or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung email targeted Steve Jobs' death as "our best opportunity to attack iPhone"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung email targeted Steve Jobs' death as "our best opportunity to attack iPhone" - Page 4

post #121 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

It's a philosophical quandary. I'm often thinking, 'Will I reply to this post?' knowing there could well already be a good answer. It depends how strongly I feel usually, or how bloody-minded or mischievous I'm feeling.

I often reply on impulse... just to see same or better reply a few posts after. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be there, have I not replied... Such is life.
post #122 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

I often reply on impulse... just to see same or better reply a few posts after. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be there, have I not replied... Such is life.

Sod's law.
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
post #123 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Why not just shoot me now? 1smile.gif

It's not AaronJ season yet. 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 #124 of 137
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post
Are you saying that there cannot be two or more technology companies selling products... and all of them make money?

 

Nope, making, which is what the post said.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #125 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope, making, which is what the post said.

I still don't understand.

There can't be two technology companies both making products while both making money?

Can you give an example?

Maybe I need more coffee...
post #126 of 137

I think you are looking at volumetric scaling versus area scaling.  The screen size power requirements go up as a function of area, and the battery goes up as a function of volume.  The size of the actual electronics stays the same so there is more full depth area left in the phone.

post #127 of 137
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post
There can't be two technology companies both making products while both making money?

 

Uh… Apple and Microsoft. Apple and Samsung.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #128 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Uh… Apple and Microsoft. Apple and Samsung.

Those are just names of companies. You didn't explain why there can't be more than one successful company in a market.

All three of those companies you listed make products and make money.

Apple sells phones and make a lot of money. Samsung sells phones and makes a lot of money too. Again... I don't understand the issue.

Microsoft has always made their money by selling software licenses (Windows and Office)... while Apple sells hardware (Macs). Microsoft and Apple were always in the PC market... but they played different roles.
post #129 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post
 

True, there are indications though that the next Android version will focus more on enterprise security. So there might be improvement in that area in the future. (for what it's worth, the Russian government does use Android tablets)

 

The security issue may be the very reason the Russian government uses Android. It's much easier for the former head of the KGB to look over everyone's shoulder...

 

While the U.S. federal government has only approved a single modified version of a Samsumg phone as the only Android device, they did approve several current versions of BlackBerry phones and all versions of Apple iPhones (and tablets). Interestingly enough several large departments of the governments are phasing out their older BlackBerries for iPhones.

 

In the education sector Apple is winning all the largest buys of tablets. The cell phone business is mostly BYOD. Apple mobile computers are the computer of choice by students while administrations often chose Mac desktops for ease of networking.

 

In the private sector Apple tablets rule in most of the Fortune 2000 companies, while the MBA has a modest presence. The iPhone greatly is present where the company pays for use and still has dominance where it's BYOD. This is likely due to company-developed apps being primarily supplied only for Apple iOS products.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #130 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

Those are just names of companies. You didn't explain why there can't be more than one successful company in a market.

 

The premise that there can only be one successful company in a market, is false. Most often there is one company that leads a market with a couple others snapping at their heels. This has not been the case with search engines, for example, nor has it been so with OS companies. But, as we see with Microsoft, HP, and Motorola, various circumstances can make a strong company vulnerable to losing their dominance or having it seriously challenged.

 

I've seen whole markets move from high-end to commodity status, others move from domestic to foreign dominance, and some completely disappear. Apple's move from dominance to nearly disappearing to reemergence to dominance is so unusual that it's a kind of legend.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #131 of 137
Good writing from Daniel Eran Dilger as always, but does anyone at Apple Insider bother to proofread his articles? There were several misspelled words. This story was the final straw for me. Although I had blacklisted Samsung hard drives years ago due to horrible warranty support, and I wasn't interested in their phones, I was OK with their other products. If they can have such a disgusting and callous attitude about the death of Steve Jobs, then I will never buy anything with the Samsung brand attached to it ever again.

