Although your argument is well formed, I don't think anybody will believe that 39/40 Mac users were rude/stupid/ignorant/whatever with you. You couldn't hand pick 40 people and get 39 of them to demonstrate the traits you claim this group of people have. I'm just saying that since you and Mac users probably don't see eye-to-eye to begin with, that maybe, just maybe, your perception about their attitudes probably isn't exactly accurate. Also, if you are in tech support, it IS your job after all to make stuff work, regardless if the user has no clue to what they are doing. I'd agree, that most Mac users don't know as much about technology solutions as someone like yourself, but there really is no reason for them to have to in the first place. They have a tool, they expect it to work. This expectation and the fundamental differences in the expectations from Windows users, are what continue to drive the Mac vs. PC debate. If you have one group that has grown accustom to just using a tool with little fuss and then they are thrust into a word of constant IT support, can you blame them?
After reading the entire thread, I have some new insight to the bad behavior of some Apple fans and even more insight to why people can be so anti-apple. I really have enjoyed this thread--far above the usual Mac vs. PC argument.
I believe I have discovered the root of what makes someone a Mac person or a PC person (with obvious gradients along the continuum). The "requirements" from a PC perspective just don't matter from the perspective of a Mac user (built-in USB card reader, or FM radio for example) From the article:
[Mossberg] had only two tiny complaints. The computer lacked a built-in card reader to access pictures stored in digital cameras, and "Apple scrimped on memory," adding far fewer megabytes of the stuff than was common on Windows machines. Mossberg's column ran for about 900 words; just 70 of them, or 8 percent, by my count, suggested anything even approaching negative criticism.... But Mossberg says that his mailbox told a different story. Several Apple fans felt slighted. What did he have against Apple? they wanted to know.
I think this quote sheds light on what people expect from a personal computer, and the differences come to light when it comes to "deal breakers". I think I speak fairly clearly on behalf of someone who might be labeled a fanboy so I can just go ahead and say I think the "tiny complaints" voiced by Mossberg are exactly that..tiny. The problem is, that PC people will take these almost insignificant complaints and run with them. Not having a built-in card reader suddenly becomes a deal-breaker for someone considering a Mac? Huh? A $2 usb add-on isn't a feasible fix? Not enough RAM? Isn't that the truth for ANY computer? How hard is it to buy some more RAM and install it?
These are not Mac fanboi apologies. This is the simple acceptance of the concept of engineering trade-offs. Over the years, Apple has tended to choose the trade-off that has the least impact or is most easily circumvented by the user. Nearly every shortcoming that is criticized by the anti-mac crowd as a show-stopper seems to have a very simple work-around. The reverse, however, is seldom true. What is the work-around for having to use an unsophisticated Windows operating system? What are the work-arounds for not having to load up your computer with every firewall, spyware, and anti-virus program on the market, only to have it go tits-up every year or so anyway? The answer I'm sure many of you will yell is "My PC NEVER crashes and I've never had a virus!" or some other nonesense, which leads to yet more insight to the PC / Mac divide. It seems millions of people have grown frustrated with the real problem of Windows viruses and instability and ARE switching to other platforms, yet the opposite isn't true. Even dismissing the wild claims of many Mac zealots, the anecdotal evidence still shows that switchers to Mac rarely switch back, and Mac users rarely switch to PC. Just because some people go way over the top when justifying the use of OSX doesn't take away from the reality of the situation.
In short, I'd prefer the easily worked around shortcomings of Apple products over the alternative (not including Linux in this discussion, keeping in mind..)
Did you read what I wrote? It takes a lot to get banned--much more than just voicing one's displeasure of Apple's business models. Say why you don't like something, then be prepared for a counter-argument. When you get the counter argument, don't respond with "Fanboi!!". Without the first flame, there would be no "fanboi" rebuttals to deal with.
I appreciate your sarcasm. I, however, have yet to be banned from slashdot because I "crawled out of the woodwork". I would suggest your definition of ad hominem attack is probably lacking as well. There is a huge difference between having a conversation about the pros and cons of OSX and throwing flames and responding with "fanboyism". The problem in this situation is that there are plenty of anti-apple flames, but ANY logical rebuttal is immediately considered a "fanboy" comment.
And yes, all 39 other mac users displayed the same total lack of technical knowledge and the same "I'm better than you attitude" More likely, the attitude of 39/40 Mac users is imagined by your own insecurities.
