or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › How Wikipedia's sloppy facts obscured reality in Apple vs. Samsung trial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How Wikipedia's sloppy facts obscured reality in Apple vs. Samsung trial - Page 3

post #81 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


There seems to be plenty of evindence that Samsung's flagship phones sell very well. From their domination of the Android-based device profits, to them being the other cellphone vendor making any real money besides Apple, too independent reports — posted right here on AI recently — of the Samsung Galaxy S4 being either the 2nd or 3rd most popular device on the US' four major carriers.

The iPhone 5c was alternating 2nd and 3rd place with the Galaxy S4. Yet the 5c was deemed a failure by everyone, and the S4 trumpeted as a good seller. 

post #82 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


You are what you hate.

And you hate what you are.

post #83 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

The iPhone 5c was alternating 2nd and 3rd place with the Galaxy S4. Yet the 5c was deemed a failure by everyone, and the S4 trumpeted as a good seller. 

If you accept the 5C as a failure that's fine, but I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd most popular device on a carrier can be labeled as such. That means I can't possibly label the S4 as a failure, especially when there is enough circumstantial data to show that it is both popular and profitable for Samsung, along with many of their previous high-end smartphones.

"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 #84 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanSolecki View Post


If you were looking for proof that education reform is long overdue, here's this nugget of... gold.

 

I thought it was proof that the war on drugs isn't working.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #85 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

...of the Samsung Galaxy S4 being either the 2nd or 3rd most popular device on the US' four major carriers.

But what about in the whole world?

If Samsung sold 82 million smartphones worldwide last quarter... how many of those were the Galaxy S4? Or expensive flagship phones in general?

Or... out of ALL the 280 million smartphones sold last quarter... how many of those were expensive phones?

I agree with elroth... the cheaper phones tend to be the ones that make up most of the sales.

Not that there's anything wrong with that 1smile.gif
post #86 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

But what about in the whole world?

If Samsung sold 82 million smartphones worldwide last quarter... how many of those were the Galaxy S4? Or expensive flagship phones in general?

Or... out of ALL the 280 million smartphones sold last quarter... how many of those were expensive phones?

I agree with elroth... the cheaper phones tend to be the ones that make up most of the sales.

Not that there's anything wrong with that 1smile.gif

Sure, because of their excessive selection and the majority of their devices are very cheap (by American standards) the S4 only accounts for a fraction of their total handset units, but elroth started his comment by stating they "don't sell" which is a very different statement.

As for outside the US I'd say the numbers are very good. From what I've seen the iPhone 5S costs considerably more than the S4 in other countries; it's the Galaxy Note 3 that is priced more comparatively to the iPhone 5S.

Do you guys think Samsung is making their profits on the cheap phones? The only reasonable answer, to me, is that they are selling enough of their high-end devices and with a decent profit margin to account for their profits in the handset market.
Edited by SolipsismX - 3/28/14 at 11:15pm

"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 #87 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Sure, because of their excessive selection and the majority of their devices are very cheap (by American standards) the S4 only accounts for a fraction of their total handset units, but elroth started his comment by stating they "don't sell" which is a very different statement.

As for outside the US I'd say the numbers are very good. From what I've seen the iPhone 5S costs considerably more than the S4 in other countries; it's the Galaxy Note 3 that is priced more comparatively to the iPhone 5S.

Do you guys think Samsung is making their profits on the cheap phones? The only reasonable answer, to me, is that they are selling enough of their high-end devices and with a decent profit margin to account for their profits in the handset market.

You can make a profit on any product at any price. You just have to charge more than what it costs to produce, market, ship, etc.

Samsung is no dummy... they know how to make a profit from their products.

But I just don't think they're selling as many flagship phones as the profit leads you to believe.

Out of 82 million smartphones sold last quarter... do you think they sold 40 million Galaxy S4? 50 million Galaxy S4? I think they would be shouting from to rooftop if that was the case.

Instead... they only talk about certain milestones... like "194 million Galaxy S phones sold since 2010"

That's a great story... but it doesn't really say anything.

We know Android phones, on average, have a low price. And Samsung sells a lot of Android phones. Those two things don't really enforce the notion that Samsung sells a lot of premium phones.

Samsung has earned the title of "world's largest smartphone manufacturer by unit sales" but that doesn't say anything about what those units are.

That's what we're trying to figure out.

If I was to make a guess... I'd say most of Samsung's sales are the cheaper $100-200 phones sold in China and India... not flagships.

Not that there's anything wrong with that 1smile.gif

.
Edited by Michael Scrip - 3/29/14 at 1:57am
post #88 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanSolecki View Post


Look at this entire thread. Look at the amount of time and effort this website devotes to bashing Samsung.

It's really embarrassing that these people exist.

DED is pretty much the Fox News of tech reporting, and everything he writes is a hit-piece.

I start visiting this site, browse through a bit to see when the updates are coming, and then one of these steaming piles always turns me away again.

Without this garbage this site would be so, so much better.

 

Samsung got caught, convicted and fined promoting their "steaming piles" on HTC's Taiwanese forums.

 

The biggest "steaming piles" are paid for by Samsung out of their $14 Billion marketing budget.

 

Without whining like yours, these forums would be so much better.

 

Go back to the "winners".

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 #89 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


You can make a profit on any product at any price. You just have to charge more than what it costs to produce, market, ship, etc.

Samsung is no dummy... they know how to make a profit from their products.

But I just don't think they're selling as many flagship phones as the profit leads you to believe.

Out of 82 million smartphones sold last quarter... do you think they sold 40 million Galaxy S4? 50 million Galaxy S4? I think they would be shouting from to rooftop if that was the case.

Instead... they only talk about certain milestones... like "194 million Galaxy S phones sold since 2010"

That's a great story... but it doesn't really say anything.

We know Android phones, on average, have a low price. And Samsung sells a lot of Android phones. Those two things don't really enforce the notion that Samsung sells a lot of premium phones.

Samsung has earned the title of "world's largest smartphone manufacturer by unit sales" but that doesn't say anything about what those units are.

That's what we're trying to figure out.

If I was to make a guess... I'd say most of Samsung's sales are the cheaper $100-200 phones sold in China and India... not flagships.

Not that there's anything wrong with that 1smile.gif

.

 

 

The average income in India is $1219, in China it's $2,100.  The idea that Samsung is garnering the lions share of it's very substantial profits by selling $100 phones into these markets is ludicrous.  Then there are the sales figures:

 

Quote:
But is the current Android flagship model really suffering from poor sales? Not according to a published report out of Korea on Wednesday, which cites Samsung CEO J.K. Shin as the source of a story claiming that more than 40 million units of the Samsung Galaxy S4 have been sold to date. 

So that's 40 million in six months.  If you want to consider that low sales , fine, but I wouldn't agree with you.  There have been  other sales figures announced which do indicate Samsung sells a lot of high end phones.

 

They sold a further 10 million Note 3s on top of those 40 million S4s

 

Quote:
 Samsung on Tuesday announced that channel sales of the Note 3 have rocketed to 10 million units in just two months. For those keeping score, that’s half as long as it took shipments of the Galaxy Note II to reach 10 million. The 60 days Samsung’s Galaxy Note 3 took to hit 10 million units shipped is also shockingly close to the 50 days it took channel sales of Samsung’s flagship Galaxy S4 to hit 10 million units.  It’s actually not much of a surprise, though; BGR reviewed the Galaxy Note 3 back in October and we called it the best smartphone Samsung has ever made.   http://news.yahoo.com/samsung-galaxy-note-3-sales-rocket-10-million-134547384.html
December 10, 2013

 

And since the argument is about the percentage of their profits coming from high end devices - don't jump up and down claiming these are channel sales, because it just doesn't matter to Samsung if the retailers dump them in the sea, so long as they are paid for them they make a profit.  But somehow I doubt all those retailers world-wide are really ordering product they don't think there is a demand for and which they think won't sell.

 

I think a lot of companies would like to fail at selling high end phones the way Samsung obviously does.

