Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...] - Linux

This is a discussion on Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...] - Linux ; Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html Traits: * Nym shifting (see below) * Self confessed thief and proud of it * Homophobic * Racist * Habitual liar * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7
Results 121 to 123 of 123

Thread: Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...]

  1. Re: Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...]

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  2. Re: Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...]

    In article , Moshe, Goldfarb.
    wrote:

    > >>> This is right; Windows advocates keep trying to find ways that Apple
    > >>> doesn't try to compete, then imply that the whole platform is faulty
    > >>> because of a bad comparison.
    > >>
    > >> I don't find that to be true, at least in my experience.
    > >> Windows users appreciate the Apple stuff and many, because of Vista, are in
    > >> fact moving over to the Mac.
    > >>

    > >
    > > But I wasn't writing of fair-minded Windows users, or ones that are
    > > close to switching platforms because WinVista is a weak product.
    > > I wrote about Windows advocates (particularly in this group).
    > >
    > > Many call them Wintrolls.

    >
    > If you read COLA, you will find very few, if any, Windows supporters
    > trolling for Windows.
    >
    > What you will find however is just about every single Linux advocate, all 5
    > of them (I'm not kidding, count for yourself), posting page after page of
    > off topic messages concerning Microsoft, it's products etc.
    >
    > There is no Linux advocacy in COLA.


    Ah; sorry, I didn't even notice this thread also was being cross-posted.

  3. Re: Apple now commands a massive 66% of the market share of PCs [...]

    In article ,
    Tim Smith wrote:

    > > > Tim Murray:
    > > > Sigh. Once again, Edwin: Do you ever read your own posts? Do you
    > > > ever check a date? How on earth can you **** up so bad?


    > > Sandman:
    > > That's what happens when you go to google, enter a search trm like
    > > "apple market share down" and then press the "I'm feeling lucky"
    > > button :-D Unfortunately, Edwin is never lucky. :P


    > Tim Smith:
    > Worse, he doesn't review the data he posts.


    Exactly.

    > Remember the workstation
    > incident?


    Vividly:
    http://csma.sandman.net/pages/830MillionWorkstations

    > He found some report on a news site on how many
    > workstations are sold each year, and used that to compare to Mac
    > sales. However, the report had a little goof in it, and had
    > workstation sales inflated by *three* orders of magnitude. The news
    > site's data was from one of those for-pay research reports. To
    > anyone who spent 5 milliseconds *thinking* about the numbers, it was
    > immediately obvious that this was a mistake. Even if the idea that
    > nearly 2 billion workstations were sold a year didn't raise flags,
    > the report also gave the total dollar value of workstation sales.
    > If the unit sales number were correct, it would mean the average
    > unit price of a workstation was a few dollars! A little Googling
    > would turn up the site of the analyst firm that had produced the
    > report, with a little blurb offering the report for sale, and a
    > summary, which included the correct figure for unit sales. But that
    > wasn't good enough for Edwin. He actually tried to save his
    > anti-Mac argument by suggesting that maybe the analyst's site had
    > made a mistake in producing the blurb, and the new site was
    > actually right.


    Most of the time he spent saying that his belief had nothing to do
    with - merely referencing logic wouldn't disprove the numbers. :-D


    --
    Sandman[.net]

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7