PDA

View Full Version : More cult like following


elsid13
04-04-2010, 08:05 AM
Just want to spread some holiday cheer.

Which has more cult like following - Apple or Scientology?

Kaylore
04-04-2010, 08:38 AM
You should have put Hillis up there.

Arkansas Bronco
04-04-2010, 08:38 AM
Where is the Hillis option? The absence of this option will confuse many posters.

ColoradoDarin
04-04-2010, 08:42 AM
Griese started Scientology and invented the iPod.

WolfpackGuy
04-04-2010, 08:47 AM
Crapple

*WARHORSE*
04-04-2010, 10:54 AM
Islam

tsiguy96
04-04-2010, 11:00 AM
i will never go back to PC after having my mac for 3 years. lovin it!

strafen
04-04-2010, 11:07 AM
You should have put Hillis up there.McDaniels, man.
There's no bigger cult than that ROFL!

Kaylore
04-05-2010, 08:57 PM
McDaniels, man.
There's no bigger cult than that ROFL!

There is may be two people that you could argue actually "worship" McDaniels, or think he can do no wrong. Worship is like talking him up like he's some kind of super coach. Most of the McDaniels supporters come from defending him from the relentless attacks on everything he does. Just because you think he doesn't suck in every aspect of life doesn't mean you worship him or even think he's a long term answer at head coach. It just means we aren't ready to join a mob to kill him like a third of the board.

In fact, the cult of anti-McDaniels is more ridiculous and prominent, because you guys attack every move, even when other coaches do something similar as "the stupidest thing ever" and dismiss every success and either minor or not his doing.

I mean look at Blue. When asked if she likes anything McDaniels did, the only thing she could come up with was begrudgingly admit Dawkins was a good a signing, but then quickly declared all his other moves were bad.

The rest of us who defend him don't think he's God's gift to coaching, we just like more moves than we dislike and find the haters incessant complaining and hyperbole annoyingly beyond reason.

Blueflame
04-06-2010, 12:00 AM
There is may be two people that you could argue actually "worship" McDaniels, or think he can do no wrong. Worship is like talking him up like he's some kind of super coach. Most of the McDaniels supporters come from defending him from the relentless attacks on everything he does. Just because you think he doesn't suck in every aspect of life doesn't mean you worship him or even think he's a long term answer at head coach. It just means we aren't ready to join a mob to kill him like a third of the board.

In fact, the cult of anti-McDaniels is more ridiculous and prominent, because you guys attack every move, even when other coaches do something similar as "the stupidest thing ever" and dismiss every success and either minor or not his doing.

I mean look at Blue. When asked if she likes anything McDaniels did, the only thing she could come up with was begrudgingly admit Dawkins was a good a signing, but then quickly declared all his other moves were bad.

The rest of us who defend him don't think he's God's gift to coaching, we just like more moves than we dislike and find the haters incessant complaining and hyperbole annoyingly beyond reason.

In fairness, Kaylore.... it's far too soon to judge most of McDaniels' moves as either "good" or "bad"... like last year's draft, for example. They need more than one season before we embrace them as studs or give up on them as busts. Same goes for this year's FA pickups... can we please let them play a meaningful down or two before we're asked to assess their performance? The jury's still out on McDaniels and the vast majority of his decisions and only time will tell which "side" of the debate was "right" or "wrong" on the coach himself or on his choices. I will unequivocally state that I was right about LaMont Jordan though... he's no longer a Bronco so that shouldn't be "controversial"... :P

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 12:25 AM
Islam

We should just say all fundamentalist monotheistic religions.

extralife
04-06-2010, 12:27 AM
funny, considering the term cult originates from polytheistic religions

Taco John
04-06-2010, 12:30 AM
You should have put Hillis up there.

What nobody here understands is that the reason that Pez and Hotrod have been scarce lately is that when they hug eachother tight, their famulous powers activate in the form of Peyton Hillis. We had something real special, and Josh ruined it all.

