| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Why do Mac users dislike Microsoft? | |
|
||
| Time: 10:26 EST/15:26 GMT | News Source: apple-x.net | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
An age-old question. Just the other day a friend of mine asked me why there seems to be such an obsession in Western culture and scholarship with Nazi Germany. The seismic historical impact that Nazism and the Second World War had on the geographical, political, social and legal makeup of Western Europe and indeed the world would seem to a rather obvious answer to this question. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 242 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:51:47 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 12:40:41 PM |
|
"Therefore, they will follow any ideology that opposes what they are dissenting, just for the sake of dissention, no matter how ridiculous the opposing view is."
This statement is ridiculous: you oppose what you are opposed to because you are opposed to it. Brilliant. Why is the Mac ideology inherently "dissenting" from Microsoft. "you don't usually hear people showering MS with praise" BUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLL...SH!T! "Why would everyone dislike MS?" Most people in fact do dislike Microsoft. They do so because they have to work with buggy or imcomprehensible software. They are barraged by them day in, day out, They do feel that they are paying too much, etc... "Microsoft is no different than any other financially successful publicly traded multi-national corporation." This is the MAYBE the silliest thing you've said. By no means is Microsoft your "ordinary" corporation. There actually was a fairly long period of time when Apple and Microsoft were rivals and had distinct platforms but Mac users either had a favorable opinion of or didn't give a sh1t about Microsoft. This was the time when Mac users were most fanatical and there were several "evangelists" users knew by name. One must take this period into account before making sweeping, retarded statements. By the way, the apple-x story is retarded as well. These kids don't remember or weren't born when Apple was the biggest of the new silicon valley companies and they proudly waved the Pirate flag over Cupertino. The key difference to their aggressiveness being Apple usually had a technology that need to be pushed mercilessly because they thought it was cool and was going to stagnate for years if left up to the rest of the industry vs. MS who usually didn't have a technology but they had businesses lined up to buy something and they had a business plan. Opting for one aggressive tendency for another doesn't inherently imply any hypocrisy. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 13:13. |
| #2 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 1:11:43 PM |
|
JWM, I was taking it easy on them. (Some people here can't deal with it, and they may have a heart attack.)
Yes, I agree. But I tend to hear people say: "Why can't I do this or that?" "Because it's a Microsoft product." "This software sucks! Freakin' Microsoft!" etc, etc, etc... I think your point definitely does factor in... as an underlying reasoning to hating the current products: "They f'ing control 95% of the market, and we get this sh1t!" "I remember when they didn't control EVERY market, and there were actually companies that produced software that worked." etc, etc, etc... The fact is, the everyday citizen without any platform ideology or concern for technology whatsoever usually does have negative feelings about Microsoft. People here claiming otherwise are just deluding themselves. |
| #3 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 1:45:43 PM |
|
Sodajerk, your over-the-top attacks lately have turned you from one who had insightful and debate-worthy comments to one that is seemingly nothing but 100% ABMism, then accuse many here of the same thing in reverse. Have you had a rash of bad installs lately or something?
Buggy and incomprehensible software... that argument is just plain old. This was true several years back, but not anymore. Buggy... all software has bugs. You always hear OS X 10.0 talked of as being released too early or being beta-quality, and that 10.1 was what 10.0 should have been... this is not an attack on OS X, but just the plain truth of the software industry. Everyone makes software with bugs. No one is immune. Incomprehensible... is it really? My mom uses it. Everyone at my current company uses it. 95% of the market uses it. If it's truly incomprehensible, then 95% of the world's PCs aren't even being used, because no one understands them. That's simply not the case, and you know it. Not only that, but they've had many years to switch to a Mac. Looking at the market share numbers, that's not happening, either. At the ad agency where I worked, we switched an entire content-creation department to Macs. We ended up switching them back when Windows 2000 arrived... and the support calls went down dramatically. Incomprehensible? Hardly. Hey, I'm not claiming that most people don't have negative feelings towards Microsoft. I don't like some of their products or some of their business practices, either. But I can tell you that my experience with their NT/2000/XP software and several of their other products has been excellent, and among those I know in my field that have had significant time on 2000--even those that really don't like Microsoft--they have had great experiences on the whole as well. |
| #4 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 9/2/2003 1:49:12 PM |
|
sodajerk:
"People here claiming otherwise are just deluding themselves." But why are you stating the obvious :) |
| #5 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 2:14:36 PM |
|
"This was true several years back, but not anymore." This argument doesn't hold water. My company has converted entirely to XP or 2000 with all Offices updated to XP. This has not diminished the support issues one iota. Nor are the issues related to unfamiliarity with the new software. Some of the same old problems. Some new ones. None are a result of inadequate training.
