Moo Bunny Amiga - last 24 messages of thread "Apple Quarterly Report"

Apple Quarterly Report

Page [1]   2
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

ASiegel. ..

(67.159.44.51) [67.159.44.51]
On Tuesday, Oct 20, 2009, Anon wrote:

> The 5810TZ has a 15.6" display, a chassis wide enough for the keyboard to
> have a numeric keypad, weighs over 5 pounds, and is 1.2" thick. It's no
> behemoth, but it is in a distinctly different size category than the Air,
> which is much lighter and smaller in all dimensions.

Yes, that is correct. I meant to write 3810TZ which has no optical drive, a 13.3 inch display and weighs a modest 1.7kg, thus is very, very similar to the Macbook Air. (Same price as I had listed above.)


>> (I do agree that Apple's desktop machines are overpriced, however.
>> Especially Mac Pro systems are ridiculously expensive compared to similar
>> Windows computers.)

> Not really true. Mac Pros are Xeon workstations, and if you compare them
> to Windows Xeon workstations they often come out quite well.

Definitely not if you look at the entry-level Mac Pro. At 2.300 EUR (German price), it costs about twice as much as comparable systems. In fact, you can get basic quad-core Xeon systems with admittedly slower processors for less than 600 EUR around here (Fujitsu, HP). If you add a good graphics card, more memory and a bigger harddisk, you should be able to make up for the slower processor speed by a fair bit (1TB harddisk vs. 320GB, 8GB vs. 3GB system memory, etc.) and still end up with a very capable workstation at a fraction of the cost. And if you really need more CPU performance, a 2.3Ghz 55x0 series Xeon processor costs roughly 300 EUR... (Mac Pro has a 2.6Ghz version.)

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.208.201) adsl-75-18-208-201.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net
On Wednesday, Oct 21, 2009, ASiegel wrote:
> On Tuesday, Oct 20, 2009, Anon wrote:
> > Not really true. Mac Pros are Xeon workstations, and if you compare them
> > to Windows Xeon workstations they often come out quite well.
>
> Definitely not if you look at the entry-level Mac Pro. At 2.300 EUR (German
> price), it costs about twice as much as comparable systems.

Hmm, I was definitely looking at the 2-socket systems. You're right, this time around they're not too competitive at the entry level.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Bernd Meyer. moo@umilator.net.

(67.152.80.234) [67.152.80.234]
On Wednesday, Oct 21, 2009, Anon wrote:
>
> Hmm, I was definitely looking at the 2-socket systems. You're right, this
> time around they're not too competitive at the entry level.

Although I find the mention of "8GB RAM" in the non-Apple alternative a red flag; The Nehalem Xeons (55xx series) all come with three memory channels, so having a memory amount not divisible by three suggests that system either has a non-Nehalem Xeon in it, or was put together with no attention to achieving optimal performance.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.208.201) adsl-75-18-208-201.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net
On Wednesday, Oct 21, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:
> Although I find the mention of "8GB RAM" in the non-Apple alternative a red
> flag; The Nehalem Xeons (55xx series) all come with three memory channels,
> so having a memory amount not divisible by three suggests that system
> either has a non-Nehalem Xeon in it, or was put together with no attention
> to achieving optimal performance.

It's actually not that implausible. Most benchmarks I've seen where the reviewer played with Nehalem memory configs showed small changes in performance between 3 channels and 2 channels populated. Also, It's also somewhat popular (as in, many Intel Nehalem boards do this) to have 4 DIMM sockets per CPU socket: 2 channels with 1 DIMM socket each, and 1 channel with 2 sockets.

One popular theory about this is that Intel decided to overspec memory bandwidth for the LGA 1366 socket/platform because the 32nm shrink/upgrade of Nehalem will include 6-core LGA 1366 CPUs. The current 4-core LGA 1366 CPUs don't require an optimal memory configuration, but 6 cores might.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Thursday, Oct 15, 2009, Steve Jobs wrote:
> Well we just finished with our quarterly report, we'll be posting it on
> Monday. Wanted to give my good buddy AdmV a heads up that like the last 3
> quarters he's going to need alot of crow, and his favorite crow dipping
> sauce to get it all down. Things are good here at Apple.

Not any more. Apple shares just took a tumble when the news broke that they're being sued by cellphone giant Nokia for infringing phone-based patents for the iPhone...