 

This litle tid-bit is interesting:

 

Quote:
 In fact, Samsung is planning to focus more on low- to mid-range handsets, claims the source, as well as tablets, where it smells much more opportunity for growth, and expects just 35% of its phones sold next year to be "premium models"

 

Since that article is about Samsung revising downward their expectations for sales of the S5, one could reasonably infer that previously, high end phones made up more than 35% of their sales.

post #90 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


There seems to be plenty of evindence that Samsung's flagship phones sell very well. From their domination of the Android-based device profits, to them being the other cellphone vendor making any real money besides Apple, too independent reports — posted right here on AI recently — of the Samsung Galaxy S4 being either the 2nd or 3rd most popular device on the US' four major carriers.

 

150 million Galaxy S models sold since 2010 vs 430 million iPhones over the same period, yet Apple are the "failures".

 

Source Sydney Galaxy S5 launch Tuesday March 25 2014.

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 #91 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

If this Wikipedia page is off, why didn't the author edited it? Or is it locked down?
 

 

As you found, you cannot fix wikipedia.  Even correctly cited factual data does not hold up to the political ideology of the wikipedia editors, which as someone else pointed out, are a bunch of biased jerks who will simply revert corrections.

 

This is why, anyone who claims something based on wikipedia as a source, is a fool. 

 

Wikipedia is a joke, for anything even mildly controversial, and the editors are jerks.

post #92 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

You can make a profit on any product at any price. You just have to charge more than what it costs to produce, market, ship, etc.

Samsung is no dummy... they know how to make a profit from their products.

But I just don't think they're selling as many flagship phones as the profit leads you to believe.

Out of 82 million smartphones sold last quarter... do you think they sold 40 million Galaxy S4? 50 million Galaxy S4? I think they would be shouting from to rooftop if that was the case.

Instead... they only talk about certain milestones... like "194 million Galaxy S phones sold since 2010"

That's a great story... but it doesn't really say anything.

We know Android phones, on average, have a low price. And Samsung sells a lot of Android phones. Those two things don't really enforce the notion that Samsung sells a lot of premium phones.

Samsung has earned the title of "world's largest smartphone manufacturer by unit sales" but that doesn't say anything about what those units are.

That's what we're trying to figure out.

If I was to make a guess... I'd say most of Samsung's sales are the cheaper $100-200 phones sold in China and India... not flagships.

Not that there's anything wrong with that 1smile.gif

.

As noted by @hill60 Samsung is selling one Galaxy for every iPhone Apple sells. Samsung is successful and they sell a shitload of higher-end devices. They sold 10 million S3 or S4's in under a month. Apple can almost do that in a weekend, but within a month is damn good. It doesn't matter if their high-end devices account for 100% of 1% of their total handset sales, it's still a lot of of high0end devices that are clearly making a profit.

I honestly don't get this where you and others are coming from here. Is this retaliation over the claims that the 5C is a failure? If so, that's neither objective nor fair.

"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 #93 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

This is why, anyone who claims something based on wikipedia as a source, is a fool.

Where did you read that? Wikipedia?

"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 #94 of 147
Quote:
Instead, Judge Koh ruled during the trial that accusations by Samsung that Apple had "doctored" photographic evidence were simply "not credible."

 

The internet made information free, and corporations and governments hired people to make it suspect.

post #95 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I honestly don't get this where you and others are coming from here. Is this retaliation over the claims that the 5C is a failure? If so, that's neither objective nor fair.

One person said "Android buyers are cheap" and another person said "Samsung makes phones that cost as much as an iPhone or more"

And I said "Samsung also sells phones that cost a lot less" and it spiraled from there.

1smile.gif
post #96 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Maybe I needs a /s ?

Maybe you needs a lol.gif !
But I never heard Corrections admit to being another sock account for DED, Prince McLean, Slash Lane or whatever.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #97 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Maybe you needs a lol.gif !
But I never heard Corrections admit to being another sock account for DED, Prince McLean, Slash Lane or whatever.

Yup, pretty common knowledge who he is. Just have to let the newer members know the connection once in awhile.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #98 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

150 million Galaxy S models sold since 2010 vs 430 million iPhones over the same period, yet Apple are the "failures".



