Who cares? All women are a little gay. Have you ever heard a straight guy say to another straight guy? "I love what you've done with your hair." Chicks say that kind of stuff all day long.
In the past week I've seen two negative Apple Watch stories - one from Fortune and one from design publication Dezeen slagging off the Apple Watch. Both stories quote designers who work for the design firm New Deal Design.....which just happens to have Fitbit as one of its clients. The Fortune article conveniently forgot to mention this fact. I find it a bit curious that the media is pushing Apple Watch FUD and D&G really hard ever since the Fitbit IPO. Nobody had ever heard of Slice Intelligence yet we got a week of Apple Watch is a flop solely based on unproven data and methodology from an analytics for most people have never heard of. If Slice Ingelligence data is so valuable and their methodology so sound why haven't we seen predictive analytics around other products? Why just Apple Watch? Why is the media asking Fitbit designers for their opinions on Apple Watch? Are we supposed to conclude that Apple Watch is a flop because designers of a competing product are slagging it off? Ben Bajarin is working with a group called Wristly that is currently surveying over 1,000 Apple Watch owners. Based on some of his tweets it appears they're getting a lot of good feedback most of it positive with hgh satisfaction rate. Yet I'm not aware of anyone in the media even sniffing around any of this analysis.
Something about all of this stinks to high heavens.
I think the saying - "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" - applies (and add click-bait). Many talk about conspiracies all the time - the media are out to get Apple - Wall Street trashes them for no reason - Samsung is paying everyone off, etc. Conspiracies are very hard to actually pull off, and simpler explanations abound.
Almost all media/blogger sites on the internet are advertising supported, which is driven by page views. The economics aren't favourable here, and declining, so you see the increase in click-bait articles, and decline in quality. Negative news drives more interest than positive. Apple, being the largest publicly traded company, and a dominant brand in the "tech world", is a name to use. Add in the fact that due to Apple having developed a strong fan base over years, there is a corresponding base (in the tech world mostly) of "Apple haters" as a reaction to that (as to why that is, I am not a psychologist). Some sites of course (Gizmodo, etc) will cater to this almost exclusively, as over time their readers come to represent much more of the "Apple hater" clientele. This is basically all you need to understand the increasing stories with a negative spin on Apple.
What people here seem to think of Wall Street is related to the trading price of AAPL. Why it goes down on good news many times, etc. It isn't fully valued (by their opinions), and thus WS is conspiring to keep it down. Starting first - trading is not investing. Many institutional investors have AAPL shares, and clearly want them to do well. They are holding them because it is a good investment. Traders are trying to make infinitesimal amounts on trades, and there is a whole rhythm to the ebb and flow of prices. If you are an investor, you just have to ignore it, or jump in if they push the price down to what you consider a good entry point. There is NO conspiracy. These traders couldn't care less about Apple the company - they just want to make money on the trades/options/etc. While many rail against analysts, you should note that almost all are bullish on Apple.
Apple is the dominant firm now in the small and emerging market of wearable computing. No one knows how large this market will get, but many are placing bets on it, and Apple itself has made a very large bet. It will take years to know if the bet has paid off. Having an Apple Watch, I certainly enjoy it and do believe it will be key part of computing & interaction over the years. That said, I can understand why many don't see the use for it (yet), as many have to see it well established before they believe it.
A big difference between now and the first iPhone is Apple's position. Back then, they were the underdog in the smartphone game. While there were always negative stories, they mostly came from competitors and Apple haters. Now Apple is the king of the hill in consumer tech, and so the reaction is different. Also, in the post-Twitter world of attention, the need for everyone to chime in with their opinion, regardless of timeframe or data, is leading to an increase of said noise.
Imagine if there was a commercial about a man and a women. They send sweet nothings to each other on their watch. Then we see ANOTHER women sending sweet nothings to the SAME guy. And he does the same. The commerical never solidifies what the relationship is between this man and those 2 women. Would that not be a DISTRACTION? Could you not see how leaving the relationship between those 3 people VAGUE remove focus on the product?
The audience can conclude various things:
1. This man is cheating on his wife.
2. This man is a player and has multiple girl friends
3. This man has multiple wives
4. One of the women is the man's sister
Can you not see how leaving things VAGUE leads to all sort of distractions?
Nothing the man did in the example above is illegal or even morally bad. Yet you have to admit more questions then answers pop up in your mind when you see a commercial like that. It is just way to VAGUE.
AGain this is coming from a pure stockholder standpoint. I want Apple to suceed. Apple would be better served if this just made it clear what is going on.
1) You're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.
