iBorg20181
Aug 17, 06:34 PM
Because they introduced video playback capability, that's why. I travel and this iPod has meant that I don't have to drag around countless dvds to while away hotel room evenings. I love it, but ultimately, the screen is ever so slightly too small (not by much, I'm not asking plasma screen here!) and I need more storage. I know I could go and buy an Archos or some such other brand but I really don't want to do that, and I'm very sure that Apple don't want me to either.
If it was still purely an mp3 player I would totally agree with you. Besides, 10 months+ with no update is a long time in the life cycle of an iPod. Only going by previous form. :)
Add to this the fact that the iPod's storage capacity has remain unchanged for, perhaps, the longest time in iPod history. With video capability, 60GB just isn't that big anymore. Hasn't Seagate had an 80GB 1.8" drive available for several months?
We need to have a new, improved, (and thinner?) form factor, with larger capacity, at the current price point.
If it was still purely an mp3 player I would totally agree with you. Besides, 10 months+ with no update is a long time in the life cycle of an iPod. Only going by previous form. :)
Add to this the fact that the iPod's storage capacity has remain unchanged for, perhaps, the longest time in iPod history. With video capability, 60GB just isn't that big anymore. Hasn't Seagate had an 80GB 1.8" drive available for several months?
We need to have a new, improved, (and thinner?) form factor, with larger capacity, at the current price point.
rorschach
Mar 30, 09:26 PM
Care to upload a screenshot? (only and only if you feel comfortable)
P.S. Are we allowed to ask questions in this thread?
http://i.imgur.com/ct17x.png
Before, the menubar would slide down and cover the toolbar.
P.S. Are we allowed to ask questions in this thread?
http://i.imgur.com/ct17x.png
Before, the menubar would slide down and cover the toolbar.
BRLawyer
Aug 26, 11:33 AM
Gee, you'd want to be damn sure of that announcement next Tuesday or risk looking like a complete idiot. We shall soon see..
Mr. Shaw is pronouncing this since late 2005...so no surprises here... :rolleyes:
Mr. Shaw is pronouncing this since late 2005...so no surprises here... :rolleyes:
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
If it's all just speculation, why be so quick to shout "privacy invasion" when you don't know the full story? It can't be one rule for you and another for everyone else.
The technical explanation from an Apple engineer will probably be the best explanation we'll see - Apple's PR rarely go into technical details on such matters. Anntenna-gate has been the only exception to that rule I can think of.
I'm not the one being quick to shout privacy invasion, it was on every tv news channel and news site. Somebody thinks it's a big deal. Now Apple brass is in damage control mode and must come up with some type of answer to appease the public.
The technical explanation from an Apple engineer will probably be the best explanation we'll see - Apple's PR rarely go into technical details on such matters. Anntenna-gate has been the only exception to that rule I can think of.
I'm not the one being quick to shout privacy invasion, it was on every tv news channel and news site. Somebody thinks it's a big deal. Now Apple brass is in damage control mode and must come up with some type of answer to appease the public.
roland.g
Sep 1, 12:56 PM
I was going to do a Mac Mini with a Ministack. I didn't like the idea of the iMac because of the integrated aspect. I already have a 19" display and would upgrade to a 23" ACD when iSight gets added. However my two hangups on the Mini were the 5400 RPM drive and integrated GPU - I want to use it for a lot of iMovie and eventually Final Cut Express. The 23" comes out and I am all over that. So, please please please make it in reduced chin aluminum. Sexy sells.
PorterRocks
Apr 2, 07:30 PM
Did this ad make anyone else misty-eyed, or is it just me? Anyone? /s
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
rasmasyean
Mar 21, 04:31 PM
we can only hope that that point will be reached with as little casualties as possible.
I think this would be conterproductive to the end result though. If you inflict swift and high casualties on the opposition, the rest might be detered from dragging out a lengthy insurgency where even more people suffer (including lots and lots of bystanders).
It's human nature and you can put yourself in their place. When you see your comrades (not just machines that you didn't even pay for) die ruthlessly in a hopeless battle, chances are you would be grateful that you were spared and realize both that you will surely get killed for nothing if you continue your defiance...and that the new regime will be strong. i.e. Most people want to be on the winning side. It "might" be different if you have been oppresed all your life and don't give a crap anymore, but in this case, it's just changing some ways to run the country.
I think this would be conterproductive to the end result though. If you inflict swift and high casualties on the opposition, the rest might be detered from dragging out a lengthy insurgency where even more people suffer (including lots and lots of bystanders).
It's human nature and you can put yourself in their place. When you see your comrades (not just machines that you didn't even pay for) die ruthlessly in a hopeless battle, chances are you would be grateful that you were spared and realize both that you will surely get killed for nothing if you continue your defiance...and that the new regime will be strong. i.e. Most people want to be on the winning side. It "might" be different if you have been oppresed all your life and don't give a crap anymore, but in this case, it's just changing some ways to run the country.
jagolden
Sep 7, 09:25 AM
A good idea, just poorly executed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
Yes, everything should be given to everyone, no one has to work for it.
