No, your idea contradicts the basic definition of the word, which includes none of the above. By your definition, an idea might be "stupid" for no other reason than you haven't heard about it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jobs Biographer Walter Isaacson: 'Execution is What Really Matters,' Apple is the Best
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, your idea contradicts the basic definition of the word, which includes none of the above. By your definition, an idea might be "stupid" for no other reason than you haven't heard about it.
online definitions:
split hairs
Fig. to quibble; to try to make petty distinctions. They don't have any serious differences. They are just splitting hairs. Don't waste time splitting hairs.
split hairs
to argue about whether details that are not important are exactly correct 'She earns three time what I earn.' 'Actually, it's more like two and a half.' 'Oh stop splitting hairs!'
I didn't. I bought a $300 Samsung Galaxy (unlocked no contract) as an alternative. That is the whole point. Too bad Apple can't build a $300 iPhone. I would have preferred an iPhone, but, had to buy a mid-price Android instead.
The point being, in case someone missed it, is that there is a significant volume to be had at the $300 (unlocked no contract) price point for families who can't afford the iPhone. When the rumors of the 5c were confirmed, people got excited, until they saw the disappointing pricing. Nobody expects Apple to compete at the low end. But, Apple used to do a better job at competing at the mid-price middle-class level than they are now. Case in point: the white plastic macbook.
Paint that discussion with Apple's competitors in the backdrop....
What is Samsung doing that is so innovative? Bigger screens? Touchless gestures? Bloatware on top of Android? What kind of visionary does Samsung have as its CEO? Does anyone even now who their CEO is?
What about Microsoft? A tablet that is a laptop. And a laptop that is like a tablet. And Windows 8. Great innovations there. And what about their CEO? What kind of visionary was he? Wasn't he that guy running around like a monkey yelling "developers developers developers developers developers developers developers..."?
Who is the visionary at HP? Who is the visionary at Dell?
Apple is never going to have Steve Jobs again. But I expect there were enough people paying attention at how SJ went about figuring out what products to bring to market. And even if they never introduce another revolutionary product, I will still be happy for as long as they continue to work on and improve Macs and iOS devices.
you just supported what I said.
As long as they simply keep on making stuff and improving (pretty much every company is improving), you'll feel comfy and satisfied.
As I said , as long as they aren't doing anything horrible they can continue on cruise control thanks to Steve. For how long nobody knows.
Innovation?
Starbird, my sentiments exactly. They became experts at data mining years ago, acquired the Usenet archives, and the latest innovation I can think of is Google Glass.
But "innovation" is not the same as "copying" or even ripping off someone else's intellectual property. I can't help but think Eric Schmidt breached the trust of Steve when he was on Apple's Board of Directors.
They try to make a better iPhone than an iPhone. A better Facebook than Facebook. A better Sharepoint than Microsoft. Why don't they do something on their own, truly original? Innovation really isn't about trying to copy someone else's stuff, it's about doing something completely different.
Often I think Google just throws paint on the wall just to see what sticks and they go after that for the time being.
I do however think that Google's corporate culture lends itself to the distinct possibility that it may out-innovate Apple. I sincerely believe that Apple's true innovations came from Steve's visions, and the company is going to shift into evolutionary rather than revolutionary mode.
Starbird, my sentiments exactly. They became experts at data mining years ago, acquired the Usenet archives, and the latest innovation I can think of is Google Glass.
But "innovation" is not the same as "copying" or even ripping off someone else's intellectual property. I can't help but think Eric Schmidt breached the trust of Steve when he was on Apple's Board of Directors.
They try to make a better iPhone than an iPhone. A better Facebook than Facebook. A better Sharepoint than Microsoft. Why don't they do something on their own, truly original? Innovation really isn't about trying to copy someone else's stuff, it's about doing something completely different.
Often I think Google just throws paint on the wall just to see what sticks and they go after that for the time being.
I do however think that Google's corporate culture lends itself to the distinct possibility that it may out-innovate Apple. I sincerely believe that Apple's true innovations came from Steve's visions, and the company is going to shift into evolutionary rather than revolutionary mode.
Why would you go for more volume and less profit? If they sold 2x phones at half the profit, they would be moronic!
The plastic Macbook was $999. That was NOT midpoint. The MBA is now $999 too and is aluminum.
arent you assuming it cannibalizes the 5s?
knocking a $100 or $150 of the 5c does not make it a cheap product in anyway rather a more fair priced product like the mba
Just like the previous iPhones cannibalize. In reality, the 5C sells more 5S than it sells 5C. Maximum profit is the concern, not fair pricing. Apple did their Maximum Profit Projections (yes, calculus!).
this old tired nonsense. in reality you have no idea of the effect of the 5c on the 5s. as if the demographic (in reality and in apples view) for the two is the same.
i never said fair pricing was the concern.
apple does a lot of things. dosent make them all right
Then why bitch about the price? And yea, basic marketing and just asking people about if they would rather spend $100 to upgrade to the 5S. General concensus is yes it's worth $100 upgrade.
my remark about the price wasnt a direct reply to you nor would i call it bitching.
it was to previous posts here (and they always appear) that if the 5c was any cheaper it would be race to the bottom. only thing i said was that a $100-150 cheaper device would not be cheap.
by that you are assuming that the 5c had a remote chance of getting these customers. and lets assume that applies to some. what also happens is that having such a small price gab between the two devices loses customers to other phone makers.
btw the thing about your statement with every person at apple going crazy in the calculator app dosent quite hold true because they have admitted that it took them a good while to realize how the demand was split ie they were expecting a very different ratio between the 5s and 5c.
Last edited:
So Walter panders to the CNBC crowd saying Google is more innovative. But when he gets called on it by some people he's not even man enough to defend what he said, so he backtracks saying it's really about execution which Apple does better. I'm sorry but just because he wrote a bio of Steve Jobs doesn't make him an expert on the tech industry.