Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts

Sunday, November 11, 2012

It takes a while to build up...



In response to Edmund Conway's post–break up (with Apple) letter comparing Apple with Obama, one comment said:
Apple and Obama fan here. Agree about Apple/iOS 6, but zero sourness about Obama. What does economy problem have to do with him, again? He did a damn grand job helping to smooth the landing and overseeing the takeoff. Building takes a lot longer than destroying; people forget that. So yeah, no matter how hard I look, I can’t see anything sour in my Obama relationship, so you’re wrong that all fans would admit that.
My response:
You are right, orchestrating and building a new bubble takes longer than contracting from an old one. It takes days or weeks for people to realize that the papers they are holding are trash. It takes years to build up the con. 
Maybe the administration has been busy choosing malinvestments into which new commodity should be encouraged.  
Perhaps it should be the tulips again. The government should declare that if you invest in tulips, but your investment flops, the government will bail you out. Then, when the over-blown tulip investments burst and crash the markets, the government should provide a ‘soft landing’ by bailing out the tulip farmers and prolonging the resulting contraction from a month to another four years. 
Obama should learn from the Japanese. They have been in stagnation for three decades. Four years are like a butterfly’s dream to them.
More on topic:
Why Did Solyndra Fail? 

Friday, January 29, 2010

iPad

The world intelligentsia responds to the new phenomenon. Click on the images to enlarge.

Friday, May 8, 2009

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Our response to Chamberlain

OK, those who didn’t grow up in the Soviet Union probably don’t get this reference. In any event, here’s our response to iPod:



I personally use Sansa Fuze 8 GB, but anything non-’pod is welcome.

(By the way, just because I am posting this video doesn’t mean that I am endorsing the craziness of owning several mp3 players.)

Thursday, January 22, 2009

No pudding for you

And no iPhone nano or Apple Netbook either. Aaaah!

Am I bovvered?

By the way, someone tells me that he cannot imagine how I can type long replies — his fingers start hurting after only a few lines. First of all, it’s possible that I am a crazy graphomaniac (my biggest problem is usually not writing but trimming — in the writing for work, that is; here I don’t bother). Second, I can definitely see how typing on that small keyboard would make one’s fingers hurt — I tried (honestly) typing a little on one of our lab’s Apples (the one looking like a lunchbox), and I had to take a break soon. (Also, it’s very annoying. Little things I am used to in PC — like the End button — don’t work. And how do you see a new window? And where is the Start button?)

I personally have been using this. For a while I was considering switching to a proper one, but then decided against it.

Microsoft’s mice suck, though. Don’t even think about it. Go with Logitech.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

So... non-Jewish

http://www.singergallery.com/assets/managed/photos/RV-007.jpg

My great-grandmother would say “Ribboinu shel oilam! So goyish! Feh!”, had she read this article. There is something very non-Jewish about estimating what would happen if (or when) a certain man died¹, G-d forbid.

Is it politically incorrect to say this? Probably. My politically correct artist friend, who is sensitive to other people’s (and creatures’) feelings would possibly get upset. But it’s still true. This level of eidelkeit is a Jewish characteristic. I don’t think it’s genetic — it derives from culture, which is (turtles all the way down) based on Torah, but there you are…

On the other hand, I believe this is an aspect of not so much non-Jewish culture as secular culture, which (whether shared by Jews or non-Jews) is, of course, also non-Jewish — i.e., “anti-Torah”. I would hope that a ben or bas Noach (a non-Jew following the aspects of Torah for non-Jews and Torah’s general ethical and spiritual principles) wouldn’t speculate on results of somebody’s death either.

* * *

This is more of a rambling than a post. I just read somewhere a Russian person writing angrily that Tanya says that all non-Jews are “akin to filth and worse than animals”. I answered that first of all, he is a liar. Second, he is an idiot. Third, for the masses reading our exchange, one needs to look at the context (not just the immediate context of a quote, but general context of where the author is coming from) before drawing rash conclusions. (For the masses reading this, Alter Rebbe speaks about something entirely different from what that guy said, thought and meant — but this is not the place to discuss this. For reference, see Chapter 1 of Tanya, including the note from Reb Hillel Paritcher’s siddur at the very end of the chapter.)

But after that, I remembered to myself what the Alter Rebbe did when asked about this line (not the one above, but the actual line) in Tanya. He smiled.

And then I saw the article about Steve Jobs.

* * *

Speaking of hashgacha protis, what are the chances of leaving your lab’s building at 7 pm on a Sunday night, walking to animal facility, standing in front of the door, realizing that you forgot the wallet (with the ID necessary to get into the Foster) at home in your Shabbos pants, and then seeing a co-worker walk out of the vivarium’s door and holding the door for you? Right when you need him. On Sunday night. On a long weekend. After the lights-off (for mice). While listening to Rabbi Paltiel’s shiur on Frierdiker Rebbe’s ma’amor (OK, that’s not such a big deal, since I am doing that most of the time anyway).