My only question is who really has the "better than you" attitude? Do you get pleasure from being technically smarter than a consumer using an Apple product? Does being better than somebody else come from having more technical knowledge, as your world-view suggests?
Judging Apple on their ad campaigns is YOUR mistake, and a really silly reason to like or dislike a company. Regardless of what Apple marketing is churning out, the hardware and software sections are cranking out great products, regardless of the lowest-common-denominator factor of their ad department.
I'm still wondering when Apple is going to figure out that in the Intel world, things move. They just can't sell the same basic laptop at the same price for years like they could with the G4. Judging by sales figures, I'd say they can keep selling the same machines with minor speed increases for the same prices indefinitely.
Firefox not being Mac looking is not the reason I don't use it--the crashing, the missing content on about 10% of pages I view, the sluggishness, and the general weirdness is why I prefer other browsers. Firefox is like a Swiss Army knife...lots of little tools that get in the way when I only need the main blade. Some people count the number of features when considering a product, but I consider how well the main features work to be most important.
Remember during the '90s when Apple products were underpowered pieces of crap. But you still had Apple fans having orgasms about their lousy hardware. I'd call that "sticking to guns whether they are loaded or not" considering.
Another great example of why I'm an "Apple fanatic". Apple hardware WAS for the most part better and faster in the 90s, with the exception of the G5 chip after Motorola and IBM stopped caring about keeping up with the megahertz race. Not only was this benchmarked in nearly every magazine of every bias, it was also evident in real-world use. In 1990 I was editing full-color two-page magazine layouts on a Mac. IBM compatibles at that time came in amber or green and went "beep". Microsoft Office was a fully fledged product on the Mac first, because PCs didn't have the oomph to utilize the features.
G3 PowerPC chips were much faster than x86 of the time, as were the earlier chipsets (080 and 8088, I think they were called?). I was able to play Warcraft II on a 66mhz Mac, yet it required a 166? mhz Intel chip to do the same on PCs. As Intel started ramping up the mhz race in the late 90s, they started winning the minds of the consumer, which is when I think a lot of Anti-Mac sentiment was born. A LOT of new computer users (read: teenagers/young adults) discovered personal computing when Pentium chips were actually better than the outdated/abandoned G5.
For you not to be impressed by modern Apple hardware is also interesting. I get it that it isn't very easy to tear apart an iMac, but it is, after all, just a PC with PC parts. Now that other companies are doing it, where's the criticism towards Dell/Sony/et. al. ? I will concede Apple needs to make a mid-range tower, if only to silence the loud minority of us geeks who want to futz around with components.
Not to make you more sick of mac users than you already are, but care to point to these 300 known viruses? I'm not saying that OSX is 100% virus-proof, but on a statistical level, it basically is.
Also, how do Intel Macs NOT run PC software natively? If I boot up in WinXP mode via bootcamp, I'm running the stuff natively. Care to elaborate? Are you inferring the lack of BIOS with the mac/intel machines makes it non-native? Perhaps you are saying the people you spoke with claimed that PC software just works right inside OSX, in which case I'd say there are stupid people everywhere. Sounds like that kind of person misunderstood what the guy at the Apple Store told them.
Actually, I see the rabid defense of Apple as an attempt to justify using non-objective terms ("it's prettier") the purchase of a computer that does less yet costs twice as much as a PC. As stupid as I find your comment, I think it is a PERFECT example of what fuels pro-Apple fervor. You state two things that are just straight up inciting and/or incorrect. First, applying the logic that people only buy Apple products because they are "prettier" is deeply flawed. First and foremost, Apple is a technology company that has to engineer software and hardware that works. They just happen to understand that design-by-committee products are a dime-a-dozen and that there is a market in taking design one step further than most companies care to.
Secondly, I guess you haven't been paying attention, but comparably spec'd Macs are generally +/- $100 of the competition. Just because Mercedez-Benz doesn't make a $12,000 economy car doesn't mean their cars are expensive. All the entry-level luxury sedan cars cost roughly the same and the same goes for Apple's products compared to the competition.
The last thing I'd like to point out is I find it interesting how PC users constantly talk about the need for Mac users to justify their expensive purchases, when most Mac users don't really put cost at the top of things to consider when buying a machine. Apple doesn't really pander to cheap people because that market is already flooded.