Source Sydney Galaxy S5 launch Tuesday March 25 2014.

Stop bashing Samsung. /s

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #99 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Yup, pretty common knowledge who he is. Just have to let the newer members know the connection once in awhile.

Heh. I know, but I enjoy the effort he puts into referring to himself in the third person and all. It's either a ruse or a psychological disorder.
The dead giveaway was Corrections referring to what DED writes as legitimate "journalism." Even people who enjoy his pro-Apple polemics wouldn't call them "journalism." Journalists have access to sources; DED has access to the Internets. 1smile.gif

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #100 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

One person said "Android buyers are cheap" and another person said "Samsung makes phones that cost as much as an iPhone or more"

And I said "Samsung also sells phones that cost a lot less" and it spiraled from there.

1smile.gif

Ah, my bad. I usually don't go back to the source of a conversation in every thread. There are just too many so if a post is suppose to be a segmented continuation of a previous comment I am very likely not to catch that.
Edited by SolipsismX - 3/29/14 at 9:54am

"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 #101 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

The average income in India is $1219, in China it's $2,100.  The idea that Samsung is garnering the lions share of it's very substantial profits by selling $100 phones into these markets is ludicrous.  Then there are the sales figures:

So that's 40 million in six months.  If you want to consider that low sales , fine, but I wouldn't agree with you.  There have been  other sales figures announced which do indicate Samsung sells a lot of high end phones.

They sold a further 10 million Note 3s on top of those 40 million S4s

And since the argument is about the percentage of their profits coming from high end devices - don't jump up and down claiming these are channel sales, because it just doesn't matter to Samsung if the retailers dump them in the sea, so long as they are paid for them they make a profit.  But somehow I doubt all those retailers world-wide are really ordering product they don't think there is a demand for and which they think won't sell.

I think a lot of companies would like to fail at selling high end phones the way Samsung obviously does.

This litle tid-bit is interesting:

Since that article is about Samsung revising downward their expectations for sales of the S5, one could reasonably infer that previously, high end phones made up more than 35% of their sales.

That sounds about right. Thanks for figuring that out. 1smile.gif

The big takeaway from these discussions is that it's rather difficult to compare Apple and Samsung. They are two vastly different smartphone manufacturers.

Samsung sells low-end, mid-range and high-end phones. They are a full-line manufacturer.

On the other hand... Apple's phones start at $450... but most of their sales are actually their $650+ models. Apple has a much narrower market.

Apple has ZERO percent of the low-end market... but that's not exactly a negative. They've just never chosen to play in the low-end market.

Samsung does play in the low-end market... but that's not a bad thing either. Just different.

Samsung is the largest smartphone manufacturer by volume. They got there by selling a lot of phones. As it turns out... 35% of their phones are high-end... and the other 65% is mid-range and low-end models.

As I've said before... that's not a bad thing. It's just funny that Samsung is always touting the sales of their Galaxy S line... when the bulk of their sales are NOT those phones.

I guess it's not sexy to talk about your low-end sales.

The topic was raised earlier that Samsung sells phones that cost more than the iPhone... and I pointed out that Samsung also sells phones that cost much less than the iPhone.

And it's looking like most of Samsung's sales are actually their cheaper, non-flagship phones.
post #102 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by eponymous View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Samsung got caught, convicted and fined promoting their "steaming piles" on HTC's Taiwanese forums.

The biggest "steaming piles" are paid for by Samsung out of their $14 Billion marketing budget.

Without whining like yours, these forums would be so much better.

Go back to the "winners".

I'm sure there are biased Android editorials. I would be inclined to call them crap as well, and would lose respect for any publication/site that printed them. Not sure where you're headed with that.
post #103 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by iNosey View Post

You stole the words right out of my mouth. That is why I despise Samsung!!
It's a common, sammy fined for faking online comments and reviews.
post #104 of 147
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

This kind of dumbassery (your comment) is the reason some people hate Apple. 

 

No, he’s correct. Would you be happier if he had narrowed the scope?

