Thanks for bolding the word 'parts' as I probably wouldn't have been able to understand otherwise. Apple makes better computers with generic parts? How? By distancing those parts different or something? The envy of the computer market? This is why I come here. For pure laughs. Scoreboard.
The emphasis on 'parts' was indeed mind not yours. I did it because you seems to expect if someone uses the same cheap parts, they should also sell it cheap. Normally I'd disregard a juvenile comment, but since your handle begs for argument:
I have a pretty much average penis. However, what I do with it and where I put it, makes all the difference in the world to me.
Apple doesn't just build computers. They design them with care to detail for present and future technologies, even if the detail and choices make no sense to a few. This forward thinking vision is IMHO the very reason Apple computers can be used foe a much longer time than other PCs. The software and hardware design works well together, even if sometimes Apple blows it.
If I could say the same for other PC manufacturers and OS developers, I'd be buying them instead or at least have more choices, but as it is now, the only choice for me is Apple Macintosh.
I find it interesting that iSuppli says Apple is using a processor that isn't on Intel's price list and then estimating the cost for it.
People can argue performance, theoretical reliability and international pricing all day. When all is said and done the Mac mini offers good performance in a very small, energy efficient and low cost package. Even more impressive is the fact that it has been Apple's most reliable computer model since it was introduced back in 2005 with a G4 processor. Talk with service providers and they'll tell you the only time they ever see the inside of a Mac mini is to do upgrades.
Once Snow Leopard comes out I plan to get a mini for my kids and, when I can afford it, one for the living room.
I was waiting for this. That is because"fanboy' is an urban slang word - probably not it the dictionary. I could be wrong. The other poster was wiki me something that is a common word in the English language- and that word was "bias'.
It's kind of bizarre to have such fans that follow my every word and bring it right back up to me.
Here comes the "But I don't want cheap hardware" argument. Apple PC's use the same hardware, intel processors, nvidia graphics..
You're mistaking the markings on a few of the major VLSI chips as somehow conveying all that makes up a computer. And you are very wrong.
Computer manufacturers can cut corners by using fewer, and lower quality, bypass and filter capacitors. They can use lower-quality analog parts (opamps, power amps, etc.) on their sound systems. They can use low-cost, and less reliable, cheap connectors for everything from the expansion slots to the headphone output jacks.
They can elect to use low-end, poor quality fans or even fans with bushings rather than high-quality bearings. They can use two or three temperature sensors rather than the couple of dozen found in a Mac Pro. They can save money by not having thermal engineers involved, and, instead, by blasting fans at full speed. They can use undersized heatsinks and high-speed fans rather than taking the more expensive route of using large, high-end heatsinks and large, low-RPM, quiet fans. Ever wonder why Apple Mac Pros, Minis, and iMacs are so much quieter than other brands of desktop computers?
They can use a cheap plastic case with poor shielding and limited resistance to flex. They can make motherboards with fewer layers that radiate more EMI and/or are more susceptible to instability from external EMI. They can use non-ECC RAM in their tower systems. They can choose not to have riser boards for RAM, making upgrades harder and cooling less effective.
See, I'm an engineer. I know that Sun, Apple, Acer, and MSI all buy CPUs from Intel. That doesn't mean that all of the systems are of equal quality.
When someone says for 2 years that the iPhone doesn't need or want MMS, video, or cut and paste and then champions it only because Apple then provides it, how else do you make a deduction and what do you call it? When posters defend Apple's ommission of firewire on a MAcBook and it gets added back on and won't admit Apple made a mistake- what do you call that? The same thing for matte screens. Remember - they were supposed to be nevermore according to the fanboys because Apple wasn't giving them. The comes the 17"- and it gets matte. And watch the others will also get matte(I'd bet) because it is far superior (glare does suck) regardless of fanboys assertion that noobody wants matte. They only say what Apple currently provides is what you need. Meanwhile netbooks sales are through the roof yet fanboys were saying, whenever I mentioned it, that a small formed device between 7-11" was no good - the MBA was all we needed. Then the rumours leaked and they all embrace it. It is a very sad train of thought actually.
The term is real and alive.
And herein lies the trouble. You're using "someone" without being specific, allowing you to create an aggregate "fanboy" by cherry picking (or simply misrepresenting) opinions from multiple posters on multiple topics over long periods of time, as if each Apple user must be held responsible for and remain consistent with every other Apple user or be revealed as a fanboy hypocrite.
This is how it generally works the internet over-- anyone expressing satisfaction with anything Apple does (or failing to belittle them or not getting excited about something Microsoft has done) is immediately branded a "fanboy" because "they" or "them" or "Apple users" or "people like that" have said something else, somewhere else, some other time.
