posted
After reading Mr. Card's diatribe against the IPOD, I began to wonder how I had failed to see how horribly transparent their false promises were as they forced their inferior product on me.
Now I sit, staring silently at the gleaming white rectangle that I had previously coveted, white ear buds dangling uselessly off my desk...
All I had wanted was an easy way to take my music with me. I fooled myself into thinking that it was a good product. I even convinced myself that I was enjoying it! All the while, being silently mocked by Steve Jobs.
Well no more! My eyes have been opened, and in my newfound clarity I see the error and ignorance of my ways! No more will I be persuaded by clever marketing, backed up by my own well-formed opinions. Down that path lies betrayal and deception! Orson Scott Card has shown me the error of my ways. The only way to combat their devious marketing is to retaliate by embracing a fanatical anti-view of their heinous product.
Because, you see children, there can be no middle ground. The Emperor is either wearing new clothes, or he is parading around, naked, for your enjoyment.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
His point was not that a person could not enjoy their IPOD, as you obviously do. It was irritation at the way Apple and Apple users touted the products as if they were the first and best, when they had been around, functional, cheaper and (in his opinion) attractive. I think it is the elitism and the smug air of superiority Apple users sometimes have when their product is no better than others, come from the same kind of monolithic corporate entity as MS (but additionaly have control over the hardware, unlike MS), have fewer varieties of software, etc, and are more expensive.
All his opinion, of course. I share some of it, though.
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Card has written before about the tyranny of having too many choices. I think Apple, by effectively removing the "luxury" of choice from its users, may remove some stress from their lives by crippling them.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
So one could say that Apple is showing true philanthropic interest, then, taking the onus of being a corporation like the one they had always despised (IBM, and later MS) upon themselves in order to give people a greater sense of security and self worth.
posted
personally, I like my ipod...and I like apple itunes. I use itunes to buy my music, and as my mp3 player on my computer. I have tried both napster and rhapsody, and I simply prefer itunes...and I like the case, and the controls of the ipod. I particularly like the fact that it has the touch sensitive controls that I can activate with my finger...but don't get pressed by any other stuff I have in my pocket (I don't think the earlier versions were like that).
Am I an apple nut? Hardly, the only apple products I use are itunes and ipod. I think their computers are overpriced, and don't have as much software to choose from (unless you do a lot of video editing). I much prefer my windows XP computer and laptop. Everyone has their own preferences, and sometimes apple might fit those preferences.
I am not the slightest bit brand loyal. I use a Microsoft OS, a mozilla (Firefox) browser, apple music player, a Microsoft e-mail client at home, Mozilla thunderbird at the office, Microsoft office for word processing/spreadsheets, and a gateway computer, with a samsung monitor. I simply use what works best for me.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a PC user but I do like the Mac especially now that they have finally gotten a usable OS. I think the application support and OS stability will grow now that they have stabilized their OS development.
I may eventually get one. Not to replace my PC but to complement it and to be compatible with all my elitist friends who all are Mac users.
It’s funny in that they would always use the “Windows crashes all the time” argument with me. That was true until I got Windows 2000 and they shut the hell up real fast like. The PC is now more stable than the Mac. But Apple will eventually work out the bugs and stability will be irrelevant.
As for Apple’s marketing techniques, they are doing no different than what Microsoft still does. We may have been able to connect to the Internet more effectively with Windows long before Apple made it common on their computers but, I was connection to the Internet long before it was possible with Windows despite what Microsoft would have you believe. Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on prevaricate advertising.
Posts: 527 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
true, the "windows crashes" line amuses me. I leave my computer running 24/7 (it acts as a Tivo). I only reboot it if there is a power outage, or I am installing an update that requires a reboot.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I use two computers at home, one is an Apple Powerbook running OS X, the other is an Alienware running Windows XP Pro. The windows machine crashes from time to time, but I'll admit that this largly results from my not taking particular care about what I download, install, etc. My father also runs XP Pro and his system(s) have no stability issues, just as my Mac doesn't. Now, the advantage that I see in OS X is that I take no more precaution in what I download, install, etc. there, but the system is still perfectly stable. Now of course software has bugs, software will always have bugs, and there is the occasional secruity vunrability (though there hasn't been any kind of serious exploit of a vunrability on OS X to date). On my PC I do run Adaware, Spybot and Norton Antivirus. I am forced to clean out my PC every once in a while as the stability slowly deteriorates. I treat my Mac exactly the same and yet run no security software besides the built in firewall, and as mentioned before have no problems.
Feature wise, I do like how much i can do using only the keyboard in Windows, its possible to enable some of this in OS X, but I still find myself needed to use the mouse a bit more often on my Mac. There are many other nice features to make up for this, and with each OS revision I've been able to do more and more without touching the mouse if I don't want to.
There are advantages to each, I prefer my mac because I don't have to worry about security, etc. (though I don't keep any sensitive data on either computer anyway), and my inner geek loves to mess around with the UNIX under the hood of OS X. I also haven't found any software available for Windows but not OS X that I actually need (or want) to use for anything, excepting games where Windows has a clear and massive advantage. This isn't to say that that will be true for everyone, but it is for me. I also like the design of my Powerbook, it's thiner and lighter than any PC laptop I've seen from the same era that is simmilarly equipped, as are the newer models on both sides. PC laptops do have some advantages in terms of the Pentium M/centrino processors developed by Intel, which are vastly superrior in terms of allowing for mobility than what is used in Apple laptops.
Now regarding the iPod, it's true you can get players with more features for lower prices, but I happen to like the interface and don't need (or particurally want) any of the other common features I've seen advertised on comparable players. I've played around a bit with the Dell player and with some of the older Rios, and in my oppinion the scroll wheel is vastly superrior for navigating than any of the other control schemes. I also use the iTunes Music Store, which is (unfortunatly) only compatible with the iPod. I find it very convienent and find more interesting and new music through it than I ever did before it was available. That being said, as I already owned an iPod when these stores became available, I haven't looked at Napster, et. al. though my friends who have used both tell me iTunes is significantly better in their oppinions.
Oh and in so far as brand loyalty, my PC is an alienware using a microsfot keyboard and mouse, a dell screen, I use the Opera web browser on windows, Firefox on my mac (though I actually drift between several on each platform), an Apple music player, Microsoft Office (on both my mac and my PC, and I like the mac version better). As the Mac is a laptop, the hardware is all Apple, though I do routinly use it with my dell monitor and Microsfot keyboard/mouse.
XvsXP is a very good (and in my oppinion very fair) site about the differences between OS X and Windows XP.
and I do appologise for posting at such length.
Posts: 187 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i am a MAC user/lover. my boyfriend loves MACs and works at the apple store here in houston. we have NO PC's in this house. i did tech support for a dialup company at one time, and all i have to say about ANY MAC OS vs. Windows is . . . MAC's when hands down, no contest.
they have far less issues than any windows based machine. they are actually easier to use. if only everyone would learn to use computers on a MAC, there would be so much less confusion. when a MAC does have an issue, it's a heck of a lot easier to get where you need to go to solve the problem.
as for the price . . . ever heard the phrase, you get what you pay for. MAC's are just better, more sound machines and the Apple software is as well. you want quality, you pay the price.
my problem with those who complain about MAC's and Apple and so on and praise Microsoft is that Microsoft can't come up with an original idea to save their freaking lives. their OS, which has become so popular, was stolen from Apple. the fact that Microsoft used their own distorted version of java script for so long really screwed a lot of people over when the SP2 update came out, because since SUN won their lawsuit, Microsoft had to stop producing their version of it. SP2 came with sun's version of java, which meant that any websites that were created using the rip off windows version were now incompatible with SP2. man i took a lot of calls from some really upset customers about that.
the reason you don't have to worry about what type of things you download on a MAC is because the morons who come up with all these worms and viruses and spyware/adware aim them at windows because Microsoft doesn't thoroughly test their software before putting it out on the market and leaves BIG OPEN HOLES (aka XP and the need for security patches and so on due to BLASTERworm, SASSERworm, beagle virus, etc.). not to mention that spyware is more prevalent on a windows machine because most spyware programs are made to attack the ever frustrating and overused IE (internet explorer). why is that? because Microsoft had the lovely idea to tie IE directly into the OS, which means in a lot of cases, if IE is attacked, the attacking element can easily make it's way into the registry and so forth to change things most people have no idea are even there.
however, if you want a comp because you're a gamer, then of course you want a PC. why is this? because even though MAC's are better for layout, sound editing, video editing, and pretty much anything else having to do with layout, design, presentation, or multimedia, the game manufacturers and developers target the PC users because there are more of them. there are more of them for the simple fact that, once again boys and girls, you get what you pay for.
ok, i shall end my rant now. sorry. we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming, already in progress.