 

Originally Posted by Jwumacisme View Post
It's a common, sammy fined for faking online comments and reviews.

 

All Samsung-owned or -operated IP addresses need to be blocked from editing any sort of encyclopedic reference to their (or their competitors’) products.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #105 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post
 

Yeah I know.  The time spent creating this article could have been spent correcting the Wikipedia page, assuming it's of any importance at all.

 

Correcting the Wiki page doesn't sell ads on AI.

post #106 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post
 

 

As you found, you cannot fix wikipedia.  Even correctly cited factual data does not hold up to the political ideology of the wikipedia editors, which as someone else pointed out, are a bunch of biased jerks who will simply revert corrections.

 

This is why, anyone who claims something based on wikipedia as a source, is a fool. 

 

Wikipedia is a joke, for anything even mildly controversial, and the editors are jerks.

 

I can't blame the regular contributors to Wikipedia (I am not one, but I have to advise my students on how to use it -- not because I recommend it, but because they will use it even if I tell them not to) for losing patience with people who refuse to understand the editing norms that they've developed. Look at any of the scads of Wikipedia policy pages. When people parachute in based on a DED editorial and think they know what the hell they're doing, they're going to get reverted. It's not about the "bias" of the editors; it's about knowing what you're contributing to and doing it right. Wikipedia's regular editors have lots of unfortunate experience with crowds of people piling in when somebody with an audience expresses outrage about an article. If you want to contribute, learn how to do so correctly.

post #107 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

No, he’s correct. Would you be happier if he had narrowed the scope?

 

Narrow the scope in what way? People rarely hate things they cannot afford; in fact they often aspire to own them, or admire them from a distance. Do people hate Ferrari or Porsche because they can't afford them? No... but they do hate the douche-bags who drive them, if they do so in a manner that is disrespectful and uncouth.

 

You're usually pretty rational, why are you agreeing with such an immature comment?

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #108 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Shaming wikipedia over the outrageous garbage allowed just in one article is more effective than trying to "correct" (completely rewrite) this and every Wiki article that details fan site controversies and complaints targeting Apple. Perhaps there will be more efforts made to avoid hiding the truth and propagating Samsung’s talking points if these egregious examples of posting false information are brought to light. 

Or you can just complain in the comments that you were forced to read something investigative and factual rather than another blog-blurb expressing a trivial opinion on some tech announcement.

There is no point trying to correct data on Wikipedia because it is a mob mentality. To put it bluntly, it's difficult to challenge robots and paid "reputation" companies that exist entirely to scrub negative perception of their brands with people who actually care about factually reported data.

Wikipedia is not a useful site, and hasn't been useful for more than 7 years. It is trying to be CNN when it's ultimately closer to 1000 monkeys writing Shakespeare.
post #109 of 147
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post
Narrow the scope in what way?

 

Instead of saying “people”, to “some people”, of course.

 
People rarely hate things they cannot afford; in fact they often aspire to own them, or admire them from a distance.

 

You’re confusing now with 40 years ago. People* today see something they cannot afford and they demand it either become affordable or that it be taken from whomever owns it and given to them.

 

You're usually pretty rational, why are you agreeing with such an immature comment?


Because it isn’t? As a minority, there are plenty of people who hate Apple on the sole reason of price.

 

*Should I say ‘some’ or ‘most’ here? I’ve certainly not given up on all.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #110 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Instead of saying “people”, to “some people”, of course.

 

 

Oh, of course. That wasn't really obvious given the context, and anyway, it's a lousy qualifier given than you could apply any generalization to 'some people'. 

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #111 of 147

I just noticed the talk page for the Wikipedia page in question.  I've worked with a team that successfully updated a 'controversial' page on wikipedia and our method was VERY different then what I'm seeing here.  'Vigilantes' going in and 'attacking' the page will get your edits reverted very quickly.  If a change is going to be made to shift the tone of the article it would be best to form a group in private and create a draft for the proposed changes.  Peer review it amongst the group and make sure it's as unbiased as possible.  Stick only to facts and provide citations for those facts.  As it stands now I can't think of a single person on this forum that would be capable of being unbiased and sticking only to facts, but surely there are AI members who don't post regularly that would fit the bill.  Our team found that the wikipedia regulars were quite welcoming when approached in that manner.  Stick to the facts and inject no opinion.  I'd also suggest giving it some time before approaching with any changes.  As the page has recently been vandalized multiple times in the last few days there is currently a lock on the page and people will also be very weary of future changes after loooking at the revision history.


Edited by DroidFTW - 3/30/14 at 12:30pm
post #112 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

I can't think of a single person on this forum that would be capable of being unbiased and sticking only to facts, but surely there are AI members who don't post regularly that would fit the bill.

I disagree, while just about everyone here is biased there are quite a few that have the honor, and integrity to stick solely to the facts, and not interject their opinions.
"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 #113 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I disagree, while just about everyone here is biased there are quite a few that have the honor, and integrity to stick solely to the facts, and not interject their opinions.

 

Noted. 

 

(I'm certainly not going to get into a debate where individual names are named and their suitability gets discussed.  Nothing good could come of that.)

post #114 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

I disagree, while just about everyone here is biased there are quite a few that have the honor, and integrity to stick solely to the facts, and not interject their opinions.

I would argue that the many honorable posters to which I think you refer do inject their opinions regularly, but attempt to do so in a way that makes it clear when they are stating an opinion and, most importantly, attempt to be as unbiased as possible so that by the end of the conversation there might be something learned.

"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 #115 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I would argue that the many honorable posters to which I think you refer do inject their opinions regularly, but attempt to do so in a way that makes it clear when they are stating an opinion and, most importantly, attempt to be as unbiased as possible so that by the end of the conversation there might be something learned.

I should have made myself clear. While those posters do interject their opinions on here, and rightly so, I think they'd be able to leave them out given the task to write a unbiased, and unopinionated piece based solely on verifiable facts.

I do agree that many here present their opinions with facts as to why. From them I've learned quite a bit. It's so much more productive than the 'I don't like Pepsi because I like Coke' types.
Edited by dasanman69 - 3/30/14 at 5:36pm
"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 #116 of 147

Whether or not any regular posters are capable of working in an unbiased and facts only nature is arguably the least important part of my initial post.  Strange how that's what gets focused on...

 

The point is that the current strategy for getting the Wikipedia page changed is a very bad one.  Don't go in and make changes like removing content and replacing it with "Samsung, go suck a duck" under an anonymous IP address or make changes just so you can screenshot it and see how long it takes to get reverted.  That's considered vandalism and it hurts your cause.  There is a much better alternative approach if you're serious about wanting the page to be improved.

post #117 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

I should have made myself clear. While those posters do interject their opinions on here, and rightly so, I think they'd be able to leave them out given the task to write a unbiased, and unopinionated piece based solely on verifiable facts.

Ah, I agree (mostly). I'd say they would consciously attempt not be as impartial as possible… but now I'm just splitting hairs. 1biggrin.gif

"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 #118 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

Whether or not any regular posters are capable of working in an unbiased and facts only nature is arguably the least important part of my initial post.  Strange how that's what gets focused on...

I didn't have a issue with the rest of your post. lol.gif
"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 #119 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

150 million Galaxy S models sold since 2010 vs 430 million iPhones over the same period, yet Apple are the "failures".

 

Source Sydney Galaxy S5 launch Tuesday March 25 2014.

Curious if thats just the Galaxy S series or all Galaxy models which includes the S, Note, Pro, Tab, R, W, M, and Y

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #120 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Curious if thats just the Galaxy S series or all Galaxy models which includes the S, Note, Pro, Tab, R, W, M, and Y

If they don't specifically mention the S it means they mean the entire Galaxy line.

Including the $2 Samsung Galaxy USB dongles in China that contain pirated movies.*


* I'm not saying they exist, just that they would be included if they did.

"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • How Wikipedia's sloppy facts obscured reality in Apple vs. Samsung trial
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › How Wikipedia's sloppy facts obscured reality in Apple vs. Samsung trial