iGeek

The_ABG · Jan 11, 2000

http://macweek.zdnet.com/2000/01/09/igeek.html Who wants to start? I'm glad he's not a financial analyst.

Easy Rhino · Jan 11, 2000

You know, I just wish I had enough free time to sit around all day and slaughter every word this man writes. I'm starting to think he's not actually a person, but a Mac that composes and distributes RDF propoganda like this. The software this Mac runs is what every developer at Apple has been working on for the past 8 years. Since Apple runs on marketing and not products, this makes sense. One thing's for sure: if I ever meet Mr. Every, I'm going to grab his shoulders and shake him vigorously...unless he's a Mac, in which case I'm going to push him off the desk.

Thom · Jan 11, 2000

Amazing. I am not joking, I read the article without looking at who it was written by. At the end I thought that it was some of the dumbest shit I had ever read.And this is where I joke not: I compared the level of shit to that of DE in my mind. Then, I see, IT IS HIM WRITING FOR ZIFF-DAVIS! I can recognize his work without a name being attached. View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

MrCatbert · Jan 11, 2000

You know, after reading this I feel a strong need to go home and take a shower...'Every time some reporter proclaims, "Welcome to the new millennium," I translate it to, "Look at me! Stupidity is the norm." 'Anyone else get the impression that this guy is far too comfortable using that expression?MrCatbert

Venture · Jan 11, 2000

David Every:"With that perspective in mind, let's compare Apple to another computer hardware company -- Dell."Seven paragraphs on the Apple/Dell comparison follow. Then, a few paragraphs later:"Conclusion You can't really measure one company's value by another's." ______________"I never said those things I said." --Yogi Berra. ______________I'm surprised that they let him have another shot, after he had to publish a retraction about things in a earlier article he got wrong.

Venture · Jan 11, 2000

David Every in MacWeek:"Apple has about 7,000 employees on $600 million in profits -- or about $86,000 in revenue per employee. Dell's 24,000 employees on $1.4 billion in profits is only about $58,000 in revenue per employee. So Apple employees either work harder or smarter, or the company is just run better."Or - (drum roll) - it takes fewer people to make software (like the Mac OS) with bigger margins than it does hardware!!!!!!Wow, rocket science here folks.

Ignatz · Jan 11, 2000

Ok, due to the previous postings I guess IÂ´m asking the impossible, but could someone explain to me the frenzy PC-users always seem to get into when DKE is mentioned? (And I donÂ´t mean that particular article which is obviously a pure evangelic piece.)Are there events in the past that I am not aware of? I mean, there are tons of literate mac-heads that write about Apple in a cheery mood, but what is so special about him? And The_ABG, IÂ´m actually sorry he wasnÂ´t my financial advisor a couple of years ago View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Easy Rhino · Jan 11, 2000

Because he is so dramatically and frequently wrong, absurdly arrogant, and utterly convincing to the unwashed masses. He embodies everything educated computer enthusiasts/professionals despise.

PinheadX · Jan 11, 2000

If anyone decides not to read this tripe, I'll summarize:Stroke, stroke, stroke, stroke, stroke. Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine. Slam, slam, slam, slam, slam. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Ignatz · Jan 11, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Easy Rhino: Because he is so dramatically and frequently wrong, absurdly arrogant, and utterly convincing to the unwashed masses. He embodies everything educated computer enthusiasts/professionals despise.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>IÂ´m definetly not trying to pick a fight here. IÂ´ve read some of his evangelic stuff and was unimpressed, and IÂ´ve read some technical stuff and found it well-researched and to the point (please, please read that sentence carefully before you flame me).Could someone point me to some docs where he is clearly raving and meets adequate opposition (i.e some kind of letter exchange or debate).IÂ´m just curious, thatÂ´s all.

suckfuldotcom · Jan 11, 2000

I'm a little suprised, honestly. I thought the piece was well written, and resonable. Now, I'm not gonna defend DKE too much, as he is what he is.But the substance of this piece wasn't that far off, especially the P/E stuff, which I noticed my ownself a while ago (maybe I should get a column at Ziff Davis!).I think you've set "DKE=autokill" sensitivity a little too high here.Dajjal

Ozguid · Jan 11, 2000

I read this article with an OPEN MIND. Seriously, I did. I kept thinking "maybe us PC enthusiast folks are overreacting and discredit everything that David Every says"..... so I read it. Twice.And I've come to the same conclusion both times.DAVID EVERY IS A FUCKING IDIOT! Goddamn, what moronic, dumbshit arguments he comes up with. The first part of the article wasn't stupid or innacurate- he detailed how Apple was making big advances in the past year in computer technology. Then.... he started comparing Apple to Dell, and came up with the argument that Apple was better then Dell because they make more profit per employee. What a dumb-fuck thing to say. That makes no sense. He then goes on to say: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Dell is just another PC clone maker in a fickle industry that buys the cheapest (not best) product. There is brand recognition and some loyalty, but there are problems as well, and the whole PC clone industry will sell its soul to save $0.50.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>WTF!?!?!?! That's the stupidest argument that I've ever heard. So, they sell their soul to save $.50, BUT, they make less profit then Apple? It seems that Dell should be making BETTER computers then Apple if you follow his warped logic. And then he goes on to say Apple's total stock market value should be higher because they make more per employee- what the hell? That doesn't matter! If I started a one-person computer company, with one employee, me, and made $100,000 a year, does that mean I should have a higher total stock market value then Apple or Dell? I shouldn't? Why not, I make more per employee.What a fucking dumbass.