"Buggy... all software has bugs." I never said MS is the only company that produces software with bugs; however, this does not negate the number of problems that are encountered on a daily basis using Office and other MS products. And I do find that these complaints number higher -- or the other problem: are simply incomprehensible and never have a proper explanation or cause -- than with other software. And this is my experience with 2000 and XP products. "Hey, I'm not claiming that most people don't have negative feelings towards Microsoft. I don't like some of their products or some of their business practices, either." Your experience differs from mine, but you still agree. So what's your beef? This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 14:34. |
| #6 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 2:32:57 PM |
|
"Why is that statement ridiculous?"
Because it doesn't answer any relevent questions! You presuppose a dichotomy between Mac and Microsoft--why? Why isn't the sentiment restricted to only Mac users? Why do people with no interest in computers still hate Microsoft? What is the point of the dissent in the first place? Seriously, it ain't just because people like dissenting--it's because they actually agree with the other side. And disagree with the target. People don't go, "Hmm, what can I hate because I have to oppose summin'." Even your examples--yes, extreme dissent is irrational, but do you think the Clinton-haters actually agree with his policies and beliefs but have gotten caught up in the dissent? Come on. "How about reading that quote in context next time, instead of firing off flame posts? The context was that Microsoft is just another corporation in which their actions are directed by their bottom line." I did, and I still think it's ridiculous. My comment was in no way restricted to the monopoly verdict. In fact, I didn't consider it. I am considering their entire history and find them utterly unique as a corporation in the world. Which corporations are just like MS? "You know, just because a software application doesn't work the way a user expects it to, doesn't make the software buggy or incomprehensible. You have to ask yourself, did the user read the documentation? Have they looked at the context of their action? Have you ever written software? The worst thing you can do when writing software is to give the user a "blank check" for features and functionality, otherwise they will ask for the most ridiculous things that comes to mind without thought or regard to whether or not that feature makes sense or will be useful." So what's your point? My point is no matter how MS makes their products, no matter how much training our company provides, no matter how controlled out IT environment is, no matter how many issues our IT department resolves, the number of issues with MS products remains proportionally (and I AM accounting for the higher % of MS products in this) higher than any other software we use. I'm certainly dismissing the dumbasses at our office in considering this -- we still encounter quite a few doozies with Office, etc... that are TRULY REAL ISSUES. "And again, show me another company that has proven to do the same thing in the same order of complexity and magnitude?" Show me a company with a history of business practices similar to Microsoft's first. Not just one or two similar incidents. An entire history of similar and uninterrupted bahavior like Microsoft's. Why does complexity and magnitude matter when we are talking about satisfaction? I can show you a number of companies that kept a tighter focus and have established higher orders of complexity for a niche with far, far less problems. So why should I allow you to defend MS by saying they CHOSE to enter and dominate all markets rather than producing a tighter, more satisfactory product in key areas? That's their problem for taking on the complexity -- it's their own mess, and only Microsoft has chosen this mess. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 14:58. |
| #7 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 3:07:32 PM |
|
"but I guarantee those were caused by faulty hardware drivers than inherent problems in the operating system."
Do people actually use this argument in a business setting? Who do you blame when your environment is 100% off-the-shelf Dell Optiplexes and 99.9% of the staff have NO extraneous hardware devices? If you want to argue these issues are still related to hardware drivers, I'd argue that MS is still to blame if they can't get their sh!t together with their #1 OEM who is producing the machines for standard business usage. Of course, I don't buy this bullsh1t that it's always a hardware driver issue, but I'm curious if some of you IT folk wander around the office blaming problems on hardware drivers? |
| #8 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 3:21:59 PM |
|
Not at all, parker. Asking a legitimate question.
And by all reckoning, the G5s are exactly as fast as I expected, considering they are running 10.2.7. |
| #9 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 3:32:13 PM |
|
"My company has converted entirely to XP or 2000 with all Offices updated to XP. This has not diminished the support issues one iota."
