?

Log in

tardis

Oh, Ars...

... you unthinking, mindless Apple automatons.  Check out this tidbit.  It's about an interview with Steve Ballmer in which, according to the poorly written article, he "predictably calls Macs too expensive".  Predictably?  Really?  REALLY?  Sad, sad Ars Technica, run by the Mactard elite..  I do believe the word you were searching for was "correctly".

Echoing the sentiments of anyone with an IQ over 75, Ballmer says "Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment—same piece of hardware—paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be".  Indeed!

Hilariously though, the author of the Apple-sponsored piece erroneously states at the bottom of the article "That still doesn't take into account the fact that Macs are not "the same piece of hardware," despite being architecturally similar."  Sorry, dude, it's the same fucking hardware.  There is a reason why a company like Psystar can so easily sell "Mac clones" -- they aren't clones, it is exactly the same hardware.  You just aren't paying $500 extra for a useless logo.

I'd go into the comments, but I'm sure you've all heard Mactards drone on and on, demonstrating their sheer ignorance.  Amusingly, many of them launch into tirades and call Ballmer a moron, an idiot, a fat bastard (I particularly enjoyed this one, seems just so appropriate coming from a Mactard).  They also reiterate many common misconceptions, stating that by using OS X they're immune to viruses and exploits.  In reality, OS X and Safari are merely a giant block of Swiss cheese from a security perspective.  Which browser/OS fell first during the recent Pwn2Own competition (in seconds, nonetheless)?  Yep.  Safari running on OS X.

It's funny.  The more I hear from these people, the it would seem that Mactards are the computer equivalent of people who love Bose audio products (Bose-o's).  It's well-known in the audiophile community that Bose products are overpriced, underperforming pieces of trash.  But people think because they're paying $3500 for something that's worth $400 at best that they're getting value.  And Bose markets in a very similar style to Apple, it's how they got to where they are today.  It's substandard equipment that looks really slick, and is marketed almost exclusively from a 'lifestyle' point-of-view.  Many of their products even have that word as part of their name. 

On various forums, even when faced with overwhelming criticism about their choice, they'll defend Bose to their dying breath (or at least, their dying keystroke before their forum account is deleted).  Just like Apple users.  Bose wasn't always as bad as it is today, and they do have a couple of great products.  But you won't see them pushing them, and you won't see them in Bose stores.  The Bose 901 series loudspeaker, introduced in the late 60's, is a piece of art and sounds great.  They still sell it today, if you can find it.

Oddly, Ars doesn't get everything wrong.  For example, check out this article, entitled "Wii Play becomes first bad game to sell 10 million".  Although, I suppose this could be attributed to the fact that the Wii is not an Apple product, in which case they'd no doubt have at least 5,000 words on why it is great because it is bad.

Comments

tardis

January 2010

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      
Powered by LiveJournal.com