Could it possibly have nothing to do with what Apple offers? I'm not so sure that is correct... how has Apple remained part of the "in-crowd" wants for so long? What's "in" is naturally what's "out" tomorrow. It's how it works. I think that Apple's offerings, the product only being a part (good support for the ENTIRE product being another), has much more to do with it.
I've worked on machines from smokers only to find the insides covered in fuzzy, sticky brown residue. It smells horrible as well. I can see how this sort of thing could cause warranty issues without question.
If I were Apple, I'd simply take in image of it and show the customer.
"When presented with a choice and there is no proof either way (such as 'is there a God') you can either ignore the question, or make your best, inductive guess. Either position is reasonable."
Read, "The God Delusion". You will find, logically, that the probability of the existence of a God in infinitesimal. Much in the same way that I can write on a piece of paper that elephants are riding on pink space ships on the other side of the sun... now go prove that it does not exist, or that fairies do not exist, or that unicorns did not exist, etc... Most importantly, are the odds 50/50? No, of course not.
Certain types of people enjoy watching the best humans have to offer within a physical set of rules. You would be surprised to learn of the intelligence behind most sports, and the lifelong training that is needed to excel in them. The winning and losing part just allows you to invest in them. It can be fun, for sure.
Each of these people may have on or several sports they like to watch. Personally, I like baseball. I watch football and am interested. I used to watch basketball when Jordan was playing. But the mind game between pitcher, catcher, batter and runners is very entertaining to me.
This is blindingly obvious to be nothing more than a sad attempt to get "face" time for a few applications for: *enter any reason for it to NOT be on/.*, and to nudge Apple into opening up iTunes, which will never happen.
I seriously need to take a course in economics. You just stated this as if everyone would be enlightened by it, yet I didn't understand one word of it.
It's not you, it's obviously me. My issue is that it sounds like I should know what it means. Crap...
"The idea that there's some super-secret classification level above top secret is idiocy spouted by moron UFO conspiracy nutjobs who can't even consult Wikipedia for a simple overview of the classification system."
Well, if that's what it says in Wikipedia then it must be true. There are no government documents that certain people with "Top Secret" clearance can't view. Period. There is nothing "above" Top Secret, and therefore nothing exists there. And besides, the government wouldn't just make stuff up or try to imply something that wasn't true, even for security purposes! They are completely transparent. Nor would they come up with a silly name that implies an impossibility, and then had certain entities operate in these "impossibilities". It's just impossible, because it says in Wikipedia that... just... pffft, come on people! Just take off the tinfoil hats and move along.
Crazy nutjobs.
Re:Apple Computer, The Homosexual's Favorite
on
No Naked Black Holes
·
· Score: 1
This coward just masterfully trolled and flamebaited (ahem) at least half a dozen issues, and most of his rant was completely false and was utterly misinformed.
" I have no idea why the US hasn't fallen in love with diesel yet."
Where I live, Diesel has been more expensive than gas, by quite a bit, for years... that's why. (North Chicago Suburbs). Even with gas now under $100, 87 Octane is still well approx $4.15, Diesel is at $4.38... and this is the CLOSEST they've been since I can remember.
"However, in both cases you get something you didn't pay for that belonged (or still belongs!) to someone else."
And what about those of us that do use P2P to share non-copyrighted material?
What about FTP? Email attachments? etc, etc, etc... Yes, P2P makes it monumentally easier to share large amounts of data to millions of others instantly, but P2P isn't the problem. Allowing other to "take" your copyrighted material is. I have still not read a case where TAKING the material was prosecuted, just making them AVAILABLE to others...
"Interferometry and Aperture Synthesis aren't hard to understand."
Then...
"I'll try to put it simply..."
And with two wiki links included? Sheesh... now I know you stated that/.ers "should be of a level of intelligence that they can understand this stuff", which I believe is true enough, but you greatly underestimate our laziness. "Virtual telescope" works just fine for me... IANAA, and I never will be, sorry.
"given that, with all of the vitriol some of you found to fling at washington dc in recent years, why can't you fling some of that now at moscow?"
I would love to, but I know it wouldn't do much good. You see, I live in the US so I have to start here. This will continue until I am able to vote in Russia...
