Re: To make movies, get a Macintosh


ed wrote:
Tim Crowley wrote:
ed wrote:
Alan Baker wrote:
In article <cz9fg.40839$q13.283929@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
NRen2k5 <nomore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Tim Crowley wrote:
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/business/technology/14677951.htm
<Repeated bull*** SNIPPED>

Shill.

- NRen2k5

Wow. There's nothing like a point-by-point refutation of an argument.

And that was *nothing* like a point-by-point refutation of an argument.

a point-by-point refutation would be a neat trick given that the og
article doesn't even list the programs he's 'testing', nevermind
mention any particular reasons why he has issues with them. ;D

He made the point very well that the Mac solution was easy, intuitive
and produced results that look classy and professional. My
experience has been the same - with the Mac "It's easy, it's fun and
the results are first-class. What more could you want?" you can
attempt to refute that, but I think you would have little success.

i'm only addressing alan's 'point', tim. if i wanted to address the
rest, i would have replied to a different post...

Alan's point was that "NRen2k5" had NOTHING to say. Then again, I have
never seen him have anything of value to say. And, in fact - The
author of the original piece made a fine point and all "Nren" could do
was shout :shill". Useless.

.

Quantcast