DIYbanter - View Single Post

Mike Hartigan

In article ,
says...
Mike Hartigan wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Ever wonder why Dilbert and the television show
"The Office" are so popular...because they are so true.

Nope, because they exaggerate what really happens.

Isn't "what really happens" the same as "true"?

Nope, Dilbert ain 'what really happens'

Maybe you would be so kind as to explain the difference between "what
really happens" and "true".

What am I missing here?

The exaggeration, stupid.

Well, there goes any hope I had for an intelligent discussion. I'm
outta here.

Perhaps "true" is not accurate since they don't deal with actual events.

Or because its exaggerated.

"True to life" is probably a better characterization of 'The Office' and 'Dilbert'.

Nope, its an exaggeration of reality.

That is what caricatures have always been about.

Caricatures make reality entertaining.

So can Dilbert and The Office.

But they still reflect reality.

Nope, they exaggerate reality.

They wouldn't be funny if they didn't. 'The Office' is a caricature
- that's why it's funny on the particular level that it is funny.

And its not true to life, its a caricature/exaggeration of life.

I find that people who have never worked
in an office are less likely to 'get it'.

Sure, but thats not surprising.

'Scrubs', on the other hand, is farce. You
don't have to work in a hospital to enjoy it.

I dont work in a hospital and dont enjoy it either.

Its slapstick, nothing like reality.

What you neatly gross over is what happens when
engineering says it can't make a product based on
the imaginary price point...who then decides?

Its never that black and white either.

Just a guess - you don't work for Corporate America.

Others that clearly do have also said it aint that black and white.

I will give you a hint....it ain't engineering.

It aint the bean counters either if it isnt possible, stupid.

Just a guess - you don't work for Corporate America.

Others that clearly do have also said it aint that black and white.

And did I mention that the CEO's bonus is tied to this product?

No it isnt.

Typically, it is.

Nope.

Particularly when the target price is 'impossible'.

Fantasy.

In the end, a company will produce the cheapest junk that it can sell...

Have fun explaining ipods and countless other products.

Are you suggesting that Apple did not try
to minimize the production cost of the iPod?

Nope, that its clearly nothing like the cheapest junk that they can sell.

Perhaps you could explain why they are made in China?

Irrelevant to whether its actually the cheapest junk that they can sell.

The real world is nothing like as black and white as you claim.

and it will work very hard to insure that the consumer
needs to buy another new one from them...

Having it not last long is a hopeless way of doing that.

Actually, you're both wrong.

Nope. He is.

The objective is to sell a product NOW.

Its much more complicated than that too.

Given the rate of change, particularly with technology
products, repeat sales are no longer an objective.

Bull****, most obviously with Apple.

Build them as cheaply as possible TODAY.

Have fun explaining the ipods and countless
other products that are nothing like that.

This year's bottom line is what the CEO's bonus is based on.

Nothing like the original claim about the CEO's bonus.

And it aint necessarily true of quite a few CEOs either.

and have to get any and all support from them.

Plenty avoid products like that.

That's pure BS.

Nope. Even you should be able to find countless
examples of individuals doing that using groups.google.

Consumers are motivated, first and foremost, by purchase price.

Not all of them are. If they were, you wouldnt see so many ipods sold.

Or those stupid expensive brand name shoes in spades.

Or SUVs either.

That's the reason so many products have a 'Made in China' label.

Nope, the real reason is because it costs less to manufacture there.

Apple and a few other American companies have
successfully marketed a perception of quality
(actually, hipness), but still import the products.

Irrelevant to that silly claim that consumers buy on price.

If they did, they wouldnt be buying ipods.

It is all about separating the consumer from as
much of their money as painlessly as possible.

Its never that black and white either.

Just a guess - you don't work for Corporate America.

Others that clearly do have also said it aint that black and white.

And that is called a conspiracy.

Wrong again, its you silly little 'planned obsolescence'
thats a conspiracy, if it was actually possible.

Actually, it has nothing to do with a conspiracy.
It's simply using a business model that works.

It isnt even possible to use planned obsolescence as a business model,
essentially because it isnt possible to design a product to fail just after
the warranty has expired, even if some operation was actually that stupid.