Advocacy
Dojo (HowTo)
Reference
Markets
Museum
News
Other
|
The article discusses how poor writers are being bombarded with hate mail -- just because they are idiots that lie about the Mac and harm Mac developers, users, resellers with their misinformation. Trying to imply that the Mac users (some of the nicest and most helpful people I know) are mean and can't take a joke. Like when Barbara was "joking" and said that the Mac platform was "dead". Now I can take a joke like the next guy, but I didn't find that funny - nor was the tone of the article "humorous", it was a serious attack on fact and reason, and tried to harm the business where I make my career. I find that about as funny as a heart attack. In fact I find that there was probably more good spirited "humor" in the user that subscribed her to a sex-related news group -- probably thinking that since she liked screwing us, maybe she would enjoy reading about others getting the same treatment. (I don't subscribe to that action, nor condone it, but it is certainly more in the "joking" spirit than attacking someone's livelihood or "playfully" harming their industry). There are 3 authors mentioned in specific -
Each author has numerous Mac slams to their credits - and each of those articles were laden with myths and errors. I have other articles on this site for these authors and articles, and links to the originals - if you have any question I recommend you chase down the source and read my commentaries. Rusty then discusses how Guy Kawasaki has a "campaign to spread the Macintosh gospel has amassed a flock of 37,000 E-mail subscribers", and goes on to say that guy uses this list as "a call to arms". Implying that Guy rallies a "flock" of followers to attack at will. Closer to the truth -- many users subscribe to a Guy's special-interest mailing list about what is going on in the Mac community, where Mac facts and articles are often pointed out -- the negative articles pointers usually include a plea "if you are going to respond, please keep it positive (and do not flame)". Isn't spin amazing? It can convert drawing attention to an error, into cries for crucifixion. It also converts those who are begging for a little accuracy in the media, into a bunch of vicious zealots who attack poor innocent writers who were just doing their job (by misinforming the public and dodging their journalistic responsibilities). <sigh> The article goes on with quotes like the following - Bill Holtz, vice president of Northern Telecom's Global Enterprise Services, from his base in Philadelphia. "There was a lot of concern about the wisdom of the decision [to go from PC's to Macs]" Small wonder: Holtz is overseeing the three-year migration of 30,000 Macintoshes to Windows 95. Isn't it ironic that a company that says they only have 5,000 Macs is migrating 30,000 Macintoshes to Win95?! It is these kind of inflated numbers and sensationalized stories (and negative ones) that get the Mac users ire. There are also plenty of company migrating to more Macs, but that doesn't make good press. So the story is spun to achieve the authors goals - that the Mac is dead, and Mac users are just a bunch of spiteful whiners by not caving into the fiction of Macs, and instead trying to stick up for the truths about them. NASA's Johnson Space Center, CIO John Garman on getting rid of Macs - "We're projecting more than $60 million in savings over five years, more later, for converting to a single standard which is Windows 95 and Windows NT" I find quotes like this exactly the point. There are many studies that prove that converting from Macs does not save money, and in fact costs money. (example - http://www2.apple.com/whymac/ggstudy/default.html) The article that fails to point out this truth and WHY the Mac users are up in arms is irresponsible - NASA looked into Garmans behavior, and has found much to question and stated clearly in a letter that Garman had not done his homework. http://www.madmansdream.com/FairyTales/IGReport/IGReportTOC.html So the point is that many writers (including Rusty in this article), are doing their jobs poorly. They are allow egregious errors and myths to riddle an opinion article sold as factual analysis. The negative and damaging spin harms Apple and Mac users, who then respond. Then the writers get offended when MacUsers, who are more informed than the writer, challenge these writers on their many mistakes. Instead of correcting the mistakes, the writers usually get bruised egos, and write follow-up pieces with more errors than the originals and blame the Mac users for being "hostile".
|
|