The crux seems to be developing an opinion about Apple users in general which is then used to castigate each Apple user in particular, which is, not to put too fine a point on it, bullshit.
So if you read any other tech blog's comments, you'll see, over and over again, that when someone make a mild remark expressing support of Apple they are immediately met with a hail of "Here we go!" and "The fanboys are rushing to their master Jobs's defense!" and "Typical fanboy LOL stop blowing Steve and get a clue LOL!"
Really, it's pretty tiresome and at this point seems to be little more than an "acceptable" outlet for the kind of tribal animosities that might otherwise get directed toward race or religion. If you take a look at the level of vitriol that gets slung around you have to assume that the "death to fanboy" brigade are simply excitable bigots who can't get it up for the old standbys.
So unless you can give us some specifics about specific posters insisting that, say, the iPhone doesn't and never will need MMS, and those same posters immediately declaring the inclusion of MMS on the iPhone some kind of Apple triumph, you're just blowing smoke out of your ass.
They don't use a desktop version of the core2duo in the iMac?
They still use the “mobile” processors due to heat. This means that that an iMac compared to a desktop tower, even a small tower, will more expensive and slower.
Intel has designed new Core2Quads that have a lower TPD. They’ve stated these are designed for All-In-One machines so I can’t help but think that Apple will be using them as I can’t imagine Intel designing these low-power desktop chips for the very scarce AIOs of other vendors. The price is nearly the same for the processor, and potentially more costly for Apple if they are buying less chips of one type, but the speed increase for the same pricepoint is more than sufficient to benefit the consumer.
Yeah this really bugs me too. It's funny the number of people who said that auto-focus cameras and video were so not needed on the iPhone, yet they were all falling over themselves to buy the 3GS when it came out to have an auto-focus camera and video. It cracks me up that whatever product Apple currently sells is the absolute pinnacle of excellence, with all the features that anyone would ever need, at a price that's perfectly justifiable. This view then conveniently changes as soon as Apple announces their next product. I've posted in and observed the AppleInsider forum for a long while now, and it's truely like watching a herd of sheep following each other around. It's sad really, as it's like these people simply don't have a mind of their own.
And herein lies the trouble. You're using "someone" without being specific, allowing you to create an aggregate "fanboy" by cherry picking (or simply misrepresenting) opinions from multiple posters on multiple topics over long periods of time, as if each Apple user must be held responsible for and remain consistent with every other Apple user or be revealed as a fanboy hypocrite.
This is how it generally works the internet over-- anyone expressing satisfaction with anything Apple does (or failing to belittle them or not getting excited about something Microsoft has done) is immediately branded a "fanboy" because "they" or "them" or "Apple users" or "people like that" have said something else, somewhere else, some other time.
The crux seems to be developing an opinion about Apple users in general which is then used to castigate each Apple user in particular, which is, not to put too fine a point on it, bullshit.
So if you read any other tech blog's comments, you'll see, over and over again, that when someone make a mild remark expressing support of Apple they are immediately met with a hail of "Here we go!" and "The fanboys are rushing to their master Jobs's defense!" and "Typical fanboy LOL stop blowing Steve and get a clue LOL!"
Really, it's pretty tiresome and at this point seems to be little more than an "acceptable" outlet for the kind of tribal animosities that might otherwise get directed toward race or religion. If you take a look at the level of vitriol that slung around you have to assume that the "death to fanboy" brigade are simply excitable bigots who can't get it up for the old standbys.
So unless you can give us some specifics about specific posters insisting that, say, the iPhone doesn't and never will need MMS, and those same posters immediately declaring the inclusion of MMS on the iPhone some kind of Apple triumph, you're just blowing smoke out of your ass.
Good try. No -I'm not - I don't have time to directly look for all these quotes just to appease your denial. You know they exist- yet want to conitinually play this game of tit for tat. I have a life. Other's have agreed with me - it is a totally recognizable trait.
'Apple Tax' is a silly term right up there with 'fanboy', the use of which signifies low intelligence, lack of insight and plain old laziness. Please, lets refrain from using stupid terminology whenever possible.
Good try. No -I'm not - I don't have time to directly look for all these quotes just to appease your denial. You know they exist- yet want to conitinually play this game of tit for tat. I have a life. Other's have agreed with me - it is a totally recognizable trait.
Enough said.
AKA "my prejudice is shared by others so why should I make any effort to discern if it's fair"?
It's easy to make any group out as wrong if you don't have to deal in particulars. Just start with "you know how they are" and use each individual example as "proof" that "they" are indeed like that.
