Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 10:18 UTC, submitted by marc anton
Apple "There are many tribes in the tech world: TiVo lovers, Blackberry addicts, Palm Treo fanatics, and people who exhibit unhealthy affection for their Roomba robotic vacuum cleaners. But there is no bigger tribe, and none more zealous, than fans of Apple, who are infamous for their sensitivity to slams, real or imagined, against the beloved company. "It's funny - even if I write a generally positive piece about Apple, I still get more complaints from Apple partisans" than from opponents, Mossberg says. He has even coined a term for the effect. "I call it the Doctrine of Insufficient Adulation."
Order by: Score:
why shoot the messenger
by MamiyaOtaru on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 10:35 UTC
MamiyaOtaru
Member since:
2005-11-11

FFS they disapprove of what Mossberg writes? That guy is a great advocate for their platform of choice. Heck, his positive reviews were one of the greatest factors in my grandfather's decision to buy a Mac. He writes for a respected publication and says good things about Apple. What more do people want?

On issues we're passionate about, we all tend to think our own views are essentially reasonable, Ross explains. Thus when a reporter, editor, news network, or pundit mentions the other side's arguments, it stings.

"If I see the world as all black and you see the world as all white and some person comes along and says it's partially black and partially white, we both are going to be unhappy," Ross says. "You think there are more facts and better facts on your side than on the other side. The very act of giving them equal weight seems like bias. Like inappropriate evenhandedness."


So true. I remember the "This Land is My Land, This Land is My Land" Jib-Jab parody of the 2004 election. Conservative family members thought it was pretty hard on Bush. Then I went and read about it somewhere with a liberal bent (kuro5hin or something) and was surprised to see comments that took it to task for being too hard on Kerry and letting Bush off lightly.

I think that was about the time I came to my understanding of the concept described in the quote above. It's interesting to see it come out (and be described) in a tech setting now.

And thanks, last line of the article, for reminding me I was reading something online ;)

Edited 2008-03-23 10:42 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Great article
by ralph on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 10:40 UTC
ralph
Member since:
2005-07-10

Great article that should be required reading for anyone hanging out on techsites like osnews.

Good thing that I'm a linux user though and so am not prone to bias... ;-D

Reply Score: 11

Sick
by JMcCarthy on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 11:14 UTC
JMcCarthy
Member since:
2005-08-12

There is something fundamentally sick / misguided about crossing the line from merely preferring the products of _x corporation to open adoration of it, and the overwhelming desire to defend its honor.

A company exists for the sole purpose of generating profit, which Apple exemplifies. There is no philosophy, there's nothing, it's like worshiping a phantasm.

At least Jesus/Allah/Buddha have /some/ substance.

Reply Score: 9

RE: Sick
by frood on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 11:38 UTC in reply to "Sick"
frood Member since:
2005-07-06

It's true that a company as an entity exists purely to generate profit. I don't believe, however, that the engineers and the other staff that choose to work at Apple do it purely with the profit margins in mind. They *do* do it for the philosophy. At least, i'd like to think they do.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Sick
by raver31 on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Sick"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

emmm, are you aware of a concept called "work" ?

The employees do not pick their employers with some sort of philosophy in mind, they do it for the pay-check.

Plain and simple.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Sick
by BluenoseJake on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Sick"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"The employees do not pick their employers with some sort of philosophy in mind, they do it for the pay-check. "

That's not true, I certainly didn't choose the job I have right now based on salary, I chose it because I like working for universities, and actually chose it over a higher paying job. I like the hours, the free courses, the pace is slower.

Salary isn't everything, or even the important thing.

Edited 2008-03-23 16:07 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Sick
by Soulbender on Mon 24th Mar 2008 05:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Sick"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Salary isn't everything, or even the important thing.


While it isn't everything it certainly is the important thing. If it wasn't you wouldn't be working at all.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Sick
by BluenoseJake on Mon 24th Mar 2008 14:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Sick"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Salary isn't everything, or even the important thing.


While it isn't everything it certainly is the important thing. If it wasn't you wouldn't be working at all.
"


I dunno, I think I like my job too much to quit if I won the lottery, but it's easy to say, in theory

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Sick
by El_Exigente on Tue 25th Mar 2008 02:06 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Sick"
El_Exigente Member since:
2007-01-08

"I dunno, I think I like my job too much to quit if I won the lottery, but it's easy to say, in theory."

In the context of this discussion, the question is not whether you would stay at your job if you won the lottery, but what you would do if you you had to live on a salary, and the salary paid by your job was not sufficient, or was below what other companies paid for the same job. Then we might have a better idea of the contribution made by Paycheck to Job Satisfaction... or even to your ability and/or desire to remain at your job.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Sick
by BluenoseJake on Tue 25th Mar 2008 04:37 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Sick"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

as I said earlier, I chose this job over a higher paying job. I liked the environment, and the hours, and the access to courses.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Sick
by rcsteiner on Mon 24th Mar 2008 20:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Sick"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

While it isn't everything it certainly is the important thing. If it wasn't you wouldn't be working at all.

That depends on the position.

I stated many times to friends and cow orkers (and I truly believe) that I would have continued to stay in my previous position (a senior programmer/analyst in flight ops for a major red-tailed US airline) even if I won the lottery. The work was so interesting and the problem solving so satisfying that I really loved my job there.

My current position isn't quite as nice, but I'd consider working here even if I didn't need the money, also. Why? Because there are elements of the application environment where I work now which are fun to play with, I love the fact that I'm almost constantly learning, and I get to play in two legacy platforms plus Java all at the same time. It's fun!

I feel sorry for those who hate their jobs... Me, I got into programming almost 20 years ago because I love to analyze problems and crank out (hopefully) elegant code. Or at least readable code. :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Sick
by kefkathecruel on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 19:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Sick"
kefkathecruel Member since:
2006-01-17

Above one said

"The employees do not pick their employers with some sort of philosophy in mind, they do it for the pay-check. Plain and simple."

That is what is called cynicism plain and simple. Belief that people are only motivated by self-interest. You, Sir, are a cynic. ;)

Edited 2008-03-23 19:18 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Sick
by raver31 on Mon 24th Mar 2008 01:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Sick"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

Cynical ? Me ? yes, yes I am.
And I am also an employer.

No-one comes to an interview and asks me how the company feels on open source, global warming, world peace, or whatever you young people chat about these days.

First thing they ask about is the wages.. THEN they might ask about the working hours and conditions.

Anyone here who says otherwise is either deluding themselves or they are not working.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Sick
by Soulbender on Mon 24th Mar 2008 05:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Sick"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You, Sir, are a cynic.


No, he's practical. The main reason people work for a company is because they need money. No one goes to work at Microsoft, Apple, IBM etc because they feel they're working for the greater good of man. They do it because they need to make a living.
Why do they need to make a living? Because living isn't free, at least not if you appreciate some minimal level of materialistic standard (you know, like having a computer and having internet access).
This is not to say that you'd make a living at any cost, no matter what the company does. You may chose not to work for certain companies and prefer others.
You may value benefits other than the salary they give you or the company culture etc.
At the end of the day however, you need to make a living. If you didnt you'd be relaxing on the beach with a beer instead of participating in the rat race.

Edited 2008-03-24 05:27 UTC

Reply Score: 2

wtf?
by SK8T on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 11:53 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

I like Apple very much, but I do not hate tech reporters.

But I hate generalisation of what people may think. Apple users are not stupid. They have their own opinion of course.

Therefore I don't like the caption of this news too much.

Reply Score: 3

Bias!
by rajan r on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 11:55 UTC
rajan r
Member since:
2005-07-27

What does he have against Sony cameras?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Bias!
by adinas on Mon 24th Mar 2008 07:45 UTC in reply to "Bias!"
adinas Member since:
2005-08-17

What does he have against Sony cameras?

Man that Farhad Manjoo must really hate sony. How can he be so biased against Sony!

Reply Score: 1

Good article but...
by themacbryan on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 12:04 UTC
themacbryan
Member since:
2008-03-23

Consider it from the other side. Is it possible that some columnists may take the smallest criticisms to their articles personally? It could be possible they are biased toward their own article.

I do understand that asking someone if they're licking Bill Gates' balls is a little harsh.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 12:15 UTC
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

I've taken down the discussion on religion. Please continue the discussion on the topic at hand.

Reply Score: 0

Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 12:21 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

I find it interesting that the person who wrote the story try to make out its a phenomena related only to the IT sector (or Apple for that matter). The extremes, no matter which side, will always claim you're either bias, or you're no praising their position high enough.

Take politics; you might talk about a particular politian; those on one side of the equation might claim you're being too nice, or worse (if you're from that side of the political equation) a traitor, then the other side will claim that you're not giving enough respect for that individuals achievements.

At the end of the day, you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. There is very little one can do when some people take a particular position to the literal extreme; be it in politics, religion and even IT. Until those people make the voluntary step to moderate themselves, and jump back to the middle - all the chatting in the world won't change their mind.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 12:43 UTC in reply to "Perfectly normal"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh the irony; under an hour since I posted my first message and someone marks down my post; isn't it ironic that the very people here who reply to this story are the same people who mark down posts they don't agree with. This truly is pathetic; I remember years ago Osnews.com used to be a half decent website to visit - now its chocked to the brim with spoilt brats whose OS knowledge extends only as far as Windows ME - and they think that Micrsosoft created the 'PC Revolution'.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Perfectly normal
by stestagg on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 13:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Perfectly normal"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

Yes, I modded you down, did you actually read the article?

The guy spends most of his time talking about the political situation in the Middle East.

And he is right to focus on Apple Fanaticism, it just so happens that there are a large number of people who have this inferiority complex about Apple's market position and are very vocal in defending themselves. The reasons for this are understandable, but it gets quite tiring for a journalist.

Reply Score: 8

RE[3]: Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Perfectly normal"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, I modded you down, did you actually read the article?


Yes I did. What basis did you make such a value on my post? I personally think that the post I'm replying to is pointless crap - but unlike you, I refrain myself from censoring other peoples opinion. Its called acting like an adult, learn it some time.

The guy spends most of his time talking about the political situation in the Middle East.


Its called creating parallels between one set of circumstances and another - he is using the middle east conflict as an anology for what happens within the IT world.

Again, are you so immature that you can't understand something as basic as an analogy? the fact that the comparison don't necessarily have to have a direct relationship with each other.

And he is right to focus on Apple Fanaticism, it just so happens that there are a large number of people who have this inferiority complex about Apple's market position and are very vocal in defending themselves. The reasons for this are understandable, but it gets quite tiring for a journalist.


There is fanaticism in all quarters - be it Apple, IBM, Sony or some other brand; its just that Apple ones happened to be the most vocal, most web savvy and Apple exploit that factor when pushing their products. Apple know there are legion of lemmings willing to do what Stevo wants them to do.

Ultimately there are rabid Apple fans, but the situation is made worse by Apple exploiting that community as free PR agents - as creators and spreaders of rumours, to create buzz about products and so forth.

Edited 2008-03-23 13:59 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Perfectly normal
by stestagg on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Perfectly normal"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

Yes I did. What basis did you make such a value on my post?


I do not 'make values' on peoples posts, because that phrase makes no sense. However, I disagreed with your original rant, so I clicked on the 'I disagree with this post' button. Simple.

I personally think that the post I'm replying to is pointless crap - but unlike you, I refrain myself from censoring other peoples opinion.


Well, I am not censoring. I am registering disagreement. I wouldn't have modded you down, if you hadn't posted that sniveling whine about being modded-down in the first place. People disagree with you sometimes. Live with it.

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Perfectly normal
by stestagg on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 14:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Perfectly normal"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

he is using the middle east conflict as an anology for what happens within the IT world. Again, are you so immature that you can't understand something as basic as an analogy?


This is an interesting statement, and it highlights a lack of understanding on your part.

An analogy is the method of drawing similarities between two fundamentally different situations/systems as a tool for aiding understanding.

What the author of this article used was a reference. He is citing an academic study that was carried out which demonstrates that this type of behaviour existst across the board, and not, as you claim, that 'its a phenomena related only to the IT sector (or Apple for that matter). '

Reply Score: 7

RE[5]: Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:14 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Perfectly normal"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

And if you took the time, I said in my previous post:

"The extremes, no matter which side, will always claim you're either bias, or you're not praising their position high enough. "

If you are going to critique someone's post; how about reading the whole damn thing - not just snippets; and actually place things in context. I was incorrect about the article only relating to IT, but then I expanded it further saying that this issue can be expanded to all things.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Perfectly normal
by ralph on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Perfectly normal"
ralph Member since:
2005-07-10

Jesus.
So someone disagreed with you and modded you down, you immediately start to whine about it and then someone even explains to you in a very reasonable post why he modded you down and you immediately start to insult this person?

Wow!

I mean, I can certainly understand not liking when some mods you down, I myself often have a hard time understanding how not everyone on the internets can see the utter brilliance of anything I utter online, but this kind of reaction is simply childish.

Oh, and while we are at it, stestagg is of course absolutely right: It was a reference, not an analogy.

Reply Score: 6

RE[5]: Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:17 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Perfectly normal"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Jesus.
So someone disagreed with you and modded you down, you immediately start to whine about it and then someone even explains to you in a very reasonable post why he modded you down and you immediately start to insult this person?

Wow!

I mean, I can certainly understand not liking when some mods you down, I myself often have a hard time understanding how not everyone on the internets can see the utter brilliance of anything I utter online, but this kind of reaction is simply childish.


How about this; leave the damn moderation alone!

I NEVER moderate ANYONE on this site down; no matter how stupid and inane their comments are. If their view is truly stupid, I'll reply, otherwise I'll ignore it. Its called behaving like an adult.

You on the other hand are promoting mob rule, censorship of differing opinions, and I'm sorry, I'm not going to sit back and allow peoples opinions to be censored simply because you disagree with it. If we're going to do that, we might as well have the whole website moderated by the editors like it used to 4-5 years ago!

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Perfectly normal
by JeffS on Mon 24th Mar 2008 16:23 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Perfectly normal"
JeffS Member since:
2005-07-12

BTW - I modded the two other guys down, simply to be a PITA, and to show that modding someone down simply because you disagree with them is the most asinine reason ever to do so.

The only legitimate reasons to mod someone down, IMHO, are:

1. Their remarks were completely inflammatory
2. Their post was littered with expletives
3. Their post had showed bigotry of some form or another, and would be extremely offensive to certain segments, and reasonable people in general.
4. Their post contained egregious lies
5. Their post contained excessive personal attacts

... in other words, modding down should only come into play when someone is being a genuine d!ck.

And to the two guys that modded down Kaiwai - I modded you down simply because I disagreed with you - deal with it! ;-) ;-) hee hee

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Perfectly normal
by charliee on Mon 24th Mar 2008 05:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Perfectly normal"
charliee Member since:
2008-03-24

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Exodus 20:7

Reply Score: 0

RE: Perfectly normal
by Al2001 on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:18 UTC in reply to "Perfectly normal"
Al2001 Member since:
2005-07-06

Anyone who's computer is as important to them as politics or religion really does have problems.

You should begin your posts like so...

Hi, My name is Kaiwai. I have Insufficient Adulation.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Perfectly normal
by leech on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Perfectly normal"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Anyone who's computer is as important to them as politics or religion really does have problems.

You should begin your posts like so...

Hi, My name is Kaiwai. I have Insufficient Adulation.


Anyone who is on this site and doesn't think their computer is more important than politics and religion should go elsewhere ;)

Come on, this is a site about Operating Systems and computing and technology. It's not about religion and politics. Quite frankly I actually would rather pay more attention to my computer than either politics or religion, but then again, most people would consider me a freak.

Politics and religion should stay a personal thing, and shouldn't be shared with other people. They've caused more strife and problems then they have ever helped.

Computers on the other hand have solved a lot more problems then they have ever created. Enough said.

Reply Score: 3

v RE[3]: Perfectly normal
by charliee on Mon 24th Mar 2008 05:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Perfectly normal"
RE[2]: Perfectly normal
by BluenoseJake on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Perfectly normal"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Anyone who's computer is as important to them as politics or religion really does have problems.


My computer is much more important to my life then religion, and it's not a problem. My computer feeds me, clothes me, puts a roof over my head, and entertains me.

Religion just tells me that I am going to hell for my lifestyle, and so is my common-law GF. Even though my GF is a social worker who has helped hundreds of people.

If I had to choose, I would pick my computer over religion every day of the week, and not feel guilty about it at all.

