Apple products are priced too high?


Recommended Posts

Why would I need to do that? Did I not tell you what I use the majority of iWork for? Wanna bet that more people will use Office for things that I described than for complex things that you described?

All you did is successfully describe ignorance. Thanks.

I don't think you even know what the definition of ignorance is. I know quite a few OS X users besides myself and every one of them has shared with me the pains of using iWork.

 

For grits and shins, I wrote a guide a couple weeks ago in Pages because I didn't want to fire up Windows. It was singlehandedly the most painful thing I have ever endured. Heaven forbid you want backwards compatibility going just one version back, too.

A bad program is one that hampers my productivity so clearly you and I have a difference of opinion.

 

I'm so sorry Mr. xWhiplash. I didn't mean to offend your sensitive nature. Will you forgive me?

 

 

Ok, so GIMP, Pixelmater, Photoshop Elements, ...

 

EVERY one of those is a program that is THHHHHAAAAATTTTTTT BAD?  They certainly hamper my productivity as I need the full Photoshop product since it has a lot of features I need.

 

So you are saying, every product in the history of computing is THHHHHAAAAATTTTT BAD unless it is the one you are using or has the exact same features?  Ok then. 

People saying that apple being overpriced is a myth, or people are wrong/stupid - need to realize "overpriced" or "expensive" are relative terms.

Relative to the person for various reasons - how much money a person has, how much value that person puts on things that apple is known for...

There really is no correct answer

  • Like 2

Ok, so GIMP, Pixelmater, Photoshop Elements, ...

 

EVERY one of those is a program that is THHHHHAAAAATTTTTTT BAD?  They certainly hamper my productivity as I need the full Photoshop product since it has a lot of features I need.

 

So you are saying, every product in the history of computing is THHHHHAAAAATTTTT BAD unless it is the one you are using or has the exact same features?  Ok then. 

Weird. Mr. xWhiplash, can you tell me how I get all of those programs in the iWork suite? I must have missed it the last time I installed it.

 

I'm so sorry Mr. xWhiplash. I didn't mean to offend your sensitive nature. Will you forgive me?

The strawman building in this one is strong.

I can bet that a huge chunk of office users do very little and as such are punishing themselves by spending money. I presume you're one of them. Sour because it costs to make a simple spreadsheet.

I think you underestimate what excel can do and how heavily used in the office work environments.

  • Like 2

People saying that apple being overpriced is a myth, or people are wrong/stupid - need to realize "overpriced" or "expensive" are relative terms.

Relative to the person for various reasons - how much money a person has, how much value that person puts on things that apple is known for...

There really is no correct answer

I can accept that.  Well said.

Again, it is not the product that is at fault here.  When I had to use Pixelmator a few times, I had a similar problem to you.  Different products have different workflows.  Using Photoshop for over a decade, it was very frustrating using Pixelmator.

 

Does that give me the right saying it is a bad product?  Nope, not at all.  It ran, it worked as advertised.  Different products have different workflows.  iWork is different than Office.

I don't think you even know what the definition of ignorance is. I know quite a few OS X users besides myself and every one of them has shared with me the pains of using iWork.

For grits and shins, I wrote a guide a couple weeks ago in Pages because I didn't want to fire up Windows. It was singlehandedly the most painful thing I have ever endured. Heaven forbid you want backwards compatibility going just one version back, too.

You're trying to translate your own, and your friends, opinions of a system to a broader audience. That's the definition of ignorance.

Again, it is not the product that is at fault here.  When I had to use Pixelmator a few times, I had a similar problem to you.  Different products have different workflows.  Using Photoshop for over a decade, it was very frustrating using Pixelmator.

 

Does that give me the right saying it is a bad product?  Nope, not at all.  Different products have different workflows.  iWork is different than Office.

Weird. I discuss iWork, and you discuss Google Docs, Photoshop, GIMP, and Pixelmator.

 

I think you lost the plot, sir.

I think you underestimate what excel can do and how heavily used in the office work environments.

Next time you join a conversation, please scroll back and do some reading. Nowhere did I bash any aspect of the Microsoft Office system. It's amazing, the best there is, but I don't need any of its features because of the costs. For what I use iWork, buying and paying for office would be a very dumb idea.