"...in this country especially, do not start or end on equal footing when quality of life, or the means to gain it is concerned. These "entitlement" programs are merely the moral outcome of this. "
Just tell me which part of the above you didn't understand. A morally just world brings about more peace and civility than "fuck you asshole! it's MINE!", like a 4th grade neanderthal would say. Freedom has profound effects on the human will. In this country we have lost this freedom to a large extent, due to the will of the "greedy". Understand, that the US is far from the freest country in the world (Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, New Zealand, etc...), we don't have the happiest people, we are the only industrialized 1st world country that does not provide basic health care for all of it's citizens, we incarcerate more people per capita than any other country, by far (more than China, more than Russia, etc...), our deficits are staggering, our education system is par at best, our electorate is rife with apathy, we have more violent crime in this country outside of war areas than any other, we invade other countries under false pretense (or a big fucking "oops!" at best), etc...
The US is #1 at two things: Making money and building bombs. Our great ability to do these two things are why we are the most powerful nation in the world, not the best. Now if you see this as a viable way to lead the world as the most powerful entity this planet has ever known, then I feel sorry for you. There are merely some of us that love this country enough, and know enough about how it works to want to change it for the better for all. We know this is what brings about security and well being. Nothing more.
"If you want to find the recipients of the largess of our bloated federal budget start and end with the entitlement programs.""
There's only one problem with this, but it's huge. The use of the term "entitlement programs" is a little misleading. A better term may be "conscience leading" or "moral corrections". Many with the philosophies that you spew seem not to understand that we all, in this country especially, do not start or end on equal footing when quality of life, or the means to gain it is concerned. These "entitlement" programs are merely the moral outcome of this.
The military-industrial complex has the opposite effect. Remember, while "entitlement programs" do require much of our resources, and rightfully so IMO, the amount we spend on far more frivolous things (yes, I said frivolous) that merely end up making the rich and powerful entities richer and more powerful, would be much more wisely spent on many other things. For example, and we'll just use the Iraq war spending and just my state (Illinois) for an example. We could have furnished 48 million homes with renewable energy alternatives. Again, this is just with the money spent for ILLINOIS. The numbers are just astounding. 48,000 more teachers, just in Illinois, just with Illinois' portion of the money spent in Iraq. 14 million more people with health care, just in this state, etc...
So, while you may have a point, I think it's misleading. Redirecting what we spend on these things would have had a MUCH more profound effect on the quality of this country and it's moral standing in the world, which by proxy, makes us safer, happier and richer. The problem is that those that hold the vast majority of power/money in the country will do anything they can to keep the status quo. The current policies in this country promote it (you can start with the Reagan admin). I just think some of us would rather have that changed, than to stop "entitlement programs".
Holy crap are you dumb... it's a PERCENTAGE of those viewers that have these misperceptions. Read the entire study in the link I gave you earlier... jeebus man.
FAR more people, not in numbers, but in PERCENTAGES OF VIEWERS, that watched Fox News held utterly false perceptions about the world's most important news items of the day. NPR/PBS, the least. This is something a 10 year old could understand.
Or, you could just use critical thought and understand that corporate led news is in the business of gaining ratings at any cost, NOT to inform. If it's flammable, and they can throw gas on the fire for ratings, hell yeah they do it. Fox is merely the best at it...
"I don't think you understand. After working 40-80 hours a week to put food on the table and whatever else we do, nobody has enough time to surf the interweb for 60 hours to find everything out. It's not like everyone can live in mom's basement and lets their parents worry about making a living then complaining about how "not smart" they are."
You hit the nail on the head. You've simply stated that you do not have enough time to be informed. 'nuff said. The rest of this first comment was 4th grade playground crap slinging, how old are you? I listen to NPR in the car, and browse the news sites on lunch, at night after the kids are in bed. Maybe you should turn off your wacky morning show hosts when driving to work? Just a suggestion.
"BTW, when you mention Fox News as a bad site for news, I'm willing to bet that your more misinformed then anyone who has ever viewed fox news. There hasn't been any studies claiming Fox news puts out erroneous information any more then any other station including PBS AND BBC. About the only accurate thing you can say is their we report you decide tag line pretty much hides a slight right leaning. Especially when you take their programs into consideration."
Here's just one (I'll give you more if you wish) that shows outright, that regular viewers of FoxNews have more inaccuracies in their recount of reality than public news forums.
"Actually, I have found PBS, the BBC and NPR to be just as lose and reckless as the other stations. I don't have enough experience with CBC to make any judgement calls on them. You obviously, from your statement, don't have your objective or critical thinking hat on. You seem to be doing a bought of fanboyism at best here or you are just repeating the false and inaccurate information someone has told you which makes you every bit as much of a misinformed person as someone who gets their news from CBS, CNN, FOX, or any other commercial news."
Interesting. I have yet to find thoughtful, long, uninterrupted, intelligent discussions about the world's worthy topics by the leaders in their field on Fox, or any other corporate led news station for quite some time. I hear it EVERY DAY on NPR. Using critical thought, I find this to be far more useful. But that's just me and the rest of the thinking world. Sorry...
