apple only offers on the MBP."
At no time did the dope in the ad mention the video card as a factor influencing his buying decision. And if graphics were important to him, then I suspect he would prefer something other than a huge HP display with ridiculously low resolution and widely reported poor quality and limited viewing angles.
"And the article does mention that he did choose Vista 64-bit"
NO, the article hopes he chose the Vista 64-bit OS, as that is the only option that would allow his HP computer to use all 4GB of RAM that he is paying for. The ad never mentions what version of Vista he got, and Microsoft's stats indicate that only a tiny fraction of Vista users have the 64 bit version of the OS. The insinuation is that is is very likely he purchased the machine with an OS that is incapable of using all 4GB of RAM, let alone any additional RAM he might want to install later.
"but that's a 64-bit OS now, while Apple is still using a 32-bit kernel and PAE, until Snow Leopard, but it's still not a true 64-bit OS ATM."
While OSX still has some 32-bit components, the bulk of the OS has been 64-bit for some time now - which among other things allows Mac users to actually use 4GB+ of RAM, unlike the VAST MAJORITY of Windows users who are wasting money on RAM their OS is incapable of utilizing. So much for the myth of the power-hungry, technically savvy Windows user.
Giampaolo will also have to spend hours of his time installing and running antivirus and adware tools, and stay on the lookout for that Conficker computer worm that Microsoft is warning Windows PC users about on the front page of its corporate website.
I bet you $1500 that he doesn't spend hours on this task.
Maybe you've got into the iPhone mode of thinking a bit too much. Modern PCs support automated background tasks. Virus scanners don't require any user input until something is found. Even clean-up can be automated.
I've got a desktop Vista PC and a MBP. I spend zero time worrying about viruses on either system.
Droning on about viruses for Windows is as retarded as Windows fans droning on about the single button Apple mouse. Congratulations for retaining your crown as AI's dumbest writer.
MS has no taste. It's as true now as it was back when Steve said it, as part of one of the most eloquent and thoughtful perspectives I've ever heard on the subject.
Why is everyone doing a price/spec comparison here. Who really cares?
If it doesn't run OS X and doesn't integrate well with the Apple ecosystem, why the hell would you buy it?? Yecch, I wouldn't touch a Windows box with a ten-foot pole. Why go cheap on the tool you'll be using day in, day out? It HAS to be a rewarding and enjoyable experience.
Are you kidding me, why do you think mot of us dumped WIndows in the first place? I'd gladly pay extra for what I get (and don't get, and won't get) with a Mac.
Does anyone here actually think these ads will hurt Apple? They simply confirm Apple's status and the desirability of it products. Labeling yourself as the budget brand ipso facto means there is also a premium brand . . . that you don't represent!
Apple has had the computing sector's number for years now - ever since the intro of the very first iMacs, and they've come up with a winning formula and cater to a very specific market. That won't change for a long, long time.
The Microsoft ad definitely lacks "taste". Their choice of an HPX was a poor one at best (* the guy was definitely not a techie). However it is worth noting that there are certain computer brands such as the Sony Vaio series that comes pretty close to Mac quality.
Strangely enough, I actually like the ad. I don't find it as bad as most commenters are making it sound.
I don't agree with quite a bit of what the article is saying as well. "cheap plastic body of the hp"?
That seems kind of harsh, i'm not sure how AI knows that hp used cheap plastic parts on that particular computer.
Also the article goes at length comparing the macbook (13 inch) to the hp (16 inch) They're in two different categories altogether. All the guy basically said is that the macbook didn't quite meet his needs. & its true.
Maybe the macbook pro, but certainly not the macbook. Just my opinion.
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M + 9600M GT graphics card with 256MB dedicated video memory
costs $2099.00.
I then went to dell.com and looked at a computer there, and customized it a bit.
A 16-inch Dell Studio XPS 16 with
Intel® Core? 2 Duo T9800 (6MB cache/2.93GHz/1066Mhz FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-bit (yes, it really can handle the next entry...)
5GB DDR3 SDRAM at 1067MHz (2 Dimms)
320GB Serial ATA HDD @ 7200rpm
8X optical drive (DVD+/- R/RW CD-RW)
ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 3670 graphics card with 512MB dedicated video memory
costs $1,949.00.