Since individual people express a very broad range of opinions and behaviors, you'll never lack for "evidence". You will, however, be a bigoted asshole.
I'm not making any judgments as to why Apple did or didn't do what they did. I'm merely commenting on how the rest of the pack always seem to blindly follow the leader, belittling and deriding those who don't do the same, then quickly backtracking when the leader takes a new course.
See my posts above. Be specific or don't go there.
Which posters belittled and derided who, about what, and then backtracked?
Seems to me you're just another person who doesn't like being disagreed with (who does?), so instead of having the courage of your convictions to debate any particular topic, on the merits, on a case to case basis, you're just going to go with "the people that disagree with me are collectively wrong and mean and sheep like" as a blanket dismissal.
That's kinda bullshitty and self aggrandizing, IMO. It allows you to play the role of intrepid free thinker going against the tide without ever having to actually put up any evidence that that's the case. Getting peeved at two or three posters for disagreeing with you in terms you find "fanboyish" is not evidence for "a pack" "blindly following its leader" that you, in your liberated objectivity, are obliged to confront.
Call out individuals for whatever, if you see fit. But the elaborate sighing over "them" is cheap and lazy.
I was waiting for this. That is because"fanboy' is an urban slang word - probably not it the dictionary. I could be wrong. The other poster was wiki me something that is a common word in the English language- and that word was "bias'.
It's kind of bizarre to have such fans that follow my every word and bring it right back up to me.
Quote:
fanboy |ˈfanˌboi|
noun
informal derogatory an obsessive male fan (usually of movies, comic books, or science fiction).
ORIGIN from fan 2 + boy .
That definition comes from the Dictionary application - you know, the one included with every Macintosh computer. You can also find the definition in the online Merriam-Webster disctionary. Your explanation sounds duplicitous to me but I am sure you will find some other reason why it is appropriate for you to source from Wikipedia yet inappropriate for others.
By the way, I am no fan of yours. You seem to live in a world where a half-full glass is almost empty. I try to avoid people like that.
For better or worse, I am blessed with excellent memory and am able to recall much of what I read from here or elsewhere. Of course, you oversized sense of self has once again led you to the wrong conclusion.
See my posts above. Be specific or don't go there.
Which posters belittled and derided who, about what, and then backtracked?
I'm talking about trends and the general direction that opinions go. Threads, posts and posters span years, and I haven't the time or inclination to go hunting them down. 2 years ago it was perfectly acceptable for the iPhone to have a rubbish 2mp camera. And yet now it has a 3.2mp camera with auto-focus (which is still pretty low-mid end now). If the 2mp was sufficient, why has this been changed? I think the fact the 3GS is selling so well just goes to show that the lack of some decent hardware features was really holding back the 2G and 3G since they all share the same broad software feature set.
Who cares? Apple makes up for it by their ridiculous gross ups on their MacBook, iPhones , iPods, etc so that this means nothing. Not to mention the $10 Apple tax on the iPod Touch ugrade. Fanboys can defend all they want but the reality is Apple is overpriced for what is inside the devices.
Apple just dropped prices and they'er still to high. That white MacBook for $1000? Indeed!
Maybe Apple should elect you to the board so you can set them all straight, eh Teckstud?
Here is the deal: Manufacturers design, produce, and market a product, and the consumer (you) decides whether or not to buy the product at the price point offered.
It doesn't seem like anyone forced you to buy a mac, or an iPhone, or any other Apple product for that matter. So, whining and complaining because you think the evil Apple overlords have abused you by charging too much is just silly (and that is the nice way of saying it.)
Why don't you just go buy an $800 Dell and go hang out on winSuperSite? The way you carry on, it seems like that would be more palatable for all of us.
I'm talking about trends and the general direction that opinions go. Threads, posts and posters span years, and I haven't the time or inclination to go hunting them down.
Cheap and lazy, as the man said. If you have an argument with something some actual person said, then take that up with that person. If you can't be bothered, and insist on generalizing about "them" -- then be aware that your argument will sound a lot like bigotry.
Quote:
2 years ago it was perfectly acceptable for the iPhone to have a rubbish 2mp camera. And yet now it has a 3.2mp camera with auto-focus (which is still pretty low-mid end now). If the 2mp was sufficient, why has this been changed? I think the fact the 3GS is selling so well just goes to show that the lack of some decent hardware features was really holding back the 2G and 3G since they all share the same broad software feature set.
Or because these products are always improving and responding to new technologies and developments in markets? Two years ago I couldn't buy a home theater with a Blu-ray player, now I can choose from a whole bunch of them. Were the manufacturers wrong to have not sold them before?