You're trying to translate your own, and your friends, opinions of a system to a broader audience. That's the definition of ignorance.

No, I believe the definition of ignorance is 

 

lack of knowledge or information.

Weird. Mr. xWhiplash, can you tell me how I get all of those programs in the iWork suite? I must have missed it the last time I installed it.

 

I'm so sorry Mr. xWhiplash. I didn't mean to offend your sensitive nature. Will you forgive me?

The strawman building in this one is strong.

 

What are you talking about?  You said iWork is THHHHHAAAAATTTTT bad because it hampers your productivity.  Do you know what comparisons are?  I compared it to the photo manipulation and editing software I have used in the past.  NONE of those are BAD products.  They work and they work EXACTLY as advertised.  Yes, they DO hamper my productivity, but they are not bad products because of that.

 

So this is what we call a comparison.  Just like iWork hampers your Office productivity, GIMP hampers my Photoshop productivity.  That does NOT mean that GIMP is a horrible horrible BAD product.

 

THAT is why I brought up those other products.

What are you talking about?  You said iWork is THHHHHAAAAATTTTT bad because it hampers your productivity.  Do you know what comparisons are?  I compared it to the photo manipulation and editing software I have used in the past.  NONE of those are BAD products.  They work and they work EXACTLY as advertised.  Yes, they DO hamper my productivity, but they are not bad products because of that.

I do know what comparisons are, but do you? Photoshop and Pixelmator don't seem to be relevant comparisons.

Next time you join a conversation, please scroll back and do some reading. Nowhere did I bash any aspect of the Microsoft Office system. It's amazing, the best there is, but I don't need any of its features because of the costs. For what I use iWork, buying and paying for office would be a very dumb idea.

 

 

.

I can bet that a huge chunk of office users do very little and as such are punishing themselves by spending money. I presume you're one of them. Sour because it costs to make a simple spreadsheet.

Okay.... Excel is a big reason people pay for office and is used for complex things.

Wow - this thread really has people's claws and fangs showing - its just a discussion about a company's products... would anyone get this upset over the cost/utility of Dyson vacuum cleaners ?

 

I like my Shark better :p

Bingo! Now you can you stop trying to press your opinion as a fact?

You screwed up when you claimed that I said anything was a fact.

Wow, LOL.

 

The plot has been lost for sure.

 

So explain to me how iWork and Office (both Office productivity software) can be compared, but Pixelmator and Photoshop (both graphics editing software) cannot?  There are a lot of articles and discussions about Pixelmator being a decent alternative to Photoshop....Seems to be they are comparable.

 

Just like how iWork affects your office productivity, Pixelmator affects my graphics productivity.

Okay.... Excel is a big reason people pay for office and is used for complex things.

Exactly. No denying that. But wanna bet that it isn't the majority that use it for complex things? Just like the majority of MacBook owners are not into audio/video/photo editing...

So explain to me how iWork and Office (both Office productivity software) can be compared, but Pixelmator and Photoshop (both graphics editing software) cannot?  There are a lot of articles and discussions about Pixelmator being a decent alternative to Photoshop....Seems to be they are comparable.

Are you debating with yourself? I didn't discuss either of those products.

 

Do you also bring tennis rackets to football games?

Exactly. No denying that. But wanna bet that it isn't the majority that use it for complex things? Just like the majority of MacBook owners are not into audio/video/photo editing...

How will you substantiate your data for that bet? You claim I state things as facts when you are no better.

ARE YOU SERIOUS ?!?!?!   My Dyson Animal Pwns your Shark!   You know nothing !!

:D

Yeah but Photoshop can totally outclass it when it comes to graphics!

Are you debating with yourself? I didn't discuss either of those products.

 

Do you also bring tennis rackets to football games?

 

So you really don't know what a comparison is?

 

You said iWork affects your productivity.  Well Pixelmator affects mine.  Does that mean it is a bad product?  No

 

We are discussing a product that affects productivity.  We are not discussing different things.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Yup, that's a doozy right there 😄
    • It's a bundle of tools created by a variety of people, so things can go wrong sometimes. It's a great addition to Windows, and I use a lot of the tools on a daily basis. Also, it's still a 0.**** release so quick updates are to be expected 😉
    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!