The Psychology of Fanboys

Testiiiiing writes "CoolTechZone.com's Gundeep Hora publishes his thoughts on why fanboys act the way they do. 'For fanboys (and I use the term with utmost respect, at least for this article), their appetite to support their favorite company to beat the big, bad corporate heavyweights gets delusional at times. And why not? After all, we all like to cheer the underdog... reasonably. In addition to cheering for the little guy, fanboys also think it's their responsibility to spread the word about their favorite company. Combine their need to do marketing on behalf of their adopted companies and their products with the passion to make others see things their way, and you have a powerful group of people.'"

Comments

But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Anonymous Coward]

M$ is clearly not an underdog, and I work with a guy who is quite a fanboy....

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[PinkyDead]

They're not fanboys. They're minions.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[mrbluze]

$ is clearly not an underdog, and I work with a guy who is quite a fanboy....

Fanboy, zealot, fanatic, fundamentalist, bigot.. other stuff. All the same in essence.

It's all just people who believe beyond reason in something. I know.. boring but true. When people know only a bit of what there is to know about something, or therabouts, they get really idealistic and passionate about it. It's human nature. Then, after time, if they get to know enough, they become cynical, or at best, just plain realistic.

Fanboys are the result of feelings of ignorance and insecurity. The more a person feels the pressures of both, the more he tries to convince others of what he thinks.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Carewolf]

They're not fanboys. They're minions.

You say it as a joke, but it might be partially true.

Through history there have been many people who where more than willing to adopt heavily critized, but very success political standpoints. Just see this rise for fascism in Italy or Germany, or the presence of creationists on slashdot.

*Okay, so Godwin me.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Elemenope]

Oh come on, that was barely a Godwin honorable mention at best. It was a highly oblique comparison that didn't even invoke the "N" word or the "H" word.

But you're still guilty. Were you following orders, minion?

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[LingNoi]

Yes I thought that I was strange the article mentions both Mac and Linux but leaves out Microsoft. Presumably Mac and Linux users would have both used Microsoft products at some point and have a broader view of experience on the topic.

I can not say the same for Microsoft users. In their eyes just using a different operating system makes you a heretic that hates Microsoft and wants to see it burn.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Hijacked Public]

I think that is some kind of perversion of brand loyalty.

Many people derive a large part of their identity from the brands of product they buy and view any negative commentary on those brands and directed at them personally. If a guy has Windows computers, a Windows handheld, a Windows DVR, and knows a hell of a lot about Windows, and you tell him that Windows sucks he may, at the very least, see that as an attack on his consumer acumen and lash out at you.

Then you have the people driving Dodge vehicles with graphics of Calvin pissing on a Ford logo. Or vice versa. And Nascar fans. Or sports fans in general. I enjoy handmade cutlery and every so often visit web forums dedicated to just that. The brand loyalty people are there even, as this thread will clearly show.

In a psychological sense Fanboyism is a lot deeper than the article suggests, and it is a consequence of a culture as materialistic as Western culture tends to be.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Elemenope]

Already marked flamebait? Wow, some mods can't take a joke. Just to be clear for the less abstractly minded, the "n" word was "Nazi" and the "h" word was "Hitler". Jeez.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[dave420]

I've found myself defending Microsoft quite a few times. It's not because I'm a die-hard Bill's-cock-sucking cheerleader, but because I actively like engaging in rational debate, and when someone says something to me, framed as fact, which is clearly not true, I will point out the inaccuracy of their statement. That's not being a fanboy, but being rational. I do the same for Mac, Linux, my fridge, Pluto, whatever. I like technology, so I want to get to the bottom of the discussion, not get to the bottom of the discussion with "my team" on top, as I don't have a team.

Fanboys aren't always logical. They may be logical 99.9% of the time, but that 0.1% will cause someone like me to call them out on their bullshit. That's the problem with fanboys, in my opinion. I'm a technologist, not an appleologist or a linuxologist or a windowsologist. I couldn't give a flying fuck what logo is on the software/hardware/candy I use, as long as it does what I want it to. I want to be proven wrong. I want to learn. I don't want to be using the second-best technology just because my favourite CEO says it's the best when real-world application tells me, and others, otherwise.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Anonymous Coward]

In its most basic and correct formulation, the goal of public relations and marketing is to disintegrate ration from action, and use autonomic responses in its place; basically, its a mechanism for controlling the will of public by means of turning them into easily trained animals.

The fanboy phenomenon is just the evolutionary extension that maintains the existing pipelines of manufactured consent, as broadcast mediums become less of a part of daily life.

Unfortunately, there is not any obvious solution to mitigate its effect. Consumer culture provides the meaning to most of the lives of citizens in industrialized societies. The genie is out of the bottle.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[pointbeing]

...In a psychological sense Fanboyism is a lot deeper than the article suggests, and it is a consequence of a culture as materialistic as Western culture tends to be.

Excellent.

Extending the parent poster's logic just a bit nobody wants to think they selected anything other than the best OS when in reality the best OS is the one that meets your needs. Some people have a lot of their personal self-worth tied up in their selection of computer platforms ;-)

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[BasharTeg]

It's called Commitment and Consistency, and it's one of the fixed action patterns described by Dr. Robert Cialdini in Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. In my opinion this is one of the most common fixed action patterns today. People buy in to technologies through Social Proof, and then once they consider themselves part of the group, Commitment and Consistency kicks in.

"Once we have made a choice or taken a stand, we will encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment."

