or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by timgriff84

To a lot of people a product is inferior because it's not Apple. Irrespective of if it's actually the same product, the Apple brand and logo add value to something. You may spend £30 on an accessory because you think it's made by Apple due to being in an Apple store and it being packaged the same as all of Apple own products, whereas if you realized it was made by someone else you may have only been willing to spend £25. In reality the third part product may actually be...
That was my exact thought. Doesn't seem a well thought through plan when people that will lead to people buying product they think have been made by Apple but arnt. In the UK we have iStores which are Apple Authorised Retailers as such have to look a certain way. But everyone believes there Apple Stores run by Apple. 
I find the name "think of the children" a bit of a dumb name for a campaign that wants to stop you from securely encrypting photos of your children incase you ever loose your phone. So yes think of the children, don't put backdoors in encryption for paedophiles to exploit.
Great that they've decided to pay people during the 3 month trial period rather than give away there work for free, but I'd still be pretty pissed to be getting a "percentage" of revenue. How about just pay them for what your customers actually used! If a customer ends up using more than you charged them for that's a failure of your business model, not an artists work suddenly becoming less valuable. While maintaining your own profit margin as well is also pretty...
Going by her statement in this instance she doesn't seem to have an issue with streaming, particularly Apple Music as people actually pay for it. Its more the idea that Apple want to offer a free trial to users to get people to sign up, but don't want to pay any of the music owners for there stuff during that time.Its like opening a shop and telling your suppliers your just going to give there stuff away and not pay them for it either. Because you want to gain popularity...
You might not be fools, but I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device. Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple.
Whoever wrote the apple policies and engage there brain though. The rest of the tech world does exist and Apples customers do have other people products.
I don't think kids having a watch bought for them makes them a spoiled brat.If a parent would buy one for themselves why not there own child?Its also not like the cheapest apple watch is completely out of range on what parents spend in there kids. Right from birth you spend hundreds if not thousands on things like prams, wendy houses, climbing frames, games consoles, games for the games console, mp3 players, clothes, trips to theme parks, phones, ipads, baby versions of...
People have multiple watches they only had one feature phone.Battery life didn't matter so much on phones as you use it every day and therefore charge every night. If a watch only lasts 18 hours you have to plan to wear it the day before.Won't be a problem for a lot of people, but for others it will turn into the watch that's always flat.
 Alcohol vs Milk isn't a great example. Effects of Alcohol costs the country millions and is a profitable industry. Milk on the other hand doesn't have as costly effects and is a struggling industry that is economically better to support than loose. To protect the poor the 20% VAT is not charged on everything. Food, children's clothes, medicine are all exempt. Do you think if tax on fuel was abolished, fuel would be cheaper? When fuel duty has been cut in the past it's...
New Posts  All Forums: