>Sure, but people developed technologies that
>let you run on a flat tyre for 50 miles, and
>there’s clearly a market among people who
>don’t have enough muscle or enough brains to
>change a wheel. (Heck, you might even get your
>fashion-victim trainers dirty.)

You see, that’s just it. The definition of a ‘minor’ feature is entirely subjective, but you’re unwilling to accept that something you don’t see as important could possibly be to anyone else.

Not having a spare wheel has nothing to do with brains or muscle, it’s about saving space and reducing weight – the wheel still has to be changed, just not immediately. But then, acknowledging that wouldn’t have afforded you the opportunity to get that little trainer dig in, would it?

Jack, I didn’t praise or rubbish the Air. I know nothing about it other than the specification, which is little more than a general pointer to performance.

If I’m able to understand your point (with my tiny brain) this would mean that in comparative tests the item with the best specification would always be the best. That’s not always the case is it? When people actually get their hands on stuff and test and compare them, bare specification doesn’t always count.

Can you really state with no doubt whatsoever that the X300 has a better screen and better keyboard and is faster? How?

Also, I apologise for calling you an idiot that was not necessary.

I always find the special pleading of Apple apologists most amusing. It’s easy to spot: you just look for a minor but unique feature being blown up in importance until it’s claimed more significant than the omission of things that actually are important.

> my new car doesn’t have a spare wheel. I guess
> that was considered pretty stupid when the first
> manufacturer brought the idea to market,
> but you know, it’s kinda catching on.

Sure, but people developed technologies that let you run on a flat tyre for 50 miles, and there’s clearly a market among people who don’t have enough muscle or enough brains to change a wheel. (Heck, you might even get your fashion-victim trainers dirty.)

Let me know when Apple comes up with a laptop that can run for another 5 hours on a flat or totally destroyed battery. Then I’ll be able to save 2mm *and* save my $5,000 business trip, which will obviously make the world a much better place.

Clearly not as big an idiot as you, however

Obviously your tiny brain can’t cope with the idea that you can compare *specifications* without actually handling the products….

I’m sorry if it is too hard for you to understand that actually handling a MacBook Air won’t magically make the battery user-replaceable, but if you can’t cope with life outside Steve’s Reality Distortion Field, that’s your problem not mine.

I have lots of experience of the parts that go into pies but I wouldn’t categorically say one was better than another without tasting them first.

Likewise when I buy a computer, I buy it based on whether it suits the work I do and the way I intend using it. That means, for example that having a laptop that won’t be dragged onto the floor because someone has tripped on the power cord and having an interface that helps me do what I need to do rather than hinders me is a big deal. And the only problem I’ve ever had with a laptop is a broken latch, so not having one of those is a definite plus. If that makes me ‘spectacularly stupid’ in your view, I hold my hands up. Guilty as charged.

You’re right on one point, though. Corporate IT buyers don’t, and never will, understand Apple products, no matter how often you show them that the long term cost of ownership is less on average than a Windows PC.

And if you think not being able to carry and easily replace a spare battery (although it now appears that you can) is bad, my new car doesn’t have a spare wheel. I guess that was considered pretty stupid when the first manufacturer brought the idea to market, but you know, it’s kinda catching on.

I apologise for not being an idiot fanboy, but I have a lot of experience of the parts used in machines like the Air, if not this particular assembly of parts, and from a specification and photos/videos, I can actually tell the difference between (say) a single seat sports car and a station wagon.

Otherwise, from a rational business point of view, you are being spectacularly stupid in putting things that make little or no difference 99.99% of the time above things that are fundamentally essential. That’s fine if it’s a vanity product, but not if you need to get real work done.

You seen to be the sort of person who chooses a car because the badge is cute and you like the way the doors click, while ignoring the engine capacity, the number of seats, etc. The companies that actually buy this kind of product in volume generally have more practical considerations.