On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 10:16 AM, KathyMac! wrote: > I'm not arguing that they should state that it is optimal for OSX. > What I > was saying is that I don't think it is honest marketing to make the > masses > believe something not completely true. What's not true? So it kinda works on some other systems. Apple does not want to provide support for the monitor on those systems due to the known problems, not to mention there may be many other problems that come up. That's the difference between supported and not. Apple is selling the monitor stating what systems they will support it on. As with any other piece of equipment, it may work for uses outside those supported, but you are on your own to do the research and take the chance. > So, it's not a lie. Ok. But it's a > half truth, right? Just like its a half truth to say you can't drive a screw with a hammer. Who wants to be responsible for the potential mess? Not Apple. > We both know they could be more specific in their tech > specs and descriptions so we are better armed with the knowledge we > need as > a consumer to make a purchase best suited for us. Any time there is > valuable > information omitted we are all at risk of making a less educated > decision. And any time they state that something works, even partially, they become obligated to support it. Just trying to provide a different view. I seem to be the official "Apple Cheerleader" today. -Mike