I am not certain about battery life. As far as I could tell, Apple's website did not mention anything about the computer's battery life, so I'm going to guess the at 3-5 hours from the people below. The Dell ships with a six-cell battery (whatever that means), with an option to add an additional 9-cell battery for $80. (The computer has one battery port, so you would have to switch batteries to change them). In the past, Dell called the 9-cell battery an "85whr" and I think the the 6-cell was a "65whr". They did not elaborate on what "whr" is, so maybe someone can tell me?
The rest of the specifications (such as backlit keyboard, webcam, physical dimensions, weight, included software/accessories, etc.) were either not easily comparable, or merely matters of personal preference, so I purposely did not include them.
Essentially, my point is, for $150.00 less, you are getting
A processor that is 0.5GHz faster
An extra GB of RAM (and the same type of RAM as the Macbook, too, so you have nothing there like you did with MS's shitty commercial)
HDD that is 70GB larger and 1.5 times as fast
Graphics card which has twice as much memory.
A computer with comparable specifications (actually, essentially identical) to the Macbook mentioned above is a (very slightly modified) Studio XPS 13. If the graphics card is upgraded to the GeForce 9500M, comparable to the one that the Macbook has, this model costs $1,229. (the processor and RAM are the same by default; the Dell has a slightly (inconsequentially, IMHO) larger HDD)
Why on earth would I want to spend nine hundred dollars extra to get identical specifications? What does a Macintosh have that could possibly justify this? And don't tell me that Macs are more reliable. They may be, but I have had a Dell laptop for three and a half years, and I have had zero problems with the hardware.
I would like to point out the lack of information on bus speed and cache size for the processor.
Also that sure the macbook has less memory for the graphics but it has TWO SETS. One being higher powered than the other to help save battery life. I'm not sure about macbook pro but my macbook white averages at least 5 hours of life.
Regarding the RAM, WOOPTY FREAKIN' DOO! You put 5 GB of RAM in a laptop! PEOPLE RARELY USE OVER 1.5!! I personally have never run into any problems with 2 GB of RAM while rendering FULL HD video.
Let's not forget the software which is mentioned in the article.
SongSmith(bad version of garageband) -$30
Office(standard) -$400 (iwork is $80 and macs come with Mail(outlook=mail))
I guess publisher=iweb so add another $50 to Office
(feel free to ad more I'm to lazy to look for Time Machine equivalents and same with iDVD)
Strangely enough, I actually like the ad. I don't find it as bad as most commenters are making it sound.
I don't agree with quite a bit of what the article is saying as well. "cheap plastic body of the hp"?
That seems kind of harsh, i'm not sure how AI knows that hp used cheap plastic parts on that particular computer.
Also the article goes at length comparing the macbook (13 inch) to the hp (16 inch) They're in two different categories altogether. All the guy basically said is that the macbook didn't quite meet his needs. & its true.
Maybe the macbook pro, but certainly not the macbook. Just my opinion.
plastic bodies are cheap compared to a unibody aluminum case. The guy sad portability and power he got a bigger computer which barely beats the macbook(if it even does).
Interesting. One of the things this article did was bring a lot of newbies out of the woodwork. How often has that happened?
Welcome to you new guys.
Welcome to a bunch of trolls that have turned this place into CNET? I don't post much, because I usually enjoy the exchanges between the more experienced and knowledgeable members.
However, you knew this was going to turn into flamebait. Just look at all the people who just signed up to give us their "wisdom"... a total infestation of people decrying "fanboys" and defending the honor of Microsoft and Linux and Ubuntu. (in fairness, some people who joined did so to defend Apple, but really -- this is the sort of thing that makes you want to contribute to a forum?)
Comments
As much as I like it, there is actually not much value placed in software from the part of Microsoft.
I agree with you here. Everyone does not buy Apple on the 'sexy' bit, although it certainly helps get people interested in walking through the store doors.
I am OK with Microsoft advertising like this, but there is something not right about not mentioning their software AT ALL in any of the ads. Where software is Apple's greatest strength!
It's as if MS has colluded with all the PC makers and said 'Leave this with us guys, we'll get your market-share back on track'.