A good idea?! What, work hard so you can give it away to someone else who's to lazy to work hard? Wont give anything us shortterm for longterm returns?
It makes no sense, period.
Why do you think the roles of Welfare in the US are so huge? It's overflowing with the lazy ones who wont get off thier a###s therefore taking away from the the people who truly need that welfare.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
Yes, everything should be given to everyone, no one has to work for it.
A good idea?! What, work hard so you can give it away to someone else who's to lazy to work hard? Wont give anything us shortterm for longterm returns?
It makes no sense, period.
Why do you think the roles of Welfare in the US are so huge? It's overflowing with the lazy ones who wont get off thier a###s therefore taking away from the the people who truly need that welfare.
theBB
Jul 18, 12:18 PM
You cannot rent an HD movie from Blockbuster or Netflix, so what makes you think "Apple has to offer HD quality". There is no need to have better quality than competitors while also providing more convenience.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
$2 per rental ain't gonna happen. That's a pipedream. If movie indutry is licensing movies to Movielink for $4-5, it is not gonna let Apple do this for much lower prices. At that price it would be much more expensive than Netflix and with a much smaller library, so my subscription will have to stay. I can only use Apple's service as an add-on, when I really want to watch a movie, but Netflix DVD is still in the mail. Besides, I would have to get a Mac mini for the living room. Well, the cost just keeps adding up.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
$2 per rental ain't gonna happen. That's a pipedream. If movie indutry is licensing movies to Movielink for $4-5, it is not gonna let Apple do this for much lower prices. At that price it would be much more expensive than Netflix and with a much smaller library, so my subscription will have to stay. I can only use Apple's service as an add-on, when I really want to watch a movie, but Netflix DVD is still in the mail. Besides, I would have to get a Mac mini for the living room. Well, the cost just keeps adding up.
stcanard
Nov 28, 02:15 PM
It may not be true that they broke even, it's just something I thought I heard on a tv interview...
I suspect its all in the definition, I'll bet the "Xbox Division" broke even, which would be a very different thing because that would mean the video games and licensing made enough money to balance the losses from the console. Of course make those games for the PS2, and they would have been profitable instead of break even, but that wasn't the point. The point was to gain foothold in a new market.
Sony is selling the PS3 at a loss as well, Nintendo I'm sure is making money on the Wii...
I don't think I'd hold up Sony as an example of how to innovate and market -- they lost their focus decades ago. Aside from the walkman, let's see what products has Sony pushed in the last 30 years...
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
Now we sit back and see if the PS3 and Blu-Ray follow the recent trend. If we're comparing Microsoft to Sony that's what you have to look forward to.
I suspect its all in the definition, I'll bet the "Xbox Division" broke even, which would be a very different thing because that would mean the video games and licensing made enough money to balance the losses from the console. Of course make those games for the PS2, and they would have been profitable instead of break even, but that wasn't the point. The point was to gain foothold in a new market.
Sony is selling the PS3 at a loss as well, Nintendo I'm sure is making money on the Wii...
I don't think I'd hold up Sony as an example of how to innovate and market -- they lost their focus decades ago. Aside from the walkman, let's see what products has Sony pushed in the last 30 years...
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
Now we sit back and see if the PS3 and Blu-Ray follow the recent trend. If we're comparing Microsoft to Sony that's what you have to look forward to.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 10:59 AM
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
Braz0s
Mar 22, 10:22 PM
Haven't read all the comments so plz excuse if mentioned...
Plz put a mono switch on it like the new Nano. My wife is a Rubella baby so she's totally deaf in one ear. That mono switch really helped.
And it's software only - it should have always been there!
Plz put a mono switch on it like the new Nano. My wife is a Rubella baby so she's totally deaf in one ear. That mono switch really helped.
And it's software only - it should have always been there!
aricher
Nov 28, 10:11 AM
I was in FYE last night, and out of curiosity, asked the sales assistant how they were selling. They hadn't sold a single one.
I was in a very busy SuperTarget on Black Friday and their electronics employee said they haven't sold any since the release. He also had an iPod Nano clipped to his belt and said that he's been steering people towards iPods. The Best Buy near where I live has only sold 9 Zunes since the release. Poor numbers for a holiday season.
I was in a very busy SuperTarget on Black Friday and their electronics employee said they haven't sold any since the release. He also had an iPod Nano clipped to his belt and said that he's been steering people towards iPods. The Best Buy near where I live has only sold 9 Zunes since the release. Poor numbers for a holiday season.
