suxen

Source: http://www.dailydot.com/technology/phil-schiller-sad/
 
In my time I've owned several Apple products, be it laptops, MP3 players, or desktop units. I am not an Apple hater, nor am I an Apple fanboy. What I am is a tech savvy individual who has a clear understanding of what getting your money's worth means. I am also an IT guy who works with both Apple and PC equipment daily in an enterprise environment.
 
The idea that a 5 year old PC is considered sad took me aback. My current ESXI 6.0 server runs on an old HPZ800 on dual E5620s whose glory days were roughly 6 or so years ago. My media center PC runs on an old HP Z210 on an i7 2600 from about 5 years ago. I have a few laptops running Windows XP and a netbook on an Intel Atom N475 from roughly 2010 running Windows 10. Some of them are slow (XP machines with standard HDDs) and some are very fast for today's standards. I have old computers, and I disagree with saying that using my 5+ year old machines are sad. My machines do what they are tasked to do without problems, and maybe that is because I am a technician. I keep my machines updated, I'll upgrade a few components on the cheap, and I will reinstall the OS and ensure everything is working. Is that sad? No. It's being resourceful, it's being thrifty, and it's being smart. More importantly, it's not being wasteful.
 
Let's talk about the 1st problem about the statement made, and that's the bold assumption that a brand new shinny Apple tablet is better than a PC, current or 5 years old. It's not. A tablet is a niche device, just like ultrabooks, and just like netbooks were back in the day. To compare a tablet to a PC of any reasonable age (not talking Commodore 64 era) is a poor comparison because you're talking apples and oranges (see what I did there?). The utility of a PC/desktop device to this day remains important to several people who use them for productivity, gaming, or just trivial things. I can't plug 5 monitors to an iPad (don't ask), I can't upgrade the graphics on an iPad, I can't upgrade ANYTHING on an iPad. I can, however, upgrade just about everything on a 5 year old PC and make it great again. So once again, poor comparison is poor. 
 
 
What's the real problem with the statement? They'll say anything to market this to anyone who is willing to pay for their stuff (then again, so would most companies,) they'll even bash their own products and point out how slow and obsolete they are when the new revision is out, and here is the messed up part: people buy into this. Suddenly your iPad became slow, suddenly your MacBook doesn't work, yadda yadda...This truly goes beyond just Apple and their tablet, but how they view computing as a whole. 
 
But 1st, a walk down memory lane...
 
I remember when I owned my 1st sleek PowerBook G4. I originally got it because my girlfriend got one from school since her program required her to have one--and it was also part of the cost of her tuition. I got one because the software was interesting, it was different, and it looked cool. The operating system was shiny, user friendly, and well rounded. I had to try one out. Last time So I bought one for about 1600 dollars. It was neat and cool to have, but it just didn't offer everything I wanted, nor software that matched what I had on a Windows laptop. Eventually after some time I sold it and got half of my original investment (less than a year old--lesson learned, so I thought).
 
A couple of years passed and I saw the new MacBook Pros, now with Intel processors. I blame Keifer Sutherland because he voiced the commercial Apple used to show the world that Apples now used Intel, and were no longer trapped in "dull little boxes." Also boot camp was a thing too! I had to have one because now I'd have no excuse to wanting to switch back to a Windows PC. The decision at the time came as follows: buy a $1300 Dell XPS laptop, or a $1700 MacBook Pro. The XPS came with an NVIDIA GPU, and the Apple with a Radeon. Back then I didn't bleed green or red, and I really enjoyed the Apple ecosystem, so I dove and bought the Apple again. I came to realize that spending 1700 on a laptop was a foolish idea, and all I bought into was the marketing, and the premium of both owning a Mac and owning a laptop that looked so sleek. This time around, I learned my lesson.
 
Today Apples and PCs are nothing but similar hardware on varying custom PCBs. You can run OS X on PC hardware and Windows on OS X hardware. The only difference is the OS and software (desktop/laptop/tablets alike). What you're buying is the same thing I bought many years ago: a sleek look and different software that does the same thing. I won't deny some Apple software does some things better than their PC counterparts, but does that apply to everyone who owns an Apple computer? Is everyone a photo/video/audio editor? No, but Apple wants us to believe we all could be should we choose to. They empower us to believe we have the ability to do what we want with their products at the expense of our bank accounts.
 
