Need a new Laptop.Should I choose a Mac?

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

Sorry for the double post but this is a bit unfair you people are always recommending reconditions macs over brand new PCs all the time with no problem and now its suddenly a problem when someone does it the other way round *confused*

There's nothing wrong with refurbished computers.

However, it's a little disingenuous to say that a particular PC is cheaper than a Mac if if turns out the the PC is refurbished, and the Mac is brand new.

busenbust

Just lateral

Robgmun

I see apple more like:

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

Which is the very thing I'm trying to get across; it's the argument that matters, not what job the person has.

No disagree, its the reason behind the argument that matter. Just because we see eye to eye doesn't mean I agree with you. The roads we travelled to get to the agreement are different.

Of course it is. Person A makes a claim, and Person B tries to refute it without dealing with it.

They have dealt with it. Their opinion is just as valid to them as yours is to you.

It's totally wrong. I'm not saying that my opinion isn't subjective. But you can't prove that whatever I say about Apple is wrong by pointing out that I like Apple. It's irrelevant.

You're right it is irrelevant. You can't prove to me that whatever you say about apple isn't coloured by your liking apple so much. Like proving the pink unicorn/god/spaghetti monster exist, you cant prove a negative.

You not using it or not being interested in it isn't enough to show that it's no good, just as me being interested in it isn't enough to show that it is good.

Exactly.

You think I can change reality just by thinking about it?

Objective or subjective???

Marty_J

Robgmun wrote: »

I see apple more like:

Apart from the fact that iTunes music has no DRM, and Apple were instrumental in convincing record companies to remove it from their products, that would be funny!

asininity wrote: »

No disagree, its the reason behind the argument that matter. Just because we see eye to eye doesn't mean I agree with you. The roads we travelled to get to the agreement are different.

But these things don't make any difference. If I had never seen the sky, and believed it was blue because that was my favourite colour, that would hardly prove the sky wasn't blue, now would it?

My biases don't have any effect on reality.

They have dealt with it. Their opinion is just as valid to them as yours is to you.

But they haven't dealt with it. You can't refute an argument by ignoring it.

You're right it is irrelevant. You can't prove to me that whatever you say about apple isn't coloured by your liking apple so much. Like proving the pink unicorn/god/spaghetti monster exist, you cant prove a negative.

But even if what I say is coloured by my liking of them, it still doesn't prove anything. It's entirely possible for me to believe something about Apple, and for that thing to be true.

That I really like Apple is neither here nor there.

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

Apart from the fact that iTunes music has no DRM, and Apple were instrumental in convincing record companies to remove it from their products, that would be funny!

It is funny. Unlike the music they restrict you to their way of doing things.

But these things don't make any difference. If I had never seen the sky, and believed it was blue because that was my favourite colour, that would hardly prove the sky wasn't blue, now would it?

If we had both never seen the sky, you thought is was blue(because it your fav colour) I thought it was green(because its my fav colour) doesn't make you right when we find out it is blue.

My biases don't have any effect on reality.

They do on your reality. My reality and yours aren't mutually exclusive.

But they haven't dealt with it. You can't refute an argument by ignoring it.

You can if its stupid.

But even if what I say is coloured by my liking of them, it still doesn't prove anything. It's entirely possible for me to believe something about Apple, and for that thing to be true.

As mentioned above its possible that what you say turns out to be right but just because its right doesn't mean the reasoning behind it is. Thats the important bit.

I could say the sun will rise tomorrow because the Sun God is doing his daily ride in his fire chariot. Does that make me right?

That I really like Apple is neither here nor there.

You like apple so are willing to over look things I'm not, for you they aren't a problem for me they might be. So yes the fact you like apple is vital.

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

It is funny. Unlike the music they restrict you to their way of doing things.

Why do you think their App Store has been such a success with both developers and end users?

You can if its stupid.

You can't. The way to refute a stupid argument is to show that it's stupid.

I could say the sun will rise tomorrow because the Sun God is doing his daily ride in his fire chariot. Does that make me right?

And if I said I don't believe in the Sun God, so that means the Sun is not going to rise tomorrow, would that make sense?

You like apple so are willing to over look things I'm not, for you they aren't a problem for me they might be. So yes the fact you like apple is vital.

But if I give a reasoned argument in defence of something, wouldn't you agree that someone would have to refute my argument by dealing with the issues it raises?

Clearly, calling me a mactard doesn't do that.

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

Why do you think their App Store has been such a success with both developers and end users?

How many hoops do they make those developers jump through?

You can't. The way to refute a stupid argument is to show that it's stupid.

Sometimes the best way is to say "shut it stupid!"

And if I said I don't believe in the Sun God, so that means the Sun is not going to rise tomorrow, would that make sense?

No if you dont believe in the sun god I would either have to convert you or slaughter you and your family. The sun god has a no tolerance policy for non believers.

But if I give a reasoned argument in defence of something, wouldn't you agree that someone would have to refute my argument by dealing with the issues it raises?

Unless the issues raised are either stupid or purposely unprovable.

Clearly, calling me a mactard doesn't do that.

Shut it mactard!

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

How many hoops do they make those developers jump through?

It mustn't be too many, otherwise no one would develop for it.

Sometimes the best way is to say "shut it stupid!"

I admit to having resorted to such a response myself on a not infrequent basis, but unfortunately, it doesn't prove anything aside from a lack of patience.

No if you dont believe in the sun god I would either have to convert you or slaughter you and your family. The sun god has a no tolerance policy for non believers.

As long as I don't have to tithe, I'm good with that.

Unless the issues raised are either stupid or purposely unprovable.

Well, then it should be enough to demonstrate either of those two things.

Shut it mactard!

You win!

RainbowShooter

Let's all play nice now :beer: