Blizzard seem to be quite successful developing graphics intensive games for both Windows and Mac at the same time. If they can do it why can't other developers?
I think you're half right. Certainly most people do not need to replace their Macs as often as they do (guilty!), so they'll hang on to their current ones longer (I will be). But they certainly won't replace it with some cheaper tat. Why pay $250 for an eepee ceeee eeee (I'm sure they charge by the 'e') when you can pay $0 and keep their, current, superior machine?
You've got evolution the wrong way round. A mutation occurs. If it overall gives you an advantage then it will probably spread. In this case "being smarter" presumably gave them an advantage (although I suspect getting the same energy for less effort had a part to play). Doesn't require some specific "need" more that it created an opportunity.
Re your sig. Does that mean when the justice system makes a mistake and kills an innocent man that the judge, prosecutor, prosecution witnesses and jury in the case should all receive the death penalty?
Given that we feed our pets cooked food does that mean we can expect an increase in their brain power? Should I be buying my cat her own Mac so that she can begin to grok this interweb thing she's heard us humans are in to? Will she need her own mobile so she can text the hot tom down the road?
The immorality was in the lie: "I'll die before the end of the month if you don't send me money!". Point out the equivalent deception in the "I Am Rich App" and I'll concede your point.
Actually both of those are normal human behaviour. Multiple studies are shown that how happy people are is relative to how they rank compared to their peers.
The "enlightened" who are dis-interested in materialism have simply changed the rules so that the are comparing their "rich spirituality" with yours. Same competition, different measure.
You see it here in/. all the time. People try and define the competition in their terms so that they can "win". Hence GNU/Linux/Windows/Whatever toy you bought today fan-boys.
Obviously they are all wrong and personal happiness is based on how Mac's you own.
The diamond business is somewhat more odd though, the rocks do indeed not "do" anything but are presumed to be "rare" and thus "valuable".
They also look pretty. Which is an important factor.
Why is this relevant? because apple prices it's product like a luxury company prices it's jewelry (which, for the record can be upwards of a 500% profit margin from my experience in working in the high-end jewelry business) the price is based on:
-brand name prestige
-design
You've separated out two factors that aren't separate. Consistent high quality design => brand name prestige. It wasn't just pulled out of Steve Job's arse. it was earned over many years.
I buy Apple, I do so because they make good stuff. Not perfect, certainly, but noticably superior to the competition. And, this is an important point, I can afford to buy their stuff and am prepared to pay for quality.
the brand name prestige equates in the consumer's eye to "rarity"
Now you're completely wrong. It equates to nothing of the sort. It equates to known quality, consistency (you know what you're getting) and yes being associated with a quality brand.
but a device like the iphone is of course not rare at all, apple can produce a near infinite amount of them quite readily.
I wouldn't normally pick on this point but you're being a wannabe geek so I am: "near infinite" is a meaningless term as Infinty doesn't exist: everything is bounded. Now if you'd meant that Apple could, if they wanted to, turn most of the matter in the Universe into iPhones then I might have let it past. But I doubt you even meant they could turn most of the matter on Earth into them.
I don't really have a point i guess... other than "people are very silly" =/
Let me help you with that one. I think that your point is that you are being very silly.
Not quite. The metal used is valuable as a commodity and has non-jewellery uses. The gems also have some value (people will pay for them) although as "everyone on slashdot knows"(tm) the diamond market is somewhat, err, manipulated.
You're also paying for the artistic skill of the artisan.
I don't know which planet you live on but we live in a market economy: something is worth what the seller will accept for it and a buyer will pay for it. The "I Am Rich" app developer is selling you the fruit of his labour: the app! He's completely up front and honest about what you are getting. If someone wants to pay him $999.99 then obviously that's what it's worth. Personally I think that makes them thick as pig shit but then I wouldn't buy a Luis Vuitton bag either.
You attempt to equate this with being is an accessory to murder makes you an idiot as well. Can I sell you this "I Am A Self-Righteous Twat" application? Only $999.99 but I only sell it to the righteous.
Slashdot Mirror
Blizzard seem to be quite successful developing graphics intensive games for both Windows and Mac at the same time. If they can do it why can't other developers?
Because it's a recent phenomenom in the UK. Until "New Labour" Labour and the Conservatives were very different, there was a real choice.
Economists can't be nerds? Nothing nerdier than a maths geek. (*ducks*).
You show as much insight as CmdrTaco reviewing the iPod.
Uhm. You do realise it's 2008 and not 1998 don't you? MS sold those shares a LONG time ago. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=aapl/
I think you're half right. Certainly most people do not need to replace their Macs as often as they do (guilty!), so they'll hang on to their current ones longer (I will be). But they certainly won't replace it with some cheaper tat. Why pay $250 for an eepee ceeee eeee (I'm sure they charge by the 'e') when you can pay $0 and keep their, current, superior machine?
YOu still haven't pointed out any deception with the regard to the "I Am Rich" app.
Not 200,000 years ago it wasnt... Been eating a lot of raw food have we?
In your case it seems so as I suspect you meant Sashimi not Sushi ;)
You clearly don't understand the meanings of the words "art" or "science". http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science/ http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/art/
By that standard a photocopier can create art.
You've got evolution the wrong way round. A mutation occurs. If it overall gives you an advantage then it will probably spread. In this case "being smarter" presumably gave them an advantage (although I suspect getting the same energy for less effort had a part to play). Doesn't require some specific "need" more that it created an opportunity.
But they are great for the allotment.
Seen? Signing with paws must be a hell of an achievement.
Why would we want to spend any time up there when we've got all the good land to live in?
Re your sig. Does that mean when the justice system makes a mistake and kills an innocent man that the judge, prosecutor, prosecution witnesses and jury in the case should all receive the death penalty?
Given that we feed our pets cooked food does that mean we can expect an increase in their brain power? Should I be buying my cat her own Mac so that she can begin to grok this interweb thing she's heard us humans are in to? Will she need her own mobile so she can text the hot tom down the road?
The immorality was in the lie: "I'll die before the end of the month if you don't send me money!". Point out the equivalent deception in the "I Am Rich App" and I'll concede your point.
"are slashdot readers really so warped" ah the old ad hominum attack. If all else fails, be abusive.
1-click is optional. Please hand in your geek credentials and use Digg in future.
The "enlightened" who are dis-interested in materialism have simply changed the rules so that the are comparing their "rich spirituality" with yours. Same competition, different measure.
You see it here in /. all the time. People try and define the competition in their terms so that they can "win". Hence GNU/Linux/Windows/Whatever toy you bought today fan-boys.
Obviously they are all wrong and personal happiness is based on how Mac's you own.
They also look pretty. Which is an important factor.
You've separated out two factors that aren't separate. Consistent high quality design => brand name prestige. It wasn't just pulled out of Steve Job's arse. it was earned over many years. I buy Apple, I do so because they make good stuff. Not perfect, certainly, but noticably superior to the competition. And, this is an important point, I can afford to buy their stuff and am prepared to pay for quality.
Now you're completely wrong. It equates to nothing of the sort. It equates to known quality, consistency (you know what you're getting) and yes being associated with a quality brand.
I wouldn't normally pick on this point but you're being a wannabe geek so I am: "near infinite" is a meaningless term as Infinty doesn't exist: everything is bounded. Now if you'd meant that Apple could, if they wanted to, turn most of the matter in the Universe into iPhones then I might have let it past. But I doubt you even meant they could turn most of the matter on Earth into them. I don't really have a point i guess... other than "people are very silly" =/
Let me help you with that one. I think that your point is that you are being very silly.
You're also paying for the artistic skill of the artisan.
You attempt to equate this with being is an accessory to murder makes you an idiot as well. Can I sell you this "I Am A Self-Righteous Twat" application? Only $999.99 but I only sell it to the righteous.
There's no correlation between intelligence and being ethical.