 
But let's focus, an Apple tablet is better than my 5 year old i7 2600 with 8GB of DDR3 RAM running a GTX 760, right? I'm not sold on that thought.
 
Everyone is entitled to buy what they want and use their money how they choose to, and maybe my take is that of someone whose disposable income is saved rather than spend on shinny things. I am not a photo/video/audio editor, nor will probably ever be one. I am a tech at heart and someone who is always looking to educate people on the wonderful world of technology.
 
 
At the end of the day, to each their own, but these are just my 2 cents (which I saved by not buying an Apple tablet). Don't mind me though, I'll be working on my sad 5 year old PC in my corner.

All of the above. 
 
In particular "femin-ism".  
 
In many European countries they are now introducing "Positive Discrimination" (Do I need to point out that there is no such thing as "positive discrimination"?).  For example companies are now told to employ at least 40% women.  WITH A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR ACTUAL QUALIFICATIONS.  Meaning if a man with more than adequate qualifications interviews before a woman with less than adequate qualificaitons, and the quota needs to be met BY LAW that company must employ the woman.
 
For example Germany : http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30208400
 
30% women on boards by 2016.  Meaning if a man is more qualified - he won't get the job.  The article then goes on to say -  "It has been decided and it is coming. We can't afford to do without the skills of women."  - as if these women, who by default get the job because they were born with vaginas, are actually qualified, and didn't fluke it.
 
another example - https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/opinion/gender-quotas-are-hammer-smash-glass-ceiling-women
 
This SICKENS me -  "The approach we offered up favours the promotion of talent. If a candidate for a supervisory board position of the under-represented gender is as well qualified as a candidate of the over-represented gender, the candidate of the under represented gender must be given priority. "
 
Fighting fire with fire does not solve employment and pay issues, this is a grassroots issue (not to mention the need for DECENT PATERNITY LEAVE to take the burden of child care off the mother, and as a bonus increase bonding between father and child).  In the UK we have NINE MONTHS maternity leave, and TWO FUCKING WEEKS paternity.  If this doesn't promote the idea of the man being the "breadwinner" and the woman staying at home with children I don't know what does.  Women need to be back at work 4.5 months after birth, and men need to be off work for 4.5 months after his SO is back to work.  However feminists don't complain about this, yet they fight for their "miscarriages of justice".  Hypocrites.
 
We are entering the age of sexism, but men are now the "victims" (a term feminists just love to use).  
 
Rant over.

Yeah but let's face it guys.  They won't get "headaches", will suck/cook/fuck on demand.  And (assuming necessary advances have been made) will engage you in conversation those 1 in 100 days you actually want to speak to a woman.
 
Plus you'll NEVER have to go down on her.
 
I'm sorry but I'm sold.  

Yeah but let's face it guys.  They won't get "headaches", will suck/cook/fuck on demand.  And (assuming necessary advances have been made) will engage you in conversation those 1 in 100 days you actually want to speak to a woman.
 
Plus you'll NEVER have to go down on her.
 
I'm sorry but I'm sold.  

I was just in Brussels yesterday. There was an atmosphere of relief a few days earlier as they had caught Abdelasam. 
My thoughts are with the brave Belgians. 

A friend his girlfriend saw the attacks in Zaventem, that's pretty fucked up. I was in the bus when I heard they bombed a metrostation too ...
 
Anyway my father picked me up from uni and I'm back home, thankfully.

Bunch of f**king cowards.
 
I really am beginning to wonder when the terrorists will realize that the more they commit these kinds of chicken shit attacks, the more suffering they will bring on their own people.
 
Seriously, how do they not get this?

I do. Sorry for not clarifying that.
 
Having amazing orators (such as Hitler) on your side absolutely helps. That helps swing intelligent people onto your side.

Education?
 
It's propaganda - look at Nazi Germany.  Same thing just on a smaller scale.
 
You could possibly place propaganda under the heading of education, but in the Middle East and 1940's Germany, I stand by seriously convincing and intelligent propaganda. 
 
What I'm trying to say is - propaganda comes first, education comes later.

Gotcha, nice to all be on the same page in this thread lol.