An atheist would say: “luck”, “chance”, etc. I say: in the argument with my artist friend regarding ethical appropriatness of what I am doing with animals, Hashem is on my side. :)

* * *

On the other hand, this all may be not about Jews vs. non-Jews, religious people vs. secular, Torah vs. klipah, but in fact about normal people vs. journalists.

________
¹ My rabbi once said that he had been included by someone in a will. He told that person’s lawyer that it would be better if the person gave him the money right away — that way my rabbi would be able to do mitzvos with that money in the honor of the person’s health (and pray for it), instead of waiting for him to die and the money to go over. :)

Sunday, January 11, 2009

New laptop from Apple

There must be a single Conservative member on board of the Onion after all.



“Oh, I’ll buy almost anything, if it’s shiny and made by Apple.”

Priceless.

Monday, November 24, 2008

Lawsuit against Apple



Who-hoo! A man sued Apple for having too many dropped calls on his iPhone. Apparently, when an iPhone user tries using a normal phone, the first reaction is surprise at how easy it is to speak without dropped calls, how easy it is to dial and use the phone, how easy it is to hold it. But then the addiction to shininess of the Apple abomination kicks back and the person has an urge to go and be intimate with his cute toy. The first comment to the second article expressed my thoughts almost exactly (I have additional reasons for hating Apple):
It seems like everyone who owns an iPhone knows that it sucks in so many of the most basic areas of mobile phone operation (especially for a supposed smartphone), and yet they just love that interface and all its “bells and whistles” so much they'll put up with anything! And same thing with the ubiquitous iPod; it’s mediocre in the most basic areas (sound quality, battery life, etc.) Plus the DRM-heavy iTunes all but guarantees that once someone buys on iTunes, they’re stuck with iPods and iTunes for good. Apple deserves kudos for its expertise in user interfaces, but even more than that it deserves the consumer backlash that will inevitably come if it keeps screwing customers like this. That’s why I’m sticking with Windows PCs, “other” MP3 players, and real phones. You keep your “sexy” Apple junk, just know that I pity you.
Someone I know didn’t know much about Apple and iPhones. She is a traditional PC (and normal cell phone) user. Then, her nephew in Israel asked her to buy him an iPhone and bring over when she goes there (iy”H). Last night, she went to an Apple store in a local mall and found out about the whole fascist Apple-AT&T love union. While before she thought my obsessive hatred of Apple was a bit strange, now she thinks that an American buying Apple is like a Jew buying a German car.

By the way, one of the reasons Windows is so glitchy is that Microsoft was forced by its rivals to spend almost a decade in anti-trust law suits. As a result, much of the company’s creative energy (especially that of its leaders who brought us Windows) was not spent on developing and improving the OS but on legal bullshit. The same thing happened with every company victimized by fascist anti-trust attacks. Either it was ruined by them (even when it won) or it suffered major losses affecting the quality of its product. At the same time, it is due to Microsoft that computers and OS are so affordable to everyday people. If it was up to Apple alone, there would be as many people using personal computers as there are people driving Rolls Royces. A personal computer would be a shiny item of luxury.

This is why I am so glad that Apple is finally being sued. Next step: suing the Apple–AT&T axis of evil as monopoly. Let the bastards taste some of their medicine.

Sunday, November 16, 2008

iPhone killer

Alex Exler informs us about a new cell phone model, which should be mass-produced (in his opinion), and advertised as a Conservative response to iPhone (in my opinion):





The phone works and is fully functional (well, it does what a phone is minimally supposed to do; it cannot be used as a calculator, e-mail checker, googler, tetris, notepad, beer-bottle opener or a microwave). In any event, the era of iPhone’s domination of the market of cute but monstrous cellphones is clearly over. Especially if they make this phone available in pink.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Mac will share... for a buck



By the way, Artemiy Lebedev reports that Apple has hierarchy based on the date of joining the company. Steve Jobs couldn’t register as number 1, so he had to get number 0. Just like in a Communist Part, says Lebedev, a Mac user himself. Well, if even those that are “using” agree…

In one of his posts in his LiveJournal, Lebedev mentioned that after coming to US, he soon realized it is no different from the USSR. Why? Because in the American warehouses they also use stupid slogans painted with unimaginative font in all caps.

As a designer, he probably thinks that things looking pretty (which is important) is all there is. A chitzon (a superficial person), in other words. This was also in the early 90’s when Russian idea of economics was finally legalized theft.

Of course, Mac users don’t give a damn about economics — or any internal process, for that matter. As long it’s shiny and pretty outside. Even if it’s difficult to use, as long as it is shiny and “designed properly”, well then...