Ignatz · Jan 11, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ozguid: What a fucking dumbass.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I still donÂ´t get it. What is so special about DKE? The comparison between Apple and Dell is admittedly not that clever, but if you look at the two key points he is trying to make, heÂ´s not that far off."Apple is underevaluated". Yes, they are, if you look at the bottom line I believe this to be correct."Big PC vendors are in for a rocky ride". Yes they are. There is immense competition, and though I believe that Dell is a bad example (they go for the quality deal, just like Apple), this competition is not financially healthy for these companies.Dajjal, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Now, I'm not gonna defend DKE too much, as he is what he is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>What is he? Or, rather, what is this phenomena called DKE? IÂ´m getting still more curious...

jonah · Jan 11, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>IÂ´ve read some of his evangelic stuff and was unimpressed, and IÂ´ve read some technical stuff and found it well-researched and to the point (please, please read that sentence carefully before you flame me).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree. While I don't particularly care for some of the conclusions he draws (especially in that article), his technical articles especially are frequently pretty good. He does a lot of research, and it shows.Jonah

Scudling · Jan 11, 2000

I'll chime in on a couple of discrepencies: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> ...an OS that is in serious transition trying to get off the foundation of DOS. Win98 was a half step; Windows 2000, another partial step...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I know he's right about Win98, but Windows2k has a foundation from DOS? As far as I know, NT was built from scratch with a DOS command interpreter thrown in. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> -- and if the whole company was evaluated on that scale, Apple would surpass Microsoft on total valuation (and many thousands of dollars per share). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>of course if you evaluate Microsoft on the same fictional scale, it would still surpass Apple. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Dell is hanging onto its position rather tenuously in an oversaturated market (judging by the number of PC makers that shut their doors each year).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yeah... those companies were serious competitors to Dell (or IBM, HP and Compaq) too.. Pluheeze.I think the reason why Every is targeted is because he is the most visible and vocal (except for SJ) voice for Apple.[edit - has to fix my ubb stuff][This message has been edited by Scudling (edited January 11, 2000).]

hmurchison · Jan 12, 2000

Man some of you guys are twits with no life. Go get a girlfriend or something and get off of Every's jock. You're like his little groupy b*tch or something.

Venture · Jan 12, 2000

How can I put this gently?DAVID EVERY IS A LIAR.I know resteves can't see this, but it seems everybody else can.As Jonah says, he does a lot of research. He then twists this into pro-Apple propaganda for his web site. It is not a question of a point of view, or an accidental mistake. It is a deliberate attempt to mislead, and worse, it's done under the guise of explaining technical things.I don't want to go through all the stuff I did recently about his "copying files in NT" article. Suffice it to say that it was a deliberate attempt to make NT look more complicated than it actually was, and to do this he had to take several deliberate steps to create a dialog box that was more complex than the one he used for the Mac. There was no way he could have done this accidentally, and when he was called on this he withdrew it from his web site.I may disagree with people's point of view, but I don't blame them for posting it. For instance, when Atilla said that the iBook did all he wanted from a portable, he didn't present it as the word of God. I don't have much sympathy for the "everything-in-the-Apple-garden-is-rosy" crowd, but they are just using a technique well-known in other areas like politics.However, Every tries to come across as the expert who explains things to you. He could come across as the Mac evangelist, but he can't come across as both, which is what he does all the time. I don't want anyone to show a platform bias when they explain what CPU features will be important in the next few years, for instance, but this is what Every does all the time.In fact, whenever he gets into articles like this he *always* makes out that whatever Apple's strategy du jour is, it's the one that everyone should be following. He's constantly lauded the G3/G4 as more advanced than the x86 competition, yet failed to mention the short pipelines that eventually caused the chip to get stalled at 450Mhz. Did he not know about this? For a self-proclaimed expert he certainly should have. "Could someone point me to some docs where he is clearly raving and meets adequate opposition (i.e some kind of letter exchange or debate)."Oh yes. Thanks to Yahoo's pitiful search facilities on its own clubs I can't give you an URL, but on the Apple Doomsday Clock club David Every said that IT management not letting users have a Mac was THE SAME AS the Nazis' treatment of the Jews in World War II.He lasted a few days and then slunk off. Public debate is not his forte.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I think the reason why Every is targeted is because he is the most visible and vocal (except for SJ) voice for Apple. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah, so Jobs is the market-speak guy, and DKE is the techno-speak guy? Well, ok, that could make sense. Maybe Apple should hire him then? And could someone please provide some links to demonstrate his claimed stupidity? I donÂ´t read too much of his evangelista stuff, you know.This "DOS in Win2k"-thing is getting me confused. Could someone please step in and put the foot down once and for all?

hmurchison · Jan 12, 2000

If he's a liar then call him one and move on. There's no use in fighting a battle you can't win. Some people here just seem too eager to attack his writing. At least he's man enough to put his opinions up on the web for all to see warts and all. Create your own site to dispel his opinions ...noone is stopping you.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

oops, missed Ventures postHe really said that? [Mac/PC and Jew/Nazi] Ok, thatÂ´s outrageous. IÂ´m hopping over to Mackido to read up on his sermons. Any other links?

IMarshal · Jan 12, 2000

Ignatz:Just read any of his articles. _Everything_ is twisted to make the Macintosh and Apple look better. When the MacOS has a feature that some other OS doesn't have, Every will explain why this feature is ultra-important. When the MacOS is lacking in some area - which is most of the time - Every will patiently explain why it's really not all that important.The phrase to sum him up with is this: intellectual dishonesty.About Windows 2000 - the only DOS in there is in the NTVDM, a DOS emulator that helps to run the WOW subsystem, which is a 16 bit Windows environment similar to the MacOS classic emulator scheduled to ship in MacOS X.

xwred1 · Jan 12, 2000

Every is really annoying. Even though he's obviously twisting information and writing misleading articles to his own nefarious ends, there must be something that draws him to the Macintosh platform, other than the fact that he might be a gay fag. Maybe he's a secret Apple media ninja, receiveing kickbacks from Apple. It almost seems as if he's using geurilla tactics: post a biased, misleading article where Apple comes out on top in every respect. That article will then bring over a few newbies who don't know any better. And then, right when the PC-heads begin to retaliate when they see what he's done, he pulls the article down as a form of damage control to cover his tracks and so on.

hmurchison · Jan 12, 2000

Every is no more annoying than you lifeless myopic individuals...waiting for his every(no pun intended) written word. Trust me he's not checking on your posts....think about it!

IMarshal · Jan 12, 2000

hmurchison:I think that the Ars Technica forums do not agree with you, as they appear to make you testy and ill-mannered, and you contribute little of value. I think a long vacation in the Apple Insider groupthink forums is way overdue. Consider it doctor's orders.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

Was over to DKEs site. Yeah, he really, really wants Apple to come out on top. DoesnÂ´t seem like he flat out lies, but rather twist and turn and bend. Strange. HeÂ´s using a kind of (quite refined) market-speak, but only in logics, as the actual text is techie. Quite interesting actually. I guess everyone here could learn a lot if they urge to up their career a little View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifHe has a section on the "racist" thread over there. According to him it didnÂ´t happen the way Venture opined. Maybe that was all but too expected, but he has quite a bit of quotations & stuff up, so in lack of further evidence from the other side of the fence I guess I trust him more. Links?

tjhoover · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ignatz: so in lack of further evidence from the other side of the fence I guess I trust him more. Links?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Trust him more than what or whom? Surely you can't find much of his argument compelling in The_ABG's link can you? His conclusion that Apple is undervalued and will probably improve its position in the coming year may have some validity but the evidence that he cites to support that leaves a great deal to be desired IMHO. His article seems to me to be almost akin to saying 2+2=5 therefore the Earth rotates around the Sun.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Trust him more than what or whom? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Read my post. It states that the "what or whom" is "the other side of the fence" which in this case would imply Venture as he brought it up. I donÂ´t know what happened because I wasnÂ´t there (and I have not been provided with a link by Venture which possibly is Yahoos fault). From the fact that one persons logical faculties in one instance proves to be questionable does not follow that this person is automatically to be discredited in any other instance.I said before that I donÂ´t want to pick a fight on this. My experience from this thread is that DKE writes cheery apple-praising articles, and a lot of people seem to object very strongly to the practices of this specific individual. I still donÂ´t quite get why, but ok, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

JB · Jan 12, 2000

I agree with xwred1 about Every. I'd put money on the belief that there is a connection between him and Apple corp. that goes beyond the average company/customer relationship. But alas I have no proof, my hunch is based on the huge personal, emotional and financial capital expended by him to defend/promote the Macintosh. For me the biggest annoyance (which maybe an overstatement) is that those Mac users who aren't very tech savvy (and you know who you are) who will parrot him (DKE) in the belief that it makes them look savvy and knowledgeable. But in most cases it only makes them look as silly as him.. Lastly his approach is less than refined. When I read his stuff it always comes off as if he has a conclusion onto which he throws "evidence" to lead the reader to come to the conclusion he so strongly desires for them to arrive at. In essence his argumentative structure puts the preverbal carriage in front of the metaphorical horse. It's a poor substitute for a well crafted and objective analysis. The "paper" on the differences between CMT and PMT was a hoot. Especially when he says that in PMT the OS "rips" control away from the application. What type of language is that? Using the term "rips" is nothing more than a subtle (if you'd call a megaphone subtle) attempt to manipulate the reader.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Lastly his approach is less than refined. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If you consider the fact that I mentioned "refined" in direct collaboration with "market-speak", I still believe it is. I can see why someone not too savvy would be jumping up and down and scream "GO APPLE!".

