Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

DRWAM — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:53:25 GMT

One more thing Dipsh, you know I love you more than those stupid blog sites, so just remember that. We New Jerseyeans need to stick together, of course not in some sexual manner that is:) In fact, I love the entire Supersite community. I owe you all a beer! We get along so well ya know;)

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

DRWAM — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:18:13 GMT

I just went through several recent pages at TUAW [my first visit] and did not find even one ill word about Microsoft. The only mention was Office for Mac, and Ballmer's comment on iPhone Active Sync development, and still never said anything bad. I skimmed a few comments, but really did not look through them, but it is loaded with fanboys. No malice in the articles at all. Then I went to Gracefulflavor [.net not .com I found out]. It has almost no mention of technology, but is mostly human interest. However, I do not believe that you are stretching the truth Dipsh. Perhaps that was the old site behaviors. Although, there certainly was a tone of fanboysm at graceful in the few Apple stuff there. Note, I looked at the recent stuff for only about five pages each. I come hear to get the goods on some things, including Apple stuff. Paul iPhone review was one of the best sources of what it does and cannot do, that I have ever seen, and without the stupid metaphors that have little or no meaning to me or the product. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that the sites have possibly changed. Again, I went through very little of the comments, for which you may be referring.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Dude1313 — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:31:50 GMT

Dipsh

You make an excellent point aout staying away from other sites that hold viewpoints counter to ones own... And here's the rub. I would be quite fine with stating away from Paul's comments if he was what he says he is: "Taking Microsoft and Apple EQUALLY to task", when clearly he doesn't.

Criticism of any platform is fine (when warranted); clear bias despite statements to the contrary... not so much.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Dipsh t Admin — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:26:07 GMT

I think that is a good analysis. I try to be evenhanded, but you know, it just doesn't happen. While it is quite fervent in the OS wars, this happens in politics incessantly, sports teams, etc. And as two New Jerseyeans speaking, we have all had to defend our state on more than one occasion.

The only thing that I disagree with is "but there's also no reason to expect Paul's often colored criticism of Apple to go unnoticed by the mac community." I don't know, I find it pretty easy to avoid this. I stay away from sites like TUAW, Graceful Flavor and the like. While I occasionally follow a link, I really don't feel compelled to comment. it's just not worth it.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

johnpapola — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:24:02 GMT

Thanks for the reply... and NJ Rocks! (I guess)

"Bonch" is clearly a moron troll. No question. I would only say that people like him are everywhere, on every platform. Perhaps the mac userbase has had a more vocal community because there was such a longer period where being a mac user meant being pissed on at every turn. That kind of thing tends to make people a bit more fanatical.

Microsoft has also, unquestionably, abused it's position in the market. I wish nothing but the best for MS, though. And by that, I mean, I want them to excel with great products that can compete on their own merit in open markets with open standards.

As for Paul, I like him, but he brings this on himself. There's no reason for mac trolls to go into non-apple posts and spew garbage, but there's also no reason to expect Paul's often colored criticism of Apple to go unnoticed by the mac community.

There have been times when you could go to his internet nexus blog and see a page full of anti-apple spewings. Some legit, some less so. But all dripping in an aggressive and unfair tone that is hard for many of us to take sitting down.

Now, this post and Pauls overall take-away from the iPhone announcement are glowing and fair. He's not all bad on Apple by any means. But I think it's important for someone who constantly professes his even-handedness to... actually be even handed. Paul should make his criticism of Apple as measured, thoughtful and supported by facts as his Microsoft criticism. That means no use of terms like "liar" unless he's got a smoking gun of knowing deception.

This is the root cause for my presence on this blog in the way that I am. I want Paul to hold himself to a higher standard and acknowledge the tone problems in his Apple writing.

I'm totally fine with you guys here being sick of Apple zealots like "bonch".

I guess it boils down to a call for de-escalation. There is a constructive dialog that can happen between our two enthusiast groups. There are things Microsoft does incredibly well and areas where they innovate and take risks. The same goes for Apple. They're a legitimate innovator.

Both sides do marketing. Both side make claims of being "the best, the first, the one true way". We should all be smart enough to ignore marketing and take these technologies on their usefulness and merit alone.

If Paul could keep his focus on that, and not go off and anti-"mac freak" tangents and "steve jobs the liar" tirades, he'd set a far better tone for the Apple discussions that take place on this site.

What do you think?

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Dipsh t Admin — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:37:13 GMT

Thanks for the clarification John. To quote Dr. Evil talking to Austin Powers "we're not so different you and I." We both use the technology of our choice to do our jobs, run our life, and we are both happy with it. I run a Windows network, and while I encounter problems with it, the tools that I use work quite well, thank you very much. I also get bored by one-liners and snarky comments, and feel compelled to reply in my "home" turf of Windows, Paul Thurrott, and yes, even New Jersey!

And while you are able to characterize Waethorn in a certain way, I can certainly characterize drylight in the same way.

What some have to remember is that back in the day we dealt with a poster called bonch and a small cadre of other MS bashing crazies, that would infect every single post with the same rhetoric. Since it has always been a Windows centric site, this became boring quite fast.

