[IVIIVIi4ck3y27]

To counter the ridicule, I think people are taking analysis of MacCentral too seriously. Between the grammar hounds and people that rant, rave, and complain when someone rains on their little fantasy, the boards become almost ridiculous to read due to the zealot tantrums. The people who only want to drink Kool Aid and believe that Apple is going to conquer the world, cure cancer (would be nice as someone with it in my family genetically, but the reality of it is unexpected and improbable), and that Jobs will be the dictator of all things "Insanely Great". When presented with anything counter to the rosy little dream, they immediately want to dissect and ruin the credibility of what is written because it's painful to accept anything other than world conquest by Jobs and company. I guess it's still the old school "pirate" mentality of Apple running through the addict's blood. LoL
I've been a Mac fanatic (but realistic enough to take Apple for it's positives and it's negatives, nobody's perfect) for years, I find the combination of news vs. blog moot... the internet has turned blogs into news sites and news sites have blogs, companies have blogs (GM uses theirs quite often, Bob Lutz sounds off there quite often), and even casual people have blogs or participate in news sites for various things. Yes it's nice to organize things where possible, but I think one can read the article and discern it's intent without having to have a "Here's Your Sign" sticker pasted to the top or an empirical structure laid out to spoon feed you necessarily. Especially if they are more than capable of dissecting it's grammar or news vs. blog content nature.
If you have that much time on your hands to pee and moan about niggling little details, take that extra time you'e exerting via your tirade and do the legwork yourself to analyze what it truly is and was. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif It might be disingenious to suggest that... but it'd disingenious to require the staff of MacWorld/MacCentral to walk on water, avoid bullets like Neo in The Matrix, and propogate on only the positives of any particular ventures that Apple partakes or aligns in. Of the Mac publications... MacWorld is less "ate up" than some other publications by design, and for better or worse that is their role depending on your opinion and preference.
As a side note... while I'd love to see Apple and Google align under the stars... this announcement at this juncture is nothing more than an image deal of 2 companies tied to innovation and Apple recognizing and rewarding that vision by making their high profile exec. a board member. This doesn't mean anything more significantly, in my belief, than the celebrity dropouts who get an honorary degree from their old University of attendance. It drums up a lot of warm feelings and makes people buzz around about Google + Apple = 0wII463 when the reality is... that is exactly the type of "hype" Apple was gunning for, even if it doesn't mean remotely that. It may down the road... but it could've without Google's exec on Apple's board too.

[Dan Frakes]

Quote:

---

MacWorld is less "ate up" than some other publications by design, and for better or worse that is their role depending on your opinion and preference.

---

I don't know whether we should feel flattered or offended; what's "ate up"? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[kellie]

Quote:

---

but it'd disingenious to require the staff of MacWorld/MacCentral to ... avoid bullets like Neo in The Matrix

---

Actually, we can do that. It's part of the Macworld staff orientation training. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif