Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote:
In , says... In , John wrote: On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , Alan wrote: In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com, wrote: On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote: That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form [over] substance ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original Apple computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC). Apple maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even after PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one. If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an exhorbitant price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then that is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in this case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody were buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market. They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion thing. I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the "creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types are insufferable boors. Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion thing". How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools. Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college students in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either. What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four years ago? Intel won. Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a tad bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper education and/or a virus/malware scanner ... If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of Linux. It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use. Keep trying. The world runs on Windows. That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact. And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time. The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the largest sale figures post. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
In article , - D Peter Maus
spouted ! On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote: In , says... In , John wrote: On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , Alan wrote: In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com, wrote: On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote: That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form [over] substance ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original Apple computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC). Apple maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even after PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one. If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an exhorbitant price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then that is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in this case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody were buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market. They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion thing. I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the "creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types are insufferable boors. Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion thing". How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools. Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college students in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either. What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four years ago? Intel won. Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a tad bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper education and/or a virus/malware scanner ... If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of Linux. It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use. Keep trying. The world runs on Windows. That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact. And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time. The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the largest sale figures post. Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for OS10 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
An article (MAC OS X LION VS. WINDOWS 7: WHICH OS IS BEST?) in my snail
mail September 2011 Laptop Magazine.The article has a URL/website, so I am typing it now. http://www.laptopmag.com/lion-vs-win7 They both have their places in the computer World.You can have both.Or, WebTV and PC and Apple/Mac. cuhulin |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/11/11 08:47 , Tankfixer wrote:
In , - D Peter Maus spouted ! On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote: In , says... In , John wrote: On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , Alan wrote: In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com, wrote: On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote: That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form [over] substance ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original Apple computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC). Apple maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even after PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one. If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an exhorbitant price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then that is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in this case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody were buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market. They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion thing. I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the "creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types are insufferable boors. Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion thing". How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools. Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college students in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either. What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four years ago? Intel won. Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a tad bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper education and/or a virus/malware scanner ... If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of Linux. It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use. Keep trying. The world runs on Windows. That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact. And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time. The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the largest sale figures post. Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for OS10 Actually, BSD is the core of OSX. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
In article , - D Peter Maus
spouted ! On 10/11/11 08:47 , Tankfixer wrote: In , - D Peter Maus spouted ! On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote: In , says... In , John wrote: On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , Alan wrote: In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com, wrote: On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote: That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form [over] substance ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original Apple computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC). Apple maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even after PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one. If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an exhorbitant price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then that is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in this case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody were buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market. They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion thing. I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the "creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types are insufferable boors. Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion thing". How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools. Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college students in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either. What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four years ago? Intel won. Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a tad bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper education and/or a virus/malware scanner ... If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of Linux. It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use. Keep trying. The world runs on Windows. That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact. And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time. The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the largest sale figures post. Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for OS10 Actually, BSD is the core of OSX. Parts of it... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/11/2011 6:47 AM, Tankfixer wrote:
In , - D Peter Maus spouted ! On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote: In , says... In , John wrote: On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , Alan wrote: In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com, wrote: On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote: That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form [over] substance ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- -- Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original Apple computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC). Apple maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even after PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one. If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an exhorbitant price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then that is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in this case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody were buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market. They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion thing. I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the "creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types are insufferable boors. Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion thing". How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools. Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college students in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either. What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four years ago? Intel won. Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a tad bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper education and/or a virus/malware scanner ... If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of Linux. It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use. Keep trying. The world runs on Windows. That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact. And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time. The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the largest sale figures post. Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for OS10 Hey, everything was just going great, then you show up with quick wit, logic and fact and shoot everything to hell ... GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM chuckle Regards, JS |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:47:07 -0700, Tankfixer
wrote: Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for OS10 Apple had the power to start over. It could start over twice to change to better CPUs. And it had the power to switch its core to BSD Unix. Microsoft couldn't do this - it did not control the design of PC compatible computers. When the environment changed from stand-alone desktop computers to computers connected with the world, Microsoft had to keep tweaking its core system again and again as it had to keep compatibility while making it safe for the new environment. It's like shoring up an existing building to make it earthquake resistant. Apple didn't need to shore up its OS in the same way. It tore down the old structure and built its OS upon a new core that had been proven to be better designed for connectivity (earthquakes). These two ways of getting to the same result were necessary because one was a hardware company and the other was a software company. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Steve Jobs.
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Obama creates 200 new jobs! | Shortwave | |||
Obama creates 200 new jobs! | Shortwave | |||
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting | Broadcasting | |||
Obama creates 30,000 jobs with $787 Billion tax dollars | Shortwave | |||
American Trauma: Jobs and the Economy | Shortwave |