"Let me guess, your still one of those gullible people who read it on the internet so it must be true, right? Critical thought isn't questioning everything, it is questioning enough to understand when your being lied to. You seem to have failed that test and are in no position to be preaching to others."
Um, you need a dictionary I think. Let me guess... no, I won't. I use critical thought.
"There's also satellite/cable TV, so you can get TV news from around the world too. If people aren't informed, it's because they are complacent, not because the information isn't available."
You don't understand. Here in the US, the "people" think that if it's important, they will hear about it on the "news" station they watch. What these people don't understand, is that advertisement/corporate news is one of the absolute worst places to get news. With stations like Fox"News" being one of the worst, and proven so via several studies.
The best? Public funded sources (BBC, CBC, PBS, NPR, etc...). I think by far the biggest problem in the US is the complete lack of teaching critical thought. Teaching at a young age that you should question everything, and only accept it after a proper vetting process (consider your source, get corroboration, etc...) would do wonders, and would combat rampant rhetoric and pure misinformation that we get today from many "news" sources.
This of course without stating the obvious that many, even in this country, do not have satellite TV or a computer (approx 36% do not have one or the other...).
"This must be bitter sweet for Steve B., since Apple likes to tout that it's software is more secure than Vista. I wonder if Walt Mossberg is taking note of this."
Why? I didn't read anywhere in this article that stated Mac OS X is less secure than Windows... as it would be just plain silly.
"I think Steve J.'s brand of evil is about the same as MS's, but because they are perceived as underdogs, people don't care as much."
You may be right. But it doesn't change the fact that more and more consumers are simply realizing that Apple sucks less than Microsoft in almost every area. But, I can only assume that's what you meant would be the benefit of people "perceiving" Apple as underdogs, as you also didn't state this. Suggesting that being perceived as underdogs would increase sales is, well... also very silly.
Slashdot Mirror
Could it possibly have nothing to do with what Apple offers? I'm not so sure that is correct... how has Apple remained part of the "in-crowd" wants for so long? What's "in" is naturally what's "out" tomorrow. It's how it works. I think that Apple's offerings, the product only being a part (good support for the ENTIRE product being another), has much more to do with it.
I've worked on machines from smokers only to find the insides covered in fuzzy, sticky brown residue. It smells horrible as well. I can see how this sort of thing could cause warranty issues without question.
If I were Apple, I'd simply take in image of it and show the customer.
"I don't know of many cats that do their business, say, on the couch rather than in a litter box."
Most cats do this instinctually. We've had many cats (kittens, newborns) over the years, and I've never had to "train" them to do so. Just an FYI.
However, we HAVE been able to train a few to do some things, like retrieve a toy, etc...
Would any world initiate be a pretty "broad view"?
Because, that's what schools are today, no? Breeding grounds for tomorrow's cubicle?
And we wonder why the world laughs at us...
"When presented with a choice and there is no proof either way (such as 'is there a God') you can either ignore the question, or make your best, inductive guess. Either position is reasonable."
Read, "The God Delusion". You will find, logically, that the probability of the existence of a God in infinitesimal. Much in the same way that I can write on a piece of paper that elephants are riding on pink space ships on the other side of the sun... now go prove that it does not exist, or that fairies do not exist, or that unicorns did not exist, etc... Most importantly, are the odds 50/50? No, of course not.
And yet you seem so close!
Certain types of people enjoy watching the best humans have to offer within a physical set of rules. You would be surprised to learn of the intelligence behind most sports, and the lifelong training that is needed to excel in them. The winning and losing part just allows you to invest in them. It can be fun, for sure. Each of these people may have on or several sports they like to watch. Personally, I like baseball. I watch football and am interested. I used to watch basketball when Jordan was playing. But the mind game between pitcher, catcher, batter and runners is very entertaining to me.
As many "experts" have explained, right about the time we finally admit to the recession it usually is the start of the recovery.
No themes and no "hot" folder?
/.*, and to nudge Apple into opening up iTunes, which will never happen.
/.?
This is blindingly obvious to be nothing more than a sad attempt to get "face" time for a few applications for: *enter any reason for it to NOT be on
How did this get on
I seriously need to take a course in economics. You just stated this as if everyone would be enlightened by it, yet I didn't understand one word of it.
It's not you, it's obviously me. My issue is that it sounds like I should know what it means. Crap...
"The idea that there's some super-secret classification level above top secret is idiocy spouted by moron UFO conspiracy nutjobs who can't even consult Wikipedia for a simple overview of the classification system."
