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.
Apple Wins One-Week Extension of Galaxy Tab Sales Ban in Australia
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Loos an argument? How do I loos an argument?
If you're trying to imply I'm an Apple fanboy... hahahahahaha.... I use my Macbook Pro for mainly for Windows development. If I had to rank my total operate usage by percent it would be: Windows 40%, Linux (Red Hat and SLES) 30%, OS X 30%.
Does that make you feel better?
I really don't understand what you guys are arguing about?
Nachos?
It's funny... I know. It would take reading multiple pages and probably multiple threads to figure this out. It's always the same guys spewing the same crap.
- Apple doesn't innovate. Android innovates.
They both copy from each other. I choose to only take one side of this argument because it's fun rubbing it in the face of Android fans.
- There were tablets before the iPad.
Comparing an iPad to previous tablets is comical. Have you ever tried to use one? They sucked. Microsoft tried to put a desktop OS on a tablet and it was a miserable failure. They sunk a huge amount of money in that endeavor and only now do they seem to get it.
- Apple is sue happy.
This is business. If Samsung or Google don't like the current patent laws lobby to change them. They have the cash. Samsung, who also sits on a treasure trove of patents, probably doesn't want patent reform. They choose to bitch about Apple, but they don't lobby strongly for patent reform. If they don't like the laws lobby strongly for patent reform. Until then they can ****.
Right. If you're talking about Oletros, I'm done. You can never conclude an argument with him. It's like he only reads one line out of the whole comment and ignores the rest of it.
Anyway, no nachos for you.
I don't know how to answer you. I don't use your ass-backwards definition of innovation: requiring sales to imply innovation, unless they were products touched by Jobs, in which case, they were innovative, period.
I do know that Apple hasn't created anything new. All they ever did was take existing technology, package and create a TV ad with a catchy song, and sold it based on its fashion value. That is not innovation. That is marketing.
webster said:
So Apple did not do something in a new way? Apple did not have new ideas about how something can be done?
Mmm, no?
----------
You can't conclude any argument because most of your arguments are plainly wrong.
And yes, I read all what people write. You don't read or don't understand
But what can be expected of someone that only sees one side of the things?
You just fit the general idea of being a fanboy, it is perfectly reasonable to people buying products of a company while being able to criticize its flaws. I love my Samsung TV but I also hate the company for its corrupt ways in South Korea. I love Windows 7 but I hate the Xbox 360 for failing on me too many times. I love my MacBook Pro but I hate the Magic Mouse and I hate iWorks.
Most of your arguments are assumptions and opinions, don't ask for something you don't even give. You don't need to be "Windroidsungs" to be able to find flaws in Apple.
Another symptom of fanboyism, they will pull anything out to protect their oh-so-beloved company/object/etc.
That still makes you a hater, and you chose the side you prefer. Either way, the reaction of fanboys are always similar, Apple or Android. It's equally fun to rub it on either sides.
They have the right to bitch, they have suffered injunctions everywhere, wouldn't you be pissed?
This does not change the fact that there were tablets. Why do you keep going around the argument?
----------
Seriously going to go after a typo?
Oh ok, you use Windows 40% of the time... So how does this contradict the fact that you could be a fanboy? Oh maybe you're more of a hater than a fanboy.
Hahaha... yeah, sure it does.
Criticizing a competing product makes me a hater?
They bitch to the press instead of lobbying for change. What is the press going to do? Don't like the laws? Lobby to change the laws or ****.
Who is arguing that there weren't tablets before the iPad? Go back and read the entire thread. I've stated before that I think they sucked. Did you ever try one? They sucked because they sucked. If Apple would have branded one of those I would be saying the same thing.
And how does that prove I am a fanboy or a hater? I like to ridicule Android because it's fun. When my friends have to reboot their phone by pulling the battery out I laugh. When my friends have to swap to a new ROM or restore to the stock ROM I laugh.
I laugh because it's funny. Typos make me laugh too.
So, you're just mocking Android and its users. That's called acting like a total arse.
1) Beauty is somewhat relative, and always situated in time. For its time, i find the sahara quite appealing. That said, stop moving the goalposts. You made a false caricature, i corrected it. Enough said.
