MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Mozfan - I blame the Internet for everything. This shite should be banned

And all IT guys lost it a long time ago - including myself.

I looked up "Evil_MS_User" and discovered a picture of a troll, along with the further explanation that he is a "small, pathetically unimportant person who gets some minuscule pleasure from taunting those before whom he feels inferior." That he is here, commenting on an article describing Dell & HP as "second-place" confirms the definition.

But this puerile stuff was priceless:

Oracle makes shite and everyone knows it - the companies have just invested too much money into their systems that they're wedded to it. All the companies that were tricked by Ellison hate his guts now - you know that. But Oracle keeps you employed, so you'd rather blame others. You can go to hell.

Substitue Microsoft and Gates & Dell for the apprpriate identities, and it is as if he were taliking to a mirror. Like so many so-called "service" people in the PC world, he has neither any conception of the principle, nor any understanding of his own misanthropic shortcomings.

MW: "full" as in "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"

This whole article is Bu11shi+. There's no IT managers pissed. It just hype by MDN.

Hey EVIL_MS_USER! Yah you, Jackoff! Before I got this job I was a unix developer. I've been dealing with networked unix machines for decades. The day Apple announced they were going to a BSD unix based OS I junked all my Windows boxes and bought a Mac and a bunch of Apple stock. We're all really impressed at your vocabulary and your novel expressions. Why don't you throw a little more jargon at everyone. Maybe they won't notice your trade school, MS certification there on the wall. Get a real degree, Dummy.

This demonization of IT guys is despicable. What the hell is wrong with you people? Not enough hate in your life?

Is there no admin here to delete the posts of this no-class sub-human Evil_MoStlyChit_User nullity? Thank you very much.

The Dell ships with the same Core Duo CPU, a SMALLER HD, does not include the VERY NECESSARY Anti-Virus, Anti-Spyware software, an OS re-install disk ($10- thank you), a smaller capacity battery, No Quicken (Mac includes the base version, etc. When equipped to a comparable level of performance and features, the Dell costs more.

Think I'm making this up?
Open 2 browser windows or tabs and compare the specs and options. The only advantage the Dell has (only to some) is the larger display.

Truth Hz

Corporate buyers need notebook users to have access to websites and programs that unfortunately will not run on Macs. I'm not saying it's Apple's fault but it is reality. Macs are great for creative users but they are not ready for the business world. And that's too bad.

Nothing like name-calling and profanity to really ensure your posts are taken seriously! lol

Robb said, "Macs are great for creative users but they are not ready for the business world"

This may be semantics...but the Macs are ready for the business world. It is the software and web-site desginers who are not. However, I got around this "problem" sufficiently using Virtual PC. Now I won't need to.

Macs are ready for the business world. Doesn't NASA uses Macs

Boeing Seattle uses apple macs too

Evil_MS_Guy - Your name says it all; you got the adjective exactly right.

You display the type of zero-thought process that most corporate IT types that I've had the displeasure of trying to work with, against, and around for far too long have always displayed. Your "inside the box" and "MS all the way attitude" have crippled and converted the entire IT industry into the sweating, heaving mass of illiterate MS-toilet paper waving "certified" plumbers that make me ashamed to admit that I work in the IT world.

And by "plumbers", I don't mean the guys who actually fix things but the guys who have such a Mafia-type stranglehold on a market that they crush any competiton and innovation that doesn't fit their paradigm in a good-old-boy, "we're all the same and we like it that way" sort of outlook that leaves no room for actual support but instead pushes all effort into furthering someone's personal agenda against all odds and all common sense and has turned our IT departments into this huge sucking noise where your support dollars are simply funneled into this black hole of a money pit that is self-propogating.

I've worked on mainframes, mini computers, personal computers, and corporate computer departments as a programmer, software analyst, network administrator, lab manager, and helpdesk support since starting off with IBM card (and that's the old paper card) equipment in 1978. In those almost 30 years I have seen (and had to support) every generation of these less-than-adequate computers struggling to run a variety of inadequate operating systems, chiefly designed and kludged together by a bunch of people whose main goal was to make money at other people's expense. (That should have clued someone in long ago) The vast, undeserved wealth of Bill Gates and Microsoft comes from corporate pocketbooks, primarily.

