Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Sep 2012 14:51 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Apple Written by Scott Cleland: "With so many fanboys spinning Silicon Valley history, it's sometimes easy to forget about the real chain of events that led to the ongoing Apple-Google thermonuclear war, how the romance turned to hate. This timeline presents an interesting case about why, despite patents and prior art, Steve Jobs had plenty of personal reasons to despise Schmidt, Page, and Brin." Cleland has a very, very good point; quite coherent and well-reasoned... That is, if you haven't got a single shred of historical sense and completely and utterly ignore the 30-odd years of mobile computing development that preceded our current crop of smartphones. It's hard not to be reminded of how certain groups of people dismiss millions of years of fossil records because this record inconveniences their argument. In any case, a comment on the article answered the question properly: "Jobs was a businessman. He was angry he was losing money. Simple."
Thread beginning with comment 534652
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
iCreationists
by BallmerKnowsBest on Mon 10th Sep 2012 22:21 UTC
BallmerKnowsBest
Member since:
2008-06-02

It's hard not to be reminded of how certain groups of people dismiss millions of years of fossil records because this record inconveniences their argument.


It goes even further than that: if you compare them based on their tactics, creationists & iFanboys are virtually indistinguishable.

Both groups desperately try to twist every topic into being about them/their object of obsession. Both groups use borderline-spam tactics, repeating the same lame talking-points over and over again ("it's just a theory!" / "OMG Google is an advertising company OMG!"). When challenged to back up any of their claims, both groups tend to get angrily-defensive & just repeat the same talking-points more emphatically (AKA the "la la la, I'm not listening" strategy)... after all, if you have to repeat talking points because you can't come up with your own argument, then you probably don't have the wits to defend an argument that someone else came up. And last, both groups are overly-fond of using deliberate misunderstanding/willful ignorance as a debate tactic.

For that matter, the revisionist history spouted by Apple fanboys might as well be considered a creation myth at this point. It's not like it has any less basis in facts or reality.

And even beyond that, remember good 'ol MrHasBean? Yep, not only was he an obsessive Apple apologist - but it turns out that he's a bon-a-fide creatard to boot:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/02/indiana-backing-away-from-bi...

Reply Score: 4