Jump to content

Mac Users Have Different Brains


Numberzz
 Share

150 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

my turn?

 

first;

i haven't read this study in its entirety, but from what i see, it's rife with confounding. that aside, let's take peek (and i suck at foruming and using quote boxes =( ).

Psychologists claim users of Apple Mac computers have a distinct mindset that predetermines their responses to and interpretations of situations.

appetite successfully whetted!

 

A study of 7,500 people found that Mac users are more liberal, less modest, and more assured of their own superiority than the population at large.

though one could argue that these are qualities that are relatively common to people who could be considered by most to be "intelligent," i'd like to kinda pick at them one by one.

 

1.) more liberal - would kinda make sense that someone who would consider themselves more liberal by word or action may be drawn to a platform such as the mac. i oft see alongside a liberal outlook on life a certain degree of disillusionment with a (the?) establishment, which in the case of operating systems, is Microsoft. freedom to choose to be a part of the "other" group, or rather, not a part of the "sheep" may well motivate some to use a mac.

 

2.) less modest - certainly a trait of a person who considers his or herself intelligent. as hinted earlier, one who sees his or herself as intelligent may look to, in a sense, transcend the commonplace so as not to feel or be considered as a person who has easily succumbed to tradition (we see marketers appealing to this very sense with phrases such as, "think different").

 

3.) more assured of their own superiority than the population at large - some people enjoy being part of a club, an exclusive subset or some larger group and once that goal is obtained, condescendence ensues (black turtleneck not required).

 

The boffins from Mindset Media say that as such, Mac users are also more likely to seek varied and novel experiences, believing that imagination and intellectual curiosity contribute to a life well lived.

this ties into the fact that, i would suppose, creative people are drawn to a platform such as the mac. some would argue that the best movie, music, photo editing apps are all for the mac and exclusively for the mac and with no real alternative on the pc platform (one HUGE reason i would presume a person looking to do something creative would go to a platform such as the mac, one wherein all the useful toys lie).

 

Mac users are also more receptive to their own inner feelings than PC counterparts and may feel both happiness and unhappiness more intensely.

manic depression and artists/creative mind? some of the worlds best works were created during manic episodes, i hear.

 

The survey revealed that people with a high openness rating (more open-minded) are upto 60 percent more likely to buy a Mac.

it would take an open mind to use an operating system different than the ones in almost every single possible store in which one can buy a computer. most people lack the time and/or tenacity to try such a thing, i'd imagine. moreover, it'd take a pretty open mind to spend 3000$ on a 1500$ machine (i love that quote!)

 

Sarah Welch, COO and co-founder of Mindset Media says that this knowledge allows companies like Apple to target potential users of the right psychographic.

 

"For the first time, marketers with brands that have distinctive Mindset Profiles, like Apple, can directly reach the people with the personality and attitudes that love what they sell, " she said.

meh. apple's been doing this thus far. i'm just biding my time until apple become the next microsoft, for the sake of shareholders' profits.

 

it's certainly that mac has some magical power to change you into an open-minded, intelligent, creative, manic depressive individual, but that it seems that people with one or more of the aforementioned traits may be more inclined to begin (AND continue) using macs because of the software, the "zomg, macs is a culture!!!111one" aspect of mac-dom, etc.

 

i'm sure that many of the same qualities are present in SOME pc users, but sample size must be taken into consideration as well (i.e., the overwhelming abundance of traits of people using pc simply because that's all they know vis-a-vis those of mac users who chose to use it for whatever the reason).

 

so certain people are drawn to mac, just as certain people are drawn to certain climates; we should not poll floridians and summarily conclude that people who like warm climates are more likely to be 65+ years old (weak argument, i know, but useful for illustrating, like crayons XD ).

 

that said...

second;

wtf was all that stuff about homosexual and macs, i read the site, but i didn't see anything like that. what does {censored} hafta do with mac? well, i have an idea...

 

and finally...

third;

i enjoyed the brief causerie between Maxintosh and Killa CLiDE, but i find myself siding with CLiDE (or is "Killa" better?). please note that i am in no way attacking anyone personally, i just wanted to bring up some pts. right quick.

