What's so fantastic about Apple?

[Stray Cat]

I posted about this a while back about the iPad - when that came out it required a PC and I had to explain to several folk that you couldn't use it straight out the box to do what the adverts showed, that you would have to connect it to a PC.

Indeed, some people are a bit silly for not first researching the products they want aren't they.




Next time I need a new oven I'll make sure I know what fuels it first.

 

[Stray Cat]

The first thing you see when you open iTunes (while it's busy totally locking up your computer, in the case of the Windows version) is banner ads for popular music to buy through the iTunes store. That's the media marketing channel. ITunes does not offer the user any way to turn off those ads.

So yeah, it kind of is a "media marketing channel," just like any other adware.

I don't think I've seen the Windows version, if that's the case, I agree it's not good. On my Mac, it just opens quickly and easily straight into my music library, no banners, no ads.

 

[Stray Cat]

But in general, the tax argument really just doesn't apply here as a justification for the more expensive machine.

˙uɥoɾ oʇ ʎldǝɹ ʎɯ ǝǝs 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ʇı ʇɐ ƃuıʞool ǝɹ,noʎ ǝsnɐɔǝq s,ʇɐɥʇ

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

˙uɥoɾ oʇ ʎldǝɹ ʎɯ ǝǝs 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ʇı ʇɐ ƃuıʞool ǝɹ,noʎ ǝsnɐɔǝq s,ʇɐɥʇ

I can help with that, then. Hire me as a consultant, pay me all your excess income, and you won't pay a dime in taxes.

Sidenote: I actually love the "upside-down" text here. A perfect use based on the point "looking at it wrong". I laughed.

 

[Chris L]

I see sales of "sense of humour vacuums"™ have risen over the last 24 hours.

How many people were surprised after buying their iPod that you needed iTunes to manage the media you put on it?

Because it's an easy decision to make; don't want to use iTunes therefore buy a different brand of MP3 player.

Want to cook using gas and not electricity, buy a gas cooker and not a electric one.

Judging from the friends and relatives I've had to walk through the process, more than a few didn't know that, but that is besides the point. Just because some people are willing to put up with something, doesn't mean that something is good. There are easier ways to manage music files. Apple doesn't use them because it can make more money tying it's customers to a proprietary technological infrastructure. There is nothing "great" or "fantastic" (the theme of this thread) about that.

 

[bit_pattern]

They're using all their resources to protect their IP. The lesson Jobs learned from when Microsoft took over the consumer PC market was to defend your IP.

I know sometimes when we have techno-lust for a gadget and can't get it, we don't care why it might be unavailable to us.

We just want it.

Well, that's why I'm an Android guy because Google are building new models of open source IP

While apple is trying to cling to outmoded and archaic notions of IP

Dinosaurs don't survive with old business models

 

[bit_pattern]

I'm a writer too, and it has me excited. You're underestimating what Apple is doing for writers.

1. They're giving you the tools to create and submit
2. They're providing a distribution center, payment collection and royalty distribution.

30% sounds fair considering your other options (self-publication, vanity pubs (full of legitimate ripoffs and scams), the difficulty of finding agent and negotiating with traditional publishing houses.

Yet Google can do it for free. Why is that exactly?

 

[Stomatopoda]

You're still not getting it. It's not about having more money to spend on me, it's about giving the government less.
The larger my profit margin, the more tax I pay.

It's easy to see how this was confusing other posters: they assumed your reasoning was logical instead of emotional. Oops.

 

[Kid Eager]

It's easy to see how this was confusing other posters: they assumed your reasoning was logical instead of emotional. Oops.

What the???!! This is a thread about Apple. The whole thread is emotional.

ETA: ...or Emo

 

[kajata]

Yet Google can do it for free. Why is that exactly?

Because they don't?

 

[Zelenius]

What's so fantastic about Apple?

It's the only technology company that also happens to be the world's largest drug company

 

[John Albert]

You're still not getting it. It's not about having more money to spend on me, it's about giving the government less.
The larger my profit margin, the more tax I pay.

Wait, what?!?

So it's not about you maximizing your own money, it's just about you "screwing the government" by paying the least amount of taxes, and you do that by buying Macs?



What you're saying makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Yet otherwise you seem to be a reasonable fellow. My conclusion: you're just taking the piss.

They're using all their resources to protect their IP. The lesson Jobs learned from when Microsoft took over the consumer PC market was to defend your IP.

You mean all the "IP" that they themselves stole from other companies?

Others have reminded you that it was a condition of the music labels to prevent piracy- DRM.

So blame them if you must blame anyone.

A "condition"?!?

What authority do the music companies have to place "conditions" on the products manufactured by a tech company?

Do you think the record labels sent hired goons to Cupertino to rough up Steve Jobs and threaten him into "playing ball"?

Lots of companies made mp3 players before the iPod, and none of them forced users to install some crappy adware application, or imposed DRM schemes onto the files. Apple was the first manufacturer to pioneer that business model.