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Bernd Meyer. moo@umilator.net.

(63.146.69.17) [63.146.69.17]
On Thursday, Oct 22, 2009, XraalE wrote:
>
> Not any more. Apple shares just took a tumble

According to Bloomberg, AAPL is up 0.14% today. According to Google, they are up a further 0.27% in after-hours trading.

That's the kind of tumble many companies would kill for :)


Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Thursday, Oct 22, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:
> On Thursday, Oct 22, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> >
> > Not any more. Apple shares just took a tumble
>
> According to Bloomberg, AAPL is up 0.14% today. According to Google, they
> are up a further 0.27% in after-hours trading.
>
> That's the kind of tumble many companies would kill for :)

People taking advantage of a fall in share prices to do guess what - buy more shares. There wasn't any real prospect of the share price tumble being long-lived in any way, was there?

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Bernd Meyer. moo@umilator.net.

(67.152.80.226) [67.152.80.226]
On Thursday, Oct 22, 2009, XraalE wrote:

> There wasn't any real prospect of the share price tumble being
> long-lived in any way, was there?

Could you point out this "tumble" in the following?

http://www.umilator.net/aapl.png

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:
> On Thursday, Oct 22, 2009, XraalE wrote:
>
> > There wasn't any real prospect of the share price tumble being
> > long-lived in any way, was there?
>
> Could you point out this "tumble" in the following?
>
> http://www.umilator.net/aapl.png

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUKTRE59L44Z20091022?symbol=NOK1V.HE

"Apple shares trading in the U.S. dipped on the news and were 0.34 percent lower at $204.21 by 6:15 p.m. British time."

The "tumble" lasted a matter of hours; long enough for the mass press to notice it, but not enough to be represented in your graph.

By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant jerkwad please? It's becoming tiresome how everyone who seems to like Macs thinks the company has harnessed the full brightness of the sun up its arse. You're far too intelligent for that kind of nonsense - they're a truly faceless corporation made up a dizzyingly diverse range of people, as well you know, and neither justify or deserve such unblinking support.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
And yes, I realise that 0.3% is hardly a tumble, at least taken holistically. However, it was the biggest drop in Apple's shares in a long time, so within context it is relatively large.

As to the continued meteoric rise in Apple's shares...well, I know what historically what happens when shares keep rising week after week, without exception. Let's just say I wouldn't be buying any, or at least be keeping a close eye on any little "tumbles" before they become real ones. (No doubt there will be Mac fans ready to leap to the rescue.)

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

AdmV. AdmV.

(195.11.197.194) london.stagetech.com
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> And yes, I realise that 0.3% is hardly a tumble, at least taken
> holistically. However, it was the biggest drop in Apple's shares in a long
> time, so within context it is relatively large.
>
> As to the continued meteoric rise in Apple's shares...well, I know what
> historically what happens when shares keep rising week after week, without
> exception. Let's just say I wouldn't be buying any, or at least be keeping
> a close eye on any little "tumbles" before they become real ones. (No doubt
> there will be Mac fans ready to leap to the rescue.)

Well, much to some's amusement, Apple have defied my forecasts :)
I'm actually a bit torn here, Nokia who have been really 'conservative' have been getting their ass handed to them on a plate by the Iphone, and like all the other handset makers, have been caught by apple with their conservative pants round their ankles. Even today, they are all still swimming round trying to respond.

Even in the new handhelds, one thing continues to be played by these bastards, that is that the lower cost devices have things removed or crippled, and you have to pay to get the features that should be there.

Nokia claim that they innovate, and others should 'pay' to use their innovations. Maybe that is true, but Nokia certainly don't innovate for you or me, and you only get innovation in the handset market when you pay ludicrous money.

Apple have handed their ass to them on a plate, and if Apple has to pay on some patents, its more than capable of doing so, it has no lack of cash. The only interesting thing is if Apple has done something in so blatant a way and been hard headed about it, Nokia might win. But from where I sit, Nokia winning serves nobody. Nokia gear will still suck to varying degree's, and I suppose the innovative Apple gear will have to rise in cost, again, nothing in our favour.

Discolsure, I bought an n800 for £40 and its a nice device, but not worth anything like the £300 Nokia demanded in its pricing originally.

The new N900 looks nice, but £500? Pfft...

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.209.214) [75.18.209.214]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> jerkwad please?