 

1.) i have a hard time wrapping my head around the notion that testing one's proficiency and reading and writing one's native language can gage much else than simply that. i would certainly include ability to speak with some degree of fluency in a test of intelligence. moreover, a large written vocabulary, though impressive, may be indicative of nothing more proficiency at using a thesaurus or more frequent contact with eloquent instruction manuals (!?). i don't know how the tests were performed or how complex thinking was measured, so i can't really comment further on that.

 

2.) i fail to see the link between pc users using phrases as, "cus iz da shizzle tru dat," and implicit lack of intelligence, relative to the "average mac user." in fact, i'm more impressed with people who can flip back and forward; i find it coooooooool hehe. as long as the individual can speak "proper" english when necessary...

 

of course we could get into the likelihood of a person living in a socioeconomic class wherein s/he is more frequently exposed to people who speak ebonics could be able to pay 3000$ for a 1500$ machine (sprinkle in a tad more thought and one can see a little more clearly another facet of the "mac users are smart, pc users are not fallacy").

 

3.)

Sorry bud, I used to be a recording engineer and you're talking out of your butt. First of all you are using the term 'professional producer' very loosely. Because of technology advancements, the term today is nearly synonymous with "musician". Secondly a producer could technically be anyone who just guides the musicians in some way, or works on the recording, does scheduling or simply lends an ear to the recording. It takes no Einstein to do any of that. Anyone could 'technically' be called a 'professional producer' simply by leaning a hand on a project and getting paid for it. Big deal. You're obviously using the term a lot differently than most people in the business would. The "producers" that you listed simply are not in the same league as most other true professional producers in the music business.

here, max, you begin to talk (intended word usage) about lax usage of the term, "professional producer" and i was very much enjoying your explanations of varying tiers of abilities and what-not up until the point at which you say, "Anyone could 'technically' be called a 'professional producer' [...]." CLiDE never explicitly mentioned whether or not the producers he listed were "true" or not, he simply said that they were, and it is possible that those same people could fit into "anyone's" definition of "professional producer," which is the only real requirement for his statement to maintain it's soundness; had he listed those as "true," then you would've won that since you never really mentioned how "most people in the business would [define 'professional producer']", though even still.... again, great explanations!

 

4.)

There was NO mention of talking, and you have NO proof that any of those people read or write like that in real life, so there goes half of your argument right there. You also have no proof that any of those people listed insist on Macs for production purposes. Just because someone might have a copy of Logic on their Mac doesn't make them a professional producer I'll agree that they may have someone else use it for PRE-production purposes, but not full production

this set here, i have a hard time understanding. as i mentioned above, the whole reading and writing thing seems to have been brought up as an issue for the sake checking one's intelligence (please correct me if i'm wrong). in that i find it difficult to imagine anyone (of skill) attempting to measure a person's intelligence without measuring speech proficiency (e.g. talking) to some degree, i find it difficult to understand the mention of "NO mention of talking"; "NO talking" would seem to hurt the hypothetical intelligence test argument invoked earlier. in other words, i wouldn't trust the results of an intelligence test if it wasn't a full one (like wais-xxx, sbv or w/e). okay, train of thought derailed, but i think my point was already made. the "NO mention" rebuttal almost seems as using an omission as a shield. or defense, rather.

 

5.)

and you have NO proof that any of those people read or write like that in real life, so there goes half of your argument right there.

i wanna use the 'no proof that x does, yet no proof the x doesn't' card here.

 

6.)

Your reasoning is so full of holes that it makes me want to go out and buy some swiss cheese. Mmm... cheese

j'dore this phrase; i might hafta steal it and use it myself. though sometimes it makes me think something like, "this glass is so full of water that it makes me want to go out and buy... more water."

 

7.)

That's another reason why clidester is wrong, as ebonics are not a users own native language.

well, i'm no linguist, but using AAPL's own dictionary.app, i've found out that Ebonics is, "American black English regarded as a language in its own right rather than a dialect of standard English." i'd imagine that if the first and only language that a person can speak is Ebonics, then it could, perhaps, be considered his or her "native" language, but i'm not sure (cf. disclaimer preceding paragraph).

 

8.)

Mac users are smarter

nuh uh, hackintosh users are, pbbt. ;)

 

oh noez, tl;dr

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Cool post -- brings forth some good points :censored2:

Sorry bud, I used to be a recording engineer and you're talking out of your butt. First of all you are using the term 'professional producer' very loosely. Because of technology advancements, the term today is nearly synonymous with "musician". Secondly a producer could technically be anyone who just guides the musicians in some way, or works on the recording, does scheduling or simply lends an ear to the recording. It takes no Einstein to do any of that. Anyone could 'technically' be called a 'professional producer' simply by leaning a hand on a project and getting paid for it. Big deal. You're obviously using the term a lot differently than most people in the business would. The "producers" that you listed simply are not in the same league as most other true professional producers in the music business. Thirdly my original post said, and I quote:

There was NO mention of talking, and you have NO proof that any of those people read or write like that in real life, so there goes half of your argument right there. You also have no proof that any of those people listed insist on Macs for production purposes. Just because someone might have a copy of Logic on their Mac doesn't make them a professional producer :wacko: I'll agree that they may have someone else use it for PRE-production purposes, but not full production, so, as usual clide, you have nothing but a straw-man argument. Your reasoning is so full of holes that it makes me want to go out and buy some swiss cheese. Mmm... cheese :(

This post is too ignorant to dignify a response. Get educated, please.

32691308__oPt.jpg

Dr. Dre, an American record producer, rapper, actor and record executive. - Wikipedia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Apple just markets their product better and so that it appeals to people more. Apple is more like a clothing brand and so more homo's like it, they like there little pink iPOD's instead of M$'s more industrial looking Zune. The fancy colors appeal to women and teenagers that dont want the drama of getting things to work they just want it to work. PC's are pretty much built by people and so they are smarter because they have to build them and make them run, and I have run into plenty of PC's owners that think they are superior just because they can build a PC, which isn't really that hard if you are careful.

 

The truly superior people are the ones that can take the best from both worlds and make them work and not feel superior to anyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

some of the worlds best works were created during manic episodes

...while drinking absinth :D

 

as long as the individual can speak "proper" english when necessary

Yes, we agree also :)

 

CLiDE never explicitly mentioned whether or not the producers he listed were "true" or not, he simply said that they were

Exactly. And his opinion does not make it fact :D They would be considered "professional" only by the virtue that they are being paid for the service. However, most other professionals in this field have many other higher credentials. That is why I said he used the term loosely :)

 

i wouldn't trust the results of an intelligence test...

Either would I, but the test mentioned was not an intelligence test, it was more of a vocabulary test. What they found was that PC users generally used only 500 unique words, while Mac users generally used almost 900. That's almost twice as many, and while it isn't a 'test' for intelligence per se, it does however clearly show that the Mac users were able to express more complex thinking, and in real life I find the correlation to be true.

 

i might hafta steal it and use it myself.

Feel free to use it, cheese is good for you :)

 

This post is too ignorant to dignify a response.

Translation: you couldn't back up anything that you claimed with facts, also, posting a posed picture of someone sitting in front of a keyboard in no way proves that they we're using it for full production work. Everything in that picture could just as easily be used for pre-production work. All you do is post one false analogy after another, and then try to link them into your own morphed logic. Sorry, but that's not how facts work in the real world :) Spike Lee, Prince and Ice T also all use a Mac, but they are highly intelligent people in their field, which further disproves your theory. I could literally list hundreds of other highly intelligent artists that also use Macs. Looks like your little list of 5 are the exception and not the rule ;) Sammy Peralta, who works with Alicia Keys, Ashanti, Craig David, Destiny's Child and Missy Elliot - uses a Mac. Kipper, who is a grammy award winner, and who works with Mary J Blige, James Taylor, Stevie Wonder, Jason Rebello and Sting - uses a Mac. Andy Earl, who is the creative genius who did Pink Floyd’s 'Delicate Sound of Thunder' album cover, plus MANY other classic photographs - uses a Mac. These people are all highly educated and they seem to give what the study said some validity. Of course no one here is trying to claim that buying a Mac makes you intelligent, but I DO believe that highly intelligent people, and people who are highly creative - tend to use Macs. I do not have a scientific explanation for why this is, I just know that in real life that's the way it seems to work out, and it doesn't matter what field they represent. For example; David Bowie, Bono, Hans Zimmer, Peter Gabriel and Seal - all use Macs. George Lucas, Robert Zemeckis and Francis Ford Coppola - all use Macs. Jerry Seinfeld, Drew Carey and Conan O'Brien - all use Macs. Even our most advanced institutions like BMW, the Smithsonian Institution, Disney, Lockheed Martin and NASA - all use Macs. Pick a field, any field, and I think you'll find that the cream of the crop in that particular field all use Macs. Why it happens scientifically I don't know, but I know in real life that's how it works out, so in that respect I do believe what the article is saying :)

 

I think Apple just markets their product better and so that it appeals to people more.

Well said :) Unfortunately there are a lot of people around that want to blame Apple for doing a good job in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha, ha, good one. I consider these "studies" utter BS, though. No offense to those who might actually believe in it. People cannot be defined or categorized based on such a ridiculous thing as their choice of OS, IMO.
i think this makes hackintosh users inbreds or something, i personally am a hackintosh,linux,and windows user ? linux is the best imo but i respect all os :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Maxintosh: I really appreciate that you took the time to list every artist and celebrity that you could think of that owns a Mac, but next time you do something like that, could you provide your sources? Please understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'm sure you're right (or insane for coming up with all these random people to mention), but I could just as easily say my dog uses a Mac (what a smart dog, right?), but that doesn't necessarily mean he actually does.

 

Also, for the record, if we're still correlating intelligence with owning a Mac (sorry, this topic has gone back and forth so many times that I've lost track), I want to say this: just because someone is an artist or celebrity doesn't mean that they are intelligent, and therefore simply saying, "This celebrity owns a Mac!" isn't proving anything. I don't know very many celebrities personally, but I do know many many artists and musicians and I will say that some of them own Macs, and not all of them are "intelligent" in every sense of the word. Some, I might say, are rather unintelligent :) But, of course, this could be my opinion, and in many cases, intelligence is an opinion until you really get in there and start doing some tests...but then again, who is conducting the tests and what model citizen are they comparing their subjects to? It's all subjective...

 

And finally, going back to artists and celebrities. Has anyone else noticed that all of the artists/celebrities mentioned so far have TONS OF CASH? Well, I suppose there aren't any celebrities without tons of cash, but there are MANY other artists who can barely afford a PC. Some don't even use computers - so where do they stand on this issue? Anyway, my point is - let's say that our favorite Mac-using celebrity/artist was born 15 years ago and is now getting into their craft. Most likely they are a poor/middle-class kid (or in some of the Rap/R&B producers' cases INCREDIBLY POOR kids). What computer are they using? I doubt it's going to be a Mac (if any computer at all). Yes, they'll eventually buy a Mac, but here are some reasons (other than the default "because they are cool and hip and intelligent" rationale):

 

A.) It's a standard in their industry

B.) They'll eventually get money to afford it

C.) The other higher-ups in their industry will probably buy it for them (yes, Dr. Dre has a boss).

 

I'd also like to take a second to say that almost anyone who can afford a Mac is not going to be living in the ghetto, and has probably had at least some kind of adequate education because they live in an area that can fund it for them. So by default, the ratio of "intelligent" Mac users to "unintelligent" Mac users will certainly be higher than the ratio of "intelligent" PC users to "unintelligent" PC users. And not only because of affordability but because of the shear volume of PCs out there versus Macs (it's not 50/50, you know). If Macs were readily affordable and easy to build (as PCs are) this survey would have nothing to report.

 

Even if we're not talking about intelligence, the same thing goes for any other "positive" trait you can imagine. I live in an urban city where simply driving 5 miles down the road will put you in an area where the city could care less about producing individuals who are wealthy, intelligent, creative, open-minded, or anything else this survey compares. And whose fault is that? The people? Their families? The government? I doubt you will see many Macs out there. I will guarantee at least SOME PCs, though. So how about we survey them and find that they're all unintelligent, closed-minded, un-creative, horrible at writing/speaking their native language AND own PCs. Great idea.

 

If you're not convinced by anything I've just said, at least understand this:

Dividing a population into two groups of people based on a correlation between their personal traits and the products that they can afford to buy is very, very, very, very wrong. Never forget that.

 

There are so many more facets that could be looked into on this debate, but I think "attempts" covered most of that stuff already in his thorough report ;) Hope my analysis didn't bring us all down. It just makes me realize how lucky I am to own a PC AND a Mac, and have the time and intelligence (relatively, of course, haha) to work on Hackintoshes :) Cheers all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good points you've made, Max!