Venture · Jan 12, 2000

Ignatz:Is this what you wanted?First of all he quotes himself in quotes and > characters. Then he quotes a reply to him with > charaters: _____________"> "Remember my site is a counter balance to the entire > media, and every PC advocate and IS-cretin that is > preaching their Wintel propeganda with no balance at > all. This is whining about those nasty little Jews trying > to defend themselves in the face of WWII > anti-semitism. " > > To even DARE compare the Mac-Win debate to a era that MURDERED millions of > PEOPLE is horrible and should NOT be done. This is irresponsibility at > its worst." ________________He goes on to reply: ________________"No, it is not. Please think a bit about what I'm saying. (I know a lot about the holocaust, and actually have an article on it going up soon).There was an antisemetic attitude in and before WWWII that existed in America, Canada, and Europe that allowed for the Holocaust to happen. It was all about eliminating that which is different, "inferior". Jews were just stereotyped by misinformation, considered inferior, then tried to be eliminated." _______________Now look at the first sentence of his next paragraph: _______________"Macs have the same exact platform problems. It isn't about facts, but misinformation. It is about setting the stage for the final platform solution. Death of a choice is not the same as death of an individual -- but the bigotry and philosophy of the attackers can be amazingly similar. You should hear the similarities in rationalizations and even words. It is the exact same human motivations that lead one to eliminate that which is different. So philisophically I meant exactly what I said... and I hope you read enough about the Holocaust and human psychology to understand exactly what I mean." ______________I am still searching through posts he made - I may be wrong, but I believe when challenged on the "exact same platform problems" he said that it was the same as.Anyway, you wanted a link, so here it is: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/appledoomsdayclock Message 4911, 4/14/99.

Ignatz · Jan 12, 2000

ThatÂ´s horrible. Ouch.

Erebus · Jan 12, 2000

Time wasted again.

tjhoover · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ignatz: Read my post. It states that the "what or whom" is "the other side of the fence" which in this case would imply Venture as he brought it up. I donÂ´t know what happened because I wasnÂ´t there (and I have not been provided with a link by Venture which possibly is Yahoos fault). From the fact that one persons logical faculties in one instance proves to be questionable does not follow that this person is automatically to be discredited in any other instance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No, it does not but on the other hand I certainly wouldn't conclude that Every was more credible than Venture based upon 1) Every's clearly faulty analysis 2) An inability to easily verify Venture's claims and 3) Every's web response which may or may not be very deliberately deceptive and self-serving. Given the evidence that you were presented with, I would have concluded that I could not make a decision one way or another. Am I missing something? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I said before that I donÂ´t want to pick a fight on this. My experience from this thread is that DKE writes cheery apple-praising articles, and a lot of people seem to object very strongly to the practices of this specific individual. I still donÂ´t quite get why, but ok, everyone is entitled to their opinion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Fine, but to me, when the sum of his prose is measured, David Every actually does a disservice to the Mac community that he purports to so strongly support. Though, as you say, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Atilla · Jan 12, 2000

Where do you folks find the time to read this fella? I normally pass over sources I deem suspect. I read the article and found it thoroughly bland. Comparing Apple to any other computer company is a waste of time. While there is much about Dell's distribution model that Apple could learn from, they need to stay focused in order to maintain their profit margins.Steve Job's recent comments to Fortune demonstrate how he views Apple's place in the industry. He seems to be moving to a US Steel type of vertical integration in the consumer space (which suggests more attention needs to be devoted to games) Perhaps in this David and Goliath era of mergers and acquisitions Apple ought to consider acquiring Sony and Nokia to fill out this vison. While I am very interested in the Mac platform, david every just doesn't appear on the radar. Sorry

IMarshal · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple ought to consider acquiring Sony [...] to fill out this vison.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe that should be the other way around?

Sony is a lot bigger than Apple ever will be. Then again, Apple doesn't have much that Sony would want, anyway.Concerning the paybacks issue, one has two choices: either Every is a paid shill, or he's a lunatic. I'm not sure even extreme fanaticism could create such a creature.

