dasanman69

roake said:

There is a difference between not discriminating and being forced to abandon ones personal beliefs.  This latest movement is yet another and an endless series of attempts to marginalize or suppress Christianity.

For example, take a random mom and pop Christian bakery with a gay couple as customers.  Most would not have problems selling items to the couple, but when it comes to endorsing or celebrating that gay union (bake a cake by that bakery, with those names on the cake, in the bakers box), then they have the right to draw a line, if not an obligation.  Within their religion and most closely-held beliefs, to make that cake is wrong, and places their own souls at jeopardy for not doing what they believe to be right.

Sure, there are tons of other bakeries, but none cares.  They want to force the Christians to do something that is against their beliefs.

I'd like to see this tried in muslim communities.  When good ol' Butch and Billybob go to there to order a "wedding" cake and stir up some kind of controversy, it ends up with a couple beheadings.

It's very easy to judge people.  We always want justice for others but mercy for ourselves.  Why do you think that difference exists?

studiomusic said:

dasanman69 said:

Someone with the user name 'studiomusic' should know much about bad deals and why people sign up for them. 

Yep, sure do! Especially for the Euro Techno music scene in the 90's...
There is a big difference between a struggling artist wanting the big break and a multi-billion dollar company (with a team of expensive lawyers) wanting more money from selling a phone made by Apple.

studiomusic said:

If these contracts are so bad, why do they renew them?
It must be worth it if everyone is signing these 'bad' deals.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on phones. If you want their phones, you need to do what you have to to have them.
Vive l'escroquerie de France!

sog35 said:

volcan said:

If you don't mind me asking, what are the massive fundamental differences? I ask because I see colleagues happily using their Android phones without any apparent problems. I personally have never used one, but they seem to have all the same features that an iPhone has, other than the differences that I noted. To me it seems logical that they would have the same feature set because Android is pretty much an exact copy of iPhone.

first of all iPhone guarantees you OS updates for a very long time.

Cheap Android phones usually are running an old version of Android and rarely get updated.
Second Android phones are full of security holes. Ever wondered why the FBI never requested Google to write a backdoor for Android?
Third cheap Android phones are made of cheap parts. Many die and start having hardware problems in less than a year.  How many 2+ year old cheap Android phones do you see in the wild? I rarely see any because after 2 years most of them are unusable because of hardware failure or the OS is so old and outdated.

And don't forget to factor in resale.

You will be able to buy a 6s for $550 in a few months when the 7 comes out.
You can buy a cheap Android for about $200.
In 2 years the 6s will be able to fetch $200 
The cheap Android will get $0.
So basically you paid only $150 more for the iPhone when you factor in resale.

Is it really worth it to save literally 21 cents a day to live with a clearly inferior Android phone?  

monstrosity said:

rogifan_new said:

I really wonder how many people are using TV for games. My guess is not many. Serious gamers would be using a console or gaming PC and everyone else is probably just playing games on their iPad or iPhone. If Apple really wanted TV to be a gaming platform they would have made a controller for it and included it in the box. 

Apple are not targeting 'serious' gamers... just yet. Apple are entering the industry through the back door, targeting casual gamers first, and doing a very good job of it.