I find this highly suspect--you mean you are still having BSODs and telling users to reboot as often as you did when you were on a 95/98-based system? If you are experiencing the same level of support calls, you are in the vast minority--I have not heard that type of report from anyone else in the user groups to which I belong. You may want to check for other suspects in your configuration. The software is by no means perfect (none is...), but it's a huge improvement, at least for the OS. As for XP over 2000 (OS or Office), I wouldn't expect a great drop. Like all software, they have their quirks and don't always do things the way you want, but they are both solid platforms, and they are superb to deploy and manage. My beef is that you still take the stance that their software is "buggy and incomprehensible," when it's clearly not buggy beyond what can be expected throughout the software industry, nor is it incomprehensible (I can comprehend it... so do I have some superior intellect or something? :) ). As for incomprehensible errors, you can't tell me this never happens on a Mac--at the ad agency where I worked, one user captured and printed an error message from their Mac and posted it on outside their office because of the absurdity of the message. That's provided that you actually get an error message, which hasn't been the case in most of my Mac error experiences. All software has quirks... I haven't found Microsoft to be any different, but I haven't found them to be higher in frequency, either, especially considering that the great majority of the time users are in a Microsoft app. My experience both using them and supporting them is that they usually have very solid products--even ahead of most, as they have many, many more scenarios to anticipate. |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 4:00:54 PM |
| Good thing we're arguing with computers and not hammers.... :) |
| #11 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 9/2/2003 4:02:56 PM |
|
Wrong questions, as usual. It should read: Why do Microsoft Users Disklike Macs?
The fact is that greater than 97 desktop computers out of 100 are being bought with a Microsoft operating system on them. And, since Steve Jobs returned to "run" crapple, market share went from 5% to less than 2.6% according to IDC in is latest Spring 2003 study. crapple: the irrellevant computer company heading to oblivion. lol By the way, Fortune Magazine (owned by Microsoft rival Time Warner) rated Microsoft the 7th most admired company on the planet for 2003. Also, we have 100 Dell Optiplex GX240 workstations that we bought two years, put W2K Server on them and put them in our server room in a distributed computing like tasking (hey, they take up a lot of room - which we have plenty of - but they were cheap - less than $700 per unit). They just keep humming along. They get fed new anti-virus pattern files via Trend Micro's Server Protect and Microsoft patches via System Management Server 2.0, but other than that they just keep massaging that data day in and day out. Not one support call so far. We are seeing similiar results across our enterprise with 80,000+ workstations running either W2K or WinXP. Our help desk group is starting to look like the Maytag repair man! lol |
| #12 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 4:27:53 PM |
|
"you mean you are still having BSODs and telling users to reboot as often as you did when you were on a 95/98-based system?"
No, we ran NT workstation previously, and the errors that we encountered prior to 2000/XP had more to do with application issues rather than system crashes. The amount of problems and their difficulty have not substantially changed. Yes. |
| #13 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 4:28:34 PM |
|
"My beef is that you still take the stance that their software is "buggy and incomprehensible," when it's clearly not buggy beyond what can be expected throughout the software industry, nor is it incomprehensible (I can comprehend it... so do I have some superior intellect or something? :) )."
And I disagree. I do find they are more buggy and more incomprehensible than other software providers. And I would hope you would have more knowledge than the average user, but superior? Who knows. I really do not expect any half honest IT person to claim that their own ability to operate MS applications without confusions equally translates to all the users in the company. Are you or is anyone else willing to claim such? I did later mention bugs/problems the cause of which were unascertainable, but when I mentioned incomprehensible, I meant basic application design, feature set, etc.... If a person has been trained properly and understans the proper methodology, but still feels the application is incomprehensible... then I see that as a reason to be angry at a company. I can't think of anyone who comes close to Microsoft in causing this type of frustration/rage. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 17:42. |
| #14 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 4:46:18 PM |
|
"What's with all the generalizations, sodajerk?" What generalization? I asked what do the IT people here do at work for an excuse; I certainly wasn't using that excuse for a generalization as I KNOW it's not the source of 99.9% of my companies problems.