Cheap and lazy, as the man said. If you have an argument with something some actual person said, then take that up with that person. If you can't be bothered, and insist on generalizing about "them" -- then be aware that your argument will sound a lot like bigotry.
Fine by me. I'm entitled to my opinion
Quote:
Or because these products are always improving and responding to new technologies and developments in markets? Two years ago I couldn't buy a home theater with a Blu-ray player, now I can choose from a whole bunch of them. Were the manufacturers wrong to have not sold them before?
That's fine, but the technology WAS there 2 years ago, Apple just deliberately missed it out to gauge money later on when it introduced an amazing 3.2mp auto-focus camera. There's a difference between not selling technology because it's not available, and not selling it simply because you want to introduce it as an 'amazing' new feature later on. Apple is supposed to be about making revolutionary products (which the 2G iPhone was, and OS 2.0 was) but Apple have since just tacked on some minor hardware and software changes. It certainly seems as if Apple didn't put much effort into the 3GS, and some of the parts they tossed into it have been available for years anyway.
When someone says for 2 years that the iPhone doesn't need or want MMS, video, or cut and paste and then champions it only because Apple then provides it, how else do you make a deduction and what do you call it? When posters defend Apple's ommission of firewire on a MAcBook and it gets added back on and won't admit Apple made a mistake- what do you call that? The same thing for matte screens. Remember - they were supposed to be nevermore according to the fanboys because Apple wasn't giving them. The comes the 17"- and it gets matte. And watch the others will also get matte(I'd bet) because it is far superior (glare does suck) regardless of fanboys assertion that noobody wants matte. They only say what Apple currently provides is what you need. Meanwhile netbooks sales are through the roof yet fanboys were saying, whenever I mentioned it, that a small formed device between 7-11" was no good - the MBA was all we needed. Then the rumours leaked and they all embrace it. It is a very sad train of thought actually.
The term is real and alive.
This is all a bunch of garbage. Your definition of fan boy amounts to this: "anyone who disagrees with you." As a matter of fact, that is how you consistently use the term: whenever someone doesn't agree with whatever negative effluent you have to spill out at the particular time.
You don't seem to get the fact that you, mr. teckstud, are not the prototype upon which all humanity is based, and therefor your particular interests or desires in a product do not act as the reference model for what every product designed by anyone ought to be. Furthermore, you interpret something like the removal of firewire, and then its addition again, as acknowledgment of a mistake, when you don't have a clue as to what drove those choices. You don't know if it was a costing decision, a space consideration, or whatever. Heck, maybe they were in fact mistakes. Maybe they misjudged the market, realized the gaffe, and corrected. Who the heck actually cares? The problem with you is that your belief is that anything Apple does which contradicts your own personal views and tastes is a mistake. And of course, anyone who doesn't see it that way is a 'fan boy'.
That's fine, but the technology WAS there 2 years ago, Apple just deliberately missed it out to gauge money later on when it introduced an amazing 3.2mp auto-focus camera. There's a difference between not selling technology because it's not available, and not selling it simply because you want to introduce it as an 'amazing' new feature later on. Apple is supposed to be about making revolutionary products (which the 2G iPhone was, and OS 2.0 was) but Apple have since just tacked on some minor hardware and software changes. It certainly seems as if Apple didn't put much effort into the 3GS, and some of the parts they tossed into it have been available for years anyway.
You have utterly no idea why Apple chose not to use a higher resolution camera earlier on, so why go on about it like you do? Have you ever actually designed a product? Been involved on the manufacture of one? There are all sorts of variables that go into decisions like this. "Can we get the part cheap enough to reach our price point?" "Can we get it small enough to fit into our form factor?" "Can we get it to draw power within our acceptable range?" "Can we get it to pass FCC?" "Does the market demand justify costs, etc." It is all a dance and building this kind of stuff is a heck of a lot more complicated, and involves many more compromises and difficult choices, than anyone who has never done it could possibly know. It bothers me when I see this kind of negative bias however, because it almost always implies an intention: "Apple didn't user a better camera because they intended to introduce the feature later" etc. It may be fair to say that later on Apple engineers intended to up the camera specifications, I do not know. But it is not fair to insinuate that the choice to use something lesser was done purely to disenfranchise the consumer. There are hundreds of factors that inform choices like this.
Comments
Thanks for bolding the word 'parts' as I probably wouldn't have been able to understand otherwise. Apple makes better computers with generic parts? How? By distancing those parts different or something? The envy of the computer market? This is why I come here. For pure laughs. Scoreboard.
The emphasis on 'parts' was indeed mind not yours. I did it because you seems to expect if someone uses the same cheap parts, they should also sell it cheap. Normally I'd disregard a juvenile comment, but since your handle begs for argument:
I have a pretty much average penis. However, what I do with it and where I put it, makes all the difference in the world to me.
Apple doesn't just build computers. They design them with care to detail for present and future technologies, even if the detail and choices make no sense to a few. This forward thinking vision is IMHO the very reason Apple computers can be used foe a much longer time than other PCs. The software and hardware design works well together, even if sometimes Apple blows it.
If I could say the same for other PC manufacturers and OS developers, I'd be buying them instead or at least have more choices, but as it is now, the only choice for me is Apple Macintosh.
People can argue performance, theoretical reliability and international pricing all day. When all is said and done the Mac mini offers good performance in a very small, energy efficient and low cost package. Even more impressive is the fact that it has been Apple's most reliable computer model since it was introduced back in 2005 with a G4 processor. Talk with service providers and they'll tell you the only time they ever see the inside of a Mac mini is to do upgrades.
Once Snow Leopard comes out I plan to get a mini for my kids and, when I can afford it, one for the living room.
The Mac Pro, not exactly a consumer machine, is the only Mac that uses a non-notebook-grade processor in the entire Mac line.
They don't use a desktop version of the core2duo in the iMac?
This is too funny coming from the same person who, just a couple of days ago, chided another poster about sourcing from Wikipedia:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...6&postcount=74
I was waiting for this. That is because"fanboy' is an urban slang word - probably not it the dictionary. I could be wrong. The other poster was wiki me something that is a common word in the English language- and that word was "bias'.
It's kind of bizarre to have such fans that follow my every word and bring it right back up to me.
Here comes the "But I don't want cheap hardware" argument. Apple PC's use the same hardware, intel processors, nvidia graphics..
You're mistaking the markings on a few of the major VLSI chips as somehow conveying all that makes up a computer. And you are very wrong.
Computer manufacturers can cut corners by using fewer, and lower quality, bypass and filter capacitors. They can use lower-quality analog parts (opamps, power amps, etc.) on their sound systems. They can use low-cost, and less reliable, cheap connectors for everything from the expansion slots to the headphone output jacks.
They can elect to use low-end, poor quality fans or even fans with bushings rather than high-quality bearings. They can use two or three temperature sensors rather than the couple of dozen found in a Mac Pro. They can save money by not having thermal engineers involved, and, instead, by blasting fans at full speed. They can use undersized heatsinks and high-speed fans rather than taking the more expensive route of using large, high-end heatsinks and large, low-RPM, quiet fans. Ever wonder why Apple Mac Pros, Minis, and iMacs are so much quieter than other brands of desktop computers?
They can use a cheap plastic case with poor shielding and limited resistance to flex. They can make motherboards with fewer layers that radiate more EMI and/or are more susceptible to instability from external EMI. They can use non-ECC RAM in their tower systems. They can choose not to have riser boards for RAM, making upgrades harder and cooling less effective.
See, I'm an engineer. I know that Sun, Apple, Acer, and MSI all buy CPUs from Intel. That doesn't mean that all of the systems are of equal quality.
The reason I see bias is because there is bias.
When someone says for 2 years that the iPhone doesn't need or want MMS, video, or cut and paste and then champions it only because Apple then provides it, how else do you make a deduction and what do you call it? When posters defend Apple's ommission of firewire on a MAcBook and it gets added back on and won't admit Apple made a mistake- what do you call that? The same thing for matte screens. Remember - they were supposed to be nevermore according to the fanboys because Apple wasn't giving them. The comes the 17"- and it gets matte. And watch the others will also get matte(I'd bet) because it is far superior (glare does suck) regardless of fanboys assertion that noobody wants matte. They only say what Apple currently provides is what you need. Meanwhile netbooks sales are through the roof yet fanboys were saying, whenever I mentioned it, that a small formed device between 7-11" was no good - the MBA was all we needed. Then the rumours leaked and they all embrace it. It is a very sad train of thought actually.
The term is real and alive.
And herein lies the trouble. You're using "someone" without being specific, allowing you to create an aggregate "fanboy" by cherry picking (or simply misrepresenting) opinions from multiple posters on multiple topics over long periods of time, as if each Apple user must be held responsible for and remain consistent with every other Apple user or be revealed as a fanboy hypocrite.
This is how it generally works the internet over-- anyone expressing satisfaction with anything Apple does (or failing to belittle them or not getting excited about something Microsoft has done) is immediately branded a "fanboy" because "they" or "them" or "Apple users" or "people like that" have said something else, somewhere else, some other time.
The crux seems to be developing an opinion about Apple users in general which is then used to castigate each Apple user in particular, which is, not to put too fine a point on it, bullshit.
So if you read any other tech blog's comments, you'll see, over and over again, that when someone make a mild remark expressing support of Apple they are immediately met with a hail of "Here we go!" and "The fanboys are rushing to their master Jobs's defense!" and "Typical fanboy LOL stop blowing Steve and get a clue LOL!"
Really, it's pretty tiresome and at this point seems to be little more than an "acceptable" outlet for the kind of tribal animosities that might otherwise get directed toward race or religion. If you take a look at the level of vitriol that gets slung around you have to assume that the "death to fanboy" brigade are simply excitable bigots who can't get it up for the old standbys.
So unless you can give us some specifics about specific posters insisting that, say, the iPhone doesn't and never will need MMS, and those same posters immediately declaring the inclusion of MMS on the iPhone some kind of Apple triumph, you're just blowing smoke out of your ass.
They don't use a desktop version of the core2duo in the iMac?
They still use the “mobile” processors due to heat. This means that that an iMac compared to a desktop tower, even a small tower, will more expensive and slower.
Intel has designed new Core2Quads that have a lower TPD. They’ve stated these are designed for All-In-One machines so I can’t help but think that Apple will be using them as I can’t imagine Intel designing these low-power desktop chips for the very scarce AIOs of other vendors. The price is nearly the same for the processor, and potentially more costly for Apple if they are buying less chips of one type, but the speed increase for the same pricepoint is more than sufficient to benefit the consumer.
Yeah this really bugs me too. It's funny the number of people who said that auto-focus cameras and video were so not needed on the iPhone, yet they were all falling over themselves to buy the 3GS when it came out to have an auto-focus camera and video. It cracks me up that whatever product Apple currently sells is the absolute pinnacle of excellence, with all the features that anyone would ever need, at a price that's perfectly justifiable. This view then conveniently changes as soon as Apple announces their next product. I've posted in and observed the AppleInsider forum for a long while now, and it's truely like watching a herd of sheep following each other around. It's sad really, as it's like these people simply don't have a mind of their own.
You rang ??
And herein lies the trouble. You're using "someone" without being specific, allowing you to create an aggregate "fanboy" by cherry picking (or simply misrepresenting) opinions from multiple posters on multiple topics over long periods of time, as if each Apple user must be held responsible for and remain consistent with every other Apple user or be revealed as a fanboy hypocrite.
This is how it generally works the internet over-- anyone expressing satisfaction with anything Apple does (or failing to belittle them or not getting excited about something Microsoft has done) is immediately branded a "fanboy" because "they" or "them" or "Apple users" or "people like that" have said something else, somewhere else, some other time.
The crux seems to be developing an opinion about Apple users in general which is then used to castigate each Apple user in particular, which is, not to put too fine a point on it, bullshit.
So if you read any other tech blog's comments, you'll see, over and over again, that when someone make a mild remark expressing support of Apple they are immediately met with a hail of "Here we go!" and "The fanboys are rushing to their master Jobs's defense!" and "Typical fanboy LOL stop blowing Steve and get a clue LOL!"
Really, it's pretty tiresome and at this point seems to be little more than an "acceptable" outlet for the kind of tribal animosities that might otherwise get directed toward race or religion. If you take a look at the level of vitriol that slung around you have to assume that the "death to fanboy" brigade are simply excitable bigots who can't get it up for the old standbys.
So unless you can give us some specifics about specific posters insisting that, say, the iPhone doesn't and never will need MMS, and those same posters immediately declaring the inclusion of MMS on the iPhone some kind of Apple triumph, you're just blowing smoke out of your ass.
Good try. No -I'm not - I don't have time to directly look for all these quotes just to appease your denial. You know they exist- yet want to conitinually play this game of tit for tat. I have a life. Other's have agreed with me - it is a totally recognizable trait.
Enough said.
'Apple Tax' is a silly term right up there with 'fanboy', the use of which signifies low intelligence, lack of insight and plain old laziness. Please, lets refrain from using stupid terminology whenever possible.
Roger... Pacman.
Good try. No -I'm not - I don't have time to directly look for all these quotes just to appease your denial. You know they exist- yet want to conitinually play this game of tit for tat. I have a life. Other's have agreed with me - it is a totally recognizable trait.
Enough said.
AKA "my prejudice is shared by others so why should I make any effort to discern if it's fair"?
