Big deal. I don't allow any of their "stuff" in my house. That goes both hardware and software wise.
All I can say is, if she wants her kids to grow up with technology that is 5 years out of date and copies of other companies stuff, fine with me.
As for the Gates "feeling the need" to help other people. What a laugh. Bill Gates is buying his place in history just like all the robber barons of the 18th and 19th and 20th centuries. It's nothing more than that. The rest is BS.
"[N]othing [from Apple] crosses the threshold of our doorstep."
So short-sighted if true. I remember Apple's computers' being praised by PC World as great machines on which to run Windows (since, you know, they're great machines). He should at least give his OS a fighting chance.
It's also a great, Orwellian rewrite of history, of course, since Microsoft owes its early success to selling Apple software.
You might want to read some of the latest articles here about his latest rant on Google and RIM. Which is common for Steve Jobs.
You should read the countless threads about the three or four day conference where google executives did nothing but bash Apple and make false predictions of their demise. Sure Steve could have ignored them, but he chose to gloat, which is ok to. To pretend he is somehow unique in this behavior is simply dishonest.
So short-sighted if true. I remember Apple's computers' being praised by PC World as great machines on which to run Windows (since, you know, they're great machines). He should at least give his OS a fighting chance.
It's also a great, Orwellian rewrite of history, of course, since Microsoft owes its early success to selling Apple software.
exactly. even if you hate apples OS(s), apple is a hardware company - and that shows - at the least he could set windows as the primary/default OS on a MBP.
As a parent I can tell you that their prohibition is the surest way to guarantee that their kids will get Apple products as soon as they get out of that house. Wouldn't surprise me if one of his kids ends up working at Apple just to rebel against or differentiate him-herself from the father.
As a parent I can tell you that their prohibition is the surest way to guarantee that their kids will get Apple products as soon as they get out of that house. Wouldn't surprise me if one of his kids ends up working at Apple just to rebel against or differentiate him-herself from the father.
I don't think that Apple is getting free advertisement from all the shows and movies. Sometimes it's strategically done. Product placements are always for sale in any kind of entertainment show or movie. Apple would spend more money on product placements than actual ads on tv.
Clearly someone that doesn't work in the industry. It is actually very rare for any company to pay for placement on a tv show or movie. At least in terms of cash money.
What they will do is make deals to provide materials and permission to use them without covering up decals, faking screen contents etc for free. This allows the production company to have what it needs without paying out money for the physical item or image use licenses (which can be very very expensive) and the other side gets the 'free advertising'.
With TV shows, companies like Apple used to just send a handful of whatever to each of the various studio prop houses on the idea that when companies go to see what they have around to use they would see it and be like "its here, lets use it". Often it was items that were clearly recognizable as whatever even if you covered the logo and never showed the screen, like the old bondi series imacs and ibooks.
Cars and clothing are two major companies (aside from electronics) that will free for free. The old WB show Dawson's Creek is still talked around town for making a deal to dress all their kids in the same company, getting the clothes for free or extremely reduced prices. CSI etc all drive the same dark SUVs cause they are getting huge discounts (up to 100%). Even sunglass companies will send samples to certain shows so that someone like David Caruso (famous for his character's sunglasses schtick) will be seen where X brand)
Movies run the same way. Free For Free is a common way to reduce budgets for cars, clothes, computers, even sometimes food and drink. Sometimes that neighborhood hot spot will be more than happy to be used in the new Jolie (or whomever) film for a pittance fee to cover the electric bill during filming. Productions love that kind of gig because it adds to the realism. I mean you can't say that the movie wasn't shot in Chicago when the leads are having a drink at THE bar.
Very rarely is product placement actually a cash payment. when it is, it is typically something very common place that has no real budget advantage (like you notice that 'everyone' in a movie is drinking pepsi even if the can is covered up) and no real reason plot wise to have everything the same.
... As for the Gates "feeling the need" to help other people. What a laugh. Bill Gates is buying his place in history just like all the robber barons of the 18th and 19th and 20th centuries. It's nothing more than that. ...
Totally agree.
I fail to understand why people think that Bill Gates throwing his money around equates to him being a "decent guy" now. People don't just up and change their entire personalities, and if he was always a "nice guy" he wouldn't have done all that stuff that his career at Microsoft is based on. If he cared about people so much, Microsoft wouldn't have been one of the most ruthless, backstabbing, winner-take-all kind of business outfit that it is clearly recorded as being.
It just makes no kind of sense to suppose that the head of *that* business, is suddenly a "nice guy philanthropist" now because he just cares so damn much about everyone. Total nonsense.
Looks like Paul Allen is in need of money to buy yet another flailing sports franchise, seeing as how his Microsoft stocks have sunk like a diving bell.
I?m seeing them a lot in TV shows, and not in an advertisement aspect either, often shrouded and used as they would use any other piece of tech as a prop.