 

Either would I, but the test mentioned was not an intelligence test, it was more of a vocabulary test. What they found was that PC users generally used only 500 unique words, while Mac users generally used almost 900. That's almost twice as many, and while it isn't a 'test' for intelligence per se, it does however clearly show that the Mac users were able to express more complex thinking, and in real life I find the correlation to be true.

i am very interested in reading more of this study. i would like to know if the ages, professions, ethnic backgrounds, etc. were adjusted for when putting the data together. one thing i've noticed about apple software is that more often than not, arguably, the price of hardware is more than it's worth. that being said, i begin to consider what group of people would want to pay that price difference; i think in most computer users' opinion, a computer is just a tool to say, check email or go on facebook (perhaps one reason why linux is not that big an option for many users). the majority of people are not exposed to mac or simply cannot justify paying the price difference, and as such remain with pc. on the other hand, people with money, people who are computer-literate enough to want to do some things that macs are "better" at (eg. multimedia editing) will choose the appropriate platform. look however at the stratification we have now (and i am in no way stating this to be anything but merely a thought experiment, not indicative of reality in any shape or form):

 

mac users:

actively choose a platform because of profession, hobby, skill

professionals are more likely to have larger vocabularies i'd presume.

computer hobbyists are more likely to have some intelligence i'd presume; similarly computer users with fair amounts of skill (a natural bent for rapidly memorizing the myriad terminal commands [etc.] could very well predispose one to just as rapidly acquiring vocabulary).

note that i say people choose a mac. the fact of the matter is that pc are more common and more easy to obtain than a mac, at least in my opinion. to get a mac, one'd have to be savvy enough to snag one off the 'net or go to some apple store, which may or may not be in the middle of nowhere, rather than simply popping into your local best buy.

 

pc users:

in short, everyone else.

in long, if you have a pot of people, and many of the more intelligent, curious, creative are drawn to mac (and so you cull them away from the top), what do you have left? the question is, are these the people of 500 unique words, or did the survey question the professors, scholars, students, etc. who continue to use pc since macs appear to offer little to justify their price? i would expect these people to get 900 words as well, but they are a scant numerator in the face of the massive user base denominator that the windows platform is able to tout; this is the reality that confounds certain polls and queries, ones such as the OP's topic. this is the one i'd enjoy seeing addressed.

 

Translation: you couldn't back up anything that you claimed with facts, also, posting a posed picture of someone sitting in front of a keyboard in no way proves that they we're using it for full production work.

yes, but it certainly makes the notion that the particular individual does in fact utilize the hardware for whatever reason a little more plausible, moreso than the contrary. though i'm not certain what pre-production entails, it seems that all the hardware in that picture could certainly find uses more robust in scope than merely pre-production.

 

Spike Lee, Prince and Ice T also all use a Mac, but they are highly intelligent people in their field, which further disproves your theory. I could literally list hundreds of other highly intelligent artists that also use Macs. Looks like your little list of 5 are the exception and not the rule Sammy Peralta, who works with Alicia Keys, Ashanti, Craig David, Destiny's Child and Missy Elliot - uses a Mac. Kipper, who is a grammy award winner, and who works with Mary J Blige, James Taylor, Stevie Wonder, Jason Rebello and Sting - uses a Mac. Andy Earl, who is the creative genius who did Pink Floyd’s 'Delicate Sound of Thunder' album cover, plus MANY other classic photographs - uses a Mac. These people are all highly educated and they seem to give what the study said some validity. Of course no one here is trying to claim that buying a Mac makes you intelligent, but I DO believe that highly intelligent people, and people who are highly creative - tend to use Macs. I do not have a scientific explanation for why this is, I just know that in real life that's the way it seems to work out, and it doesn't matter what field they represent. For example; David Bowie, Bono, Hans Zimmer, Peter Gabriel and Seal - all use Macs. George Lucas, Robert Zemeckis and Francis Ford Coppola - all use Macs. Jerry Seinfeld, Drew Carey and Conan O'Brien - all use Macs. Even our most advanced institutions like BMW, the Smithsonian Institution, Disney, Lockheed Martin and NASA - all use Macs. Pick a field, any field, and I think you'll find that the cream of the crop in that particular field all use Macs. Why it happens scientifically I don't know, but I know in real life that's how it works out, so in that respect I do believe what the article is saying

many (most?) of the people listed here are indeed terribly brilliant; however, many of these same people happen to work in industries that favor the use of software that just so happens is primarily on the mac. Maybe Final Cut for movie editing or Logic for making beats and music or Photoshop for whatever. I don't know anyone who is serious about creating media for a living that wouldn't at least try a mac. also, many of the people listed in quote are quite wealthy and could easily pay apple's premium irregardless of relative value or lack thereof.

 

i suppose, reasonable questions are the following:

what does a mac have to offer to justify its premium hardware costs?

for a person with money to blow, this question isn't difficult at all.

for a person more strapped for cash, this could be difficult to answer.

 

now, if it is in fact the case that intelligence leads to better job, and by extension, more disposable income, then we can easily see that more smart people use macs because smart people are more likely to have the money to pay for them (i realize that this isn't exactly the case, but i state to prove a point this thing).

 

now, if it is in fact that people who are in professions wherein volume of income is tethered in some fashion to the ability to create products that are best and most elegantly made on a mac, then the mac's premium can be justified as a solid investment. again, professionals are generally educated people, nice vocabularies (unrelated: often, intelligence = not very modest at all, indeed modesty seems inversely proportional to "iq" or anything that inspires heightened perceived self-worth).

 

but, whom does that leave us with? there are people for whom platform doesn't matter. these people are probably more apt to choose pc as platform. there are people who cannot afford the mac premium. these people are probably more apt to choose pc as platform.

 

i suppose the question i'd like to see the answer to is, are PCs as valuable as macs ceteris paribus, or do macs, or for that matter pcs, have some intrinsic value that the other doesn't have such that one is more worthy for use use by intelligent people than the other.

 

"i personally believe" that if every single computer user in the world were given a chance to use both platforms discussed in this post for two weeks and subsequently given a choice, no cost at all involved, that user would most likely pick the mac like such as. but the way it is, there is a skewed dimension to mac usage such that it's "wop-sided" in favor of people who are, at least in their eyes, smart.

 

I think Apple just markets their product better and so that it appeals to people more.

i agree. but all the marketing in the world won't put a mac in the hands of the relatively less affluent, or the relatively indifferent, or the relatively....

 

apple knows what demographic it's marketing to and how to gently caress egos, attitudes, and emotions. one can observe this when people begin to defend apple and its products against even legitimate criticism as if that person were being attacked on an individual level. apple seems to be their friend. granted, it's fun to feel part of a group, especially an 'elite' one complete with jeans and black turtlenecks, i suppose; apple appeals well to this flavor.

 

Unfortunately there are a lot of people around that want to blame Apple for doing a good job in this area.

i thoroughly agree, though, as i mentioned in a previous post, i'm biding my time until AAPL becomes just another MSFT. it has happened to many publicly traded companies before it, and it will happen to many more in its subsequent.

 

sorry guys,

tl;dr again ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@attempts: seems we have some parallels in our long posts (mine was maybe a little more angry than yours though, haha). would you happen to have been writing yours while mine was posted? ;)

 

maybe this means we've talked this topic into some sort of harmonious stalemate, haha. somehow i doubt it! :)

 

@MoC: i think we're long past looking at it in such an elementary way, although you are very right. at this point, i think we're in it for the fun of the debate...and boredom...and maybe a pinch of bitterness :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@agrafuese: haha, yeah! i was thinking once i posted, i prolly wouldn't have pushed the post button if i had seen yours there^^ i had started typing a response and then watched a movie and then i posted. wow, great points you have!

 

it's been awhile since i've enjoyed myself this much on a forum~

thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every individual is unique and everyone has a different brain. The whole concept that 'mac users' are different than Windows users are different is a collectivist idea that promotes putting people into groups which in turn fosters things like racism and socialism that prevents individual freedom.

 

The terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' has been misused for awhile now. Liberal is usually associated with social liberties with government 'helping' people. When they 'help' people they pigeonhole people into categories and take away choice while robbing people to pay for programs that they may not support. True conservatism in a governmental sense would mean minimal governmental regulation and influence on ones lives promoting choice and individual freedom. It is 'social conservatism' that has made people confuse this.

 

Now you may argue that the poor suffer without the government redistributing wealth and setting up welfare programs for poorer people, but with the creation of government welfare programs everyone pays for them and are less likely to have charities or churches to provide for and help the poor. That gives the poor one choice and without competition encintive to evolve into a more efficient system vanishes.

 

As an atheist I'd rather trust a church to help a needy person rather than my government, and if government was turely conservative they would not make laws against choices that effect the individual (like the concept that marijuana is a crime). But people stay ignorant and keep society enslaved by collectivist ideas like "mac users have differnt brains...".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You spelled absinthe wrong.

No we didn't. That is one of four accepted spellings :rolleyes:

 

Maxintosh: I really appreciate that you took the time to list... could you provide your sources?

Absolutely, in fact I'll list several among many :) One of the most obvious would be Apples site itself. It is a long list so take your time browsing through it and enjoy. There are also many other sites that list well known people who use Macs, here is one such site, and here is another. Whoo-hoo! I just saw where Nicole Kidman uses a Mac ...you go girl :D

 

just because someone is an artist or celebrity doesn't mean that they are intelligent

I agree completely, but I tried to limit my post to those who are well known for being extremely intelligent in their respective fields. For example; Stevie Wonder, Prince, Andy Earl, Bono, Peter Gabriel, Francis Ford Coppola, Jerry Seinfeld, Hans Zimmer, George Lucas, etc, etc, these people are all highly intelligent and highly creative. I'll give you two other examples; the guys that write the TV shows South Park and Scrubs, who I think are one of the most creative and funniest shows around, use Macs. Pick a field, ANY field, and I promise you that the people who are at the top of those respective fields will all be attracted to using Macs. Herbie Hancock is a legend, and he uses a Mac. Klaus Badelt who is one of the best Film Composers (Pirates of the Carribean, The Curse of the Black Pearl, Constantine, The Recruit, Gladiator. ETC.) uses a Mac. David Campbell (has worked with Alanis Morissette, The Mars Volta, Phil Collins, Michael Jackson, Bon Jovi, Mariah Carey, Kelly Clarkson, Elton John, Kiss, Duran Duran, Leonard Cohen, Stevie Nicks, Eric Clapton, Rod Stewart, Hole, Ayumi Hamasaki, Sum 41, Linkin Park, Avril Lavigne, Will Smith, Fort Minor, Faith Hill, Evanescence, ETC.) who has recorded 400 gold and platinum albums uses only a Mac. Again, you are right that just because someone is an artist doesn't mean they are intelligent, BUT those that are intelligent and/or highly creative are all attracted to and use Macs. I believe that's all the article was suggesting :)

 

the question is, are these the people of 500 unique words, or did the survey question the professors, scholars, students, etc.

I believe they surveyed a broad spectrum of people that were known to be partial to PC's, and were known to regularly visit PC related web sites.

 

it seems that all the hardware in that picture could certainly find uses more robust in scope than merely pre-production.

That was my point as well, and there simply is no way to look at a posed picture and determine how is was being used. Most professional studios would use it for pre-production and then master it on something like this.

 

Note to bedlight: if you got all excited from the picture from before, then please make sure that you're sitting down BEFORE you click on the link above :P We're not responsible for any injuries that you might acquire :P

 

Very good points you've made, Max!

Thank you attempts! I appreciate the kind words :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, in fact I'll list several among many :P One of the most obvious would be Apples site itself. It is a long list so take your time browsing through it and enjoy. There are also many other sites that list well known people who use Macs, here is one such site, and here is another. Whoo-hoo! I just saw where Nicole Kidman uses a Mac ...you go girl ;)

I learn something new every day. Thank you Max, you're a good man!

I use linux.

MoC, what distro/release of Linux do you run? Just curious, because I've never used it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the article forgot to mention that all mac users fit into one of three broad categories:

Clueless (as in they have no idea that apple is ripping them off for everything.)

Aesthetically driven (since new macs are really just PC hardware in a pretty shell, they must justify the extra cost over a PC by pointing out how pretty it is.)

Forced (such as myself, due to circumstances beyond my control I am forced to use a mac at work. I know full well it's a rip-off, I know full well that a PC can do the same job faster and for less money, but I don't have the ability to switch us over to a Windows based system.)

 

Intelligence has little to do with it. According to the WISC III I'm highly intelligent, and yet I only use a real mac when I HAVE to (work.) And even then, I do my best to avoid giving any more company money to Apple than I have to. Our Power Macs came with 1gb of ram. Why? Because I bought the same ram for half or less than half price at newegg... What a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...