Posts: 52 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It all comes down to choice for me. Do I want the hardware that Steve Jobs has decided I need or do I make my own computer with everything I want? If I buy a Mac can I choose to not use a Mac OS? If I buy an Ipod and I want to buy music online can I choose to buy it from a source not called iTunes? Can I play games? I'll stick with my windows based PC thank you very much. And If I don't like windows I can always just switch to linux, its even free. I'm somehow even able to edit video's too, who would have thought it possible? Of course I'm not as cool as the 2% of the world who use Macs, but you get what you pay for.
Posts: 796 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree that it is all about choice. I like my IPod. I think that it works well, and I'm able to seamlessly manage all of my music across multiple computers and devices (All of which are Windows based).
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: as for the price . . . ever heard the phrase, you get what you pay for. MAC's are just better, more sound machines and the Apple software is as well. you want quality, you pay the price.
Nope. This just isn't true. Apple has the advantage of a homogenous hardware base and a very passionate and evangelical (although not particularly skilled) user base. Its relative "quality," though, is highly debatable; it's all a matter of what you're looking for in a computer.
That said, OS X is a great OS, and it's the only Apple OS I'll even permit on our network here. But it's not enough to save the company. Their much-lauded "superiority" in the art and music world has pretty much narrowed itself down to desktop publishing, and the abysmal stillbirth of Quark 6 may well be the nail in that coffin; Adobe's InDesign performs equally well on both platforms. (Any remaining "superiority" on the professional video front has long since been handed to clustered Unix boxes and/or Wintel machines, while the last few hold-outs on the music end persist only because the manufacturers of add-on cards have been slow to market with Wintel hardware -- something that will also change, once those manufacturers realize that they can no longer demand boutique prices in a marketplace with real competition.)
In ten years, if it's still around, Apple will be primarily a consumer electronics company -- probably concentrating on the modern equivalent of a Tivo. It'll probably do very well in that space.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, you do know Apple didn't invent the GUI OS interface, right? They used the model invented by Xerox after making a deal with them. In 1985, MS did the same thing and thus Windows 1.0 was born. So that line about MS stealing and the "inventiveness" and "originality" of Apple is crap (and I say this as one who learned programming on the Apple IIe back in 1984, so I did/do love what they made possible back then). Steve Jobs is a nut job. Bill Gates is a conniving opportunist. Big deal.
The real advantage to MS (and IBM based clones) is the competition. The competition, both in terms of hardware and software means better and cheaper products.
posted
"The competition, both in terms of hardware and software means better and cheaper products."
In Apple's defense, there are two meanings of "better." Certainly, a complete lack of competition has its advantages; if you only ever have to write one driver for a piece of hardware, that driver's likely to be pretty darn compatible. So when you buy Apple hardware for an Apple machine, you're getting something that will probably work -- for a given value of "work." Because it's certainly true that that hardware may not do everything you'd like it to do, and it's equally true that you are entirely at the mercy of that single manufacturer when it comes to whether or not it will ever do what you want it to do. Apple users have mastered the art of convincing themselves that they didn't really want to do something, anyway.
But once you start mixing and matching -- like, say, adding a HP 50" plotter to a mixed network -- you discover that you're ALSO at the mercies of manufacturers who may or may not have designed decent Apple drivers. If you've got a Mac, for example, you're pretty much stuck with an Epson wide-format printer if you want it to work at all; all the major printer companies have released Mac drivers that "work" (again, for a given value of "work"), but may not be able to, say, actually print the entire width of a wide-format page. I speak here from experience.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
I lack words. Siberia is too good for you; a bullet to the back of the neck is much too good for you. I'm really not sure what punishment fits this; tell you what, report to Siberia for a couple of years while the Party thinks it over. And you with such a low member number, too! Shame, shame.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
But it's the nature of the beast, the nature of competition. Hardware from a single source (and that source being closely related to the OS manufacturer) means less breakpoints in the entire system. But that also means you are at the mercy of that manufacturer.
Competition means other manufacturers (particularly of the drivers) which introduces a whole new area of error and the need for user awareness. (Wow, sounds like I am defending capitalism.)
But I see your point.
King of Men: Sorry. Just caught what you were referring to. I am a moron.
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
uh, yeah, contrary to popular belief, Apple did not make a deal with Xerox to use the GUI. Quite honestly, neither did Microsoft, who, although won the actual lawsuit Apple brought forth, still felt guilty enough to pay out a lot of money over the issue because they didn't really have the authorization to use the interface in the first place.
The GUI had its roots in the 1950s but was not developed until the 1970s when a group at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) developed the Alto, a GUI-based computer. The Alto was the size of a large desk, and Xerox believed it unmarketable. Jobs took a tour of PARC in 1979, and saw the future of personal computing in the Alto. Although much of the Interface of both the Lisa and the Mac was based (at least intellectually) heavily on the work done at PARC, and many of the engineers there later left to join Apple, much of the Mac OS was written before Job's visit to PARC.
and as far as competition is concerned, Apple did allow for third party companies to mass market clones of MAC's and the software for awhile, but when they realized how much the third party companies were screwing things up and therefore causing problems with the usability and compatibility of other hardware/software, they took the privilege back. this is a major problem with Microsoft. there are too many third party companies making hardware to run windows and software for windows, with no real supervision by Microsoft to make sure that these things are being made properly according to any set of rules or standards. how many times have you heard a MAC user complain about having to remove a program he/she just installed because it wasn't compatible with the other software from that other OEM and so on, especially as compared to those who use windows?
And as for the "Of course I'm not as cool as the 2% of the world who use Macs, but you get what you pay for." . . . I believe the percent of people who use MAC's is higher than that and the fact that one company holds that kind of percentage is outstanding. No other company holds that high a percentage of computer users. How many computer manufacturers are there in the world? And how many people use each? Microsoft has a hold on the most popular OS, but that's only because they don't care much about making sure things are done correctly. Which also relates to the timetable issue someone else brought up about Apple not manufacturing upgraded items as fast. The reason for that as far as hardware is concerned is because they care enough to make sure something is a worthy piece of machinery before putting it out on the market. And as for software, uh . . . Apple has upgraded the OS 4 times since Microsoft came out with the wondrous, worm bait XP. Microsoft seems to only care about getting new products out there so people think they are great because they are coming out with new stuff so fast. it's "let's get it on the market fast so we seem innovative and fresh, who cares if it works properly or opens people who are not highly technical or computer gurus, you know, the average computer user, to all kinds of viruses and other security risks.?"
so, who is behind whom?
Posts: 52 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually plenty of companies sale more than 2% of total pc sales
quote: The 2004 market share numbers are out, and it's more good news for Dell. The Austin, Texas-based PC maker held on to the top spot with 17.9 percent of the worldwide PC market (up from 16.7 percent), with HP in second place with 15.8 percent (down from 16.2 percent) according to figures released by market research group IDC.
Shipments of PCs worldwide rose either 14.7 percent or 11.8 percent, depending on whose numbers you look at: IDC's or rival research firm Gartner. The numbers vary due to differing research methodologies, but no matter how you slice it, the PC market was strong in 2004. The interesting question is whether anyone can slow Dell down. Given that the growth was driven largely by corporate buyers, where Dell is traditionally strong, it may be rough going for HP and the gang.
The utter commoditization of the PC market has made profits more difficult to come by for just about everyone but Dell. HP's PC business is barely profitable, and last week the company announced plans to merge the PC division into its very profitable Imaging and Printing Group.
Behind Dell and HP came IBM with 5.9 percent, Fujitsu/Siemens with 4.0 percent, and Acer with 3.6 percent of the market. Of course, IBM is getting out of the PC business all together, having sold off its PC manufacturing business to Chinese PC maker Lenovo. Lenovo has been strong in China, and hopes that the IBM brand name will win it some love in the US and Europe.