You're a fool if you think the record companies forced Apple into manipulating and dicking around their customers with crappy adware and DRM.

It wasn't a "condition" at all. It was a business strategy for Apple to position itself as a content provider, and they did it by imposing an obnoxious marketing scheme and severely limiting the freedom of choice of their own consumers.

I place the blame for that right squarely where it belongs, and that's why I will no longer buy stuff from Apple.

 

[Stray Cat]

It's easy to see how this was confusing other posters: they assumed your reasoning was logical instead of emotional. Oops.

Yes indeed. Making such assumptions is illogical too.

 

[Stray Cat]

Wait, what?!?

So it's not about you maximizing your own money, it's just about you "screwing the government" by paying the least amount of taxes, and you do that by buying Macs?

No, I do it many different ways.

What you're saying makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Yet otherwise you seem to be a reasonable fellow. My conclusion: you're just taking the piss.

Well I'm not being entirely serious, but the jist of it is true (and I realise illogical in the strictest sense).
I am very anti-establishment.

As for "maximising" my money. I'm really not motivated by money, I earn enough for myself. When I've got enough, I stop working until I need some more. If I worked a regular schedule 5 days a week, I'd be rich... but I'm not bothered about being rich... heck I'd only give it all to Apple in exchange for useless bits of junk anyway

 

[Zelenius]

Well I'm not being entirely serious, but the jist of it is true (and I realise illogical in the strictest sense).
I am very anti-establishment.
)

"Anti-establishment?". Apple is the establishment. It is not only the largest tech company in the entire world, it is the largest company in the entire world, with a $ 417 billion market cap(it's often neck and neck with Exxon Mobil or sometimes number 2). Hence, buying from Apple is hardly being anti-establishment.

When it was the underdog battling Microsoft many years ago, it may have made a little more sense to feel you were being anti-establishment by buying Apple products. But these days, Apple is much bigger and more monstrous than Microsoft. As crazy as it sounds, give it a few more years, and maybe buying Microsoft products will be the "anti-establishment" thing to do. But that's assuming Apple doesn't eat it for lunch.

 

[Stray Cat]

Judging from the friends and relatives I've had to walk through the process, more than a few didn't know that, but that is besides the point.

Then I refer you to this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7974237&postcount=341

Just because some people are willing to put up with something, doesn't mean that something is good.

I didn't say it did.

There are easier ways to manage music files.

Yes, but some people are willing to "put up with" a stick shift even though it's easier to drive an automatic. Or maybe they aren't 'putting up' with it at all and simply prefer it.

Apple doesn't use them because it can make more money tying it's customers to a proprietary technological infrastructure.

Even though it's dead easy to buy an iPod and get iTunes (free) and never give Apple another penny and still have a fully functioning iPod with an ever expanding/changing media collection on it. Bearing in mind that I've already said iTunes is bad on Windows, based upon what John has written about banner ads and stuff, but people manage to successfully ignore ads all day long so having ads doesn't have to translate to Apple squeezing every penny out of people.

There is nothing "great" or "fantastic" (the theme of this thread) about that.

Like most things, some people like it and some people don't.
Some people who do like it will probably go so far as to say it's "great" and "fantastic". Personally, it does what I want it do, I'm not sure that's great or fantastic but I like it and also like that other people have their own favourites too.

I'll point out that the whole iPod thing is probably better, easier and properly integrated if you already have a Mac, it sounds like the Windows version of iTunes is a bit of a dog so I can understand some people won't like it and I'm not here to defend Apple, if iPods and Windows are not good bedfellows, then I would agree that Apple are being a bit crap.

 

[Stray Cat]

"Anti-establishment?". Apple is the establishment. Being one of the largest corporations in the world, with a $ 417 billion market cap, buying from this company is hardly evidence of being anti-establishment.

When it was the underdog battling Microsoft many years ago, it may have made a little more sense to feel you were being anti-establishment by buying Apple products.

Sorry you've lost me... where did I say I am anti-establishment because I buy Apple products?

Oh, that's right, I didn't. I said I buy Macs because they are the perfect tool to do my job.

 

[Stomatopoda]

Yes, but some people are willing to "put up with" a stick shift even though it's easier to drive an automatic. Or maybe they aren't 'putting up' with it at all and simply prefer it.

If Apple made transmissions, they'd not only shift drive gears automatically, but shift into reverse and/or neutral whenever Apple sees fit... and they'd still have fans who blame the traffic deaths on other drivers not using the Apple transmissions, or just enjoy the thrill of "driving different".

 

[Stray Cat]

If Apple made transmissions, they'd not only shift drive gears automatically, but shift into reverse and/or neutral whenever Apple sees fit... and they'd still have fans who blame the traffic deaths on other drivers not using the Apple transmissions, or just enjoy the thrill of "driving different".

If you say so.

But Macs are not know for crashing often.

 

[epepke]

Well, that's why I'm an Android guy because Google are building new models of open source IP

Android is kind of cool. I kind of like it. It is a copy, albeit not an exact one, of the Apple iOs, though.