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 12:35 AM
funny, considering the term cult originates from polytheistic religions

Include them, too. EDIT - just take the whole concept of communitarian theism and classify them as types of cults.

Hillis is more of a cult than anything one here.

Apple just makes better computers than PC. Wouldn't really call that a cult. Unless you're wearing Apple t-shirts and going to Apple conventions, and there are people who do that.

Play2win
04-06-2010, 02:00 AM
The Iconoclasts-- the haters, seem to be much more the cultists than the follower ever were.

extralife
04-06-2010, 02:39 AM
Apple just makes better computers than PC. Wouldn't really call that a cult.

Apple clearly operates on selling a particular image that people crave to be identified with. This is where they make their profit. The sleek design, and the image that is entwined with the little logo on their products accounts for a significant mark up. I agree that Macs are better computers for the vast majority of the public, but that has been the case for a long time. It wasn't until Jobbs came back and tied the product to the design of the imac, and then later associated it with his mp3 player that anyone paid attention. The computers themselves clearly are not worth their tremendous price, but the expense is part of the appeal. Apple could sell macs a lot cheaper than they do, but it is vital to their strategy that the computers, which account for a small percentage of their sales, project an air of cultured affluence rather than simple functionality.

Popps
04-06-2010, 02:40 AM
You should have put Hillis up there.

/end thread.

extralife
04-06-2010, 02:40 AM
The Iconoclasts-- the haters, seem to be much more the cultists than the follower ever were.

please don't ever, ever, under any circumstances associate consumerism of any type with iconoclasm. what a farce.

ZONA
04-06-2010, 02:47 AM
mac vs PC is so played out it's not even funny. Both use the same intel processors (but with PC's you can choose AMD). The Leopard OS did do better in benchmarking then Vista but with Windows 7, it's about the same now. It really just boils down to which interface do you prefer, that's about it. All the stock apps function just about the same, just a few different looks really.

The one thing PC does have going for it that mac doesn't have, is that you can build your own custom PC with parts purchased. You can't do that with a mac, you have to have Apple build the custom mac for you, which costs more. Building your own PC (if you know how) with the best available parts will cost you much less then the same mac.

That's really about it.

extralife
04-06-2010, 02:57 AM
yes, but the closed architecture is beneficial to the average consumer, price excluded. less software conflicts, less need to independently update things, less room for infection. it's like a video game console or a DVD player. put something in, click a button, have at it. the modularity, open design and price difference of the PC is much preferable for heavy, diverse or informed computer users, but that doesn't describe much of the populace. the price difference makes things thorny. I'd recommend macs to a great deal of people, but when I can build a PC for you for $500 versus the $2.5k Apple is asking, well, that tends to drown out the rest.

ZONA
04-06-2010, 03:20 AM
yes, but the closed architecture is beneficial to the average consumer, price excluded. less software conflicts, less need to independently update things, less room for infection. it's like a video game console or a DVD player. put something in, click a button, have at it. the modularity, open design and price difference of the PC is much preferable for heavy, diverse or informed computer users, but that doesn't describe much of the populace. the price difference makes things thorny. I'd recommend macs to a great deal of people, but when I can build a PC for you for $500 versus the $2.5k Apple is asking, well, that tends to drown out the rest.

Well it's not that macs do a better job of protecting themselves from threats like trojans, viruses, etc. The internal OS protection via Firewall or Antivirus is about the same. Even then, most people prefer to use custom software such as Macafee or Norton (which I hate both). There are just more bugs out there written for the PC's because they have a much larger market. The losers out there that create the bugs want to do as much damage as they can so clearly they more often choose the PC's as their targets. So yes, PC's are more risky in that regard, that there are many many more people creating attacks for the PC then there are for macs.

WABronco
04-06-2010, 03:41 AM
Hmmmm definitely scientology. The whole thing is just rigged.

