No, but when someone spews out errant information in an attempt to piss off an entire community, then yeah, it generally makes them a troll.
You're not the first, so sorry if you didn't get quite the reaction you expected.
I'm inclined to say he's pretty reasonable, especially when discussing with a person that claims that there is an absolute objective style. Might as well argue with someone that says that there is an absolute objective utopia.
From an OBJECTIVE view, I'd have to say a few of the members on this board tuned you out extreme as soon as you pointed out you worked for IBM.
You could have given winning lotto numbers and you'd still get ignored.
Mac users only like criticism from mac users. Anyone else just simply doesn't know what they are talking about...
For the record, I am a mac user... 8)
Ive already said many times im a Mac user have been for 15+ years which could be longer than some forum members have been alive. Some people just want to jump all over everything if you don't agree with them. The fact I work for IBM really has nothing to do with anything ive never worked on anything relating to G* chips or anything to do with Mac computers. Im strictly a mainframe programmer and anything else I do is strictly for enjoyment.
The simple fact is until Apple changes its vision MS will have a strangle hold on OS systems for many years to come. That doesnt work well for any of us. MS isnt the problem the problem occurs when any company has 95% or any market.
To give another example, gaming consoles, xbox, ps2/3 may have some games that are exclusive to their systems which may temp consumers to buy one or the other. Overall sofware companies that code for these console systems make money by coding their games to work on all console systems and in many cases pc's. Steve Jobs is the only one that believes keeping the Mac OS system available to Macs only is a good idea, im fairly certain the rest of the stock holders believe its a bad idea.
Believe me I get it, I get it to the point that I understand that way the Mac runs has nothing to do with its hardware and everything to do about the OS and how the OEM products are built around that standard.
If anyone could explain to me how having more options would be a disadvantage to the end user I would sure love to hear that debate.
The only reason I currently dont have a new iMac is I was fairly certain that Apple would be putting a 64bit chip in fairly soon. The intel release was fairly common knowledge if you follow trends.
Not to offend anyone but the iMac was released too soon and the reason Apple did that was they got stuck and had to release it. The software wasnt ready and still isnt and in my opinion wont be until it can all run without the use of an emulator. Apple knew loyal users (not knowledgeable) ones would buy it not because it made sense but because it was the new toy on the block and "cool" looking.
Those users will be kicking themselves when they see a new iMac with a faster yet cheaper chip to produce, more ram and a better video card for the same price. Those users will have zero upgrade options unless you consider buying a new computer six month later a valid upgrade option.
The fact that the new chips are cheaper to produce will allow Apple to upgrade ram and video yet keep the cost on par with the current iMac.
So the title of this thread is "Is the iMac mitake) I guess the answer to that question differs depending on if your Apple or the end user that bought a rushed system.
Doesnt hurt my feelings if people ignore me just means they choose that because they are unable to truly debate what I have to say. Im up for any respectful debate and will always admit if someone has a better idea or if I happen to be wrong about something. Theres no shame is being wrong or making a mistake.
No, but when someone spews out errant information in an attempt to piss off an entire community, then yeah, it generally makes them a troll.
You're not the first, so sorry if you didn't get quite the reaction you expected.
Didn't have an expectation on reaction. Like I said in my post before this im a long time Mac user and I was even born in CT...
Not trying to piss anyone off. Just stating what id like to see happen in the future, my vision might be differnet from yours and thats fine if we all had the same opinion that would make things pretty boring. My information is accurate evne when I went back and looked at the Sony specs the prices is on par with the iMac 20" and so is the hardware. For someone that is 19 years old posting the link 100.00 one way or the other might be alot I know at 19 it was for me, however to me 100-200 is still on par price way and so is the hardware.
If you really read my posts you will see I really only have two issues. The first is I believe integraded is bad. It can look cool but its not upgradable which is never good in the long run. I feel certain that you can at least agree with me that being able to upgrade your system if you wanted too without having to buy a new one would be a nice option.
