Ed, I'm on digest and if somebody pointed this out already I apologize.
But you should get your facts right. I understand your opinion but you
spouting off things that aren't correct make me discount everything
else you say.
For example...
> I mean...take for example this latest ream of "switch"
> commercials...I exist in a WinTel centric environment
> at work, and we come into work in the morning with,
> "hey, did you see that latest Apple commercial about
> that Network Engineer who couldn't share a printer in
> his office? What an idiot he must be! One thing for
> sure, he's no network engineer" or something similar
> (don't get on my case about the above statement, I
> know it's not a real switch commercial, just a blatant
> example) Then we all have a good laugh about how all
> apple users must be retarded! (sorry to everyone who
> really IS retarded, no insult intended...;-P
> Then apple shoots themselves in the foot by leaking
> that the Windows switch commercial involves stock
> footage from Microsoft, therefore it can't be real! I
> mean...give me a break! Like all those Apple switch
> commercials are real? uh-huh...the girl who saved
> christmas with iphoto...unless she celebrates
> christmas during the epiphany (somewhere in
> february)...iphoto wasn't offered last christmas!
> .......
> Ed
> web/gadget guru
Thanks for playing Ed. Better luck next time. Apple had nothing to do
with Microsoft's faked ad. Nor did they ever even mention it. The fact
that it was fake, paid testimony was found out in part by Slashdot
readers and an AP reporter I believe. They even tracked down the PR rep
that actually wrote the "switcher story."
Not to mention that the Apple switch ad to which you refer (Janie
Porche) makes absolutely *no* references to iPhoto. In December of 2001
(the Christmas she's probably talking about) OS X 10.1 was already
released and came with the Image Capture application that does exactly
what she describes. Nowhere is iPhoto even mentioned. Perhaps you're
thinking of Guatam Godse? :-P
Sorry, but I just can't stand factual errors when they're used in
support of an argument. I just discount the whole point entirely.
Matt
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Dec 02 2002 - 22:02:26 EST