Reply Score: 8

RE[3]: Perfectly normal
by mind!dagger on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Perfectly normal"
mind!dagger Member since:
2007-06-26

Religion just tells me that I am going to hell for my lifestyle, and so is my common-law GF.


Who said you're going to hell? Isn't that a town in Texas? < wink >

Edited 2008-03-23 16:55 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Perfectly normal
by Nalle on Mon 24th Mar 2008 00:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Perfectly normal"
Nalle Member since:
2005-07-06

No, as far as I know, its a small place about 20 km from Trondheim, Norway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell%2C_Norway

I come from Trondheim and have been there a few times - nice place.

The sign shown on Wikipedia is, by the way one of the most photographed train station buildings/signs in the world.

Nalle Berg
./nalle.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Perfectly normal
by Mellin on Wed 26th Mar 2008 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Perfectly normal"
Mellin Member since:
2005-07-06

i've been to hell in norway

Edited 2008-03-26 13:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Perfectly normal
by victorhooi on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 21:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Perfectly normal"
victorhooi Member since:
2005-06-30

My computer is much more important to my life then religion, and it's not a problem. My computer feeds me, clothes me, puts a roof over my head, and entertains me.

Religion just tells me that I am going to hell for my lifestyle, and so is my common-law GF. Even though my GF is a social worker who has helped hundreds of people.

If I had to choose, I would pick my computer over religion every day of the week, and not feel guilty about it at all.


It's not about guilt. The following isn't directed at you, just in general at people who mis-represent something they know nothing about. Religion won't let me do this, religion won't let me do that. Agh..

You don't go to hell for your lifestyle - not unless you're way out the side of wacko - and you sound like a reasonable guy, so I doubt that.

The reason you would go to hell is because you don't believe in Christ *shrugs*, it's actually that simple. And nobody knows if you're going to hell - I don't, and you don't. If you're a Christian, you know if you're going to heaven (assurance of faith), but for others, it's up to Him.

And for the record, "hell" is defined as "separation from God" - it's not fire and brimstone, it's a place where God is not. To a Christian, that's obviously a bad thing, since we happen to like him.

Anyhow, this isn't Scientology, it's all on public record, a simple wikipedia search would actually tell people what Christian believe.

Cheers,
Victor

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Perfectly normal
by kaiwai on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Perfectly normal"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

"Anyone who's computer is as important to them as politics or religion really does have problems.


My computer is much more important to my life then religion, and it's not a problem. My computer feeds me, clothes me, puts a roof over my head, and entertains me.

Religion just tells me that I am going to hell for my lifestyle, and so is my common-law GF. Even though my GF is a social worker who has helped hundreds of people.

If I had to choose, I would pick my computer over religion every day of the week, and not feel guilty about it at all.
"

You've got that right; when you put religion in one corner and the millions died for its 'cause' and those in the computer side of the equation - the only thing that gives people the assumption that 'religion' takes a higher place is the fact that there is an invisible sky daddy which they worship.

Even if you were to say that Microsoft and Apple were religions in their own right, I'm still waiting for there to be suicide bombers from either side trying to wipe each other out. I'm still waiting for political movements to emerge out of these to advocate laws against the other side and stopping their 'computer perversions'.

Although I assume your post was tongue 'n cheek - there was a valid point in reference to computers, religion and politics.

Reply Score: 3

I like Apple.
by yakirz on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 13:11 UTC
yakirz
Member since:
2006-05-11

I don't love it, I like it.

I think their OS and software are superior to what Microsoft offers, and I like their hardware better than what Dell or HP sells. Put those together, and I prefer Macs to PCs, even when they're running FOSS.

However, I don't think Apple is perfect, and though he's a good CEO, I think Jobs can be a flaming asshole, and I don't think I'd like him personally.

I am going to rail against someone who's an anti-Mac zealot, like Dvorak, but I definitely don't cry foul any time a columnist has something negative to say about Apple, Jobs or the Macintosh/iPod/iPhone.

Edited 2008-03-23 13:11 UTC

Reply Score: 1

IndigoJo
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm not entirely sure it's apposite to compare Mac zealots with those who complain about "bias" in media reporting of the Israel/Palestinian dispute. There are organised gangs of letter-writers and emailers who periodically flood media outlets with complaint letters when they find a report which does not match the view they support, and they complain of bias when in fact they want the media to be biased in their favour. All those I know of who do this are on the pro-Israel side, by the way. Are there organised gangs of Mac freaks who bombard reporters with hostile emails whenever they detect a note of criticism in a review of an Apple product, or is it just individual Mac freaks being Mac freaks?

