The crash rate stat is garbage not all stats are created equal. Cve is the gold standard and the government uses that information.
Conjecture + Hyperbole = your statement
Last edited:
The crash rate stat is garbage not all stats are created equal. Cve is the gold standard and the government uses that information.
Then maybe you can detail exactly the under lying stats:Conjecture + Hyperbole = you
Then maybe you can detail exactly the under lying stats:
- the apps profiled
- the period of time
- the type of phones
- the methodology
Until you have some answers, stats=conjecture probably nonsense, unlike cve.
Yeah I think the back and recent apps buttons are bad control mechanisms. I much prefer iOS's swipe to go back and swipe to switch apps.
Why would I be closing apps? The OS is supposed to deal with that.
I've never used a one button mouse.
Thank god for Apple to get it right and not listen to people like you!
Just another example of blindly accepting information on the internet as gospel, this article about crashes. I am under no obligation to accept any evidence without a critical eye thrown toward it, and making sure others don't either.Why ask me? Since you said the stat (which is publicly published) is garbage, then onus is on you to provide evidences how is it garbage.
Otherwise you are just wearing your rose tinted glasses.
Seems like consumers have voted with their wallets about the iphone 7. Proft margin, profit and revenue come from sales, of which there are plenty of and they disagree with this hyperbole. You can try to tell the buying public they are purchasing it wrong...
The black S8 looks and feels exactly like a jet black iPhone 7. It just has a bigger screen.
The copy can never be better than the original.
Incorrect, Apple is not Intel. By your logic people should have stopped buying Apple products years ago, but it didn't happen. Therefore apples was/is selling a product that consumers wanted at the correct price point.Completely incorrect and this has been elucidated countless times with the Intel example. Intel has the highest profit margins and record sales. AMD are making a loss. By your logic people didn't want octa cores and are willing to pay nearly 2K for one. But guess who came out with the customer friendly product at half the price and forced Intel to come out with Kaby Lake X
Yes they are. Intel makes monstrous profits in the PC market just like Apple in the smartphone market. The resemblance is uncanny. You could even say Samsung is AMD minus the losses.Incorrect, Apple is not Intel.
By your logic people should have stopped buying Apple products years ago, but it didn't happen. Therefore apples was/is selling a product that consumers wanted at the correct price point.
No they are not. I guess we'll agree(or not) to disagree.Yes they are.
Ok if that's your opinion, I don't see it that way. Apple customers do not, imo, want an android device (or android nudged device), they want a device designed by Apple.Kaby lake will outsell the entirety of Ryzen despite being proven inferior in multi threaded benchmarks. However that does not in any way mean people only wanted incremental CPU improvements and a lousy 4 core CPU for years on end.. Ryzen forced Intel to come out with Kaby Lake X. Similar is the case with Apple. The iPhone 8 is in all honesty a product of Android nudging Apple. I can see nothing unique in the product the competition hasnt already done
How so? I am seeing Intel the only profitable company in their industry as also is the case with Apple.No they are not. I guess we'll agree(or not) to disagree.
Apple customers want the features given by Android but need to wait for Apple to copy them(file managers,OLED,wireless charging,curved display,iris scanners,integrated home button etc). Similarly Ryzen compelled Intel to come out with an i9 to copy ThreadRipper. However Intel customers need to wait for the copy to be launchedOk if that's your opinion, I don't see it that way. Apple customers do not, imo, want an android device (or android nudged device), they want a device designed by Apple.
Always back to the same question...How do you know what the masses want? You don't speak for me. I guess I can speak for the masses also. Apple customers do not want a slippery, bezeless phone. They do not want an iOS version of android. They do not want or need system level file access...they are not clamoring for oled or wireless charging. They want a top notch Apple computer, an ecosystem that just works with all devices working together harmoniously and natively.How so? I am seeing Intel the only profitable company in their industry as also is the case with Apple.
Apple customers want the features given by Android but need to wait for Apple to copy them(file managers,OLED,wireless charging,curved display,iris scanners,integrated home button etc). Similarly Ryzen compelled Intel to come out with an i9 to copy ThreadRipper. However Intel customers need to wait for the copy to be launched
Funnily enough everything you stated that people don't want is on the iPhone 8Always back to the same question...How do you know what the masses want? You don't speak for me. I guess I can speak for the masses also. Apple customers do not want a slippery, bezeless phone. They do not want an iOS version of android. They do not want or need system level file access...they are not clamoring for oled or wireless charging. They want a top notch Apple computer, an ecosystem that just works with all devices working together harmoniously and natively.
Not everybody wants everything that the rumor mill has being in the next iPhone.Funnily enough everything you stated that people don't want is on the iPhone 8
I can't tell if you are trying to say that itunes/Apple's app store is a good or bad thing.
True, both have their vulnerabilities.I am not trying to refute the stat. I am just refuting the popular belief that iOS is totally safe and android is totally unsafe.