<![CDATA[Gizmodo: propaganda]]> http://tags.gizmodo.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gizmodo.com.png <![CDATA[Gizmodo: propaganda]]> http://gizmodo.com/tag/propaganda http://gizmodo.com/tag/propaganda <![CDATA[Losing Net Neutrality: The Worst Case Scenario]]> It's alarmist, over-the-top pro-net-neutrality propaganda, sure, but this chart goes a long way to explaining why the IT dude at the office wears that "All Packets are Created Equal" shirt to work every Thursday: because tiered ISPs are scary.

And before you dismiss the chart outright, check out your cable company's channel packages. Replace content provider fees with new network backbone charges, and cable packages with traffic or website packages, and hey, look, shit—this doesn't seem so crazy, does it? Click here for the full version. [Reddit via Crunchgear]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5391707&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Leaked Document Shows Verizon's Psyops Anti-iPhone Propaganda]]> Oh, deary deary me... Verizon's tactics to combat the JesusPhone 3G now include briefing its employees about the iPhone's failings, so they can answer customer questions about why it doesn't carry the device. There are four big "myths" about the cellphone apparently, ranging from "twice as fast" to "iPhone data plan covers all data," there's even a dig about the lack of audible turn-by-turn GPS navigation. Hasn't Verizon worked out that that's just an app, and is a facility that may yet be added in the future?

My fave "mythbusting" point has to be that the iPhone 3G "will be twice as fast only where AT&T has 3G coverage!" No shit... like, you can only run trains on train tracks? OK, so it's really a dig at AT&T's 3G coverage, but you get my point.

This has apparently been distributed within Verizon, and though there's the possibility that it's not quite legit, it certainly seems the real deal to me. What do you think, chaps? [Thanks, Harris!]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5041213&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[MacBook Pro Fastest Windows Laptop? Not So Fast]]>
"The fastest Windows notebook we tested this year is a Mac," writes PC World about the MacBook Pro after it scored an 88 on its WorldBench 6 Beta 2 benchmark. Only problem is, it looks like that same publication reviewed a Eurocom D900C Phantom-X laptop that achieved a better score on that same benchmark, a 97 (higher number is better). So what gives? Too bad PC World contradicted itself, but the Apple propaganda machine played right along, trumpeting in one of its annoying spots the humiliating results of a MacBook Pro running Windows better than any other laptops. Not quite. Check out PC World's benchmark tables of the two machines, side-by-side:

Don't believe everything you read, especially when it's coming from Cupertino. [PC World (MacBook Pro), and PC World (Eurocom D900C Phantom-X), via Joe's Blog]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=331223&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Windows Vista vs. Mac OS X Leopard: Upgrade Hell or One-Stop Shopping]]> osx_vs_vista_upgrades.jpgHere's a fine piece of propaganda from the fanboys at MacHouse. Ha ha. But they fail to mention that first of all, Leopard isn't available yet, and second, Apple will charge you for each point upgrade of OS X, and you only have to buy Windows once every five years.

Windows Vista and Mac OS X Leopard Upgrade Charts [Mac House, via CrunchGear]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=233540&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Latest Mac Vs. PC Propaganda Buries the Hatchet, But Not Really]]>
Never content until we've covered Apple's every move and shown all of their television commercials here, now we're showing you the latest one that hides its subtle brainwashing under the guise of the "happy holidays" mind virus. And what holidays are those? I think the Santa hats give it away. Enough already of this total bullshit.

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=223256&view=rss&microfeed=true