Good writing, but what I'm missing is a summary of why we here the "pundits" praise Microsoft, Samsung, Google etc, while the mainstream media can't wait to publish the next anti-Apple headline? Do those companies pay more than Apple does, or are *we* biased in our perception?
It is because everyone's interested in anything Apple while they don't care one bit about anything from other company. They use Apple in the title as clickbait even if the article barely is related to Apple.
It is because everyone's interested in anything Apple while they don't care one bit about anything from other company. They use Apple in the title as clickbait even if the article barely is related to Apple.
Could be, but then why are headlines about Apple better clickbait than those about Samsung or Microsoft?
Used Apple Pay all the time and just love it. Feel much safe as well in knowing that I could ignore news headline "major security breach at xxxx retailer" as long as that said retailer support Apple Pay. Sigh. Looking forward the day an iPhone is all I need to get around.
When I first saw the Apple Pay story on TheGuardian website it was immediately obvious that it was a bank problem, similar to how banks give out loans to people who can't pay it back, without checking, with only the $$$'s signs for guidance.
However, on your final point.. "I can't wait to see what they write about Apple Watch tomorrow."
Here's the thing about the Apple Watch. It's got some pretty serious shortcomings, much like the original iPad did. The iPad v1 was pretty thick and heavy, not to mention the lack of a camera for facetime/skype/other video conferencing tools. The iPad 2 remediated all of those, and sold WAY more than the iPad v1. Heck, 1 quarter of iPad 2 was almost as much as all of iPad v1 sales.
Similarly, while yes, the Apple Watch has some pretty great stuff under the hood, it's got major disadvantages. The chief among these is battery life. My wife was dying to get an Apple Watch when the rumors first started flying around before the previous event. Then the event happened, and to her, the device became only half as useful as it once was. What's missing? Well, she uses her fitbit as a silent alarm to wake up in the morning, for which I'm grateful on those rare days when I get to sleep in later than 6. In order to have an effective silent alarm, the battery life of the device must be greater than 1 day. Apple Watch, by their own admission, has a useful life of 1 day, and we're supposed to charge it at night.
So much like the iPad and iPhone before it, the initial version will only be half or so of what we really want. And so, we won't buy it. Many will, but we will not, as there's not much point in throwing away money on a device that doesn't do the core things we're looking for.
Will it get better? Almost certainly. Will we end up with an Apple Watch? Some day, probably the 3rd or 4th version.
Good writing, but what I'm missing is a summary of why we here the "pundits" praise Microsoft, Samsung, Google etc, while the mainstream media can't wait to publish the next anti-Apple headline? Do those companies pay more than Apple does, or are *we* biased in our perception?
You really need it explained to you? It should be obvious that these vested interests feel profoundly threatened by Apple's success. So they try to bring it down to their level. Instead of taking Apple's example of creativity and productivity and apply it to their own activities, they laggardly try to stop it. This is sheer criminality, as criminals won't and/or can't work.
However, on your final point.. "I can't wait to see what they write about Apple Watch tomorrow."
Here's the thing about the Apple Watch. It's got some pretty serious shortcomings, much like the original iPad did. The iPad v1 was pretty thick and heavy, not to mention the lack of a camera for facetime/skype/other video conferencing tools. The iPad 2 remediated all of those, and sold WAY more than the iPad v1. Heck, 1 quarter of iPad 2 was almost as much as all of iPad v1 sales.
Similarly, while yes, the Apple Watch has some pretty great stuff under the hood, it's got major disadvantages. The chief among these is battery life. My wife was dying to get an Apple Watch when the rumors first started flying around before the previous event. Then the event happened, and to her, the device became only half as useful as it once was. What's missing? Well, she uses her fitbit as a silent alarm to wake up in the morning, for which I'm grateful on those rare days when I get to sleep in later than 6. In order to have an effective silent alarm, the battery life of the device must be greater than 1 day. Apple Watch, by their own admission, has a useful life of 1 day, and we're supposed to charge it at night.
So much like the iPad and iPhone before it, the initial version will only be half or so of what we really want. And so, we won't buy it. Many will, but we will not, as there's not much point in throwing away money on a device that doesn't do the core things we're looking for.
Will it get better? Almost certainly. Will we end up with an Apple Watch? Some day, probably the 3rd or 4th version.
Go ahead, "think" yourself out of a great new product. I want to see and touch and try one in person. That's a far better way to evaluate a product. All you thinkers who think your way out of buying an ?Watch won't be missed.
Wow, fucking sublime write up. Absolutely devastating takedown of these charlatans and "stories" that are little more than regurgitated diarrhea. It's incredible what publications can get with publishing these days, and how little facts they actually need to contain by agenda ridden clowns. Even sadder is that they have an army that will parrot whatever lies are said, even on forums like these, and at the same time claim to be "Apple fans" that are somehow holding the company accountable. Hilariously pathetic.
Used Apple Pay all the time and just love it. Feel much safe as well in knowing that I could ignore news headline "major security breach at xxxx retailer" as long as that said retailer support Apple Pay. Sigh. Looking forward the day an iPhone is all I need to get around.
Totally agree. Drivers licenses should be included, too.
Go ahead, "think" yourself out of a great new product. I want to see and touch and try one in person. That's a far better way to evaluate a product. All you thinkers who think your way out of buying an ?Watch won't be missed.
I don't need to try one - the manufacturer pointed out the key deficiency. If the watch is only good for 1 day before needing a recharge, as was stated during the announcement event, it's a dead fish, for us. Since they came right out and said it's good for 1 day, there wasn't any need to overthink/over-analyze.
"Oops, can't use my watch today, I forgot to charge it last night. Again."
If it was a 3-day, 5-day or 1-week lifespan on the battery, it would be perfectly usable, and a great product. A watch that's dead after 1 day isn't a great product. It's a so-so overall product with some really great tech inside.
It's the same mantra as previous products. I didn't buy an iPad v1 because it was bulky and lacked the key feature I'd be interested in for a tablet (front facing camera). I didn't buy an iPhone v1 because it had slow wireless data, no app ecosystem, and very little third-party integration. Today, there's an iPhone 6 in my pocket and an iPad Air in my bag. When they refine a product and really get it right (which takes 1-3 revisions), it's beyond compare. In a space where there's no driving need to replace an existing device, like the smart watch space, it's a non-starter, for me at least.
I think the clickbait issue plays a big part in why "news" outlets publish false and misleading stories about Apple, but more so I think it's the fact that Apple has always been a company with lots of people who quite literally HATE them and they're simply using that polarization to their benefit - as that hatred is what gets people to click on the "news" to further support their point of view that Apple is potentially worse than even the government.
There is just something about Apple, going way back to their beginnings, that makes a lot of people angry - maybe it's the creative vs non-creative model they promoted in the beginning?
I've never understood it and have been on both sides of the personal computer fence since the advent of the PC. In the past it was all Microsoft vs Apple, which is where things stood until Apple changed the conversation by introducing the iPhone. It's strange how I see MS in a different light now, especially as they move to change from a PC vs Apple model to one that sees Apple customers as customers they should simply be trying to embrace for their own benefit.
Android fans also took umbrage at the attention Apple Pay was getting, considering that Google Wallet had blown out an NFC mobile payment scheme years ago in 2011, and Motorola had introduced a phone with a fingerprint scanner earlier that same year--four years before iPhone 6.
One problem was that nobody in Android land had put those two things together, nor had enough work gone into either project to make either one of them really usable or even reasonably functional.
This section for me is the most important. The spec and feature trolls roll out this argument every time Apple releases a new product. But as DED points out what good are specs and features if they don’t deliver a pleasant experience. Every time I use Apple Pay people ask me about it. They’ve never seen something like it. What does this say about Android having this “feature” for four years before iOS? Really, what does it imply?