2) Sales are relative. First, example one, it would clearly be more impressive if Boeing sold one thousand 787's tomorrow than if GM sold one thousand cars. Second, example two, Henry Ford selling one million cars was way more impressive than modern day Ford doing so. Quod erat demonstrandum.
3) Something that is not relative, however, are logics. Now that you corrected your logic, the next door popped open; re-using your new line of though we can then argue the following: the tablets shown were wanted, just "out of the price range of many/some people". Hence, its - in your opinion - poor sales are not to be seen as reflection of un-wanted-ness of the product.
Indeed. Apple have made some god awful ugly stuff, yet people cheered at the time.
http://www.roughtype.com/images/556px-Power_Mac_G3_AIO_corrected.jpg
http://images.brighthub.com/44/5/4459e51e7569d3c8f8cd1980308d1d6b2fc3a9a4_large.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5046/5220884317_4f76762693.jpg
When Samsung makes a video mocking iPhone users it's called funny. When I criticise Android I'm being an ass. :roll eyes:
What I said was actually funny and true. I know plenty of Android users and they can dish out and take criticism. Unlike the fandroids here.
But is what's right for one company right for the users/customers around the world?
If Microsoft carried on like Apple and crushed everyone, including Apple which they probably could of in the past. They would of been doing what was right for them, and perhaps legally right also.
But would you have stood up and supported them as they had the rights to do it, or is what's right for a major company, perhaps not what is right, or should be allowed for the public/customers/world of computing?
Just because something it legal, does not make it right.
When Samsung mocks iPhone users they act like an arse too.
But what can be expected of someone that laughs at typos because is the only thing they can do when their arguments are debunked?
Apples wins
Apple are right to stick by their stand. Since it shows they honestly believe in what they are fighting. If you invented something, surely you would prove it, protecting it legally with patents. You too would feel the same way, and be forced to defend what has been copied.
Apple are right to stick by their stand. Since it shows they honestly believe in what they are fighting. If you invented something, surely you would prove it, protecting it legally with patents. You too would feel the same way, and be forced to defend what has been copied.
Hahaha... you didn't correct anything. You tried and failed to put words in my mouth.
You are trying to equate selling airplanes versus selling cars? Really? An airplane costs >> more than a car.... super awesome analogy.. hahaha...
Tablets were wanted by whom? Die hard Windows users? People who wanted to use a stylus versus using their fingers? People who never actually used one?
Tablets were panned for years by critics and the criticism was well deserved. Care to dispute that?
Yes, they were more expensive than laptops, but price wasn't the only reason that tablets were panned. Stop trying to use price as the only metric.
You're trying to change the subject (again). We were discussing iPads and tablets, not other Apple products.
Are you claiming that everyone that sues over patents is because they have invented them and they have the right to sue and they will prove it?
I'm not always right. But since you want to claim that my arguments were debunked, please show where they were debunked. Show me proof? Isn't that your favorite argument?
In the US you have to protect your patents and a company has the legal right to do this. The issue is some patents, as awarded, are too broad. If Samsung and Google were truly interested in patent reform they would lobby for reform. Samsung has a large patent pool and why would they want to risk having some of their patents invalidated?
Both have the wherewithal to mount a sustained patent reform campaign.
But instead of lobbying for reform, Samsung and Google bitch to the press.
No.
Way to miss the point. My point was that sales were relative in (at least) two dimensions. Relative, yes. That is the exact opposite of trying to equate sales of X with sales of Y.
"super awesome comprehension.. hahaha...."
Beats me. Completely besides the point. You claim that people want X but can't afford it. If that is a valid logic, so is the claim that people want Y but can't afford it. Either sales are absolutely indicative, or they are not. You can't have it both ways, cherry-picking logics as you see fit.
iPads were panned by critics, and criticism was well deserved. Irrelevance-ness aside, what is your point? That tablets were not for all? No surprise there, really.
Im not picking metrics, I'm going with whatever metrics you apply. You stated that Apple computers were to expensive. That was the (sole, stated) explanation for Apple relatively poor sales (v. MSFT). Feel free to use more metrics if you see fit. Just make sure you apply them in a stringent fashion.
No, i am really not. You, on the other hand, are. Me? I'm merely cleaning up the incomprehensible, incoherent mess you leave behind as you try to jump position and move the goal.