My apologies to those wishing the thread would die, but I won't do you that favor just yet. Some people, or rather, cranks, NEED to be put to their proper place, because god forbid, if they don't and they end up in a position of power (by becoming louder-mouthed than anyone else) they can wreak havoc and cause a lot more damage and pain and suffering as their ill-formed, erroneous, unbased hatred and misinformation will pollute everyone else.
@tone007:
You are correct about the Sony laptops. The Sony TX was the first to have a LED-lit LCD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAIOAnyways, I never claimed Apple was the first, but that Apple uses them as standard parts, more so than other companies which keep them for the high-end models and thus are extra.
Lastly, even though I didn't like the non-metal Macs myself, I do think a large amount of the population does. Unfortunately they had problems with the materials on the first generation. However I know they've been replacing all those within warranty without questions asked, and even multiple times for the same customer. The discussion forums at apple.com are full of such evidence.
@cantido:
You don't seem as much of a crank as the Raffale person, although you seem on the edge, so let me set you straight so you don't go off on a tangent like our italiano amigo. The quoted text is yours.
"Apple don't make screens."Duh. I said Apple has been using them. Who said anything about them making screens?
"Basic partitioning tools are free."I was talking about bloatware. Need to read some more there bud.
"I wonder what the difference is between Chinese plastics/chemicals and the stuff everyone else uses... hmmmmmm absolutely nothing? A lot of factories outside China use Chinese plastics."Once again you didn't understand my sentence. I said Apple uses the same Chinese materials, HOWEVER they also check to make sure the Chinese aren't duping them, because otherwise they wouldn't get EPEAT certifications. Furthermore, what people who are cranks and thus outsiders to the rest of society don't understand is that if Apple claims in their presentation events (ex:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialevent1008/) that they use such and such materials which are safe and then those statements are found to be false (ex: if materials said to be safe are proven to be unsafe) they get SUED BIG TIME BY LAWYERS. They can't lie without repercussions. Only the mafia doesn't count on repercussions. And Microsoft.
"Steve jobs told you that personally?"Actually he did:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialevent1008/And unlike you, he has some reputation to uphold and millions of very rich stockholders which will take him to court if he lied.
"The materials they use will be dictated by the laws regarding which materials they are allowed to use. Batteries for example contain all sorts of nasties,... Apple use exactly the same cells as everyone else because just like the screens they don't make them."Yes, I never claimed they use alien technology, and neither does Apple: nobody claimed that they use safer batteries. Their green tech is specifically listed in the keynote. See it to understand what materials we're talking about.
"They use EXACTLY the same raw materials as everyone else, because just like everyone else they don't produce the parts that make up their machines."You under the false assumption that the world is made of all equal parts. It's not. They can CHOOSE to tell the Chinese companies: use plastic X instead of plastic Y. Just like most companies today say: use ROHS materials instead of non-ROHS. Make sense?
And as for marketing, we talked previously about getting sued if you're a big company and you LIE. Perhaps cranks are used to it, but in the real world lies cost.
"Seems very much like a case of fanboism here to me."No, it actually seems much like a case of
blind Amiga zealotry by clueless cranks. I've listed factual information which you can easily check online for yourself. None of the counter arguments include any factual information, but rather opinions, and misinformed at best.
"I use a Mac... but Mac OS X is bloody awful, it's running Debian. Enough said."Yes, now you've totally convinced me! You definitely use a Mac. Should I start laughing now?
And if I may give you the benefit of the doubt, what is so bloody awful about it? Indulge me...
"The build quality of the previous macbook generation is pretty shocking to be honest considering how much they cost."I don't entirely agree with this sentence because it's a BLANKET statement: too general. More correctly: they had problems with the plastics (ex: wrist pad area discoloration). There's no denying that, but the rest of the machines were quite problem free. Also keep in mind that Mac users are quite vocal and even if a small percentage have the problem, it will be heard.
@zylesea:
I see another crank here.
"ROFL! Apple green?! Moohaaha!"I was using the term green generically and not for everything that Apple uses or HAS used.
"Man, Apple were recently one of the worst companies according to ecological and social standards (at least when considering their partner production plants in China)."Really?? Point to your sources that say this.
