|Originally posted by shlo_mo_shun
On the topic of macs, I have one important factor to add. Not for retards, but for those that come from the non-computer generation, the fact that they are well engineered visually is a plus. Take my grandma, for example. A mac comes in a nice clean case, with only the necessary buttons, hell, their mouse only has one button. Whether it translates into an easier system or not, it certainly takes down the nerve factor that many older people experience when confronting new technology. FOr her, it is a godsend not to have all these cords, external devices, and such. She only uses it for the simplest of applications. Now there is a difference between actual ease of use and percieved ease of use, but for some, the anxiety of a computer is acutally a real problem, not just a percieved one, and a computer that reduces this anxiety is well worth the price. Having said that, I have also found XP to be the best OS I have ever used. Hardware installation has been really a bonus, and the reliability has been excellent.
I think I agree with you here. Even though XP is about as easy to use as the Mac OS, I guess you could say that Apple made theirs simpler in some aspects. The mouse is a good example. But I also think this is another issue altogether. I mean, sure, it might be good for older generations, etc. However, at the same time, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you agree with the fact that Apple’s OS is simpler, then in many senses it becomes an inferior product. Over-simplification does come at a cost. In essence, what I am trying to say is, “this OS is slowing us down.” If the grandma without any sort of computer experience whatsoever can use it, then I don’t think this is a good thing entirely. Let me see if I can find an analogy. Ok, here’s one: Imagine if all cars could only go up to 20 MPH because old people can’t drive very well. Sure, it’s great for them, they won’t be crashing, but how good is that for the rest of us?
By the way, let’s not get into an argument about whether in fact they can drive well or not. It is an example only, and I am simply assuming because of the deterioration of their visibility, hearing, reaction time, etc. That’s not my point, though.
|Originally posted by shlo_mo_shun
Yale, beware, I think maybe that ivy education is feeding you with too much idealogical superiority.
But seriously, I have a contention, since everyone I have ever bumped into that went to an Ivy had parents that went to the same. Did your parents go to Yale by chance? Just curious.
Heres to the IVYS , talk about an overpriced OS.
I agree with you here too. I know that I am a pompous snob as well, even if not as much as some real pompous snobs out there. My parent’s didn’t go to Yale, but they did go to another Ivy League university. So, your theory is reinforced somewhat I suppose. However, if it’s the heredity card you are playing, then I can’t help you there. Alumni status and family legacies do not travel across universities, not even amongst the Ivy League. Finally, I also agree that the Ivy League is a severely overpriced OS. Have you seen how much Cornell costs? It’s something like $50,000 a year! And they’re not even ranked very high! However, what can I do? You get in, you go. My parents can pay the fees, so I might as well go.
So, hehehe, let me join you in your
to the Ivies, huh?
And since were are at it, huck farvard, and puck frinceton!