Check out just one example of this on Paul's WInInfo:

www.windowsitpro.com/.../index.cfm

Repeat this for every post that Paul made. One bad "apple" spoils the whole damn bunch, if you will ;)

And lotsamystuff knows why I have this joke user name.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

johnpapola — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:35:52 GMT

Dipsht,

Thanks for the google search and thanks for being far more on-point than Waethorn. You know, the reason I use my real name isn't to promote myself through these forums (at least not entirely ;). My potential clients/employers don't generally read geek blog comments. It's because as a mac defender and partisan, I've found my knowledge questioned regarding how I use the platform and how it's used professionally in the past and have decided ideologically to be open and forthcoming in any online debates.

I believe that, if you post with your real name, you are at the very least taking some responsibility for the tone of the discussion and it keeps you from descending into ad-homenim attacks and character smears.

As for why I even bother to troll around Paul's blog and write ridiculously verbose posts? Well, I am a geek. I enjoy debate (when it is real debate). And I really chaffe at false characterizations and disingenuousness (it's a Libra thing, I think). I come to Paul's site because he's a great resource for staying up to date with the Windows world.

Why am I a Mac partisan? Because I truly enjoy Apple's tools, I admire their product design approach and their creative marketing and honestly believe that the mac is a superior platform to Windows for the majority of users. I was a hardcore, custom PC-building, anti-mac Windows user from my first computer through college. But a series of professional experiences and inopportune windows meltdowns, coupled with OSX and Final Cut Pro's excellence lead me to switch.

As for this thread... You're right. I am making some generalizations. In that sense I'm being a bit hypocritical. However, they aren't broad, but specifically pertain to anti-Apple windows zealots. That makes the group I'm targeting pretty small, pretty homogenous and pretty fair game in my mind. This is the group of people, like Waethorn, that feel compelled to attack Apple, it's products and worst of all it's entire userbase even though they don't use our platform and could easily ignore it.

Ultimately, this comes back to the context of this blog. Paul routinely goes on rants about the "Mac Freaks" and has gone on the record as saying that there are literally "no windows fanboys". Waethorn and the thousands of other Apple-hating trolls like him across the internet's millions of comment-enable Apple articles makes Paul's statement demonstrably false.

You won't find me trolling Windows-centric threads with the kind of barbs and attacks that Waethorn spews in these Apple posts, because I don't care about Windows and windows users in so far as they are happy with their platform and aren't actively trying to undermine my platform. My personal experience of these kinds of forums is that the Apple-related posts are swarming with Apple haters while the Windows-related posts that have nothing to do with Apple are generally far less invested with Apple-zealots looking for a fight.

So... to the core question that I raised, which Waethorn sniped at, then dodged all future debate:

"I just don't get why apple-bashing PC nerds take such personal offense when Steve takes a cheap shot at Windows. It's not like they ever make fun of PC users (which would be insane since most computer users are on windows)." - me from the top of the thread.

To which, Waethorn pointed to the PC vs. Mac ads, claiming that the ads represent the users, not the computers themselves. Myself and others disputed that false assertion, and Waethorn descended into his usual ramblings... first with some nonsense psych 101 red herring, then by fully disengaging from the discussion and criticizing each post with silly line-by-line snark.

My point is that this kind of "debate" I've found to be a classic pattern of Apple-bashing zealots like Waethorn over the past seven years of engaging in forums as a mac user. It's simple hit-and-run attack followed by childish, information-free retorts like "pot, meet kettle" or worse.

So, if you've read this whole insane post, I thank you, and hope this shreds some light on things.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Dipsh t Admin — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:29:30 GMT

john, what argument? According to you, the argument is over, and you are right.

"Zealots are, by definition a fringe group of activists. And *Apple* zealots obviously are defined by their preference of *Apple* above other platforms."

This statement is true either way.

"but a statement of how me and my friends in college regarded it."

From thesaurus.reference.com/.../generalization

"a generality is an indefinite, nonspecific statement or observation, one that describes a condition, situation, or set of facts in general; a generalization is a statement or conclusion inferred from a set of descriptions, experiments, or observations"

Listen, I wasn't a Psych major, but you are making a very broad statement based on *your* observations, and treating it as fact. That's not a defensible argument.

And joe, who said I'm not biased? Of course I know I'm biased. And like you, my bias is based on my beliefs of which OS is better for my needs. And given that this is election season in the US, each biased side can make arguments for that fact. Call me a zealot or a tool, or blind, or whatever, but in the end, I'm no less a zealot, tool or blind as anyone else who makes contrary opinions.

"or use your real name as I do in web forums"

Hmm, could it be because you are a "director - producer - editor" and that by putting your name anywhere you can get it, increases your name in the industry? Assuming that I've searched correctly, are you the same that penned this:

"Did I mention that I’m a former PC-freak turned super-crazy mac nerd that worships Steve Jobs?"

And somehow you are better equipped to deal "directly and honestly in debate?"

