Linked by David Adams on Thu 19th May 2011 17:41 UTC, submitted by Hans Otten
Apple Well, this will come as no surprise to OSNews readers, but as outlined in a recent BBC documentary, UK neuroscientists have studied brain scans of hard-core Apple fans and have found that their mental reactions to Apple imagery are quite similar to scans of religious devotees' brains when shown images of their iconography. The DigitalTrends article summarizing the finding singles out Apple users, but I think we all know that, RDF aside, this is not an Apple-only phenomenon.
Order by: Score:
Comment by merkoth
by merkoth on Thu 19th May 2011 18:52 UTC
merkoth
Member since:
2006-09-22

lol apple fanbois!!!1

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by merkoth
by WorknMan on Thu 19th May 2011 19:53 UTC in reply to "Comment by merkoth"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

lol apple fanbois!!!1


Honestly, I don't know what's worse... Apple or Android fanboys. One would think Fandroids are a little more informed, but when Netflix for Android comes out supporting like six phones (including the Droid Incredible, but NOT the Incredible 2) and they still insist that fragmentation on Android doesn't exist/isn't a problem, you have to wonder what Kool-Aid they've been drinking.

Note: I like Android and have a Droid Incredible myself, but even the most enthusiastic supporters of a platform need to be realistic about its problems. For example, iOS REALLY needs a better notification system and the option to be untethered from iTunes.

Edited 2011-05-19 19:54 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by merkoth
by robojerk on Thu 19th May 2011 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by merkoth"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

Netflix only working for six phones is an artificial fragmentation.

Anyone with a rooted phone can get Netflix to work on their device. I own a Motorola Droid, running Android 2.3.3, I have Netflix and it performs fine. We should be asking why Netflix just didn't release an app for all Android phones, who paid them off to only support the magic 6?

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by merkoth
by _txf_ on Thu 19th May 2011 21:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by merkoth"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

but when Netflix for Android comes out supporting like six phones (including the Droid Incredible, but NOT the Incredible 2) and they still insist that fragmentation on Android doesn't exist/isn't a problem, you have to wonder what Kool-Aid they've been drinking.


That is hardly the fault of android. Netflix only supports those phones due to the paranoia of the mpaa and their ilk. The qualcomm chips have a drm module that netflix needs. The program is perfectly capable of running on ther devices.

However, regarding fragmentation ...
Yes, there is fragmentation, as a consequence of choice and variety which far better than the monolithic iphone or the (practically) WP7 clones.

Since when have we expected pcs or even macintoshes been expected to homogeneously run any piece of software equally? it would be pretty boring and this site would have absolutely no reason to exist.

Fragmentation is only a major problem if you choose to view it as such.

Edited 2011-05-19 21:20 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by merkoth
by merkoth on Thu 19th May 2011 21:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by merkoth"
merkoth Member since:
2006-09-22

Note to self: Avoid joking in OSNews.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by merkoth
by Moredhas on Fri 20th May 2011 08:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by merkoth"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

Hi, you must be new. Welcome to the internet. After the Eternal September, humour was outlawed here.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by merkoth
by testman on Fri 20th May 2011 14:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by merkoth"
testman Member since:
2007-10-15

Exceptions are made for jokes that are still funny. ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by merkoth
by JAlexoid on Fri 20th May 2011 15:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by merkoth"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

That is hardly the fault of android. Netflix only supports those phones due to the paranoia of the mpaa and their ilk. The qualcomm chips have a drm module that netflix needs. The program is perfectly capable of running on ther devices.

You are probably not aware that Netflix officially supports Nexus S, which does not have a Qualcomm SoC. Nexus S has Hummingbird from Samsung.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by merkoth
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 06:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by merkoth"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23


Honestly, I don't know what's worse... Apple or Android fanboys.

They are totally different beasts. Apple is a brand and Android is an OS. There are Android fanboys but they are fragmented. They are not a single mass with a single message. They come from different backgrounds and they don't repeat the same message from the same leader. Some of them are reactionary anti Apple fanboys who see Android as a counter power, some of them adhere to the free software political ideology, etc. Very few, if any of them just repeat what Google says.

Edited 2011-05-20 06:07 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by merkoth
by Nth_Man on Fri 20th May 2011 07:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by merkoth"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

"Fan" comes from "fanatical", and you'll see fanatical comments and thoughts (even the "that's this way", "that it's wrong", "I'm right and you are not", etc) in a lot of fields, specially if there are options to choose.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by merkoth
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 08:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by merkoth"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Yes, I realize that but my point is that Apple fans are not the same as Android fans. They are both fans but for different reasons. What is unique about Apple fans is that they were indoctrined by a marketing department and their number. They are not a handful of geeks but a whole class of people and they don't have a philosophical background, just a brand and a leader.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by merkoth
by mrstep on Fri 20th May 2011 02:35 UTC in reply to "Comment by merkoth"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

Ah, but at least Apple and Jobs exist. This article was meant to highlight that Apple fanatics have turned the 'cult' part of the mind to follow actual products that make our lives better, unlike people who are still clinging to their invisible buddies.

