Collin973 said:
but don'tchoo seeeeeeeee.......?
u2 = founded in 1976
apple = founded in 1976
there's the connection....!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New U2 iPod Released
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
but don'tchoo seeeeeeeee.......?
u2 = founded in 1976
apple = founded in 1976
there's the connection....!
quietmind said:
None of this is relevent today, much like U2's music.
*rolls around laughing at you*
all's i know is....i'm waiting for francis hwang to update the "u2 vs. negativland" ipod.
in case u don't remember.... here it is.
in case u don't remember.... here it is.
This band was a success before you were even a thought. Press pause on that Lincoln Park or Britney Spears and check the stats:
"Founded in 1976, U2 have maintained a high level of popularity since the mid 1980s. The band has sold approximately 50.5 million albums in the U.S., according to the RIAA, and over 140 million worldwide, has had six #1 albums in the US and nine #1 albums in the UK and is one of the most successful groups of all time. Since the release of their album The Joshua Tree they have been frequently referred to as the biggest rock band in the world by fans and critics alike. The band has won 22 Grammy awards, second only to Stevie Wonder among popular music artists." - Wikipedia
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but dismissing U2 as "never being a great band" and "one of the most overrated" is humorous.
I say we should have a Wooden SE iPod
with both Steve Jobs and Woz signuatres burnt into the back
with both Steve Jobs and Woz signuatres burnt into the back
conditionals said:
OK, give me a list of reputable music critics that slammed U2 albums. show me unbiased reviews slamming U2. if I don't see it , I'll only assume the above is your own opinion.
More than 20 Grammy's, million of albums sold, many sold out tours, cover of Time magazine couple times, etc. makes me believe U2 is a great and relevant band. anything else is jealously bashing
I am fine with people not liking their music. I hate country for example, but I am not going out there and bashing people who has talent just because I don't like their style of music.
Ireland as an Imperial Power..
Whatever, you don't like the color scheme of the U2 iPod. Good for you, but at least learn some history. It's not that difficult. Ireland (where all bar 1 of U2 [The Edge was born in Wales] was born and where all grew up), was never an imperial power. In fact it was ruled by an imperial power (Great Britain) until just after World War I. Ireland, in the 1840s, was the location of one of the world's greatest famines where the population of the island as a whole was reduced from approximately 10 million to about 4 million - from deaths and a huge amount of emigration, mainly to a very youthful USA at the time.....
So what did you think "Sunday Bloody Sunday" was all about???! A violent nosebleed?
whmees said:
Whatever, you don't like the color scheme of the U2 iPod. Good for you, but at least learn some history. It's not that difficult. Ireland (where all bar 1 of U2 [The Edge was born in Wales] was born and where all grew up), was never an imperial power. In fact it was ruled by an imperial power (Great Britain) until just after World War I. Ireland, in the 1840s, was the location of one of the world's greatest famines where the population of the island as a whole was reduced from approximately 10 million to about 4 million - from deaths and a huge amount of emigration, mainly to a very youthful USA at the time.....
So what did you think "Sunday Bloody Sunday" was all about???! A violent nosebleed?
LaMerVipere said:
U2 are great at what they do. You might not like it and so you say it isn't "great" music. Fine, that's your opinion, but you can't be dogmatic and make it a rule or an absolute that U2 isn't "great" just cause you don't think so. It is what it is and a lot of people like it.
]None of this is relevent today, much like U2's music.
Uh huh. Nothing is more relevant than money, particularly a lot of it. Well over a hundred million dollars (and millions more in album sales) for the tour says that U2's music is still quite relevant indeed.
Uh huh. Nothing is more relevant than money, particularly a lot of it. Well over a hundred million dollars (and millions more in album sales) for the tour says that U2's music is still quite relevant indeed.
WOW! U@ is a great band but they definetly dont deserve there own ipod and definetly not twice. Im wondering when does the ruch ipod come out????? too bad i wouldnt even buy that... whoever buys those things are eiher really big u2 fans or idiots ferreal give us some thats cool not a u2 ipod how lame i bet they got paid alot by u2 to make it tho.
