4 ms·
...says someone from an article in an Apple enthusiast column in which all links are either self-referential or point to Apple related sites, and not a single o
by squarefoot 5y ago
...says someone from an article in an Apple enthusiast column in which all links are either self-referential or point to Apple related sites, and not a single one goes to any actual information directly from IBM. The fact that there's not one mention of Linux, although IBM invested a lot in it since the late 90s, speaks volumes about the credibility of this article.
- gigel82 5y agoHow dareth thou! (you'll rile up the fanboys...)
- squarefoot 5y agoHeh, I noticed:^) Privacy and other considerations aside, I'm not against Apple or their products, which are much better built than the vast majority of PCs out there, and of course cost as such, but one can't become a Mac user without being involved in the Apple ecosystem which surely means more consistency but also being more closed (the former being a natural byproduct of the latter). If this article falsely praised Linux without any reference to information that proves the contrary where it applies I would be pissed off as well. As a Linux enthusiast (not fanboy) there's nothing worse than having people that I "converted" to Linux going back to Windows and telling me that I was lying when I told them that Linux was superior in this or that. The article tells something that if true would surely make some noise, especially since two years later they acquired RedHat. I would expect a link to IBM telling us the same thing, and not an article that essentially links to other versions of itself.
- cube00 5y agoApple related sites that seem to have since removed their content.