Once again, Apple wins! ;)

Reply Score: 3

Apple-Only
by brewmastre on Thu 19th May 2011 19:26 UTC
brewmastre
Member since:
2006-08-01

The DigitalTrends article summarizing the finding singles out Apple users, but I think we all know that, RDF aside, this is not an Apple-only phenomenon.


How dare you imply that others (non-Apple users) may be mentally capable of such love and devotion; this is something that only those of us evolved enough to use Apples products can understand! This part of the brain is merely shut-off in the rest of the lower population. You know what, from now on don't speak unless spoken to or given express written permission from Supreme Commander Jobs!


;)

In all seriousness though, thank you to the author, That was very well stated.

Edited 2011-05-19 19:40 UTC

Reply Score: 5

Comment by KLU9
by KLU9 on Thu 19th May 2011 19:51 UTC
KLU9
Member since:
2006-12-06

Long live atheism!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by KLU9
by Kroc on Thu 19th May 2011 20:44 UTC in reply to "Comment by KLU9"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

…the new religion.

What this study has shown is that a human nature exists that presents itself in different people under different guises, be it idolism of a company, or of a religious dogma, or the rejection of religion. People can be religious about atheism.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by KLU9
by Murrell on Thu 19th May 2011 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by KLU9"
Murrell Member since:
2006-01-04

Yes, I believe that was the joke.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by KLU9
by Nth_Man on Fri 20th May 2011 02:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by KLU9"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

People can be religious about atheism.

Yes, that original commenter thinks that he knows what will happen when his body is dead. Also he thinks that some things are wrong and some are right. He has a religion, he has also chosen, even if he says that he does not have a religion.

Edited 2011-05-20 02:49 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by KLU9
by lucas_maximus on Fri 20th May 2011 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by KLU9"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Atheism is not a belief.

It is the idea of following the scientific method, which is a methodology and not a belief.

The only difference between being agnostic and being atheist is the certainty between the two.

I don't consider myself Athiest or Agnostic ... but somewhere between the two.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by KLU9
by WereCatf on Fri 20th May 2011 10:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by KLU9"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Atheism is that the person believes that there are NO supernatural forces whatsoever, agnostism is that the person doesn't currently believe in any specific supernatural force but doesn't deny the possibility of such existing. I don't see how you can be "between those two" because they're quite clear about the distinction and are mutually exclusive.

I personally am agnostic: I don't believe in any specific supernatural being or force, ghosts, spirits or anything the like, but I don't deny the possibility of such existing even without my knowledge of them.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by KLU9
by lucas_maximus on Fri 20th May 2011 18:54 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by KLU9"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Not believing in supernatural forces usually means that you base your beliefs and opinions on repeatable scientific facts. I see them as opposite sides of the same coin.

When I say that I am somewhere between Atheism and Agnostic, I quite firm enough that these things don't exist. However I not arrogant enough to say it with 110% conviction.

Edited 2011-05-20 19:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by KLU9
by james_gnz on Tue 24th May 2011 11:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by KLU9"
james_gnz Member since:
2006-02-16

Yes, that original commenter thinks that he knows what will happen when his body is dead. Also he thinks that some things are wrong and some are right. He has a religion, he has also chosen, even if he says that he does not have a religion.
I think I know whether or not pixies exist. And I think I'm right about it. Does this make me religious? I'm not sure about your definition.

Reply Score: 1

Received from Mount Cupertino
by fretinator on Thu 19th May 2011 19:51 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

10 Commandments from the Lord Thy Jobs
---------------------------------------------------------------

1. The Lord thy Jobs hath one button, and the number of buttons is one. Thou shall have no other buttons before thee.

2. Thou shall not take upon thy Mac any graven images. Neither of creatures that creep, nor of swimming blow fish.

3. Thou shall not take the name of thy Mac in vain. It is normal and good to reboot regularly.

4. Though shall remember the Apple Store and keep it holy.

5. Thou shall remember thy motherboard and honor it. Though shalt not allow dust to prevail therein.

6. Thou shall not kill the power to thy Mac except by shutting down properly.

7. Though shall not adulter thyself by running Windows, Linux, or any other OS except thy wife, the OS of X.

8. Neither shall thou steal from the Lord the Jobs by installing Mac software on any other machine except thy Apple-provided Mac.

9. You shall not bear false witness to thy neighbor - Macs do not cost more, if you factor in total cost of ownership.

10. Thou shall not covet your neighbor's computer, especially if it is a Macbook Pro, of the unibody construction. Neither shall thou desire your neighbors's iPad 2 or white iPhone 4.