Ugh. I hate to say this. Crush their spirits. Completely and utterly. Ex/ Japan WW2. Remind them what a global superpower really is.
 
Maybe there's another way. I'm hardly an expert on this field, and I don't really condone the use of nukes, purely for the fact that it's a slippery slope waiting to begin someday, best not to start it now.

I heard it on the New as well.  I hope the people of Belgium and the people at the airports. 
 
I was out with my mum shopping, got called a "terrorist". I had to talk some sense into him. Not all Muslims are terrorists. I'll stop here before people start getting upset. 
 

Thanks. No need to apologies. People are just uneducated. it happened in Watford at Costco. I spoke to him for a good 30 minutes. My mum and carried on with the shopping. In the end he apologised. 

So you want to get of terrorists by using war? Do you realise that war is an act of terrorism?So bombing these Countries based on a few people with their crazy "ideologies" is a good idea? Wait a minute, It's happened already! Iraq and Afghanistan. 

You couldn't be more right.
 
Religion is a fucking poison.
 
Look at Ireland, look at Catholicism.  The cover up of paedophilia only existed because of the institution of the church.
 
I'm sick of separation of church and state.
 
We just need state.

Stalin, Hitler. The Tudors, Henry the 8th. Vikings. Victorians. Christianity. There's most likely more. But I don't remember that well.I studied history from 2005-2008. 

Yeah,  I'm talking about your religion and your religious leaders,  not you. I have no problems with believers,  but religious leaders that enforce dogma, push their way into politics and eventually unto others that I have a problem with. 
 
You probably can or at least should know how to separate your personal faith from bombing a fucking metro station in the name of a God and at the behest of a priest. 

they should have kept the Abdelasam capture quiet (write it off as a drug raid or such), not only to prevent a single bad actor from isis in security from killing him before they could get information, but also to hopefully prevent a retaliation like this.  I'm almost certain these were linked in some way.

You couldn't be more right.
 
Religion is a fucking poison.
 
Look at Ireland, look at Catholicism.  The cover up of paedophilia only existed because of the institution of the church.
 
I'm sick of separation of church and state.
 
We just need state.

I was not aware of MGTOW, cheers for this.

lol i thought this post is about the OS android from the title 

2016 Feminism = Women's privileges.
 
Grow up

Typically America, guns are okay, nudity is not.
9/10 porn is made in America anyway.
 
And with America I mean the US of A.

2016 Feminism = Women's privileges.
 
Grow up

All of the above. 
 
In particular "femin-ism".  
 
In many European countries they are now introducing "Positive Discrimination" (Do I need to point out that there is no such thing as "positive discrimination"?).  For example companies are now told to employ at least 40% women.  WITH A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR ACTUAL QUALIFICATIONS.  Meaning if a man with more than adequate qualifications interviews before a woman with less than adequate qualificaitons, and the quota needs to be met BY LAW that company must employ the woman.
 
For example Germany : http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30208400
 
30% women on boards by 2016.  Meaning if a man is more qualified - he won't get the job.  The article then goes on to say -  "It has been decided and it is coming. We can't afford to do without the skills of women."  - as if these women, who by default get the job because they were born with vaginas, are actually qualified, and didn't fluke it.
 
another example - https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/opinion/gender-quotas-are-hammer-smash-glass-ceiling-women
 
This SICKENS me -  "The approach we offered up favours the promotion of talent. If a candidate for a supervisory board position of the under-represented gender is as well qualified as a candidate of the over-represented gender, the candidate of the under represented gender must be given priority. "
 
Fighting fire with fire does not solve employment and pay issues, this is a grassroots issue (not to mention the need for DECENT PATERNITY LEAVE to take the burden of child care off the mother, and as a bonus increase bonding between father and child).  In the UK we have NINE MONTHS maternity leave, and TWO FUCKING WEEKS paternity.  If this doesn't promote the idea of the man being the "breadwinner" and the woman staying at home with children I don't know what does.  Women need to be back at work 4.5 months after birth, and men need to be off work for 4.5 months after his SO is back to work.  However feminists don't complain about this, yet they fight for their "miscarriages of justice".  Hypocrites.
 
We are entering the age of sexism, but men are now the "victims" (a term feminists just love to use).  
 
Rant over.