So you got banned for close-mindedly bashing Apple, and the people that called you out are the zealots? I didn't read your comments, but it's one thing to not like iTunes then say why in clear, logical sentences, and another thing altogether to bash a relatively good product because of its closed structure (and get banned for it). If you don't agree with the business model that's fine, voice as much, but for those who LIKE the product, the functionality, the ease-of-use, the "lock-in" is a non-issue. In other words, the Anti-Apple-anti-lock-in crowd are the zealous ones here, not fans of the product (fanboys, as the term is too loosely thrown around).
I have a right mouse button on my Bluetooth mouse. I can also click the trackpad button with two fingers on the trackpad. Then there's command-click, which has been used to bring up a context menu on Macs since the introduction of OS X AFAIK. Right mouse functionality has been a feature since at LEAST OS 8 (not just since OSX), and maybe even as far back as 7.6, which is about three ice ages ago in computer years. Yet another non-issue that people gripe about. Ok, so yeah SOME people would LIKE a physical track pad right mouse button, but very few of those people are long time Mac users. Like I said in my post, PC people switching to Macs (or people who just like to pick on Macs) are the ones decrying the lack of said button. After using a single physical button, combined with the two finger scroll and right click functionality of OSX, I find the physical right button on my work Dell not only redundant, but actually a POOR function, in that it gets in the way, and I frequently right click when I mean to left click.
This is over analyzed. For the MOST part, we Mac users have simply just been righting the wrongs. "Macs can't do this/that", "Macs don''t have right click", "Macs are slow", "Apple will be dead in X years", etc. Such blatant misrepresentations of the Mac platform REQUIRE a response, which in turn is treated as Apple zealotry for some reason. The idiots who start the attacks against Apple products perpetuate Apple fanboyism, not the other way around.
True, there are misinformed masses of Apple users out there that yell loudly and stupidly, but for the most part I find them to be people who are either new to computers in general (more specifically, new to Macs) or are vain, smug idiots who care more about what they THINK you think about them and their pretty plastic device.
Finally, Apple products are held to a higher standard than other products, because of the expectation of greatness. So when some randomly not-so-good feature appears that is TYPICAL in the PC world, Apple gets bashed to all hell for it. Related to this is the PCs crowd incessant will to bash the lack of PC-like features on a Mac, such as "real" delete keys on the laptops. These missing options are generally non-issues and don't warrant the criticism. Again, when I voice that, I'm labeled an apologist fan-boy. Makes no sense...
If there were just a couple more Linksys users in every neighborhood, we'd have city-wide access in every city in America! From my house right now, I "see" eight wireless signals. The three that are unsecured are all labeled "Linksys".
Disregarding What Me Worry's inability to sense your sarcasm, I still have to address your post. Snarkiness aside, my point is that there is an obvious distinction between a real journalist (Wired.com's, in this case) carefully placing his words and a guy with an obvious agenda (as evident in his name of "I don't believe in intellectual property). Wired said "possibly" illegal activity, and slashdot editor posts an erroneous summary of "illegal activity". I have many friends who have left slashdot due to this sort of lazy and dishonest journalism.
I don't even really think I took a side in the argument, as your post infers either, but I will attempt to now. "Warrantless" wiretapping is a misleading comment, because it infers that "warrantless" wiretapping is illegal, when it clearly isn't. It is not easy to do, but there are several ways to circumvent the normal laws restricting wiretapping. At the most extreme example, in the case of credible threats to US Persons, the Attorney General can authorize wiretaps without a warrant (or call it an emergency warrant granted by the Attorney General if you must). The point is, that most of the posts made by editor "I don't believe..." are overtly biased, yet are positioned as factual journalism.
As usual with this sort of story, "I Don't Believe..." guy makes his own conclusions in the poorly formed summary. It is strange how he derived "and used them to illegally acquire..." from the story that clearly uses the carefully constructed "possible" qualifier. There is a huge difference, legally and intellectually, between illegal and possibly illegal activity.
Old paradigm: Microsoft waits for Apple to make a feature then copies it. New paradigm: Apple makes a new feature then waits for Company X to file a copyright claim.
So ever since yesterday I've been wondering if this was an attempt to bring down the Democratic Governor of a key state And ever since yesterday I've been wondering how somebody with such a gaping character flaw (money for sex) came (pun intended?) to be Governor.
