or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Google?s Android powered by remarkable new 'Flawgic'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Editorial: Google?s Android powered by remarkable new 'Flawgic' - Page 7

post #241 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


That's bullshit. We talked about sales which is why we knew Apple was struggling. We also talked about user experience which was an issue before the redesign of the Mac and Mac OS.
So glad that you aren't employed by Apple. Nothing says turning success into failure faster than asinine suggestions like making iPhones only work on a proprietary Apple mobile network.

I am not convinced that is the asinine. I am not talking about covering the whole world or having iPhones work only on proprietary Apple network. But what about an iOS-only network.

 

Not all airports have free Wifi (take Heathrow, for example). Most subways systems do not. Apple has the cash to cover all airports and subways in the world. Imagine providing free Wifi to all iPhone users in those public places, along with other corridors with heavy traffic. Make sure Apple Maps app works really, really well at those locations (particularly in providing information on how to get to hotels, etc.).

 

Building this out worldwide is hard for other companies to match. Google doesn't make enough money from mobile to make such an investment (their efforts to provide free Wifi in certain US cities have clearly not paid off), and they certainly wouldn't do this only to benefit mostly Samsung. Can Samsung do this? Maybe. But Apple definitely can afford to, and will make it back in iPhone sales. Perhaps it might not work out. But it's not asinine a concept at all. In fact, it is arguably the same type of investment that Google made in building Google Maps.

post #242 of 298
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post
I'm not sure that startups are managed more frugally than established companies. In fact, it is often the other way around.

 

All right, "with the frugality a start-up would be expected to have". lol.gif

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #243 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I am not convinced that is the asinine. I am not talking about covering the whole world or having iPhones work only on proprietary Apple network. But what about an iOS-only network.

Not all airports have free Wifi (take Heathrow, for example). Most subways systems do not. Apple has the cash to cover all airports and subways in the world. Imagine providing free Wifi to all iPhone users in those public places, along with other corridors with heavy traffic. Make sure Apple Maps app works really, really well at those locations (particularly in providing information on how to get to hotels, etc.).

Building this out worldwide is hard for other companies to match. Google doesn't make enough money from mobile to make such an investment (their efforts to provide free Wifi in certain US cities have clearly not paid off), and they certainly wouldn't do this only to benefit mostly Samsung. Can Samsung do this? Maybe. But Apple definitely can afford to, and will make it back in iPhone sales. Perhaps it might not work out. But it's not asinine a concept at all. In fact, it is arguably the same type of investment that Google made in building Google Maps.

How could this possibly work? Look at how long its taken Apple to get to every area of the world with cellular reception. Now look at the cost and time it has taken to just get LTE up in markets. Most of Europe still seems to be without it. I simply don't see how Apple could build towers across every country they work in to get the coverage they need to support the iPhone.

Now lets say they invest the hundreds of billions to do this across 200 countries overnight. What happens if the iPhone isn't popular enough in a country to warrant its own network? What if the product itself falters across the globe? Does Apple then open it up to other handsets? What about those that have plans that may include a range of cellular connected devices? Do they get off their Verizon shared plan to make their life more cumbersome by having to move everything but their grandparents emergency cell phone that was only $10 a month to a more expensive plan?

Then there is the MVNO but that's just worse all around. It costs Apple less up front but you get a poorer network as you're piggybacking off an MNO.

No matter how you go at it just doesn't work to pair a proprietary cellular network to a proprietary handset.

As for Google Maps, I have no idea why that would be an example. Google Maps works across every OS that has a web browser. It's not tied simply to Android or Chrome OS.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #244 of 298
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
How could this possibly work?

 

I know of one way: Have Apple buy China Mobile, Verizon, O2, Vodaphone, and Orange. That's most of the world right there. Kick out everyone on those networks except iPhones and then continue to expand from there.

/s

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #245 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I know of one way: Have Apple buy China Mobile, Verizon, O2, Vodaphone, and Orange. That's most of the world right there. Kick out everyone on those networks except iPhones and then continue to expand from there. /s

Actually, if Apple had any interest in being an MNO buying out others would be the way to do it. They would not, however, do it so they could push out all other handsets but the iPhone. They would do it because they see a direct line for increased profits, which likely includes proprietary features that will work between the iPhone and carrier to make them both better than they could be otherwise.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #246 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I know of one way: Have them buy China Mobile, Verizon, O2, Vodaphone, and Orange. That's most of the world right there. Kick out everyone on those networks except iPhones and then continue to expand from there.
/s

How does one purchase something not for sale? Shareholders would have to agree along with government agencies. And even if they did do you think service plans would be much cheaper than they are now? Networks take an army to run and maintain.

