Second Gates/Seinfeld commercial airs

Well, I have to say, I did find that quite amusing. Certainly moreso than the first advert. Still not a Seinfeld fan though.

@ tayme - Lets keep in mind that Paul does own several Mac products including the latest Macbook, iPhone 3G etc. His reviews on Apple products have been overwhelming positive nor has he unfairly slighted any product that has not deserved positive or negative criticism. What Paul is attacking are three areas. 1. Mac fanatics who cannot take any level of criticism and constantly attack Thurrott. I think his restraint is more than admirable consider what has been said here and over the years at windowsitpro. Month and after month, year after year of trash talk, its honest about time he fought back. Many of the respondents in here have debunked a lot of the Mac fanatics in here. Sometimes Paul is wrong and you're within your rights to hold his feet to the fire. Many users have more than crossed the line and he has a right to jab back with no apologies. The problem is that when we debunk and argument, all we get is personal ad hominym attacks. How many times have heard shills, strawman attacks, calling people "boy", and other nonsense. If I may respond back to all the BS that has been said in here, I shall quote Senator Obama , " Spare me the phony outrage." 2. Mac biased writers. For those of us not absolutely devoted and loving of Mac, we can see a very clear Mac bias in the tech media. Just like a lot of us who are more independent and liberal in our politics see Fox News as propaganda for the Administration and the GOP. I'm sure many will disagree with me. This year alone there have been so many misteps, blunders, distortions, and flat lies coming out of Culpertino. Yet the majority of the tech media does not holds Jobs and Company to the fire. Safari needs greater security, but the heat is off Apple. Mobile Me has been a trainwreck, yet a measly 90 day trial is given and all is forgiven. The latest iTunes 8 debacle is clear evidence of a need for an extended beta program. Yet I don't see Mac users flooding Culpertino's website for such a program. Yet thousands of people are participating in Steven Sinofsky's blog about Engineering Windows Seven. The National Vulnerability Database has rated both XP and Vista as having the least vulnerabilities in 2008. Yet none of that made press headlines. 3. False and misleading advertisements. Mac "switcher" and "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads are bogus. They're talking about previous problems and make brash generalizations. Yet Vista and XP use is a highly touted feature of Leopard and Tiger. How can something thats so bad also be a touted feature at the sametime? Its clearly a double standard that doesn't fly. But does anyone report this? Paul Thurrott. He's the only one I've seen who has mentioned this. So if you leave thats fine. I'll stick around. He's done the job well for me for 11 years and I"m not going anywhere. Yet I soley do not depend on the Supersite for my tech news. I go to a number of different sites to get varying opinions. ZDnet, Ars Technica, PC World, G4, etc. I also don't let advertisements fool me to buy something. I do my own research for days before I make a buying decision. Now back to the subject at hand. These ads are supposed to be lighthearted and humorous. The idea is that after a few of these, besides their general message, is that you'll see how condesending the Mac ads are. Sometimes to wake people out of apathy you have to have dramatic examples. These commericals are to such a degree that it really does contrast with the Mac ads. Then people will see the Mac ads and say, "Ouch, thats harsh. I really don't think Microsoft and Vista are that bad. I use Office everyday and I get the job done. Maybe they're wrong? Perhaps I should try it for myself." I think thats the point but sometimes people have to be handheld and brought to that point.

@Dip, Love that graph. "Other crap" is a much much bigger slice now, though. ;)

subzero Excellent post I'd point out an example on point 2 Many of the people here say that when Paul is working with Leo Laporte on Windows Weekly he and Leo are much more neutral. A little comparison: Paul has put up with a buggy iPhone 2 through three software versions (not counting today's 2.1) and is just now considering dropping the iPhone (well, throwing it, actually) if 2.1 does't fix the problems. That seems like somebody bending over backwards to try and like the product. Leo, by comparison, admits he carries a second phone with him since the iPhone 2 is so unreliable that he can't count on it for basic phone functionality. He also laughs at himself as a fanatic for being willing to do that to keep using the iPhone. That sounds like a person with a strong bias (but with a reasonable understanding of his biases) I'd hardly call Leo part of the iCabal. After all, he's biased but not blinded. A better example of the iCabal are all of those people ("journalists" and regular users) who spent the last few months saying that the problems didn't exist, or were vastly overblown, or were purely the fault of AT&T. That is, until Dear Leader admitted the problems were about to be fixed. Then, it was OK to talk about them by praising Apple for fixing them.

bettieblu I think you'd be surprised and perhaps horrified at how many people use Hannity as their primary or even only news source.

@bettiblu - Paul has been around for a long time over on Windows IT Pro and before he went commercial, he had a site and email newsletter called WinInfo Digest. Ther are others, probably as well. I have been reading Paul's stuff since the mid 90's, I think. --tayme

Yeah I have read his stuff for a long time in Windows NT mag or whatever the name of it is now. I have read articles on this site for a while now, but the blog is pretty new or I thought so.

@bettieblu, Paul runs the WinInformant out of Windows IT Pro, where he allows comments on many of his stories there to. He's gotten a lot of comments there and emails about that too. Thats what I mean by years and years. @tayme - Hannity is banned in our house. We've blessed the house with holy water to keep people like him far far away. But I have to respectfully disagree with you about Glenn Beck. He's said some nutty things too. However, I actually respect conservative senators like Richard Luger, Chuck Hagel, John Warner, and former Senator Lincoln Chafee. Those guys always earn my respect and gratitude.

subzero I'd tend to agree with your appraisal of both Beck and with Luger, Hagel, Warner and Chafee. I'd also put in (to counter tayme's comment) that Al Franken is one of the most well informed policy wonks ever to run for office. Agree or disagree with him, his facts are very solid and very well researched. Much as I'd like to see him as the junior Senator from Minnesota, there's a part of me that would be saddened by that because I wouldn't get to hear him discuss politics outside of the venue of CSPAN.

@subzero - I can respect your opinion on Beck and the others. You probably don't like Beck, because you lean left. @Mike, on the other hand, while I can respect your opinion, I have to totally disagree with you regarding Franken. His "facts" are too polluted with his bias to be taken serious. Much like the "facts" that you present on Paul's sites. That is my opinion, because I lean right. That is the great thing about living in a democracy, we are each free to agree or disagree with anybody that we choose. --tayme