People still buy technology with the wrong, wrong mindset that it is a capital asset, Frankly, I don't believe anyone can claim to know the first reason why other people buy technology.
I'm not confusing Flash video with Flash, although I think a lot of other people in this thread are. You can create instructional/tutorial files in Flash that don't require any input. In fact, Captivate does exactly this, yet the default output is.swf (not flash movie). I would guess the answer to your valid questions would be "Apple needs to put that in their SDK", but given Jobs' statement, I doubt that will happen. Maybe the capability is already there. Mouse-over could be "translated" from a finger drag across and mouse clicks are translated from finger pokes. I'd imagine you'd select a text field the same way you do now on the iPhone with any other type of web page.
There is simply too much stuff out there on the web that is flash based that doesn't require any type of input that isn't visible from the iPhone, which is shame. I understand the other guy's post about Apple pushing the envelope and killing off ugly trends, but in my field (Software Simulation & Training), Flash is the preferred tool, supplanting even more robust packages like Director and Authorware. Most the heavy hitter multimedia authoring suites have fallen out of favor for Flash, like it or not (personal, I don't like it, but it pays the bills).
You missed probably the largest use of Flash outside of dorking around on the 'net. Training, rapid E-learning, tutorials, etc. are one of the main reasons we put up with Flash at all.
Flash is optimized for windows. I keep seeing this, yet I don't buy it. Source, anyone? Apple and Macromedia were long time bedfellows, and Adobe is so deeply ingrained in the lowest level of MacOSX, it isn't even funny. I develop Flash stuff on cutting edge Core2duo workstations, and the output is no better than the stuff I do on my Core2duo iMac at home. One thing is true, Flash (CS3) is much more stable on my home Mac than it is my work computers. Purely anecdotal perhaps, but Flash crashes at least once a day on any one of my four XP workstations, yet in 15 months, it has yet to crash on OSX.
Slashdot Mirror
Although your argument is well formed, I don't think anybody will believe that 39/40 Mac users were rude/stupid/ignorant/whatever with you. You couldn't hand pick 40 people and get 39 of them to demonstrate the traits you claim this group of people have. I'm just saying that since you and Mac users probably don't see eye-to-eye to begin with, that maybe, just maybe, your perception about their attitudes probably isn't exactly accurate. Also, if you are in tech support, it IS your job after all to make stuff work, regardless if the user has no clue to what they are doing. I'd agree, that most Mac users don't know as much about technology solutions as someone like yourself, but there really is no reason for them to have to in the first place. They have a tool, they expect it to work. This expectation and the fundamental differences in the expectations from Windows users, are what continue to drive the Mac vs. PC debate. If you have one group that has grown accustom to just using a tool with little fuss and then they are thrust into a word of constant IT support, can you blame them?
I believe I have discovered the root of what makes someone a Mac person or a PC person (with obvious gradients along the continuum). The "requirements" from a PC perspective just don't matter from the perspective of a Mac user (built-in USB card reader, or FM radio for example) From the article:
[Mossberg] had only two tiny complaints. The computer lacked a built-in card reader to access pictures stored in digital cameras, and "Apple scrimped on memory," adding far fewer megabytes of the stuff than was common on Windows machines. Mossberg's column ran for about 900 words; just 70 of them, or 8 percent, by my count, suggested anything even approaching negative criticism.I think this quote sheds light on what people expect from a personal computer, and the differences come to light when it comes to "deal breakers". I think I speak fairly clearly on behalf of someone who might be labeled a fanboy so I can just go ahead and say I think the "tiny complaints" voiced by Mossberg are exactly that..tiny. The problem is, that PC people will take these almost insignificant complaints and run with them. Not having a built-in card reader suddenly becomes a deal-breaker for someone considering a Mac? Huh? A $2 usb add-on isn't a feasible fix? Not enough RAM? Isn't that the truth for ANY computer? How hard is it to buy some more RAM and install it?