No market share discussion is complete without mentioning Apple. While the company saw its global share continue to hover around the 2.0 percent mark, its US market share rose from 2.9 percent to 3.2 percent in 2004, due largely to sales of the new iMac G5 and iBooks. That's a bit behind industry growth, but the figures for 2005 should be interesting due to the release of its new US$499 Mac mini (note: not a review). Will the Mini be a winner, or just another fad?
posted
ok, i respect that you could find an article to support your figures, but think about it. supply and demand. of course dell and HP/Compaq, etc. hold that high a percentage rate. look how many companies there are making PC's. but, think about it this way. you have a single company (apple) who manufactures its own computers, hardware, software, etc. against NO ONE else, and they still hold 2-3% of the market. do you know how many people 2-3% of the computer owning population is???
urgh, i'm tired and really should be sleeping right now. it's just frustrating that people think that MAC users and Apple itself is smug for no reason. i'm not smug. i use a windows machine just as easily as a MAC. but i prefer my MAC. i learned computers on a windows machine, but now that i have had a MAC, it's the only kind of personal computer i want to have. period. because in my personal opinion, it's just better. that doesn't make me an elitist, it makes me an informed consumer who doesn't just rattle off at the mouth while having absolutely NO experience with the product i'm bashing, unlike a lot of people i hear put down Apple/MAC's. windows is fine for those who like it and find it easier to use. i just think people should stop pummeling Apple for being good at what they do and knowing it. Those of us who prefer Apple/MAC's know that we can do anything we want to do on a MAC with. Now if the game manufacturers would get the clue, EVERYTHING would be perfect.
Posts: 52 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I believe the percent of people who use MAC's is higher than that and the fact that one company holds that kind of percentage is outstanding."
3% of the entire PC market is rather small. As has been pointed out, there are several major manufacturers that account for that many machines. Apple is no larger than a boutique PC manufacturer, like Alienware.
"Those of us who prefer Apple/MAC's know that we can do anything we want to do on a MAC with."
This is the key. Those of us who want to do additional things find little use for a Mac.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm. There have been no less than three threads on this subject over the past couple of days, all of them with Apple fanbois ranting about how OSC is mistaken. Now, there have been more than three threads about "How can a fine author like OSC hold such barbaric opinions on gay marriage", but not in the first couple of days after that column appeared. I wonder if this subject will show a similar longevity? It's certainly off to a fine start.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Apple is no larger than a boutique PC manufacturer, like Alienware.
That is a bit misleading. In terms of desktop sales that is true, they don't hold a very large market share. But their business has been moving away from focusing on desktops in recent years. In terms of their size look at the iPod, it holds about a 92% share of the hard drive based mp3 player market. The iPod Shuffle is up to 43% of the flash based market and is rising sharply. And iTMS has somewhere in the range of a 70% share of online-music sales. Those are some impressive numbers, and I am sure that they are going to continue to expand what they are doing, moving further from a desktop based business to more of a business that happens to sell desktops along with all of its other products.
Posts: 38 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I'm in the PC industry too I would love to add something to this conversation, but Tom has said everything I wanted to say (and better than I would have said it ) so I am going to just say... Yea, What TomDavidson said
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is commenting on the elitist smugness of the otherside considered elitist? I fully aknowledge M$'s weaknesses and Mac's strengths. I just am sick of the faulty reasoning, like I commented in the post just above.
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Card is right about the bad user interface on the iPod, and right about Apple's "Steve Jobs Enthusiasm Enhancement Field." The man can make beta software which crashes onstage look like the next world-bending innovation. I watched him do it, years ago, when he was demonstrating software on NeXT computers.
I'll never own an iPod. The thing looks like it should cost $100, not $300, and it is artificially constrained in ways that would make Microsoft's consumer base howl and gnash, if it had come from Microsoft.
Frankly, I can store all the music I want to store on my PocketPC's SD card, And just as frankly, I think it would be much better if iTunes fed music to those devices, and other MP3 devices, instead of just the iPod.
Until then, Apple can takes its approach to digital music and, well, how to say this without being impolite...
Hmm! Can't think of a way to say it without being rude, so I guess I won't!
Posts: 89 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: But their business has been moving away from focusing on desktops in recent years. In terms of their size look at the iPod, it holds about a 92% share of the hard drive based mp3 player market.
