Let's try to remember what state Apple was in years ago, how do you know that Nokia won't do the same, after all, they have been reinventing themselves for 150 years now.
You, me, no one else knows what is going to happen in the future, but it is rather naive to think Apple is the only one that can reverse issues.
Let's hope Nokia can reverse its fortunes. The industry needs healthy competition. It's no good for Apple or anyone else for competitors to die off, one after another.
Having said that, Apple's comeback is far, far from a frequent occurrence in the history of the tech industry (or any industry).
Let's try to remember what state Apple was in years ago, how do you know that Nokia won't do the same, after all, they have been reinventing themselves for 150 years now.
You, me, no one else knows what is going to happen in the future, but it is rather naive to think Apple is the only one that can reverse issues.
Let's revisit your trolling in a year's time when Nokia have followed RIM down the toilet, because that's where both of them are heading. Nokia bet the farm on WindowsPhone and lost. It has nothing else. It's that simple.
We've seen century-old companies biting the bullet in this ecomony left, right and center - the age of a company has no bearing on it's future.
Uh uh. It would appear you missed the point of my post. If you really wanted to be math-y about "a completely different line of thought or action" the word you would be searching for is "orthogonal" to, not "tangent" to.
Be that as it may, I was simply suggesting that the original poster who said "doing a 360" was using a colloquial reference that just about anyone -- except, apparently, the snarky guy who took off on him about his and America's math knowledge, and to whom I was responding -- reading his post understood.
Many such colloquial references use lousy math concepts (including the one you cite, which you obviously did not realize).
Sigh. "Doing a 360" is a fancy basketball dunk, or sometimes a fancy dive into water, and so on. By changing his phrase you're putting words in the mouth of the original poster who got it wrong. When he's referring to turning tables--as the original poster was referring to--then turning tables 360 degrees results in no net change. If anything, he should have said "doing a 180" (to use your turn of phrase).
Normally saying "turning the tables" is enough to imply 180. But he added the 360 for emphasis, which made it funny.
But, since you're obviously new to basic math, I'll point out that "a completely different line of thought" does not have to be orthogonal to another line of thought, as you seem to assert. Orthogonal means "at right angles". However, a completely different line can be formed simply by changing a line's slope or y-intercept. It does not require a right angle, i.e., it does not require orthogonality. So in summary, a completely different line of thought does not imply orthogonality to another line of thought.
So no, the term I was searching for was not "orthogonal". Rather, "on a tangent" was simply intended as a humorous colloquial idiom that happened to be math-related. Man, some people really can't take a joke!
Anyhow, sounds like your primary complaint is with the use and definition of "on a tangent". May I suggest you take it up Merriam-Webster or the Oxford English Dictionary, not here in the forum.
Don't have to own one to know how something looks.
Can you point out Saturn from photos of different planets? Can you opine as to what Hollywood actress is more actress despite never seeing them in person? He didn't say it "feels" like crap, but it "looks" like crap. I disagree on all counts but he's only referring to aesthetics which does seem to vary widely.
I've no idea what a "man draw" is, but I can tell this response has some Nokia ties and that someone got hit a little too close to home.
I stand corrected. Was in a hurry and wrote "draw" when I meant "drawer". Regardless I guess that means you two are cut from the same clueless cloth in regards to Nokia and its history...
For your edification: (The Man Drawer)... You're welcome...
I stand corrected. Was in a hurry and wrote "draw" when I meant "drawer". Regardless I guess that means you two are cut from the same clueless cloth in regards to Nokia and its history...
Thanks for the correction, but I fail to see where I've provided any sort of statement that would warrant that accusation. I've said they'll be dead in a year or two, but nothing about their worthiness.
Nope, as I said, go have a read about their history.
I did.
In the early days... Nokia was involved in making wood pulp, cables, rubber, footwear, tires, electrical generation, etc. Then in the 1960s they got into semiconductors, electronics, televisions, and telecommunications. In short... Nokia made all sorts of stuff.
However... in the 1980s Nokia spun off their tire manufacturing and rubber boot manufacturing. And during the 1990s... Nokia divested itself of all of its non-telecommunications businesses.
Face it... Nokia is now a mobile phone and communications company... regardless of their illustrious history of making paper, rubber boots and tires.