NicoleRichie
Apr 20, 01:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Only rare in the US. Most rentals I have had in the last year out of the US are stick. Taugt myself how to drive a manual by "borrowing" my friends dads Shelby mustang for let's say joy rides... Don't tell him, only my mates mom knows.
Only rare in the US. Most rentals I have had in the last year out of the US are stick. Taugt myself how to drive a manual by "borrowing" my friends dads Shelby mustang for let's say joy rides... Don't tell him, only my mates mom knows.
lyzardking
Dec 22, 02:01 PM
Are they having problems finishing on time or do they quit before they get all the way finished?
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
Zadillo
Oct 23, 06:51 AM
At this point does anyone even need a "source" for one of these rumors? It seems like at this point anyone can say "MBP updates coming as early as THIS WEEK!!" and it is eventually going to be true, as Abstract says.
bushido
Apr 26, 02:21 PM
well we all know who really controls the goverment and everyone involved ... companies. so whoever throws more money at them is obvs gonna win
Rodimus Prime
Feb 23, 11:53 PM
on a random note just so you know switching to diesel you need to improve your MPG by around 30% for the switch to be carbon neutral. Remember Diesel as a lot more carbon in it per unit volume than unleaded.
berkleeboy210
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
just checked the apple store... currently 1-2 business day shipping time for the iMac.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
Fukui
Mar 26, 04:25 PM
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.
I don't think MS dropping IE was because of Apple's market share.
Its more to do with longhorn and the mixing of web api's and desktop api's
(.NET) so that there is no distinction between an application that runs on the web (IE) or run from your desktop, thats why its canceled further development for Windows XP and lower.
In longhorn, the Api's that you use for displaying web pages (java say goodbye) are the same ones that are bolted ONLY TO LONGHORN. To continue MSIE development on mac wouldn't work because then mac has all the same Api's as Longhorn, and MS wouldn't want that...besides, MSIE was more of a gesture than anything else, since it never supported activeX wich was the only real major reason for needing IE6...
I don't think MS dropping IE was because of Apple's market share.
Its more to do with longhorn and the mixing of web api's and desktop api's
(.NET) so that there is no distinction between an application that runs on the web (IE) or run from your desktop, thats why its canceled further development for Windows XP and lower.
In longhorn, the Api's that you use for displaying web pages (java say goodbye) are the same ones that are bolted ONLY TO LONGHORN. To continue MSIE development on mac wouldn't work because then mac has all the same Api's as Longhorn, and MS wouldn't want that...besides, MSIE was more of a gesture than anything else, since it never supported activeX wich was the only real major reason for needing IE6...
JoshH
Sep 6, 09:43 PM
I'm in consensus with everyone else... the quality has to be there. 480p minimum, and even then, that can look questionable on a high res monitor.
APPLENEWBIE
Sep 6, 09:24 PM
After following all this stuff today, I am really concerned about whateverthehell it is that will be announced next week. There seems to
be limited interest in movie downloads, when there are already good alternatives (netflix, the local video shop, etc.) There are definitely some
questions if that would/will even fly. I, for one, don't really care if I rent. I have a bunch of DVD movies, but rarely view them more than twice. So... even though an apple movie download service comes along, I really wonder how successful it will be. Which leads me to wonder... The Steve is not dumb. He is not going to order up a special meeting like this for something that may turn out to be nothing... Hell, it is apparently viewed by apple as much more important than the introduction of the 24" iMac, which is a heck of an interesting gadget. Do you think that there may be some REALLY BIG new technological/hardware gizmo being intro'd? Something that makes the movie store just a minor part of a larger picture. I keep thinking, Apple is a hardware company. Always has been. SHOW ME THE HARDWARE!
be limited interest in movie downloads, when there are already good alternatives (netflix, the local video shop, etc.) There are definitely some
questions if that would/will even fly. I, for one, don't really care if I rent. I have a bunch of DVD movies, but rarely view them more than twice. So... even though an apple movie download service comes along, I really wonder how successful it will be. Which leads me to wonder... The Steve is not dumb. He is not going to order up a special meeting like this for something that may turn out to be nothing... Hell, it is apparently viewed by apple as much more important than the introduction of the 24" iMac, which is a heck of an interesting gadget. Do you think that there may be some REALLY BIG new technological/hardware gizmo being intro'd? Something that makes the movie store just a minor part of a larger picture. I keep thinking, Apple is a hardware company. Always has been. SHOW ME THE HARDWARE!
likemyorbs
Mar 24, 02:14 PM
Ok let's not argue about gay being a choice or not again. What's the point? We just had this argument 2 pages ago and the person who thinks it's a choice usually just feels outnumbered and backs out, and rightfully so. Their opinion is wrong, they may realize it years down the line, or they may not. Either way, their side is losing. Bigots always lose in the end in this country, and they know it.
No comments:
Post a Comment