Reply Score: 2

PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

What makes you think that the pro-Israeli letter writers are particularly organized?

I think both groups manage it in an equal way: Mac people and pro-Israelis talk to each other and mention some article, they notice the offending parts and get angry and then independently decide to send the letters. The only organization here is one telling the other, "hey, did you see that article? Those anti-(mac|semitic) bastards!"

Reply Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Are there organised gangs of Mac freaks who bombard reporters with hostile emails whenever they detect a note of criticism in a review of an Apple product, or is it just individual Mac freaks being Mac freaks?


Yes, in fact, there are.

Reply Score: 2

WTF!
by mind!dagger on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:06 UTC
mind!dagger
Member since:
2007-06-26

How can you compare a so-called conflict with IT? I'm not sure I see the logical connection. Maybe it's the same as those people who compare IT with religions or politics.

Oh well, I may be a little grumpy after repairing a brand-new Vista system that got fully hosed by a family member late last night.

My little Mac Mini can do more than most PCs since it can drive three operating systems. The decision is based purely on its technical capacity to perform. It's not religion, politics or conflict.

Reply Score: 2

RE: WTF!
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:14 UTC in reply to "WTF!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

How can you compare a so-called conflict with IT? I'm not sure I see the logical connection. Maybe it's the same as those people who compare IT with religions or politics.


He's merely stating that there is a striking resemblance between the findings of the scientific study and the actions of pro/anti (in this case) Apple people. This striking resemblance is difficult to miss, seeing the effects found in the original study have been confirmed in various other studies, which used completely different subject matters than the first study.

Human psychology scales quite well. Whatever psychological processes at work on a 'global' level (in this case, the way people perceive reports in the media on the Israel/Palestine conflict), are most likely also at work on similar issues on a more 'local' level (in this case, Apple).

Hence, it makes perfect sense to extend the findings of the original study to the issue at hand in this article. However, as always, a more detailed study would be required to actually confirm said effects.

Edited 2008-03-23 15:14 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: WTF!
by mind!dagger on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:46 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF!"
mind!dagger Member since:
2007-06-26

I avoid studies. Especially those studies which may be biased.

For example, the study which says you need three or more full glasses of milk a day to maintain calcium levels. The study is supported by the milk industry.

My take? If you need than much calcium. Go buy a milk cow, climb underneath and suck away at the teet.

Resemblances do not prove facts.

When one looks at the chromosomes of humans and the living great apes, like the orangutan, gorilla, and chimpanzee, it is immediately apparent there is a great deal of similarity between the number and overall appearance of the chromosomes across the four.

We are actually closer related to the Bonobo ape than a Gorilla. Just because your uncle from America looks like a Silverback gorilla does not prove similarity. It just 'looks' that way as primate development does across the branch of the forest dwelling apes.

I reject political, religious and conflict comparisons as naive and based in pseudo science. These include witchcraft, theocracy and class aggression.

Technology is nothing more than a collection of circuits. How we perceive it and use it is entirely up to the individual ape behind the keyboard.

Edited 2008-03-23 15:52 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF!
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If it swims like a duck, eats like a duck, and vocalises like a duck, and looks like a duck, it's most likely a duck.

And not a dinner table.

Edited 2008-03-23 15:59 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: WTF!
by mind!dagger on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WTF!"
mind!dagger Member since:
2007-06-26

Ring-a-ring-a-roses, A pocket full of posies, Hush. hush. hush. hush. We're all tumbled down. -Kate Greenaway, 1881 edition, Mother Goose.

Edited 2008-03-23 16:02 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF!
by Steven on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF!"
Steven Member since:
2005-07-20

"How can you compare a so-called conflict with IT? I'm not sure I see the logical connection."

Good thing nobody was doing that, isn't it? The comparison was between two groups of people who share a common disorder: malignant narcissism (wherein their sense of self is replaced by an idea. I'm sure there's a term for that, if anyone cares to point me to it). IT didn't really come up in it.

"How we perceive it and use it is entirely up to the individual ape behind the keyboard."

...that's sort of the whole point of his article: How we relate to technology, and how that parallels with how we relate to other ideas.

The logical connection is, of course, that a psychological cause for one behavior is usually connected to other stupid behaviors as well... Because our society springs from our psychological quirks, most things (be they religion, war, politics, or any other fanatical zeal) are connected in that they have the same root cause (which is simply applied in a different direction).

This expands into other areas too, such as, say, seeing a topic on Mac users and assuming it's about IT and technology rather than people(i.e. seeing what you want to see, rather than reality). There's a natural tendency to assume that things posted to an IT site will be about technology rather than human interaction and psychology. As a result of that some people don't pick up on the change of topic when it happens. I would wager that such people frequently misunderstand other topics of discussion. The fact that it happens in the IT realm does not limit it to area?

How did you miss it, exactly?

"I avoid studies. Especially those studies which may be biased."
Just an FYI... all studies are biased. If there was no bias, the study would not have been done to begin with.

Reply Score: 2

RE: WTF!
by BluenoseJake on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:25 UTC in reply to "WTF!"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

My little Mac Mini can do more than most PCs since it can drive three operating systems. The decision is based purely on its technical capacity to perform. It's not religion, politics or conflict.


Any Core 2 duo Could run those 3 particular OS's, and my PC can run many more than 3 OSs, and so can your Mini. The only reason that my PC cannot run OS X is because of Apple, not because it cannot not technically run it, but because Apple will not let it. It's that simple. Therefore, your Mini can not do anything mine cannot do, it is OS X that is limited, artificially, by Apple.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: WTF!
by mind!dagger on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 16:45 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF!"
mind!dagger Member since:
2007-06-26

I could run OS X on a standard PC. Several students on campus have done this.

For me, installing OS X onto a PC would be as illegal as using a pirated version of Vista. Darn, ethics getting in the way.

BTW, A + B does not always lead to C in logic. ;-)

Edited 2008-03-23 16:47 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF!
by Xenu on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF!"
Xenu Member since:
2008-03-02

Isn't that precisely what he said? Apple holds the copyright on OS X, so only Apple can decide who gets a copy of OS X from them (and thus, who gets a copy legally), and it just so happens that Apple will only give you one installed on a Mac. It is not because of a limitation of non-Apple PCs that you can't install the OS on them, but simply because Apple won't let you.

Reply Score: 2

It is ALL about Google Analytics
by kaelodest on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 15:52 UTC
kaelodest
Member since:
2006-02-12

For Friggin real - I see more Apple \ iPhone \Mac OS web posts in the fourth week of any given month than in the other three weeks combined. I do not expect any writer to say 'Hey this is how it is I need to make my numbers soo here is my monthly Macs Suck or Mac Users are Naive' But rest assured that there is a manager or a weekly editorial meeting where these journalists are told to pick up their numbers.
That is not to say that Mac users are not vocal. We are. Most M.I.S-I.T. users are to some extent. You see it in Win32 users who absolutely NEED EXCHANGE SUPPORT!!!! (Emphasis Added but Real) KDE\Gnome and the Mac OS.
The difference is that I am busy and I find that I am willing to pay a severe premium to be relatively free of Viruses, Malware, and crapware. Yes I get the same effect on Linux, but like i said I am very busy. I do not want to kill a day searching for sources and patches and then finding out that I just broke another package that I built from scratch.
It is a PRIDE thing. I am proud of my Mac and the work that i do on it. I am amazed by how fast Java runs here. I am proud when an exec comes up to me and asks me how I got the company to buy a MBPro, and when I tell them it was my $$$ then they get it. ANd go get one for themselves.

Yes it is a rant. but lets see how many Mac stories there are in the first week of April.

Reply Score: 0

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

The difference is that I am busy and I find that I am willing to pay a severe premium to be relatively free of Viruses, Malware, and crapware. Yes I get the same effect on Linux, but like i said I am very busy.


If I had known you, I could've taught you in about 20 minutse how to remain virus/malware free on Windows, and how to do so while spending $0 on security-related software, so you wouldn't have had to pay a severe premium.

Now, please do not read anything into this that I am not saying. Just because I know how to do the above and you do not, I don't in any way consider myself to be superior. Hell, you could probably do a hundred other things that I can't. But I wouldn't necessarily consider paying a lot more than you had to in order to achieve desired result as something to be proud of. Granted, there are other reasons to use Macs besides security, but that is the primary reason you listed. Security on Windows isn't a problem so long as you know a few basic rules (esp don't use Internet Explorer) and have a little bit of common sense. (Eg - don't download something that promises you nude pics of the latest celebrity of the month). Honestly, it's not that complicated ;)

Reply Score: 2

Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03


If I had known you, I could've taught you in about 20 minutse how to remain virus/malware free on Windows, and how to do so while spending $0 on security-related software, so you wouldn't have had to pay a severe premium.


I disagree 100%. I know (myself included) people who is very competent in Windows world and doesn't spend a dime in security related software and yet have caught some malaware or trojan or something and had to reinstall their os for the sake of efficiency.

Windows XP is an insercure operating system by default, and even with care and attention, it can suffer from stuff. The fact that you think that you're so safe means that youre not "very busy". When you are really busy and working against time, you just want to get things done.

I'm not against windows as I myself use it everyday, but when I'm on a Mac i really have much less to worry about regarding security.

Security on Windows is possible, but not without tweaking things, and being extremely cautious.

Reply Score: 4

kaelodest Member since:
2006-02-12

Well It may be off topic -- Security, but I do know those reasons and methods to keep windows 'safe'. It is however not something that I desire to do or want to have to do just to use Microsoft Office. I use Windows daily and I do not have many of the issues that plague windows users. Hell I use safe computing practices on the Mac. My general user account is NOT an administrator. And even if I wanted to see nude 19 yr old starlets that should not make my whole system a malware magnet.

Long before Airbags were the law of the land people bought Mercedes, Audi and Volvo and got that type of personal security for a significant premium. It is for me the simple reason that after working with windows (and Mac at work) all day one of the last things I want to do is comb through the windows and pull out all of the malware that comes down the wire.

As a father of two how can I keep them from clicking on a banner or trying to get a 'free' iPod Touch and not having them take windows to fubar land. For me it is all about the Total Cost Of Ownership. First of All the price of Apple products is not so big if you can afford it, second the quality of Apple products SW & HW is worth the price if I do not have to factor in Symmantec or Macaffee. Third my time at home is not billable so I do not want to have to 'work' just to play.

I still go back to the premise that on a slow news week expect poor journalism to select a 'hot' buzzword. Like Apple\ iPod\ iPhone

Reply Score: 1

tyrione
Member since:
2005-11-21

to write critical articles on the subject matter. They might be surprised that people knowing that the person writing the article has an intimate knowledge of it might make them realize they should be more critical of the subject matter in question.

If Keith Ohlfs wrote a critical article on the UI Design where people are informed of who the hell he is--father of the NeXT UI--then perhaps they'd better take notice of what the hell is going on and be more critical.

Since he's designing here: http://www.vudu.com/product_specs.html
I think people would also give more respect to such articles as they are written by people actually creating the products.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by bb_matt
by bb_matt on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 22:14 UTC
bb_matt
Member since:
2006-01-04

Listen to some of you, heh, exactly the type that the article points out!

ROFL.

Reply Score: 2

blah blah blah
by macUser on Mon 24th Mar 2008 16:43 UTC
macUser
Member since:
2006-12-15

So before Apple became the new hotness, Mac users were stupid for using their products... I mean, that's the gist of what the tech media has been writing about Mac users since 1984.

So now, Macs are hot, and the gist is Mac users are not only stupid for using Apple products, but they're raving, fanatical lunatics too...

Why does the tech media feel so inclined to write hatchet jobs on Apple's users? I suppose if you can't discredit the product then you must go after an easier target. Perhaps if Microsoft put out a better product we might finally see some articles on how PCs users are a bunch of spiteful, arrogant lemmings, and if Linux could ever get anywhere beyond the data center, we'd be blessed to learn such weanies they are in the "journalist's" eyes.

Sure, Mac users are vocal about a product they love. They've been reminded on a daily basis since 1984 that their OS is a toy and that they're stupid for using it. PC/linux users are so quick to disparage Mac users yet totally incapable of turning the looking glass on themselves.

Reply Score: 2