How many companies give every user local admin rights? At my company (375+ people), there are 4 people total outside of the IT dept. allowed to install software. So, sorry, no shareware to blame here. "blaming Microsoft for the woes of the world (yes, I'm joking) is really the ridiculous statement." I haven't blamed them for anything. I've simply stated that hatred or anger towards MS is by no means restricted to Mac users and is quite self-explanatory. What I questioned was the excuses, defenses put forth... "The best analogy I can think of is an ecosystem." And yet MS promotes and encourages and convinces and gets many corporate architectures to be an ecosystem of one. Hence, I'm asking who do you blame then? "I don't think the number of bugs in Microsoft's software products are any more than any other company's software of the same size, usage and complexity. The problem with Office and Windows is that there is nothing else out there of the same size and complexity to compare to." And as I said, this is their own problem. They decided they could be everything to everybody so they are the only ones to blame. "Back on point, Mac fanatics are much more prevalent than MS fanatics." Baloney. They are less prevalent. I would expect that the fanatic % is the same amongst both user groups. You simply do not hear from the quiet Mac users. "MS is just an easy target for people to bash because they are on top. " And they are also an easy target because even complete idiots know many of the problems with them (somehow the informed MS "experts" are the only ones who don' see them.) They are an easy target because you don't have to be in the opposing camp to hate them, etc... |
| #15 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 5:41:18 PM |
|
"I do find they are more buggy and more incomprehensible than other software providers."
More incomprehensible? That doesn't make sense--either it has the chance of being comprehended, or it doesn't. And like I was saying, the market figures say that people can comprehend it. They don't have to understand everything (just as they don't have to understand everything on the Mac), they just need it to do what they want it to do. And if it wasn't doing it for them, the market share wouldn't be where it is. "Baloney. They are less prevalent. I would expect that the fanatic % is the same amongst both user groups. You simply do not hear from the quiet Mac users." NO WAY. Nearly everywhere I've been, the Mac users will extol the virtues of the Mac and be really into having a Mac, whereas the Windows users really just don't care as long as they get their work done. Case-in-point: how many Windows t-shirts do you see people wearing? How many Apple t-shirts? How many users do you see with Windows posters, versus how many users have Mac posters? "And they are also an easy target because even complete idiots know many of the problems with them...." No, everyone knows about them because nearly everyone uses one. Mac users (even the "complete idiots") also see the problems with their platform, but they rarely talk about it outside of their Mac circles because they don't want to admit to their platform's shortcomings in front of those to whom they haven't yet had the chance to evangelize. Also, there's a strong tendency towards having an inferiority complex, and a worry that they must "remain strong" in order to ensure the success of the platform. |
| #16 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 5:49:39 PM |
|
"That doesn't make sense--either it has the chance of being comprehended, or it doesn't." I have NO CLUE what YOU ARE SAYING. What is "it"? I hope you aren't arguing that there are no degrees to comprehension -- that you either udnerstand it or you don't. If so, pathetically bad argument and possibly reason to give up discussin this with you. You can certainly find one thing more comprehensible than another thing.
I've never bought into the argument that marketshare reflects true consumer sentiment so you're wasting time with that one on me. When has Microsoft made a good looking T-shirt? Or poster? (Those are jokes by the way. But there is an argument there as well -- better branding doesn't equate to fanaticism. Are you necessarily a fanatic for having a poster, a sticker, or a t-shirt? Don't think so--more importantly, I know so from experience. I know plenty of people with a sticker or two or a t-shirt that certainly aren't fanatics. Simply because you react to them as such doesn't make it so.)That's your evidence that there are more Mac fanatics? Pretty fckin weak. You don't hear the softie arguments because you are one. Trust me--I hear it all day long from the softies. "No, everyone knows about them because nearly everyone uses one." "Them" being problems. That's not a contradiction, that's complete agreement. So... yes, everyone knows them because nearly everyone uses one. (But the softies will claim that they don't have IT departments anymore, sure, jdhawk. But softies would never hide, ignore, or fail to acknowledge the shortcomings of their platform, right?) What does Apple have to do with that? The article and discussion is about why Mac users hate Microsoft. I've added to the argument that it's quite natural to hate Microsoft that most MS users hate Microsoft. And you concede that Windows users are aware of the many problems with their software as a rebuttal of that point? Hmm. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 18:47. |
| #17 By 135 (208.186.90.91) at 9/2/2003 6:48:35 PM |
|
Well I don't know about the quality of your arguments, jerky boy.
