1 [ mass noun ] information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view: he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda.
Then feel free to enlighten us and start disputing some facts from the article.
Then don't go to sites that are obviously biased towards one platform other another? Every site that is platform centric is going to have a certain degree of bias towards that platform, it all depends on the source of information and what conclusions they derive, but we have the ability to question it. He does have some data that obtained by reputable sources to lead to his conclusions.
Consider this one man's think piece about the smartphone industry.
On the Homepage the article is labeled as an editorial. The forum version is not so it's forgivable that you might not have recognized the intent of the writer.
Samsung must be "really feeling it" now--time to spend another couple billion dollars on advertising!
Like most people, I don't do video editing, so I can build a linux compute server that's twice as fast for my purposes as the 2013 Mac Pro (and configurable with 4X the memory) for less $$.
Feel free to build some and start selling them to the masses.
On the Homepage the article is labeled as an editorial. The forum version is not so it's forgivable that you might not have recognized the intent of the writer.
It shouldn't be forgivable. Any thread started on AI by a "regular" member should be treated as an editorial until the content of the post proves otherwise. Go to "SamsungInsidersDotCom" and you'll see Samsung editorials in their forums. Go to "PatriotsInsiderDotCom" and you'll find editorials about how great Tom Brady is. That should be expected and it's so surprising when people come here not expecting that.
Feel free to build some and start selling them to the masses.
It shouldn't be forgivable. Any thread started on AI by a "regular" member should be treated as an editorial until the content of the post proves otherwise. Go to "SamsungInsidersDotCom" and you'll see Samsung editorials in their forums. Go to "PatriotsInsiderDotCom" and you'll find editorials about how great Tom Brady is. That should be expected and it's so surprising when people come here not expecting that.
What if there was a site called Objective Insider? Would they have opinion pieces on objectivity?
Apple has dominated the "affordable luxury electronics" market at every turn but I think a wrist-worn device market ads a lot more complexity than Apple has ever seen. I'm certain they are the company that can pull it off but I'm not sure that time is now (even though I hope it is).
We'll see if Apple has really changed as pundits say. If they release something when they should have waited, that would be a bad sign. Not sure the tech is even ready.
We'll see if Apple has really changed as pundits say. If they release something when they should have waited, that would be a bad sign. Not sure the tech is even ready.
The pundits will likely do their usual dance like they've done with the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. They'll claim that Apple isn't moving fast enough and should just release something but no matter how revolutionary the product is they'll say that it's not good enough even as it becomes the de facto standard as the only viable solution moving forward.
1 [ mass noun ] information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view: he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda.
Then feel free to enlighten us and start disputing some facts from the article.
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.
Feel free to build some and start selling them to the masses.
It shouldn't be forgivable. Any thread started on AI by a "regular" member should be treated as an editorial until the content of the post proves otherwise. Go to "SamsungInsidersDotCom" and you'll see Samsung editorials in their forums. Go to "PatriotsInsiderDotCom" and you'll find editorials about how great Tom Brady is. That should be expected and it's so surprising when people come here not expecting that.
Well, to be fair, Tom Brady does rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
The pundits will likely do their usual dance like they've done with the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. They'll claim that Apple isn't moving fast enough and should just release something but no matter how revolutionary the product is they'll say that it's not good enough even as it becomes the de facto standard as the only viable solution moving forward.
Yeah, and it will be many of the same people who were talking about how the iPhone (and later the iPad) would be total failures/spell Apple's doom/etc.
Every article the DED does stinks of propaganda, editorial or not. It's well-constructed and all but it's the sort of thing that really gives Apple fans and websites like this one a bad name.
Side note, has Mr Dilger ever considered joining an election campaign?
The question shouldn't be whether the author has a goal of propagandizing. The question should be, is the information basically correct? Having said that, I'm sure I've just opened the door to those who will dig through every article written by DED and pull out tiny bits they feel aren't 100% accurate. But that's not the point either. Is this basically an accurate portrayal of the last 40 years of Apple versus its competition? Seems to me it is, given what I have seen myself and given the facts of how business has gone for those in the markets in which Apple participates. Maybe there's another theory of why Apple's competition has so often bitten the dust, one that has nothing at all to do with Apple. But that's not even the point. Apple is still standing and showing good health in each of these markets; PCs, music sales and players, smartphones, tablets. The record stands by itself.
Excellent article! The Analysts show so little understanding of the "luxury brand" concept. When Apple introduced the 5C and it sold way less than the premium 5S, that said so much about Apple's strong premium/luxury brand.
And yet we'll still have all the Analysts comparing Apples to oranges, by holding up Apple's marketshare against every single entry level Android phone in inventory on the planet.
The proof of this article's wisdom, is the fact that Apple's competitors are visibly eager to copy Apple's formula of minting money, by creating their own copies of Apple's system.
Propaganda is what Samsung engages in, like paying celebrities to tweet about Samsung from their iPhones and creating fake astroturf campaigns. It's all a lie, and some dumb people actually fall for it.
Everybody else has been engaged in a race to the bottom for a long time now. That's no business to be proud of. Selling crap for cheap is a sign of desperation, it's hardly innovative.
Anybody who thinks that Apple should follow in that path is clueless about Apple, because that's simply not what Apple is or what Apple does.
I don't see Apple as a luxury brand. More expensive (upfront) than some competition, but not luxury.
Even then, the cost Apple charges at least for the iPhone is only a part of the cost of using the device. The iPhone cost needs to be compared to the expense of monthly phone charges.
In the past, there have been several comparisons between the upfront cost of out-of-the-box Apple products, with few configuration choices, versus the cost of competitor devices with many choices and tradeoffs. Most comparisons show that the "premium" for an Apple machine vs a comparable competitor machine is not that different -- perhaps $150.
With Apple, it is easy to make a choice among the offerings: one need use only a few criteria for determining functionality, then take into account the cost (not negotiable), and you have made your choice (really, Apple has made that choice for you).
With competitors, you have significant variability of brand name, substantial mix of components, stores, store support, current sales, bundled software. Unless one were quite knowledgeable about what you needed, it is not an easy task to decide what device/bundle to choose, and from whom. And, of course, the salespersons will have many opinions on which of the myriad of choices would fit your needs, much of which might be driven by store policy to push one device or another, and salesperson commission. Determining the functionality/price balance is none too simple.
There is probably little possibility of making a decision you will regret, after already chosen to buy an Apple product. With a competitor, "did I buy the right configuration?, could I have done better?" will often be a nagging concern.
Every article the DED does stinks of propaganda, editorial or not. It's well-constructed and all but it's the sort of thing that really gives Apple fans and websites like this one a bad name.
Side note, has Mr Dilger ever considered joining an election campaign?
Side note, have you ever considered a home away from under a bridge?
Curious how someone who just joined knows so much about DED and his article history. I wonder, what was your previous troll account username?
Comments
this screams propaganda
propaganda |pr?p??gand?| noun
1 [ mass noun ] information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view: he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda.
Then feel free to enlighten us and start disputing some facts from the article.
this screams propaganda
Then don't go to sites that are obviously biased towards one platform other another? Every site that is platform centric is going to have a certain degree of bias towards that platform, it all depends on the source of information and what conclusions they derive, but we have the ability to question it. He does have some data that obtained by reputable sources to lead to his conclusions.
Consider this one man's think piece about the smartphone industry.
On the Homepage the article is labeled as an editorial. The forum version is not so it's forgivable that you might not have recognized the intent of the writer.
It shouldn't be forgivable. Any thread started on AI by a "regular" member should be treated as an editorial until the content of the post proves otherwise. Go to "SamsungInsidersDotCom" and you'll see Samsung editorials in their forums. Go to "PatriotsInsiderDotCom" and you'll find editorials about how great Tom Brady is. That should be expected and it's so surprising when people come here not expecting that.
What if there was a site called Objective Insider? Would they have opinion pieces on objectivity?
...using Vanilla as the forum software of course.
It did not take long for the trolls to lite.
To paraphrase Mr. Twain
"I would rather have DED's editorial,
than another man's kiss the Bible."
So keep waving that editorial smoke screen,
you can lead a man to truth,
but you can't make him believe
especially if he has his blinder$ on.
What if there was a site called Objective Insider? Would they have opinion pieces on objectivity?
Who knows?
For sure, they would post whatever generates page views.
Welcome to the Internet.
We'll see if Apple has really changed as pundits say. If they release something when they should have waited, that would be a bad sign. Not sure the tech is even ready.
The pundits will likely do their usual dance like they've done with the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. They'll claim that Apple isn't moving fast enough and should just release something but no matter how revolutionary the product is they'll say that it's not good enough even as it becomes the de facto standard as the only viable solution moving forward.
propaganda |pr?p??gand?| noun
1 [ mass noun ] information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view: he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda.
Then feel free to enlighten us and start disputing some facts from the article.
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.
Feel free to build some and start selling them to the masses.
It shouldn't be forgivable. Any thread started on AI by a "regular" member should be treated as an editorial until the content of the post proves otherwise. Go to "SamsungInsidersDotCom" and you'll see Samsung editorials in their forums. Go to "PatriotsInsiderDotCom" and you'll find editorials about how great Tom Brady is. That should be expected and it's so surprising when people come here not expecting that.
Well, to be fair, Tom Brady does rule.
The pundits will likely do their usual dance like they've done with the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. They'll claim that Apple isn't moving fast enough and should just release something but no matter how revolutionary the product is they'll say that it's not good enough even as it becomes the de facto standard as the only viable solution moving forward.
Yeah, and it will be many of the same people who were talking about how the iPhone (and later the iPad) would be total failures/spell Apple's doom/etc.
Excelent article DED! as always
The question shouldn't be whether the author has a goal of propagandizing. The question should be, is the information basically correct? Having said that, I'm sure I've just opened the door to those who will dig through every article written by DED and pull out tiny bits they feel aren't 100% accurate. But that's not the point either. Is this basically an accurate portrayal of the last 40 years of Apple versus its competition? Seems to me it is, given what I have seen myself and given the facts of how business has gone for those in the markets in which Apple participates. Maybe there's another theory of why Apple's competition has so often bitten the dust, one that has nothing at all to do with Apple. But that's not even the point. Apple is still standing and showing good health in each of these markets; PCs, music sales and players, smartphones, tablets. The record stands by itself.
Excellent article! The Analysts show so little understanding of the "luxury brand" concept. When Apple introduced the 5C and it sold way less than the premium 5S, that said so much about Apple's strong premium/luxury brand.
And yet we'll still have all the Analysts comparing Apples to oranges, by holding up Apple's marketshare against every single entry level Android phone in inventory on the planet.
The proof of this article's wisdom, is the fact that Apple's competitors are visibly eager to copy Apple's formula of minting money, by creating their own copies of Apple's system.
this screams propaganda
No genius.
Propaganda is what Samsung engages in, like paying celebrities to tweet about Samsung from their iPhones and creating fake astroturf campaigns. It's all a lie, and some dumb people actually fall for it.
As for the article, good article!
Everybody else has been engaged in a race to the bottom for a long time now. That's no business to be proud of. Selling crap for cheap is a sign of desperation, it's hardly innovative.
Anybody who thinks that Apple should follow in that path is clueless about Apple, because that's simply not what Apple is or what Apple does.
I don't see Apple as a luxury brand. More expensive (upfront) than some competition, but not luxury.
Even then, the cost Apple charges at least for the iPhone is only a part of the cost of using the device. The iPhone cost needs to be compared to the expense of monthly phone charges.
In the past, there have been several comparisons between the upfront cost of out-of-the-box Apple products, with few configuration choices, versus the cost of competitor devices with many choices and tradeoffs. Most comparisons show that the "premium" for an Apple machine vs a comparable competitor machine is not that different -- perhaps $150.
With Apple, it is easy to make a choice among the offerings: one need use only a few criteria for determining functionality, then take into account the cost (not negotiable), and you have made your choice (really, Apple has made that choice for you).
With competitors, you have significant variability of brand name, substantial mix of components, stores, store support, current sales, bundled software. Unless one were quite knowledgeable about what you needed, it is not an easy task to decide what device/bundle to choose, and from whom. And, of course, the salespersons will have many opinions on which of the myriad of choices would fit your needs, much of which might be driven by store policy to push one device or another, and salesperson commission. Determining the functionality/price balance is none too simple.
There is probably little possibility of making a decision you will regret, after already chosen to buy an Apple product. With a competitor, "did I buy the right configuration?, could I have done better?" will often be a nagging concern.
Curious how someone who just joined knows so much about DED and his article history. I wonder, what was your previous troll account username?