Let me save you the trouble: you are probably referring to the Greenpeace fiasco. Please educate yourself and stop spreading F.U.D. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Greenpeace <-- read the "Greener Electronics campaign" and quit misquoting unbased "research" from a biased and corrupt organization.
"Now they got a pot of green color and painted their house grenn and wanna make ppl think they were innovatibve in ecological standards.
There are really plenty reasons to actually like Apple, but their ecological standard definitively doesn't belong to that card."Actually there is a reason here in the USA, and it's called the EPEAT:
http://www.epeat.netThey awarded Apple the Gold standard. That's one more reason for you to like Apple - unless, of course, you still believe all the F.U.D. that your envious of Apple sources are feeding you.
@ami_junki:
"my screen cracks 6 months into use"Yeah, stop banging it on your head. Screens break, they're made of glass and plastics. Apple never said they made or used bullet-proof screens. Of course they denied your claim if you were responsible for the damage or it wasn't covered! Any sane company would do the same! Get over yourself and be realistic: *ALL* manufacturers abide by more or less the same warranty rules.
Once again, the point about the user experience is not once you DAMAGE the freagging product. It's when you use the product according to the conditions set forth within the warranty rules. Jeez, how much fact-bending hatred do you guys have?!?!?! I'd like to see you claim that Dell ought to replace your cracked LCD screen just because.
You might feel at home (in the wrong sort of way) with this site:
http://notalwaysright.com/@Raffaele:
Just in case you're still not sure what you see in the mirror each morning, here's a clue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)
Oh and something more: since you really believe I have nothing to do with Amigas, please Amiga-fy me: I challenge you to give me your Amigas for FREE so I can become converted. Yes, I'll take that Pegasos II as well! Come on, prove to us how much of an avid Amigan you are and that you want to spread Amigadome everywhere. Help convince and infidel (me) that Amigas are the best: give me your Amiga hardware! And I'll even spare you the pain: I won't give you a SINGLE of my beautiful Macs! :-D Deal?
PS. Thanks for posting Mac photos on this forum! Excellent way to advertise Macs! :-) Oooh they're such beautiful sexy amigas! Chikitas! (OK, to be honest, I didn't really like the first iMac design - not for myself at least).
@kickstart:
Yes, the Mac never really had a demoscene and I also agree it's not good for the platform. HOWEVER, what idiots don't know is that it's not related to the machines or the OS. As we (demosceners) all know, almost EVERY machine can be a demo machine. I'm sure we've all seen C64 demos kick the pants out of even PC demos. The difference with the Mac is the culture. It's a mostly American-only platform and since the demoscene is very strong outside of the US, it never really got attracted to the Mac. However most "art scenes" or "publishers' scenes" are saying the same for non-Mac platforms, because afterall Desktop Publishing was the Mac's scene. Furthermore, I've met diehard Mac demosceners and from Germany none the less!! Of course one has to have an open mind to be able to see and be a part of that.
As for your other comments, let's just say it won't be very beneficial that I reply at this point.
@mdwh2:
"I've never seen that - what's more likely IME is you get a flood of posts saying how Apple are the best thing ever, and being "narrow-minded" raving how they hate PCs."Your density or denseness must exceed that of a black hole, right? The posts were NOT about people hating PCs, but rather people hating Macs "just becasue". After reading Raffaele's spews, you should have gotten a hint, not?
@pixie:
"Build yourself a revenue income then, what's Apple fault again, making money?"Your quote was against the tool's comment, and you are very correct in your pointed question! In fact anyone with the ability to read English would be able to see that Macs are a SIGNIFICANT part of Apple's revenue and not just iPods:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/07/21results.htmlhttp://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/04/23/apple-earnings-mac-sales-surge-iphones-not-so-muchOne can simply do the math (millions of units times a median price) and see that the Mac is a huge part of Apple's revenue.
Of course those who are ignorant don't anything other than: 1) hatred of Apple (they don't know why, but the clone scene has done a good job) and 2) iPods. They are clueless as to all the awesome technologies coming out of Apple.
You tell them multicore CPU + SLI video cards and all they can think of is playing FPS games with other saliva dripping, pimple popping, YouTube-watching {bleep} teenagers, instead of something as awesome as OpenCL (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL) and GCD (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_(technology)). Where's something similar in Windows, Linux or even in the Amiga world?
@adolescent:
While well intentioned, your post has fallen victim to F.U.D.. I pointed out some links earlier, but here's the jist of the great Greenpeace fiasco (copied from Wikipedia - read it carefully and follow the links, there's a LOT to learn that you never knew because you've only seen one side of the story - full link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Greenpeace):
Greener Electronics campaign
In August 2006, Greenpeace released a "Guide to Greener Electronics," which ranked fourteen consumer electronics vendors in environmental issues. Greenpeace encouraged manufacturers to clean up their products by eliminating hazardous substances and to take back and recycle their products responsibly once they become obsolete.
The Guide to Greener Electronics[30] stated "the ranking is important because the amounts of toxic e-waste is [sic] growing everyday and it often ends up dumped in the developing world. Reducing the toxic chemicals in products reduces pollution from old products and makes recycling safer, easier and cheaper." It ranked Nokia and Dell near the top, but essentially gave failing grades across the industry, ranking Toshiba thirteenth, and Apple Computer in eleventh place out of the fourteen brands. The report singled out Apple for its low rank, saying: "Already, many of the companies are in a race to reach the head of the class - that is, except for Apple, who seems determined to remain behind rather than be the teacher's pet we'd hoped for." This caught the attention of tech media news sites, and was widely reported. Greenpeace gave Nintendo a score of 0.3 / 10 is based on the fact that Greenpeace has almost no information on the company, which by Greenpeace's grading system, automatically results in a zero for the affected categories.
Daniel Eran of RoughlyDrafted Magazine criticized the guide in an article,[31] saying the Greenpeace guide's "ranking puts far more weight upon what companies publicly say rather than what they actually do. It is also clear that Greenpeace intended the report more as an attention getting stunt than a serious rating of corporations' actual responsibility." In response, Greenpeace attacked Roughly Drafted's credibility, pointing out that it has in the past been called "the lunatic fringe of Mac fandom" by other bloggers after comparing the cost of Windows and Mac OS X.[32]
It is in fact alleged that Greenpeace has had no factual evidence, instead relying on unsubstantiated official company information for the report in order to garner publicity, as well as political and monetary support. The Environmental Protection Agency's EPEAT shows Apple leading the ranks in all categories. ArsTechnica called the Greenpeace report a fraud after factual substantiation was questioned.
Greenpeace responded to the criticisms in a rebuttal also published by RoughlyDrafted. Along with the Greenpeace rebuttal, the article[33] further presented the results of a second Greenpeace report, called "Toxic Chemicals in Your Laptop Exposed," which Roughly Drafted called an 'apology' for the initial claims Greenpeace made in the Greener Guide rankings. While Greenpeace itself has never used the word "apology", they did restate several of their initial claims in a response to Keith Ripley, another reviewer of the report.[34] For example, the data reported findings of minimal traces of TBBPA, an unregulated fire retardant in the Apple computer; the Greenpeace press release said Apple "appears to be using far more of this toxic chemical than its competitors". This is despite the fact that the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks concluded in March of 2005 that TBBPA "presents no risk to human health"[35] and "the World Health organisation conducted a scientific assessment of TBBPA and found that the risk for the general population is considered to be insignificant."[36]
More criticism of the statement in the Greenpeace press release followed in:[37] "The most recent report, 'Toxics in Your Laptop Exposed,' did credible scientific tests, but then threw out the data to instead present a lathered up, misleading and deceptive press release that was simply a lie. No amount of credible science is worth anything if you ignore the findings and simply present the message you wanted to the data to support."
Greenpeace published an article on its website, addressing the criticism so far, with a special focus on scientific issues.[38]
@amigadave:
I know what you're saying, and you're right, but sometimes some bugs have to be squashed before they spoil the other fruits. It's just amazing the amount of ignorance that certain people carry on their shoulders. It makes you (me) want to do something. Like write things as caustically as possible just so that you can sear enough of their brain's virtual surface away, in hopes that perhaps they can start receiving some of the light from the outside world in their darkened minds.
That's all for now. Going back to tinkering with my Amiga now: I think I can overclock it a little more with this 55Mhz crystal! Can't do that so easily with my Mac ;-) Ciao!
