Thankyou for finally making the nuclear bomb comment. As an Australian I find these Americans quite disturbing with some of their opinions and am glad to see a likeminded individual.
but more often they go for wordings like "we're better than the competition."
Normally they say why they're better then the competition. The PC vs Mac ads don't do that. They just spend 30 seconds poking fun at PCs without saying anything about a Mac.
So, in your estimation, it's better to keep using the sucky product than to reward negative advertising?
It takes quite a bit of effort to switch operating systems, let alone to switch computers (because otherwise you break Apple's EULA if you don't buy a new computer despite the fact your old hardware is perfectly fine). Apple saying "we don't suck as much as Windows" doesn't convince me its worth the effort.
Even if it's the competition who pointed out its general suckiness.
A couple of points. A) I'm quite happy with Windows XP. I don't think it sucks. B) It isn't that they're saying Windows sucks. It's that they're not saying what's so good about Apple.
A lot of them seem to be "Mac is cool, you can do stuff like make videos while on a PC you can make spreadsheets." Not only is it untrue, its insulting to anyone with half a brain.
If it was supposed to compete with Apple's Mac vs. PC ads, which many people apparently find comical and true
Y'know I've never been a fan of negative ad campaigns. If the best thing you can say about your product is "we don't suck as much as the other guy" I'm probably not going to bother switching.
there are no restrictions for applications, the developer have a wide choice of developer tools (vb, visual c++, any.net language with netcf support, third party tools like lazarus).
Its a pretty sad world when Windows is less anti-competitive then someone else.
What? Where children go looking at their parents divorce records? Yeah. That's a pretty interesting problem right there. Of course they could use some common sense and not read something that could upset them. But hey, their parents were probably too busy sleeping around then to raise their kid.
Seems pretty messed up when an entire city can't have public toilets. As an Australian we have an entire country filled with public toilets. Seems to be a non-issue over here.
don't do business at all. And before you say "who decides what's ethical" I'd say my fellow countrymen get to decide what's ethical for those within our country as well as what's ethical for Australian corporations. I'd say Americans should have the same right. That way they can hold Yahoo to a higher standard then they would hold some random Chinese company.
Of course online criminals are very rarely prosecuted. Just look at all of those that illegally upload copyrighted material. The worst they have to fear most of the time is a civil case, and even then its extremely unlikely they'll get that.
Personally I'd rather pirates be chased then hookers. I don't even understand why whores are illegal except for the fact America is a puritanical society. I'm not sure what pornography cases are being talked about. I'm not too sure what's meant by pornography cases (child molestation or something else?).
Slashdot Mirror
Thankyou for finally making the nuclear bomb comment. As an Australian I find these Americans quite disturbing with some of their opinions and am glad to see a likeminded individual.
You can do some serious damage with an umbrella if you know how.
But anyone can do real damage with a gun and they don't even need to know how.
Isn't it sad when a year combined with a city's name is trademarkable?
Showing how you do something better than someone else
But they don't. At least none of the early ones did. Instead they spread FUD and misinformation.
Negative campaigns work. Just look at politics. Doesn't mean I have to like them.
but more often they go for wordings like "we're better than the competition."
Normally they say why they're better then the competition. The PC vs Mac ads don't do that. They just spend 30 seconds poking fun at PCs without saying anything about a Mac.
So, in your estimation, it's better to keep using the sucky product than to reward negative advertising?
It takes quite a bit of effort to switch operating systems, let alone to switch computers (because otherwise you break Apple's EULA if you don't buy a new computer despite the fact your old hardware is perfectly fine). Apple saying "we don't suck as much as Windows" doesn't convince me its worth the effort.
Even if it's the competition who pointed out its general suckiness.
A couple of points. A) I'm quite happy with Windows XP. I don't think it sucks. B) It isn't that they're saying Windows sucks. It's that they're not saying what's so good about Apple.
A lot of them seem to be "Mac is cool, you can do stuff like make videos while on a PC you can make spreadsheets." Not only is it untrue, its insulting to anyone with half a brain.
If it was supposed to compete with Apple's Mac vs. PC ads, which many people apparently find comical and true
Y'know I've never been a fan of negative ad campaigns. If the best thing you can say about your product is "we don't suck as much as the other guy" I'm probably not going to bother switching.
Isn't there suppose to be a product that's sold at some stage? I thought that getting extra sales was sort of the point of television advertisements?
you have to pay an extra, hidden Apple-tax to do so.
That sounds about right for Apple. Its similarly impossible to run MacOS on anything except approved Apple hardware thanks to DRM.
If I'm exercising I probably don't want to stop every 5 minutes to talk to some stranger.
Because their apps should be so good that they can withstand actual competition?
If you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you.
All you have to do is make sure you don't create something that's too good.
there are no restrictions for applications, the developer have a wide choice of developer tools (vb, visual c++, any .net language with netcf support, third party tools like lazarus).
Its a pretty sad world when Windows is less anti-competitive then someone else.
So the people who are being scared by these warnings truly do know there is insecurity?
she's talking about a very interesting problem.
What? Where children go looking at their parents divorce records? Yeah. That's a pretty interesting problem right there. Of course they could use some common sense and not read something that could upset them. But hey, their parents were probably too busy sleeping around then to raise their kid.
To protect little Susie's feelings. After all, that's the important thing, isn't it?
Seems pretty messed up when an entire city can't have public toilets. As an Australian we have an entire country filled with public toilets. Seems to be a non-issue over here.
don't do business at all. And before you say "who decides what's ethical" I'd say my fellow countrymen get to decide what's ethical for those within our country as well as what's ethical for Australian corporations. I'd say Americans should have the same right. That way they can hold Yahoo to a higher standard then they would hold some random Chinese company.
And in keeping with the point of this article, copyright infringement can be prosecuted criminally as well. And it very rarely is.
Of course online criminals are very rarely prosecuted. Just look at all of those that illegally upload copyrighted material. The worst they have to fear most of the time is a civil case, and even then its extremely unlikely they'll get that.
Personally I'd rather pirates be chased then hookers. I don't even understand why whores are illegal except for the fact America is a puritanical society. I'm not sure what pornography cases are being talked about. I'm not too sure what's meant by pornography cases (child molestation or something else?).
Sounds live an oversight. e-mail him.
If his games are worthless they wouldn't be pirated. And yet clearly it is.