PS I just noticed you're super sized /s lol
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #247 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I think we all should give Daniel a big shout-out for his very successful effort to stir the pot and attract a fresh new batch of Android and/or MS fans to AI, members some here playfully call "trolls". It was getting a bit quiet lately. 6 pages on a weekend is damn impressive. Perhaps some of our new members can stick around awhile.



A mirror, have you heard of it? Because if you would look into it, you might get a sense of understanding why your own posts attract a fresh new batch of Android and/or MS fans to AI, members some here playfully call "trolls"
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #248 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

How about the RRP of the iPhone 5 16GB vs the RRP of the Samsung Galaxy Note 2 16GB, I get $A799 vs $A849.

 

Google has been "in the spotlight" since not long after they came out of Stanford and became a household word and the generic term for Internet search.

 

/yawn , can't you come up with anything better, it's as if you are looking through a $1400 webcam strapped to the side of your face.

 

The really revealing number will be these prices minus their respective resale values in say, a year from now?

Folks who look beyond the surface *know* Apple products are a valuable and economical choice.

[BTW, I have no idea what RRP stands for, but lets assume a fair "street price" without subsidy and comparable quality service.]


Edited by DESuserIGN - 3/24/13 at 12:43pm
post #249 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

[BTW, I have no idea what RRP stands for, but lets assume a fair "street price" without subsidy and comparable quality service.]

What does RRP stand for?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #250 of 298

Read the whole thing. What a waste of time. Funny thing is after listening to all this sniveling, I am way less likely to buy anything Apple.

post #251 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

What does RRP stand for?

Try the same search terms in a Google Search. . .
Another example off why Google still offers the better search experience IMO
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #252 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Try the same search terms in a Google Search. . .
Another example off why Google still offers the better search experience IMO

I did, which is why I choose Bing over Google. The point of a search is to provide the most accurate data for a given query, not the most options. Bing provided the most accurate data for this query. Google was alright if I changed the search parameters to " What does RRP stand for in regards to price?" but Bing was still more accurate and then I noticed it was still more accurate even when I dropped the "in regards to price?" portion.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #253 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post


The man behind the writing of this article had an opinion. I refuted his opinion with my opinion. His opinion had flaws, and I corrected them. Now if my opinions have flaws that you want to correct, feel free to correct them. Except you have no real opinions, you only have talking points. You just go with the flow of Apple, even though it's obviously a sinking ship that everyone outside of the Apple bubble can see.

And the only device that has a higher MSRP than the iPhone 5 is the Galaxy Note 2. Given that we're talking about Google, not Samsung, we'd be comparing Google's to Apple's, so it's the Nexus 4 (MSRP $349) vs iPhone 5 ($649). iPhone 5 commands a $300 premium, therefore quality needs to be at least almost double what the Nexus 4 offers, or else it will catch some flak. Same thing with iPhone 5S. It better have an 8K video recorder or something.

 

The discussion is around Android.

 

Hey how much do these Android phones cost?

 

http://www.vertu.com/en/default.aspx

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertu_Ti

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #254 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I did, which is why I choose Bing over Google. The point of a search is to provide the most accurate data for a given query, not the most options. Bing provided the most accurate data for this query. Google was alright if I changed the search parameters to " What does RRP stand for in regards to price?" but Bing was still more accurate and then I noticed it was still more accurate even when I dropped the "in regards to price?" portion.

Why? the definition showed up at the top of the Google Search without having to follow another link to get there as you did with Bing.
What did you see at the very top of the Google Search results before the links were even offered?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #255 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

What does RRP stand for?

Ah, thank you; didn't know there was an alternative to lmgtfy. Love your 248 post here ↓
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #256 of 298

"I refuted his opinion with my opinion..."

There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #257 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Try the same search terms in a Google Search. . .
Another example off why Google still offers the better search experience IMO

 

Recommended Retail Price.

 

Bing is better, if only because it isn't Google.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #258 of 298

I thought 'Kool Aid' was a reference to the electric acid kool aid test, as in 'tripped out', rather than jim jones

post #259 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Why? the definition showed up at the top of the Google Search without having to follow another link to get there as you did with Bing.
What did you see at the very top of the Google Search results before the links were even offered?

Why what? Why would I choose the one that had the correct definition at the top as opposed to one that didn't have it listed clearly even after further narrowing the use of the initialism?





"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #260 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

Now Windows continues to decline (it's still on top PC wise, but it's largely irrelevant in terms of growth, much like Blackberry was/is) and all because they were the dominant OS, and they didn't F ee L they needed to ch A nge too much of their OS.Apple is following this trend.

You can call me a troll, you can say I'm spreading fud, W hatever. Apple doesn't have the pull it used to, it can't continue it's status quo unless it's making efforts to reinvent technology and the internet. They have the capabilities, the money, the talent, and the manufacturing chain. They are sitting on a G old m I ne in terms of te C hnological resources, and yet they squander that by playing it safe.

 

Take a couple of paragraphs out of a troll rant and what do you get?

There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #261 of 298

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:45am
post #262 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



A mirror, have you heard of it? Because if you would look into it, you might get a sense of understanding why your own posts attract a fresh new batch of Android and/or MS fans to AI, members some here playfully call "trolls"

I don't write the articles, and and I think you give way too much credit to what posts I make. It's pretty clear what the intent of Daniel's op-ed was IMO. . .

and it worked well. 7 pages of response's on a weekend!
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #263 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Why what? Why would I choose the one that had the correct definition at the top as opposed to one that didn't have it listed clearly even after further narrowing the use of the initialism?

I thought the Google definition was correct. altho there's obviously other less common meanings for that acronym as you pointed out. Since you're saying it wasn't the intended definition I'll trust you on that. I was apparently wrong. I figured MSRP would be the typical and expected acronym for suggested manufacturer prices, with the Google definition for RRP being correct. That's the first time I'd ever heard RRP being related to a suggested retail price.

My apologies.
Edited by Gatorguy - 3/24/13 at 6:53pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #264 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Gee, a new fun forum game.  Thanks.

Tooli?

 

lol.gif

There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #265 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

I thought 'Kool Aid' was a reference to the electric acid kool aid test, as in 'tripped out', rather than jim jones

It would depend on the message being conveyed, I always assume the Jim Jones followers.
Edited by dasanman69 - 3/24/13 at 4:38pm
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #266 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

How could this possibly work? Look at how long its taken Apple to get to every area of the world with cellular reception. Now look at the cost and time it has taken to just get LTE up in markets. Most of Europe still seems to be without it. I simply don't see how Apple could build towers across every country they work in to get the coverage they need to support the iPhone.

Now lets say they invest the hundreds of billions to do this across 200 countries overnight. What happens if the iPhone isn't popular enough in a country to warrant its own network? What if the product itself falters across the globe? Does Apple then open it up to other handsets? What about those that have plans that may include a range of cellular connected devices? Do they get off their Verizon shared plan to make their life more cumbersome by having to move everything but their grandparents emergency cell phone that was only $10 a month to a more expensive plan?

Then there is the MVNO but that's just worse all around. It costs Apple less up front but you get a poorer network as you're piggybacking off an MNO.

No matter how you go at it just doesn't work to pair a proprietary cellular network to a proprietary handset.

As for Google Maps, I have no idea why that would be an example. Google Maps works across every OS that has a web browser. It's not tied simply to Android or Chrome OS.

I think all iPhone should be connected to the network, regardless if the consumer has a plan. The idea would be all the native apps would get free Internet, such as iTunes, Maps, etc. For apps, the customer would pay per MB used within the apps. So if you download a music streaming service app like Pandora, you will essentially pay more than if you used an offline app.

I also think they should charge for the size of the app, for example if the app is 2 GB in size, then it would cost something like $20-25 to download (on top of the app cost)

I think the hidden advantage to this is people will

1) use native apps over App store apps
2) People will be more conscious about downloading apps via WiFi.
3) People who don't use their phones like heavy users won't get penalized with a higher payment.
4) The idea of having free calls, text, and Web will entice people to buy the phone and use Apple products.