Second the Mac isnt all about hardware in fact other then case design the same hardware we all have in our Macs is the same hardware that is in our pc computers if you happen to own both. The reason Macs run well is because the OS is a true OS not a Gui interface that still to some extent sits on a dos based system.
In the good old days I would always run OS2 warp which back then was a pretty damn good OS when it came to dual boot and running multi network platforms. I hated Windows and at the time it was even worse we ran 3.1. My opinion is it would be nice if Apple gave up this elite crap and made all there software available to all end users.
Ask yourself this question, wouldnt it be nice to be able to buy any hardware you wanted and be able to run any OS you wanted even dual boot to any OS you wanted too.
This way if you wanted to buy a Mac computer you would be doing so because you liked the design of the hardward not because it was the only way to run the OS system.
Like I said before if a company is going to use the 'we are elite' mentality they go all the way which is not what Apple does, they are now willing to use intel chips and allow windows to run on mac system and they will allow Ipods to run anywhere, allow itunes, quicktime to run anywhere.
If they really had the balls and thought there shit was that great they would force consumers to buy a Mac to run any product they offer. They go halfway and they do it because they couldnt survive if they didnt. Even being as stupid as not making a two botton mouse because thats what windows users used.
I'm inclined to say he's pretty reasonable, especially when discussing with a person that claims that there is an absolute objective style. Might as well argue with someone that says that there is an absolute objective utopia.
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Other evidence of trolling:
Bait-
Quote:
Doesnt hurt my feelings if people ignore me just means they choose that because they are unable to truly debate what I have to say. Im up for any respectful debate and will always admit if someone has a better idea or if I happen to be wrong about something. Theres no shame is being wrong or making a mistake.
Inconsistency, more bait -
Quote:
Originally posted by Guybrush Threepwood
... I'd have to say a few of the members on this board tuned you out extreme as soon as you pointed out you worked for IBM. . .
Mac users only like criticism from mac users. Anyone else just simply doesn't know what they are talking about..
There's no reason to assume anything because someone works for IBM. IBM makes the PowerPCs, which are in no personal computers anymore, but is also such a large company that it does thousands of things, most of which have little to do with anything regarding Apple or the mac. They sold off their PC division to Lenovo a while ago. Furthermore, why even mention it? It's like you're trying to prove that you're not in high school.
Lastly, why all the sudden these new members, all supporting each other on the same thread? It's been a long time since kids from ars technica used to come over en masse to cause trouble, but it would always follow a pattern just like this. If you're wondering why we think it's trolling, that's it right there.
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Im 39 years old my mom stopped buying my computers a long time ago.
Apple market shares are not growing if you choose to believe that then its because you just want to believe it in your own mind. Apple holds about 3.6 of the US market and 2.0% of the worldwide market. While tons are ipods are selling they are selling to pc users.
Cost is not a factor to me but I dont throw away money either.
When you open up the case just about every computer out there is exactly like the iMac, your in love with the case. The eMac was a flop and by most business standards so is the iMac. Should we even talk about the mac cube? That really set the market on fire didnt it?
A computer is a tool and you have turned it into an emotion. That if fine, just stop say "we" unless you have a mouse in your pocket.
Apple holds about 3.6 of the US market and 2.0% of the worldwide market. While tons are ipods are selling they are selling to pc users.
OK. Great. Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't growing. No one's ever said that Apple's going to be the dominant manufacturer anytime soon, but yes, their market is growing.
If you really are 39, then you're a pretty dumb 39.
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Other evidence of trolling:
Bait-
Inconsistency, more bait -
There's no reason to assume anything because someone works for IBM. IBM makes the PowerPCs, which are in no personal computers anymore, but is also such a large company that it does thousands of things, most of which have little to do with anything regarding Apple or the mac. They sold off their PC division to Lenovo a while ago. Furthermore, why even mention it? It's like you're trying to prove that you're not in high school.
Wait I just checked your profile, now I see why you are so upset. You own one of the rushed iMacs thats soon going to be replaced. I would be upset too. You bring up the IBM thing far more then I do. Only brought it up because its nice to give people a little intro about yourself when you join a forum.
Dont have to prove anything this is the internet you or I could be 12 or 97 doesnt really matter, your the one in defensive mode not me.
Wait I just checked your profile, now I see why you are so upset. You own one of the rushed iMacs thats soon going to be replaced. . .
Actually, I bought it after the Intel Macs were available. I have some legacy software that will never be ported to Intel, and doesn't run well under Rosetta. I'll probably by a MacBook Pro when they go 64bit. I also never brought up IBM except when questioning one of your cronies.
OK. Great. Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't growing.
If you really are 39, then you're a pretty dumb 39.
Really what makes me dumb? Is it the fact you really can't debate me. Small is fine but they have been small for 20 years. When do you think they might plan on growing?
Your the typical internet tough guy, no facts and when you cant debate the subject you just insult people because you're safe behind your monitor. You can ignore me at anytime. If not learn to show common respect when you post because if you act this way on the computer then we will have to assume you just cant deal with people in general.
Actually, I bought it after the Intel Macs were available. I have some legacy software that will never be ported to Intel, and doesn't run well under Rosetta. I'll probably by a MacBook Pro when they go 64bit. I also never brought up IBM except when questioning one of your cronies.
As I said, a dumb 39 or an average 16.
Cronies...lol. Well seeing you consulted with mine the next time I have lunch at taco bell ill consult with yours.
Honestly, for what they are, they are great. one stop. plug 'n play and it is easy to setup, like a TV with a built in cable tuner VS having a box, but there is a hole: they need that "education" modle to go mainstream at a price of $899, people could easily justify $200 more than a Dell or whatever for asthetics (folks pay asthetic premeums all the time with appliances, like Black or white plastic V steel or aluminium) but the current system is just too pricy for the average consumer under ~30 to look at, even with iLife and OSX.
Cronies...lol. Well seeing you consulted with mine the next time I have lunch at taco bell ill consult with yours.
Is that supposed to be an insult?
I think you're dumb because all you do is bait, and also because you seem to have trouble forming readable sentences. Several posts ago I finished "debating" you, which I wrapped up by dismissing all of your false claims. As we've seen they're all backed up with evidence and fairly basic logic.
The personalization and libel are mostly for my own enjoyment, I'll admit, but no-one likes trolls so I may as well have my fun.
extremeskater and the other dude who was pulling for os x to be available on general pc's:
You just don't get it do you? The whole point of Apple business plan is the integrated system. Itunes + iPod. OS X + hardware. The stuff just works together. That's what makes Apple different. You think if Apple was trying to accomodate hundreds of different OEM systems they wouldn't be (almost) as screwed up as the Windows colluge is? The idea of a mac is that you just plug it in and it works. Everything... The plan you have doesn't allow that.
Just a side point: mr. Skater has mentioned several times that marketshare is on a decline. Any proof? a decline does not mean a low market share, it means a decreasing marketshare. I was under the impression that the opposite was taking place.
Another thing-- beyond the OS there are other things that differentiate a Mac and a PC even now.. BIOS, special motherboard designs, other components, etc. Otherwise, why would bootcamp be necessary?
AS for the point of the post (which is titled incorrectly, by the way: it should be "should apple have a cheaper tower?") I agree to a point. Even from the point of being able to get a bigger monitor it makes sense.
But apple's had such offerings before. Perhaps we will see something at WWDC?
There's no reason to assume anything because someone works for IBM. IBM makes the PowerPCs, which are in no personal computers anymore, but is also such a large company that it does thousands of things, most of which have little to do with anything regarding Apple or the mac. They sold off their PC division to Lenovo a while ago. Furthermore, why even mention it? It's like you're trying to prove that you're not in high school.