These are not Mac fanboi apologies. This is the simple acceptance of the concept of engineering trade-offs. Over the years, Apple has tended to choose the trade-off that has the least impact or is most easily circumvented by the user. Nearly every shortcoming that is criticized by the anti-mac crowd as a show-stopper seems to have a very simple work-around. The reverse, however, is seldom true. What is the work-around for having to use an unsophisticated Windows operating system? What are the work-arounds for not having to load up your computer with every firewall, spyware, and anti-virus program on the market, only to have it go tits-up every year or so anyway? The answer I'm sure many of you will yell is "My PC NEVER crashes and I've never had a virus!" or some other nonesense, which leads to yet more insight to the PC / Mac divide. It seems millions of people have grown frustrated with the real problem of Windows viruses and instability and ARE switching to other platforms, yet the opposite isn't true. Even dismissing the wild claims of many Mac zealots, the anecdotal evidence still shows that switchers to Mac rarely switch back, and Mac users rarely switch to PC. Just because some people go way over the top when justifying the use of OSX doesn't take away from the reality of the situation.
In short, I'd prefer the easily worked around shortcomings of Apple products over the alternative (not including Linux in this discussion, keeping in mind..)
Did you read what I wrote? It takes a lot to get banned--much more than just voicing one's displeasure of Apple's business models. Say why you don't like something, then be prepared for a counter-argument. When you get the counter argument, don't respond with "Fanboi!!". Without the first flame, there would be no "fanboi" rebuttals to deal with.
I appreciate your sarcasm. I, however, have yet to be banned from slashdot because I "crawled out of the woodwork". I would suggest your definition of ad hominem attack is probably lacking as well. There is a huge difference between having a conversation about the pros and cons of OSX and throwing flames and responding with "fanboyism". The problem in this situation is that there are plenty of anti-apple flames, but ANY logical rebuttal is immediately considered a "fanboy" comment.
My only question is who really has the "better than you" attitude? Do you get pleasure from being technically smarter than a consumer using an Apple product? Does being better than somebody else come from having more technical knowledge, as your world-view suggests?
Judging Apple on their ad campaigns is YOUR mistake, and a really silly reason to like or dislike a company. Regardless of what Apple marketing is churning out, the hardware and software sections are cranking out great products, regardless of the lowest-common-denominator factor of their ad department.
Firefox not being Mac looking is not the reason I don't use it--the crashing, the missing content on about 10% of pages I view, the sluggishness, and the general weirdness is why I prefer other browsers. Firefox is like a Swiss Army knife...lots of little tools that get in the way when I only need the main blade. Some people count the number of features when considering a product, but I consider how well the main features work to be most important.
Another great example of why I'm an "Apple fanatic". Apple hardware WAS for the most part better and faster in the 90s, with the exception of the G5 chip after Motorola and IBM stopped caring about keeping up with the megahertz race. Not only was this benchmarked in nearly every magazine of every bias, it was also evident in real-world use. In 1990 I was editing full-color two-page magazine layouts on a Mac. IBM compatibles at that time came in amber or green and went "beep". Microsoft Office was a fully fledged product on the Mac first, because PCs didn't have the oomph to utilize the features.
G3 PowerPC chips were much faster than x86 of the time, as were the earlier chipsets (080 and 8088, I think they were called?). I was able to play Warcraft II on a 66mhz Mac, yet it required a 166? mhz Intel chip to do the same on PCs. As Intel started ramping up the mhz race in the late 90s, they started winning the minds of the consumer, which is when I think a lot of Anti-Mac sentiment was born. A LOT of new computer users (read: teenagers/young adults) discovered personal computing when Pentium chips were actually better than the outdated/abandoned G5.
For you not to be impressed by modern Apple hardware is also interesting. I get it that it isn't very easy to tear apart an iMac, but it is, after all, just a PC with PC parts. Now that other companies are doing it, where's the criticism towards Dell/Sony/et. al. ? I will concede Apple needs to make a mid-range tower, if only to silence the loud minority of us geeks who want to futz around with components.
Not to make you more sick of mac users than you already are, but care to point to these 300 known viruses? I'm not saying that OSX is 100% virus-proof, but on a statistical level, it basically is.
Also, how do Intel Macs NOT run PC software natively? If I boot up in WinXP mode via bootcamp, I'm running the stuff natively. Care to elaborate? Are you inferring the lack of BIOS with the mac/intel machines makes it non-native? Perhaps you are saying the people you spoke with claimed that PC software just works right inside OSX, in which case I'd say there are stupid people everywhere. Sounds like that kind of person misunderstood what the guy at the Apple Store told them.