2) Was there a "love triangle" aspect to the ad?
3) Now you're conflating morality choices that include extramarital affairs and skullduggery with that of something natural.
4) Again, and for the very last time, the focus of the ad inconsequential as to whether the two people are gay or straight, and your insistence on having these people labeled says a lot about you.
You asked a stupid question about "love triangles" and then jump into an even stupider non-sequitur about the existence of "gay animals." Even "I like turtles" would have made more sense.
I'm saying having a love triangle could be natural also
Yes, as in occurring in nature. I suppose through your puerile usage social constructs technically do occur in nature since they do exist, but that's like saying award shows are "natural" because they do exist within our physical world.
So bad. These are really the epitome of schmaltzy. Apple is focusing on people lounging around who could easily pull out their Phone or interact far more comfortably with just about any other device.
They should just focus on people on the go. Using Apple Pay, athletic activity, or a guy on a ladder hammering a nail. Situations where pulling out an iPhone is not the easiest thing to do. These do not give anyone a reason why they should go out and buy the thing.
I have no problem with having gays in commercials. Its just they make it so hard to tell if they actually are or they aren't. Its just confusing. First time I watched it I thought they were gay. Second time I thought they were just close friends. In some cultures straight girls hold hands with other straight girls. Just wish they were more clear about whats going on. If it was about gays then dont make it so hard to tell.
If it's making you question your sexual orientation, then it IS important, and I applaud you for making the effort to try and clarify this in public.
You have our full support, to be sure.
The rest of us see two people travelling, depicting a fictional usage scenario for a lifestyle product.
Wow, what a thread this turned out to be. Because two girls went travelling together? What if they were a boy and a girl who went travelling, Portrayed with juuuust the exact same "vague" relationship? Would anyone care? Probably not. Nobody would probably say "I don't get it, are they heterosexual?". I haven't read all comments here, but are there any girls commenting in this thread? Or are you just embarrassed on our male behalf? Please girls, come save this thread.
Why should it be more important to make this relationship "obvious" than it would be if they were mixed-gender? If you're honest, you know that nobody would give a shit if they were.
This reminds of the years where long-haired men caused confusion, 'cause "you couldn't tell the men from the women anymore".
The world got over it, and yet some people still have issues the world can't solve.
The world will get over you needing to know, and maybe some day, you will, too.
Comments
Says the guy that won't enjoy the commercial unless he knows whether the communication between TWO PEOPLE was about gay stuff or not.
Are they suppose to be gay?
Who cares? All women are a little gay. Have you ever heard a straight guy say to another straight guy? "I love what you've done with your hair." Chicks say that kind of stuff all day long.
In the past week I've seen two negative Apple Watch stories - one from Fortune and one from design publication Dezeen slagging off the Apple Watch. Both stories quote designers who work for the design firm New Deal Design.....which just happens to have Fitbit as one of its clients. The Fortune article conveniently forgot to mention this fact. I find it a bit curious that the media is pushing Apple Watch FUD and D&G really hard ever since the Fitbit IPO. Nobody had ever heard of Slice Intelligence yet we got a week of Apple Watch is a flop solely based on unproven data and methodology from an analytics for most people have never heard of. If Slice Ingelligence data is so valuable and their methodology so sound why haven't we seen predictive analytics around other products? Why just Apple Watch? Why is the media asking Fitbit designers for their opinions on Apple Watch? Are we supposed to conclude that Apple Watch is a flop because designers of a competing product are slagging it off? Ben Bajarin is working with a group called Wristly that is currently surveying over 1,000 Apple Watch owners. Based on some of his tweets it appears they're getting a lot of good feedback most of it positive with hgh satisfaction rate. Yet I'm not aware of anyone in the media even sniffing around any of this analysis.
Something about all of this stinks to high heavens.
I think the saying - "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" - applies (and add click-bait). Many talk about conspiracies all the time - the media are out to get Apple - Wall Street trashes them for no reason - Samsung is paying everyone off, etc. Conspiracies are very hard to actually pull off, and simpler explanations abound.
Almost all media/blogger sites on the internet are advertising supported, which is driven by page views. The economics aren't favourable here, and declining, so you see the increase in click-bait articles, and decline in quality. Negative news drives more interest than positive. Apple, being the largest publicly traded company, and a dominant brand in the "tech world", is a name to use. Add in the fact that due to Apple having developed a strong fan base over years, there is a corresponding base (in the tech world mostly) of "Apple haters" as a reaction to that (as to why that is, I am not a psychologist). Some sites of course (Gizmodo, etc) will cater to this almost exclusively, as over time their readers come to represent much more of the "Apple hater" clientele. This is basically all you need to understand the increasing stories with a negative spin on Apple.
What people here seem to think of Wall Street is related to the trading price of AAPL. Why it goes down on good news many times, etc. It isn't fully valued (by their opinions), and thus WS is conspiring to keep it down. Starting first - trading is not investing. Many institutional investors have AAPL shares, and clearly want them to do well. They are holding them because it is a good investment. Traders are trying to make infinitesimal amounts on trades, and there is a whole rhythm to the ebb and flow of prices. If you are an investor, you just have to ignore it, or jump in if they push the price down to what you consider a good entry point. There is NO conspiracy. These traders couldn't care less about Apple the company - they just want to make money on the trades/options/etc. While many rail against analysts, you should note that almost all are bullish on Apple.
Apple is the dominant firm now in the small and emerging market of wearable computing. No one knows how large this market will get, but many are placing bets on it, and Apple itself has made a very large bet. It will take years to know if the bet has paid off. Having an Apple Watch, I certainly enjoy it and do believe it will be key part of computing & interaction over the years. That said, I can understand why many don't see the use for it (yet), as many have to see it well established before they believe it.
A big difference between now and the first iPhone is Apple's position. Back then, they were the underdog in the smartphone game. While there were always negative stories, they mostly came from competitors and Apple haters. Now Apple is the king of the hill in consumer tech, and so the reaction is different. Also, in the post-Twitter world of attention, the need for everyone to chime in with their opinion, regardless of timeframe or data, is leading to an increase of said noise.
1) You're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.
2) Was there a "love triangle" aspect to the ad?
3) Now you're conflating morality choices that include extramarital affairs and skullduggery with that of something natural.
4) Again, and for the very last time, the focus of the ad inconsequential as to whether the two people are gay or straight, and your insistence on having these people labeled says a lot about you.
What a weird train of thought for that rhetoric.
You asked a stupid question about "love triangles" and then jump into an even stupider non-sequitur about the existence of "gay animals." Even "I like turtles" would have made more sense.
Yes, as in occurring in nature. I suppose through your puerile usage social constructs technically do occur in nature since they do exist, but that's like saying award shows are "natural" because they do exist within our physical world.
As I said, infinite facepalms.
Am I disputing that "a romantic relationship involving three people" has not existing since the beginning of time (i.e.: The Big Bang)? Absolutely.
Times infinity.
No wonder you hate ads. You're too busy deciphering them and miss the entire show you were watching.
Can you imagine having to know the sexual orientation of each actor before figuring out what the ad was about? That would be exhausting.
My mistake. :rolleyes:
They're either all gay, or straight Jews
So bad. These are really the epitome of schmaltzy. Apple is focusing on people lounging around who could easily pull out their Phone or interact far more comfortably with just about any other device.
They should just focus on people on the go. Using Apple Pay, athletic activity, or a guy on a ladder hammering a nail. Situations where pulling out an iPhone is not the easiest thing to do. These do not give anyone a reason why they should go out and buy the thing.
I have no problem with having gays in commercials. Its just they make it so hard to tell if they actually are or they aren't. Its just confusing. First time I watched it I thought they were gay. Second time I thought they were just close friends. In some cultures straight girls hold hands with other straight girls. Just wish they were more clear about whats going on. If it was about gays then dont make it so hard to tell.
If it's making you question your sexual orientation, then it IS important, and I applaud you for making the effort to try and clarify this in public.
You have our full support, to be sure.
The rest of us see two people travelling, depicting a fictional usage scenario for a lifestyle product.
BTW: Don't think the curry in Currywurst has anything to do with indian curry.
It's a sauce which is one off the most disgusting things the german kitchen has ever elaborated.
Oooh. You've never had a really good Currywurst. Much of the stuff you get at tourist traps or Autobahn stops is pretty vile, yep.
But go to Curry Grindel, Edelcurry or Schorsch in Hamburg, and a number of similar places in Berlin, and — wow.
So good.
Nobody would probably say "I don't get it, are they heterosexual?".
I haven't read all comments here, but are there any girls commenting in this thread? Or are you just embarrassed on our male behalf? Please girls, come save this thread.
Why should it be more important to make this relationship "obvious" than it would be if they were mixed-gender? If you're honest, you know that nobody would give a shit if they were.
This reminds of the years where long-haired men caused confusion, 'cause "you couldn't tell the men from the women anymore".
The world got over it, and yet some people still have issues the world can't solve.
The world will get over you needing to know, and maybe some day, you will, too.