In one British Mac vs. PC commercial, they are promoting an idea how PCs at home are boring and make home look more like office. I don’t know what exactly that means. Because I am able to custom-build my PCs, my office PCs area geared each for the specific function they serve (processing of heavy graphics, information analysis, a bit of computing), while my home PC is designed for things I do at home at my leisure — for example, computer gaming. But I forgot, Macs are so much better designed for computer games and other forms of fun than PCs…

Monday, October 6, 2008

Free iPhone



Continuing the topic of similarity of iPhones and socialism: under socialism, things are given to you “for free”. Of course, you find out later that “for free” means you pay several times the item’s cost for its wrapping — but hey, fair is fair; at least you got the item itself for free.

Alex Exler writes (in Russian) about conditions of getting an iPhone for free in Moscow: you sign up for MTC (Russian cell phone company) plan and get a free iPhone. Of course, you have to pay immediately 30,000 rubles and then use the company’s service for 15 months (5000 rubles a month) — but that’s part of getting a free iPhone. So, you pay $1200 right away for a free iPhone and then pay them $2000 more for 15 months’ worth of using it — not bad…

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Apple and liberals



I always had a suspicion coming from personal experience: most of Mac users (and, more generally, Apple product users) by choice are liberals — at least in the US. When I write “by choice”, I mean: when they had an educated choice between a PC and a Mac — not when they had to use a Mac for professional reasons (being in graphic design, for example) or because they were computer-illiterate, and a Mac seemed easier to use.

Now I finally understood why. American liberals are emotional thinkers and wannabe socialists. To them, “looks/feels better” is equivalent to “better”, and they love the idea of a central controlling agency imposing this “better” on everyone. This is what liberal models of government and economy are all about, and this is what Apple is all about.

The story of iPhone, for example, is a classic story of socialism: central control introduces something that looks shiny and pretty (and has crappy inner functionality; its usefulness is inversely proportional to its shininess), something that has “all-in-one” principle; something whose particular use is forced upon the customers (you are limited to the companies, with which iPhone will work; you’re not allowed to download custom-made software — i.e., typical socialism), and all this centralized regulation results in a “black market” attempting to go around the regulations (the great number of people trying to “unlock” the iPhones — for which they are punished by Apple — to which the people respond by designing ways to overcome the punishment — and so on).

Every time you update an OS on a Mac, you need to do a complete revolution: by a new computer, i.e., change all of hardware at once. If you want to install Vista on an older computer, you have a choice about which hardware to upgrade: usually, the memory and maybe the video-card (although, not necessarily). Same when you want a brand-new computer: you have a choice of buying a PC from some company like Dell (or HP... or Asus... or many other companies, competing with each other) or building it yourself after buying parts. You can custom-build Macs too. In theory. It’s called “Hackintosh” — i.e., hacking the system by going around the regulations again.

It is always funny when people criticize Vista for not working on older systems. Did you try to install Leopard on an older Mac? This reminds me of those Russians that argue that they want to have democracy and capitalism but preserve “the authentic Russian way” — which means, apparently, having a mentality of tsarist and Soviet Russia (ruled by a despot; nobody takes personal responsibility for anything). Then they complain that they don’t work together: well yes, you need to update the hardware before you install the software that allows for greater functionality. The question is: will you have a choice on how to update it?

By the way, the decision to use Intel processors on new Macs is interesting: it reminds me of how Chavez introduces socialism in his country.

Finally, the propaganda campaign by Apple against Microsoft reminds me of Soviet propaganda against the West. “It works just as well; you can do everything here you can do there, and it looks shinier. And we will provide everything you need for you without burdening you with responsibility of making a choice. What? You can’t play games? You can’t use custom-made solutions? What do you need that for? More work, less play!”

How did this realization come about? Today I was re-reading Douglas Adams: an atheist, an intellectual who likes to talk and write about things outside of his area of expertise, and a Mac user — in other words, a liberal. In his essay “Frank the Vandal” (published in his posthumous book, Salmon of Doubt), he writes: “The Mac started out as a wonderfully simple and elegant idea (give them so little memory they won’t be able to do anything anyway) [...]”. In a different essay he writes that in his opinion, reducing possibility of choice is better: e.g., producing “snap-shot” cameras (called “soap-boxes” by Russians) that lack zoom and thus don’t allow people to take bad photos. In other words, let’s treat people as idiots and give as little control as possible, regulating their behavior instead — what socialism is all about.

* * *
On a separate note, the conversation between somebody who switched to a Mac from PC and a traditional PC user reminds me of a conversation between a Jew who turned (r”l) to Christianity and an Orthodox Jew:
— Why did you switch?
— For years I knew there was something wrong with it. Now, when I switched, I realized: this is what I was looking for to begin with and stuck with the old thing only because it was forced on me by tradition when I was younger.
— What was wrong with it?
— For starters, too many moving parts. The new thing is much easier to use, and it looks more shiny.
— Those parts serve a purpose. They are put there for a reason by the designer. Among other things, they give you flexibility, allowing you to use the system in all situations.
— Yeah, but it took too much energy to figure out how to use them.
— So, let’s see: you switched because you never took the time to read the manual and understand how to use the system properly?