**Someone pointed out that I too made errors in my above comment, which I have just corrected. My point was that when you run a blog site that has a lot of readers, you should make sure to proofread, and fix your errors before you post. No one is perfect, but Daniel Eran Dilger frequently posts articles with a lot of grammatical errors, and typos. I've been reading his stuff for years, and this is normal for him.
Edited by Howie Isaacks - 4/19/14 at 8:45am
post #132 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howie Isaacks View Post

Good writing from Daniel Eran Dilger as always, but does anyone at Apple Insider bother to proofread his articles? There were several misspelled words. This story was the final straw for me. Although I had blacklisted Samsung hard drives years ago due to horrible warranty support, and I wasn't interested in their phones, I was OK with their other products. If they can have such a disgusting and callous attitude about the death of Steve Jobs, then I will never buy anything with the Samsung brand attached to it ever again.
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
post #133 of 137

Thanks for pointing out my errors.... This is not my blog, so I'm free to make errors. I don't make them on my own blog because I proofread before posting. You missed the basic point of what I said. You were obviously more interested in making me look like a hypocrite than you were with understanding my point.

post #134 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howie Isaacks View Post
 

Thanks for pointing out my errors.... This is not my blog, so I'm free to make errors. I don't make them on my own blog because I proofread before posting. You missed the basic point of what I said. You were obviously more interested in making me look like a hypocrite than you were with understanding my point.

You talk about bad grammar, and yet your brief post was a perfect example of bad grammar. Yes, I highlighted the two misspelt words, but what was worse was the way in which you obscured the meaning of your words.

 

You should have put a new paragraph before 'This story was the final straw for me.' It initially looked as though you were done with AI because of the poor proofreading, but you really meant that it was Samsung's bad behaviour that was the final straw.

 

Secondly, the main thrust of your post was really Samsung's behaviour, yet in leading with the petty complaint about proof-reading, you misplace the emphasis.

 

I've probably made several grammatical errors myself in this post, but if I were you, I would be very wary of criticising proofreading. It weakens your argument when you don't display high standards in your own writing, and at any rate, I don't think your complaint is justified. I sometimes correct spelling for my own amusement or if someone is irritating me, but I would never make an issue out of it with regard to AI articles, because there is no need to. There are mistakes from time to time, but generally, the standard is very high. You can choose to be amused by the mistakes, ignore them or be offended by them. I choose the first two.

“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
“I wasted time, and now doth time waste me.”
Reply
post #135 of 137
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post
Those are just names of companies. You didn't explain why there can't be more than one successful company in a market.

 

I’m not going to pretend that you need a picture drawn for you. No more handholding.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #136 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I’m not going to pretend that you need a picture drawn for you. No more handholding.

Sorry man.... I honestly have no idea what you were trying to say.

I said: "There can't be two technology companies both making products while both making money?"

And then you replied with: "Apple and Samsung... Apple and Microsoft"

I obviously need more handholding... because I don't understand that response.

Your posts are usually so well written and clear. You probably have a great point (as you normally do)

But this one has me stumped.

Again... sorry for not understanding.
post #137 of 137
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post
I said: "There can't be two technology companies both making products while both making money?"

 

Okay, you’re dead right; I apologize. My whole thing operates under the stipulation that ‘making products’ here refers to R&D put into a product and not wholesale theft of hardware or software, and I don’t think I clarified that anywhere yet. So with that in mind,

 

Looking at Apple and Microsoft (think ’96 onward), you see Apple making money on every device they sell and… Windows whoring itself out to Dell, Gateway, and whoever was still alive back in the ‘90s that I’ve forgotten. Back then we had Windows, OS X, and… not really anyone else. Sure, we have all the flavors of Linux, et. al. in the industry, but they inherently don’t make money.

 

But the biggest indicator shows up right now in phones. Apple, making products while making money on them, Samsung, wholesale stealing products but making money, rendering that money moot for the purpose of this argument, Microsoft, who made their own products for once in their existence but not making any money on them, and every other company in the industry, who, at least in the US, are ALL losing money.

 

I know there are other options I could list, but the world doesn’t care about what you know–just what you can remember at any given time.:lol::(

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Samsung email targeted Steve Jobs' death as "our best opportunity to attack iPhone"
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung email targeted Steve Jobs' death as "our best opportunity to attack iPhone"