I'd like to point out that although there are many good reasons to run Linux and I certainly appreciate it as a product (I run Linux, FreeBSD and Windows), there are many people who run Linux but can't give you a reasonable explanation as to why. It's a perfectly legitimate choice if you were to pick operating systems out at random, or if you could not afford a commercial operating system, or for many other reasons. However, most "fanboi" type Linux advocates and users don't have a logical reason for using Linux. Instead, they rely heavily on social proof. Linux users are "sticking it to the man", a perspective which fits with the age and demographics of many Linux "fanbois". More specifically, Linux "fanbois" will describe Microsoft's business practices as a reason to run Linux. This is a valid reason to run Linux and to advocate Linux if you're informed on what exactly Microsoft's business practices are, but most Linux "fanbois" will only say that Microsoft is a monopoly and that they bundle products. They have no knowledge of the specifics, they're only parroting what they read in forums and someone's blog. They claim there is evidence out there to support their position (And there is!) but they have no knowledge of it. Basically, you could say they're right for the wrong reason. The "reasoning" that drove them towards the "right" answer is Social Proof. The Linux movement, composed of Linux advocates, manages to convince not only intelligent people who choose the operating system for logical reasons, but also empty minded "fanbois" who are convinced by Social Proof that Linux is superior, and that by running Linux they will be part of an exclusive club of the Elite who run Linux (starting to relate to Scarcity). This easily convinced "fanboi" then spends the time to get Linux working on his computer. This isn't always an easy task depending on driver support, learning how to install an operating system in the first place, and other technical factors that can make switching to Linux difficult for a novice. Once that difficulty has been overcome, the "fanboi" feels that he has invested a great deal of time and energy into Linux, therefore there must be some kind of payoff. The "fanboi" is very unlikely to be able to even use Linux for anything other than an internet appliance, running a web browser, email software, etc, from X, so very little of the actual benefit of Linux is lost on the "fanboi". Yet after having invested himself in Linux and "learning how to use it" (even though he didn't really), the "fanboi" has finally reached Commitment and Consistency. Having put time and effort into Linux, committing himself to it, he can't believe that he spent all that time and effort for nothing. Even if Linux was a horrible operating system (which it isn't), the "fanboi" would still be a solid believer in the superiority of the system he installed, because he cannot accept that idea that he might have wasted his time installing something either horrible OR closer to reality: something he isn't knowledgable enough to use.

There's nothing wrong with any of this, with one major exception. The "fanboi" may end up learning Linux really well which makes for a great job skill and a deeper understanding of computers as a whole. What's wrong with the "fanboi" is the fact that he and his ilk act as advocates of the system while speaking from a position of ignorance, based on Social Proof (other really smart people run Linux) and Commitment and Consistency (I run it so it's t

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Anonymous Coward]

I love this arguement, because it is one of the more nonsensical things I see on Slashdot, and I see ALL THE DAMN TIME.

Does anyone (other than Twitter) really, honestly think that Microsoft actually *pays* people to post pro-MS messages *on slashdot*? I mean seriously, it's absolutely rediculous. I can imagine MS paying people to spread a pro-MS message, but on Slashdot? Give me a break. The slashdot community is not some powerful cabal of systems administators that can make or break any tech product, and I highly doubt MS really cares about what gets posted here.

I've seen several reasoned, articulate rebuttals to anti-MS bullshit* around here, and nearly every such post gets modded into oblivion and the poster labelled as a fanboy shill. It's really quite sad, because in the same thread there will usually be several incoherent anti-MS rants that somehow get +5 Informative.

*that is not to say that all all anti-MS stuff is bullshit - most of it around here is quite legit. But there is an abundance of FUD, too.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Crash Culligan]

dave420: I've found myself defending Microsoft quite a few times. It's not because I'm a die-hard Bill's-cock-sucking cheerleader, but because I actively like engaging in rational debate, and when someone says something to me, framed as fact, which is clearly not true, I will point out the inaccuracy of their statement. That's not being a fanboy, but being rational.

Indeed. Thus, you're not defending Microsoft, you're defending the facts, which in those cases just happen to support Microsoft. It's been known to happen from time to time.

Ahh, argumentation based on facts. I miss the good old days.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[ozmanjusri]

I love this arguement, because it is one of the more nonsensical things I see on Slashdot, and I see ALL THE DAMN TIME

Microsoft has paid for positive comments elsewhere, including Wikipedia. http://www.informationweek.com/industries/showArti cle.jhtml?articleID=196903015.

They're trying to drum up support through their own blogs http://blogs.msdn.com/ausdev/, there was the fake support letters during their anti-trust prosecution, the fake Zune fansites, the fake Switchers campaign and a dozen more.

Why would Slashdot be immune?

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[BlackCobra43]

Ballmer shot first

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[endianx]

Simple. It is a case of claiming Windows is better than Linux (easy) vs. actually learning to use Linux (complicated).

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, the article you linked to says MS hired someone to correct blatent errors and misinformation in wikipedia. Since I doubt that you ever considered even for a second that there might be a legit need to do that, I will just assume that MS is evil and hired someone to push a pro-MS agenda on wikipedia.

In that case, if you are going to hire someone to push a pro-MS agenda, it makes perfect sense to have them do it on wikipedia. Wikipedia is a defacto standard for web reference. Everyone uses it.

In contrast, would anyone interested in a MS product or technology surf on over to Slashdot to get an opinion? A site owned and operated by The OPEN SOURCE Technology Group? I would say that no reasonable person would expect an unbiased opinion on slashdot anyway, and so why would MS waste time and money fighting an uphill battle here, when they can make arguements elsewhere that actually have a chance of seeming credible?

That's why Slashdot is immune - because MS isn't stupid enough to try to lie to people who wouldn't believe them even if they were telling the truth.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[LingNoi]

In my experience and your post proves it. It is windows users fan boys that are the zealots with their "Linux fan boy we hate Microsoft rawr!" bashing. Whereas the Linux users are far too busy getting stuff done.

However, most "fanboi" type Linux advocates and users don't have a logical reason for using Linux. Instead, they rely heavily on social proof. Linux users are "sticking it to the man", a perspective which fits with the age and demographics of many Linux "fanbois".

Yes lets overlook the fact that some people prefer GNU/Linux and believe it is much better then Windows Vista from a technical stand point. Yeah you could argue with me over what is better but thats not the point.

Microsoft fan boys paint this picture time and time again of Linux zealots but I never see the zealotry they complain about on for example the Ubuntu forums arguably the largest user base of GNU/Linux desktop users. Where as on the other end of the scale you got Microsoft saying Linux sucks on their website!.

Where has Ubuntu or any other distribution ever run a "get the facts" campaign?

To the moderate, there is no one right answer, but there may be a best solution for a particular problem. Moderates run Windows when it makes sense, Linux when it makes sense, Free/Net/OpenBSD when it makes sense, and Mac OSX when it makes sense.

This is the only enlightening thing you said in your whole article. You should have deleted everything before it. These are the true Linux users.

We use Ubuntu as a server at work for our SVN needs. I use Ubuntu on my laptop because I think its development model is technically superior. When I am at work I miss using Ubuntu since in my experience windows is sub par and slows me down.

It is not because I hate Microsoft. I don't truly believe anyone switches from Windows because of that and I wish you and everyone else would stop labeling GNU/Linux users as Microsoft haters.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[dedazo]

Yes, everyone knows Bill Gates himself pays people to post stupid things on Slashdot (thanks to twitter, as always).

And I won't even address your reference to the Wikipedia issue, which is a perfect example of fanboy exaggeration for the sake of making an emotional argument. And wow, they "shill" in their own blogs. Unthinkable.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[jmac1492]

The page you linked to says that a few organizations (notably the state of Illinois) switched from Linux to Windows. The idea is that people will read the page and think, "Hmm... if it's good enough for Illinois, it's good enough for me." The person who made the page isn't a fanboy, he is an employee. Microsoft pays him to advertize Microsoft's products on Microsoft's website. Perfectly acceptable buisness practices.
Compare that to Slashdot. On the front page right now is a story about how the RIAA changed its servers so they run Linux. Recent stories about Linux (recent is defined as "on the front page of the Linux section right now") includes a story about how "Red Hat Linux Gets Top Govt. Security Rating," where the discussion goes on to be pretty much everyone saying "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$." Another one is "Ubuntu Linux Validates As Genuine Windows," about how someone tricked the WGA check so it would validate on WINE. The discussion was pretty much "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$." Another story, "Microsoft Bends To Norwegian Pressure," is about how Microsoft and the public school system in Norway renegotiated their contract, and Microsoft came out behind. (For the record, this story is in the Linux section not because this story itself has anything to do with Linux, but because Linux stands the most to gain from anything bad happening to Microsoft, including rain in Redmond, Washington.) The discussion was pretty much "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$." The next one, "Venezula Producing Its Own Linux PCs," deals with, well, Venezula making PCs with Linux preinstalled. The discussion was pretty much "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$," although there was a fair amount of discussion about US/Venezula relations. The next story, "Shuttleworth Says No Patent Deals With Microsoft," is about Mark Shuttleworth, the man in charge of deciding whether or not Ubuntu will make a deal licencing patents from Microsoft, has officially decided not to, ending months of speculation over whether he would say no or hell no. The discussion? ZOMG TAKE THAT M$! The next story is "Intuit Finally Offers Some Support For Linux," which is about Intuit making a version of its bookkeeping software that will run on a Linux server. Again, the discussion centered around ZOMG TAKE THAT M$! The next one is "Linspire Signs Patent Pact With MS" and is about how Linspire took the same kind of patent deal Shuttleworth turned down a couple of stories earlier on the page. The discussion there is mostly "ZOMG LINSPIRE IS SUX AND SO IS M$!" The next two stories are actually not Microsoft related in any way. ("Torvalds vs Schwartz GPL Wars" and "Closed Source On Linux and BSD?")

I don't have any hard numbers to back this up, but I highly doubt most of slashdot has contributed to the Linux kernel, or to any distribution. These aren't the Ubuntu fourms, sure, but Slashdot (and especially its Linux section) are probably a fairly high concentration of Linux users. This is what people talk about when they say that most Linux users are rabid fanboys.

Before I'm inevitably accused of being a M$ shill, I'd like to paraphrase someone. "Fix your own server's log before you start complaining about the log in mine."

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[bladesjester]

You forgot at least one other type - the practical ones. We use the tools that make the most sense for the job without wanting to be part of a holy war.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[mazarin5]

I'm calling you out on Godwin.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[MS-06FZ]

I just don't see a lot of Windows users trying to convince their friends with Apples or Linux-based machines that Windows is better. ...Because they're not insecure about that point. Fanboyism is largely about insecurity, I think - people trying to prove to others that their own choice is the best. I think Windows fanboyism exists primarily as a response to Linux and Mac fanboyism - they see Linux or Mac fans heralding their own systems and want to respond in kind. Without that clear "outsider" boundary, the Windows fanboys would have to fight among themselves (Vista vs. non-Vista, I suppose, or Intel vs. AMD - just whatever decisions they could find, I guess.)

