in the other thread:
refers directly to the imac. i've established that i hate imacs.
word count: 1.
pointing out that you're a one-trick pony. nothing really about macs.
word count: 2.
pointing out that your initial claim about imacs, which i have established i hate, is wrong.
1 and 3, i admit, are somewhat personal attacks. i'm sorry you feel that way.
2 is still the same: your initial claim was wrong about imacs, which i've established i hate.
only a half-sarcastic remark. however, the market and the image does bear this observation out. hipsters like apple. hipsters also tend to be the ones running to it specialists-like me-to fix things that they messed up without realizing it because they don't understand machines.
personal attack on you, perhaps. it's true though. you've never really said much positive about microsoft until this thread, and seem to believe that apple can do no wrong. that's a classic example of fanboism.
reiterating the allegation that your initial claim was wrong.
emphasizing that point.
====
now, this:
lots of foul language? that's two words. you can bet there are people with fouler language than i.
also, how is anything there inconsistent witht he worldview that i've pointed out before?
note that all of my attacks are on apple's imac or the image that they try to sell--i do not attack their g5 hardware for the powermac, i do not attack their os, i do not attack their useful contributions.
try again.
it's disgustingly ugly.
refers directly to the imac. i've established that i hate imacs.
and i was amused that you had to bump your other thread because nobody really gave that big of a **** about it.
word count: 1.
pointing out that you're a one-trick pony. nothing really about macs.
btw, how the **** is it "fully expandable"?
word count: 2.
pointing out that your initial claim about imacs, which i have established i hate, is wrong.
1. he misspells sayonara.
2. he still hasn't answered how the heck this new imac is "fully expandable".
3. putting someone who disagrees with you, however vehemently, i think is a rather cowardly act. especially since until this point i've never actually insulted him, just his inane fanboi support of apple.
2. he still hasn't answered how the heck this new imac is "fully expandable".
3. putting someone who disagrees with you, however vehemently, i think is a rather cowardly act. especially since until this point i've never actually insulted him, just his inane fanboi support of apple.
1 and 3, i admit, are somewhat personal attacks. i'm sorry you feel that way.
2 is still the same: your initial claim was wrong about imacs, which i've established i hate.
because those are the people who are least capable of understanding what makes good technology good, and are blinded by style points.
only a half-sarcastic remark. however, the market and the image does bear this observation out. hipsters like apple. hipsters also tend to be the ones running to it specialists-like me-to fix things that they messed up without realizing it because they don't understand machines.
of course, to mac fanbois, nothing apple does can ever be wrong.
personal attack on you, perhaps. it's true though. you've never really said much positive about microsoft until this thread, and seem to believe that apple can do no wrong. that's a classic example of fanboism.
this is not "fully expandable". the term "fully expandable" includes the ability to add features, which does not appear to be in line for this imac either.
reiterating the allegation that your initial claim was wrong.
this is merely relaying what is an apple claim. which means that it is close to hogwash, also. not because apple is filled with liars, no i don't mean anything like that. i mean that the "most user-servicable" line is bull****, seeing as x86 has been like that almost ever since its inception.
try again.
try again.
emphasizing that point.
====
now, this:
Ok, I read your posts in that thread. I found lots of foul language and nothing to indicate this "different" point-of-view that you've pointed out to me.
lots of foul language? that's two words. you can bet there are people with fouler language than i.
also, how is anything there inconsistent witht he worldview that i've pointed out before?
note that all of my attacks are on apple's imac or the image that they try to sell--i do not attack their g5 hardware for the powermac, i do not attack their os, i do not attack their useful contributions.
try again.

Comment