Originally Posted by Wovel
I agree,, it just means you are both narrow minded and short sighted. It also means you believe everyone should agree with your viewpoint. You have completely ignored the dozens of people in this thread (including me) who have posted their personal real-world professional uses of the iPad. Your selective responses show that you clearly have no interesting in acknowledging there is a viewpoint different from your own.
Even now you can't be civil. As for the counter examples, the fact is that people's personal annecdotes, and a few special interest stories from the news do not outweight the fact that 16 of the top 20 apps are games/entertainment. If I am to be objective, I have no choice but to base my conclusions on the mvast majority of examples. If you think I am wrong in my conclusion you must also disagree with most of modern physics, since even relativity does not cover 100% of examples.
I have written code running on everything from 200+ core IBM P-Series servers to iPhones, does this make me better than you, or some how more relevant to the discussion?
There comes a point when you've seen a wide enough range of examples that more doesn't matter. I think I am already past that point, so "no."
You are the one failing to grasp it at all. You call anyone a child who disagrees with you. Anyone who factual disproves your claims, you completely ignore. In fact every word in the section quoted above applies to you more than anyone else in the thread.
In my initial post I simply stated my technical evaluation of the iPad within my context of knowledge, I did not call anyone names. In fact you, and 5 others all called me names just for doing that.
"snob" anantksundaram in #13
"dinosaur" DocNo42 in #26
"ignorant, shortsighted, clueless" Apple II in #27
"wierd" Wovel in #28
"maroon" Sacto Joe in #29
"moron" Slurpy in #37
I then defended myself in 40, 42 and 43 with the rather mild "child" "thoroughly modern" and "proving my point." Far more civilised responses relative to what I was replying to. That was the extent of my name calling, and it was all in self-defence. And then after that I get:
"hilarious" boeycc15 in 46
"moronic" NextTechnorati in 47
"Sage" (sarcastic) cgc020 in 56
"Serious" (sarcastic) cgc020 in 61
"no capacity for out of the box thinking" CQB in 74
"Dysfunctional" Carmissimo in 80
"troll, dumb" newbee in 92
"confused, troll" Wovel in 94
"insuferable pinhead" Sacto Joe in 95
"sad" Blah64 in 96
"short-sighted" walshbj in 98
"predjudiced" Suddenly Newton in 99
"teenager pretending to be an adult" Bakloyd in 102
The fact that you would accuse me of being the one doing the name calling, is the same mistake you're making in the iPad argument itself, failing to see relative numbers on each side.