So what would be the end goal of an Apple device only wireless network? To set a standard. What I mean is, too many mobile phones connected to different networks, switching frequencies, and using an open standards (LTE) is inefficient. Apple could create it's own radio communication standard with its own packet management system that would allow for its infrastructure to suffer minimum overload. Plus it would get them off paying Samsung for LTE patents. They could operate on a separate frequency from other networks. This would save them on costs of modems, as you only have one frequency and one standard radio technology that you support.

By creating this closed standard for connecting devices to the Internet, Apple could lease connectivity to accessory makers. For example you can have a vehicle that interfaces with your iPhone via the network, using your Apple ID. So if I'm driving and I forgot my iPhone at home, I could still answer the call with my vehicle, because it's all connected to one Apple ID. I could manage what devices are part of my account so if my vehicle is stolen, I could use the track my iPhone app, but instead it's track my car.
post #267 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


How could this possibly work? Look at how long its taken Apple to get to every area of the world with cellular reception. Now look at the cost and time it has taken to just get LTE up in markets. Most of Europe still seems to be without it. I simply don't see how Apple could build towers across every country they work in to get the coverage they need to support the iPhone.

Now lets say they invest the hundreds of billions to do this across 200 countries overnight. What happens if the iPhone isn't popular enough in a country to warrant its own network? What if the product itself falters across the globe? Does Apple then open it up to other handsets? What about those that have plans that may include a range of cellular connected devices? Do they get off their Verizon shared plan to make their life more cumbersome by having to move everything but their grandparents emergency cell phone that was only $10 a month to a more expensive plan?

Then there is the MVNO but that's just worse all around. It costs Apple less up front but you get a poorer network as you're piggybacking off an MNO.

No matter how you go at it just doesn't work to pair a proprietary cellular network to a proprietary handset.

As for Google Maps, I have no idea why that would be an example. Google Maps works across every OS that has a web browser. It's not tied simply to Android or Chrome OS.

I didn't say anything about proprietary cellular network, or anything else you have refuted here.

post #268 of 298
Why are the article apostrophes showing as question marks?
post #269 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

I think all iPhone should be connected to the network, regardless if the consumer has a plan. The idea would be all the native apps would get free Internet, such as iTunes, Maps, etc. For apps, the customer would pay per MB used within the apps. So if you download a music streaming service app like Pandora, you will essentially pay more than if you used an offline app.

I also think they should charge for the size of the app, for example if the app is 2 GB in size, then it would cost something like $20-25 to download (on top of the app cost)

I think the hidden advantage to this is people will

1) use native apps over App store apps
2) People will be more conscious about downloading apps via WiFi.
3) People who don't use their phones like heavy users won't get penalized with a higher payment.
4) The idea of having free calls, text, and Web will entice people to buy the phone and use Apple products.

So what would be the end goal of an Apple device only wireless network? To set a standard. What I mean is, too many mobile phones connected to different networks, switching frequencies, and using an open standards (LTE) is inefficient. Apple could create it's own radio communication standard with its own packet management system that would allow for its infrastructure to suffer minimum overload. Plus it would get them off paying Samsung for LTE patents. They could operate on a separate frequency from other networks. This would save them on costs of modems, as you only have one frequency and one standard radio technology that you support.

By creating this closed standard for connecting devices to the Internet, Apple could lease connectivity to accessory makers. For example you can have a vehicle that interfaces with your iPhone via the network, using your Apple ID. So if I'm driving and I forgot my iPhone at home, I could still answer the call with my vehicle, because it's all connected to one Apple ID. I could manage what devices are part of my account so if my vehicle is stolen, I could use the track my iPhone app, but instead it's track my car.

And why would a carrier allow millions of iPhones on it's network then? What benefit would they have? Why must everything be good for Apple but bad for all others? If you don't want a data plan then don't buy a iPhone.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #270 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I didn't say anything about proprietary cellular network, or anything else you have refuted here.

How in the hell are we suppose to read that as not an iOS-only network if you specifically write "But what about an iOS-only network."

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #271 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

I think all iPhone should be connected to the network, regardless if the consumer has a plan. The idea would be all the native apps would get free Internet, such as iTunes, Maps, etc. For apps, the customer would pay per MB used within the apps. So if you download a music streaming service app like Pandora, you will essentially pay more than if you used an offline app.

I also think they should charge for the size of the app, for example if the app is 2 GB in size, then it would cost something like $20-25 to download (on top of the app cost)

I think the hidden advantage to this is people will

1) use native apps over App store apps
2) People will be more conscious about downloading apps via WiFi.
3) People who don't use their phones like heavy users won't get penalized with a higher payment.
4) The idea of having free calls, text, and Web will entice people to buy the phone and use Apple products.

So what would be the end goal of an Apple device only wireless network? To set a standard. What I mean is, too many mobile phones connected to different networks, switching frequencies, and using an open standards (LTE) is inefficient. Apple could create it's own radio communication standard with its own packet management system that would allow for its infrastructure to suffer minimum overload. Plus it would get them off paying Samsung for LTE patents. They could operate on a separate frequency from other networks. This would save them on costs of modems, as you only have one frequency and one standard radio technology that you support.

By creating this closed standard for connecting devices to the Internet, Apple could lease connectivity to accessory makers. For example you can have a vehicle that interfaces with your iPhone via the network, using your Apple ID. So if I'm driving and I forgot my iPhone at home, I could still answer the call with my vehicle, because it's all connected to one Apple ID. I could manage what devices are part of my account so if my vehicle is stolen, I could use the track my iPhone app, but instead it's track my car.

I do commend and appreciate you for at least detailing your point here and you do bring up some unique ideas. Unfortunately it's a flawed idea and I wish I had the time to detail why.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #272 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowasaki View Post

 

:D

 

I don't actually think that most people have actually bothered to read my posts properly!  I am NOT having a go at Apple at all I really like 90% of their kit but it's NOT perfect and I was simply expressing my opinion which lots of people didn't like.  The last chap was slagging me off in a post where I was basically saying I liked the new maps app but it had issues (which Apple had agreed to!)

 

Oh well :)  I've been a member on here for twice as long as some of the moderation staff but I don't post very often.

Sounds like one of those sleeper-cell trolls I've heard about!  Pardon, make that sleeper-cell concern troll.

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #273 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Try the same search terms in a Google Search. . .
Another example off why Google still offers the better search experience IMO

I searched "rrp" in both Bing and Google.  Bing got the right answer on the first result, and Google got the right answer on the second.  So how does this show that Google still offers the better search experience?  Oh wait - "IMO" - in your opinion.  Well you're certainly entitled to your own opinion...

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #274 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

I thought 'Kool Aid' was a reference to the electric acid kool aid test, as in 'tripped out', rather than jim jones

Disagree. I use it in referencing the Jonestown tragedy where followers of Jim Jones blindly drank the poisoned kool-aid.  Also use the phrase ,"drinking the grape kool-aid," as that was supposedly the flavor that was used.

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #275 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication View Post

Disagree. I use it in referencing the Jonestown tragedy where followers of Jim Jones blindly drank the poisoned kool-aid.  Also use the phrase ,"drinking the grape kool-aid," as that was supposedly the flavor that was used.

 

And it was actually Flavoraid that was poisoned in Jonestown, but more people recognize the KoolAid brand so that's what stuck.

 

The expression of being "fed Koolaid," clearly in the context of Jonestown, was originally used shortly after the atrocity as a way of saying that somebody was being deceived by a traitor with the intent of killing or harming them. It denoted victimization.

 

The change of using the expression to simply mean 'willfully, blindly following someone' only started in the late 90s, a gap of 20 years after the mass murder, long enough for many people to have lost any association with a real understanding of what it actually meant. The change was based on an ignorant assumption of people who guessed what a "cult" must have meant.

 

If you research anything about the actual event, you'll find that it wasn't a doomsday cult of people choosing to die, but rather a mass killing where many weren't even aware of any poison, while others were forced to drink it under gunpoint or were injected by force. Others who died were babies who had no ability to make a decision to follow anything. The leaders filmed the event, so you can find a documentary the presented what actually happened on video.

 

Many who died there were trying to escape from the compound, and it happened after the group's leaders had murdered members of an investigation team that included a US congressman. It wasn't a group wanting to go to heaven or something. It was over 900 people who were killed or lead to their deaths buy a charlatan who not only didn't want to be caught alive, but wanted to kill everyone around him.  

  

So using the phrase to mean "foolish blind followers" is perverse and ignorant. 