But you've most certainly proven yourself to be a fanatic. |
| #18 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 6:55:34 PM |
|
ooh, yeah, that was a good argument, soda. You got me.
I don't find myself fanatical at all. I am very anti-Microsoft, but I'm fanatical about Mac? I keep arguing that the Mac is irrelevent to this issue. Am I an anti-Microsoft fantic? Sure. But I don't see how that affects the argument. Aren't you the fondest of shouting out, "Ad hominem! Ad hominem!" The key figures here at activewin continue to prove themselves completely illogical to me. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 18:57. |
| #19 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 7:07:48 PM |
|
What is "it"? "It" is anything. If something is incomprehensible, it's not capable of being comprehended. There is no such thing as "more incomprehensible." But anyhow, that is beside the point. It's not surprising that you don't buy into the argument that "marketshare reflects consumer sentiment," as it wouldn't support your claims. However, Apple had at one time a larger market share than any of the OEMs. How do you explain this huge drop in market share? Are that many customers not picking the best choice for themselves?
I'm sure you do hear it all day from "softies"--you're a Mac devotee. You need to protect your platform, as evidenced here. You really can't tell me that there are less Mac fanatics--you always hear in articles about the "fiercely loyal" "Mac faithful" and witness the ruthless praise at any Apple product launch, whether the product is exciting or not. You never hear Windows users described this way. "What does Apple have to do with that? The article and discussion is about why Mac users hate Microsoft." That's precisely what Apple has to do with that--the Mac users. They attack Microsoft in broad daylight, but criticize the Mac in "closed session." I've been there, and I know what it's like. They don't like a lot of the things Apple does, and they don't like everything about the Mac, either. This is very true in the Microsoft world as well, but there it's called "hate." In the Mac world, it really has no name--it's not an option to hate anything Apple in that world. It's also not really an option to discuss the platform's problems with Windows users. With Windows users, the Mac faithful talk about how Windows bites, and how Mac rules. They don't discuss the shortfalls--they must remain loyal, they must perpetuate the species. For them, it's a bit of fun and a chance to get a bit of life for themselves by putting down and bashing Windows and Microsoft, whether it's amongst themselves or with others. For a Mac loyalist, buying a Mac is like making a statement of what they believe. Attacking that is like attacking their beliefs. Anything threat to their beliefs is obviously wrong, and perhaps even worthy of hate. That's why they hate Microsoft. It's not about the technology... it's about their statement first. Then they hate anything Microsoft, technology or otherwise. In the end, no technology is perfect. But whereas in the Apple culture, users aren't allowed to admit that about Apple technology--except amongst themselves--Windows users readily admit that about Windows. |
| #20 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 7:29:29 PM |
|
certainly something can be more incomprehensible. Your inability to understand this in part demonstrates your lack of understanding.
"However, Apple had at one time a larger market share than any of the OEMs." And they're still the fifth largest when many more PC OEMs have died. What's your point? "Are that many customers not picking the best choice for themselves?" I never said and never will say Mac is the best platform. I fail to see how that refutes myy poin even if I did. I've said it's perfectly understandable that people hate MS and it's not isolated to Mac users. That is my argument. I don't know why you are mentioning Apple. "you're a Mac devotee" How so? I spend 80% of my time on a PC. I do not say Mac is the best platform. I don't recommend Macs to people. I don't own any posters or t-shirts. The rest of your post is full of drivel and generalizations so there's no need to respond. I will say this: I don't know what you read, but I would say the two leading Apple commentator are Gruber and Siracusa... I hardly hear them say anything positive about Apple. |
| #21 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 9/2/2003 7:36:39 PM |
|
thank God for the scrollwheel on my mouse. Just scrolled right by all the sodajerk posts. I would recommend others do the same. Nothing new to see... just a frustrated little man, looking for someone... anyone... to hear his cries.
related to the article... when i was a mac zealot... i also hated MS. I think back at coding webpages with bbedit and doing some silly graphics with photoshop... and i have to laugh. But then I realized that I could actually make money in this industry, and could code in actual languages that others would pay me for. So, I transitioned to the pc... and the pay increases were forthcoming. Its normal to have a bad guy. For apple-ites... the bad guy is MSFT. For those that prefer MSFT, we usually rail against Oracle, open source, etc. But boy, doesnt it feel good to know that 97% of the world agrees with you in your selection of an OS. This post was edited by mooresa56 on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 at 19:38. |
| #22 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 7:48:22 PM |
|
"fanatics are less informed and more likely to use rhetoric, make inflammatory remarks and come to illogical conclusions when arguing their point (if they have one)."