It's easy to make any group out as wrong if you don't have to deal in particulars. Just start with "you know how they are" and use each individual example as "proof" that "they" are indeed like that.
Since individual people express a very broad range of opinions and behaviors, you'll never lack for "evidence". You will, however, be a bigoted asshole.
I'm not making any judgments as to why Apple did or didn't do what they did. I'm merely commenting on how the rest of the pack always seem to blindly follow the leader, belittling and deriding those who don't do the same, then quickly backtracking when the leader takes a new course.
See my posts above. Be specific or don't go there.
Which posters belittled and derided who, about what, and then backtracked?
Seems to me you're just another person who doesn't like being disagreed with (who does?), so instead of having the courage of your convictions to debate any particular topic, on the merits, on a case to case basis, you're just going to go with "the people that disagree with me are collectively wrong and mean and sheep like" as a blanket dismissal.
That's kinda bullshitty and self aggrandizing, IMO. It allows you to play the role of intrepid free thinker going against the tide without ever having to actually put up any evidence that that's the case. Getting peeved at two or three posters for disagreeing with you in terms you find "fanboyish" is not evidence for "a pack" "blindly following its leader" that you, in your liberated objectivity, are obliged to confront.
Call out individuals for whatever, if you see fit. But the elaborate sighing over "them" is cheap and lazy.
I was waiting for this. That is because"fanboy' is an urban slang word - probably not it the dictionary. I could be wrong. The other poster was wiki me something that is a common word in the English language- and that word was "bias'.
It's kind of bizarre to have such fans that follow my every word and bring it right back up to me.
fanboy |ˈfanˌboi|
noun
informal derogatory an obsessive male fan (usually of movies, comic books, or science fiction).
ORIGIN from fan 2 + boy .
That definition comes from the Dictionary application - you know, the one included with every Macintosh computer. You can also find the definition in the online Merriam-Webster disctionary. Your explanation sounds duplicitous to me but I am sure you will find some other reason why it is appropriate for you to source from Wikipedia yet inappropriate for others.
By the way, I am no fan of yours. You seem to live in a world where a half-full glass is almost empty. I try to avoid people like that.
For better or worse, I am blessed with excellent memory and am able to recall much of what I read from here or elsewhere. Of course, you oversized sense of self has once again led you to the wrong conclusion.
See my posts above. Be specific or don't go there.
Which posters belittled and derided who, about what, and then backtracked?
I'm talking about trends and the general direction that opinions go. Threads, posts and posters span years, and I haven't the time or inclination to go hunting them down. 2 years ago it was perfectly acceptable for the iPhone to have a rubbish 2mp camera. And yet now it has a 3.2mp camera with auto-focus (which is still pretty low-mid end now). If the 2mp was sufficient, why has this been changed? I think the fact the 3GS is selling so well just goes to show that the lack of some decent hardware features was really holding back the 2G and 3G since they all share the same broad software feature set.
Who cares? Apple makes up for it by their ridiculous gross ups on their MacBook, iPhones , iPods, etc so that this means nothing. Not to mention the $10 Apple tax on the iPod Touch ugrade. Fanboys can defend all they want but the reality is Apple is overpriced for what is inside the devices.
Apple just dropped prices and they'er still to high. That white MacBook for $1000? Indeed!
Maybe Apple should elect you to the board so you can set them all straight, eh Teckstud?
Here is the deal: Manufacturers design, produce, and market a product, and the consumer (you) decides whether or not to buy the product at the price point offered.
It doesn't seem like anyone forced you to buy a mac, or an iPhone, or any other Apple product for that matter. So, whining and complaining because you think the evil Apple overlords have abused you by charging too much is just silly (and that is the nice way of saying it.)
Why don't you just go buy an $800 Dell and go hang out on winSuperSite? The way you carry on, it seems like that would be more palatable for all of us.
I'm talking about trends and the general direction that opinions go. Threads, posts and posters span years, and I haven't the time or inclination to go hunting them down.
Cheap and lazy, as the man said. If you have an argument with something some actual person said, then take that up with that person. If you can't be bothered, and insist on generalizing about "them" -- then be aware that your argument will sound a lot like bigotry.
2 years ago it was perfectly acceptable for the iPhone to have a rubbish 2mp camera. And yet now it has a 3.2mp camera with auto-focus (which is still pretty low-mid end now). If the 2mp was sufficient, why has this been changed? I think the fact the 3GS is selling so well just goes to show that the lack of some decent hardware features was really holding back the 2G and 3G since they all share the same broad software feature set.
Or because these products are always improving and responding to new technologies and developments in markets? Two years ago I couldn't buy a home theater with a Blu-ray player, now I can choose from a whole bunch of them. Were the manufacturers wrong to have not sold them before?
