You know, on some websites, you get warned for making a post like that. Point for point rebuttals of what people say are a no-no.
I'd think it makes a long rebuttal easier to follow than just replaying with a huge block of text. If AI says it's a "no no" then I'll gladly stop even if makes it harder to read the thread.
What most irritating is when someone posts a comment and doesn't state anything specific, some other viewpoint with examples and proof, etc.
To just say "this screams propaganda" and nothing else, just seems like propaganda from other bias perspective towards another platform. I think maybe Brandon is trying to promote Samsung, Android, etc. without just coming forth and telling everyone he doesn't like Apple. At we'll know where he's coming from. At least that's my viewpoint based on the comment that he made thinking that an editorial piece is propaganda, when it's just someone's opinion/viewpoint based on observations and market research from reputable organizations.
I blocked Mr. "this screams propaganda" as a troll the first day he came on this site. He is irrelevant. Just another person who comes to a pro Apple site and spews anti apple rhetoric because of an innate need to make himself feel good by putting others down for there choices and to get a rise out of people who are here to read about all things Apple. I can honestly say that I don't frequent Android sites and call people who use android stupid and ridicule there choices on what they use. What a complete and utter waste of time.
I blocked Mr. "this screams propaganda" as a troll the first day he came on this site. He is irrelevant. Just another moron who comes to a pro Apple site and spews anti apple rhetoric because of an innate need to make himself feel good by putting others down for there choices and to get a rise out of people who are here to read about all things Apple. I can honestly say that I don't frequent Android sites and call people who use android stupid and ridicule there choices on what they use. What a complete and utter waste of time.
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
This site has a very odd definition of troll...
The people who run in and claim without reason that Apple is dead and sucks and stole this and that and blah blah blah and other things that solely seek to incite rage in the userbase are trolls...those who seek to correct misconceptions about Apple competitors or to point out that there are other companies innovating are not trolls. They feel that you need to be 100% not just pro-Apple (technically I'd be pro-Apple as I love Apple - just bought a rMBP 15 :-) ) but must prefer Apple everything over anything else.
There are quite a few level headed posters here but others (won't name names) are very unreasonable.
One thing I hate though is when some random troll (who for some reason just joined and can post without it going to moderation like I have to wait for) makes some completely off the wall comment the entire discussion gets derailed and it sucks because you have to weave through the BS and the retorts to find a meaningful discussion.
Also apparently mentioning you own Apple products is proof that you are an absolutely Samsung shill and that your opinion is immediately invalid...unless your opinion is that Apple is absolutely perfect AND that their competitors are absolute shit in every wave shape or form.
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
No its not because because your opinion is different, I have no problem with that, its that almost all of your posts are abrasive and anti apple on a pro apple website. I removed the insulting name from my previous post as that was not right but my opinion still stands that it is a waste of time to post anti apple comments on a pro apple website. I can't speak for you but I would never waste my time doing that to an android website and I would be ridiculed there if I did.
But Apple has hundreds of billions in cash. Of course Apple could sell their products at lower prices. Sure that would mean lower profit margins - which would probably lead to the point where they might have only tens of billions in cash rather than a few hundred billion, or thereabouts, or perhaps not, given the elasticity of market response to lower iPhone prices. But given their financials, Apple has a LOT of room to offer their products at lower prices.
They've just spent how many billions? in buying back their own stock. It did this because that was determined as a better 'investment' than putting the money into other developments, perhaps even outside the computing sphere. This did smack somewhat of a lack of imagination, especially in the light of Google's myriad developments.
It's interesting that Apple hasn't invested in developing market share through lower prices. Financially, they are certainly in a position to do so. When you examine Apple's enormous spend on advertising rather than 'spending' on lower margins, Apple seems to choose the advertising route to maintain the notion of premium product. But when three people are using Facebook on an Android, Windows and iPhone, there is no difference, or at least no significant difference. Yes, I know the build quality, the build quality!
I suppose the Aspirational Buy element for their products has always been a part of 'Apple's DNA'. Who knows whether it will be a sustainable one? It certainly wasn't as Apple approached the precipice in the stumbling faltering days before charismatic Steve Jobs' return.
In this article he recounts how Steve Jobs wanted the Mac to be affordable for everyone, and felt betrayed by John Sculley's idea to raise the price significantly. There was even a scene of this in the Jobs movie with Ashton Kutcher.
Back then, Steve had little choice but to go along with the price increase. But when Steve came back to Apple, he had all the power to do what he believed in. Instead of doing something about it, he ended up defending Apple's premium prices, as if he believed in it all along.
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
Your premise assumes that the original Macintosh sold well. It didn't. Jobs was envisioning numbers like he got with the original iMac or possibly even the iPhone. Those were lower priced and designed for and aimed at the masses so they were hits. The original Mac was a great PC that contained many innovations that were copied. But it was never a mass market PC the way that Apple 2 was or iMac. Sculley was a boob.
Cheap is not always cheap though how durable is a note for a price of $700 among other cheap androids, people needs to wake up from being tricked and wasting their money after switching to Mac and iPhones there is no turning back and am waiting for the debut of the iPhone 6, Go Apple
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
Your premise assumes that the original Macintosh sold well. It didn't. Jobs was envisioning numbers like he got with the original iMac or possibly even the iPhone. Those were lower priced and designed for and aimed at the masses so they were hits. The original Mac was a great PC that contained many innovations that were copied. But it was never a mass market PC the way that Apple 2 was or iMac. Sculley was a boob.
I think your comment should have @Haggar. I never said (nor do I believe) Sculley was right. I made a sarcastic remark ( denoted on this board by: ¡ ). Though possibly in poor taste re: Steve Job's passing It was never my intention to acquiesce to Sculley's position.
I think your comment should have @Haggar. I never said (nor do I believe) Sculley was right. I made a sarcastic remark ( denoted on this board by: ¡ ). Though possibly in poor taste re: Steve Job's passing It was never my intention to acquiesce to Sculley's position.
Huh? Look above your response. I don't see you anywhere. I only see me responding to @Haggar.
Does anybody remember the controversial contract between Apple and Verizon? The one that holds Verizon accountable to sell 23.5 billion worth of devices by the end if the year or the will owe Apple 14 billion? Could this monopoly be creating the increase in sales? How would Apple stock fare when this contract expires when the stock splits by 7 down to $10-11/shr? I guess the best way to predict the direction of Apple is to watch the direction of Verizon.
Just think the stock jumped because of the buyback and hype,after the stock split down to 10-11$/shr more people can affors to invest in the stock, this might hold on for a bit, but i fear this might create a future reverse split, maybe just in half, but it is quite possible considering Apple hasn't released any monumental devices in quite some time. Remember when Apple was a $4 stock, well BBRY is a $8 stock, and has a larger potential for growth. I believe Apple's fashion statement is getting old, and the devices will need to be competitively priced in the future.
Wow. What a refreshing and logical article. As most anybody in the consumer electronics industry knows, nobody wants to be in a race to the bottom, but almost everybody is. Many Japanese and now Korean companies have always gone through a market share to profits to market share cycle over and over again. They place a huge emphasis on share because it is a matter of pride. Then when the losses become unsustainable they will trade share to try and become more profitable. Many don't succeed. If they do, they again try to grow share at almost any cost.
I'll take a company that is profitable, invests in R&D and understands its customers any day.
On September 5, 2007, the 4GB model was discontinued, and the 8GB model price was cut by a third.[62] Those who had purchased an iPhone in the 14-day period before the September 5, 2007 announcement were eligible for a US $200 "price protection" rebate from Apple or AT&T. However, it was widely reported that some who bought between the June 29, 2007 launch and the August 22, 2007 price protection kick-in date complained that this was a larger-than-normal price drop for such a relatively short period and accused Apple of unfair pricing.[63][64]
In response to customer complaints, on September 6, 2007, Apple CEO Steve Jobs wrote in an open letter to iPhone customers that everyone who purchased an iPhone at the higher price "and who is not receiving a rebate or other consideration", would receive a US$100 credit to be redeemed towards the purchase of any product sold in Apple's retail or online stores.[65]
Comments
But not here!
I'd think it makes a long rebuttal easier to follow than just replaying with a huge block of text. If AI says it's a "no no" then I'll gladly stop even if makes it harder to read the thread.
Oh, it’s certainly not here. Just a little jab at another site I visit, is all.
What most irritating is when someone posts a comment and doesn't state anything specific, some other viewpoint with examples and proof, etc.
To just say "this screams propaganda" and nothing else, just seems like propaganda from other bias perspective towards another platform. I think maybe Brandon is trying to promote Samsung, Android, etc. without just coming forth and telling everyone he doesn't like Apple. At we'll know where he's coming from. At least that's my viewpoint based on the comment that he made thinking that an editorial piece is propaganda, when it's just someone's opinion/viewpoint based on observations and market research from reputable organizations.
I blocked Mr. "this screams propaganda" as a troll the first day he came on this site. He is irrelevant. Just another person who comes to a pro Apple site and spews anti apple rhetoric because of an innate need to make himself feel good by putting others down for there choices and to get a rise out of people who are here to read about all things Apple. I can honestly say that I don't frequent Android sites and call people who use android stupid and ridicule there choices on what they use. What a complete and utter waste of time.
Edit: Removed insulting name.
I blocked Mr. "this screams propaganda" as a troll the first day he came on this site. He is irrelevant. Just another moron who comes to a pro Apple site and spews anti apple rhetoric because of an innate need to make himself feel good by putting others down for there choices and to get a rise out of people who are here to read about all things Apple. I can honestly say that I don't frequent Android sites and call people who use android stupid and ridicule there choices on what they use. What a complete and utter waste of time.
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
This site has a very odd definition of troll...
The people who run in and claim without reason that Apple is dead and sucks and stole this and that and blah blah blah and other things that solely seek to incite rage in the userbase are trolls...those who seek to correct misconceptions about Apple competitors or to point out that there are other companies innovating are not trolls. They feel that you need to be 100% not just pro-Apple (technically I'd be pro-Apple as I love Apple - just bought a rMBP 15 :-) ) but must prefer Apple everything over anything else.
There are quite a few level headed posters here but others (won't name names) are very unreasonable.
One thing I hate though is when some random troll (who for some reason just joined and can post without it going to moderation like I have to wait for) makes some completely off the wall comment the entire discussion gets derailed and it sucks because you have to weave through the BS and the retorts to find a meaningful discussion.
Also apparently mentioning you own Apple products is proof that you are an absolutely Samsung shill and that your opinion is immediately invalid...unless your opinion is that Apple is absolutely perfect AND that their competitors are absolute shit in every wave shape or form.
So im a troll because my opinion is different. The first person to replied to me pointed out that it was a editorial, and i said "Sorry for my ignorance"
No its not because because your opinion is different, I have no problem with that, its that almost all of your posts are abrasive and anti apple on a pro apple website. I removed the insulting name from my previous post as that was not right but my opinion still stands that it is a waste of time to post anti apple comments on a pro apple website. I can't speak for you but I would never waste my time doing that to an android website and I would be ridiculed there if I did.
They've just spent how many billions? in buying back their own stock. It did this because that was determined as a better 'investment' than putting the money into other developments, perhaps even outside the computing sphere. This did smack somewhat of a lack of imagination, especially in the light of Google's myriad developments.
It's interesting that Apple hasn't invested in developing market share through lower prices. Financially, they are certainly in a position to do so. When you examine Apple's enormous spend on advertising rather than 'spending' on lower margins, Apple seems to choose the advertising route to maintain the notion of premium product. But when three people are using Facebook on an Android, Windows and iPhone, there is no difference, or at least no significant difference. Yes, I know the build quality, the build quality!
I suppose the Aspirational Buy element for their products has always been a part of 'Apple's DNA'. Who knows whether it will be a sustainable one? It certainly wasn't as Apple approached the precipice in the stumbling faltering days before charismatic Steve Jobs' return.
https://itunes.apple.com/ru/app/hey-fox!/id860506068?mt=8
Everyone should take a look at this article by Andy Hertzfeld from the original Macintosh team:
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Price_Fight.txt
In this article he recounts how Steve Jobs wanted the Mac to be affordable for everyone, and felt betrayed by John Sculley's idea to raise the price significantly. There was even a scene of this in the Jobs movie with Ashton Kutcher.
Back then, Steve had little choice but to go along with the price increase. But when Steve came back to Apple, he had all the power to do what he believed in. Instead of doing something about it, he ended up defending Apple's premium prices, as if he believed in it all along.
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
Good luck to Sculley collecting ¡
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
Your premise assumes that the original Macintosh sold well. It didn't. Jobs was envisioning numbers like he got with the original iMac or possibly even the iPhone. Those were lower priced and designed for and aimed at the masses so they were hits. The original Mac was a great PC that contained many innovations that were copied. But it was never a mass market PC the way that Apple 2 was or iMac. Sculley was a boob.
Cheap is not always cheap though how durable is a note for a price of $700 among other cheap androids, people needs to wake up from being tricked and wasting their money after switching to Mac and iPhones there is no turning back and am waiting for the debut of the iPhone 6, Go Apple
So all the Apple fans who vilify Sculley now owe him a debt of gratitude for having the wisdom and vision to sell Macs with premium pricing. I guess even Steve came around to Sculley's vision, so he also owes Sculley.
Your premise assumes that the original Macintosh sold well. It didn't. Jobs was envisioning numbers like he got with the original iMac or possibly even the iPhone. Those were lower priced and designed for and aimed at the masses so they were hits. The original Mac was a great PC that contained many innovations that were copied. But it was never a mass market PC the way that Apple 2 was or iMac. Sculley was a boob.
I think your comment should have @Haggar. I never said (nor do I believe) Sculley was right. I made a sarcastic remark ( denoted on this board by: ¡ ). Though possibly in poor taste re: Steve Job's passing It was never my intention to acquiesce to Sculley's position.
I think your comment should have @Haggar. I never said (nor do I believe) Sculley was right. I made a sarcastic remark ( denoted on this board by: ¡ ). Though possibly in poor taste re: Steve Job's passing It was never my intention to acquiesce to Sculley's position.
Huh? Look above your response. I don't see you anywhere. I only see me responding to @Haggar.
I'll take a company that is profitable, invests in R&D and understands its customers any day.
No, because they didn’t.
Wikipedia must be lying. I also remember this and the reaction on it very clearly. I must also be lying then.
Rewriting history is attempted many times; the real story is that Apple made a mistake and corrected it before it was a real problem.
Read Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_iPhone#cite_note-sept5iPhonePressRelease-62 ):
Price drop outcry[edit]
On September 5, 2007, the 4GB model was discontinued, and the 8GB model price was cut by a third.[62] Those who had purchased an iPhone in the 14-day period before the September 5, 2007 announcement were eligible for a US $200 "price protection" rebate from Apple or AT&T. However, it was widely reported that some who bought between the June 29, 2007 launch and the August 22, 2007 price protection kick-in date complained that this was a larger-than-normal price drop for such a relatively short period and accused Apple of unfair pricing.[63][64]
In response to customer complaints, on September 6, 2007, Apple CEO Steve Jobs wrote in an open letter to iPhone customers that everyone who purchased an iPhone at the higher price "and who is not receiving a rebate or other consideration", would receive a US$100 credit to be redeemed towards the purchase of any product sold in Apple's retail or online stores.[65]