I have noticed them also. ANd thus far only being used in ways that are actually within the realm of real. Like over the weekend, I was watching one of those police shows and they were viewing security footage on an ipad. And no "okay zoom and enhance, now spin it to a side with no actual camera and show me that view" tricks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
When Apple locks down Mac OS X (and we all know they will), there will be no Macs in my household either.
No WE don't ALL KNOW they will.
Apple has given a clearly thought out logic to locking down iOS, that many folks accept as logical and sensible. The same arguments don't apply to Mac OS which is why Apple hasn't made them.
So unless you are willing to step up and state on the record that you work for Apple and have actual insider info that yes they are locking down Mac OS (with your full name and position in the company so we can verify your info), keep your 'the sky is falling' to yourself please. Don't speak for the rest of us and what we know or think. It's tacky.
There are a lot of things that children growing up may find uncool about their parents but your dad co-founding the one-of-the-most-successful-companies-ever, the one that's not cool, has to be a new one.
Knowing all the businesses (and their employees) that MS put out of work over the years using illegal business practices, I wouldn't be proud of a parent who did that and wouldn't think it was cool.
Apple has given a clearly thought out logic to locking down iOS, that many folks accept as logical and sensible. The same arguments don't apply to Mac OS which is why Apple hasn't made them.
So unless you are willing to step up and state on the record that you work for Apple and have actual insider info that yes they are locking down Mac OS (with your full name and position in the company so we can verify your info), keep your 'the sky is falling' to yourself please. Don't speak for the rest of us and what we know or think. It's tacky.
Apple has been locking in more and more for almost a decade now. And see what pinnacles of success it got them to. What makes you think they would change that m.o.? There's no incentive ? from Apple's point of view ? in that.
Of course Micro$haft thought the same thing at one time... They in fact still do.
Every Christmas for the last 7 years.. Steve Jobs has personally addressed a small package with a current generation iPod for each of the Gates children.. no return address.. no identifying marks...and puts it in the mail by December 1st.
And each Christmas morning... as the box is torn open a raging father grabs up the gifts.. and stops them into the floor while screaming 'no no no no no no no!'.
This has ruined Christmas for the last time. This year... Steve has mailed them a simple Job Offer letter. Each child (once 18) is entitled to a Dollar a year from Apple... an employee name badge... no benefits.. but a shiny new iPod each time one is released. All they have to do is sign.
Comments
All I can say is, if she wants her kids to grow up with technology that is 5 years out of date and copies of other companies stuff, fine with me.
As for the Gates "feeling the need" to help other people. What a laugh. Bill Gates is buying his place in history just like all the robber barons of the 18th and 19th and 20th centuries. It's nothing more than that. The rest is BS.
Does he still have a Mac in his office, at least? (Look over his shoulder.)
that pose is somewhat disturbing.. but wow where did you get that picture of a mac in Bill's office?
How do you have a patent on "Alerting Users to Items of Current Interest"?
with the current system you can patent just about anything. eg, more than 2 fingers on a touchscreen...
"[N]othing [from Apple] crosses the threshold of our doorstep."
So short-sighted if true. I remember Apple's computers' being praised by PC World as great machines on which to run Windows (since, you know, they're great machines). He should at least give his OS a fighting chance.
It's also a great, Orwellian rewrite of history, of course, since Microsoft owes its early success to selling Apple software.
You might want to read some of the latest articles here about his latest rant on Google and RIM. Which is common for Steve Jobs.
You should read the countless threads about the three or four day conference where google executives did nothing but bash Apple and make false predictions of their demise. Sure Steve could have ignored them, but he chose to gloat, which is ok to. To pretend he is somehow unique in this behavior is simply dishonest.
So short-sighted if true. I remember Apple's computers' being praised by PC World as great machines on which to run Windows (since, you know, they're great machines). He should at least give his OS a fighting chance.
It's also a great, Orwellian rewrite of history, of course, since Microsoft owes its early success to selling Apple software.
exactly. even if you hate apples OS(s), apple is a hardware company - and that shows - at the least he could set windows as the primary/default OS on a MBP.
As a parent I can tell you that their prohibition is the surest way to guarantee that their kids will get Apple products as soon as they get out of that house. Wouldn't surprise me if one of his kids ends up working at Apple just to rebel against or differentiate him-herself from the father.
wow.. i was just about to post something similar!
I don't think that Apple is getting free advertisement from all the shows and movies. Sometimes it's strategically done. Product placements are always for sale in any kind of entertainment show or movie. Apple would spend more money on product placements than actual ads on tv.
Clearly someone that doesn't work in the industry. It is actually very rare for any company to pay for placement on a tv show or movie. At least in terms of cash money.
What they will do is make deals to provide materials and permission to use them without covering up decals, faking screen contents etc for free. This allows the production company to have what it needs without paying out money for the physical item or image use licenses (which can be very very expensive) and the other side gets the 'free advertising'.
With TV shows, companies like Apple used to just send a handful of whatever to each of the various studio prop houses on the idea that when companies go to see what they have around to use they would see it and be like "its here, lets use it". Often it was items that were clearly recognizable as whatever even if you covered the logo and never showed the screen, like the old bondi series imacs and ibooks.
Cars and clothing are two major companies (aside from electronics) that will free for free. The old WB show Dawson's Creek is still talked around town for making a deal to dress all their kids in the same company, getting the clothes for free or extremely reduced prices. CSI etc all drive the same dark SUVs cause they are getting huge discounts (up to 100%). Even sunglass companies will send samples to certain shows so that someone like David Caruso (famous for his character's sunglasses schtick) will be seen where X brand)
Movies run the same way. Free For Free is a common way to reduce budgets for cars, clothes, computers, even sometimes food and drink. Sometimes that neighborhood hot spot will be more than happy to be used in the new Jolie (or whomever) film for a pittance fee to cover the electric bill during filming. Productions love that kind of gig because it adds to the realism. I mean you can't say that the movie wasn't shot in Chicago when the leads are having a drink at THE bar.
Very rarely is product placement actually a cash payment. when it is, it is typically something very common place that has no real budget advantage (like you notice that 'everyone' in a movie is drinking pepsi even if the can is covered up) and no real reason plot wise to have everything the same.
...complimented...
... As for the Gates "feeling the need" to help other people. What a laugh. Bill Gates is buying his place in history just like all the robber barons of the 18th and 19th and 20th centuries. It's nothing more than that. ...
Totally agree.
I fail to understand why people think that Bill Gates throwing his money around equates to him being a "decent guy" now. People don't just up and change their entire personalities, and if he was always a "nice guy" he wouldn't have done all that stuff that his career at Microsoft is based on. If he cared about people so much, Microsoft wouldn't have been one of the most ruthless, backstabbing, winner-take-all kind of business outfit that it is clearly recorded as being.
It just makes no kind of sense to suppose that the head of *that* business, is suddenly a "nice guy philanthropist" now because he just cares so damn much about everyone. Total nonsense.
People don't just up and change their entire personalities
There are plenty of examples throughout history where people regretted their actions and changed their goals and motives, seemingly overnight.
I?m seeing them a lot in TV shows, and not in an advertisement aspect either, often shrouded and used as they would use any other piece of tech as a prop.
I have noticed them also. ANd thus far only being used in ways that are actually within the realm of real. Like over the weekend, I was watching one of those police shows and they were viewing security footage on an ipad. And no "okay zoom and enhance, now spin it to a side with no actual camera and show me that view" tricks.
When Apple locks down Mac OS X (and we all know they will), there will be no Macs in my household either.
No WE don't ALL KNOW they will.
Apple has given a clearly thought out logic to locking down iOS, that many folks accept as logical and sensible. The same arguments don't apply to Mac OS which is why Apple hasn't made them.
So unless you are willing to step up and state on the record that you work for Apple and have actual insider info that yes they are locking down Mac OS (with your full name and position in the company so we can verify your info), keep your 'the sky is falling' to yourself please. Don't speak for the rest of us and what we know or think. It's tacky.
whats stopping you from using chrome? or at least IE8?
You might want to read some of the latest articles here about his latest rant on Google and RIM. Which is common for Steve Jobs.
They were scarcely "rants." Do you even know what the word means?
There are a lot of things that children growing up may find uncool about their parents but your dad co-founding the one-of-the-most-successful-companies-ever, the one that's not cool, has to be a new one.
Knowing all the businesses (and their employees) that MS put out of work over the years using illegal business practices, I wouldn't be proud of a parent who did that and wouldn't think it was cool.
Apple has given a clearly thought out logic to locking down iOS, that many folks accept as logical and sensible. The same arguments don't apply to Mac OS which is why Apple hasn't made them.
So unless you are willing to step up and state on the record that you work for Apple and have actual insider info that yes they are locking down Mac OS (with your full name and position in the company so we can verify your info), keep your 'the sky is falling' to yourself please. Don't speak for the rest of us and what we know or think. It's tacky.
Apple has been locking in more and more for almost a decade now. And see what pinnacles of success it got them to. What makes you think they would change that m.o.? There's no incentive ? from Apple's point of view ? in that.
Of course Micro$haft thought the same thing at one time... They in fact still do.
And each Christmas morning... as the box is torn open a raging father grabs up the gifts.. and stops them into the floor while screaming 'no no no no no no no!'.
This has ruined Christmas for the last time. This year... Steve has mailed them a simple Job Offer letter. Each child (once 18) is entitled to a Dollar a year from Apple... an employee name badge... no benefits.. but a shiny new iPod each time one is released. All they have to do is sign.
Should make for a great home movie....