Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #286324 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-03-26 19:11 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-03-31 10:49 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 143 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-26 19:11 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 04:10 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-26 21:45 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 17:08 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 13:14 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 17:16 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 14:36 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 18:44 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:14 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 22:35 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:59 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-27 13:23 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 14:40 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:11 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-27 13:18 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 17:21 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-27 13:44 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 17:46 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-27 13:52 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 18:01 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 14:45 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 18:58 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-27 15:05 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 19:13 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:16 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 22:32 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:43 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 22:55 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 16:01 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:14 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 16:47 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 00:32 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 18:08 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 01:21 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 18:30 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 01:50 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 22:54 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 20:02 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 23:22 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-28 09:03 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 13:13 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 13:42 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 14:17 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 19:13 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 12:23 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 19:38 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 19:59 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 21:51 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-28 18:02 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-03-30 09:06 -0500
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 15:51 +0100
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 11:22 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 12:48 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 14:02 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 11:14 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 11:17 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-28 23:12 +0100
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-28 18:55 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Donald Miller <donaldmiller955@mail.com> - 2015-03-28 19:11 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-28 19:20 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 00:29 +0100
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-28 23:38 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-28 19:43 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 23:51 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 14:45 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:00 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-29 16:14 +0100
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:42 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-29 12:41 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 16:59 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Donald Miller <donaldmiller955@mail.com> - 2015-03-29 13:03 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 03:45 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 03:54 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 07:00 -0500
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 10:27 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 20:56 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-28 21:13 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:21 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-28 22:23 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:46 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 01:28 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 19:25 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:47 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 16:42 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-28 19:44 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-03-30 09:13 -0500
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 13:45 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:23 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-28 22:40 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:43 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 09:51 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:22 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-28 18:49 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-28 09:47 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 14:15 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 09:49 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 17:02 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 11:52 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-28 10:16 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-27 15:02 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:10 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 15:17 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-27 10:25 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 17:29 +0000
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:30 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 08:36 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-30 09:06 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 09:20 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 18:31 +0200
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-30 09:36 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 12:23 -0500
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:45 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 18:01 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 23:01 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 20:11 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 21:58 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 19:09 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 23:02 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 20:10 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 09:36 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-31 10:13 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 12:35 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 08:32 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 07:34 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:22 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 21:02 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-02 08:45 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 09:16 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-04 20:00 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-04 18:42 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-02 08:48 -0500
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-02 08:53 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 09:27 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 11:30 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 12:44 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 10:06 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:51 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 18:02 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 23:01 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-31 05:12 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 09:41 -0400
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 12:08 -0700
Re: The stupid case sensitivity debate Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-31 10:49 -0700
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 13:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bvhdy9.fjeu@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286437 |
Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
> "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote in message
> news:jg830.a3p3@rooftop.invalid...
>>
>> Why did they name them iDevices anyway instead of aDevices?
>> They're apple products after all, not intel.
>>
> <quote>
> Ken Segall was an employee at an L.A. ad agency handling Apple's account who
> came up with the name "iMac" and pitched it to Steve Jobs. Jobs wanted the
> product to be called "MacMan", but eventually warmed to Segall's suggestion.
> Segall says that the "i" stands for "Internet", but also represents the
> product as a personal and revolutionary device ('i' for "individuality" and
> "innovation").
> Attention was given to the out-of-box experience: the user needed to go
> through only two steps to set up and connect to the Internet. "There's no
> step 3!" was the catch-phrase in a popular iMac commercial narrated by actor
> Jeff Goldblum.
> Another commercial, dubbed "Simplicity Shootout", pitted seven-year-old
> Johann Thomas and his border collie Brodie, with an iMac, against Adam
> Taggart, a Stanford University MBA student, with an HP Pavilion 8250, in a
> race to set up their computers. Johann and Brodie finished in 8 minutes and
> 15 seconds, whereas Adam was still working on it by the end of the
> commercial.
> Apple later adopted the 'i' prefix across its consumer hardware and software
> lines, such as the iPod, iBook, iPhone, iPad and various pieces of software
> such as the iLife suite and iWork and the company's media player/store,
> iTunes.
> </quote>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#History
> That 'i' in the name worked out well for Apple but the new watch breaks from
> the naming convention. It's the "Apple watch" and not the iWatch. Conpiracy
> theories?
