Noozer said:
And how does that help? The machines come with single button mice, so all
software has to assume that the user has only one button.
3 buttons + scroll ball has been the standard Apple OEM mouse for
almost a year and a half. Luckily for me, you failed to read that
entire sentence (wherein it was revealed that multi-button mice have
been standard equipment on Macs for quite some time) at all, so you
didn't call me on my actual error (Aug 2005 to now is not "a couple of
years"), but tripped over your own shoelaces in a rush to act on the
"Kick Me" sign you thought you saw on my back. Also: if you're worrying
about how many buttons a user has on a Macintosh, YOU'RE DOING IT
WRONG. Well formed Macintosh software hooks to higher-level events
(i.e. Option+Click and Right-Click look exactly the same if you're not
being a drooling retard and following the HIG).
Wrong... An Intel Mac is still not a PC. Just because they share a CPU
doesn't mean that hardware makers will develop Mac drivers for the PC cards.
Which is why none of my hardware works in Linux...oh wait. (Director's
Commentary: I know OS X is not Linux; this is a demonstration that the
"lack of official vendor support = won't work" argument you're making
is ****ing stupid and worthless) Shit, I'd wager dollars to donuts
esoteric hardware support is better on an Intel Mac than a PC with
Windows XP: Apple gets to leverage a significant chunk of the legwork
the *BSD/Linux guys do in terms of hardware support. The ball's in your
court, Butter Tits Jr. What are the killer gadgets that don't have Mac
drivers? Zunes?
Mac users choose Mac because it's pretty.
"Mac users choose Mac because it's pretty." Is being devoid of actual
content your goal here, or is YHWH protecting me from your idiocy
somehow? Are you implying the image I linked to is "pretty?" Pretty is
more than blinging up the buttons and scrollbars. If you understood me
the first time, you'd realize I am repeating myself with that; however,
you obviously didn't, so here this sentence is.
Hrm... Can't disagree so you attackhim personally?
There would need to be some sort of actual debatable talking point
there for an actual disagreement to occur. If providing some context
for his ongoing self-flagellation by Internet is attacking him
personally, this is only because objective reality has a strong
anti-Matt Moulton bias. Would you listen to a man that fixes a flat by
rotating the tires when he tells you Jaguars are terrible cars (because
they don't seat drivers over 12 stone)?
Are you actually so ****ing broken you think "Anything that can be done
on a Mac can be done better using teh PC" is insightful commentary
worthy of anything other than a severe beating? If so, please tell me
you're a regular here and will be replying to more of my posts with all
the panache you've shown in your debut! It's like I've died and gone to
mongoloid cage fighting heaven!