Lastly, why all the sudden these new members, all supporting each other on the same thread? It's been a long time since kids from ars technica used to come over en masse to cause trouble, but it would always follow a pattern just like this. If you're wondering why we think it's trolling, that's it right there. [/B][/QUOTE]
I apologize. Sarcasm is my second language. Using analogies is obviously not the best thing to do. Listen, I'd love to show off my "uncroniness" by talking about the Performa 575's or challenge you to Hypercard showdown, however my bangin' days on Hotline were over a long time ago. Ones age nor the amount of posts one presents determines the status as a mac guru.
The only support I gave was the fact the man gave valid points and presented an arguement, and the best thing you can tell him is that he's a troll.
Why all the hate? Even if you're wrong that doesn't mean you're a troll, does it?
Honestly, for what they are, they are great. one stop. plug 'n play and it is easy to setup, like a TV with a built in cable tuner VS having a box, but there is a hole: they need that "education" modle to go mainstream at a price of $899, people could easily justify $200 more than a Dell or whatever for asthetics (folks pay asthetic premeums all the time with appliances, like Black or white plastic V steel or aluminium) but the current system is just too pricy for the average consumer under ~30 to look at, even with iLife and OSX.
They are a great computer and most Macs that I have used I can use for alot longer than any pc I by without upgrading. My major point is that all system could be that way because its the OS that makes the computer last. The software is well written and not clogged with a bunch of useless code that in the long run requires more and more systems specs to run the same software. As a gamer its crazy that people need monster systems to run games and gpu cards that cost 500.00 because of poor written code, talking windows versions.
The point I was trying to relay is if the OS was avail to anyone you would pick your own hardware, if that was mac hardward fine it would be not just for the sake or running the OS but because you actually liked the design of the hardware. Having Mac hardware that was easy to upgrade would also be a nice change.
extremeskater and the other dude who was pulling for os x to be available on general pc's:
You just don't get it do you? The whole point of Apple business plan is the integrated system. Itunes + iPod. OS X + hardware. The stuff just works together. That's what makes Apple different. You think if Apple was trying to accomodate hundreds of different OEM systems they wouldn't be (almost) as screwed up as the Windows colluge is? The idea of a mac is that you just plug it in and it works. Everything... The plan you have doesn't allow that.
Just a side point: mr. Skater has mentioned several times that marketshare is on a decline. Any proof? a decline does not mean a low market share, it means a decreasing marketshare. I was under the impression that the opposite was taking place.
Another thing-- beyond the OS there are other things that differentiate a Mac and a PC even now.. BIOS, special motherboard designs, other components, etc. Otherwise, why would bootcamp be necessary?
Of course I get it. Apple route is to go the way of intergation, thats nothing new and is the reason they things never change for the company. You were fine until you got to hardware. There is nothing about the hardware that is needed to keep the system running correctly. The current hardware in Macs is the same hardware in pc's. The motherboard is of course the issue that doesnt help the process it hurts it because its intergrated.
If Mac was running motherboards that had extreme bus speeds, low latancy ram and their own form of gpu then I would agree with you, but they dont its the same stuff that is in every other computer.
Apple has certainly had their share of hardware issues over the years so its not like they are building super hardware, its their software that has been solid.
Bootcamp does nothing more then create a virtural partition so you so you can run both OS systems. Has nothing to do with hardware or motherboards. Bootcamp creates the partition the reason you can run windows on a mac know has everything to do with how the intel chips processes information and how the intel bios runs. Its the difference between native and binary. Its also the reason why OSx now needs and emulator which by the way slows programs down.
Comments
Originally posted by extremeskater
There isn't anyone here that is a troll. Get a grip. Just because someone doesn't agree with you that doesn't make them a troll. \\
No, but when someone spews out errant information in an attempt to piss off an entire community, then yeah, it generally makes them a troll.
You're not the first, so sorry if you didn't get quite the reaction you expected.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
No, but when someone spews out errant information in an attempt to piss off an entire community, then yeah, it generally makes them a troll.