Secondly, I guess you haven't been paying attention, but comparably spec'd Macs are generally +/- $100 of the competition. Just because Mercedez-Benz doesn't make a $12,000 economy car doesn't mean their cars are expensive. All the entry-level luxury sedan cars cost roughly the same and the same goes for Apple's products compared to the competition.
The last thing I'd like to point out is I find it interesting how PC users constantly talk about the need for Mac users to justify their expensive purchases, when most Mac users don't really put cost at the top of things to consider when buying a machine. Apple doesn't really pander to cheap people because that market is already flooded.
So you got banned for close-mindedly bashing Apple, and the people that called you out are the zealots? I didn't read your comments, but it's one thing to not like iTunes then say why in clear, logical sentences, and another thing altogether to bash a relatively good product because of its closed structure (and get banned for it). If you don't agree with the business model that's fine, voice as much, but for those who LIKE the product, the functionality, the ease-of-use, the "lock-in" is a non-issue. In other words, the Anti-Apple-anti-lock-in crowd are the zealous ones here, not fans of the product (fanboys, as the term is too loosely thrown around).
Right mouse functionality has been a feature since at LEAST OS 8 (not just since OSX), and maybe even as far back as 7.6, which is about three ice ages ago in computer years. Yet another non-issue that people gripe about. Ok, so yeah SOME people would LIKE a physical track pad right mouse button, but very few of those people are long time Mac users. Like I said in my post, PC people switching to Macs (or people who just like to pick on Macs) are the ones decrying the lack of said button. After using a single physical button, combined with the two finger scroll and right click functionality of OSX, I find the physical right button on my work Dell not only redundant, but actually a POOR function, in that it gets in the way, and I frequently right click when I mean to left click.
True, there are misinformed masses of Apple users out there that yell loudly and stupidly, but for the most part I find them to be people who are either new to computers in general (more specifically, new to Macs) or are vain, smug idiots who care more about what they THINK you think about them and their pretty plastic device.
Finally, Apple products are held to a higher standard than other products, because of the expectation of greatness. So when some randomly not-so-good feature appears that is TYPICAL in the PC world, Apple gets bashed to all hell for it. Related to this is the PCs crowd incessant will to bash the lack of PC-like features on a Mac, such as "real" delete keys on the laptops. These missing options are generally non-issues and don't warrant the criticism. Again, when I voice that, I'm labeled an apologist fan-boy. Makes no sense...
If there were just a couple more Linksys users in every neighborhood, we'd have city-wide access in every city in America! From my house right now, I "see" eight wireless signals. The three that are unsecured are all labeled "Linksys".
I don't even really think I took a side in the argument, as your post infers either, but I will attempt to now. "Warrantless" wiretapping is a misleading comment, because it infers that "warrantless" wiretapping is illegal, when it clearly isn't. It is not easy to do, but there are several ways to circumvent the normal laws restricting wiretapping. At the most extreme example, in the case of credible threats to US Persons, the Attorney General can authorize wiretaps without a warrant (or call it an emergency warrant granted by the Attorney General if you must). The point is, that most of the posts made by editor "I don't believe..." are overtly biased, yet are positioned as factual journalism.
As usual with this sort of story, "I Don't Believe..." guy makes his own conclusions in the poorly formed summary. It is strange how he derived "and used them to illegally acquire..." from the story that clearly uses the carefully constructed "possible" qualifier. There is a huge difference, legally and intellectually, between illegal and possibly illegal activity.
Old paradigm: Microsoft waits for Apple to make a feature then copies it. New paradigm: Apple makes a new feature then waits for Company X to file a copyright claim.
This article features two subjects slashdotters truly despise: Apple ingenuity and the TSA. This should be an interesting thread.
I've seen some pretty strange attempts at justifying bad purchases in the past, but this article tops them all.
Well, until I can mod them "-1 Overtly Biased: Against", it's my only option.
There is simply too much stuff out there on the web that is flash based that doesn't require any type of input that isn't visible from the iPhone, which is shame. I understand the other guy's post about Apple pushing the envelope and killing off ugly trends, but in my field (Software Simulation & Training), Flash is the preferred tool, supplanting even more robust packages like Director and Authorware. Most the heavy hitter multimedia authoring suites have fallen out of favor for Flash, like it or not (personal, I don't like it, but it pays the bills).
You missed probably the largest use of Flash outside of dorking around on the 'net. Training, rapid E-learning, tutorials, etc. are one of the main reasons we put up with Flash at all.