Cheap and lazy, as the man said. If you have an argument with something some actual person said, then take that up with that person. If you can't be bothered, and insist on generalizing about "them" -- then be aware that your argument will sound a lot like bigotry.
Fine by me. I'm entitled to my opinion
Or because these products are always improving and responding to new technologies and developments in markets? Two years ago I couldn't buy a home theater with a Blu-ray player, now I can choose from a whole bunch of them. Were the manufacturers wrong to have not sold them before?
That's fine, but the technology WAS there 2 years ago, Apple just deliberately missed it out to gauge money later on when it introduced an amazing 3.2mp auto-focus camera. There's a difference between not selling technology because it's not available, and not selling it simply because you want to introduce it as an 'amazing' new feature later on. Apple is supposed to be about making revolutionary products (which the 2G iPhone was, and OS 2.0 was) but Apple have since just tacked on some minor hardware and software changes. It certainly seems as if Apple didn't put much effort into the 3GS, and some of the parts they tossed into it have been available for years anyway.
The reason I see bias is because there is bias.
When someone says for 2 years that the iPhone doesn't need or want MMS, video, or cut and paste and then champions it only because Apple then provides it, how else do you make a deduction and what do you call it? When posters defend Apple's ommission of firewire on a MAcBook and it gets added back on and won't admit Apple made a mistake- what do you call that? The same thing for matte screens. Remember - they were supposed to be nevermore according to the fanboys because Apple wasn't giving them. The comes the 17"- and it gets matte. And watch the others will also get matte(I'd bet) because it is far superior (glare does suck) regardless of fanboys assertion that noobody wants matte. They only say what Apple currently provides is what you need. Meanwhile netbooks sales are through the roof yet fanboys were saying, whenever I mentioned it, that a small formed device between 7-11" was no good - the MBA was all we needed. Then the rumours leaked and they all embrace it. It is a very sad train of thought actually.
The term is real and alive.
This is all a bunch of garbage. Your definition of fan boy amounts to this: "anyone who disagrees with you." As a matter of fact, that is how you consistently use the term: whenever someone doesn't agree with whatever negative effluent you have to spill out at the particular time.
You don't seem to get the fact that you, mr. teckstud, are not the prototype upon which all humanity is based, and therefor your particular interests or desires in a product do not act as the reference model for what every product designed by anyone ought to be. Furthermore, you interpret something like the removal of firewire, and then its addition again, as acknowledgment of a mistake, when you don't have a clue as to what drove those choices. You don't know if it was a costing decision, a space consideration, or whatever. Heck, maybe they were in fact mistakes. Maybe they misjudged the market, realized the gaffe, and corrected. Who the heck actually cares? The problem with you is that your belief is that anything Apple does which contradicts your own personal views and tastes is a mistake. And of course, anyone who doesn't see it that way is a 'fan boy'.
Fine by me. I'm entitled to my opinion
If you don't mind sounding like a bigot, then presumably you won't be surprised when your opinions are suitably ignored.
Fine by me. I'm entitled to my opinion
That's fine, but the technology WAS there 2 years ago, Apple just deliberately missed it out to gauge money later on when it introduced an amazing 3.2mp auto-focus camera. There's a difference between not selling technology because it's not available, and not selling it simply because you want to introduce it as an 'amazing' new feature later on. Apple is supposed to be about making revolutionary products (which the 2G iPhone was, and OS 2.0 was) but Apple have since just tacked on some minor hardware and software changes. It certainly seems as if Apple didn't put much effort into the 3GS, and some of the parts they tossed into it have been available for years anyway.
You have utterly no idea why Apple chose not to use a higher resolution camera earlier on, so why go on about it like you do? Have you ever actually designed a product? Been involved on the manufacture of one? There are all sorts of variables that go into decisions like this. "Can we get the part cheap enough to reach our price point?" "Can we get it small enough to fit into our form factor?" "Can we get it to draw power within our acceptable range?" "Can we get it to pass FCC?" "Does the market demand justify costs, etc." It is all a dance and building this kind of stuff is a heck of a lot more complicated, and involves many more compromises and difficult choices, than anyone who has never done it could possibly know. It bothers me when I see this kind of negative bias however, because it almost always implies an intention: "Apple didn't user a better camera because they intended to introduce the feature later" etc. It may be fair to say that later on Apple engineers intended to up the camera specifications, I do not know. But it is not fair to insinuate that the choice to use something lesser was done purely to disenfranchise the consumer. There are hundreds of factors that inform choices like this.