The iPhone released in Europe was the original model, still running a 1.x OS, the same as the US, it didn't take off in Europe until the 3G model came out
It was, and it came out well after it came out here in the US. It also didn't come out in all Eu countries at once, or on all carriers. Once it did, sale s rose a good deal.
Who said anything about Nokia? I was talking about perception of prices from a consumer viewpoint, apart from Apple, I didn't mention a brand. You were the one that just came in with a predetermined agenda.
Oh please. I've been reading your posts, and those of others. Don't try to pretend that we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I really have to quote lines from almost every post from and to you? Should I count all the times the name Nokia has come up in a post with you?
EDIT: Well, apart from the title of the thread that is, that'll learn me to post a thread again after a couple of days
Exactly! This is a thread about Nokia to a large part, and you are responding to posts about Nokia. So you are taking part in a discussion that compares Nokia, at least in your posts, to Apple. Therefor, my comments are perfectly proper.
This thread is about the smartphone business not about consumer perceptions.
"Apple crossed another major milestone in its second quarter of fiscal 2011, surpassing Nokia for the first time ever to become the world's largest phone vendor in terms of revenue."
That might have been the title, but someone else changed the topic pretty fast
You're discussing Nokia in this entire thread, and defending them, as usual.
Nokia is shrinking quickly, it's beginning to shrink even more quickly now.
There are import duties that countries charge. That's not Apple's fault. Higher taxes makes a difference as well, especially since much of it is hidden in many countries.
No, you are very much mistaken, the only brand I mentioned initially was Apple, and the only time I mentioned Nokia was to reply to one of your late postings.
And now why are going on about taxes for? Does Apple have to pay a different sales tax to another manufacturer?
It was, and it came out well after it came out here in the US. It also didn't come out in all Eu countries at once, or on all carriers. Once it did, sale s rose a good deal.
But it wasn't the original iPhone that was released in Europe that was the big seller, it was later models.
Also, it was release in Germany, France and the UK first in Europe, that is a population of 200 million people.
Which goes back to prove the original statement, the original iPhone wouldn't take off in Europe.
Oh please. I've been reading your posts, and those of others. Don't try to pretend that we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I really have to quote lines from almost every post from and to you? Should I count all the times the name Nokia has come up in a post with you?
Go back through this thread, up until your post, count how many times I wrote Nokia.
Exactly! This is a thread about Nokia to a large part, and you are responding to posts about Nokia. So you are taking part in a discussion that compares Nokia, at least in your posts, to Apple. Therefor, my comments are perfectly proper.
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
No, you are very much mistaken, the only brand I mentioned initially was Apple, and the only time I mentioned Nokia was to reply to one of your late postings.
And now why are going on about taxes for? Does Apple have to pay a different sales tax to another manufacturer?
Excuse me, but that incorrect. You've been responding to posts about Nokia from a number of people here. It's public record. Go back and look at all of those posts. I don't have to make anything up, it all here in print.
Go back through this thread, up until your post, count how many times I wrote Nokia.
How about I save you some time, it was zero,.
You didn't have to use the name when responding to posts made to you that was about them. You say that I'm the only one posting to you about them, but that's obviously wrong.
You've responded to posts from the thenewperson and Piot who discussed Nokia in their posts. I'd have to look back to see if there were any others, but you could have done that yourself before denying it. Then, other posts from other people were expanding on the arguments you gave to those two, which, again, were referring to the points made about Nokia, though not by name at that point. So yes, you're talking about Nokia in this discussion without needing to use their name. Get real!
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
The point of the article, along with its name, is that Apple passed Nokia. You can't pretend that Nokia isn't a relevant part of the topic. If it was about Apple passing Samsung in this metric (which it did ages ago), then Samsung would have been an appropriate company to be comparing them to, and why.
But people, for the most part here, are talking about Apple's successes compared to other companies, and the company on their mind, whether or not they've all used the name in their posts, is the one Apple is being compared to, which again, is Nokia.
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
The point of the article, along with its name, is that Apple passed Nokia. You can't pretend that Nokia isn't a relevant part of the topic. If it was about Apple passing Samsung in this metric (which it did ages ago), then Samsung would have been an appropriate company to be comparing them to, and why.
But people, for the most part here, are talking about Apple's successes compared to other companies, and the company on their mind, whether or not they've all used the name in their posts, is the one Apple is being compared to, which again, is Nokia.
Excuse me, but that incorrect. You've been responding to posts about Nokia from a number of people here. It's public record. Go back and look at all of those posts. I don't have to make anything up, it all here in print.
Excuse me, but that is incorrect. I might have responded to someone, but I didn't mention Nokia. That is on public record, go back and look at the posts, I didn't mention them. I don't have to make anything up, it is all here is print.
You didn't have to use the name when responding to posts made to you that was about them. You say that I'm the only one posting to you about them, but that's obviously wrong.
Excuse me? The very reason I didn't mention them is because I wasn't talking about them. What is so hard to understand about this. Get over your attitude, you are meant to be a moderator, you are showing a high bias in this discussion which you don't seem to want to get over.
Excuse me, but that is incorrect. I might have responded to someone, but I didn't mention Nokia. That is on public record, go back and look at the posts, I didn't mention them. I don't have to make anything up, it is all here is print.
Please don't be disingenuous. I read all of the posts, as you obviously haven't. That's easily seen by you saying "I might have". In other words, you either don't know, don't remember, or want to pretend you don't.
I really don't see what the big deal is here with you. Almost all of you posting over the years has to do with defending Nokia, or putting Apple's successes down. Nothings changed.
Excuse me? The very reason I didn't mention them is because I wasn't talking about them. What is so hard to understand about this. Get over your attitude, you are meant to be a moderator, you are showing a high bias in this discussion which you don't seem to want to get over.
You're the one who started this silliness. I'm just responding to it. Though, it's a good point. I really shouldn't respond to your silliness.
Please don't be disingenuous. I read all of the posts, as you obviously haven't. That's easily seen by you saying "I might have". In other words, you either don't know, don't remember, or want to pretend you don't.
Yes I have, and I know what I have written, I can go back and read it again, I wrote what I wrote, not what you are trying to make out I wrote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I really don't see what the big deal is here with you. Almost all of you posting over the years has to do with defending Nokia, or putting Apple's successes down. Nothings changed.
That's rubbish and you know it is. I have questioned anyone making an incorrect claim, is that my fault that a lot of people tend to do that on Appleinsider? This site has really gone downhill over the last couple of years, it used to be a good place to come to get information, now it is just full of the "Apple can do no wrong" clan, and those who moderate against anything that goes against that statement.
Excuse me? I thought you claimed you read all the posts? If you had you would know that I didn't start anything.
Yes, you did. You started this silly denial business instead of just responding to the facts. I suppose you don't have anything you can use for that, so you deny arguing it at all.
Comments
The iPhone released in Europe was the original model, still running a 1.x OS, the same as the US, it didn't take off in Europe until the 3G model came out
It was, and it came out well after it came out here in the US. It also didn't come out in all Eu countries at once, or on all carriers. Once it did, sale s rose a good deal.
Who said anything about Nokia? I was talking about perception of prices from a consumer viewpoint, apart from Apple, I didn't mention a brand. You were the one that just came in with a predetermined agenda.
Oh please. I've been reading your posts, and those of others. Don't try to pretend that we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I really have to quote lines from almost every post from and to you? Should I count all the times the name Nokia has come up in a post with you?
Again, who mentioned Nokia? Wasn't me.
EDIT: Well, apart from the title of the thread that is, that'll learn me to post a thread again after a couple of days
Exactly! This is a thread about Nokia to a large part, and you are responding to posts about Nokia. So you are taking part in a discussion that compares Nokia, at least in your posts, to Apple. Therefor, my comments are perfectly proper.
This thread is about the smartphone business not about consumer perceptions.
"Apple crossed another major milestone in its second quarter of fiscal 2011, surpassing Nokia for the first time ever to become the world's largest phone vendor in terms of revenue."
That might have been the title, but someone else changed the topic pretty fast
You're discussing Nokia in this entire thread, and defending them, as usual.
Nokia is shrinking quickly, it's beginning to shrink even more quickly now.
There are import duties that countries charge. That's not Apple's fault. Higher taxes makes a difference as well, especially since much of it is hidden in many countries.
No, you are very much mistaken, the only brand I mentioned initially was Apple, and the only time I mentioned Nokia was to reply to one of your late postings.
And now why are going on about taxes for? Does Apple have to pay a different sales tax to another manufacturer?
It was, and it came out well after it came out here in the US. It also didn't come out in all Eu countries at once, or on all carriers. Once it did, sale s rose a good deal.
But it wasn't the original iPhone that was released in Europe that was the big seller, it was later models.
Also, it was release in Germany, France and the UK first in Europe, that is a population of 200 million people.
Which goes back to prove the original statement, the original iPhone wouldn't take off in Europe.
Oh please. I've been reading your posts, and those of others. Don't try to pretend that we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I really have to quote lines from almost every post from and to you? Should I count all the times the name Nokia has come up in a post with you?
Go back through this thread, up until your post, count how many times I wrote Nokia.
How about I save you some time, it was zero,.
Exactly! This is a thread about Nokia to a large part, and you are responding to posts about Nokia. So you are taking part in a discussion that compares Nokia, at least in your posts, to Apple. Therefor, my comments are perfectly proper.