But Windows fanboys do knock Apple fans for being drawn in by image, paying more money for inferior hardware, or having a computer without a good selection of games available - and knock Linux fans for being dorks who care more about uptime bragging rights than about having a reliable, full-featured system. And they knock both groups for knocking Windows and Microsoft. Bear in mind that fanboys are not advocates or participants, they're armchair quarterbacks. Rather than creating things themselves, they are interested in allying themselves with something and bickering about how anything else is junk - because if something else actually turned out to be better, then their choice would be a bad one. (That's how the rationale goes, anyway - the actual reality of the situation is more complicated.)

From their perspective Windows can do more than other systems: it can play games and it can run just about any software they can download off the net. Just about any time someone writes a program that's useful to them it's written for Windows. The same is not always true of Linux or Mac.

True fanboys of Linux and Mac aren't the "peaceful advocates" people seem to think they are, either. That's why there's a "Linux Advocacy FAQ" - to get overzealous Linux fans to understand that fanboyism doesn't help the Linux cause. Linux fanboys will often claim that Linux software is better than it is - or that the customization (source-code level or otherwise) available makes it a better system than it is. They'll claim GIMP is every bit as good as Photoshop, that Blender is every bit as good as 3DSMax, and, alternately, that WINE is perfectly usable Windows emulation or that Windows compatibility is irrelevant. Realistically, that's not all true, it's not a fair evaluation. Rather, it's a biased evaluation intended to yield a particular result.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[The One and Only]

Nice theory--but I've seen banner ads for Windows Server on Slashdot, so there goes your theory that Microsoft isn't targeting us.

Re:But how do you explain the M$ fanboys?

[Goofball_666]

Some people have a lot of their personal self worth tied up in their product and manufacturer selections as a consumer. Anything that threatens their integrity by exposing problems or issues with a product they have chosen to identify with causes an irrational reaction and a need to defend that product and all things related to it and by proxy of their choice in that product, themselves.

If you think about it a minute it is the capitalistic equivalent of religious zealotry. These are the same people who would be thumping bibles at you and creating moral laws against offensive things or going door to door trying to convert you to their way of thinking about moral and theistic values had they been exposed to that type of environment early enough. These are people who, had they been born in other countries with much more restrictive religious factions and governing bodies, end up joining with extremist groups and killing themselves and others to prove that their viewpoint is the correct one.

Extremism in any form is disturbing, highly limiting and should be avoided at all costs. Nature has some fine examples of extremist fauna that die rapidly outside of a very narrow set of parameters. You could say they are zealots of the parameters of their environment. Humans could learn a great deal from simple observation of over specialization.

Failure to allow for and listen to viewpoints and factual observations outside of your own opinion in any matter causes no end of grief and suffering that is unnecessary and harmful to all parties involved. Note that I said allow for and listen too, that doesn't mean that you have to agree, just be aware that there are other possible angles to everything in life. Everyone perceives the world in different ways.

Note: this is my opinion. You are welcome to disagree with it if you wish, just don't act like it doesn't even exist.

I usually get called...

[daveschroeder]

...a "fanboy" (or, more often, "fanboi", and sometimes even "fangirl") when I disseminate correct information about Apple on slashdot, clarify a misleading story, or correct completely and utterly factually and provably incorrect claims. It's not even about trying to "convert" anyone to anything. I usually respond by asking if the person calling me a "fanboi" could point out anything incorrect that I said in my post. That is usually followed up with brilliant posts about sex acts.

So, here's another question: this article is called "The Psychology of Mac Zealots"; what's the "psychology" of people who instantly call anyone who posts anything about Apple a "fanboy"? The article talks about how "fanboys" might be right, but also says that being anonymous and abusive (and therefore annoying) when making their point is a hallmark of a "fanboy". So how can a person who is neither (and also is correct about a factual point) a "fanboy"?

It isn't about "rooting for the underdog" or trying to create "converts" (directly, anyway). It's about wanting correct information disseminated about something you're interested in. And if it adds factual information to the discussion, what's wrong with that? To me, saying that something is obviously better or "rocks" or that something else "sucks" with no logical reasoning to back it up is what makes someone a "fanboy".

Cue the posts calling me a "fanboy fanboi"!

Re:I usually get called...

[garcia]

Cue the posts calling me a "fanboy fanboi"!

I'd like to follow that up with a dissemination of correct information. You are a "fanboi fanboy". Thanks, just wanted to clear that up before this thread got out of hand.

Re:I usually get called...

[Sciros]

I don't agree fully, although your POV is logical :-) I've always thought of "fanboys" as simply HARDCORE UBER-FANS regardless of whether they're right, wrong, trolls, etc. Sometimes being a fanboy has nothing to do with liking the "underdog," or the dominant player for that matter. G.I.Joe fanboys collected all the action figures, read the comics, watched the cartoon, drew their favorite GI Joes, argued for Snake Eyes's total domination in every Pirates vs Ninjas debate, etc. Total fanboys. But, nothing "factual" to disseminate, no "underdog" to root for, no saying something "rocks" or something "sucks," no logical reasoning necessary :-)

Re:I usually get called...

[abaddononion]

So, here's another question: this article is called "The Psychology of Mac Zealots"; what's the "psychology" of people who instantly call anyone who posts anything about Apple a "fanboy"?
I agree with you. I thought the notion that fanboys root for the underdog is ludicrous. I mean... how long have Playstation supporters been being called Sony fanboys? And the PS2 was SO not an underdog last gen. According to this mentality, there is no such thing as a Microsoft fanboy, or a Square-game (i.e. Final Fantasy) fanboy. That's just pure nonsense.

This is a very poor way to attempt to classify fanboys. I doubt this guy even uses teh intranets. (itsajoke. If someone's a fanboy of his, I dont need to be lectured on how he's a long-time internet journalist, or whatever, if that's indeed the case.)

Re:I usually get called...

[cowscows]

It's a silly situation, because for every five level headed Apple supporters like you, there's one rabid Apple fanboy who posts 10 people's worth of comments where he/she actually does stretch the truth, and basically acts ignorant towards reality and such. This in turn brings out not only the anti-apple zealots, but also plenty of people who just decide to troll the fanboy for fun. As is usual in most debates involving more than two people, the noise of the extremes drowns out the real discussions that should be occurring, and everyone ends up frustrated and pissed off.

The only real solution is to ignore the noise as best you can and hope that others try to do the same. It's not a great solution, but the alternative would be a highly restricted, highly moderated forum, which has its whole own set of problems, and isn't what /. wants to be anyways.

All that being said, I think even the most rabid of fanboy-ism has a number of causes, some born out of a real and well earned affection that's sort of run wild, others caused just by boredom or a desire to argue with people. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. Large companies like Apple or Sony operate at a level of sales well beyond a point where the words/actions of their fanboys can make or break the company.

Re:I usually get called...

[LighterShadeOfBlack]

Yes but do you "correct information" when it would put Apple in a bad light*? Being objective is a two way street. If you only provide information in Apple's favour then yes, you are in fact a fanboy/girl/person. Just because what you say is correct doesn't mean you're not one. I'm not saying you are, and I'm sure as hell not about to check your posts to find out. It's just something to consider.

*: Any response to the effect of "Apple never does anything that puts itself in a bad light" would be an instant confirmation of fanism. Every company, person, organisation, and thing has negatives.

Re:I usually get called...

[joss]

> I usually get called a "fanboy" (or, more often, "fanboi", and sometimes even "fangirl") when I disseminate correct information about Apple on slashdot

That's because you're posting on a Linux fanboy site.

Re:I usually get called...

[MontyApollo]

I don't know about your case in particular, but people that seem to defend Apple and "clarify a misleading story" on Slashdot do seem to be overly sensitive to these issues. A lot of commentary about MS or Vista is misleading or wrong, but nobody gets overly indignant about it. Whenever there is a story about Apple that is remotely critical, there is usually a storm of protest to "clarify" the story or to often call it flamebait.

I think the group effect is fanboism even though the individuals may not be guilty.

It is pretty annoying though the way the Apple fanboys mod down any comment remotely critical. Rightly or wrongly, you might be associated with these people. People flame MS all the time and get modded "funny", but the exact same comments directed toward Apple make certain people genuinely upset.

Re:I usually get called...

[daveschroeder]

That's an interesting point. I'd just respond by saying two things:

- If you're a user of a product by choice, you probably believe the positives outweigh the negatives, one would hope, so naturally you're going to have less negative things to say about it in general.

- Personally, my main concern is submissions and highly moderated comments with incorrect information; nearly always it's negative information, so the items being corrected are already skewed to the negative side, meaning that the corrections will nearly always be "positive".

If some moron is going nuts about "ZOMG iPhone r0xxxx and it's better than every smartphone EVAR" (or the reverse), I don't see any need to respond to that at all. But if someone says "We don't know if iPhone has a removeable SIM, so Apple is really screwed in Europe", and then I say, "Uh, yes, it's already been proven that it does have a removable SIM and there is no technical reason it couldn't be used on any carrier in Europe if Apple chose to sell it unlocked," that, in my view, doesn't make me a "fanboy", even though it casts Apple's situation in a positive light. In fact, incorrect information nearly always casts the subject in a negative light. Someone saying "the MacBook Pro is the greatest laptop ever" doesn't need to be "corrected" because that's a subjective opinion.

Re:I usually get called...

[GreggBz]

Every single example you list was modded troll, flaimbait or 0. What, exactly, is this injustice you are complaining about? Anyone can dig the trenches of the Internet for some foul, stupid, pointless crap about whatever. That's the way it is. Lighten up. Further, maybe if you were not so easy to pick on.. Listen, I have no agenda. I grew up with Amiga, use Linux and Windows every day and work on my mom's Mini Mac with pleasure. (Although, I don't own a Mac, for that I deeply apologize.) I really should not respond anymore. I don't like this kind of petty blah.. And now I find it humorous that you are so diligently responding to every single contrary argument against your original post. Have a laugh dude.

Re:I usually get called...

[daveschroeder]

And now I find it humorous that you are so diligently responding to every single contrary argument against your original post.

I responded to two out of 14 comments; yours, and one other person's, both of whom specifically asked me a question. I don't care whether you or anyone else owns a Mac. That's the whole point of this discussion: I'm not trying to "convert" people, nor do I get pissed off when I find out someone doesn't have a Mac. Yet, I suppose now I don't know how to lighten up when I'm responding to someone who accused me of "diligently responding to every single contrary argument" when it was two replies so far (to my initial post), and one was to your own. If you didn't want me to respond, why'd you ask me to?

Re:I usually get called...

[Tim Browse]

If you're a user of a product by choice, you probably believe the positives outweigh the negatives, one would hope, so naturally you're going to have less negative things to say about it in general.

I can't believe there's this many comments on this story but nobody has mentioned cognitive dissonance yet. It's a powerful force.

I mention it in relation to your comment about product choice, because studies have shown that once people have chosen a product, they look for evidence to support their choice, or give greater credence to marginal advantages of one product over another, and even avoid lines of inquiry that might show that choice to have been a mistake. Which sounds like a fanboy to me :-)

Artical /.ed

[oliverthered]

But I'll have a guess that it's a little like being religious, other people can tell you all sorts of bad truths about your beliefs but that still doesn't stop you believing.

