211–220 of 437 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They said exactly what was claimed. Grep for for "bogged" and read again. Then again, maybe that's not what he meant to say. Because as read, these quotes suggest some pretty absurd things.
That would be because they're selectively quoted, out of context, by a biased party.
My dad: Apple just won right? Me: No - they just lost big time - Apple is done. Dad: Wait - What? They just won the court case and got a billion dollars to boot. Me: That doesn't matter - Samsung won. Dad: Explain. Me: As soon as you have to sue your competition to remain competitive - you're done. Apple did the same thing with Microsoft in the nineties. Furthermore, Samsung builds not only many of Apple products - i…
Apple is the most successful IT company in the world and they are the most profitable in the phone industry and have the greatest market share in the tablet and music player industries. So not sure how you come up with this ludicrous idea that they can't compete. Also "open systems" always win ? Linux would like a word with you.
Success always comes before the fall - Apple can either stabilise or fall. They will fall.
Linux won - Android is Linux. Consumer electronics are Linux. Servers are Linux. Everything runs on Linux. Microsoft is done.
Google wins. I own Google now.
My dad: Apple just won right? Me: No - they just lost big time - Apple is done. Dad: Wait - What? They just won the court case and got a billion dollars to boot. Me: That doesn't matter - Samsung won. Dad: Explain. Me: As soon as you have to sue your competition to remain competitive - you're done. Apple did the same thing with Microsoft in the nineties. Furthermore, Samsung builds not only many of Apple products - i…
They're clearly in the wrong here. It's not about the fundamental form factor of the devices, it's about blatant plagiarism. Apple's designs are aren't perfect, and instead of perfecting or improving the devices (which would be better for consumers), they simply didn't think about it. Shame on you Samsung.
My dad: Apple just won right? Me: No - they just lost big time - Apple is done. Dad: Wait - What? They just won the court case and got a billion dollars to boot. Me: That doesn't matter - Samsung won. Dad: Explain. Me: As soon as you have to sue your competition to remain competitive - you're done. Apple did the same thing with Microsoft in the nineties. Furthermore, Samsung builds not only many of Apple products - i…
Big distinction is that Apple lost their big court case with Microsoft in the 90s.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Big distinction is that Apple lost their big court case with Microsoft in the 90s.
Key point here is suing your competition to remain competitive is an indicator of a coming fall.
I don't think its that black and white but suggesting the lawsuit, and not the lawsuit outcome, is somehow responsible for a company's lack-of-success is silly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feature phone or not (you have to compare it to the original iPhone which wasn't a smartphone either), it looked a lot like the iPhone. Apple didn't invent touch screen phones, they "just" made them popular. It's a big accomplishment, but they didn't create the segment.
The LG Prada looks a lot like the iPhone ? That's crazy. I couldn't think of two phones that looked less alike.
Few buttons, PDA. Tablet with news, Knight Ridder tablet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI Icons finger sized in a grid. Well given we already had desktops, and given it's a handheld device, then it's insanely obvious to have fewer icons in a grid at finger size. Low resolution screen compared to our desktops, hey maybe we should have fullscreen as the default. Pinch to zoom, multiple sci-fi movies. Slide t…
PalmOS had icons in a grid looking pretty much the same too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market was waiting for capacitive touchscreens to become viable. You can't use multitouch properly on resistive screens (or non-touchscreen devices). Apple pounced as soon as capacitive screens became viable - albeit extremely expensive at the time. The first iPhone was "ahead of its time" in the sense that the market wasn't really ready for it. The first iPhone was an expensive PoS - it wasn't until the app stor…
If the market was just waiting for capacitive touchscreens to become available, why did it take all the others years to come up with anything competitive after the iPhone launched? Why didn't they all have capacitive iPhone look-alikes ready in the lab then? Isn't it more reasonable to assume that the mobile market would have stayed roughly as it had the previous 10 years, with incremental improvements in screens, di…
Because apple was the only one that hadn't invested in anything else. Simple as that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They said exactly what was claimed. Grep for for "bogged" and read again. Then again, maybe that's not what he meant to say. Because as read, these quotes suggest some pretty absurd things.
That would be because they're selectively quoted, out of context, by a biased party.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-appl...
I hope you don't consider CNET biased. If anything, they are usually criticized for being Apple-biased.