DrPizza · Jan 12, 2000

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Of course, the millennium really starts next year, but why pick nits? Maybe because the writers or proofers know better (or could if they wanted to), but they just don't care. Every time some reporter proclaims, "Welcome to the new millennium," I translate it to, "Look at me! Stupidity is the norm."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 'Me' referring to DKE, no doubt, for whom stupidity is certainly the norm. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Nineteen ninety-nine was a pretty good year for Apple.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Esp. one certain G4 debacle. Yeah, I'd say that it was a pretty good year. And the failure to release a 'modern' OS. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The company released some of the best and most innovative products in the industry -- and continued to make huge strides for users.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 'best' and 'most innovative' -- in your unbiased opinion, of course. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple kept pushing the iMac forward.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Playing 'catch up'. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It introduced colors; reintroduced fanless (quieter) computers; and pushed for more power efficiency,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yippee. My 'leccy bill will be one pence less than it would otherwise be. I'm so happy. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>increased speed,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To near-useful levels. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>graphics<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To last year's standard in the rest of the world. Gotta love that innovation. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and better gaming.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Better than what? Better than last year's iMac, yes. Better than a fucking C64? No. Better than a PC -- even last year's -- or a console? No. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple continued the evolution away from anachronistic ports (such as old-style serial, ADB and SCSI)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> SCSI is anachronistic? In what respect? In the respect that it's still actively developed, becoming more advanced all the time, and is the only mid-price/high-throughput solution available? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>to newer I/O options such as FireWire,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> AFAIK, 400 Mbit/sec FireWire predates U2W SCSI.... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Universal Serial Bus<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> More catch-up. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and digital video<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> WTF does this mean? Does this mean digital outputs suitable for use on LCD screens (which the iBook doesn't have, nor (AFAIK) the PowerBook or the iMac), or are you repeating 'FireWire' but calling it 'digital video'. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>across the product line. Apple added niceties such as front-loading CD and DVD drives,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nice to you, not to me, I cannot stand them, but (alas) will have to get a front-loading DVD drive, as Pioneer don't appear to sell tray-loading SCSI DVD-ROMs in the UK (anywhere?). <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>made the iMacs more expandable -- and totally redefined easy upgrading with the G3 and G4 enclosures.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> WTF? Evidently, you've never seen a Dell Dimension's minitower case. If that's not easy to open, I don't know what is. It's been like that for years, and only now have Apple caught up. More innovation, I guess. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple even started a push toward wireless networking.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> LOL. Yeah, they started a push, but only if you choose to ignore the countless wireless networking devices that were available before the advent of AIRport. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>On the portable front, Apple promoted innovation with the brand-new iBook and venerable PowerBook. The iBook ushered in better design tradeoffs with lower cost,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Better design tradeoffs with lower cost == such a bulky crappy looking case that you can't fit in a decent size screen, but still charging as if you'd put a usable monitor into the damn thing.Lower cost *to Apple* maybe. To consumers? You've got to be shitting me. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>a built-in handle, battery life measure in many hours (6-plus?),<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which is special in what way? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>durability,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yet to be proven. I know that there's some concern about the durability of the latch, or lack thereof. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>styling<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Apple R&

"Hey, everyone, everybody likes toilet seats, so let's make a computer that looks like one!" <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and simplicity in I/O.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 'simplicity' == removal. Want video out? Too fucking bad. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Performance of Apple portables is still market-leading<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You missed a bit out -- "Performance of Apple portables is still market-leading within the market of 'All portable Apple computers'". Market leading in the market of 'All portable computers'? Not even close. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- and strong sales demonstrate that many people value the improvements Apple made.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> iBooks have sold reasonably well, for retail computers. How well have PowerBooks sold, may I ask? Last I heard, Apple couldn't shift 'em for love nor money. Too expensive, too slow, too old, too crap. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple pushed hard in the OS area.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oooo -- OS 9. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The company released a major update to Mac OS 8, then a minor update, then it released Mac OS 9. Mac OS 9 introduced multi-user support -- a feature in Unix and bigger systems but hitherto unavailable to mainstream PC users.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Uh -- Windows 98? Windows NT? Bonehead? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>OS 9 also brought back the Keychain: A great idea that died with the ill-fated PowerTalk has been reincarnated and improved.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Out of interest, what precisely does the keychain do that my .pwl files don't (I've not been able to quite work that out, yet). <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Most important may be automatic Net-based upgrading; while a little immature, this capability will be a fundamental part of future OS enhancements.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Windows Update for Macintosh? w00t. How innovative. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Amid all this progress,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Only within the market of 'Apple computers'. It's very shoddy when compared to PCs. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple only went backward<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You said it, bud. They're running full tilt, just to go backwards less quickly. Not good. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>(or sideways) in a very select few areas, such as the interfaces on QuickTime and Sherlock. Below the surface, however, QuickTime advanced multimedia with integration of streaming,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which has been present for yonks in WMP and RealPlayer -- and actually works worth a damn in them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and Sherlock integrated Internet searching into the user experience.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Wow. Just like IE. Just like Start...Find...On The Internet. Thereby integrating Internet searching into the user experience. How novel. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple continued its work on Mac OS X, releasing OS X Server<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which by all accounts is universally hated. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and shipping an early developer release of the client version. Many new technologies to speed the transition to the new platform have been released or announced.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Like...? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>OS improvements weren't limited to customer features; they also included enhanced developer features and better marketing,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, you're half way there -- better marketing is certainly true. 'Better' in that it has bigger lies than anyone else's. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>both of which should help generate more Mac products. Apple was able to shut down most of its security leaks and surprise the industry few times (for the good of all).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> e.g. Lack of new hardware at MWSF, the G4 debacle. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>At times, the concern with security went too far; developers are getting a tad frustrated with the new "closed" Apple. Overall, however, the marketing and health of the platform is vigorous and lucrative. Apple products are everywhere: in commercials, hidden in movies and TV shows, and in other companies' commercials<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But not on peoples' desks. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- and when you start looking at what you get from Apple's products in terms of features per dollar, the Macs are just fantastic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Compared to what? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple analysis I'm not a financial analyst, nor do I play one in a magazine. But I can observe some basics -- such as the fact that Apple's stock tripled from the $30 range to the low triple digits per share -- and I think I can safely say that next year should be pretty good as well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And? Linux and Internet shares also have a huge value, but they're in no way indicative of the performance (or financial well-being) of their companies. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>My reasoning? The optimistic view that reason eventually wins out over hype.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So OS X will flop and Win2K will prevail. Hurrah. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>With that perspective in mind, let's compare Apple to another computer hardware company -- Dell.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So on the one hand, we have Apple (with their monopoly) who have devoted users (some might say zealots) and can charge whatever they like, and on the other hand, we have Dell, who participate in a intensely competitive market. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple has a market valuation of $16 billion (the value of outstanding stock)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Fucking irrelevent to anything, c.f. Linux + Internet companies' ridiculous market valuations. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>on yearly sales of more than $6 billion, and it's been running more than $600 million a year in profit. Earnings per share are about $3.61, and the price-earnings ratio is running around 27 to 1. Apple has about 7,000 employees, and a return on sales of around 10 percent.Dell's market evaluation is $133 billion. Dell is running about $18 billion per year in sales (three times Apple), but Dell only has a little more than double the profits. Dell has a return on sales of around 8 percent (2 percent lower than Apple's). If we were to assume that market valuation (stock price) was related to either total sales or profits,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But we know that that is rarely the case with hi-tech companies. Why make the assumption. ASS-U-ME? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>then Apple's stock valuation should be at least one-third to one-half Dell's. That means Apple should be at about $44 to $66 billion -- or about $300 to $450 per share. Considering Apple's margins are better, Apple's stock should be higher still, and the current rates are still a bargain.Stock value isn't just about sales and profits;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or even, in the hi-tech industry, anything to do with sales or profits. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>there are many other factors. Earning per share is another indicator. Apple's shares are earning about $3.61 each, while Dell's shares are earning about $0.53. For each dollar you put into Apple, you get about seven times the money returned (in earnings). By that metric, Apple should be selling for about 7 times what it is to be even with Dell (or about $700 per share for Apple). Still seems like Apple stock is a bargain.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But that gives no indication as to the well-being of the company. It just means that they have overvalued stock. IMO, that's a bad thing. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Another indicator of health is how much money you make and how few employees it takes to make that money.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Since when? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Remember, employees are assets to a company in that they help it get its job done<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So, ah, technically, they ain't 'assets' at all, unless you have good ol' slave labour. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- but they are a liability when it comes to costs, payroll and so on. Companies that make the most money with the fewest employees are often better investments.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Does that mean that they're healthy companies? Of course it fucking doesn't. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple has about 7,000 employees on $600 million in profits -- or about $86,000 in revenue per employee. Dell's 24,000 employees on $1.4 billion in profits is only about $58,000 in revenue per employee. So Apple employees either work harder or smarter, or the company is just run better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or they're in an uncompetitive market and hence able to overcharge their clients, and that they're clients are willing to be taken for a ride like that. And let's not forget, Dell spends a fair bit of money on such things as *technical support*, that Apple simply don't bother with ( View image: http://forum.arstechnica.com/forum/ubb/tongue.gif -- of course, they do, but not that's worth a damn). <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>This implies that Apple should not only be trading at roughly the same level ($500 per share) but far more, since it is a better company.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Better than what? Better than Dell? Heh. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Of course there are myriad other indicators for what a company is worth: growth, market health, assets and liabilities, back inventory and so on. Apple didn't do great on total income growth -- the company has eliminated sales of lots of peripherals, software products and other wares -- and they cut the cost of many products, reducing the total income as well. But cutting out chaff is often a good thing; the actual growth in areas where Apple is selling products has gone up, and the volume of sales has risen dramatically. Almost every other indicator seems to demonstrate that Apple is still considerably undervalued.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Shurely shome mishtake? s/undervalued/overvalued. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Dell is just another PC clone maker in a fickle industry that buys the cheapest (not best) product.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> By extension, I suppose that expensive == good and that (cheap && good) is mutually exclusive. Dell make the (IMO, of course, but all these things are) best PCs for most people. Apple don't make the best computers for anyone. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There is brand recognition and some loyalty,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not like Apple loyalty there ain't. I'm not aware of any Michael Dell RDF. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>but there are problems as well, and the whole PC clone industry will sell its soul to save $0.50. Dell is hanging onto its position rather tenuously<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> S'funny, if I look at their past performance, I don't get that impression at all. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>in an oversaturated market (judging by the number of PC makers that shut their doors each year).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And look at the number of start-up PC makers that open their doors each year -- a certain level of 'turnover' of companies is to be expected and is *healthy*. Look what Apple did when it allowed other Apple-makers to open their doors. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple, on the other hand is a leader in its own market<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well duh. Of course, when they allowed other companies into that same market, things were rather different for them, weren't they. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- and Mac buyers buy based on value, not just cost.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Bwa ha ha. Mac buyers buy Macs because of the RDF. They are told -- they tell themselves -- that Macs are better than 'Wintel' 'PeeCees'. And they actually believe it. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple has some of the highest brand loyalty and recognition around. Apple's customers are far less likely to leave the Mac because the environment is superior<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Only if you like watching computers boot up the whole time. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and the products are higher-quality.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Since when? Crap software + over priced, under powered, unexpandable hardware + crap tech support != high quality, IME. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The only big erosions away from the Mac was when the press was scaring customers with tales of doom and gloom.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> == broken RDF machine. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Now that Apple is seen as secure,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> == fixed RDF machine. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>the momentum of Mac platform growth will continue -- and accelerate.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just as it hasn't done over the past 1.5 years. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>When you look further into the future, you see the PC industry trying to move from the current PC architecture to either a true RISC chip (like Merced or Itanium)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ROTFLMAO. They're the SAME, retard. And frankly, as my RISC/CISC hybrid processor is faster than your RISC/CISC hybrid processor, I don't give a shit about its design motivations. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>or to a redesign of the current platform that includes all sorts of "platform" specifications.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>PCs have an OS that is in serious transition trying to get off the foundation of DOS.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> LOL. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Win98 was a half step;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> LOL. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Windows 2000, another partial step.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OMFG. Does this guy know anything? Win2K -- just like NT 4, NT 3.51, NT 3.5, and NT 3.1 -- has *no* foundations on DOS *whatsoever*. The closest they come to DOS is when they *emulate* it inside a *virtual machine*. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>But the market is paralyzed by Microsoft's incompetence, and people are catching onto -- and growing tired of -- getting locked into Microsoft's proprietary products.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And Apple's proprietary products are better are they? Oh wait -- you can't even get them yet. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The market is being broken open with new solutions. Linux is making a dent in the PC server area; Java is a way to create more platform independence;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Snigger. At the expense of speed and platform independence it is, yeah. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and even vertical computing appliances such as Pilots, game consoles and WebTV all show that the industry is willing to accept computing devices that aren't just PCs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But the contrasting lack of widespread uptake of Macs shows that they're not willing to replace their *computers* with Macs. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Users are feeling less constrained by IBM-compatible PCs and OSes, and this fact bodes well for Apple and the industry at large,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Apple make PC-type computers, and PC-type computers *only*. ATM they have no information appliances, no palmtop computers, no consoles, no nothing like that. Unlike (say) MS, who are actively developing in those areas. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>including players such as Sun and IBM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We're gonna have Network Computers over my dead body. When I can pick up a PC for ?400, there's no way on earth that I'm gonna get an NC. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It's less auspicious for PC companies such as Dell. Companies are feeling some real pain when it comes to NT and the pay-for-fix<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When was the last time I paid for an SP? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and continuous upgrades required<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> MacOS 8, 8.1, 8.5, 8.6.... No continuous upgrades on Mac? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- and they're realizing that some of the so-called "proprietary" solutions are as open as the supposedly open PC.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Such as? Well, one notable company not included in any such list would be Apple. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The rosy glow of "no one got fired for buying Microsoft" is wearing off.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Heh. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Then there is the possibility that Microsoft will be broken up in the wake of the Department of Justice's antitrust case against it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There's a possibility that monkeys might fly out my butt. Doesn't mean it'll happen, though. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>That prospect would mean more choices for the industry<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, it wouldn't. It would mean that people would buy their OS from 'MS OS division' and their copy of Office from 'MS App division'. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and additional opportunities for companies such Apple.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 'MS App division' would be allowed to drop their support for MacOS, and MacOS would be severely damaged as a consequence. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Any way you slice it, Apple is going into 2000 with more opportunities for growth than those available to your garden-variety clone maker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Who cares about a monopoly growing even bigger, at the expense of innovation and variety? Not me. Fuckings to Apple. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It seems to me that Apple could easily double or triple in value this year and still be dramatically undervalued compared with the rest of the PC industry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Double and triple in value, perhaps. Whether that's an indicator of true worth is rather up for debate. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Furthermore, that's the least exciting way to look at Apple's potential.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah. If the company were to just fuck off and die, we would have new and improved ways of teasing Mac Zealots -- that would be far more exciting. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>If you were to break Apple up into a few companies and evaluate those parts, Apple could be valued dozens or hundreds of times higher than it is today.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Apple hardware division would have approximately the same value, Apple OS division would be worth next to nothing. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Judging from current Internet standards, Apple.com would probably be valued higher than the whole of Apple currently is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But that doesn't mean that it's successful or gonna stick around for long. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>QuickTime and QuickTimeTV should be valued as much as Real Networks alone (if not more)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Less, because RealNetworks at least make a product that actually works at streaming video/audio, when QT is just plain awful. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>-- that would just about double Apple's valuation for that segment alone -- and if the whole company was evaluated on that scale, Apple would surpass Microsoft on total valuation (and many thousands of dollars per share).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And then if you split MS up and valued it it would be worth even more. And if you split me up I might turn into lots of little PeterBs all writing mammoth posts on various UBB sites. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple's pursuit of new Internet arenas looks to make it a serious player.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 'New' arenas == providing a free e-mail facility for Americans and Canadians above the age of 18 using MacOS 9. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>You can't really measure one company's value by another's.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which must be why you've tried to do just that. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The sad truth is on Wall Street, reason doesn't always win out (at least not in the short term), and sometimes insanity is the norm.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> e.g. massive overvaluations of RedHat, Apple, AOL, et al.. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>You need only look at the ridiculous overvaluation of a few Internet stocks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And Apple! Don't forget Apple! <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The perception is that all Internet stocks are doing well; the reality is that a few are grotesquely overvalued, and most are ignored. Hype, perception and rumor<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> RDF? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>all factor in -- short term -- but eventually, the market undergoes corrections. I think the threefold growth of Apple's stock this last year is just the beginning of that correction.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, it's just awaiting that correction. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>As someone who owns a few shares of Apple stock, I hope the positive correction<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Positive 'correction'? You're fucked up. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>continues its trend for another year or two and brings Apple up to a more logical and reasonable valuation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, and then I'd like to see Dell, Microsoft, et al., be similarly 'reasonably' valued -- they'd be worth more than Apple. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Apple is doing a fantastic job on what it can control.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The entire Mac market. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There are a few annoyances and frustrations, of course -- but the company's products are the best ever,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh wow. I can have a 450 MHz G4. Or a twin PIII-800 overclocked to something ridiculous with a GeForce Quadra running Win2K or BeOS or something like that. Hmm. Doesn't really make the G4 look like 'best ever'. Of course, the 'best ever' Apple product (G4-500) is somewhat hard to buy, isn't it? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>its marketing is much better,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Necessarily. Otherwise no-one at all would buy them. RDFs aren't free, you know. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>its public relations operation is much improved,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But their customer relationships still suck compared to those of any big PC vendor. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and Apple continues to move forward.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Relative to Apple, yeah, relative to the computer industry, no way in hell. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>And this whole past year was just a windup for the punches to be delivered this year. Apple will deliver OS X;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'll believe _that_ when I see it. And just more catch-up. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>it's also likely to have multiprocessing,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which is how far behind PCs? And how much will it cost? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>which will empower even more OS growth and application features.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> SMP makes fuck all difference for your average consumer. Also, why would someone pick OS X to benefit from SMP when there are tried and proved solutions from many other vendors? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There are some huge improvements due for the processors,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And God knows, they need them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>memory bus,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And God knows, they need them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>graphics,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And God knows, they need them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>sound<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And God knows, they need them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and styling.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And God knows, they need them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The products are continuing to drop in price,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To near-reasonable levels. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>they are more open<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How many Apple clones are there currently available to buy? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and compatible than ever,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Whoa -- you mean, Macs have solved their reliance on resource forks? New to me. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and they are delivering more and more useful features and performance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oooh. It's a supercomputer. That won't make your games or wordprocessing go any faster, but it's nice to have. huh? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>If we see as much progress this year as we've seen last year, things will be incredible!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yep, PCs will probably be at quad 2 GHz machines as standard by about 2001.... Kewl. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I think I'm going to have a very happy year, I certainly expect that Apple will, and I wish everyone else the same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why don't you just fuck off?

The_ABG · Jan 12, 2000

I think Ignatz requested some links re: DKE. I think this is what you're looking for: http://messages.clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/appledoomsdayclock/bbs ?action=m&tid=appledoomsdayclock&sid=12182497&mid=4911 That should be the start of DKE's ramblings at the Yahoo club AppleDoomsdayClock. You'd have to read a few days' worth of postings to get it all in (or check the "View Replies to this Message" for threads). A summary article also appears here: http://www.netherworld.com/~mgabrys/clock/tock45.html <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>IÂ´m actually sorry he wasnÂ´t my financial advisor a couple of years ago<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Why, because Apple's stock was in the tank and he would've told you to buy Apple stock? Hell, *I* coulda told you to buy Apple stock when it was at its nadir. It doesn't take a genius to tell you: "Buy low, sell high!" View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

underthumb · Jan 12, 2000

PeterB-That was a most thorough smackdown. However, while you're kicking ass, remember to use correct grammar. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>'¦Pioneer don't appear to sell tray-loading SCSI DVD-ROMs'¦<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>"Pioneer does not appear to sell'¦" <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>'¦.Dell spends a fair bit of money on such things as *technical support*, that Apple simply don't bother with<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>"Apple simply does not bother with'¦"Occasionally the strength of one of your replies was lessened by these oversights.Just a piece of friendly advice.(Yes, you could also use "doesn't," just not "don't.") [This message has been edited by underthumb (edited January 12, 2000).]

DrPizza · Jan 12, 2000

Actually, those points of grammar were quite deliberate, in an effort to lend a somewhat vernacular turn of phrase to the piece. Hence my usage of such words as 'gonna' throughout.

Easy Rhino · Jan 12, 2000

Wow. That should be linked directly off the Ars front page. Several good laughs to start the morning off right - thanks pete.

iGeek

Ars Praefectus

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Ars Centurion

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius

Ars Legatus Legionis

Ars Legatus Legionis

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Ars Tribunus Militum

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Tribunus Militum

Ars Tribunus Militum

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius

Seniorius Lurkius

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Ars Legatus Legionis

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Tribunus Militum

Ars Praefectus

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Ars Tribunus Militum

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Centurion

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Praefectus

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Legatus Legionis

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran

Ars Centurion

Ars Centurion

Ars Scholae Palatinae

Ars Tribunus Militum

Well-known member

Ars Praefectus

Ars Praefectus

Well-known member

Ars Scholae Palatinae

nproxy.org