whose OS is better, relate in any way to the issues at hand, except in the most peripheral of ways?
For many years Mac fanatics claimed that their platfrom would triumph because the MacOS was far superior (which indeed it was).
But now that the tables have turned, and that Win95 and WinNT have surpassed in many ways an outdated MacOS, we have that issue is "irrelevant, except in the most peripheral of ways"...
Do Bill Jackson or Alomex still believe, after all this time, that anyone here is going to convert to Wintel,
Who's talking about converting to Wintel? I don't know about Bill, but I am trying to measure the strengths and weaknesses of this company, which in particular includes it's OS.
or sell their Apple stock based on predictions that haven't seen a correct moment in three months, and now seem more wrongheaded than ever?
An amazing example of selective memory. As I mentioned a few weeks back, I was bearish on Apple for three years, from $43 per share to $13 per share last December. A few weeks later I changed my recommendation to neutral. Three years of correct predictions cannot be overcomed by a "flash-in-the-pan" runup of three months.
In these many years spent arguing about Apple, Mac fanatics have been lagging indicators of Apple's problems. The main reason? they're in denial. I can give you a long list of examples of things bears talked about here and the response was a long denial period:
Insufficient job cuts from Amelio.
Buggy MacOS (version 7).
Macs were expensive.
The MacOS was falling behind.
Market share was shrinking.
Macs were slow.
Among our Apple bulls here, there are a few who still are in deep denial mode, but I find the majority more ready to admit that Apple is not perfect.
If I was to start a twelve-step Mac-fanatic recovery group I would start by having fanatics admit that Win95, after years of copying MacOS, has finally (roughly) equalled it. |