I have said for over two years that Apple's future lies as a consumer electronics company. I fully expect it to release a DVR within another year or so. Its future as a computer manufacturer is rather dim, but its future as a gadget company seems assured.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok . . . the more i read comments here the more frustrated i get. my whole point in the last thing i posted was that I DON'T REALLY CARE WHAT KIND OF COMPUTER PEOPLE USE!!!! it's a personal decision based on personal preference. of course everyone thinks that the thing they prefer is the best because to them it is or they wouldn't prefer it. apparently my point was missed in more ways than one, especially considering the response immediately after mine. i don't know why people seem to think us MAC users are such elitists when we say we think our choice is better. what is so elitist about having an opinion that just happens to differ from someone else's? Apple makes wonderful computers (unique, easy, efficient, friendly) and lots of other wonderful products. yes Apple makes iTunes just for iPods, but that's because IT'S APPLE and hardly anyone else makes programs for them, mainly because they don't do it correctly. why should Apple make products for machines that have already over-saturated the market? there are hundreds of companies that make stuff for windows based machines and such. and besides, no one gripes about microsoft or other companies not manufacturing very much software for MAC's.
okay, i'm done. FOR GOD'S SAKE PEOPLE, GET A GRIP. it's all based on opinion. and we all know what opinions are like right???
Posts: 52 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: i don't know why people seem to think us MAC users are such elitists when we say we think our choice is better. what is so elitist about having an opinion that just happens to differ from someone else's?
Here's why people are responding in ways that are infuriating to you, or more illustrative:
quote: i don't know why people seem to think us MAC users are such elitists when we say we think our choice is better. what is so elitist about having an opinion that just happens to differ from someone else's?
Stick with this:
quote:it's a personal decision based on personal preference.
quote:ok . . . the more i read comments here the more frustrated i get. my whole point in the last thing i posted was that I DON'T REALLY CARE WHAT KIND OF COMPUTER PEOPLE USE!!!! it's a personal decision based on personal preference. of course everyone thinks that the thing they prefer is the best because to them it is or they wouldn't prefer it. apparently my point was missed in more ways than one, especially considering the response immediately after mine. i don't know why people seem to think us MAC users are such elitists when we say we think our choice is better. what is so elitist about having an opinion that just happens to differ from someone else's? Apple makes wonderful computers (unique, easy, efficient, friendly) and lots of other wonderful products. yes Apple makes iTunes just for iPods, but that's because IT'S APPLE and hardly anyone else makes programs for them, mainly because they don't do it correctly. why should Apple make products for machines that have already over-saturated the market? there are hundreds of companies that make stuff for windows based machines and such. and besides, no one gripes about microsoft or other companies not manufacturing very much software for MAC's.
okay, i'm done. FOR GOD'S SAKE PEOPLE, GET A GRIP. it's all based on opinion. and we all know what opinions are like right???
Honey, so far you're the only person to use ALL CAPS in this thread. Who needs to get a grip, exactly? Breathe for a second. So far, no one has said anything earth-shattering or, really, all that inflammitory. It's just the old, well-worn PC vs. Mac debate.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Junkman: batman vs. superman who'd win?
oh, oh! I know this one... Superman! Because heäs got all the cool powers, while Batman is just an ordinary human.... no, wait, it's a trick question! Batman has the Kryptonite Ring that he and Superman stole from President Luthon (well, atleast he had it last time I read the superman-comic), so Batman would just use it to make Superman weak and then beat him with hi superior martial arts-training ... But then Jonathan Kent might show up with his shotgun and blow bat away, although then Robin should be there to watch Batman's back...
... nevermind, let's party instead Posts: 10 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Junkman: batman vs. superman who'd win?
oh, oh! I know this one... Superman! Because heäs got all the cool powers, while Batman is just an ordinary human.... no, wait, it's a trick question! Batman has the Kryptonite Ring that he and Superman stole from President Luthon (well, atleast he had it last time I read the superman-comic), so Batman would just use it to make Superman weak and then beat him with hi superior martial arts-training ... But then Jonathan Kent might show up with his shotgun and blow bat away, although then Robin should be there to watch Batman's back...
... nevermind, let's party instead
man first its Luthor not Luthon, and second the corret answer is Darth Vader.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
