What image of a tsunami would be acceptable to represent Samsung's words? Am I to assume that no image is acceptable but the language of an overpowering natural event is perfectly fine? :???: I've never seen that image before but I can't imagine any image of a tsunami or hurricane or lightning strike or tornado would affect me if there were no people being shown in the image.
Do you need an image of a tsunami to convey the metaphor that Samsung refers to in the title? I didn't realize there was ambiguity in the word "tsunami", that requires illustration for the sake of clarity. I'm sorry, I didn't see an image of a Galaxy phone flying into the World Trade Center to illustrate the "attack" on Apple's customer base. Tool.
Your personal attacks aside, this is what I don't get about your comment. You're perfectly fine with the mental imagery of 9/11 attacks on the WTC using Galaxy phones but you're not fine with AI using a photo of tsunami after Samsung mentions it. That sounds pretty fucked up to me.
Apple messed-up by not producing a large screen iPhone
I wouldn't say they messed up, they are more successful than any other smartphone company out there, plus releasing a larger screen later enables Apple to have a staggered "attack" instead of using all the tricks at once.
There are boats full of people in that image who will most certainly drown violently. They are no doubt terrified of their impending doom.
But clearly, the Samsung apologists are out in full force, seeking to find some distraction from the actual article.
Wonder what percentage of voice you guys can represent.
Really DED? You post a tasteless image, get called on it, and then try to obfuscate the issue by calling those who object to the image "Samsung Apologists". Give me a break.
Your personal attacks aside, this is what I don't get about your comment. You're perfectly fine with the mental imagery of 9/11 attacks on the WTC using Galaxy phones but you're not fine with AI using a photo of tsunami after Samsung mentions it. That sounds pretty fucked up to me.
I actually wouldn't be ok with it, which is why I used that example to make my point. I have a feeling you know that but are just being obtuse, in which case, hakuna matata.
The image is from the 2011 tsunami that hit Japan and was responsible for the deaths of 15,000+ people.
Knowing that I can't imagine I would use the image but I wonder where does this sensitivity end? [@]dasanman69[/@] posted an image he feels is acceptable. Is it because it's a painting? Would the same image painted be acceptable or does it have to be a fictional event so that there is no possible way to have a direct connection to a living person?
I actually wouldn't be ok with it, which is why I used that example to make my point. I have a feeling you know that but are just being obtuse, in which case, hakuna matata.
But you created the mental imagery you then stated you wouldn't be OK with! You created it to make your point just as Dilger created one to make his. I see poor taste as poor taste regardless of you describing it, doctoring a photo, or drawing it.
The memo added, "as we continue to attack their product, we must also sustain the attack on their customer base
Samsung is waging war. I would like to see Apple hit Samsung with the power of a thousand tsunamis. Nuke Samsung and wipe them out! Take no prisoners.
Just about the only thing that they can claim to have that Apple doesn't yet have is phone size, whoopdeedoo. Notice how nobody can make a decent Android phone that is not gigantic sized. Nobody can compete with the iPhone. And soon, when there are bigger iPhones available, it'll spell even more trouble for all Android phones and Samsung.
At the ridiculous rate that Android phones are going, soon their phones will be bigger than a damn iPad. Samsung has nothing. No innovation, no nothing.
There are boats full of people in that image who will most certainly drown violently. They are no doubt terrified of their impending doom.
But clearly, the Samsung apologists are out in full force, seeking to find some distraction from the actual article.
Wonder what percentage of voice you guys can represent.
But it's a painting. Nobody died in real life.
Samsung acknowleded it's weaknesses, and made a game plan to counter a product that could potentially be devastating to it's business. It's something all types of companies do everyday.
Apple is very unique in how it spends it's time making the best possible product, and worrying very little about the competition, so why do you find so astounding that Samsung acts just like every other company that exists, has existed, and will exist? You can't expect for them to be like Apple, because Apple is the exception not the norm.
Samsung acknowleded it's weaknesses, and made a game plan to counter a product that could potentially be devastating to it's business. It's something all types of companies do everyday.
Apple is very unique in how it spends it's time making the best possible product, and worrying very little about the competition, so why do you find so astounding that Samsung acts just like every other company that exists, has existed, and will exist? You can't expect for them to be like Apple, because Apple is the exception not the norm.
1) Does that painting represent a real event? If so, does that still mean it's not incentive?
2) Are every photograph tsunamis or other natural events that can possibly harm others also off limits?
Comments
[QUOTE]but our loyal customer must become vocal advocates[/QUOTE]
Since Samsung has to pay bloggers to be "vocal advocates", does that mean their plan to get loyal customers to do this for them for free backfired?
Metaphorically, no need to show an actual tsunami that's moments away from causing death and destruction.
This one.
I don't see why. It's Samsung that called it a tsunami.
The image is from the 2011 tsunami that hit Japan and was responsible for the deaths of 15,000+ people.
I'm completely disgusted Daniel would sink this low, what a scumbag.
Your personal attacks aside, this is what I don't get about your comment. You're perfectly fine with the mental imagery of 9/11 attacks on the WTC using Galaxy phones but you're not fine with AI using a photo of tsunami after Samsung mentions it. That sounds pretty fucked up to me.
But that initial image is awesomely tacky and hilarious!
This one.
There are boats full of people in that image who will most certainly drown violently. They are no doubt terrified of their impending doom.
But clearly, the Samsung apologists are out in full force, seeking to find some distraction from the actual article.
Wonder what percentage of voice you guys can represent.
There are boats full of people in that image who will most certainly drown violently. They are no doubt terrified of their impending doom.
But clearly, the Samsung apologists are out in full force, seeking to find some distraction from the actual article.
Wonder what percentage of voice you guys can represent.
Or you can stop being a wise ass and remove the image.
I wouldn't say they messed up, they are more successful than any other smartphone company out there, plus releasing a larger screen later enables Apple to have a staggered "attack" instead of using all the tricks at once.
That image is really poor taste.
I approve of it.
Your personal attacks aside, this is what I don't get about your comment. You're perfectly fine with the mental imagery of 9/11 attacks on the WTC using Galaxy phones but you're not fine with AI using a photo of tsunami after Samsung mentions it. That sounds pretty fucked up to me.
I actually wouldn't be ok with it, which is why I used that example to make my point. I have a feeling you know that but are just being obtuse, in which case, hakuna matata.
Knowing that I can't imagine I would use the image but I wonder where does this sensitivity end? [@]dasanman69[/@] posted an image he feels is acceptable. Is it because it's a painting? Would the same image painted be acceptable or does it have to be a fictional event so that there is no possible way to have a direct connection to a living person?
But you created the mental imagery you then stated you wouldn't be OK with! You created it to make your point just as Dilger created one to make his. I see poor taste as poor taste regardless of you describing it, doctoring a photo, or drawing it.
The memo added, "as we continue to attack their product, we must also sustain the attack on their customer base
Samsung is waging war. I would like to see Apple hit Samsung with the power of a thousand tsunamis. Nuke Samsung and wipe them out! Take no prisoners.
Just about the only thing that they can claim to have that Apple doesn't yet have is phone size, whoopdeedoo. Notice how nobody can make a decent Android phone that is not gigantic sized. Nobody can compete with the iPhone. And soon, when there are bigger iPhones available, it'll spell even more trouble for all Android phones and Samsung.
At the ridiculous rate that Android phones are going, soon their phones will be bigger than a damn iPad. Samsung has nothing. No innovation, no nothing.
Android users are the puppets of Samsung.
What we all knew all along, straight from the horses mouth.
But it's a painting. Nobody died in real life.
Samsung acknowleded it's weaknesses, and made a game plan to counter a product that could potentially be devastating to it's business. It's something all types of companies do everyday.
Apple is very unique in how it spends it's time making the best possible product, and worrying very little about the competition, so why do you find so astounding that Samsung acts just like every other company that exists, has existed, and will exist? You can't expect for them to be like Apple, because Apple is the exception not the norm.
1) Does that painting represent a real event? If so, does that still mean it's not incentive?
2) Are every photograph tsunamis or other natural events that can possibly harm others also off limits?
Samsung is waging war. I would like to see Apple hit Samsung with the power of a thousand tsunamis. Nuke Samsung and wipe them out! Take no prisoners.
Agreed. A good old fashioned nuking.