Comments
Good writing, but what I'm missing is a summary of why we here the "pundits" praise Microsoft, Samsung, Google etc, while the mainstream media can't wait to publish the next anti-Apple headline? Do those companies pay more than Apple does, or are *we* biased in our perception?
It is because everyone's interested in anything Apple while they don't care one bit about anything from other company. They use Apple in the title as clickbait even if the article barely is related to Apple.
That fraud thing thankfully died down
It is because everyone's interested in anything Apple while they don't care one bit about anything from other company. They use Apple in the title as clickbait even if the article barely is related to Apple.
Could be, but then why are headlines about Apple better clickbait than those about Samsung or Microsoft?
Foggy said it best... readers are interested in Apple. They are more likely to read an article about Apple than any other company.
There could be an article about Samsung killing kittens... or Microsoft curing cancer.
But a tiny article about Apple (or one that barely talks about Apple) will get more clicks.
However, on your final point.. "I can't wait to see what they write about Apple Watch tomorrow."
Here's the thing about the Apple Watch. It's got some pretty serious shortcomings, much like the original iPad did. The iPad v1 was pretty thick and heavy, not to mention the lack of a camera for facetime/skype/other video conferencing tools. The iPad 2 remediated all of those, and sold WAY more than the iPad v1. Heck, 1 quarter of iPad 2 was almost as much as all of iPad v1 sales.
Similarly, while yes, the Apple Watch has some pretty great stuff under the hood, it's got major disadvantages. The chief among these is battery life. My wife was dying to get an Apple Watch when the rumors first started flying around before the previous event. Then the event happened, and to her, the device became only half as useful as it once was. What's missing? Well, she uses her fitbit as a silent alarm to wake up in the morning, for which I'm grateful on those rare days when I get to sleep in later than 6. In order to have an effective silent alarm, the battery life of the device must be greater than 1 day. Apple Watch, by their own admission, has a useful life of 1 day, and we're supposed to charge it at night.
So much like the iPad and iPhone before it, the initial version will only be half or so of what we really want. And so, we won't buy it. Many will, but we will not, as there's not much point in throwing away money on a device that doesn't do the core things we're looking for.
Will it get better? Almost certainly. Will we end up with an Apple Watch? Some day, probably the 3rd or 4th version.
I'm sorry, Daniel, but a regular thumbs up to your article is not just gonna cut it this time:
Good writing, but what I'm missing is a summary of why we here the "pundits" praise Microsoft, Samsung, Google etc, while the mainstream media can't wait to publish the next anti-Apple headline? Do those companies pay more than Apple does, or are *we* biased in our perception?
You really need it explained to you? It should be obvious that these vested interests feel profoundly threatened by Apple's success. So they try to bring it down to their level. Instead of taking Apple's example of creativity and productivity and apply it to their own activities, they laggardly try to stop it. This is sheer criminality, as criminals won't and/or can't work.
Could be, but then why are headlines about Apple better clickbait than those about Samsung or Microsoft?
Nobody cares about losers.
Nice piece there DED.
However, on your final point.. "I can't wait to see what they write about Apple Watch tomorrow."
Here's the thing about the Apple Watch. It's got some pretty serious shortcomings, much like the original iPad did. The iPad v1 was pretty thick and heavy, not to mention the lack of a camera for facetime/skype/other video conferencing tools. The iPad 2 remediated all of those, and sold WAY more than the iPad v1. Heck, 1 quarter of iPad 2 was almost as much as all of iPad v1 sales.
