Makes perfect sense to me. Generally speaking, Mac users are wealthier, brighter, more successful, better educated, more informed and get hotter women than say Android users, just as an example. People who want the best and those who truly appreciate tech buys Apple.
If I ran a e-commerce website, I wouldn't even allow Android users to access it, as it would be a waste of time and resources to let all sorts of riff raff and street bums with no money from accessing my site and using up precious data. I would have to assume that they were not truly looking to rent a hotel room, and that they were actually looking to purchase a roach motel, and I would redirect them to the appropriate site.
You're embarrassing the rest of us by showing your lack of education in this post.
I just watched one of the Orbitz execs on CNBC. CNBC brought up the fact there was a huge backlash going on, and the exec said they were going to continue using their superior technology, to give users the best experience. Another example of companies not listening to their customers, until its too late. HELLO, ever heard of New Coke, or Netflix?
Can you say "TROLL?" Guess you haven't read the reviews. I won't be getting one, Don't need the power or graphics. But, I know some graphic designers that are head over heels on this machine.
Can you say "TROLL?" Guess you haven't read the reviews. I won't be getting one, Don't need the power or graphics. But, I know some graphic designers that are head over heels on this machine.
So many myths, so little time. I challenge you to present any evidence whatsoever that shows that the cost of anything is significantly impacted by any litigation. And you can forget about health care and malpractice insurance, because the answer there is unequivocally no, it is not affected by litigation expenses. (In fact, in those instances, it's established that price increases are, historically, largely driven by the need of insurance companies to recoup losses from bad investments in financial markets.)
I'm sorry, you're right. Lawyers and multi-million dollar lawsuits have little to no impact on a company's balance sheet. And before you say "no, I said the cost" well it is built into the cost of everything. But I am a mere mortal working in corporate America, while you are smart enough to have solved health care, so I'll defer to you.
So many myths, so little time. I challenge you to present any evidence whatsoever that shows that the cost of anything is significantly impacted by any litigation. And you can forget about health care and malpractice insurance, because the answer there is unequivocally no, it is not affected by litigation expenses. (In fact, in those instances, it's established that price increases are, historically, largely driven by the need of insurance companies to recoup losses from bad investments in financial markets.)
This is one of the most laughable statements I've read for a while!
I am sure this is the sort of feature Orbitz must have thought about a lot, and even got some legal opinion on, before implementing.
At one level, customers might think they are getting ripped off. But if you really think about it, all they are doing, is using User Data that the user is anyway sending them, to reorganize results. All the results are shown to everyone, and the prices are the same. It is just re-ordered.
I actually think this is a much more ethical thing than the things Google does.
For instance, Amazon has a feature where they show "people who bought the items you did, also bought"... This obviously is likely to show expensive items (better hotel rooms) to a user who has purchased expensive items (a Mac), and cheaper items (cheaper hotel rooms) to a person who has purchased cheaper items (Windows computers). But all items in the store are available to everyone. No one has complained about Amazon's methods! I is just that what orbitz is doing is even safer - they are just re-ordering results.
I can see a future Microsoft ad - buying Windows makes it easier for you to lead a cheaper life!
As an aside, should we increase the TCO of a Mac because of this?!
I'm sorry, you're right. Lawyers and multi-million dollar lawsuits have little to no impact on a company's balance sheet. And before you say "no, I said the cost" well it is built into the cost of everything. But I am a mere mortal working in corporate America, while you are smart enough to have solved health care, so I'll defer to you.
Evidence? You don't have any. This is just what you've been told by propagandists (i.e., lobbyists) and find it emotionally satisfying to believe.
This is one of the most laughable statements I've read for a while!
Well, you are welcome to present your evidence. What's that? You don't have any either? Well, of course you don't.
Sorry, but this is just another one of those mindless thing, like "competition is always good", that people repeat over and over again until they unquestioningly believe it's true, until they can't even conceive that it could not be true.
Well, you are welcome to present your evidence. What's that? You don't have any either? Well, of course you don't.
Sorry, but this is just another one of those mindless thing, like "competition is always good", that people repeat over and over again until they unquestioningly believe it's true, until they can't even conceive that it could not be true.
Does this mean that people who do not view Orbitz on a Mac will be unable to see all of the hotel choices? Would this also apply to the Mac users here if they happen to view Orbitz on something other than a Mac?
Makes perfect sense to me. Generally speaking, Mac users are wealthier, brighter, more successful, better educated, more informed and get hotter women than say Android users, just as an example. People who want the best and those who truly appreciate tech buys Apple.
If I ran a e-commerce website, I wouldn't even allow Android users to access it, as it would be a waste of time and resources to let all sorts of riff raff and street bums with no money from accessing my site and using up precious data. I would have to assume that they were not truly looking to rent a hotel room, and that they were actually looking to purchase a roach motel, and I would redirect them to the appropriate site.
Hi Crayon Boy
I think you are confusing IOS and OSX, the two are quite different. I guess that you were toooooo busy fighting off those gorgeous models to notice that it is mac vs pc.
Good luck with the e-commerce site , i guess you will you be selling colouring pens?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Makes perfect sense to me. Generally speaking, Mac users are wealthier, brighter, more successful, better educated, more informed and get hotter women than say Android users, just as an example. People who want the best and those who truly appreciate tech buys Apple.