 

It also has nothing to do with dropping acid in the 60s, which occured over ten years before Jonestown. Nobody used "drinking kool-aid" an expression of "taking a blind leap of faith" during that period. You can do a lexis nexus search.

post #276 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

I find it interesting that DED, Macalope and Gruber have all written long pieces to defend Apple in the month of March.

 

As some pointed out, DED penned the original Flawgic piece on RoughlyDrafted on March 9. Prior to that, the Macalope also wrote about Apple's reality distortion field being turned around (http://www.macworld.com/article/2029830/macalope-a-fundamental-disconnect.html). On March 1 (http://daringfireball.net/2013/03/open_and_shut) and March 15 (http://daringfireball.net/2013/03/ceding_the_crown), Gruber wrote unusually long pieces to refute the idea that Open trumped Shut and that Apple had lost the smartphone crown.

 

Coincidence? Perhaps. Or, perhaps, the Apple defender league got together and said, "Our careers and life savings are invested in Apple. Cupertino is not doing much to protect us. So we have to take it upon ourselves." Probably not. But it would be interesting to ponder the possibility.

 

So three columnists will be out of a job when Apple goes out of business next month unless they individually write up a defense of the company that saves it for perhaps another 30 days of life support? Interesting theory. 

 

Or perhaps it's that the ridiculous propaganda being spun about the company is getting so so incredibly deep that its impossible for a reasonably intelligent person not to point out how absurd it is.

 

So rather than a desperate conspiracy of three people nobody knows outside of the Mac blogs, perhaps the real issue is that one company took the business away from everyone in the smartphone business and everyone in the PC business, and the only hope left for them centers around a savior company with an ideological base of free software advocates.

 

Not a "conspiracy" so much as a series of massive companies that have been all but wiped out, and desperately need to create the impression that up is down and black is white, starting with the idea that the best performing tech company on earth is in decline and a poorly performing malware platform mobiles is "winning."

post #277 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowasaki View Post


...."Siri is rubbish and I turned it off;...

Wow! I am just so disappointed that none of the regulars here caught, or pointed out the obvious irony of "Flawgic" at work.

Considering that this guy most likely and successfully got his Forum Moniker "Cow a Saki" using no other than Siri, when he thought that that she magically could find his missing "crotch-rocket" in the parking lot of a bike show.... 1cool.gif The name does lend itself to a drunken purchase of a Note II and strapping it to your head though. Fitting.

I am one of those that liked the article (second time around after also reading it on RD a week ago*)... even if did, as is the style of DED... use creative embellishment to augment his case. Fact is that every point taken, at it's core, has the kernel of truth in it.

* The first time I read this opinion piece, I immediately thought of how well this would go over on AI. 276 replies is not bad... although I was seriously expecting 350+. I'm obviously trying to help with that after the thread has long dried up 1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #278 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyleish View Post

I'm not going to get emotional over a phone ...

 

It seems that if that's true you'll be in a minority of one in the smartphone arena.

 

FYI: I don't and have never had a mobile phone. Yet. And I'm 54! 1wink.gif

post #279 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

In the final analysis, everyone, absolutely everyone, has a bias.  So to write articles that acknowledge your own bias, and put it right up front are in some ways more "honest" than to write some shit that passes for objectivity but is just as biased in the end as anything else.  You only have to look at the writings of guys like Seth Weintraub on 9to5 mac, almost any writer on Engadget, to see that they also have some pretty extreme biases themselves and yet they write as if their opinion is direct from the Gods or whatever and hide behind the cloak of "objectivity."  

 

Absolutely spot on. An ex of mine said it well with "the only place you will find 'objectivity' is in the dictionary". One of the biggest lies perpetrated by almost all the MSM is the idea that they are objective and balanced. There are always at least two sides to every story. The most honest way, as Gazoobee say, is to be upfront about your own bias. In 2013 there is an absolute overwhelming deluging of information coming at us from every direction and it's up to us and nobody else to do our best to question its veracity and do our own homework. If you want a superb example of the media repeating what they're told then have a look here.

post #280 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiltedGreen View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

^ post

If you want a superb example of the media repeating what they're told then have a look here.

That link is pathetic. With a .org TLD to boot!

@Gazoobee: excellent point there!
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Google?s Android powered by remarkable new 'Flawgic'