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

johnpapola — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:54:31 GMT

Waethorn,

I'm very sorry that you are incapable of dealing directly and honestly in debate. Once again you dodged the question. You've failed to demonstrate how or where Apple makes fun of PC users, as you claimed their ads do.

I'm sorry that you have the debating skills of a grade-schooler. It makes these exchanges so fruitless and frustrating. I suppose, in the end, I'm the moron for wasting any time engaging you like an adult when you're nothing more than a bomb-throwing, infantile, fanboy.

Maybe someday you'll grow up and have enough confidence and maturity to not only admit when your argument fell apart, or use your real name as I do in web forums so that you aren't hiding behind some lame handle criticizing people like a 12 year old.

Grow up, dude.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Waethorn — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:18:17 GMT

"it would be funny if .... they admitted that sometimes they deal in hyperbole, but at the end of the day it is just sad."

as was that entire rant of yours, on all of those points.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Waethorn — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:14:56 GMT

"That statement was not a generalization, though, but a statement of how me and my friends in college regarded it."

next time, look up the word "generalization" in the library.

"I work in advertising and promotions."

then you and losta must get along just fine. ;)

"I also find your little psychobabble rant to be a classic example of someone tossing out some red herring nonsense because they can't provide a concrete and compressible argument. Again, classic zealot playbook."

hey Dipsh_t - there's another one!

"Nobody with any intellectual honesty would base their opinions on some second-hand focus group."

and yet people still read the WSJ....

"And even if the mac character comes across as a smug hipster, so what?"

"What you have, once again, demonstrated is that Windows zealots like to attack the character of Mac users as well as their platform. How smug of you."

Pot meets kettle. Response: "So what?"

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

joe-dokes — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:18:04 GMT

hey Johnpapola,

First off your statement about psych majors, it so true, I remember having to take a upper division psych course as part of my history degree in order to teach in California. As I breezed through it with an A I overheard the psych majors complaining about how this was the "weed out" class designed to flunk many students. In short, I came to the realization that psych majors on average were morons.

The funniest thing about Paul Thurott , Waethorn, and DipShpAdmin is the fact that they don't realize that they're biased. I'm an Apple fan, I believe they make a superior product. I believe that MS used highly illegal means to establish and maintain its monopoly. I believe 90% is a monopoly. But most importantly I believe that I am biased. I am a bit more willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt, I am a bit more willing to call the next iPod killer a POS before even seeing it. All that being said, it is the fact that Thurott et al. continue to believe that they are objective that I find most infuriating.

They actually believe what they say. Thurott actually believes that Steve Jobs intentionally lies during his keynote. Waethorn actually believes that mac kernel panic three times a day. And DipshtAdmin actually belives both that the Windows os is the best desktop os out there.

Paul's attacks on Walt Mossberg over at the WSJ are hysterical, or they would be if he didn't actually believe what he is writing. I Paul Thurott who names his website Paul Thurott's Windows Fucking Supersite am a completely unbiased observer while Mossberg drinks Steve Jobs Koolaide by the gallon.

And Waethorn, who writes crap like, Every time I walk into an Apple Store every mac suddenly goes into a kernel panic and mac geniuses run around like the building is on fire denying that any of the machines have a problem. I then saddle up to some hapless mac fool and point out how I can build him a Windows machine for 1/10 the cost of a mac and 10 times the performance. It will run without problem for ten years and produce less green house gases too.

Like I said, it would be funny if it were an act, or they admitted that sometimes they deal in hyperbole, but at the end of the day it is just sad.

Regards

Joe Dokes

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

johnpapola — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:05:21 GMT

Hey Dipsht, you may want to try to engage the actual argument instead of trying to discredit my point with semantics. Just a thought.

On my dig of psych, yeah... I'm biased against it. I'll admit it. That statement was not a generalization, though, but a statement of how me and my friends in college regarded it.

There's a big difference. It's the difference between making a bold declaration of "fact" and declaring an opinion. Like "Steve Jobs is a liar" vs. "I believe that Steve Jobs is a liar".

As for the zealots statement, I stand by it. Zealots are, by definition a fringe group of activists. And Windows zealots obviously are defined by their preference or windows above other platforms.

It's no different than saying "all libertarians are in favor of small government". It's a generalization, but it's also part of the definition.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

Dipsh t Admin — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:17:58 GMT

"Frankly, most of us regarded psych as the major for lazy and/or directionless party freaks with no goals looking for an easy A."

"What you have, once again, demonstrated is that Windows zealots like to attack the character of Mac users as well as their platform."

And in your argument of trying to contend that Mac users are not smug, you make two gross generalizations in the same post.

re: Apple Announces iPhone 2.0 Software Beta

DRWAM — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:27:56 GMT

I hate arguments, but I just don't think that Apple would call PC users names and think that this would get them to buy a Mac. They are showing [exploiting] PC problems to get them to switch. I don't think that I am smug, but i enjoy using both platforms but prefer my Mac, possibly because of all the malware and virus threats/fears. However, these fears did not start at Apple, and the commercials are amusing, but I know that they are over exaggerating, IMHO.