And I saw them become, by hook and by crook, not by technical superiority, the "darling" of the Corporate world in what has become a deeply incestuous relationship. Microsoft has managed to embed themselves so deeply into the commercial corporate and government worlds that the main reason that Macs (and any valid other choice, like Linux) are villified is due to their lack of ability to interface with several self-perptuating monopolistic chunks of software that do nothing but suck money out of organizations at astonishing rates, such as Microsoft Exchange. That "lack of ability" is not Apple's fault, but Microsoft's purposeful choice. You can get better performance out of a single $500 Mac Mini running Post Office than you can a slew of $4000 Dell PowerEdge "servers" running Microsoft Exchange. And the amount of support required for Exchange in contrast is also staggering.

I mainly run UNIX-based servers now, by choice, and the majority of problems that we run into come from the small subset of Dell and Gateway "servers" that we have, running Microsoft software. They make up less than one-fifth of our other servers and consume more than 90% of our support time, updating security fixes, loading patches, rebuilding servers due to crashes or other unexplained software errors, running anti-virus software and corporate monitoring software to check licenses and verify configurations, submitting reports on their status and "level of security" (I'd laugh if it wasn't so darned ironic and stupid) to all levels of management.

And the other servers? Several running Oracle? Hardly a problem at all.

Another section had a "mission critical" application running on Oracle on another PC server. Did they have the same rock-steady and reliable performance that we had come to take for granted on our UNIX servers? Hardly. Oracle on that hardware and OS wheezes and shudders and struggles to perform. When the server crashes and goes belly-up (several times in one month), you see lots of folks in high places walking around with white faces trying to come up with some way to say that its not their fault. Do they learn from their mistakes and move it over to a more secure and more easily supportable and stable UNIX server? No. (More importantly, do they fire or crucify the snakes that made that decision in the first place? No.) They simply try to find some way to put the blame on someone else. And it continues for over a year with no change.

It all makes me decide that, after all this time, I need to move to a different career that doesn't have to deal with these idiots and these vastly inferior computers that have come to take over the computer landscape of today. I am utterly disgusted by what we've allowed ourselves to become and those fools that we've allowed to take over the reins and guide our destinies.

Sorry for the long post but it had to be said.

I bet that Intel as a company will switch to Apple. Installing security patches almost every day and restarting a machine cost them too much to not consider it. What will the IT world think when all of Intel is using Apple computers? Once Apple releases and Exchange equivalent then you can kiss MS goodbye. The only companies that won't switch are the ones that have old IT guys and lame business processes.

Coporate IT weenies ought to be fuming that Microsoft can't produce a faster, more secure, 64-bit operating system.

Adding a dual-core processor to a Dell with Windows is like putting a Tipo 133 V-12 engine in a Skoda Estelle with a Yugo transmission.

"Hey Bartt, sounds like a cowboy with no steers. What is the name of your wonderful Mac-driven construction company?"

I am not Bartt, but from 1985 through 1992 I introduced (reluctantly initially) Macintoshes through one of the largest construction companies in Australia (http://www.lendlease.com.au) with thousands of staff running hundreds of Macintoshes with negligible support costs.

In the mid-1990s some bone-head moved them to Windows (despite the user outcry) and the support costs went sky high and the stock price dropped. But hey... they were now INDUSTRY STANDARD.

MW: 'board' the IT bonehead was sleeping (woman) with the chairman of the board (man)

Evil_MS_User, you remind me so much of a guy I used to work with. He too, was filled with hate, and couldn't see beyond the screen of his Dull. When the company I was working for bought his, he was told to work with me to integrate the Macs we used into his Dull Network. Well, talk about unhelpful! Here are two of his reasons (he thought) Macs couldn't connect to the internet using the same Router as his precious Dulls:

1) Macs are a 'Security Risk' to the network (he said this with a straight face, and was SERIOUS!
2) Macs are 'just toys' and don't support common standards (again, said with a straight face!)

Anyways, I was higher up the management chain than him, and my boss (who is an avid Mac user) saw through all his myths and lies and in one weekend we did it all without his help. He had kittens when he returned on Monday and nearly broke down in tears.

12 months on we are nearly 100% Mac, and the idiot MCSE has 'moved on to pursue other interests.' You see, now our are filled with making our systems work FASTER, more EFFICIENTLY and we don't have to patch patches, update anti-virus, defragment, reinstall etc. Poor little Sean couldn't understand this concept, and was left twiddling his thumbs.

To be blunt, the sooner w@nkers like you move on the better, for the entire IT industry. No more M$, open source/OS X all the way.

Don't feed the trolls. Now, back to the subject of the article.

The reason for the situation where Apple gets to market first with new chips is obvious -- Apple's current small market share. All new chips come off new production lines which are ramping up and having to be tweaked and certified to go into full production mode. It happens every time for new devices. It is tautological. And Apple could only announce some, but not all, of its new designs for lack of parts. That is why many of us were disappointed in not seeing more new stuff at Macworld. Companies like Dell have to wait for a sufficient volume of product to be shipped before they can offer new computers.

Apple will not always have this advantage, which is a good thing.

Real IT guy,

Thank you!

So far, the best post this year.

Yonah : Jonah

Hey, the story of Jonah is the OT parallel to the NT story of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). Hang on - is Apple like the prodigal son returning to the IT world after years in the Moto/IBM desert? Wasn't the son eating iPods (or was that pods) with the pigs? Is it time to reluctantly warn the Evil_MS_Users (Ninevites) of the coming danger?

MW: 'faith' may we all get the faith of the Prodigal Son (use a Mac, trust in God). Hey, they don't call me Holy Mackerel for nothing!

Corporate mantra: No one ever got fired for choosing Microsoft products.

I see it this way, TOUGH SH@T!!! I would like the numbers on how much
it costs Corporate America a year for security, virus detection and spyware blocking. Not to mention how much cave dwellers like Evil_MS_User's cost.

He reminds me of a guy from ING that can't say 2 words with a DUH attached. I also think DB Admin needs a reality check. "I handle a time critical database on Oracle that accounts for about $100M in revenue per year". The Database makes $100M ?? Then why don't you put the database in charge? Come on!! You are just a TOOL and with Windows your a rusty TOOL.

2006 is the test for IT types, get on OSX or get out. CEOs, Board of Directors and VPs run the world, not you.

This is going to be fun!!!

Mass produced swiss cheese third-party conglomerations must wait for MicroSoft to patch their OS for the new chip to work properly. You IT patchers just sit around like usual and wait and do a spreadsheet or a simple document while Mac users do something much more important like creatively changing the world.

New Corporate Mantra: Email server down again? Make it work or just get out!!! Better get Mac.

I like people like Evil_MS_User. It's MCSE-only types whose training consists of following Microsoft procedures rather than understanding technology who make the most mistakes.

Then companies have to get in consultants like me to fix the mess that was once their network. And I can buy more property with all the money I make.

So please don't shoot the beast. Feel free to put him in his place with a few witty comments though.

Evil_MS_User = a very poor imitation of Sputnik®

Well, the heat's on but I'm staying in the kitchen. Now for some more reasoned debate...

I don't at all deny the security vulnerabilities of Windows - I have to deal with it everyday. But I've always maintained that they are rooted in legacy stuff that M$ HAS to maintain because of its huge installed base. No CEO will be happy if his CIO goes to him saying "we have to scrap the accounting system used by department Y because M$ dropped support for DCOM and RPC in its latest Service Pack."

The Jihad against M$ was begun by UNIX guys who were displaced by M$ products. Companies chose M$ products because M$ made their products easier to PROGRAM for. The UNIX and IBM guys suddenly saw their stranglehold on computing (via mainframes) evaporate as personal computing took hold. They have hated M$ and personal computers ever since.

And please note: if you look at the backgrounds of all the underground Hacking groups that target M$ - 2600, CHAOS - I can't remember all their names now, they all have UNIX backgrounds, either from work or school. They are very good at programming and that is how they prove themselves to their peers.

The problem escalated with the Internet. And it wasn't M$ who began what I believe is the Root Of All Evil - a browser actually EXECUTING CODE locally on the desktop. That little "feature" was introduced by our dear friend Andreesen at Netscape (lionized by the media) - who bragged that Javascript would make the OS "superfluous" with this move. Sun tried to keep those processes in their own little sandbox and everyone agreed that it was just too slow... so now parts of the JRE runs locally, too. Security considerations will always fall before the demands of the dollar.