You're not the first, so sorry if you didn't get quite the reaction you expected.
I'm inclined to say he's pretty reasonable, especially when discussing with a person that claims that there is an absolute objective style. Might as well argue with someone that says that there is an absolute objective utopia.
Originally posted by JeffDM
I'm inclined to say he's pretty reasonable, especially when discussing with a person that claims that there is an absolute objective style.
I agree.
From an OBJECTIVE view, I'd have to say a few of the members on this board tuned you out extreme as soon as you pointed out you worked for IBM.
You could have given winning lotto numbers and you'd still get ignored.
Mac users only like criticism from mac users. Anyone else just simply doesn't know what they are talking about...
For the record, I am a mac user... 8)
Originally posted by Guybrush Threepwood
I agree.
From an OBJECTIVE view, I'd have to say a few of the members on this board tuned you out extreme as soon as you pointed out you worked for IBM.
You could have given winning lotto numbers and you'd still get ignored.
Mac users only like criticism from mac users. Anyone else just simply doesn't know what they are talking about...
For the record, I am a mac user... 8)
Ive already said many times im a Mac user have been for 15+ years which could be longer than some forum members have been alive. Some people just want to jump all over everything if you don't agree with them. The fact I work for IBM really has nothing to do with anything ive never worked on anything relating to G* chips or anything to do with Mac computers. Im strictly a mainframe programmer and anything else I do is strictly for enjoyment.
The simple fact is until Apple changes its vision MS will have a strangle hold on OS systems for many years to come. That doesnt work well for any of us. MS isnt the problem the problem occurs when any company has 95% or any market.
To give another example, gaming consoles, xbox, ps2/3 may have some games that are exclusive to their systems which may temp consumers to buy one or the other. Overall sofware companies that code for these console systems make money by coding their games to work on all console systems and in many cases pc's. Steve Jobs is the only one that believes keeping the Mac OS system available to Macs only is a good idea, im fairly certain the rest of the stock holders believe its a bad idea.
Believe me I get it, I get it to the point that I understand that way the Mac runs has nothing to do with its hardware and everything to do about the OS and how the OEM products are built around that standard.
If anyone could explain to me how having more options would be a disadvantage to the end user I would sure love to hear that debate.
The only reason I currently dont have a new iMac is I was fairly certain that Apple would be putting a 64bit chip in fairly soon. The intel release was fairly common knowledge if you follow trends.
Not to offend anyone but the iMac was released too soon and the reason Apple did that was they got stuck and had to release it. The software wasnt ready and still isnt and in my opinion wont be until it can all run without the use of an emulator. Apple knew loyal users (not knowledgeable) ones would buy it not because it made sense but because it was the new toy on the block and "cool" looking.
Those users will be kicking themselves when they see a new iMac with a faster yet cheaper chip to produce, more ram and a better video card for the same price. Those users will have zero upgrade options unless you consider buying a new computer six month later a valid upgrade option.
The fact that the new chips are cheaper to produce will allow Apple to upgrade ram and video yet keep the cost on par with the current iMac.
So the title of this thread is "Is the iMac mitake) I guess the answer to that question differs depending on if your Apple or the end user that bought a rushed system.
Doesnt hurt my feelings if people ignore me just means they choose that because they are unable to truly debate what I have to say. Im up for any respectful debate and will always admit if someone has a better idea or if I happen to be wrong about something. Theres no shame is being wrong or making a mistake.
Take care..Brian
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
No, but when someone spews out errant information in an attempt to piss off an entire community, then yeah, it generally makes them a troll.
You're not the first, so sorry if you didn't get quite the reaction you expected.
Didn't have an expectation on reaction. Like I said in my post before this im a long time Mac user and I was even born in CT...
Not trying to piss anyone off. Just stating what id like to see happen in the future, my vision might be differnet from yours and thats fine if we all had the same opinion that would make things pretty boring. My information is accurate evne when I went back and looked at the Sony specs the prices is on par with the iMac 20" and so is the hardware. For someone that is 19 years old posting the link 100.00 one way or the other might be alot I know at 19 it was for me, however to me 100-200 is still on par price way and so is the hardware.