Hardly.

[bynary]

In addition to cheering for the little guy

Sony is hardly "the little guy". In other words, fanboyism exists at all levels of the market.

Typical Fanboy

[Anonymous Coward]

And note how fast his fanboy buddies modded him up.

Let's talk psychology

[Billosaur]

The fanboy is fixated, a product of the Skinner box of technology. They find a particular product/service to be so useful, so much like what they have always wanted (read: reinforcing), that the idea that there is anything different/better out there is inconceivable. Also, deprive them of their fixation, and they go into withdrawals.

The fixation is unhealthy and limiting. People with fixations are frequently unable to adapt to changes in their environment. They cling to a thing even after that thing ceases to bring them the comfort/serenity that it first did. They will viciously attack anyone who disparages they chosen tool, unable to see the light of even the most cogent argument.

I've personally never let an individual piece of technology/software or service consume me. Some are nice, some are useful, some are downright cool. But this is the Internet Age -- if you wait five minutes, something new and better will invariably come along. If you don't allow yourself to be open to new ideas and ways of thinking, you're bound to be left behind.

Re:Let's talk psychology

[TapeCutter]

Yes, fanboys remind me of the streotypical expert who is said to "know more and more about less and less until eventually they know everything about nothing".

Fanboy: Possibly the most abused term ever

[AKAImBatman]

When someone uses the term "fanboy", it tends to conjure up an image of someone who is so fanatical in their support that they ignore all logic and reality in pursuit of ensuring that their company is the one that wins "the war". (Whatever that may be.) As such, it tends to be a rather derogatory term used to discount someone from a discussion because their fanaticism makes their opinion useless.

Unfortunately, there's a growing trend of abuse in relation to the term. More and more I'm hearing *real* fanboys preemptively use the term to discount others. For example, any true fan of a game system should be willing to acknowledge its faults as well as its strengths. I very much enjoy my Nintendo Wii, but I know that its low cost came at the expense of raw horsepower. That doesn't bother me. Similarly, PS3 fans should be willing to acknowledge that their system is incredibly expensive (in comparison to the rest of the market) and that there is a fairly small game library at the moment.

Yet what I regularly hear is the PS3 fanboys jump in and yell, "Anyone who likes the Wii is a Nintendo fanboy! After all, how could you not like a $600 Bluray player! The game system is FREE!" Or something to that effect, anyway. ;)

This constitutes an outright abuse of the term. Now I'll admit that it doesn't help the situation that many Wii fans (and even worse: fanboys) don't like Sony or their business practices. So they tend to cheer on any difficulties that the company may be having. (I'll even admit to this myself. I don't want Sony around if they're going to install rootkits, shut down distributors, sell exploding parts, ignore customer service, or the billion other anti-consumer things they've done of late.) That still doesn't justify the abuse.

Similarly, a lot of Windows users are simply familiar with what they are used to. So they're not so much as fanatical themselves, they're just highly resistant to solid logic that's often used by the Mac community. They're also quite used to the Mac users of yore, who were very much fanboys. (I'm sorry, Mac OS 8 was NOT that great of an OS.) So they also abuse the term in an attempt to get people to stop pestering them about how much better the Mac is. They're comfortable, so they don't want to be bothered. Sometimes they even become a sort of inverse fanboy in that they hang onto ever possible wrong they see with the opposition. (Case in point: Java is slow.) Never mind if it's still true or not. It was once at least sort of true, so that's good enough.

So next time you think of using the term "fanboy", think for a moment. You may be abusing the term and making yourself look bad at the same time.

Re:Fanboy: Possibly the most abused term ever

[morgan_greywolf]

Every technology has their fanboys. There are Mac fanboys, Windows fanboys, Ubuntu Linux fanboys, Sony/PS3 fanboys, Nintendo/Wii fanboys, etc. To me a fanboy is someone who ignores reality to show everyone how 'great' their choice of tool is. Apple/Mac/iPod fanboys typically defend Apple even when Apple is being an asshat. Linux fanboys love to bash Microsoft even when they have actually produced something good and useful. Windows fanboys love to point out how BSODs on Windows 2000/XP/Vista are exceedlingly rare, while ignoring the fact that Windows is insecure mostly because the architecture favors usability over security and that poorly-written Windows applications, which are quite numerous, cause all sorts of other problems because the Windows monoculture encourages poor programming practices.

Myself, I tend to be ecumenical and use what works. For myself, I choose Ubuntu at home, with Windows 2000 running under QEMU for those Windows applications that I feel I cannot live without. I use Windows at work (not by choice) but still find its features to be useful and helpful at times. Mac OS X is a good, solid OS, but it comes with a larger price tag than either a Windows or Linux PC and really doesn't have good support for some types of applications (and not just gaming).

Fanboys do marketing huh...

[suv4x4]

Combine their need to do marketing on behalf of their adopted companies and their products with the passion to make others see things their way, and you have a powerful group of people.

Right, here's the kind of reactions the marketing of a group of unstoppable fanboys achieve.

I too am someone who witnessed the sad transformation of a Windows/Linux guy into a Mac fanboy. Now every little problem I have on my computer, be it slow connection, or program hang, or WHATEVER, serves as a reason that I should be constantly reminded "how much I need a Mac".

"Man, you SO need a Mac!"

"Shit, dude, you gotta get a Mac."

"Macs are sooo cool, let's find you a Mac."

Everything on a Mac is godly and I apparently and struggling to survive without that on my Windows system. Even shadows! How the heck can I work without shadows behind my windows?! Impossible.

