Anyone else notice this on Apple's website about the Macbook's description?

[aplqna]

"I can post where I want, nice try."

Yes, yes, you can, but some people don't appreciate it when you come to the forum and complain on the littlest thing, what do you expect us to do?

I was just wondering if anyone else noticed or had the same thoughts. And, actually, I expected this response because I won't say what I think of most people on this forum and their mental capacity.

"Doesn't matter. Not the point. Point is, there is a problem of representation in the depiction and description and it could hold legal ground- this no matter how petty you view it or how much I bug you."

GO AND FILE A LAWSUIT THEN.

LOL - so sorry my post got you that aggravated. Jeeze. This forum is not only for Apple praise, but also critiquing the company. Sorry 'bout your luck.

 

[wordoflife]

OP, why are you still arguing about this?
It's not that big of a deal. Get over it.

 

[aplqna]

Only if ones reading comprehension skills are up to par.

Not really. What about the image? It is clear it shows the Macbook with edge-to-edge glass. Oops, I'm sorry... only if one's visual comprehension skills are up to par.

 

[pt0016]

I was just wondering if anyone else noticed or had the same thoughts. And, actually, I expected this response because I won't say what I think of most people on this forum and their mental capacity.





LOL - so sorry my post got you that aggravated. Jeeze. This forum is not only for Apple praise, but also critiquing the company. Sorry 'bout your luck.

I say that, as you don't seem to be understand what all the posters are trying to tell you, and if you are so much into thinking that it is misleading, and grounds for a lawsuit, then go and file one, I'm glad I was able to get the point across to you.

 

[aplqna]

OP, why are you still arguing about this?
It's not that big of a deal. Get over it.

If it isn't that big of a deal, there wouldn't be multiple people on top of every comment I make in defense against the argument. If you don't like my thread, you can get over that.

I say that, as you don't seem to be understand what all the posters are trying to tell you, and if you are so much into thinking that it is misleading, and grounds for a lawsuit, then go and file one, I'm glad I was able to get the point across to you.

What? You got no point across to me. I'm not filing a lawsuit. I already said why I posted the thread. Go back and read. Have a good day

 

[184550]

Does anyone else recall that thread within the last year or so about the iPhone box top being too 'long' and the OP thought that the iPhone was being crushed in transport. I can't seem to find it with Mroogle.

Anyway, that is what this thread reminds me of.

 

[pt0016]

Wrong. Take Apple's cinema DISPLAY. And as I have said before, and I will say again, when Apple means LCD they say LCD... in almost every other case, when they say display they are referencing the complete viewing unit.

Apple's Cinema Display is really just the display, LCD, including the internal conponents. You don't see them labeling the iMac as iMac, all in one display.

It is misleading in combination with the 360-degree image. Apple's own employees were mislead by the description and image when I showed them - LMAO!

They were mislead, because they likely don't understand what you are trying to get at, and the employees had to consult with the upper management.

 

[aplqna]

Does anyone else recall that thread within the last year or so about the iPhone box top being too 'long' and the OP thought that the iPhone was being crushed in transport. I can't seem to find it with Mroogle.

Anyway, that is what this thread reminds me of.

Aw, you're so witty! Nice to know, though, that no matter who trys to irk me, the fact won't change that the Macbook's 360-degree image is flawed and the description is misleading. That is nothing like someone complaining about a box. I do hope you'll continue posting to my thread. It's quite fun.

 

[184550]

Aw, you're so witty! Nice to know, though, that no matter who trys to irk me, the fact won't change that the Macbook's 360-degree image is flawed and the description is misleading. That is nothing like someone complaining about a box. I do hope you'll continue posting to my thread. It's quite fun.

Hey, whatever massages that ego of yours.

Glad to help.

 

[miles01110]

Aw, you're so witty! Nice to know, though, that no matter who trys to irk me, the fact won't change that the Macbook's 360-degree image is flawed and the description is misleading.

Is that all you have to say? You're right... from a certain point of view. Your dozen or so posts in this thread only seem to peripherally touch on this issue or are full of meaningless grammatical corrections. Get over it and move on.

 

[aplqna]

Apple's Cinema Display is really just the display, LCD, including the internal conponents. You don't see them labeling the iMac as iMac, all in one display.

No, but when they talk about the front it is the "glass display". They are speaking of the whole viewing unit, not the LCD.

They were mislead, because they likely don't understand what you are trying to get at.

Wrong, the woman even told me at the end of the conversation that it was odd because she had a hard time figuring out whether or not it was glass or plastic due to the description and visuals.

 

[pt0016]

Aw, you're so witty! Nice to know, though, that no matter who trys to irk me, the fact won't change that the Macbook's 360-degree image is flawed and the description is misleading. That is nothing like someone complaining about a box. I do hope you'll continue posting to my thread. It's quite fun.

If it is so flawed, then like I said, instead of complaining on the forum, to go and file a lawsuit, because inside that twisted mind of yours, you think it's flawed, and misleading. Unfortunately for you, the majority of posts are against you, not with you.

 

[aplqna]

Is that all you have to say? You're right... from a certain point of view. Your dozen or so posts in this thread only seem to peripherally touch on this issue or are full of meaningless grammatical corrections. Get over it and move on.

Your comment makes no sense.

The message goes for everyone who continues to argue with me- get over the fact that I have an opinion you don't and move on. This is my thread, miles, so I will not be "moving on". That's for you to do.

 

[jsilas]

This thread hilariously reminds me that people care entirely too much about meaningless and inconsequential minutia.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Aw, you're so witty! Nice to know, though, that no matter who trys to irk me, the fact won't change that the Macbook's 360-degree image is flawed and the description is misleading. That is nothing like someone complaining about a box. I do hope you'll continue posting to my thread. It's quite fun.

Oh no, it is just like someone complaining about a box.
I have to ask, how much time do you have on your hands?

 

[pt0016]

No, but when they talk about the front it is the "glass display". They are speaking of the whole viewing unit, not the LCD.

No, they mention: Connect your Mac with Mini DisplayPort to the LED Cinema Display for a panoramic viewing experience unlike any other. You get a huge 27-inch glossy widescreen display with a cinematic 16:9 aspect ratio and an astonishing 2560-by-1440 resolution.
http://www.apple.com/displays/

 

[aplqna]

If it is so flawed, then like I said, instead of complaining on the forum, to go and file a lawsuit, because inside that twisted mind of yours, you think it's flawed, and misleading. Unfortunately for you, the majority of posts are against you, not with you.

I don't care if they are 100% against me. Whatever lol, I posted because I wanted to put my opinion out there. I don't have to file a lawsuit, this is all I wanted to do is bring up the topic. And like I said, you are welcome to leave my thread if you think I am wasting time.

This thread hilariously reminds me that people care entirely too much about meaningless and inconsequential minutia.

Perhaps, but I am not wrong.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Perhaps, but I am not wrong.

You may be right ( or not ) but really, 2009? You're starting a thread about something you found in 2009? I don't get it.
And son, you need to learn the art of multi-quote.

 

[aplqna]

Oh no, it is just like someone complaining about a box.
I have to ask, how much time do you have on your hands?

Just as much as a person like yourself who comments on a comment to engage in an argument about something "trivial" on a tech forum. LOL

No, they mention: Connect your Mac with Mini DisplayPort to the LED Cinema Display for a panoramic viewing experience unlike any other. You get a huge 27-inch glossy widescreen display with a cinematic 16:9 aspect ratio and an astonishing 2560-by-1440 resolution.
http://www.apple.com/displays/

UM right- you have proven my point that when Apple uses the term display it is in reference to the whole display and not just the LCD. Thanks for helping me prove the point!

 

[GoCubsGo]

Just as much as a person like yourself who comments on a comment to engage in an argument about something "trivial" on a tech forum. LOL

I'm far from engaged in your inane argument. If you're going to speak about who is involved your argument then that list is limited. But kid, if this were trivial why are you so worked up over it and why is this about something you did in 2009?

 

[pt0016]

UM right- you have proven my point that when Apple uses the term display it is in reference to the whole display and not just the LCD. Thanks for helping me prove the point!

Stop self contradicting yourself. They are referencing the huge 27" widescreen display, not the UNIT itself

 

[pt0016]

I don't care if they are 100% against me. Whatever lol, I posted because I wanted to put my opinion out there. I don't have to file a lawsuit, this is all I wanted to do is bring up the topic. And like I said, you are welcome to leave my thread if you think I am wasting time.

No, you posted to ask "Anyone one else notice this on the Apple website about the Macbook's description?"

You asked for our opinion, we gave you our opinion, but you found instead of taking it in, to correct the grammatical mistakes in our opinion.

"Originally Posted by Intell
The site may be talking about the Late 2008 MacBook. Which is just like the 13" Macbook Pro."

What in the world are you talking about? I am referencing Apple's current websites that describe the current white unibody Macbook. I have included the links. Follow them."

That post just makes people think you are ignorant, in fact, what in the world are YOU talking about?

 

[mr.steevo]

Perhaps, but I am not wrong.

I like the design, the idea of a science museum and planetarium, the location, but I don't think that design will look good at that location. I think it would look better next to the Mexican Heritage Ctr on Rainey Street, down by the river with downtown in the background. I think it should blend in better with the architecture surrounding MLK and Congress if that's where they want to put it. But I think realistically, to generate interest, the concept drawings are far more exciting than the final drawings will be, if they get that far.

 

[aplqna]

I'm far from engaged in your inane argument. If you're going to speak about who is involved your argument then that list is limited. But kid, if this were trivial why are you so worked up over it and why is this about something you did in 2009?

You're engaged in the argument, boy. I did not say my post was trivial. "Trivial" was in quotes to ask you why you'd be commenting on something you and others are viewing as trivial. This is not about 2009- it is the current situation. I heard about the lawsuit a guy is bringing about Apple over it's description of iPhone 4's "engineered glass" and it sparked my memory. I went to the Apple website and - yup - the description and image are just as it was in 2009 for the Macbook. So, I posted the thread to see if anyone's noticed. People post things on here about issues much farther in the past than this thread. Even so, there are no regulations about the age of something being referenced in a post.

Stop self contradicting yourself. They are referencing the huge 27" widescreen display, not the UNIT itself

CINEMA DISPLAY is the name of the unit as a whole. Take a look.

 

[pt0016]

You're engaged in the argument, boy. I did not say my post was trivial. "Trivial" was in quotes to ask you why you'd be commenting on something you and others are viewing as trivial. This is not about 2009- it is the current situation. I heard about the lawsuit a guy is bringing about Apple over it's description of iPhone 4's "engineered glass" and it sparked my memory. I went to the Apple website and - yup - the description and image are just as it was in 2009 for the Macbook. So, I posted the thread to see if anyone's noticed. People post things on here about issues much farther in the past than this thread. Even so, there are no regulations about the age of something being referenced in a post.

The iPhone 4 glass issue is actually an issue, it is happening to thousands of people, this however... just you.

CINEMA DISPLAY is the name of the unit as a whole. Take a look.

Yes, but inside that, they say, "Plug your mac into the cinema display, you get "a huge 27-inch glossy widescreen display with a cinematic 16:9 aspect ratio and an astonishing 2560-by-1440 resolution" This is describing the panel itself. Why are you even arguing about this?