Hmmmm.
I imagine if someone did benchmarks between these two machines, would totally kill the premise of this ad.
http://laptoplogic.com/reviews/apple...k-2008-release
http://laptoplogic.com/reviews/HDX16t
The HP gets a pretty decent review here, because it is unbiased. It compares favorably with the Macbook.
Benchmarking could be done by installing Windows on the Macbook, but of course, you can't install OSX on a non-apple machine, which is not a plus to me.
However, Ubuntu or another Linux distro could be installed on both machines if you want to test with the best operating system available.
BTW, if it takes anybody two hours to find and install free software such as Openoffice and Avast, I would say they are stretching the truth if they call themselves technically inclined.
Get back to me when you can assemble your own machine for $300 and install your operating system on it.
DDR2 533MHz memory runs at 1066MHz front side bus so his system is not crippled. Idiot.
I imagine if someone did benchmarks between these two machines, would totally kill the premise of this ad.
Well, for what it's worth, we can look at Geekbench.
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/120016 - HP, Dual Core, 2.13 ghz - gets a 2542.
Really though, to say that this guy picked this laptop because macs don't perform is silly. Whatever other anecdotal evidence people come up with, at least with Geekbench, the macs hold their own.
Now that Macs have Intel under the hood, the main differences come down to the supporting chipsets and the OS installed.
As has already been mentioned above, switching from Microsoft to Linux will give any PC a huge performance boost. The current version of Ubuntu (8.10) is extremely responsive on a 2002 vintage processor, and on a new quad core machine it absolutely flies.
come on, i drive a prius ... i'm green. now give me what i want.
You are joking, right?
Plus, if he waited 3 months he'd get a free iPod.
Of course, with the scant money that he's saving (he could have bought the high end MacBook by matching Microsoft's money with his own $100), Giampaolo will now get to go shopping for software, where he can easily spend several hundred dollars just trying to match the features and usability of the free iLife and Mac OS X tools Apple bundles with the MacBook.
Giampaolo will also have to spend hours of his time installing and running antivirus and adware tools, and stay on the lookout for that Conficker computer worm that Microsoft is warning Windows PC users about on the front page of its corporate website.
I can see it now ?
Apple's next ad's give someone $1500.00 to buy the best laptop they can, and folks put in some of there own money to get a Mac!
Somehow in this commercial they say, Computer, PLUS software, PLUS headaches, PLUS viruses, PLUS Pop-ups, PLUS spy-ware - "Hell the Mac is A LOT LESS money!
The Mac runs Mac OS X. The Dell cannot. That's reason enough.
For many, aesthetics and the user experience DO count.
Yes, we can quibble about this or that spec, but ultimately, it's about running Mac OS X and the software designed to run on it, NOT about saving a few pennies up front. BTW, running Mac OS X DOES save me money in the long run.
Also, NEVER buy RAM from Apple.
Hell the Mac can run windows and the Dell can't
Skip
Well it would lower the Mac price point for comparison purposes, even though the white Macbook would still have many advantages over the HP, including aesthetics, quality, superior OS, superior software, etc. But the point is that the ad portrays this ass clown as a technically savvy user, yet he fails to look beyond the most basic of specs and ignores a slew of important issues that make the HP a poor choice for his stated needs.
"And I'm not even sure how important DDR3 vs DDR2 in current laptops. Desktops with faster RAM and lower latencies may see more of a difference, but laptops are generally slower than desktops no matter what. "
If you're not sure how important DDR3 vs DDR2 is on laptops then perhaps you should withhold your comments until you educate yourself on the subject.
"Although the HP does have the Geforce 9600M, which Apple only offers on the MBP."
At no time did the dope in the ad mention the video card as a factor influencing his buying decision. And if graphics were important to him, then I suspect he would prefer something other than a huge HP display with ridiculously low resolution and widely reported poor quality and limited viewing angles.
"And the article does mention that he did choose Vista 64-bit"
NO, the article hopes he chose the Vista 64-bit OS, as that is the only option that would allow his HP computer to use all 4GB of RAM that he is paying for. The ad never mentions what version of Vista he got, and Microsoft's stats indicate that only a tiny fraction of Vista users have the 64 bit version of the OS. The insinuation is that is is very likely he purchased the machine with an OS that is incapable of using all 4GB of RAM, let alone any additional RAM he might want to install later.
"but that's a 64-bit OS now, while Apple is still using a 32-bit kernel and PAE, until Snow Leopard, but it's still not a true 64-bit OS ATM."
While OSX still has some 32-bit components, the bulk of the OS has been 64-bit for some time now - which among other things allows Mac users to actually use 4GB+ of RAM, unlike the VAST MAJORITY of Windows users who are wasting money on RAM their OS is incapable of utilizing. So much for the myth of the power-hungry, technically savvy Windows user.
Giampaolo will also have to spend hours of his time installing and running antivirus and adware tools, and stay on the lookout for that Conficker computer worm that Microsoft is warning Windows PC users about on the front page of its corporate website.
I bet you $1500 that he doesn't spend hours on this task.
Maybe you've got into the iPhone mode of thinking a bit too much. Modern PCs support automated background tasks. Virus scanners don't require any user input until something is found. Even clean-up can be automated.
I've got a desktop Vista PC and a MBP. I spend zero time worrying about viruses on either system.
Droning on about viruses for Windows is as retarded as Windows fans droning on about the single button Apple mouse. Congratulations for retaining your crown as AI's dumbest writer.
Why is everyone doing a price/spec comparison here. Who really cares?
If it doesn't run OS X and doesn't integrate well with the Apple ecosystem, why the hell would you buy it?? Yecch, I wouldn't touch a Windows box with a ten-foot pole. Why go cheap on the tool you'll be using day in, day out? It HAS to be a rewarding and enjoyable experience.
Are you kidding me, why do you think mot of us dumped WIndows in the first place? I'd gladly pay extra for what I get (and don't get, and won't get) with a Mac.
Does anyone here actually think these ads will hurt Apple? They simply confirm Apple's status and the desirability of it products. Labeling yourself as the budget brand ipso facto means there is also a premium brand . . . that you don't represent!
Apple has had the computing sector's number for years now - ever since the intro of the very first iMacs, and they've come up with a winning formula and cater to a very specific market. That won't change for a long, long time.
For example:
Sony Vaio FW390 Series
Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 (2.4GHz)
2GB RAM (DDR2-800)
320GB 7200rpm
Blu-Ray Read Only Drive
ATI Mobile HD3650 512MB
16.4" @ 1920x1200 XBRITE-FullHD
>> Costs $1229.99 USD
I'll say that is an actual competitor to the MacBook Pro, not the shitty HPX.
I don't agree with quite a bit of what the article is saying as well. "cheap plastic body of the hp"?
That seems kind of harsh, i'm not sure how AI knows that hp used cheap plastic parts on that particular computer.
Also the article goes at length comparing the macbook (13 inch) to the hp (16 inch) They're in two different categories altogether. All the guy basically said is that the macbook didn't quite meet his needs. & its true.
Maybe the macbook pro, but certainly not the macbook. Just my opinion.
Welcome to you new guys.
Interesting. One of the things this article did was bring a lot of newbies out of the woodwork. How often has that happened?
Welcome to you new guys.
I'll second this. Welcome!
*sound of me repeatedly hitting my head on desk*
Okay, whoever made that ad needs to be fired. Now. What the hell is MS thinking? God.
Anyways, I saw a lot of people talking about benchmark comparisons between macs and PCs, so I decided to see for myself.
I looked at a computer on Apple.com and customized it a bit.
A 15-inch Macbook Pro with
- 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
- 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM (2 Dimms)
- 250GB Serial ATA HDD @ 5400rpm
- 8x optical disc drive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
- NVIDIA GeForce 9400M + 9600M GT graphics card with 256MB dedicated video memory
costs $2099.00.I then went to dell.com and looked at a computer there, and customized it a bit.
A 16-inch Dell Studio XPS 16 with
- Intel® Core? 2 Duo T9800 (6MB cache/2.93GHz/1066Mhz FSB)
- Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-bit (yes, it really can handle the next entry...)