I'm suspecting that when you sum up the total of positive and negative effects of rabid fanboys defending their limited view on the world, the picture isn't nice. I'm sure there are people who will despise Mac and Linux without ever seen them, just because of the overly zealous fanboys that nagged them incessantly.

You gotta be kidding me

[Sunburnt]

How, exactly, did this trolling article make it to the top of the Firehose? Have we become Digg while I was sleeping?

Man, I must be new here.

sigh....

[twoboxen]

I guess it's a slow news day. How am I supposed to avoid work all day when this is all slashdot has to offer :(

Re:sigh....

[Halo1]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Slashdot is teh best site evar. Go back to Fark if you can't appreciate the editor quality we have here.

Fan Boys = people who cant admit to mistakes

[svendsen]

I'd like to know how anyone can be a fan boy for anything that boils down to luxury items? I mean the answer is easy: you bought something and need to justify why you bought it even if it sucks. You'd rather say product A is amazing and is a cure all vs. damn made a mistake need to fix it. You can also tell how unhappy a person is with their product by how much energy and effort they put into attacking the competition.

Who isn't a fanboy?

[wandazulu]

Isn't everyone a fanboy for some reason or another? Aren't the Ford guys who put that Calvin sticker peeing on a Chevy logo (and vice versa) fanboys? And how about all those Harley Davidson tattoos out there, would you call that 300 lbs leather-clad biker a fanboy? And then there's the people who watch a particular tv show and say "Hey, you gotta watch this..." and then is hurt that you don't have any interest in watching a bald guy picking songs from a juke box in a Jersey restaurant.

Finally, I know a guy who is as close to a luddite as you can get..no computer, no tv, just a regular phone and a radio for electronics. Prefers reading to everything else and doesn't give a whiz about what bike he rides, what clothes he buys, anything; whatever's on sale and fits he gets. But if you ask what he's reading, he'll say he's reading Grapes of Wrath for the umpteenth time and then he'll talk your ear off about how Steinbeck is the only good writer America ever produced, and on and on for an hour or more. So that makes him a Steinbeck fanboy, doesn't it?

Re:Who isn't a fanboy?

[svendsen]

I don't think so. I think if he was a fan boy he would TELL you what he is reading and why it is the best without even being asked. IMHO fan boys will interject their opinions on their cult of choice when a) it wasn't even asked B) not even remotely close to the topic being discussed C) they know no one cares about D) they know this is the millionth time they have talked about this with the exact same group of people.

Re:Who isn't a fanboy?

[Otter]

And how about all those Harley Davidson tattoos out there, would you call that 300 lbs leather-clad biker a fanboy?

Absolutely! Someone who ties his self-image to a motorcycle he went into the shop and bought is every bit as pathetic as some nerd who does the same with electronics or entertainment industry products. I'd be less likely to tell the biker that to his face, but that's not the same thing. Anyway, nowadays someone who even owns a motorcycle is less lame than the guys sticking Orange County Choppers stickers on the back window of their SUVs.

The one group I'd single out as especially lowly are the file sharers whose lives revolve around stealing products and denouncing the people who make those products. At least the bikers don't say "Harleys suck so that's why it's OK for me to steal them."

Money

[GWLlosa]

Tech/Gaming hobbies can be expensive. Just ask someone who has played WoW since launch how much of their money Blizzard has now. If it weren't for the fact that Blizzard/WoW is "amazing/ohmygod/awesome/cool", then it'd be possible that that money was misspent, right? Your average person is convinced he is not a fool. Fools don't make stupid decisions. Therefore, your average person is convinced that that PS3/WoW/iMac they just bought must be worth every penny. Given the prices on some of these things, the products (and their companies) must therefore somehow be 'better' than they seem. Result: Delusional Fans.

Cheering for sports teams?

[HockeyPuck]

How is 'fanboyism' any different from cheering for your favorite sports team, political candidate or having faith in your religion.

And in keeping with the tradition of analogies on /.

Apple hardware is like the Yankees, someone paid far too much and got so little.

Either way, both the Yankees and Apple suck.

Yours Truly,
Curt Shilling

Inverse Fanboy

[tb()ne]

You bring up a good point with case of the "inverse fanboy" who feverishly, persistently, and often irrationally criticizes or insults a particular company or product. The phenomenon is widespread but I think it needs a better name. If there's not a prevalent term yet, I vote for "flameboy" or "foeboy".

Re:Inverse Fanboy

[Hal_Porter]

You bring up a good point with case of the "inverse fanboy" who feverishly, persistently, and often irrationally criticizes or insults a particular company or product.

Or country ;-) The word is bigot. We don't need any neologism for it.

The term should be Zealot.

[LWATCDR]

Fanboy seem to be looking for a replacement for religion. I mean okay you like your PS3 or Wii but why do you care if anybody else does? Same for Apple, Windows, or Linux.
I think part of it is defending your choice. People like to be right so if you bought a Wii instead of a PS3 you can feel that you are better or smarter than those that bought a PS3. If you bought a PS3 you might feel that people are insulating you be cause they are taking such glee in the lack luster sales of the PS3 so you defend it.

Frankly I find it depressing that people are now identifying themselves with some marketing juggernaut like Sony, Apple, Microsoft, AMD, Intel, and or Nintendo in place of some spiritual or ethical framework. Oh and before anyone makes some comment about killing for religion how many people got shot or hurt trying to get a PS3?
"It benefits a man not, too sell his soul for the whole world, but for a gaming console..."

Re:The term should be Zealot.

