5 ms·
Don't be silly Bob. Apple is not arrogant nor greedy... unless you're a socialist who thinks that all companies that actually sell software are "arrogant and g
by BitGeek 19y ago
Don't be silly Bob. Apple is not arrogant nor greedy... unless you're a socialist who thinks that all companies that actually sell software are "arrogant and greedy".
The stallman cult thinks this and they have gone so far as to have protests against Apple when they sued microsoft! That's how twisted their socialist thinking is-- they support the monopolist against the underdog!
If you're 50 years old, get a mac, you'll find that its a hell of a lot easier to use than Linux.
To claim that its "superficial" is to not understand the real advantages of the Mac... alas, I suspect too many people like you reject microsoft and then reject Apple (because of FUD spread by MS or linux fans) and then go back to microsoft when they discover that Linux is a damn hard to administer desktop (for most people.)
I have been using unix for 20 years and I only run Linux in particular situaitons because generally the admin load is just not worth it. Why deal with it when Mac OS X is so much better? So, I use it on servers, but only when I am not able to use apple hardwware (They make great servers too....)
The thing about Apple is, its far better than people think... and most people have never tried it, and yet many of these peopel have a negative impression of it based on propaganda from MS proponents.
- stolennomen 19y agoIts very difficult to be honest and altruistic when your sole reason for being is to make money. This is the motivation for these men that run businesses. Or do you suppose their motivation is to bring happiness to people? Morals and money dont really mix very well. When a companies board of directors sit down to discuss the bottom line, how often do you think moral issues are discussed? Ive never heard any in all my years in the IT industry.
- BitGeek 19y agoThat's a very sick and twisted view of the world-- and it is from Karl Marx. The reality is, you make money when you bring happiness to people. You make people happy and they want to give you money they want to buy more of your products because they want to keep being made happy again, or made even more happy. Thus, the happier you make your customers the more money you make. Further, making people happy, and making money are intrinsically moral things. Trading with people is honest and moral. Those who talk of altruism speak of violence. Altruism is the destruction of your self to benefit others. (Literally). Thus socialists throw around the word "altruism" (and "Sacrifice" and a lot of other code words) to try and make it seem moral-- but at the root of it, what they are doing or advocating is putting a gun to your head and taking your money (and your money is just a representation of the labor you put in to earn it.) So, don't you talk to me about morals-- when its clear you are advocating an immoral ideology. The bottom line is this: Free people trade with each other and profit by trades that make people happy. This trade is moral, it is honest, and it is right. It is intrinsically peaceful. Socialists oppose free trade, they believe in forcing people at gun point to "trade" on terms that the socialist approve of. This is not peaceful, this is not moral, and obviously the people who are having their lives threatened are acting under duress--- duress is not compatible with happines. So, the next time you hear "sacrifice" come out of the mouth of a politician -- realize its not him that will be sacrificing-- its you and he's putting a gun to your head to get richer. That is the language of the thief and the looter, the socialist and the immoral. This is so obvious that I shouldn't have to say it-- but its amazing how twisted people's minds get when they are subjected to socialist propaganda day in and day out. To think you just said people doing things that make them happy, because they make them happy is immoral!
- BrandonM 19y agoWow, this is obviously the viewpoint of someone who is not at all familiar with gift societies, someone who seems to me to be desperately clinging to a dogmatism in order to convince him- or herself that his or her life has been lived in a moral manner. The truth is that it's not all black and white. Socialist != Evil, and Capitalist != Good. You speak of corporations bringing happiness to people, but I would like to point out something that I heard a month or so ago. It used to be that people had necessities and very basic desires which were fulfilled by entrepreneurs (merchants and guildworkers) in a capitalist system. In the present-day US and several other countries, however, that is no longer the case. Companies used to be in the business of manufacturing goods to fulfill needs. Nowadays, they instead manufacture needs to sell goods. Why do you think advertising is such a huge industry? It's all kind of funny when you consider the cycle. The current corporate structure relies on a large amount of drone workers doing the majority of the work for a small cut of the pay. The only way to make these workers do this work that no one in their right mind would do willingly is to pay them. Why do they need that money? To buy the very things that these corporations are telling them that they need to be buying. It's all a crazy, vicious cycle, and I'm afraid that it is the inevitable result of long-term capitalist societies. Do you see anything changing for the better in these regards? In an Anthropology class a few years ago, we talked about studies that some researchers had done in comparing the lives of people in developed countries to hunter-gatherer tribes in South America and Africa. The people in these tribes typically spent 2-3 hours a day to provide their food and shelter, and the rest of the time was spent chatting, telling stories, singing, dancing, sporting, and other tribal activities. I would argue that that is happiness, not going to work 8-10 hours a day, 5 days a week so that I can get a new car that gets me to work more comfortably. To compare Open Source software to development at gunpoint is absurd. If I have an interesting idea for a piece of software that I would like to write, I am going to write the software and be very happy to share it with the open source community. This has nothing to do with violence; I have enjoyed the benefits of a completely free computing system with extensive functionality, and I am quite happy to return the favor. This is known as a gift society, not violent, immoral ideologies. And this money-for-happiness equation that you are promoting looks a lot like pie in the sky. I worked for 2 years for a small grocer in a country gas station / food mart. The store had been in his family for something like 40 years, and he served a valuable need to the surrounding community in providing the only gas and groceries for 20 miles around. He and his wife worked long days and were by no means rich, but they made enough to live on. His regular customers knew him by name, and he was a regular bidder at the 4-H auctions every summer. Clearly, in this case, the exchange of money for goods is happy for everyone. Unfortunately, cutthroat companies like Wal-Mart move into town who have no concern for the well-being of the community, doing things like storing materials in parking lots which poison water supplies during rain, avoiding a golf cart security guard in their parking lot even though it has proven to reduce crime to 0%, relying on federal programs to cover worker health benefits, and driving all local businesses out and then moving out when the profit margins are no longer good. So the customers save money, yes, but they lose out in so many other ways. This is the problem with faceless corporations who do not see things at a human level. In summary, my problem is not with capitalism, and I am not a socialist. I merely fear that the inevitable end of capitalism is the type of corporate society that has been steadily evolving in the U.S. and elsewhere, one in which paper and numbers are more important than people.