Apple's best move was to drop MacOS and use its GUI over a Unix kernel - when they did that I told everyone it was the smartest move they did and actually started looking at Macs in a more favorable light. Of course, a lot of apps broke - but the Mac "faithful" didn't care. The installed base wasn't that large and they weren't running business critical apps on thousands of systems in the company, anyway. So it was a clean break.

But then I made the mistake of starting to visit Mac sites and I began to "feel the love". So - an eye for an eye.

When Unix-based systems get a larger share of the desktop (which will probably happen), then we'll see just how "secure" their vendors will be able to keep them against the hordes of hungry (and very expert) programmers from the former East Bloc, China, etc. Security researchers agree that M$ has the best system around for delivering updates to its users - out of necessity. It will be interesting to see how the others fare in the future.

Peace.

MDN has it right again! Good work, chaps!
The irony of the situation is so funny.
And it IS only going to get worse!
The new Apple (Intel) ad is weak to say the least, but it's a start.
Let's hope that the ads will get better and see heavy rotation from here on out.

"some nice Windows patches to patch patches you patched last week after the previous patch broke the patch you patched that didn't fix the original patch you patched, right?"

I picture Inspector Clouseau reading this dressed as a pirate with the eye patch desperately trying to keep that parrot on his shoulder inflated. Try it!

We hate you f-wierd you tool!

"Corporate IT buyers fuming"

So THAT is the horrific stench in the air. Mystery solved.

We will never support or recommend Macintosh computers in corporate.

It's signing our jobs death warrant.

We need MS to fail and fail repeatly so it justifies our jobs and gives a way to provide a salary for our families.

If we install Mac's and some hot shot smooth talker from Dell pops and grabs the "suits" ear about how much money they can save by switching to Dell and then the suits ask me why our whole operation is on a totally different operating system that's not standard and we have no choice but to use Apple's stuff no matte what they charge.

How long would you think my career would last with a blemish like that?

Heck I got 5 kids to feed.

F*CK APPLE, INTEGRATION INTO MAINSTREAM CORPORATIONS WILL NEVER OCCUR UNLESS MAC OS X RUNS EVERY PIECE OF WINDOWS SOFTWARE SEAMLESSLY WITH NO PERFORMANCE LOSS.

Then most corporate lemmings are too dumb to use two operating systems anyway, it will confuse them.

SO FORGET IT!! APPLE LOST.

Damn you, MDN!!!

You made me lose my place at which patch I'm supposed to apply to this stack of Inspirons. Was it the 3rd patch, or the 5th patch that patches the 2nd patch? Or was it the 18th patch? Or maybe the first 21 laptops were already done? You so darn confused me. It's like mumbling random numbers to a bank teller counting a stack of cash.

Hmmm…what an interesting revisionist version of reality you live in.

You speak of DCOM and MS' version of RPC as if it were somebody else's fault that they - along with several truckloads of MS' so called "embrace and extend" technologies - are riddled with security flaws.

The simple truth is that by introducing technologies like DCOM, ActiveX et al into operating systems that were little more than "lipstick on a pig" (Windows 95, 98, ME), Microsoft has been the architect of its own (and all of its customers) problems.

Of course, it would never have/has never occurred to Microsoft to promote CORBA as an object-request broker (or indeed any other standards-based technology [Windows Media vs. QuickTime/MPEG-4, Java, PNG, etc.) because that would have run counter to its (self-serving) commercial agenda.

And because it persists with a bizarre "not invented here" mindset that even Apple deserted back in the late Nineties, it has to create every single rivet on every single wheel itself so, instead of leveraging the work of either the open-source community or other commercial interests, it is continually faced with either building a safer, more secure mousetrap or building increasingly proprietary products with more bloated functionality to "lock in" their intellectually-addled customers. And lets try and imagine which side of the company wins…

Windows 2000 allegedly shipped with over 150,000 "issues" : Let's repeat that - ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND issues. Many of which compromised or continue to compromise the safe, secure and stable operation in the IT operations of governments, companies and charities. Was Windows XP any better? Not really.

As for companies choosing MS products because they're easier to program; this might be partially true (albeit from a very narrow perspective), but the reality is that most corporate enterprises originally purchased Office, Exchange et al because MS cross-subsidised the volume licensing of these additional products through the profits it earned from exercising (illegal) monopolistic pressure on OEM PC manufacturers, thus creating the illusion of cheaper products. And so the monopoly was widened, and the corporate customer base became more reliant on badly-engineered products and sub-systems.

Acer has a Duo Core system: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/12/review_acer_8204wlmi/

It has nice features. I wonder how well the MacBook Pro will do against it? Now we can almost compare apples to apples.

PS. You may not be able to boot from a firewire drive. I hope that's not true: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/12/apple_macbook_analysis/

VISTA and Mac OS X "Lepoard" will be so close in style, security and reliability that it will be rather trivial to switch Mac users to Windows Vista.

There really is no hope left for Mac's, it's over and it's been over for them for quite some time.

Apple has lost plenty of developers with this processor switch, some will never return. MacTels will have a crippling amount of software available for it, just the big names.

The next step is that Microsoft will put out a version of Windows Vista for Mactels, people can dual boot and as they work themselves into Vista and realize it's not so bad, it's secure and reliable, then of course all the software is available for it and the transition is complete.

Apple realized it couldn't continue anymore, the damage from John Scully was too great, Apple suffered under shoddy leadership for way too long.

Steve Jobs is getting old, he's the only one capable of making Apple what it is.

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that." - 06/06/2005

That spells "transition" right there.

Apple isn't going to protect their machines from Windows Vista, so this gives MS the green light to produce a copy and once done, developers will tell Mac users "just boot Windows Vista"

So this is how it's going to go down.

Apple will move more into selling profitable software, content and accessories.

Apple has already complied with Intels EFI, removed Firewire and changed processors.

Face it Macheads, it's over.

"And so the monopoly was widened, and the corporate customer base became more reliant on badly-engineered products and sub-systems."

Welcome to the American interpretation of laissez-faire economics. It is the nature of the beast to maximize profits. And the monopoly is the surest road to that goal. Take a look at the U.S. and try to count how many monopolies or quasi-monopolies exist. And the EU isn't any better - look at the number of "national champions" there are in the airline industry, telecom, auto manufacturing, etc.

I didn't ask for this - I would actually prefer a system where the best technology won out. But that is not the reality. So I work with it. If Unix-based systems ever became the dominant computing base again I would migrate to that with no problem. That's the difference between me and you - I'm a realist.

So you people should really stop whining. Heck, VHS won out over Betamax, and guess which was the better technology.

I run, and make money with my Mega production company. I make 'Boodles'. I have 3000 Macs and one IT girl who also makes the tea. I have one Dell (for checking the weather) and have 74 IT men (big, strong guys) to keep the Dell pumping.

InsideAppleman what the heck are you talking about? Vista is missing half the features it was supposed to have. Apple is in its refining stage of OSX while Microsoft is going to be putting out pretty much a beta product when it finally ships Vista the end of the year if not next year. Even there demos are still crashing just wait till they get Vista on real customer computers and see how many crashes will happen. Apple has the stable, secure platform and they control the whole widget both software and hardware and everything is engineered for each other. Microsoft only controls the software while all the Dells and HP's of the world do what ever they want with there hardware and all together they prey that it might work. But then they end up with Microsofts terrible security issues which they themselves actually program into there operating system so you end up with spyware,malware, trojans, virsuses. And all they want you to do is sign up for some service and pay big dollars every fricken year to supposedly guarantee you that your PC will be safe. Isn't that what you are supposed to be initially buying the product for? Reliability and security so you can just get your work done and not have to worry about all that. With OSX it is a reality today, not a promise in the air for the future like Microsoft says. You really need a reality check.

@ Evil >

Whoa there Silver!

A couple of posts back, you distinctly implied that MS has the superior, easy-to-program technology.

Now you start quoting VHS vs. Betamax, inferring that Macintosh is the Betamax in your analogy.

Do you need me to buy you some flip-flops, because yours are going to wear out fairly soon.

Funny. Of the few buyers I know, they all want functional $600 laptops and could care less about the latest and greatest processors because what's out works. Granted my sample size is very small, but it seems as if this article is making a mountain out of an anthill.

No, I am not flip-flopping. I've always conceded that the Unix-based OS is inherently more secure than the Windows OS because of its client-server architecture. However, M$ started moving towards that paradigm with XP, where your desktop is really a Terminal Services session with the OS. And with Vista the migration will be complete. All the while maintaining support for upwards of 80% of the literally tens of thousands of Windows applications out there. For any corporation, backwards-compatibility is key.

BTW, want to keep your Windows NT/2000/XP system a lot more secure? Use a standard user account for day-to-day work and an admin account for installing stuff (which is the Unix way). That's what all the corporations have been doing since NT4.0, with varying success because software developers have been slow in migrating their apps to work with low-permissions user profiles. But it's gotten a LOT better and very few companies nowadays still give their users administrator rights to their desktops.

And I never said that MS had the "superior, easy-to-program technology" - I said that M$ made it easier for developers "to program for" their OS. How did they do it? By releasing free - and rather good - Rapid Application Development (RAD) kits. "Look, build a database app in 4 easy steps!". And the developer looks good, takes home his paycheck and buys a new TV. Simple.

EMU (and we know how he was operated) said "BTW, want to keep your Windows NT/2000/XP system a lot more secure? Use a standard user account for day-to-day work and an admin account for installing stuff (which is the Unix way). That's what all the corporations have been doing since NT4.0, with varying success because software developers have been slow in migrating their apps to work with low-permissions user profiles. But it's gotten a LOT better and very few companies nowadays still give their users administrator rights to their desktops."

Do you realise how behind the times that sounds here? On a Mac forum? Where everyone has been doing that for years?

Anyway, this thread went downhill when the political posts appeared. I'm out.

Dave H:

You probably won't read this since you're "out" - but I've been doing that on my personal systems since NT4.0. Which was released around 1996, I seem to recall. So really - who is behind the times here?

"The installed base wasn't that large and they weren't running business critical apps on thousands of systems in the company, anyway. So it was a clean break."

Actually, it was a clean break because Apple and its developers made the transition mostly painless. Though, I admit I hadn't transitioned any of the workflows I managed to OS X until Panther. And, Panther is the last of the legacy supporting MacOSs and Tiger is forcing me to upgrade a few WinNT servers to Win2K. But they needed upgrading anyway.

"We hate you f-wierd [sic] you tool!"

That doesn't make any sense. If I'm a tool and you're a cunt, we should be feeling the love.

Perhaps its nothing to do with Intel and everything to do with Dell's and HP's production problems.

Now, Rob. If you're going to start bringing common sense into this thread, we're going to lose a lot of angry trolls and then what? Think of the children.

Adul/Abdul, whatever your nom-de-plume is:

Whilst your 'contribution' might well be valuable on a political forum, this isn't a political forum. Or perhaps that's your intent... to add your views anywhere you see fit?

Don't you see the certain irony in your headline: '...shocking interview with an Iraqi suicide bomber [my emphasis].

Please go somewhere else.

regardless, I would never boot into windows. There is not excitement at the possibility of a dual boot. Why on earth would I boot my mac into a crappy OS like windows?

And for the windows fanboys, why would they boot into a mac OS that is inferior?

This whole argument is lame. Evil_MS_User does sound like the typical IT guy (We have a few like him where I work as well). Complete ignorance - bleeding ignorance. I say - let em go, they arent worth wasting my time in arguments. Im in an IT department, and im our MAC guy. Im not out fixing machines all day long, or installing patches all day long, or restarting machines, or formatting machines - all to make them work. I sit on my mac and get my work done (as do the other 30+ with Macs in the office).

Personally, I get tired of his lame excuses - and hes really running out of them.

Evil_MS_User - I dont have anything against you, you sound like a semi-intelligent person. So please dont take this as a direct attack - I just see some similarities between your comments (which do seem to flip flop) and the MS guys I work with. Sometimes your approach seems a little off - BUT, this is the internet, so there will always be mass confusion.

Peace,

Mr evil is going all soft and cuddly. Ain't it sweet.

re: Well I'm a corporate IT guy and we want Dell to switch to AMD - better technology. Intel can take its on-chip DRM somewhere else.

And to all you Mac losers that hate us - the feeling is _more_ than mutual

But there's one difference between us and you - we can make your lives miserable and you can't do a thing about it.

And we even get paid for it!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ...

I am truly EVIL 8-)

----

twat.

Go back to your bug ridden, virus infected and ancient OS pos and leave the real people to use the real technology.

One day you will wake up and say thank god for an alternative to windows. Probably when you have lost 10 years of familiy photos and your music collection.

Until that eventuallity - leave the room - you are not invited and you aint wearing the right pass to get in.