Pardon, could you and your buddy AdmV stop being such stereotypical knee-jerk anti-Apple douchebags? Thanks.

> It's becoming tiresome how everyone who seems to like Macs
> thinks the company has harnessed the full brightness of the sun up its
> arse.

No, what's tiresome is when people who resent Apple's recent success seize on any excuse, no matter how trivial, to run them down. Such as this 'tumble' kerfluffle.

> You're far too intelligent for that kind of nonsense - they're a
> truly faceless corporation made up a dizzyingly diverse range of people, as
> well you know, and neither justify or deserve such unblinking support.

Yes yes, we're iPod people. We drink the koolaid. Bla bla bla.

Shut the fuck up, you boring idiot. You only make yourself look more foolish by trying to paint Bernd as a sycophant merely because he pointed out that the facts didn't quite match your spin.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

AdmV. AdmV.

(195.11.197.194) london.stagetech.com
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Anon wrote:
> On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> > By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> > jerkwad please?
>
> Pardon, could you and your buddy AdmV stop being such stereotypical
> knee-jerk anti-Apple douchebags? Thanks.

I'm not his buddy, fuckface. You'd know that if you were not so clueless.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Anon wrote:
> On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> > By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> > jerkwad please?
>
> Pardon, could you and your buddy AdmV stop being such stereotypical
> knee-jerk anti-Apple douchebags? Thanks.

The problem with you and Bernie is that everyone is anti-Apple, unless they happen to be ass-kissing Apple at the time. Which is the sign of a fanboy.

They are a corporation, not a religion. Get over it.

> > It's becoming tiresome how everyone who seems to like Macs
> > thinks the company has harnessed the full brightness of the sun up its
> > arse.
>
> No, what's tiresome is when people who resent Apple's recent success seize
> on any excuse, no matter how trivial, to run them down. Such as this
> 'tumble' kerfluffle.

News items use emotive language, and as emotive language goes, that's hardly extreme in any sense. Again, just get over it. Negative press coverage is not an attack on you personally. Me thinking you're a name-following dickwad is.

> > You're far too intelligent for that kind of nonsense - they're a
> > truly faceless corporation made up a dizzyingly diverse range of people, as
> > well you know, and neither justify or deserve such unblinking support.
>
> Yes yes, we're iPod people. We drink the koolaid. Bla bla bla.

Or rather the Costa coffee while trying to use a big chunky phone that charges you hand over fist for the same services O3 will give you for practically free.

> Shut the fuck up, you boring idiot. You only make yourself look more
> foolish by trying to paint Bernd as a sycophant merely because he pointed
> out that the facts didn't quite match your spin.

Spin - LOL. Do you ever listen to yourself? Since when was "tumble" spin, you fucking moron? Maybe on "plumett", or "collapse" you would have had a point, but you really don't. No go away and have a frappucino and try not to lose your beret.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Bernd Meyer. moo@umilator.net.

(67.152.80.246) [67.152.80.246]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:

> The "tumble" lasted a matter of hours; long enough for the mass press to
> notice it, but not enough to be represented in your graph.

Considering that graph has considerably better than hour resolution, that's a bit of a silly thing to say.

> And yes, I realise that 0.3% is hardly a tumble, at least taken holistically.
> However, it was the biggest drop in Apple's shares in a long time, so within
> context it is relatively large.

You don't follow the share market much, do you?
0.3% of a $200 stock is 60 cents. Look at Google's graph again, and pay attention to the "noise", i.e. the "natural" day-to-day fluctuations. Hint: 60 cents is roughly 6 pixels...

> By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> jerkwad please?

Oh, I like Apple's products, and their attitude towards product development and design.

That, however, is not what makes me post in these threads.

The reason I post here is not that I am pro-Apple, it's that I am pro truth and strongly anti pompous, self-important ignorant arseholes.
(Note --- you might think there was a comma missing from that list of adjectives, but there wasn't. I am moderately tolerant of pompous, self-important well-informed arseholes).

> It's becoming tiresome how everyone who seems to like Macs
> thinks the company has harnessed the full brightness of the sun up its arse.

You might want to look again.