Okay, if that's your def, I'm not a fanatic at all. "Just because you have had bad experiences with MS products or have inferior or problematic hardware running MS products doesn't allow you to conclude that "everyone dislikes MS"." I'm not using that as the basis of my argument. My own experiences are probably better than the average user. I base my statement on observations around me. "There are a lot of companies and a lot of departments at said companies that wouldn't exist without Microsoft's presence." Baloney! You'd be using other products. "Apple fans and anti-MS zealots are a LOT more prevalent and a LOT more vocal than us "normal" people that use MS products to do our jobs and don't bring the religious ferver into our jobs that the zealots bring." But you include anti-MS zealots... My whole point is that a lot of people intensely hate MS. I would also argue that NO ONE at this site is a "normal" person. "And the argument that MS is a monopoly is a non-issue." I NEVER BROUGHT IT UP DUMB ASS. "When it is all said and done, truthfully, it makes my life easier." Your life, not mine. Weren't you just saying that individual experience is irrelevent? "How is that? Just because you don't agree with them, they are illogical? If anyone is illogical, it is you. I have yet to see a rational argument as to why "everyone" should dislike Microsoft. " Let's see: most of my arguments, no one has attempted to rebut. Soda who loves to claim ad hominem attacks uses one against me while conceding that he won't address my arguments (because they may be well-argued). Bluvg claims that comprehension is a matter of black-and-white, not degrees but someone who uses Windows 80% of the time is a Mac devotee. You are arguing about MS being a monopoly when I never brought it up. Do we need more examples of illogic? |
| #23 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 7:54:25 PM |
|
"Simply put, it's trendy to hate Microsoft." Ah, yes, the 20 year trend that grows and grows!
I love your definition of "trendy," Rogee! |
| #24 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/2/2003 7:54:26 PM |
|
in com pre hen si ble
1a. Difficult or impossible to understand or comprehend; unintelligible: incomprehensible jargon. b. Impossible to know or fathom: incomprehensible mysteries. (from dictionary.reference.com) In other words, once it's impossible to understand, it can't become any less possible to understand. So, no, there's no such thing as "more incomprehensible." But it's really not a point here, right? "'However, Apple had at one time a larger market share than any of the OEMs.' And they're still the fifth largest when many more PC OEMs have died. What's your point?" I never asked that question, did I? It doesn't matter. For what it's worth, some have left, a few have come, and largely Dell scooped up the major portion. But the relative status of the PC OEMs has little to do with Apple's market share. "I've said it's perfectly understandable that people hate MS and it's not isolated to Mac users. That is my argument." That's not all... you have made other statements, including that "They do so because they have to work with buggy or imcomprehensible software." I am debating that and other statements. "I don't know why you are mentioning Apple." Because we are discussing why Mac users hate Microsoft. You can't backpedal and say you're not a Mac-supporter, unless you've recently had a change of heart. We've been in too many discussions for you to say otherwise. You defended Apple nearly every time it has come up, whether it has been about UI or hardware or whatever. Hey, there's nothing wrong with that, but don't try to say the "I'm not a Mac-fan" bit--I'm not buying it! :) |
| #25 By 3339 (66.219.95.6) at 9/2/2003 8:00:09 PM |
|
bluvg, you are an idiot "difficult or impossible to..." Can something be MORE or LESS difficult?
"I never asked that question, did I?" But you brought it up. I said it was irrelevent from the start. "That's not all... you have made other statements, including that "They do so because they have to work with buggy or imcomprehensible software." I am debating that and other statements." Yes, that is supporting evidence as to why average users do not like MS. What does Mac marketshare have to do with rebutting that statement though? "You can't backpedal and say you're not a Mac-supporter, unless you've recently had a change of heart." My statements today are entirely consistent with the comments I made the first day I begin posting. I am not backpedaling at all. So... I think I've demolished all of your more recent objections... since we've had a few posts now that don't address the topic at all... can we get back to the subject: can the softies admit that Microsoft hate is not limited to Mac users? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 242 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:51:47 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