Reply Score: 14

RE: Received from Mount Cupertino
by righard on Thu 19th May 2011 21:02 UTC in reply to "Received from Mount Cupertino"
righard Member since:
2007-12-26
Spot on
by jboss1995 on Thu 19th May 2011 20:04 UTC
jboss1995
Member since:
2007-05-02

That was deep! Good article, vary good reasoning and it did make me take a look at myself and wonder why I would defend and OS as though it was my god. Worship comes in many forms. Thanks for making it so clear.

Reply Score: 1

OS Choices
by Drumhellar on Thu 19th May 2011 20:47 UTC
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

What a lame thing to get so polarized about, when there are far more important and meaningful things, like Mario vs Sonic.

Reply Score: 6

RE: OS Choices
by lucas_maximus on Fri 20th May 2011 08:39 UTC in reply to "OS Choices"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Well everyone knows it is sonic.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: OS Choices
by Drumhellar on Sat 21st May 2011 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE: OS Choices"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Yet, Sonic couldn't save Sega from being forced out of the console market.

I think that means Mario wins.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by danbuter
by danbuter on Thu 19th May 2011 20:55 UTC
danbuter
Member since:
2011-03-17

I'd like OS X a whole lot more if Finder was updated to even 2001 file manager standards.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by danbuter
by pandronic on Fri 20th May 2011 11:06 UTC in reply to "Comment by danbuter"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Yup, Finder is a complete piece of crap. Try TotalFinder or Forklift.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by danbuter
by JAlexoid on Fri 20th May 2011 15:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by danbuter"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

So... If Finder = piece of crap, then TotalFinder = Total piece of crap?

Reply Score: 2

theosib
Member since:
2006-03-02

So the conclusion of the researchers is that if you're a strong devotee of X, and you see symbols relating to X, then you'll have an emotional reaction that's similar across various X's, including religions.

There seems to then be the implication that being a devotee of X is therefore irrational.

While I admit that fanboiism can TURN irrational, no one seems to talk about why someone became a devotee of X in the first place. Maybe there WAS a rationale for it. And since the choice worked for the eventual devotee, they have stopped worrying about the justification. Humans naturally try to simplify their lives, and it can be disruptive to be constantly reevaluating one's choices, most of which are trivial and arbitrary anyhow (not to belitte them--one's preferred brand of ice cream does not need to be constantly reassessed when all you want to do is have ice cream while watching a movie, and it makes the ice cream shopping quicker).

I switched to using Macs when Windows caused revulsion in most people. Now that Windows 7 is out, it's quite usable, but I still feel this sense of dread at the idea of using it. Besides that irrational sense of dread, there's also the practical resistance to having to unnecessarily learn a new system. Not that I can't learn it, but that I have other work I have to do, and I don't want mucking with an OS slowing me down, which is why I switched to Mac in the first place. I want the computer to get the hell out of my way, and Macs _generally_ do a better job of that.

Also, I like Mac aesthetics. I like the rigid unibodies. (I'm not a big fan of the plastic MacBook's aesthetics.) I like AppleCare, which costs money but has fantastic service. And of course, I like the appearance and usability of MacOS and many of the major apps (like OmniGraffle). But when I build my own computer from parts, I don't try to make a hackintosh. I install Linux. (But I mostly only build my own if I want a server.)

Sorry, I had a point to make, but I have other work to do, so I'll quit here. ;)

Reply Score: 2

Misguided article
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 05:23 UTC
spiderman
Member since:
2008-10-23

The article seems to imply that the result of the study can apply to any fan of any OS.
The study was not about an OS, it was about a company that literally invented the evangelism as marketing concept. It does only apply to Apple. The fans are not after the OS, they are after the brand. They are not a handful of geeks either. They are a mass. No other brand or system can enjoy the kind of phenomenon that made the iPhone and the iPad so popular. Every media talked about it for free, hordes of fanboys were defending the lack of feature as a feature, etc. This is the result of Apple's unique marketing technique.

Then the article tries to picture the fans as some kind of enlighten people with an analogy with people who cross rivers. This is totally misguided. This is like comparing political belief or religion that is based on philosophical concepts with a sect that is based on giving away your money to the leader. What the study is showing is that Apple has managed to use sectarian techniques as a marketing technique. By trying to depict that as a good thing, the article looks like an article written by a fan.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Misguided article
by james_gnz on Tue 24th May 2011 11:15 UTC in reply to "Misguided article"
james_gnz Member since:
2006-02-16

Steve Jobs never said I deserve to spend eternity being burnt alive while being eaten by maggots. Nor do Apple fanboys see every wedding and funeral as an opportunity to sell me a Mac. I much prefer Apple fanboys to Jesus fanboys.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 20th May 2011 09:34 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

I think there is a difference between Apple users and iPhone owners.

