comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:06:50 -0500, Mike wrote:
>
>
>>In article ,
>>Steve de Mena wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Derek Currie wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>> Sandman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <5vc7v3heb4t37m5pd1buoal3rfjf5n2sa3@4ax.com>,
>>>>> Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT), Brad
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Fellow Mac Experts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I am looking for speculation as to when Apple will begin putting Blu-
>>>>>>>ray drives into its computers. I have been waiting a long time for
>>>>>>>these things. The format war is over. I have to think there are
>>>>>>>other people wanting Blu-ray either for burning HD content or for the
>>>>>>>massive storage opportunity. I sure would like to be able to burn to
>>>>>>>Blu-ray rather than all these 4.7 gig DVDs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What do you think? Yet this year? If not, when next year?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If they do it like they do most other things they'll put the current
>>>>>>generation of Blu-Ray players in Macs after two more generations of
>>>>>>Blu-Ray players are out. Maccies will then swoon and declare that
>>>>>>Apple invented Blu-Ray.
>>>>>
>>>>>Maccie Myth #345
>>>>
>>>>Geez, is the Mayor of Turdness still around? Troll deluxe.
>>>>
>>>>FACT: Who was the FIRST computer company to adopt USB 1 as THE
>>>>serial standard in ALL their computers? And this is a company
>>>>that had already created a superior competing standard several
>>>>years previously, called 'FireWire'. It took the rest of the PC
>>>>industry a full YEAR to catch up and adopt USB. >>tick tick<<
>>>>Give up? Oh come on.
>>>
>>>Maybe the rest of the computer industry cared about backward
>>>compatibility with the serial and parallel devices consumers already
>>>owned, which would need costly adapters (where feasible) to work on a
>>>USB-only system.
>>>
>>>Steve
>>
>>Which were also far less effective, and not hot-swappable as is USB and
>>FireWire.
>>
>>It also exemplifies what's wrong with the Wintel world with it's need
>>for backward compatibility(read legacy) things which cause all manner of
>>problems since these "old" technologies often set the lowness of the
>>high-water mark.
>
>
> Because everyone wants to and can afford to toss all of their
> currently working peripherals in the trash and buy new ones just
> because some control freak running a computer company tells them too.
>
>
Heck I ran into that problem a while back with HP.
I bought a new all-in-one officejet. On the box it said it would work
with XP, Win2000, win98se. Well, their software wouldn't install on
win98se. I called up HP support and hadji the hindu answers the phone.
I told him that their software doesn't work on my IBM. Hadji said I
should buy a new computer with XP on it. That was HPs solution, folks!