Well, if that's what it says in Wikipedia then it must be true. There are no government documents that certain people with "Top Secret" clearance can't view. Period. There is nothing "above" Top Secret, and therefore nothing exists there. And besides, the government wouldn't just make stuff up or try to imply something that wasn't true, even for security purposes! They are completely transparent. Nor would they come up with a silly name that implies an impossibility, and then had certain entities operate in these "impossibilities". It's just impossible, because it says in Wikipedia that... just... pffft, come on people! Just take off the tinfoil hats and move along.
Crazy nutjobs.
This coward just masterfully trolled and flamebaited (ahem) at least half a dozen issues, and most of his rant was completely false and was utterly misinformed.
He deserves some sort of award, seriously.
It could have been worse? Statistically improbable...
Ta da!
" I have no idea why the US hasn't fallen in love with diesel yet."
Where I live, Diesel has been more expensive than gas, by quite a bit, for years... that's why. (North Chicago Suburbs). Even with gas now under $100, 87 Octane is still well approx $4.15, Diesel is at $4.38... and this is the CLOSEST they've been since I can remember.
"However, in both cases you get something you didn't pay for that belonged (or still belongs!) to someone else."
And what about those of us that do use P2P to share non-copyrighted material?
What about FTP? Email attachments? etc, etc, etc... Yes, P2P makes it monumentally easier to share large amounts of data to millions of others instantly, but P2P isn't the problem. Allowing other to "take" your copyrighted material is. I have still not read a case where TAKING the material was prosecuted, just making them AVAILABLE to others...
"Interferometry and Aperture Synthesis aren't hard to understand."
/.ers "should be of a level of intelligence that they can understand this stuff", which I believe is true enough, but you greatly underestimate our laziness. "Virtual telescope" works just fine for me... IANAA, and I never will be, sorry.
Then...
"I'll try to put it simply..."
And with two wiki links included? Sheesh... now I know you stated that
"given that, with all of the vitriol some of you found to fling at washington dc in recent years, why can't you fling some of that now at moscow?"
I would love to, but I know it wouldn't do much good. You see, I live in the US so I have to start here. This will continue until I am able to vote in Russia...
"...in this country especially, do not start or end on equal footing when quality of life, or the means to gain it is concerned. These "entitlement" programs are merely the moral outcome of this. "
Just tell me which part of the above you didn't understand. A morally just world brings about more peace and civility than "fuck you asshole! it's MINE!", like a 4th grade neanderthal would say. Freedom has profound effects on the human will. In this country we have lost this freedom to a large extent, due to the will of the "greedy". Understand, that the US is far from the freest country in the world (Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, New Zealand, etc...), we don't have the happiest people, we are the only industrialized 1st world country that does not provide basic health care for all of it's citizens, we incarcerate more people per capita than any other country, by far (more than China, more than Russia, etc...), our deficits are staggering, our education system is par at best, our electorate is rife with apathy, we have more violent crime in this country outside of war areas than any other, we invade other countries under false pretense (or a big fucking "oops!" at best), etc...
The US is #1 at two things: Making money and building bombs. Our great ability to do these two things are why we are the most powerful nation in the world, not the best. Now if you see this as a viable way to lead the world as the most powerful entity this planet has ever known, then I feel sorry for you. There are merely some of us that love this country enough, and know enough about how it works to want to change it for the better for all. We know this is what brings about security and well being. Nothing more.
"If you want to find the recipients of the largess of our bloated federal budget start and end with the entitlement programs.""
There's only one problem with this, but it's huge. The use of the term "entitlement programs" is a little misleading. A better term may be "conscience leading" or "moral corrections". Many with the philosophies that you spew seem not to understand that we all, in this country especially, do not start or end on equal footing when quality of life, or the means to gain it is concerned. These "entitlement" programs are merely the moral outcome of this.
The military-industrial complex has the opposite effect. Remember, while "entitlement programs" do require much of our resources, and rightfully so IMO, the amount we spend on far more frivolous things (yes, I said frivolous) that merely end up making the rich and powerful entities richer and more powerful, would be much more wisely spent on many other things. For example, and we'll just use the Iraq war spending and just my state (Illinois) for an example. We could have furnished 48 million homes with renewable energy alternatives. Again, this is just with the money spent for ILLINOIS. The numbers are just astounding. 48,000 more teachers, just in Illinois, just with Illinois' portion of the money spent in Iraq. 14 million more people with health care, just in this state, etc...
So, while you may have a point, I think it's misleading. Redirecting what we spend on these things would have had a MUCH more profound effect on the quality of this country and it's moral standing in the world, which by proxy, makes us safer, happier and richer. The problem is that those that hold the vast majority of power/money in the country will do anything they can to keep the status quo. The current policies in this country promote it (you can start with the Reagan admin). I just think some of us would rather have that changed, than to stop "entitlement programs".
Holy crap are you dumb... it's a PERCENTAGE of those viewers that have these misperceptions. Read the entire study in the link I gave you earlier... jeebus man.
FAR more people, not in numbers, but in PERCENTAGES OF VIEWERS, that watched Fox News held utterly false perceptions about the world's most important news items of the day. NPR/PBS, the least. This is something a 10 year old could understand.
Or, you could just use critical thought and understand that corporate led news is in the business of gaining ratings at any cost, NOT to inform. If it's flammable, and they can throw gas on the fire for ratings, hell yeah they do it. Fox is merely the best at it...
Original poster here...
"I don't think you understand. After working 40-80 hours a week to put food on the table and whatever else we do, nobody has enough time to surf the interweb for 60 hours to find everything out. It's not like everyone can live in mom's basement and lets their parents worry about making a living then complaining about how "not smart" they are."
You hit the nail on the head. You've simply stated that you do not have enough time to be informed. 'nuff said. The rest of this first comment was 4th grade playground crap slinging, how old are you? I listen to NPR in the car, and browse the news sites on lunch, at night after the kids are in bed. Maybe you should turn off your wacky morning show hosts when driving to work? Just a suggestion.
"BTW, when you mention Fox News as a bad site for news, I'm willing to bet that your more misinformed then anyone who has ever viewed fox news. There hasn't been any studies claiming Fox news puts out erroneous information any more then any other station including PBS AND BBC. About the only accurate thing you can say is their we report you decide tag line pretty much hides a slight right leaning. Especially when you take their programs into consideration."
Here's just one (I'll give you more if you wish) that shows outright, that regular viewers of FoxNews have more inaccuracies in their recount of reality than public news forums.
See page 17 for a reality check. WARNING: PDF
"Actually, I have found PBS, the BBC and NPR to be just as lose and reckless as the other stations. I don't have enough experience with CBC to make any judgement calls on them. You obviously, from your statement, don't have your objective or critical thinking hat on. You seem to be doing a bought of fanboyism at best here or you are just repeating the false and inaccurate information someone has told you which makes you every bit as much of a misinformed person as someone who gets their news from CBS, CNN, FOX, or any other commercial news."
Interesting. I have yet to find thoughtful, long, uninterrupted, intelligent discussions about the world's worthy topics by the leaders in their field on Fox, or any other corporate led news station for quite some time. I hear it EVERY DAY on NPR. Using critical thought, I find this to be far more useful. But that's just me and the rest of the thinking world. Sorry...
"Let me guess, your still one of those gullible people who read it on the internet so it must be true, right? Critical thought isn't questioning everything, it is questioning enough to understand when your being lied to. You seem to have failed that test and are in no position to be preaching to others."
Um, you need a dictionary I think. Let me guess... no, I won't. I use critical thought.
Thanks for playing, please move along...
"There's also satellite/cable TV, so you can get TV news from around the world too. If people aren't informed, it's because they are complacent, not because the information isn't available."
You don't understand. Here in the US, the "people" think that if it's important, they will hear about it on the "news" station they watch. What these people don't understand, is that advertisement/corporate news is one of the absolute worst places to get news. With stations like Fox"News" being one of the worst, and proven so via several studies.
The best? Public funded sources (BBC, CBC, PBS, NPR, etc...). I think by far the biggest problem in the US is the complete lack of teaching critical thought. Teaching at a young age that you should question everything, and only accept it after a proper vetting process (consider your source, get corroboration, etc...) would do wonders, and would combat rampant rhetoric and pure misinformation that we get today from many "news" sources.
This of course without stating the obvious that many, even in this country, do not have satellite TV or a computer (approx 36% do not have one or the other...).
"This must be bitter sweet for Steve B., since Apple likes to tout that it's software is more secure than Vista. I wonder if Walt Mossberg is taking note of this."
Why? I didn't read anywhere in this article that stated Mac OS X is less secure than Windows... as it would be just plain silly.
"I think Steve J.'s brand of evil is about the same as MS's, but because they are perceived as underdogs, people don't care as much."
You may be right. But it doesn't change the fact that more and more consumers are simply realizing that Apple sucks less than Microsoft in almost every area. But, I can only assume that's what you meant would be the benefit of people "perceiving" Apple as underdogs, as you also didn't state this. Suggesting that being perceived as underdogs would increase sales is, well... also very silly.
Whoa, dude. You are wrong, and angry.
Are you a Republican?