In half a year's time, when SSDs will still be an expensive niche product with no relevance whatsoever to your basic mom-and-pop PC, will you call me a rabid fan of spinning media just because I point out how another one of AdmV's predictions has turned out to be complete and utter garbage, despite his complete conviction and utter confidence?
Or will you realise, in that context, that I am merely cutting down the idiot who believes that his self-centered, undifferentiated and uncritical view of the world is how the world *is*, no doubt possible?

> News items use emotive language,[...]. Negative press coverage is not an attack on you personally.

Uh, but the news item did not say "tumble", now did it? The news item said "dip". The news item *also* pointed out that while Apple indeed "dipped" 0.34%, Nokia was *also* down 0.3%....

The one who said "tumble" was you. Now, you might want to think about that...

(BTW --- actual "tumbles" are roughly 10 times the size of that "dip". See
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-shares-tumble-on-downgrade-tough-2009-is-forecast
for an amusing-10-months-later example. Or here is an older one:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/69613/apple_computer_shares_tumble_on_imac_release_delay/index.html
And the most recent actual tumble:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN1448105320090114
)

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:
> On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
>
> > The "tumble" lasted a matter of hours; long enough for the mass press to
> > notice it, but not enough to be represented in your graph.
> >
> Considering that graph has considerably better than hour resolution, that's
> a bit of a silly thing to say.
>
> You don't follow the share market much, do you?
> 0.3% of a $200 stock is 60 cents. Look at Google's graph again, and pay
> attention to the "noise", i.e. the "natural" day-to-day fluctuations. Hint:
> 60 cents is roughly 6 pixels...

True, the international news is wrong and Bernd Meyer's graph is correct. That is, they (as in collectively, not just characteristically "pro" or "anti" Apple) have found something worth reporting, on all the major news sites (including the BBC).

And then your graph doesn't show anything.

What does that really say about your graph?

And my original point stands. Apple keep falling into the sewer and climbing out covered in gold. One day they're going to fall in and come out covered in shit. That is a statistical inevitability, and something I was trying to point out. They are riding one product line and sooner or later the vein will run out.

> > By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> > jerkwad please?
>
> Oh, I like Apple's products, and their attitude towards product development
> and design.

I do not. Style over substance was never my thing. That, however, is not what makes me post in these threads.

> That, however, is not what makes me post in these threads.
>
> The reason I post here is not that I am pro-Apple, it's that I am pro truth
> and strongly anti pompous, self-important ignorant arseholes.
> (Note --- you might think there was a comma missing from that list of
> adjectives, but there wasn't. I am moderately tolerant of pompous,
> self-important well-informed arseholes).

Unfortunately, I am not. Not for the first time in an Apple thread, you nitpick on entirely mundane issues, while still being very much on the minority view (see above). It is consistent, irritating nitpicking when it comes to Apple, entirely by you and "Anon" (although, that is very much in his nature), which leads me to the conclusion you're doing it because you both think the sun shines out of Apple's arse. I can't see anyone else even bothering to counter my err, OMG HUGE SPIN!!!

When I see you do this on AmigaWorld, you are not nitpicking, you are countering very wrong statements. You honestly can't see the difference?

> In half a year's time, when SSDs will still be an expensive niche product
> with no relevance whatsoever to your basic mom-and-pop PC, will you call me
> a rabid fan of spinning media just because I point out how another one of
> AdmV's predictions has turned out to be complete and utter garbage, despite
> his complete conviction and utter confidence?
> Or will you realise, in that context, that I am merely cutting down the
> idiot who believes that his self-centered, undifferentiated and uncritical
> view of the world is how the world *is*, no doubt possible?

I'm not sure what you think AdmV has to do with my comment; I had posted it before I even read most of AdmV's posts.

And even AdmV won't be wrong about SSD forever. Things can of course change very suddenly. For example, if Intel made a quantum leap in SSD design, hard drives could die out overnight. It's not at all likely, but it could happen.

> > News items use emotive language,[...]. Negative press coverage is not an attack on you personally.
>
> Uh, but the news item did not say "tumble", now did it? The news item said
> "dip". The news item *also* pointed out that while Apple indeed "dipped"
> 0.34%, Nokia was *also* down 0.3%....

I saw "tumbled" in the original news article I saw it on, which I thought was the BBC but it wasn't, and have lost it now. I honestly don't care, and you shouldn't either. I suppose I didn't expect an obsessive-compulsive response to it, and to be honest just can't be fucking arsed choosing better wording. Do you really think I was saying Apple were in trouble? If you do, read the post after it. As I've told Anon, as superlatives go, "tumble" hardly an enormous transgression on fact.

> The one who said "tumble" was you. Now, you might want to think about
> that...
>
> (BTW --- actual "tumbles" are roughly 10 times the size of that "dip". See

Says who? You're not going to tell me there terms are actually defined numerically? Not by the mainstream press they ain't.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

AdmV. AdmV.

(195.11.197.194) london.stagetech.com
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:

> Oh, I like Apple's products, and their attitude towards product development
> and design.

You mean like your lauded nvidia 8600 series in laptops? What a knob you are.
I'm not even going to bother wasting time getting your comments on that pile of turd. Still, anyone buying into it can thank you for your own glorious advice.

> That, however, is not what makes me post in these threads.
>
> The reason I post here is not that I am pro-Apple, it's that I am pro truth
> and strongly anti pompous, self-important ignorant arseholes.
> (Note --- you might think there was a comma missing from that list of
> adjectives, but there wasn't. I am moderately tolerant of pompous,
> self-important well-informed arseholes).

Pro truth would be declaring that running with Admin rights is a clever thing with windows and regarding malware and spyware - according to you. You're a dickhead and a knob. Predictions are not based upon truth, dickhead. Even a knob whom is as cretinously dimwitted as you would actually realise this.

> In half a year's time, when SSDs will still be an expensive niche product
> with no relevance whatsoever to your basic mom-and-pop PC, will you call me
> a rabid fan of spinning media just because I point out how another one of
> AdmV's predictions has turned out to be complete and utter garbage, despite
> his complete conviction and utter confidence?

Like your prediction about the future of Amiga OS?
You wasted more on your own prediction than I ever will you piece of slimy shit. I laugh at the fact you come on talking about how others are pompous, self important arseholes. Its a laugh a minute here, seeing this eminate from your direction. Whats the share price of 'Amithlon' these days shithead? Apple's is better? Check the mirror dickhead.

How about some more competition on predictions fuckface?
http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/press/amithlon.html

What did you say?
""It is with great pleasure that I finally enter into a deal directly with Amiga", said Bernie Meyer. "This new version, to be distributed with Amiga's seal of approval, provides customers with a clear indication that Amithlon is an actively developed product with great prospects. This partnership will allow users of Classic AmigaOS to use their applications on modern, affordable hardware.""

You must have got your crystal ball out for that. I don't believe I can come within a million miles of your level of 'wrong' predictions you slimy piece of shit.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Atheist2. nofudge@yahoo.com.

(64.180.70.121) [64.180.70.121]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:

> You're far too intelligent for that kind of nonsense - they're a
> truly faceless corporation made up a dizzyingly diverse range of people, as
> well you know, and neither justify or deserve such unblinking support.


Steve Jobs has one foot in the...., _then_ there will be a "tumble", just like Amiga Inc. eXPerienced (I feel so bad about that, NOT).

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Atheist2. nofudge@yahoo.com.

(64.180.70.121) [64.180.70.121]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Bernd Meyer wrote:
> On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> > By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> > jerkwad please?
>
> Oh, I like Apple's products, and their attitude towards product development
> and design.
>
> That, however, is not what makes me post in these threads.
>
> The reason I post here is not that I am pro-Apple, it's that I am pro truth
> and strongly anti pompous, self-important ignorant arseholes.
> (Note --- you might think there was a comma missing from that list of
> adjectives, but there wasn't. I am moderately tolerant of pompous,
> self-important well-informed arseholes).

LOL.

> > It's becoming tiresome how everyone who seems to like Macs
> > thinks the company has harnessed the full brightness of the sun up its arse.
>
> You might want to look again.
>
> In half a year's time, when SSDs will still be an expensive niche product
> with no relevance whatsoever to your basic mom-and-pop PC, will you call me
> a rabid fan of spinning media just because I point out how another one of
> AdmV's predictions has turned out to be complete and utter garbage, despite
> his complete conviction and utter confidence?

Maybe a hybrid 32 Gig SSD for the OS and your initial important applications, STOP, for _MERELY_ win-dross xpoo operation, and a 160-250 Gig HD for the rest of your things in netbooks and laptops.


> Or will you realise, in that context, that I am merely cutting down the
> idiot who believes that his self-centered, undifferentiated and uncritical
> view of the world is how the world *is*, no doubt possible?