If I ran a e-commerce website, I wouldn't even allow Android users to access it, as it would be a waste of time and resources to let all sorts of riff raff and street bums with no money from accessing my site and using up precious data. I would have to assume that they were not truly looking to rent a hotel room, and that they were actually looking to purchase a roach motel, and I would redirect them to the appropriate site.
You're embarrassing the rest of us by showing your lack of education in this post.
I just watched one of the Orbitz execs on CNBC. CNBC brought up the fact there was a huge backlash going on, and the exec said they were going to continue using their superior technology, to give users the best experience. Another example of companies not listening to their customers, until its too late. HELLO, ever heard of New Coke, or Netflix?
Can you say "TROLL?" Guess you haven't read the reviews. I won't be getting one, Don't need the power or graphics. But, I know some graphic designers that are head over heels on this machine.
Wrong thread, I imagine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU
You're embarrassing the rest of us by showing your lack of education in this post.
Do you suffer from multiple personality disorders? Because you are only one person and you speak only for yourself, don't pretend otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Wrong thread, I imagine.
My theory is that they were responding to post #34, but didn't quote correctly.
I'm sorry, you're right. Lawyers and multi-million dollar lawsuits have little to no impact on a company's balance sheet. And before you say "no, I said the cost" well it is built into the cost of everything. But I am a mere mortal working in corporate America, while you are smart enough to have solved health care, so I'll defer to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU
You're embarrassing the rest of us by showing your lack of education in this post.
Guys who use the word 'Adonis' in their username probably shouldn't talk about 'embarrassment'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
So many myths, so little time. I challenge you to present any evidence whatsoever that shows that the cost of anything is significantly impacted by any litigation. And you can forget about health care and malpractice insurance, because the answer there is unequivocally no, it is not affected by litigation expenses. (In fact, in those instances, it's established that price increases are, historically, largely driven by the need of insurance companies to recoup losses from bad investments in financial markets.)
This is one of the most laughable statements I've read for a while!
I'm flattered.
!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Sounds like a fair, ethical, smart way of taking advantage of user data without violating privacy.
Alternately, it sounds like a really stupid way to lose a Mac user base.
Business 101: Don't piss off potential or existing customers.
Buh-bye Orbitz.
At one level, customers might think they are getting ripped off. But if you really think about it, all they are doing, is using User Data that the user is anyway sending them, to reorganize results. All the results are shown to everyone, and the prices are the same. It is just re-ordered.
I actually think this is a much more ethical thing than the things Google does.
For instance, Amazon has a feature where they show "people who bought the items you did, also bought"... This obviously is likely to show expensive items (better hotel rooms) to a user who has purchased expensive items (a Mac), and cheaper items (cheaper hotel rooms) to a person who has purchased cheaper items (Windows computers). But all items in the store are available to everyone. No one has complained about Amazon's methods! I is just that what orbitz is doing is even safer - they are just re-ordering results.
I can see a future Microsoft ad - buying Windows makes it easier for you to lead a cheaper life!
As an aside, should we increase the TCO of a Mac because of this?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneaburns
I'm sorry, you're right. Lawyers and multi-million dollar lawsuits have little to no impact on a company's balance sheet. And before you say "no, I said the cost" well it is built into the cost of everything. But I am a mere mortal working in corporate America, while you are smart enough to have solved health care, so I'll defer to you.
Evidence? You don't have any. This is just what you've been told by propagandists (i.e., lobbyists) and find it emotionally satisfying to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
This is one of the most laughable statements I've read for a while!
Well, you are welcome to present your evidence. What's that? You don't have any either? Well, of course you don't.
Sorry, but this is just another one of those mindless thing, like "competition is always good", that people repeat over and over again until they unquestioningly believe it's true, until they can't even conceive that it could not be true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Well, you are welcome to present your evidence. What's that? You don't have any either? Well, of course you don't.
Sorry, but this is just another one of those mindless thing, like "competition is always good", that people repeat over and over again until they unquestioningly believe it's true, until they can't even conceive that it could not be true.
I need to provide evidence that I laughed?
Couldn't you just accept my word? (>_<)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
I need to provide evidence that I laughed?
Couldn't you just accept my word? (>_<)
Yes, well, sarcasm is the last resort... and all that.
Does this mean that people who do not view Orbitz on a Mac will be unable to see all of the hotel choices? Would this also apply to the Mac users here if they happen to view Orbitz on something other than a Mac?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Makes perfect sense to me. Generally speaking, Mac users are wealthier, brighter, more successful, better educated, more informed and get hotter women than say Android users, just as an example. People who want the best and those who truly appreciate tech buys Apple.
If I ran a e-commerce website, I wouldn't even allow Android users to access it, as it would be a waste of time and resources to let all sorts of riff raff and street bums with no money from accessing my site and using up precious data. I would have to assume that they were not truly looking to rent a hotel room, and that they were actually looking to purchase a roach motel, and I would redirect them to the appropriate site.
Hi Crayon Boy
I think you are confusing IOS and OSX, the two are quite different. I guess that you were toooooo busy fighting off those gorgeous models to notice that it is mac vs pc.
Good luck with the e-commerce site