"Best" is a subjective term and varies by user's needs
There is no "best" for everyone
My take is that it is amazing that Apple wins anything at Mobile World Congress given that they do not exhibit there, whereas Samsung does so there's no surprise. On other words, MWC attendees are likely to be a biased sample.
My take is that it is amazing that Apple wins anything at Mobile World Congress given that they do not exhibit there, whereas Samsung does so there's no surprise. On other words, MWC attendees are likely to be a biased sample.
"Best" is a subjective term and varies by user's needs
There is no "best" for everyone
So how do you explain the iPhone 4 winning the previous year or the iPad 2 winning tablet of the year. Just give credit where it is due.
They also awarded this:
Best Mobile Tablet
Winner: Apple - Apple iPad 2
Would you be saying that if iPhone was rated best?
----------
+1. Thank you.
If this thread was about "iPhone" being named "best" at something, I doubt we'd see people asking "who wrote it" or "best is just subjective."
So how do you explain the iPhone 4 winning the previous year or the iPad 2 winning tablet of the year. Just give credit where it is due. The GS2 is just that good....![]()
That has nothing to do with these awards. All products are taken into account, whether you exhibit there, or not.
I am not saying the GS2 is bad, or even that the iP4S is better. What I am saying is that the MWC attendees are likely to have a bias toward non-Apple products because they are attending a show at which Apple doesn't exhibit. When Apple products are considered and they win, I would argue they have done so in spite of a potential bias. The results of the MWC poll are just not that trustworthy....![]()
Let me put it another way: Do you think the votes would have changed if Apple had exhibited in a big way at MWC?