[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

I'm not saying you need to suddenly drop everything and worship at the altar of Steve Jobs, but honestly, do you really think it's fair to talk about a company having a problem with a machine you had 7-10 years ago? I'm all for calling companies on the carpet when they screw up, but to say their computers leave much to be desired when you haven't owned one in (at least) 5 years is not even remotely close to fair.

As long as it's true, what does fairness have to do with it? People hold long grudges after poor products or treatment.

For example, I once bought a cool JVC CD changer. It had both a six-disc magazine and a drawer so you easily pop in a new disc without messing around with the magazine. It died in a very short time, and when I returned it to the store, I was told they didn't carry those anymore and was offered a Pioneer changer instead. It wasn't as useful -- it had a six-disc magazine which could be replaced with a single-disc drawer -- but it still works after more than 13 years.

I later bought a cool JVC S-VHS VCR. It had a drawer that could hold either a full-size VHS tape or a VHS-C tape, eliminating the need for using a VHS-C adapter. I paid quite a bit for that gem. It eventually failed, so I had to drive it to a JVC repair place in San Francisco (60-90 minutes away) to get it fixed. It broke again a while later, so I did another drive. After the third time it broke, I wrote it off.

What's the point of those stories, which took place many years ago? To this day, I won't buy a JVC consumer product. Is that "fair"? Maybe not, but why should I risk getting burned again?

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

I'm not saying you need to suddenly drop everything and worship at the altar of Steve Jobs, but honestly, do you really think it's fair to talk about a company having a problem with a machine you had 7-10 years ago? I'm all for calling companies on the carpet when they screw up, but to say their computers leave much to be desired when you haven't owned one in (at least) 5 years is not even remotely close to fair.

As long as it's true, what does fairness have to do with it? People hold long grudges after poor products or treatment.

For example, I once bought a cool JVC CD changer. It had both a six-disc magazine and a drawer so you easily pop in a new disc without messing around with the magazine. It died in a very short time, and when I returned it to the store, I was told they didn't carry those anymore and was offered a Pioneer changer instead. It wasn't as useful -- it had a six-disc magazine which could be replaced with a single-disc drawer -- but it still works after more than 13 years.

I later bought a cool JVC S-VHS VCR. It had a drawer that could hold either a full-size VHS tape or a VHS-C tape, eliminating the need for using a VHS-C adapter. I paid quite a bit for that gem. It eventually failed, so I had to drive it to a JVC repair place in San Francisco (60-90 minutes away) to get it fixed. It broke again a while later, so I did another drive. After the third time it broke, I wrote it off.

What's the point of those stories, which took place many years ago? To this day, I won't buy a JVC consumer product. Is that "fair"? Maybe not, but why should I risk getting burned again?

Steve

[Vincent Ferrari]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

As long as it's true, what does fairness have to do with it? People hold long grudges after poor products or treatment.

Hey Steve! Long time no see!

Anyway, it has everything to do with it. Let's examine the part of his statement that I took issue with:

Originally Posted by CrashX

They make a great MP3 player, but their computers leave much to be desired.

Notice the tense: present. I have an issue with anyone saying that a product is crap (and he said it with plenty of authority, too) just because they had a bad experience a few years ago.

Nobody is saying you should risk getting burned again, however the assertion that a company makes a crap product based on one experience 5-7 years ago is not fair in anyway, and that to me isn't right. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, though, and I never said he has to change his, I just figure the basis for it is a bit off, that's all.

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

Hey Steve! Long time no see!

If New Posts allowed selecting which forums to view, you wouldn't have seen me now, so blame that. (I'd probably screen out Zune and Apple Thoughts because I don't really use a Zune or Apple products. Not that I dislike them -- I just use other stuff.)

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

Notice the tense: present. I have an issue with anyone saying that a product is crap (and he said it with plenty of authority, too) just because they had a bad experience a few years ago.

So if he'd instead said "their computers left much to be desired", that would have been OK?

Steve Jobs has been CEO since 1997, Apple has been making Macs for over 24 years now, so Crash's experience, while admittedly not timely, is at least on the same playing field.

Had Apple been a new company back then, or even been under a different CEO, those might be reasons why it wasn't fair. However, you didn't present any evidence that things had changed, just that the story was old. If things have changed, by all means share that.

I'm not saying Apple does a good or bad job -- as I said, I don't use their products currently (although I do have an Apple ][+ in my attic and generally have a positive opinion of Apple other than thinking they're control freaks). I just don't think criticiziing the post as unfair without indicating things have changed is, well, fair.

Fair enough?

Steve