If you really read my posts you will see I really only have two issues. The first is I believe integraded is bad. It can look cool but its not upgradable which is never good in the long run. I feel certain that you can at least agree with me that being able to upgrade your system if you wanted too without having to buy a new one would be a nice option.
Second the Mac isnt all about hardware in fact other then case design the same hardware we all have in our Macs is the same hardware that is in our pc computers if you happen to own both. The reason Macs run well is because the OS is a true OS not a Gui interface that still to some extent sits on a dos based system.
In the good old days I would always run OS2 warp which back then was a pretty damn good OS when it came to dual boot and running multi network platforms. I hated Windows and at the time it was even worse we ran 3.1. My opinion is it would be nice if Apple gave up this elite crap and made all there software available to all end users.
Ask yourself this question, wouldnt it be nice to be able to buy any hardware you wanted and be able to run any OS you wanted even dual boot to any OS you wanted too.
This way if you wanted to buy a Mac computer you would be doing so because you liked the design of the hardward not because it was the only way to run the OS system.
Like I said before if a company is going to use the 'we are elite' mentality they go all the way which is not what Apple does, they are now willing to use intel chips and allow windows to run on mac system and they will allow Ipods to run anywhere, allow itunes, quicktime to run anywhere.
If they really had the balls and thought there shit was that great they would force consumers to buy a Mac to run any product they offer. They go halfway and they do it because they couldnt survive if they didnt. Even being as stupid as not making a two botton mouse because thats what windows users used.
Nothing here but truth.
Originally posted by JeffDM
I'm inclined to say he's pretty reasonable, especially when discussing with a person that claims that there is an absolute objective style. Might as well argue with someone that says that there is an absolute objective utopia.
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Other evidence of trolling:
Bait-
Doesnt hurt my feelings if people ignore me just means they choose that because they are unable to truly debate what I have to say. Im up for any respectful debate and will always admit if someone has a better idea or if I happen to be wrong about something. Theres no shame is being wrong or making a mistake.
Inconsistency, more bait -
Originally posted by Guybrush Threepwood
... I'd have to say a few of the members on this board tuned you out extreme as soon as you pointed out you worked for IBM. . .
Mac users only like criticism from mac users. Anyone else just simply doesn't know what they are talking about..
There's no reason to assume anything because someone works for IBM. IBM makes the PowerPCs, which are in no personal computers anymore, but is also such a large company that it does thousands of things, most of which have little to do with anything regarding Apple or the mac. They sold off their PC division to Lenovo a while ago. Furthermore, why even mention it? It's like you're trying to prove that you're not in high school.
Lastly, why all the sudden these new members, all supporting each other on the same thread? It's been a long time since kids from ars technica used to come over en masse to cause trouble, but it would always follow a pattern just like this. If you're wondering why we think it's trolling, that's it right there.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Im 39 years old my mom stopped buying my computers a long time ago.
Apple market shares are not growing if you choose to believe that then its because you just want to believe it in your own mind. Apple holds about 3.6 of the US market and 2.0% of the worldwide market. While tons are ipods are selling they are selling to pc users.
Cost is not a factor to me but I dont throw away money either.
When you open up the case just about every computer out there is exactly like the iMac, your in love with the case. The eMac was a flop and by most business standards so is the iMac. Should we even talk about the mac cube? That really set the market on fire didnt it?
A computer is a tool and you have turned it into an emotion. That if fine, just stop say "we" unless you have a mouse in your pocket.
Originally posted by extremeskater
Apple holds about 3.6 of the US market and 2.0% of the worldwide market. While tons are ipods are selling they are selling to pc users.
OK. Great. Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't growing. No one's ever said that Apple's going to be the dominant manufacturer anytime soon, but yes, their market is growing.
If you really are 39, then you're a pretty dumb 39.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Actually, I don't support that view. ShawnJ and midwinter argued from that side -- I argued the opposite.
Anyway, the reason why it comes across as trolling is because it's repetitive, factually erroneous, and the illustration of the position has been developed in a very childish fashion. There is no PC much like the iMac, Mac market share is growing, and there's no evidence that very many PC users care much about upgrades. To argue that there are more PC users who intend on upgrading then there are mac users in total is beside the point, since there are many times more people who don't care about upgrading. If Apple can assume a 10% penetration rate (or whatever) among iPod users with PCs, 10% of 90% is a lot better than 10% of 5%.
We have heard enough times from high school kids who want Apple to make them a computer the way they want, and cheap, because mom doesn't give them enough allowance.
Other evidence of trolling:
Bait-
Inconsistency, more bait -
There's no reason to assume anything because someone works for IBM. IBM makes the PowerPCs, which are in no personal computers anymore, but is also such a large company that it does thousands of things, most of which have little to do with anything regarding Apple or the mac. They sold off their PC division to Lenovo a while ago. Furthermore, why even mention it? It's like you're trying to prove that you're not in high school.
Wait I just checked your profile, now I see why you are so upset. You own one of the rushed iMacs thats soon going to be replaced. I would be upset too. You bring up the IBM thing far more then I do. Only brought it up because its nice to give people a little intro about yourself when you join a forum.
Dont have to prove anything this is the internet you or I could be 12 or 97 doesnt really matter, your the one in defensive mode not me.
Originally posted by extremeskater
Apple holds about 3.6 of the US market
Hey, you were close, right?
Originally posted by extremeskater
Wait I just checked your profile, now I see why you are so upset. You own one of the rushed iMacs thats soon going to be replaced. . .
Actually, I bought it after the Intel Macs were available. I have some legacy software that will never be ported to Intel, and doesn't run well under Rosetta. I'll probably by a MacBook Pro when they go 64bit. I also never brought up IBM except when questioning one of your cronies.
As I said, a dumb 39 or an average 16.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
OK. Great. Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't growing.
If you really are 39, then you're a pretty dumb 39.
Really what makes me dumb? Is it the fact you really can't debate me. Small is fine but they have been small for 20 years. When do you think they might plan on growing?
Your the typical internet tough guy, no facts and when you cant debate the subject you just insult people because you're safe behind your monitor. You can ignore me at anytime. If not learn to show common respect when you post because if you act this way on the computer then we will have to assume you just cant deal with people in general.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Actually, I bought it after the Intel Macs were available. I have some legacy software that will never be ported to Intel, and doesn't run well under Rosetta. I'll probably by a MacBook Pro when they go 64bit. I also never brought up IBM except when questioning one of your cronies.
As I said, a dumb 39 or an average 16.
Cronies...lol. Well seeing you consulted with mine the next time I have lunch at taco bell ill consult with yours.
Originally posted by extremeskater
Cronies...lol. Well seeing you consulted with mine the next time I have lunch at taco bell ill consult with yours.
Is that supposed to be an insult?
I think you're dumb because all you do is bait, and also because you seem to have trouble forming readable sentences. Several posts ago I finished "debating" you, which I wrapped up by dismissing all of your false claims. As we've seen they're all backed up with evidence and fairly basic logic.
The personalization and libel are mostly for my own enjoyment, I'll admit, but no-one likes trolls so I may as well have my fun.
You just don't get it do you? The whole point of Apple business plan is the integrated system. Itunes + iPod. OS X + hardware. The stuff just works together. That's what makes Apple different. You think if Apple was trying to accomodate hundreds of different OEM systems they wouldn't be (almost) as screwed up as the Windows colluge is? The idea of a mac is that you just plug it in and it works. Everything... The plan you have doesn't allow that.
Just a side point: mr. Skater has mentioned several times that marketshare is on a decline. Any proof? a decline does not mean a low market share, it means a decreasing marketshare. I was under the impression that the opposite was taking place.