A lot of people own iPhones and I know a whole bunch, but a large number (mostly women, oh well) don't even know Steve Jobs, don't have a Mac and don't even know which type of iPhone they have. Sure they love their phones, but you can't call them Apple fanatics.

The "religious" Apple user is in fact a percentage of all Apple product owning people. It might be a big percentage, but even so you can't say every Apple product owning person believes in the Apple Church.

Also one can't become an Apple fanatic before you get influenced. That just proves Apple knows how to make cool stuff and more important sell it. At least their stuff has a personality (like most computers did in the 80's). Other companies just try to bump the specs, dish it out and pull it as quickly if it doesn't sell well enough.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 10:20 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23


Also one can't become an Apple fanatic before you get influenced. That just proves Apple knows how to make cool stuff and more important sell it. At least their stuff has a personality (like most computers did in the 80's). Other companies just try to bump the specs, dish it out and pull it as quickly if it doesn't sell well enough.

I believe it's their clever marketing that makes you think they make cool stuff. Their stuff is still just dumbed down Unix, much less cool than my customized LFS but they sell it like something magic and the fans do that marketing for them. That is what the personality of their stuff is about in my opinion.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 20th May 2011 10:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I think it's more that marketing. It's a certain vision they put in to practice where they both control the hard- and software. Add attention to detail and of course marketing and you have something.

At home I have a lot of retro stuff, a lot from the 70's and 80's. A lot of stuff breathes personality and is part of the producer's history. During the 90's this was lost, IMHO, when the PC clones took over. All computers turned in to ugly PCs with DOS and Windows.

Sure my Amiga is crap compared to a 2011 PC, but it is more fun.

And now when Dell or HP comes with a new product you know it's just specs in a box. That's what they sell specs for a price. Most non-tech users hardly know the brand of the PC they use (well, most don't even), let alone the type.

Yesterday someone at work even offered me an old computer. Hoping it was not a PC I said I might be interested. What was it? Well, a PC. A Dell or an HP. They have had it for years, don't even know what brand. I told her to bring it along but I wouldn't pay for it. I'll use it as a test machine or give it away if someone is interested.

I do like the IBM XT though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Apple does not control the hardware since about a decade or so. Sun or IBM do but not Apple. They are just selling the same hardware as Dell or HP in a shiny box. If you think they control the hardware it is because of their brand and marketing. They just control the OS and that OS is just collection of modified open source components with a shiny interface on top. This is very far from the Amiga. My opinion is that they have that brand that makes people think their stuff is more cool than a random PC with Ubuntu.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 20th May 2011 11:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Apple certainly uses a lot of off-the-shelve components, but I doubt you could build your own MacBook Air with stuff you can buy in a shop.

It's easier to clone an HP or Dell spec-wise. Arguably your Dell clone will be cheaper and higher specced than an iMac, but a Mac has OS X that's tailored to the hardware.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by MOS6510
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 11:33 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

I'm not sure about that. I think Pystar proved that technically you can build Mac clones. I don't think it's any harder than building a PC. The biggest problem is of course Apple's legal team. I believe Apple does not like clones because it removes the magic in people's mind.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 20th May 2011 12:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, a quick Google finds:

***
Cons :

No Wi-Fi
No Bluetooth
No OS updates
Limited OS X
***

On a Mac everything (usually) works, which is part of the success. When I switched from Linux to OS X I stopped spending time getting things to work and again after an OS update.

My wife uses my old iMac G5. It came with Panther, which I found a bit disappointing. It was upgraded to Tiger and then Leopard. It never needed a reinstall, nor did any Mac/MacBook here. Only used Macs I get my hands on I reinstall.

Buy a Psystar Hackintosh and I'm sure you'd need to google and fiddle around to get stuff working.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by MOS6510
by spiderman on Fri 20th May 2011 12:51 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by MOS6510"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Wait, those are not TECHNICAL problems. On Pystar machines, wireless technologies like Wifi and Bluetooth were optional. You can technically build a Mac clone with wireless, Pystar did build them but they choose to sell them as options for commercial reasons. The limited OS and lack of updates are legal problems, not technical.

It's a myth that everything works more out of the box on a Mac. It does not work anymore out of the box than a random Dell with Ubuntu. Many hardware and software components do not work on a Mac, just like on any random computer. If you want something that work with most things out of the box, buy a Dell with Windows.

Edited 2011-05-20 12:56 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by MOS6510
by twitterfire on Fri 20th May 2011 21:39 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


It's easier to clone an HP or Dell spec-wise. Arguably your Dell clone will be cheaper and higher specced than an iMac, but a Mac has OS X that's tailored to the hardware.


That's bull. Apple wants you to think that the os is tailored to the hardware, but it is not.

As for not being able to build clones, you don't even have to build clones, you can install it to your PC, like I and many others did.

Reply Score: 2