If these people truly cared about helping others, they would not need anything in return for their donation other than the knowledge that they helped; all this suggests is that the buyer actually just wants to raise their own prestige amongst their own friends. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The one-off machi</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">ne itself will probably be worth 3000-5000 or more, which could have been, drumroll, donated to charity. The time spent at the auction house, not to mention the cost of getting everyone there, etc,</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> could have been spent helping charities. In short, Apple could just put a blurb on their page asking people to donate to charity (they could arrange it and all if they like) and that would actually probably get more money. Lots of media time and energy and money is being spent on covering this device, again more money that could be donated.</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Then there is the argument that by doing this they are raising awareness and thus increasing donations. I'm sure there is data to support this (as there is to counter it, probably if someone searched).</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">There are two sides, or more.</span>
Explain to me then why US citizens are allowed to deduct charitable donations on their tax returns? Ive is getting to do a fun side project and at the same time raise lots of money for RED. Sure he could just write out a big check but then people would complain it wasn't enough or he was just showing off. I guess I don't see why this is a big deal when celebrities and other rich people do stuff like this all the time to raise money for charity. The end result is what should matter.
A little off topic, but does anyone think each generation of Mac Pro will see a change in its anodised hue / finish like the iPhone does to set it apart from the previous generation?
This I don't get, at all. There are, for instance, HUGE fashion events to raise money for AIDS or hunger or whatever. People are wearing and bidding on -- as an example -- pairs of shoes that cost nearly $10k retail, and end up going for much, much more for that. People bid on gowns for sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Do you really think that if you got AIDS treatment, and were completely poor in some 3rd world country, you'd care that the money to help you came from some real rich person bidding on a pair of 5" strappy Louboutins?
My thoughts exactly.
Well, you know we love the Doctor right here in the States, too!
But I meant US (as in geek-y tech types) not U.S. (as in the United States). But I'm pretty sure you got the first time around.
WHO are you calling a geeky tech type!
BTW, I can remember like it was yesterday watching the first ever Dr. Who episode as a kid in England. The next week, because there was so much fuss over how good it was but many people missed it, they showed the first and second episode the following week one after the other, as a one off exercise. My little sister commented, "It's going to take a long time to watch in a few weeks!". We were ROFL, she was about 6.
It's a beautiful computer but helping the poorest of the poor dying of AIDS, TB and Malaria by selling each other Range Rovers, Leica's, Dom Perignon, 18 karat gold earphones and $40,000 computers seems in bad taste to me.
It's not in bad taste at all. I think that this red Mac Pro looks great, but I wouldn't want one, because it's associated with AIDS, charity and the poor.
But if others wish to donate to charity, then good for them, I don't think that anybody can legitimately criticize others who are giving money. People are free to spend their money on whatever they please.
Sure, it would be great if people just donated to charities simply because they felt it was the right thing to do. But this practice has evolved because charities have found they can drum up more money if they make a spectacle that can be promoted and talked about.
I'd say it's about pragmatism. If $1000 given with 70% selfless motivations and 30% selfish motivations, it's still more useful than $100 given with 100% selfless motivations.
It's not in bad taste at all. I think that this red Mac Pro looks great, but I wouldn't want one, because it's associated with AIDS, charity and the poor.
It's not in bad taste at all. I think that this red Mac Pro looks great, but I wouldn't want one, because it's associated with AIDS, charity and the poor.
That's a very strange reason not to want a product - regardless of the quality. If we disregard the price for the time being, in what way is a Product Red Mac Pro less compelling than a stock MP with the same internals? They have exactly the performance. And the red one has the added benefit of helping those less well off than you. I would have thought that would make it more compelling a purchase.
The SGI Crimson was the SGI I always dreamt of having. This red Mac Pro remembers me of it (except for the size -the Crimson was deskside- and that it's metallic).
But my favorite color for the new Mac Pro would be WHITE. For me, Apple means WHITE. I miss the white Apples a lot.
Comments
Explain to me then why US citizens are allowed to deduct charitable donations on their tax returns? Ive is getting to do a fun side project and at the same time raise lots of money for RED. Sure he could just write out a big check but then people would complain it wasn't enough or he was just showing off. I guess I don't see why this is a big deal when celebrities and other rich people do stuff like this all the time to raise money for charity. The end result is what should matter.
Hubba Bubba!
A little off topic, but does anyone think each generation of Mac Pro will see a change in its anodised hue / finish like the iPhone does to set it apart from the previous generation?
Colorways... just saying /s
WHO are you calling a geeky tech type!
BTW, I can remember like it was yesterday watching the first ever Dr. Who episode as a kid in England. The next week, because there was so much fuss over how good it was but many people missed it, they showed the first and second episode the following week one after the other, as a one off exercise. My little sister commented, "It's going to take a long time to watch in a few weeks!". We were ROFL, she was about 6.
It's a beautiful computer but helping the poorest of the poor dying of AIDS, TB and Malaria by selling each other Range Rovers, Leica's, Dom Perignon, 18 karat gold earphones and $40,000 computers seems in bad taste to me.
It's not in bad taste at all. I think that this red Mac Pro looks great, but I wouldn't want one, because it's associated with AIDS, charity and the poor.
But if others wish to donate to charity, then good for them, I don't think that anybody can legitimately criticize others who are giving money. People are free to spend their money on whatever they please.
Explain to me then why US citizens are allowed to deduct charitable donations on their tax returns?
Because taxes have always acted as a instrument of social policy.
Sure, it would be great if people just donated to charities simply because they felt it was the right thing to do. But this practice has evolved because charities have found they can drum up more money if they make a spectacle that can be promoted and talked about.
I'd say it's about pragmatism. If $1000 given with 70% selfless motivations and 30% selfish motivations, it's still more useful than $100 given with 100% selfless motivations.
Maybe this will get Apple to do custom colors. I think that would be cool. Though not purple.
Now we're talking!
I love Apple but I just couldn't resist....
I'm pretty sure you shouldn't abbreviate the Doctor.
I can't believe I just read this statement.
I love Apple but I just couldn't resist....
Classic flavor?
I wonder how much custom third party skins will be? Slide it on and shrink to fit with a hair drier.
IPHONE 6 beautiful picture on web http://imgdino.com/viewer.php?file=78253612471688092037.png
IPHONE 6 beautiful picture on web http://imgdino.com/viewer.php?file=68899432006084666448.jpg
That's a very strange reason not to want a product - regardless of the quality. If we disregard the price for the time being, in what way is a Product Red Mac Pro less compelling than a stock MP with the same internals? They have exactly the performance. And the red one has the added benefit of helping those less well off than you. I would have thought that would make it more compelling a purchase.
But my favorite color for the new Mac Pro would be WHITE. For me, Apple means WHITE. I miss the white Apples a lot.