Another thing-- beyond the OS there are other things that differentiate a Mac and a PC even now.. BIOS, special motherboard designs, other components, etc. Otherwise, why would bootcamp be necessary?
But apple's had such offerings before. Perhaps we will see something at WWDC?
Lastly, why all the sudden these new members, all supporting each other on the same thread? It's been a long time since kids from ars technica used to come over en masse to cause trouble, but it would always follow a pattern just like this. If you're wondering why we think it's trolling, that's it right there. [/B][/QUOTE]
I apologize. Sarcasm is my second language. Using analogies is obviously not the best thing to do. Listen, I'd love to show off my "uncroniness" by talking about the Performa 575's or challenge you to Hypercard showdown, however my bangin' days on Hotline were over a long time ago. Ones age nor the amount of posts one presents determines the status as a mac guru.
The only support I gave was the fact the man gave valid points and presented an arguement, and the best thing you can tell him is that he's a troll.
Why all the hate? Even if you're wrong that doesn't mean you're a troll, does it?
Originally posted by a_greer
Honestly, for what they are, they are great. one stop. plug 'n play and it is easy to setup, like a TV with a built in cable tuner VS having a box, but there is a hole: they need that "education" modle to go mainstream at a price of $899, people could easily justify $200 more than a Dell or whatever for asthetics (folks pay asthetic premeums all the time with appliances, like Black or white plastic V steel or aluminium) but the current system is just too pricy for the average consumer under ~30 to look at, even with iLife and OSX.
They are a great computer and most Macs that I have used I can use for alot longer than any pc I by without upgrading. My major point is that all system could be that way because its the OS that makes the computer last. The software is well written and not clogged with a bunch of useless code that in the long run requires more and more systems specs to run the same software. As a gamer its crazy that people need monster systems to run games and gpu cards that cost 500.00 because of poor written code, talking windows versions.
The point I was trying to relay is if the OS was avail to anyone you would pick your own hardware, if that was mac hardward fine it would be not just for the sake or running the OS but because you actually liked the design of the hardware. Having Mac hardware that was easy to upgrade would also be a nice change.
Brian
Originally posted by meelash
extremeskater and the other dude who was pulling for os x to be available on general pc's:
You just don't get it do you? The whole point of Apple business plan is the integrated system. Itunes + iPod. OS X + hardware. The stuff just works together. That's what makes Apple different. You think if Apple was trying to accomodate hundreds of different OEM systems they wouldn't be (almost) as screwed up as the Windows colluge is? The idea of a mac is that you just plug it in and it works. Everything... The plan you have doesn't allow that.
Just a side point: mr. Skater has mentioned several times that marketshare is on a decline. Any proof? a decline does not mean a low market share, it means a decreasing marketshare. I was under the impression that the opposite was taking place.
Another thing-- beyond the OS there are other things that differentiate a Mac and a PC even now.. BIOS, special motherboard designs, other components, etc. Otherwise, why would bootcamp be necessary?
Of course I get it. Apple route is to go the way of intergation, thats nothing new and is the reason they things never change for the company. You were fine until you got to hardware. There is nothing about the hardware that is needed to keep the system running correctly. The current hardware in Macs is the same hardware in pc's. The motherboard is of course the issue that doesnt help the process it hurts it because its intergrated.
If Mac was running motherboards that had extreme bus speeds, low latancy ram and their own form of gpu then I would agree with you, but they dont its the same stuff that is in every other computer.
Apple has certainly had their share of hardware issues over the years so its not like they are building super hardware, its their software that has been solid.
Bootcamp does nothing more then create a virtural partition so you so you can run both OS systems. Has nothing to do with hardware or motherboards. Bootcamp creates the partition the reason you can run windows on a mac know has everything to do with how the intel chips processes information and how the intel bios runs. Its the difference between native and binary. Its also the reason why OSx now needs and emulator which by the way slows programs down.
Brian