I'm sure Apple will be first to join the fight against Open Source, what with all the money they invested creating their Unix systems from scratch.
As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
41–50 of 93 posts
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#42He hits a nerve, though. The evangelism for companies has been rising at an insane rate. Why do people feel the need to defend their favorite company against the encroachment of other companies?
I could understand if their paycheck was on the line. If you write iPod apps and Android starts taking market share, that threatens you. (Assuming you can't also write Android apps, for whatever reason.) But most people just go crazy with no stake at all.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#43So.. they hate Android. But their explanation of why is to point to some blog post which by my view concludes that Android is bringing 'perfect competition' to the marketplace. Soo.. I presume they are against that, but what's funny is the blog post they point to even discusses how perfect competition benefits the consumer and how preventing it would be detrimental.
Sounds like the blog post they point to doesn't exactly give reasons to hate android like they think it does...
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#44So, an Ad company (Paybuyer - "a tiny startup with a major technology") makes a website campaigning people not to use AdSense? > "Help defend RIM, your city, and universities by joining a rally outside RIM's Annual General Meeting" I feel sorry for those who will actually go there, thinking that by this they will help RIM, and not that in fact they're helping Paybuyer. EDIT: One more thing, instead of ignoring this k…
Don't you perpetuate it too by responding? Wait, didn't I just perpetuate it further?
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#45More context: As I'm jogging to work, there were students holding up boards with those posters right in front of the RIM buildings. I feel embarrassed as a fellow Waterloo student.
Yeah, cooping in Toronto right now, just asked a bunch of my friends at school about this... I share your embarrassment. It actually hurts that a company is trying to manipulate us like this. Not just because it's so blindingly obvious, but because it will work on enough people.
Wait, they're doing it and not getting paid by someone to do it? I mean people (usually ridiculously hot women) stand out on the street holding up signs telling me how awesome red-bull is.
It's pretty easy to pick up a street promotions crew. The job generally tends to have Abercrombie-style hiring practices, pays a bit more than minimum wage, and is pretty flexible.
I'd honestly be shocked if there were people dumb enough to do that for real.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
> every player needs to be balanced Correction: at least two players need to be balanced. iPhone, to my mind, provides just such a balance. Trying to boost every single also-ran product into a position of strategic equity is a waste of time. Right now, RIM is the poster child for the Innovator's Dilemma, and there's little anyone including RIM can do about it.
You mention 'at least two players' but from your explanation, you seem satisfied with ONLY two players. I disagree. I'd rather have multiple competitive players than merely two.
I can't recall the name off hand and my googlefu is failing me but there's a theory that says a system that supports multiple political parties eventually evolves (or devolves) into two parties.
I think there's a business correlary as well.
Markets aren't designed to support more than one or two players. There's not enough market share in a given space for it. Eventually you'll have first, second and everyone else. The people in first and second may change but there's always a disproportionate market share between number 2 and the rest of the pack.
You might want multiple COMPETITIVE players but you will rarely see it. Eventually the minor market folks will quit because it makes no sense financially to continue in the space.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is this one of those "it doesn't have to make sense, it's just for publicity" things? Pretty much. > Why are the uni students holding a rally? What connection do they have to"Paybuyer, LLC" which funds this Adwords competitor? It's not a rally; they're holding up giant signs to face traffic. I think it was four people to a sign. (It didn't occur to me to take a picture until I was already far away.) This is just a…
These aren't my pictures, but they were posted to Twitter, so I think they're fair game: http://twitpic.com/5olpan http://twitpic.com/5olpi2 http://twitpic.com/5olpn6 http://twitpic.com/5olpup
I honestly thought this whole thing was a hoax or some type of bad joke, then I see my former engineering building behind some people carrying the stupidest signs imaginable. This reeks of the "buy American" bromide that GM fans expose.
I have to believe that most people at U of W don't have an unnatural affinity towards RIM, and that this is all just a really stupid stunt.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#48He hits a nerve, though. The evangelism for companies has been rising at an insane rate. Why do people feel the need to defend their favorite company against the encroachment of other companies? I could understand if their paycheck was on the line. If you write iPod apps and Android starts taking market share, that threatens you. (Assuming you can't also write Android apps, for whatever reason.) But most people just…
Humans like choosing sides, however arbitrary. We're tribal at heart.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> every player needs to be balanced Correction: at least two players need to be balanced. iPhone, to my mind, provides just such a balance. Trying to boost every single also-ran product into a position of strategic equity is a waste of time. Right now, RIM is the poster child for the Innovator's Dilemma, and there's little anyone including RIM can do about it.
You mention 'at least two players' but from your explanation, you seem satisfied with ONLY two players. I disagree. I'd rather have multiple competitive players than merely two.
I'd prefer this as well. The richest competitive ecosystem is always preferable. What I was addressing was the assertion that all players "needed" to be balanced. Necessity is not equivalent to preference. I'd prefer that all players be roughly equivalent, but in order to avoid a monopoly I'll settle for two major dominant competitors.
Re: As I run past the RIM buildings, I see these posters
#50He hits a nerve, though. The evangelism for companies has been rising at an insane rate. Why do people feel the need to defend their favorite company against the encroachment of other companies? I could understand if their paycheck was on the line. If you write iPod apps and Android starts taking market share, that threatens you. (Assuming you can't also write Android apps, for whatever reason.) But most people just…
http://www.neurosciencemarketing.com/blog/articles/apple-fan... is quite interesting in this regard. I know its focused on Apple users, but I wouldn't be surprised if you get similar results by putting evangelists for different platforms through the experiment.