Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Apr 2011 17:50 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Gnome The day is finally here, the day that the GNOME team releases GNOME 3.0, the first major revision of the GNOME project since 2002. Little of GNOME 2.x is left in GNOME 3.0, and as such, you could call it GNOME's KDE4. We're living in fortunate times, what, with two wildly divergent open source desktops.
Thread beginning with comment 469415
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Sigh...
by kaiwai on Thu 7th Apr 2011 04:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Sigh..."
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Sounds like something Microsoft or Apple would do... but they have a reason: Microsoft can sell a more functional, more expensive license to those who want more features and power (ie. Starter -> Home Premium or Professional), while Apple is trying to sell shiny white overpriced hardware to computer-illiterate users and going for the lowest common denominator is the way to do it.


Wow, such blinding ignorance is mind boggling, and I've been on this website for just over 9 years (prior to the existing registration system that exists today). If you don't mind sunshine, us Mac users aren't all 'computer-illiterate users' who are simply attracted to 'shiny white overpriced hardware' (as your post implied) - some of us have IT backgrounds with many other users knowing how to use a computer and have indepth knowledge but no longer wish to play 'nurse' to their computer. Some of us are actually happy not to worry about our computers because some of us have other stuff in our lives to focus on rather than to be constantly nursing something that should take care of itself.

Btw, I have earned by Linux/*BSD/Solaris stripes and if you want to use those operating systems then all power to you but don't come on this forum all high and mighty thinking that pushes you up to the totem pole of prestige any more than other people who have been posting on this website since it first opened.

Edited 2011-04-07 04:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Sigh...
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 7th Apr 2011 06:08 in reply to "RE[5]: Sigh..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Wow, such blinding ignorance is mind boggling, and I've been on this website for just over 9 years (prior to the existing registration system that exists today). If you don't mind sunshine, us Mac users aren't all 'computer-illiterate users' who are simply attracted to 'shiny white overpriced hardware' (as your post implied) - some of us have IT backgrounds with many other users knowing how to use a computer and have indepth knowledge but no longer wish to play 'nurse' to their computer. Some of us are actually happy not to worry about our computers because some of us have other stuff in our lives to focus on rather than to be constantly nursing something that should take care of itself.

I didn't say that *all* Mac users actually *are* computer-illiterate--I implied that those are the people Apple primarily markets to. Obviously there are exceptions (when aren't there?), and different types of people get Macs (Leo Laporte likes them, and he's certainly not computer-illiterate), but you can't deny that Apple tries its hardest to dumb things down and make a walled garden where things get done *their* way or not at all, all in an effort to make it as "user-friendly" as possible.

If I were to brew a craft beer and advertise it with rainbow-colored zebras, I'm sure some male beer connoisseurs would try it too, not just the women its advertising material (including logos) might be expected to attract. Just look at Delirium Tremens with its pink elephants (case in point: I need to try that one...).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Sigh...
by kaiwai on Thu 7th Apr 2011 06:33 in reply to "RE[6]: Sigh..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I didn't say that *all* Mac users actually *are* computer-illiterate--I implied that those are the people Apple primarily markets to.


Microsoft does that too but they bank on their entrenchment within the enterprise to carry them through into the consumer desktop - "gotta have at home what I have at work" is the mentality of so many who would consider an alternative but believe if it isn't the same as work then all hell will break loose.

Obviously there are exceptions (when aren't there?), and different types of people get Macs (Leo Laporte likes them, and he's certainly not computer-illiterate), but you can't deny that Apple tries its hardest to dumb things down and make a walled garden where things get done *their* way or not at all, all in an effort to make it as "user-friendly" as possible.


What is so bad about the AppStore - you can install load applications on your computer today and into the future without relying on it (no, I don't indulge in the fantasies 1984 like conspiracies that Apple will turn it into an iOS device) and I like the fact that with the AppStore they tell developers that they're not allowed to use private API's or rely on external libraries that are not bundled with their applications. Far too often I've had applications break because some dim bulb at said software company thought it would be cool to use a private API because they were too lazy to implement said functionality themselves. If it means that the AppStore forces software companies to bundle everything they need in a self contained application then I'd sooner have that than the mess that exists- especially when it comes to Adobe and their ability to sprawl shit from one end of the hard disk another (the only thing worse than the uninstaller from Adobe is one from Symantec to uninstall Norton Anti-Virus).

If I were to brew a craft beer and advertise it with rainbow-colored zebras, I'm sure some male beer connoisseurs would try it too, not just the women its advertising material (including logos) might be expected to attract. Just look at Delirium Tremens with its pink elephants (case in point: I need to try that one...).


*shrugs* But I'm sure the vast majority would buy one and keep buying one if it tasted good - no one would keep purchasing a beer that tastes horrible if the only satisfaction is viewing the logo on the front. In the case of the Mac the 'look' might pull in the customer but something has to keep them there beyond just 'teh shiny' and Apple knows that if their product isn't up to what customers demand then they'll simply decide to go with another vendor. Those people tell others of their negative experience and their over all sales drop. If we were talking about 'mindless purchasing' then common sense would dictate that the path of least resistance (purchase a Windows computer) would have the largest number of informed people due to their non-interest in any alternatives ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2