BILL & HP copy APPLE Design

[chevy]

Apple is so bad that
1) It's one of the most famous brand worldwide
2) It makes money
3) It has been created in 1974 and is still alive. How many computer companies do you know that are that old ? IBM, yes. HP ? they changed their business, but ok I take it. And ?
4) It has created an operating system and still makes money selling it. How many companies do you know that still make money selling an OS for consumers ? Microsoft, yes of course. And ?

Evolution doesn't select the best, but the fitest... and Apple is still alive.

[gfen]

I'm a troll because I'm pointing out obvious flaws in the displayed zealotry?

Hardly.

Am I trying to fan the flames to start people into some sort of a war? Well, not really. I honestly do want to know what all this terriffic innovation is, though, cause I've never seen it.

Perhaps I need to explain: I like the Macintosh. I've always admired Apple's offerings, from a hardware standpoint. I've always thought their software left alot to be desired. Lately, though, I reverse those. Either way, I'm not a basher. I'm certainly not a troll, I just grate under the constant nonsense spouted by the zealots.

This holds true for all zealotry, including the PC zealots, the linux zealots (who were only slightly less annoying than the Be zealots).

[binaryDigit]

Originally posted by chevy
Apple is so bad that
...
Evolution doesn't select the best, but the fitest... and Apple is still alive.

Actually in this case "bad" is a reference to business tactics and not to represent a company being poorly run (before anyone chimes in, I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, just clarifying). Note that your points about Apple can exactly be mapped onto Microsoft (assuming a somewhat liberal interpretation of "computer company" in point 3), and it's Microsoft that many here would ascribe the term "bad" to.

[chevy]

Originally posted by binaryDigit
Actually in this case "bad" is a reference to business tactics and not to represent a company being poorly run (before anyone chimes in, I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, just clarifying). Note that your points about Apple can exactly be mapped onto Microsoft (assuming a somewhat liberal interpretation of "computer company" in point 3), and it's Microsoft that many here would ascribe the term "bad" to.

I separated "computer company" from "OS provider" on purpose.

BTW Microsoft is not as "old" as Apple is, not a big difference but still a difference.

Microsoft made a fantastic work, and is no1 in OS, no doubt. This does not mean that no2 is small or bad. Competition is so: there is a no1, but no2 is no shame. And places change with (more or less) time.