Sorry if that sounds snarky... but you keep mentioning Nokia's history... even though that has little to to with the problems they face today in the mobile phone industry.
Again... I'm not knocking Nokia... but they were simply unable to cope with what was happening around them.
Samsung recently stole the crown of largest mobile phone manufacturer... a title that Nokia had for over a decade.
I certainly don't think Nokia will ever go out of business, however. They still make lots of products. But it's a different world now.
Let's revisit your trolling in a year's time when Nokia have followed RIM down the toilet, because that's where both of them are heading. Nokia bet the farm on WindowsPhone and lost. It has nothing else. It's that simple.
Trolling? Oh, that's right, I am on Appleinsider, when you are a troll if you disagree about anything, thanks for putting me in my place.
Again, I will say this, I don't know what the future holds for Nokia, they might be brought out in a few months, who knows, it is in the future, and like anything in the future, no one knows what is going to happen. But lets get back to what I was replying to, companies reinventing themselves.
We've seen century-old companies biting the bullet in this ecomony left, right and center - the age of a company has no bearing on it's future.
Who has ever say it did have a bearing. Sorry, you need to go back and re-read things, the age of the company isn't being discussed at all, the person I responsed too was talking about companies reinventing themselves.
Sorry if what I said sounded like a claim... I seriously didn't intend it to be.
Anyway... you've told me TWICE to go back and look at Nokia's history... which I have. But you never say anything beyond that.
What, specifically, am I looking for in Nokia's history?
Thanks to you... I've learned more about Nokia in the past 2 days than I ever knew before. They have some interesting history. But none of that can explain the current funk they are in.
All I can see is that Nokia used to be the biggest manufacturer of mobile phones... but they are now experiencing tremendous competition.
Anyway... you've told me TWICE to go back and look at Nokia's history... which I have. But you never say anything beyond that.
What, specifically, am I looking for in Nokia's history?
You don't know what you are looking for? Ok, this is what you said
True.... but Apple also has a habit of re-inventing themselves and entering new markets. I just don't think companies like Nokia are able to do that.
Now, since you have looked at Nokia's history twice, are you really telling me you don't know what you are looking for based on your own statement?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Let's try to remember what state Apple was in years ago, how do you know that Nokia won't do the same, after all, they have been reinventing themselves for 150 years now.
You, me, no one else knows what is going to happen in the future, but it is rather naive to think Apple is the only one that can reverse issues.
Let's hope Nokia can reverse its fortunes. The industry needs healthy competition. It's no good for Apple or anyone else for competitors to die off, one after another.
Having said that, Apple's comeback is far, far from a frequent occurrence in the history of the tech industry (or any industry).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89
Sent a text today? Made a call? Like that grid of apps on your phone or tablet? Used the App store? Taken a snap?
Tell us how Nokia was involved in these things (not that it really matters at this point.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly75
The definition of a prime number?
It's a really tasty number with hardly any fat.
I love how you insult the guy over a device you haven't even used yourself, let alone purchased.
Who's the silly one again? Other than you, I mean.
Let's revisit your trolling in a year's time when Nokia have followed RIM down the toilet, because that's where both of them are heading. Nokia bet the farm on WindowsPhone and lost. It has nothing else. It's that simple.
We've seen century-old companies biting the bullet in this ecomony left, right and center - the age of a company has no bearing on it's future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Even on their best day they were no Apple.
They most certainly are not a loss to the industry or consumers.
When you were digging around in your man draw looking a totally useless statement to come up with, is this the best you could find?
I've no idea what a "man draw" is, but I can tell this response has some Nokia ties and that someone got hit a little too close to home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Uh uh. It would appear you missed the point of my post. If you really wanted to be math-y about "a completely different line of thought or action" the word you would be searching for is "orthogonal" to, not "tangent" to.
Be that as it may, I was simply suggesting that the original poster who said "doing a 360" was using a colloquial reference that just about anyone -- except, apparently, the snarky guy who took off on him about his and America's math knowledge, and to whom I was responding -- reading his post understood.
Many such colloquial references use lousy math concepts (including the one you cite, which you obviously did not realize).
Sigh. "Doing a 360" is a fancy basketball dunk, or sometimes a fancy dive into water, and so on. By changing his phrase you're putting words in the mouth of the original poster who got it wrong. When he's referring to turning tables--as the original poster was referring to--then turning tables 360 degrees results in no net change. If anything, he should have said "doing a 180" (to use your turn of phrase).
Normally saying "turning the tables" is enough to imply 180. But he added the 360 for emphasis, which made it funny.
But, since you're obviously new to basic math, I'll point out that "a completely different line of thought" does not have to be orthogonal to another line of thought, as you seem to assert. Orthogonal means "at right angles". However, a completely different line can be formed simply by changing a line's slope or y-intercept. It does not require a right angle, i.e., it does not require orthogonality. So in summary, a completely different line of thought does not imply orthogonality to another line of thought.
So no, the term I was searching for was not "orthogonal". Rather, "on a tangent" was simply intended as a humorous colloquial idiom that happened to be math-related. Man, some people really can't take a joke!
Anyhow, sounds like your primary complaint is with the use and definition of "on a tangent". May I suggest you take it up Merriam-Webster or the Oxford English Dictionary, not here in the forum.
My gawd, the literal interpretation of mixed metaphors. There are truly few things on the internet of less importance to humanity.
Please tell me how you could say that Nokia's hardware and software look like crap? Did you ever own one?
Don't have to own one to know how something looks.
Can you point out Saturn from photos of different planets? Can you opine as to what Hollywood actress is more actress despite never seeing them in person? He didn't say it "feels" like crap, but it "looks" like crap. I disagree on all counts but he's only referring to aesthetics which does seem to vary widely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I've no idea what a "man draw" is, but I can tell this response has some Nokia ties and that someone got hit a little too close to home.
I stand corrected. Was in a hurry and wrote "draw" when I meant "drawer". Regardless I guess that means you two are cut from the same clueless cloth in regards to Nokia and its history...
For your edification:
Thanks for the correction, but I fail to see where I've provided any sort of statement that would warrant that accusation. I've said they'll be dead in a year or two, but nothing about their worthiness.
I did.
In the early days... Nokia was involved in making wood pulp, cables, rubber, footwear, tires, electrical generation, etc. Then in the 1960s they got into semiconductors, electronics, televisions, and telecommunications. In short... Nokia made all sorts of stuff.
However... in the 1980s Nokia spun off their tire manufacturing and rubber boot manufacturing. And during the 1990s... Nokia divested itself of all of its non-telecommunications businesses.
Face it... Nokia is now a mobile phone and communications company... regardless of their illustrious history of making paper, rubber boots and tires.
Sorry if that sounds snarky... but you keep mentioning Nokia's history... even though that has little to to with the problems they face today in the mobile phone industry.
Again... I'm not knocking Nokia... but they were simply unable to cope with what was happening around them.
Samsung recently stole the crown of largest mobile phone manufacturer... a title that Nokia had for over a decade.
I certainly don't think Nokia will ever go out of business, however. They still make lots of products. But it's a different world now.
Sorry, you were the one that mentioned history, you were the one that claimed no one could reinvent themselved like Apple, you, not me
Trolling? Oh, that's right, I am on Appleinsider, when you are a troll if you disagree about anything, thanks for putting me in my place.
Again, I will say this, I don't know what the future holds for Nokia, they might be brought out in a few months, who knows, it is in the future, and like anything in the future, no one knows what is going to happen. But lets get back to what I was replying to, companies reinventing themselves.
Who has ever say it did have a bearing. Sorry, you need to go back and re-read things, the age of the company isn't being discussed at all, the person I responsed too was talking about companies reinventing themselves.
Wait a minute... earlier you said I implied that. Remember?
Sorry if what I said sounded like a claim... I seriously didn't intend it to be.
Anyway... you've told me TWICE to go back and look at Nokia's history... which I have. But you never say anything beyond that.
What, specifically, am I looking for in Nokia's history?
Thanks to you... I've learned more about Nokia in the past 2 days than I ever knew before. They have some interesting history. But none of that can explain the current funk they are in.
All I can see is that Nokia used to be the biggest manufacturer of mobile phones... but they are now experiencing tremendous competition.
yes, I remember what I wrote, you seem to have forgotten what you wrote, here, I will remind you...
You don't know what you are looking for? Ok, this is what you said
Now, since you have looked at Nokia's history twice, are you really telling me you don't know what you are looking for based on your own statement?