Similarly, while yes, the Apple Watch has some pretty great stuff under the hood, it's got major disadvantages. The chief among these is battery life. My wife was dying to get an Apple Watch when the rumors first started flying around before the previous event. Then the event happened, and to her, the device became only half as useful as it once was. What's missing? Well, she uses her fitbit as a silent alarm to wake up in the morning, for which I'm grateful on those rare days when I get to sleep in later than 6. In order to have an effective silent alarm, the battery life of the device must be greater than 1 day. Apple Watch, by their own admission, has a useful life of 1 day, and we're supposed to charge it at night.
So much like the iPad and iPhone before it, the initial version will only be half or so of what we really want. And so, we won't buy it. Many will, but we will not, as there's not much point in throwing away money on a device that doesn't do the core things we're looking for.
Will it get better? Almost certainly. Will we end up with an Apple Watch? Some day, probably the 3rd or 4th version.
Go ahead, "think" yourself out of a great new product. I want to see and touch and try one in person. That's a far better way to evaluate a product. All you thinkers who think your way out of buying an ?Watch won't be missed.
Used Apple Pay all the time and just love it. Feel much safe as well in knowing that I could ignore news headline "major security breach at xxxx retailer" as long as that said retailer support Apple Pay. Sigh. Looking forward the day an iPhone is all I need to get around.
Totally agree. Drivers licenses should be included, too.
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/about16_rules.html
Go ahead, "think" yourself out of a great new product. I want to see and touch and try one in person. That's a far better way to evaluate a product. All you thinkers who think your way out of buying an ?Watch won't be missed.
I don't need to try one - the manufacturer pointed out the key deficiency. If the watch is only good for 1 day before needing a recharge, as was stated during the announcement event, it's a dead fish, for us. Since they came right out and said it's good for 1 day, there wasn't any need to overthink/over-analyze.
"Oops, can't use my watch today, I forgot to charge it last night. Again."
If it was a 3-day, 5-day or 1-week lifespan on the battery, it would be perfectly usable, and a great product. A watch that's dead after 1 day isn't a great product. It's a so-so overall product with some really great tech inside.
It's the same mantra as previous products. I didn't buy an iPad v1 because it was bulky and lacked the key feature I'd be interested in for a tablet (front facing camera). I didn't buy an iPhone v1 because it had slow wireless data, no app ecosystem, and very little third-party integration. Today, there's an iPhone 6 in my pocket and an iPad Air in my bag. When they refine a product and really get it right (which takes 1-3 revisions), it's beyond compare. In a space where there's no driving need to replace an existing device, like the smart watch space, it's a non-starter, for me at least.
I think the clickbait issue plays a big part in why "news" outlets publish false and misleading stories about Apple, but more so I think it's the fact that Apple has always been a company with lots of people who quite literally HATE them and they're simply using that polarization to their benefit - as that hatred is what gets people to click on the "news" to further support their point of view that Apple is potentially worse than even the government.
There is just something about Apple, going way back to their beginnings, that makes a lot of people angry - maybe it's the creative vs non-creative model they promoted in the beginning?
I've never understood it and have been on both sides of the personal computer fence since the advent of the PC. In the past it was all Microsoft vs Apple, which is where things stood until Apple changed the conversation by introducing the iPhone. It's strange how I see MS in a different light now, especially as they move to change from a PC vs Apple model to one that sees Apple customers as customers they should simply be trying to embrace for their own benefit.
DED: you are the Macalope and I claim my $5
You know, now that you bring this up...
Android fans also took umbrage at the attention Apple Pay was getting, considering that Google Wallet had blown out an NFC mobile payment scheme years ago in 2011, and Motorola had introduced a phone with a fingerprint scanner earlier that same year--four years before iPhone 6.
One problem was that nobody in Android land had put those two things together, nor had enough work gone into either project to make either one of them really usable or even reasonably functional.
This section for me is the most important. The spec and feature trolls roll out this argument every time Apple releases a new product. But as DED points out what good are specs and features if they don’t deliver a pleasant experience. Every time I use Apple Pay people ask me about it. They’ve never seen something like it. What does this say about Android having this “feature” for four years before iOS? Really, what does it imply?