More? LOL.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.209.214) [75.18.209.214]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, AdmV wrote:
> On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, Anon wrote:
> > On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> > > By the way, could you stop being such an stereotypical Apple sycophant
> > > jerkwad please?
> >
> > Pardon, could you and your buddy AdmV stop being such stereotypical
> > knee-jerk anti-Apple douchebags? Thanks.
>
> I'm not his buddy, fuckface. You'd know that if you were not so clueless.

Tee hee. I'm perfectly aware you have your spats. Nevertheless, you are kindred spirits on a level you seem to be blithely ignorant of, as you both are about so many things.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.209.214) [75.18.209.214]
On Friday, Oct 23, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> Spin - LOL. Do you ever listen to yourself? Since when was "tumble" spin,
> you fucking moron?

Since the price dip was so tiny it could hardly be described as a tumble.

> Maybe on "plumett", or "collapse" you would have had a
> point, but you really don't.

tumble

verb
1 (typically of a person) fall suddenly, clumsily, or headlong

noun
1 a sudden or headlong fall

Here's a hint, airhead: when you're caught spinning, spinning some more does not make you look good.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
On Sunday, Oct 25, 2009, Anon wrote:
>
> Since the price dip was so tiny it could hardly be described as a tumble.
>
> tumble
>
> verb
> 1 (typically of a person) fall suddenly, clumsily, or headlong
>
> noun
> 1 a sudden or headlong fall

Nitpicking, nothing more, nothing less.

> Here's a hint, airhead: when you're caught spinning, spinning some more
> does not make you look good.

Here's a bigger hint: learn to realise you've been pwned.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

XraalE. moo.

(82.40.25.245) 82-40-25-245.cable.ubr04.uddi.blueyonder.co.uk
Oh look, a bit of history:

http://www.crn.com/hardware/22103499;jsessionid=NKGUMRORCL0KXQE1GHPCKH4ATMY32JVN

Five percent a tumble? My, what SPIN. A tumble is what, like falling downstairs? Or losing more than 10% by strict numerical definition? No, it's a headline meant to snatch the attention.

Anon, you're a fucking idiot. If didn't have a negative outlook on Apple fanboys before, I certainly do now.

Reply to this
Direct link to this message

Re: Apple Quarterly Report

Anon. .

(75.18.209.214) [75.18.209.214]
On Sunday, Oct 25, 2009, XraalE wrote:
> Oh look, a bit of history:
>
>
> http://www.crn.com/hardware/22103499;jsessionid=NKGUMRORCL0KXQE1GHPCKH4ATMY32JVN
>
> Five percent a tumble? My, what SPIN. A tumble is what, like falling
> downstairs? Or losing more than 10% by strict numerical definition? No,
> it's a headline meant to snatch the attention.

Yes, and you've been doing nothing in this thread but proving that you're shallow enough to take sensational headlines at face value and defend them to the death, for no better reason than that it lets you imagine that you are superior to people you suppose are fanboys. It's very amusing. Keep on digging your hole, it's fun to watch.

Since you seem to be innumerate, here's a little math for you: Even if you pick 5% as 'the' number to defend as defensibly being a tumble, 5% of 200 (which is roughly where Apple's stock price is at) is 10. Go look at the graph. It did not fluctuate by 10 points on October 22. Not even close.

And once again, they ended up slightly positive that day. Some tumble.

> Anon, you're a fucking idiot. If didn't have a negative outlook on Apple
> fanboys before, I certainly do now.

This:

www.roughlydrafted.com

is an actual Apple fanboy. Vent your spleen at him, I don't mind.

Reply to this
Page [1]   2

Short list view

Previous thread - Next thread

Back to Moo Bunny

It is now: 11:48:46 GMT.
Moo Bunny brand Message Boards
[General Stuff (10:30:54)] [Space (Aug 2009)] [Anime (2007)]
[WalkingFish (Oct 3)] [Cabinet of Curiosities (2007)] [Portland (2008)]
Retro and Exotic Computing
[Atari ST (2007)] [WeirdMac (Jan 2009)]
Amiga Boards
[Amiga Section (11:37:14)]
John Shepard's Projects
[Rastport (Tuesday)] [Squid's Amiga Page & Rumor Mill (n/a)] [Art by John Shepard (Sep 2009)]