I definitely LOL at people who smugly insist that their apples are much better than PC's...when they're totally non-computer-hip peoplez.

ZONA
04-06-2010, 04:07 AM
Hmmmm definitely scientology. The whole thing is just rigged.

I definitely LOL at people who smugly insist that their apples are much better than PC's...when they're totally non-computer-hip peoplez.

I know. I personally don't care which somebody uses but one time at a job I had, this younger gal brought in her mac to work on during her lunch break (since you're not allowed to use company PC's for personal stuff). I simply just said to her "ah, a mac huh". She replied "oh yeah, way better then PC's". I said "oh yeah, why is that (playing dumb, as if I knew nothing about computers)". She replied "they just are, I can play my songs better". Or good lord, I didn't even continue the converstaion and just walked away.

Play2win
04-06-2010, 04:53 AM
Its pretty simple, whatever you grew up using, or are more accustomed to, is going to be more intuitive for you. The machines, and their operating systems are not that much different anymore. It comes down to which one feels right to you. Which one helps get what you want to do the fastest and most efficiently. Which one are you the most effective on, and which ones do you have the most fun with.

Who knows the iPhone/touch/iPad might turn into a bona fide development platform. Meaning that major software companies and their application might start to developed for the iPad sometime down the road. Photoshop, Office, Dreamweaver, etc. Though scaled down versions, and heavily reliant on "The Cloud", it could be interesting.

In five years or so, Adobe might be developing three versions of Photoshop: PS for the PC, PS for the Mac, and PS for the iPad.

enjolras
04-06-2010, 11:50 AM
mac vs PC is so played out it's not even funny. Both use the same intel processors (but with PC's you can choose AMD). The Leopard OS did do better in benchmarking then Vista but with Windows 7, it's about the same now. It really just boils down to which interface do you prefer, that's about it. All the stock apps function just about the same, just a few different looks really.

The one thing PC does have going for it that mac doesn't have, is that you can build your own custom PC with parts purchased. You can't do that with a mac, you have to have Apple build the custom mac for you, which costs more. Building your own PC (if you know how) with the best available parts will cost you much less then the same mac.

That's really about it.

It's not really that simple. OS X, with it's Unix core, has a far better security model than windows 7. It's a machine I'm much more comfortable with my parents (for instance) using as it's far more difficult for them to get into serious trouble with it.

I prefer the Mac for it's command line, although my personal machines are all Ubuntu. Best of both worlds, a solid OS built with commodity hardware.

enjolras
04-06-2010, 11:53 AM
Well it's not that macs do a better job of protecting themselves from threats like trojans, viruses, etc. The internal OS protection via Firewall or Antivirus is about the same. Even then, most people prefer to use custom software such as Macafee or Norton (which I hate both). There are just more bugs out there written for the PC's because they have a much larger market. The losers out there that create the bugs want to do as much damage as they can so clearly they more often choose the PC's as their targets. So yes, PC's are more risky in that regard, that there are many many more people creating attacks for the PC then there are for macs.

I should have responsed to this. That's just wrong. Windows (including 7) has a legacy security model that is just awful. It's far to easy to garner superuser privileges. The permissions on the system as a whole are poorly segregated. There are so many windows viruses and exploits simply because the poor security model makes it far easier to turn minor issues into very serious ones through permission escalation.

The unix model is far superior. The magic is that Apple has found a way to take advantage of the unix permission model, while making it relatively transparent to the end user. It's much more difficult to fully exploit a OS X machine.

Play2win
04-06-2010, 12:26 PM
The unix model is far superior. The magic is that Apple has found a way to take advantage of the unix permission model, while making it relatively transparent to the end user. It's much more difficult to fully exploit a OS X machine.

Another "Magic" apple has found, is that they design the OS for their specific hardware, while at the same time they design the hardware for their specific OS. In fact, Apple has a lot of Software, both consumer-grade and professional, that they design specifically for BOTH their hardware and OS.