My prediction:
It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but mainly
because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as iCult-approved.
Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version with a
nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 13:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mf6b3o$2vt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286439 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote:
> My prediction:
> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but
> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as
> iCult-approved.
> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version with
> a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately.
I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch
thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few people
who'll buy the things, I guess.
--
When Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck ...
it'll be a vacuum cleaner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 14:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bhvu0.3fa03@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286441 |
ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >> My prediction: >> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but >> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as >> iCult-approved. >> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version with >> a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately. > I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch > thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few people > who'll buy the things, I guess. https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 19:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mf6ugm$kek$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286446 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote:
> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote:
>
>>> My prediction:
>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but
>>> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as
>>> iCult-approved.
>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version
>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately.
>
>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch
>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few
>> people who'll buy the things, I guess.
>
> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392
Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion?
--
When Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck ...
it'll be a vacuum cleaner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 12:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d1d55128-1445-4020-837b-d95fa744a07d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #286481 |
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 1:14:21 PM UTC-6, ronb wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: > > > ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: > > > >>> My prediction: > >>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but > >>> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as > >>> iCult-approved. > >>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version > >>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately. > > > >> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch > >> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few > >> people who'll buy the things, I guess. > > > > https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 > > Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? It probably came from: http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 19:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fgey93q.p3q@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286481 |
ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>>> My prediction: >>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but >>>> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as >>>> iCult-approved. >>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately. >> >>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >> >> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 > Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? Got it here: http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when the subject is Apple products.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 19:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <geu93.a03qq@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286485 |
owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >>> >>>>> My prediction: >>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, but >>>>> mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be seen as >>>>> iCult-approved. >>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold separately. >>> >>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >>> >>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 >> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? > Got it here: > http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ > Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when > the subject is Apple products. Hold on. I think it's Hamilton. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTh9jmhZSlwmmlVmphsivYsLBvre27PQaNyNfq7q2lzSFnVmklFFQ Here's one with that same hat and everything: http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4784975.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Lewis-Hamilton.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 21:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mf77po$pur$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286485 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote:
> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote:
>
>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote:
>>>
>>>>> My prediction:
>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore,
>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be
>>>>> seen as iCult-approved.
>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version
>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold
>>>>> separately.
>>>
>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch
>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few
>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess.
>>>
>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392
>
>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion?
>
> Got it here:
> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/
> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when
> the subject is Apple products.
Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more
shallow?
--
When Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck ...
it'll be a vacuum cleaner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 18:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <i11rd2sofiqp.ee9fhtlpkzlg$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #286491 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 21:51:53 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote: > >> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >>>> >>>>>> My prediction: >>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, >>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be >>>>>> seen as iCult-approved. >>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold >>>>>> separately. >>>> >>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >>>> >>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 >> >>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? >> >> Got it here: >> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ >> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when >> the subject is Apple products. > > Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more > shallow? Considering the huge success of devices like the FitBit the Apple watch could be a success for health conscious folks. I already have a FitBit so have no need for it. It's also quite ugly looking in my opinion. Linux users are extremely cheap so $349 is way over their budget. If it sold for $19.95 on a late night infomercial they might take a stab at it though. Seems like a lot of sour apples here. If it was a Linux device the tone would be completely different and it would be a great device. Either way, I'll stick with my Omega watch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 09:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmhim32.243.jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
| In reply to | #286492 |
On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 21:51:53 +0000 (UTC), ronb wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote:
>>
>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote:
>>>
>>>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> My prediction:
>>>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore,
>>>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be
>>>>>>> seen as iCult-approved.
>>>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version
>>>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold
>>>>>>> separately.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch
>>>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few
>>>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392
>>>
>>>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion?
>>>
>>> Got it here:
>>> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/
>>> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when
>>> the subject is Apple products.
>>
>> Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more
>> shallow?
>
> Considering the huge success of devices like the FitBit the Apple
> watch could be a success for health conscious folks.
> I already have a FitBit so have no need for it.
> It's also quite ugly looking in my opinion.
> Linux users are extremely cheap so $349 is way over their budget.
It's also moot since there are devices like the fitbbit.
> If it sold for $19.95 on a late night infomercial they might take a
> stab at it though.
> Seems like a lot of sour apples here. If it was a Linux device the
That presupposes that this thing is actually a success by any way
of measuring that sort of thing. The market is already saturated with
devices of this kind. Many are cheaper and just as effective and many
are just more useful.
What does Apple have to offer the early adopters this time?
What do they have to offer the common rube that needs to be led
around by the nose and dragged into using this sort of thing?
[deletia]
Of course the ironic thing here is that the first smart watches were
silly Linux hacks that were way ahead of their time.
--
Truth is irrelevant as long as the predictions are good. |||
/ | \
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Poaster <wp@dev.null> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 15:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eg4oub-755.ln1@user-1842.linux.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #286719 |
It was reported that JEDIDIAH posted: > On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: http://www.numo.net/ numo.net - Click here to buy "numo.net" Seems that "Tomas" is extremely cheap, so to buy the "numo.net" domain, is waaay over the "40tude.net" troll's budget. > That presupposes that this thing is actually a success by any way > of measuring that sort of thing. The market is already saturated with > devices of this kind. Many are cheaper and just as effective and many > are just more useful. > > What does Apple have to offer the early adopters this time? > > What do they have to offer the common rube that needs to be led > around by the nose and dragged into using this sort of thing? > > [deletia] > > Of course the ironic thing here is that the first smart watches were > silly Linux hacks that were way ahead of their time. > -- openSUSE 13.2 64-bit KDE 4.14.6 Kernel: 3.19.1-2.1.desktop x86_64 GNU/Linux 2015-3-10
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 11:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kosaxp7e8d21$.7xd8clphrx04$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #286724 |
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:51:26 +0100, William Poaster wrote: > It was reported that JEDIDIAH posted: > >> On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: > > http://www.numo.net/ > numo.net - Click here to buy "numo.net" > > Seems that "Tomas" is extremely cheap, so to buy the "numo.net" domain, > is waaay over the "40tude.net" troll's budget. For someone who seems to be tunnel vision focused on headers it seems odd that you are unable to adjust your signature to match your headers. Your signature: openSUSE 13.2 64-bit KDE 4.14.6 Kernel: 3.19.1-2.1.desktop x86_64 GNU/Linux 2015-3-10 Your headers: X-Desktop: KDE 4.14.2 Maybe you are one of those who fakes headers in a lame attempt to trick people into believing you are running Linux when you are not. From what I've seen of your prose, you don't appear to have the intelligence to install Linux. A common occurrence it appears.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 12:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfbuol$mcv$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286729 |
On 3/30/2015 11:22 AM, Tomas wrote: > On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:51:26 +0100, William Poaster wrote: > >> It was reported that JEDIDIAH posted: >> >>> On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: >> >> http://www.numo.net/ >> numo.net - Click here to buy "numo.net" >> >> Seems that "Tomas" is extremely cheap, so to buy the "numo.net" domain, >> is waaay over the "40tude.net" troll's budget. > > For someone who seems to be tunnel vision focused on headers it seems > odd that you are unable to adjust your signature to match your > headers. > > Your signature: > > openSUSE 13.2 64-bit > KDE 4.14.6 > Kernel: 3.19.1-2.1.desktop x86_64 GNU/Linux 2015-3-10 > > Your headers: > > X-Desktop: KDE 4.14.2 > > Maybe you are one of those who fakes headers in a lame attempt to > trick people into believing you are running Linux when you are not. > From what I've seen of your prose, you don't appear to have the > intelligence to install Linux. A common occurrence it appears. Way to piggyback on my 'mismatched Dumb Willie header' posts, "Tomas". Fucking idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 14:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1kndw71imy0nu.4lon51az9j2o.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #286751 |
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 12:48:48 -0400, DFS wrote: > On 3/30/2015 11:22 AM, Tomas wrote: >> On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:51:26 +0100, William Poaster wrote: >> >>> It was reported that JEDIDIAH posted: >>> >>>> On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: >>> >>> http://www.numo.net/ >>> numo.net - Click here to buy "numo.net" >>> >>> Seems that "Tomas" is extremely cheap, so to buy the "numo.net" domain, >>> is waaay over the "40tude.net" troll's budget. >> >> For someone who seems to be tunnel vision focused on headers it seems >> odd that you are unable to adjust your signature to match your >> headers. >> >> Your signature: >> >> openSUSE 13.2 64-bit >> KDE 4.14.6 >> Kernel: 3.19.1-2.1.desktop x86_64 GNU/Linux 2015-3-10 >> >> Your headers: >> >> X-Desktop: KDE 4.14.2 >> >> Maybe you are one of those who fakes headers in a lame attempt to >> trick people into believing you are running Linux when you are not. >> From what I've seen of your prose, you don't appear to have the >> intelligence to install Linux. A common occurrence it appears. > > > Way to piggyback on my 'mismatched Dumb Willie header' posts, "Tomas". Didn't see them. > Fucking idiot. Don't be so hard on yourself, Connor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 11:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfbp7u$ut0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286719 |
JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: > >> Linux users are extremely cheap so $349 is way over their budget. I'd sooner pay that for a Windows laptop than any kind of watch. > It's also moot since there are devices like the fitbbit. "Tomas" is another kiddie-shit troll. -- The PILLSBURY DOUGHBOY is CRYING for an END to BURT REYNOLDS movies!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 11:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <oztilerjdn8o.1sd4a6w8qdzwx.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #286727 |
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 11:14:59 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 2015-03-28, Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> wrote: >> >>> Linux users are extremely cheap so $349 is way over their budget. > > I'd sooner pay that for a Windows laptop than any kind of watch. Why not a Linux laptop? Do you enjoy supporting Microsoft? >> It's also moot since there are devices like the fitbbit. > > "Tomas" is another kiddie-shit troll. yadayadayada. sos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 23:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20150328231200.67665d24@maxa-pc> |
| In reply to | #286491 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 21:51:53 +0000 (UTC) ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote: > > > ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: > > > >>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: > >>> > >>>>> My prediction: > >>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch > >>>>> anymore, but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence > >>>>> will not be seen as iCult-approved. > >>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch > >>>>> version with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and > >>>>> sold separately. > >>> > >>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the > >>>> smartwatch thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There > >>>> will be a few people who'll buy the things, I guess. > >>> > >>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 > > > >> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? > > > > Got it here: > > http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ > > Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell > > when the subject is Apple products. > > Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any > more shallow? > Hahahhaha, I would buy one even I don't wear watches I would wear this one ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 18:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mf7bg8$8gp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286491 |
On 2015-03-28 5:51 PM, ronb wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote: > >> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >>>> >>>>>> My prediction: >>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, >>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be >>>>>> seen as iCult-approved. >>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold >>>>>> separately. >>>> >>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >>>> >>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 >> >>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? >> >> Got it here: >> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ >> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when >> the subject is Apple products. > > Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more > shallow? Sure. Considering that they are the absolute anti-thesis to Linux losers who don't wash, shave or wear clothes from this century, it just makes sense that they would take care of themselves and do everything in their power not to end up looking like Wretched Stallman or worse: one of you. -- Slimer OpenMedia, GreenPeace Supporter & SPCA Paw Partner Encrypt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Donald Miller <donaldmiller955@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 19:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <blcehadvbfmk422junn7h9dgeobieu1pvm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #286497 |
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:55:57 -0400, Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote: >On 2015-03-28 5:51 PM, ronb wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote: >> >>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >>> >>>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> My prediction: >>>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, >>>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be >>>>>>> seen as iCult-approved. >>>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold >>>>>>> separately. >>>>> >>>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >>>>> >>>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 >>> >>>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? >>> >>> Got it here: >>> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ >>> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when >>> the subject is Apple products. >> >> Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more >> shallow? > >Sure. Considering that they are the absolute anti-thesis to Linux losers >who don't wash, shave or wear clothes from this century, it just makes >sense that they would take care of themselves and do everything in their >power not to end up looking like Wretched Stallman or worse: one of you. When I was a Linux supporter I spent a substantial amount of time trying to convince Windows users to switch to Linux. While some tried Linux, most went back to Windows because Linux proved to be an incredibly awful operating system for them to use. I used to parrot all the standard Linux excuses like; Linux is secure. Linux is freedom. Linux is free from spyware. Linux is inexpensive. Linux is the future because Microsoft is ultimately doomed. And so forth. In the end it didn't matter. Nobody really cared. They wanted to play games, use software checked out from the library, use their camera applications and so forth. It took me the better part of about 5 years of my life to have a talk with Jesus, figuratively of course, and realize Linux is a huge piece of shit for a desktop system. I'm not a developer but I do know a couple of programmers and they pretty much laugh at the free Linux tools vs those commercial IDE environments. It just gets worse for typical people. The final nail in the coffin for me was stepping back and taking an unbiased look at the leaders of the Linux movement and their followers. It's all pretty sick in my opinion. Reminds me of my hippie days except for the fact that we were harmless and accepted anyone. The Linux community at large will only accept you if you parrot their ideology. It's very much like mainstream religions, any of them. And just a sick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 19:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mf7cu6$i33$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286498 |
On 2015-03-28 7:11 PM, Donald Miller wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:55:57 -0400, Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote: > >> On 2015-03-28 5:51 PM, ronb wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:38:28 +0000, owl wrote: >>> >>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:17:50 +0000, owl wrote: >>>> >>>>>> ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:13:10 +0000, owl wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> My prediction: >>>>>>>> It will fail parlty because nobody wants to wear a watch anymore, >>>>>>>> but mainly because it is not named "iWatch" and hence will not be >>>>>>>> seen as iCult-approved. >>>>>>>> Apple will follow this with the "iPocket" -- a pocket-watch version >>>>>>>> with a nice chain called the "iChain" of course, and sold >>>>>>>> separately. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I honestly think just about everyone should give up on the smartwatch >>>>>>> thing. But I guess they can do what they want. There will be a few >>>>>>> people who'll buy the things, I guess. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/image2.png?w=704&h=392 >>>> >>>>> Is this a serious ad, or something from Onion? >>>> >>>> Got it here: >>>> http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/24/apple-sales-overhaul-apple-watch-fashion/ >>>> Has a [9]5Mac logo on it. Is 9to5Mac a satire site? Hard to tell when >>>> the subject is Apple products. >>> >>> Alas, no -- 9to5Mac is NOT a satire site. Could these people be any more >>> shallow? >> >> Sure. Considering that they are the absolute anti-thesis to Linux losers >> who don't wash, shave or wear clothes from this century, it just makes >> sense that they would take care of themselves and do everything in their >> power not to end up looking like Wretched Stallman or worse: one of you. > > When I was a Linux supporter I spent a substantial amount of time > trying to convince Windows users to switch to Linux. While some tried > Linux, most went back to Windows because Linux proved to be an > incredibly awful operating system for them to use. > I used to parrot all the standard Linux excuses like; > Linux is secure. > Linux is freedom. > Linux is free from spyware. > Linux is inexpensive. > Linux is the future because Microsoft is ultimately doomed. > And so forth. > > In the end it didn't matter. > Nobody really cared. > They wanted to play games, use software checked out from the library, > use their camera applications and so forth. > > It took me the better part of about 5 years of my life to have a talk > with Jesus, figuratively of course, and realize Linux is a huge piece > of shit for a desktop system. I'm not a developer but I do know a > couple of programmers and they pretty much laugh at the free Linux > tools vs those commercial IDE environments. It just gets worse for > typical people. The final nail in the coffin for me was stepping back > and taking an unbiased look at the leaders of the Linux movement and > their followers. > It's all pretty sick in my opinion. > Reminds me of my hippie days except for the fact that we were harmless > and accepted anyone. The Linux community at large will only accept you > if you parrot their ideology. It's very much like mainstream > religions, any of them. And just a sick. My observations were entirely identical. I never actually tried to push Linux down everyone's throat though, I simply touted its benefits and hoped that others would take the plunge even though just about no one ever did. Even my wife couldn't be convinced to run the toiletware and she had suffered through a number of my rants about Linux being more "secure." The moment I really decided that I should never use it again is when I suffered through a number of problems with Linux on my desktop, after I had decided that I would it to power my gaming machine as well. Screen tearing, refusal to shut down and a missing splash screen were but three of the multiple problems I had. I could suffer through them, but the fact that the Linux losers in here kept denying that I even had a problem was what showed me that using it was not worth the time or effort. I've since rid my computer of most open-source software, keeping Firefox, Thunderbird and VLC only because I am either used to them or because Microsoft's offering is more limited (IE sucks and Windows Media Player is kind of pathetic). I even spent a lot of time re-encoding my music into .WMA rather than .OGG simply because I didn't want to be tied to open-source in any way anymore. -- Slimer OpenMedia, GreenPeace Supporter & SPCA Paw Partner Encrypt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web