Alan Baker
In article <slrnl0099b.llh.jedi@nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>wrote:

JEDIDIAH
On 2013-08-05, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>wrote:

Alan Baker
In article <ktmekq$6pe$1@news.albasani.net>, Nobody <invalid@invalid.com>wrote:

Nobody
Alan Baker wrote:

Alan Baker
In article <ktji4m$io0$2@news.albasani.net>, Nobody <invalid@invalid.com>wrote:

Nobody
Alan Baker wrote:

Alan Baker
In article <jvoa4p$s1e$1@news.albasani.net>, Nobody <invalid@invalid.com>wrote:

Nobody
On 8/6/2012 1:48 AM, Mike wrote:

Mike
Quite a few around the control room at JPL.

Oh wait, the trolls say Macs are only for graphics!

Nobody
US tax payers can be happy their money is buying some nice toys.

Alan Baker
Riiiight.

Because magically, the Mac is exempt from cost-cutting at NASA.

LOL

Nobody
So you're saying there isn't a lot of Macs at the JPL?

Alan Baker
I'm saying that despite budget cuts there are clearly people at JPL who value having a Mac enough to spend the money.

Nobody
So they are spending tax payer money on fancy toys, in spite of your claim budget cuts prevent this.

Alan Baker
Your statements are based on a false premise which itself is based on your biases.

Since you don't like Macs, you assume they're "fancy toys".

The simpler conclusion is that if people are still buying Macs when there is a cash crunch, it's probably because they value them highly for their needs.

JEDIDIAH
Unless you need something pretty to impress your conspicous consumer friends, an Apple product is probably a waste of money. They come in form factors that are not terribly work friendly. They sacrifice functionality for aesthetics. They have fewer available options.

Unless you have a hardon for a particular bit of Mac-only software, the Mac itself is pretty pointless.

Macs are for running MacOS, and that's only for the vanishingly small minority of people that do real work with Apple hardware.

Alan Baker
Ah! The circular argument!