Google and Nvidia is a very small portion of developers as a whole. Almost every professional freelancer will use Mac along with any company serious about developing their own software. Linux as well but that can vary. Windows? For few specific technologies maybe but no chance it would be a popular choice.
Which future sponsor would suit United the best?
- Thread starter Rezyuz
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
It's a very small percentage yes, but I'd suggest it's fairly representative of how tech companies develop, as they generally don't exist in a bubble and valley culture always tends to be pretty homogenous. The major reason to use macs is to develop for iOS which is pretty awesome. I'm pretty sure both the companies I mentioned are fairly serious about developing their own software though.
The reason macbooks were so popular for laptop choice is due to the Chinese hacks some years ago rather than some inherent advantage. Which is why they are now dwindling. (I wasn't there at the time, but everybody at google had to hand in their laptop in 2010 or so and receive a macbook instead due to a security mandate.)
I'm not suggesting they aren't decent, (I'm typing on a macbook currently) but to say they are used for the vast majority of development is either disingenuous or ignorant. My brother starts at Apple in 8 months (contract signed, but current company won't release him from contract early) , so I can ask him then what they all use if you'd like to revisit the discussion
Last edited:
The one which pays us the most money
You're saying I am ignorant about this yet you think the reason people used macs was due to Chinese hacks rather than inherent advantage. That means you clearly have no proper software development experience. The benefits of using OSX are unparalleled.It's a very small percentage yes, but I'd suggest it's fairly representative of how tech companies develop, as they generally don't exist in a bubble and valley culture always tends to be pretty homogenous. The major reason to use macs is to develop for iOS which is pretty awesome. I'm pretty sure both the companies I mentioned are fairly serious about developing their own software though.
The reason macbooks were so popular for laptop choice is due to the Chinese hacks some years ago rather than some inherent advantage. Which is why they are now dwindling. (I wasn't there at the time, but everybody at google had to hand in their laptop in 2010 or so and receive a macbook instead due to a security mandate.)
I'm not suggesting they aren't decent, (I'm typing on a macbook currently) but to say they are used for the vast majority of development is either disingenuous or ignorant. My brother starts at Apple in 8 months (contract signed, but current company won't release him from contract early) , so I can ask him then what they all use if you'd like to revisit the discussion
Also, 2 of my buddies work as developers at google. Both use macs. Your info is wrong and you need to educate yourself.
Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. Google recalled all laptops and issued macbooks instead because the CIO mandated it. It's not a trade secret, look it up.
They probably use macbooks, or develop for IOS or something. Most don't.
Most do. Developing for IOS is hardly the advantage. Again, you clearly haven't developed much software you have no idea what you're on about here.
There's a famous (funny) quote that 90 percent of devs at google use homebrew (funnier with the context). Homebrew is specific for mac. You're telling me suddenly 90 percent of employees now can't use the software they needed
Coca-Cola or McDonalds.
I don't know why but I always thought a massive Adidas originals in the middle of the shirt would look cool; failing that maybe Apple or Samsung. I am pretty much resigned to us only being involved with American companies given our owners' connections. Maybe xBox would work?
I think he is a front end developer.
Coca Cola seems the obvious choice.
American brand, tons of money, one of the most recognizable brands in the history of humanity, and the logo would actually look pretty classy, especially considering it's at home on a red background.
American brand, tons of money, one of the most recognizable brands in the history of humanity, and the logo would actually look pretty classy, especially considering it's at home on a red background.
Coca Cola for the home shirt, Coke Zero for the black and Coke Light for the white?
Not that these things matter but given certain controversies in south America I think we might do well to avoid association with Coca-Cola
https://www.telesurtv.net/english/n...g-Terrorist-Paramilitaries-20160901-0005.html
That would definitely synch up pretty well with Coke's packaging and marketing, yeah.
Although here in the USA, it'd be Diet Coke (instead of Coke Light) and now Coke Zero has just been rebranded as 'Coke Zero Sugar'
I don't think brands that are as closely associated with red as McDonalds or Coke would be a good choice, aesthetically speaking. If that Atlanta United mockup is anything to go on, it'd look more like a Coca-Cola FC kit than a Manchester United one.
Apple would probably be the best. Just a simple logo, everyone knows what it means, leaves plenty of room on the shirt for additional logos
The rebranding is a small issue, but we the fans may not like it when they bring us to have a cherry colored 3rd kit if they wanted to market cherry coke.
Durex to hopefully go with our tinder sleeve sponsor .
.