[LWATCDR]

I go to church every Sunday. I often get challenged on why I go to that church. Why should I care what anybody else things about my choice in religion? Why should I care if you use a Mac or Windows or Linux. BTW the Mac is a very good system. Windows XP isn't that bad and frankly it is currently the best choice for gaming and CAD. I think Linux is a much better choice for a server than the Mac and or Windows and for a lot of people can make very good desktop.

Why defend your choice? Why should you have to? You see the parallels with religion we are getting? Those that challenge others all the time like you describe have some deep seeded fear that they are wrong. It is almost like they fear you for not agreeing with them.
As for me I will continue to play Mario Party 8, Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004, program on my Linux system, and go to my church on Sunday.
Hope you enjoy your choices in life as much as I do mine.

Re:The term should be Zealot.

[dhasenan]

I have a vested interest in other people using Linux. The more people using it, the more likely it is that software will be released for it. Likewise with the Wii or PS3.

This doesn't hold for areas where the competition is mainly for implementation of an existing format. In those cases, you don't get nearly as much fanboyism for particular implementations. Also, you don't get as much fanboyism for the generic product. It seems to make sense intuitively, but I'd be interested to learn why that is.

Re:The term should be Zealot.

[LWATCDR]

"I have a vested interest in other people using Linux. The more people using it, the more likely it is that software will be released for it. Likewise with the Wii or PS3."
So if Linux declines in popularity move to a new OS. If the Wii doesn't get all the game you want then buy a 360 or PS3 when the price comes down.
Heck I have a GC, PS2, Wii, and a Dreamcast. They are all a lot of fun and I got them all cheap.
Only the GC is now useless.
Your vested interest is only the cost of a console or in the case of Linux 0 since it is free. Even the price of the console is questionable do you like the game you have for it? Did you get your money worth yet? If not then yea some new games would be nice but when do you hit break even. I really like Linux and I do make an effort to inform people of it's benefits but if they choose Windows or a Mac then okay fine. I use Windows to play games all the time. The only reason I don't have a Mac is because of the cost. I don't need a new system right now.

Grammer Fan Boyz

[jimbolauski]

The most biggest group of Fan Boys are the Grammer Fan Boyz. I Can't remember the last time the wasn't corectid for my grammer. They are clearly the mostest annoing, I can deal with the lennox, MS, Mac, OS/2 zellots but them grammor Folks are awful.

More interesting the psych of the labelers...

[DrRobert]

Typically when a group is labelled, the most interesting thing is the psychology of the group that is doing the labelling. A label is used to contain, restrict, and demean someone with an opposing view, or a view that you simply do not understand. After all, they aren't doing what most people do, so they can't be right can they... But I'm not a lemming so therefore they must be labelled as something else. If the psychology of the fanboy were really important they would name themselves. People in general do not trust people who go against the grain, particularly if they are sure of themselves. This is an issue that is gratly exaggerated on slasdot... where you must begin every post with " In my humble opinion...but I could be wrong...not to be a fanboy but..." If you just state what you think, you are a zealot or narrow-minded, or a fanboy. It should be a given that anything you say is your opinion, people should realize and accept that whether they agree or not. You should not have to beg off abuse in advance. Labels are just a part of the phenomenon of people not being able to accept individual differences (in my humble opinion) through insecurity.

People would label me a unix or mac fanboy depend on the individual comment, but it not because I have a particular attitude about those things, no religious zealotry, no overarchign RMS-philosophy, just that those tools do what I need done. If I ever needed a windows machine, or a PS3, or whatever. I would by one... It has just never come up as an issue. The non-fanboy can't accept that though.. in general...

Article summary misleading

[CODiNE]

Original article is titled "The Psychology of Mac Zealots", which was changed here to "The Psychology of Fanboys" a much more neutral sounding title. Yet the summary still includes enough information to pass on the meme that Apple fanboys are suffering from a Napoleon Complex. Let's see... small marketshare, check. Support for their favorite company, check. Yeah... it's fun to slam Mac users ain't it? Couldn't possibly be any Windows fanboys out there right? Or even "PCs" in general, naw only those small-marketshare crazies. Those poor misguided children.

Re:Or, in less nerdy terms...

[Hal_Porter]

Fanboy seems to be the calling card of someone with passion behind a product or company. Take away the tech and IT and gizmos and they're just fans. As in sports fans.

Hardcore fans have their team. THEIR team. Armchair coaching while watching the game, collecting memorabilia, indoctorinating others with how awesome his team is and, if they're doing less than awesome, it's because of external influences and not lack of awesomeness.

Well yeah, but aren't these sorts of people idiots? I remember reading Byte magazine and liking the interplay of the industry - seeing how one side could invent something revolutionary, and the other side could respond to it by tweaking what they had because they couldn't afford a revolutionary change. Or how Intel and Amd would both arrive with the best processor they could do each generation but inevitably one would win. And the problem with fanboys is that they fixate on one side and buy their products even when they are temporarily bad. But that actually messes up the process - if you care about technology you should buy the best performing alternative in each generation because losing money is is a powerful incentive to improve.

See also

[idontgno]

Amiga Persecution Complex

Signed,
idontgno
former Amiga fanboi

Re:Or, in less nerdy terms...

[Belial6]

Yes, they are idiots.

I would disagree with the idea that everyone should only buy from the company that has the absolute best tech at that moment. As you said, one side would win. Sometimes Intel is the best, sometimes AMD is the best. The problem is that if no one bought AMD when they were not #1, there would be no AMD, and Intel would not get better. So, perhaps, sometimes, fanboys do us all some good by keeping a company afloat during the hard times. Whether their propping up of crappy products from the current top dog does more harm than the good done by keeping an underdog around.