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
No, you are very much mistaken, the only brand I mentioned initially was Apple, and the only time I mentioned Nokia was to reply to one of your late postings.
And now why are going on about taxes for? Does Apple have to pay a different sales tax to another manufacturer?
Excuse me, but that incorrect. You've been responding to posts about Nokia from a number of people here. It's public record. Go back and look at all of those posts. I don't have to make anything up, it all here in print.
Go back through this thread, up until your post, count how many times I wrote Nokia.
How about I save you some time, it was zero,.
You didn't have to use the name when responding to posts made to you that was about them. You say that I'm the only one posting to you about them, but that's obviously wrong.
You've responded to posts from the thenewperson and Piot who discussed Nokia in their posts. I'd have to look back to see if there were any others, but you could have done that yourself before denying it. Then, other posts from other people were expanding on the arguments you gave to those two, which, again, were referring to the points made about Nokia, though not by name at that point. So yes, you're talking about Nokia in this discussion without needing to use their name. Get real!
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
The point of the article, along with its name, is that Apple passed Nokia. You can't pretend that Nokia isn't a relevant part of the topic. If it was about Apple passing Samsung in this metric (which it did ages ago), then Samsung would have been an appropriate company to be comparing them to, and why.
But people, for the most part here, are talking about Apple's successes compared to other companies, and the company on their mind, whether or not they've all used the name in their posts, is the one Apple is being compared to, which again, is Nokia.
No, this is a thread about Apple reaching a milestone.
I didn't mention Nokia as I wasn't talking about them, you were (and incorrectly assuming I was.
The point of the article, along with its name, is that Apple passed Nokia. You can't pretend that Nokia isn't a relevant part of the topic. If it was about Apple passing Samsung in this metric (which it did ages ago), then Samsung would have been an appropriate company to be comparing them to, and why.
But people, for the most part here, are talking about Apple's successes compared to other companies, and the company on their mind, whether or not they've all used the name in their posts, is the one Apple is being compared to, which again, is Nokia.
Excuse me, but that incorrect. You've been responding to posts about Nokia from a number of people here. It's public record. Go back and look at all of those posts. I don't have to make anything up, it all here in print.
Excuse me, but that is incorrect. I might have responded to someone, but I didn't mention Nokia. That is on public record, go back and look at the posts, I didn't mention them. I don't have to make anything up, it is all here is print.
You didn't have to use the name when responding to posts made to you that was about them. You say that I'm the only one posting to you about them, but that's obviously wrong.
Excuse me? The very reason I didn't mention them is because I wasn't talking about them. What is so hard to understand about this. Get over your attitude, you are meant to be a moderator, you are showing a high bias in this discussion which you don't seem to want to get over.
Excuse me, but that is incorrect. I might have responded to someone, but I didn't mention Nokia. That is on public record, go back and look at the posts, I didn't mention them. I don't have to make anything up, it is all here is print.
Please don't be disingenuous. I read all of the posts, as you obviously haven't. That's easily seen by you saying "I might have". In other words, you either don't know, don't remember, or want to pretend you don't.
I really don't see what the big deal is here with you. Almost all of you posting over the years has to do with defending Nokia, or putting Apple's successes down. Nothings changed.
Excuse me? The very reason I didn't mention them is because I wasn't talking about them. What is so hard to understand about this. Get over your attitude, you are meant to be a moderator, you are showing a high bias in this discussion which you don't seem to want to get over.
You're the one who started this silliness. I'm just responding to it. Though, it's a good point. I really shouldn't respond to your silliness.
Please don't be disingenuous. I read all of the posts, as you obviously haven't. That's easily seen by you saying "I might have". In other words, you either don't know, don't remember, or want to pretend you don't.
Yes I have, and I know what I have written, I can go back and read it again, I wrote what I wrote, not what you are trying to make out I wrote.
I really don't see what the big deal is here with you. Almost all of you posting over the years has to do with defending Nokia, or putting Apple's successes down. Nothings changed.
That's rubbish and you know it is. I have questioned anyone making an incorrect claim, is that my fault that a lot of people tend to do that on Appleinsider? This site has really gone downhill over the last couple of years, it used to be a good place to come to get information, now it is just full of the "Apple can do no wrong" clan, and those who moderate against anything that goes against that statement.
You're the one who started this silliness. I'm just responding to it. Though, it's a good point. I really shouldn't respond to your silliness.
Excuse me? I thought you claimed you read all the posts? If you had you would know that I didn't start anything.
Excuse me? I thought you claimed you read all the posts? If you had you would know that I didn't start anything.
Yes, you did. You started this silly denial business instead of just responding to the facts. I suppose you don't have anything you can use for that, so you deny arguing it at all.