- 5GB DDR3 SDRAM at 1067MHz (2 Dimms)
- 320GB Serial ATA HDD @ 7200rpm
- 8X optical drive (DVD+/- R/RW CD-RW)
- ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 3670 graphics card with 512MB dedicated video memory
costs $1,949.00.I am not certain about battery life. As far as I could tell, Apple's website did not mention anything about the computer's battery life, so I'm going to guess the at 3-5 hours from the people below. The Dell ships with a six-cell battery (whatever that means), with an option to add an additional 9-cell battery for $80. (The computer has one battery port, so you would have to switch batteries to change them). In the past, Dell called the 9-cell battery an "85whr" and I think the the 6-cell was a "65whr". They did not elaborate on what "whr" is, so maybe someone can tell me?
The rest of the specifications (such as backlit keyboard, webcam, physical dimensions, weight, included software/accessories, etc.) were either not easily comparable, or merely matters of personal preference, so I purposely did not include them.
Essentially, my point is, for $150.00 less, you are getting
- A processor that is 0.5GHz faster
- An extra GB of RAM (and the same type of RAM as the Macbook, too, so you have nothing there like you did with MS's shitty commercial)
- HDD that is 70GB larger and 1.5 times as fast
- Graphics card which has twice as much memory.
A computer with comparable specifications (actually, essentially identical) to the Macbook mentioned above is a (very slightly modified) Studio XPS 13. If the graphics card is upgraded to the GeForce 9500M, comparable to the one that the Macbook has, this model costs $1,229. (the processor and RAM are the same by default; the Dell has a slightly (inconsequentially, IMHO) larger HDD)Why on earth would I want to spend nine hundred dollars extra to get identical specifications? What does a Macintosh have that could possibly justify this? And don't tell me that Macs are more reliable. They may be, but I have had a Dell laptop for three and a half years, and I have had zero problems with the hardware.
I would like to point out the lack of information on bus speed and cache size for the processor.
Also that sure the macbook has less memory for the graphics but it has TWO SETS. One being higher powered than the other to help save battery life. I'm not sure about macbook pro but my macbook white averages at least 5 hours of life.
Regarding the RAM, WOOPTY FREAKIN' DOO! You put 5 GB of RAM in a laptop! PEOPLE RARELY USE OVER 1.5!! I personally have never run into any problems with 2 GB of RAM while rendering FULL HD video.
Let's not forget the software which is mentioned in the article.
SongSmith(bad version of garageband) -$30
Office(standard) -$400 (iwork is $80 and macs come with Mail(outlook=mail))
I guess publisher=iweb so add another $50 to Office
(feel free to ad more I'm to lazy to look for Time Machine equivalents and same with iDVD)
Strangely enough, I actually like the ad. I don't find it as bad as most commenters are making it sound.
I don't agree with quite a bit of what the article is saying as well. "cheap plastic body of the hp"?
That seems kind of harsh, i'm not sure how AI knows that hp used cheap plastic parts on that particular computer.
Also the article goes at length comparing the macbook (13 inch) to the hp (16 inch) They're in two different categories altogether. All the guy basically said is that the macbook didn't quite meet his needs. & its true.
Maybe the macbook pro, but certainly not the macbook. Just my opinion.
plastic bodies are cheap compared to a unibody aluminum case. The guy sad portability and power he got a bigger computer which barely beats the macbook(if it even does).
Interesting. One of the things this article did was bring a lot of newbies out of the woodwork. How often has that happened?
Welcome to you new guys.
Welcome to a bunch of trolls that have turned this place into CNET? I don't post much, because I usually enjoy the exchanges between the more experienced and knowledgeable members.
However, you knew this was going to turn into flamebait. Just look at all the people who just signed up to give us their "wisdom"... a total infestation of people decrying "fanboys" and defending the honor of Microsoft and Linux and Ubuntu. (in fairness, some people who joined did so to defend Apple, but really -- this is the sort of thing that makes you want to contribute to a forum?)
I guess this site needed the traffic.
aqnguyen87
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tx
Posts: 2
ssampier
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
kim chi <-------- the first real troll poster
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
HiFivinFisto
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
delpt
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
qwerty
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
EndoFallTime
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
mj93284
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
randomdude
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
archangel3700
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
codedude
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
overdue
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
2kunlimited
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
joindup
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
jegs
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1
Icarusmk2
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1