Our hearts go out to little Jennifer, Rory, and Phoebe Gates. Their mom and dad won't let them have an iPod or iPhone. But before you iPhone haters start cheering, we're talking about choice. Shouldn't Bill and Melinda's kids have a say in what digital-music player or texting-about-that-cute-new-kid-in-class device they use? …
As I recall, at least in the older days, Bill himself was fairly famous for using a Mac as his own personal computer. Still MS Office of course, but still sounds like double standards to me.
@ moron - i mean Fubar
"PS my xbox is off with M$ after falling pray to RRoD, just like the other 80% of owners."
Err well done for misreading figures, its not 80% of owners that would have meant in a one month peroid when they sold 310,000 units in the us, about 248000 would also have been returned for errors in the us that month.
NO business, even ms could handle that level of returns, so quote better figures please k thnx.
It was "apparently" (although there are lots of other studies out there that quote lower figures) 80% of the INITIAL RUN, but again, doesn't take into affect people who crammed them into small spaces, agreivating the factor by providing no ventalation.
Also @ Adam T
"Yes, $1 Billion worth of worse than it is? Or are you thinking that's normal on the "Day in the life of AIG" scale?
I think your the blind one here, he quotes "RRoD, in reality, up to 80% of the 360s from the first production runs fell victim to Microsoft's costly error" but doesn't actually provide any EVIDENCE to prove his point. I can say that 90% of the people in the world can fly by flapping there arms but it doesn't prove its real. All we can see is a anti ms stance in the article as it also critizes the business practices. So well done for proving my previous point about MS haters!
Again, not saying it doesn't happen, but have a fair few mates with 360's a few with ps3's and a couple with WII's as well. The ONLY 360's that have failed from my group was the modded ones,a failed wii and a ps3 in need of a restore for some reason.
I'm talking about the One Child policy in China with forced surgical contraception and abortion which removes the rights of the putative parents and denies children the right to have a brother or sister at the behest of the state.
That's no what you said
Also, Planned Parenthood's origins are in Eugenics ... originally to erase black people from the plane
Show me proof and not from some Christian web site either .
You're right, I didn't say that. But more importantly I didn't say what you presumed me to say ... in other words, I don't fit into the box you have prepared and labelled for me.
I have no intention on showing you proof and furthermore I don't frequent Christian websites. As a matter of fact I am not a religionist of any description. Do your own research.
So the brand recognition / peer pressure issue becomes more laughable as the number of people who have iPhones etc goes up?
Nope, that's not how it works Jessica.
And if BillG allowed his kids to use Apple products it would be a horrendous marketing problem. Unless they found how to Windows Mobile on the iPhone and XP onto the MacBook
"Posted Tuesday 3rd March 2009 10:05 GMT
Melinda Gates is the one showing iPhone envy, so Matriarch is correct.
Or are you suggesting Melinda is really a man? (it doesn't sound like she wears the trousers!)"
"Matriarch: a woman who rules or dominates a family, group, or state ; specifically : a mother who is head and ruler of her family and descendants". Or to put it another way, in a matriarchal social system, "SHE wears the trousers".
So do you still perceive the orginal use of the term in the article to be correct? Or was it just a bit of poetic license?
Re: ‘Bill Gates bans progeny from iPhone Nation'
In other news, Apple report a record month of sales for iPhones and iPods
At first when I read the last bit, I thought it said, "luminous CHEST hair that falls freely to her shoulders". Wow, that's some gal
Planned Parenthood's origins are in Eugenics ... originally to erase black people from the planet
Try again . Eugenics was about people under a certain IQ, not race base. I read exactly what you said. I didn't twist any thing to fit it into a box. You made a statement. I called you on it and then you try to back pedal by saying you meant some thing else when that clearly not what you typed .
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Interview Global Warming IS REAL, argues sceptic mathematician - it just isn't THERMAGEDDON
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 spewed online a MONTH early – by Microsoft