Pop
U2 is a pop band and they aim to be a pop band. They write music that will sell first and foremost, which is why some critics and, apparently, a lot of people here don't like them. But, hey, there's nothing wrong with that. And Apple isn't some god of good tastes. You guys think so highly of Apple that what you assume to be an endorsement of U2 upsets you. Hey, I felt the same way when one of my friends told me to give She Wants Revenge a try.
Personally, a Radiohead iPod would have been more welcomed by me.
U2 is a pop band and they aim to be a pop band. They write music that will sell first and foremost, which is why some critics and, apparently, a lot of people here don't like them. But, hey, there's nothing wrong with that. And Apple isn't some god of good tastes. You guys think so highly of Apple that what you assume to be an endorsement of U2 upsets you. Hey, I felt the same way when one of my friends told me to give She Wants Revenge a try.
Personally, a Radiohead iPod would have been more welcomed by me.
calculus said:
The most sensible thing I've heard on this site. Ever! The existence of the U2 iPod (or the black MacBook, for another example) doesn't harm those people who don't want them. Who cares?
Indeed, this type of logic could be applied to a whole variety of things, even constitutional amendments that are currently being debated in the US Senate.
quietmind said:
Sounds like you have been watching too much VH1 - Behind The Music
No credible musicians could give a flying **** about being on the cover of Time.
Fuchal said:It doesn't change the fact that How to Dismantle and Atomic Bomb is disappointing highly-calculated play-it-by-the-books made-for-the-masses pop rock.
Quoted again.
Everything U2 is bent that way.
Edge100 said:The most sensible thing I've heard on this site. Ever! The existence of the U2 iPod (or the black MacBook, for another example) doesn't harm those people who don't want them. Who cares?
Indeed, this type of logic could be applied to a whole variety of things, even constitutional amendments that are currently being debated in the US Senate.
Exactly.
People are so stupid that they are here just to bash U2 because they have nothing going on on their lives. Don't like U2, don't buy the Ipod. Like U2 good, buy the Ipod if you want. Simple as that.
Seems like most U2 bashers are mad because Apple did not unveil their IPOD Britney Spears in the pink color with sparkles on the back, or wait, is this the Ipod Paris Hilton?
iGav said:
in fairness, the u2/apple deal is the first sponsorship of theirs i know of, besides the general usage of their songs in various media. i could of course be wrong, but i'd hardly say that they sell out constantly to corporations. granted, they don't need to sell out to be swimming in $.
i can certainly see how it's easy to criticize the guy for being a rich bastard when he's preaching about 3rd world debt and hunger and aids, and in a way, i think someone with his status and hunger SHOULD be doing what he's doing, it shouldn't be the exception to the rule. lots of people with money will donate quietly or have their own relatively quiet involvement (bill gates, etc), but bono's appeal to such a wide range of ages and audiences (as a rock star, yes) allow him to reach people who are otherwise apathetic to such things. talking specifically about the ONE campaign and DATA here...
as for their music, eh, to each their own. though i'm curious what all the u2 naysayers would prefer to listen to. no band is universally popular...
efoto said:*cough* DMB *cough*
I still wouldn't buy that, but it would at least be cool for Apple to show support for talented bands....oh, other talented bands I mean
hahahahahahaha. dmb...... uggh
jelloshotsrule said:
...They want you to be Jesus
They'll go down on one knee
But they want their money back
If you're alive at thirty-three...
Seriously. It's ok to be rich (it's the American way, right?), but if you're going to help people, you have to take an oath of poverty? Puhlease!
Bono is doing something about an issue he cares about. Would the naysayers prefer he did nothing? I don't understand how people can label him a hypocrite. He hates world poverty, so he's investing his time, money, and political influence to fight it. How would it help the cause if Bono gave up all his money?
Jovian9 said:
1. some leaders haven't earned much respect in my opinion.
2. how did you get in on the meetings (the actual meetings, not the photo ops before/after) with such prestigious leaders/figures?