I can hope that is exactly the same thing McD is doing for the Broncos with the Offense, Defense, and Special Teams. ;D

broncosteven
04-06-2010, 12:35 PM
Aren't all Sciencetologyists types forced to use Apple products and doesn't Jobs have subliminal code in apple products that promote Sciencetologyism theorys and dogma which makes this poll moot?

That is why I voted for Pez and Hotrod.

Play2win
04-06-2010, 12:37 PM
Aren't all Sciencetologyists types forced to use Apple products and doesn't Jobs have subliminal code in apple products that promote Sciencetologyism theorys and dogma which makes this poll moot?

That is why I voted for Pez and Hotrod.

Nope. Clearwater, FL is pretty much a "PC ONLY" Zone... ;D

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 01:18 PM
Apple clearly operates on selling a particular image that people crave to be identified with. This is where they make their profit. The sleek design, and the image that is entwined with the little logo on their products accounts for a significant mark up. I agree that Macs are better computers for the vast majority of the public, but that has been the case for a long time. It wasn't until Jobbs came back and tied the product to the design of the imac, and then later associated it with his mp3 player that anyone paid attention. The computers themselves clearly are not worth their tremendous price, but the expense is part of the appeal. Apple could sell macs a lot cheaper than they do, but it is vital to their strategy that the computers, which account for a small percentage of their sales, project an air of cultured affluence rather than simple functionality.

That's called marketing, brah.

Bronco Yoda
04-06-2010, 01:24 PM
None of you deserve to utter the name 'Hillis' out loud let alone put it in print.

Repent immediately and perhaps the pigskins gods will forgive you.

Popps
04-06-2010, 01:37 PM
I'll bet Hillis uses a Mac.

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 01:46 PM
I'll bet Hillis uses a Mac.

Hillis doesn't have a computer. All he needs is an old beat up pickup truck, a fishing pole and a can of Skoal.

Bronco Yoda
04-06-2010, 01:48 PM
Hillis uses Steve Jobs forehead as a beer coaster.

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 05:00 PM
For PBR

broncosteven
04-06-2010, 05:02 PM
I'll bet Hillis uses a Mac.

to wipe with

elsid13
04-06-2010, 05:32 PM
I fear the wrath of PEZ-ROD on all you unbelievers.

Popps
04-06-2010, 06:52 PM
.

ZONA
04-06-2010, 06:53 PM
Seriously, isn't the pants falling off look the bigger cult then any of these? Every time I turn around it seems, there is a young man with his frickin pants basically tied around his thighs with a belt. I don't understand this facination of looking like a retard who just can't quite figure out how the pants are supposed to be worn. I don't think it's quite as stupid as pulling one of your pant legs up to your knee while leaving the other one down, but it's not that far behind either.

I mean, cmon, isn't this one of the most gay things ever?

http://momgrind.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/low-rise-jeans.jpg

DenverBrit
04-06-2010, 07:06 PM
How come the girls don't adopt that fashion??

Blueflame
04-06-2010, 07:45 PM
How come the girls don't adopt that fashion??

Because girls wear butt-floss to avoid the dreaded VPL? ???

broncosteven
04-06-2010, 07:53 PM
.

Hills would never be associated with crap like Vista, however Windows 7 is the greatest OS ever produced.

Much like HILLIS

Mogulseeker
04-06-2010, 08:03 PM
Seriously, isn't the pants falling off look the bigger cult then any of these? Every time I turn around it seems, there is a young man with his frickin pants basically tied around his thighs with a belt. I don't understand this facination of looking like a retard who just can't quite figure out how the pants are supposed to be worn. I don't think it's quite as stupid as pulling one of your pant legs up to your knee while leaving the other one down, but it's not that far behind either.

I mean, cmon, isn't this one of the most gay things ever?

http://momgrind.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/low-rise-jeans.jpg

Nice spliff :peace: