Well, let's see. They call themselves "Fox News". Their web site is foxnews.com. They constantly refer to the "Fox News Channel" on their web site.
Gee, I wonder why anyone would 'mistakenly' assume that they're a news station. I guess in your view, it's better to be blatant liars than to call yourself a news station?
If they're barely above the poverty level then how the hell are they affording Apple products?
Two answers:
The iPhone is now given away for free. It is the first choice of the impoverished class, because it is MUCH more affordable than the BOGO Android phones, which require you to lay out 2 or 3 hundred bucks in cash.
School systems generally are the ones who buy iPads if their students are impoverished.
But the OP seemingly would deprive not only the rural schoolchildren, but would also deny even the struggling working class. If he were to accomplish what he wishes for, the advantages that Apple brings to people's lives would be denied even to the most deserving.
OK. So because some Koreans are underserving of Apple's blessings, then the impoverished schoolchildren struggling to just keep their heads above poverty should also be denied the chance to advance themselves with using Apple products.
Yes, that would be one consequence of my policies if I were in charge. And people in poverty shouldn't be buying or using Apple products. They can get by with a much cheaper netbook. That makes much more economic sense.
The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
Granted, Samsung's naming convention, "50" vs. "5.0", is confusing because the "5.0" is the newer and more advanced product. Granted, Samsung should have caught the mistake back in 2008... 2008 folks. This is really old news. The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...1CWY/XAA-specs) and 5.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...0CWY/XAA-specs) both have hardware features that trump the iPod Touch 4th Gen . Compare those specs to the iPod Touch's and see for yourself (http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/specs.html). Not even an old "scandal" can hide that fact.
The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.
Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.
Reminds me greatly of The Jerusalem Duality (S01E12 Big Bang Theory) where Sheldon was trying to talk people into creating an exact replica of Jerusalem in the Mexican desert
Wow coincidence. I don't watch much sit-com TV, but I just recently saw one of their episodes for the first time and that was actually the one, however I came in in the middle of the program after that Jerusalem scene. I just watched it online right now. Pretty funny show. I'll have to try to watch it more often.
I'm not getting into a mudslinging contest on this matter, but Apple/Jobs has/had a fairly good history of ripping people's ideas off. Remember Watson/Sherlock? Fax as a printer (that one goes back to the NeXT era), etc.
Or we could start with Windows and the Mouse which were stolen from Xerox PARC. At the time Jobs' attitude was: "You can't patent gravity" meaning: there's only one way of doing something naturally right, because it's the nature of the thing, and there can't be patents on such things.
How things change when the company is no longer the underdog, but a company with one of the highest market caps, even beating Exxon at times (not sure where they stand right now, but it doesn't really matters, since underdog is hardly the way to label Apple at this stage of the game.)
I just wish the people who are so quick to decent Apple on ethical grounds would also be equally quick on ethical grounds to condemn Apple for retaining ownership of a device you lawfully bought by preventing the lawful owner of having root-access to the device, and treating users like chattel by deciding for them what they may or may not do on a computer with internal phone peripheral that they own.
A non-jailbroken phone is essentially unusable, for a variety of reasons, not least of which because the proximity sensor doesn't work properly with dry skin or longer hair. On a jailbroken phone I can install CallLock, and the problem is solved. And that's just the one feature that's the most relevant to the thing being a phone. There are plenty of other things that require a jailbreak, too, and no, piracy isn't one of them. I don't have a single pirated app, and have no intention of owning any, either.
The thing is, Apple rips off small developers who don't have the resources to stage that kind of legal offense/defense like Samsung, so you never hear anything about it.
When I had some ideas that I would have liked to discuss with Apple, they said, patent it first, or if we like it, we'll simply do it without you. (That's pretty much a verbatim quote).
If you have any idea of how expensive it is to apply for a patent, and even more so, to defend it, then you start to realize that patents have long ceased to protect and support small inventors, but have become weapons in the arsenal of large industrial conglomerates to duke it out with each other; just as we now see it between Apple and Samsung.
Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.
Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.
Thank you for your response. You are correct that the link appears to be broken. It is not. Rather, Samsung redirected that ancient 2008 page for the ancient Galaxy Player 50 to prevent people unwilling to do research from mistakenly thinking that that 2008 page for the Galaxy Player 50 has some connection with the new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
How about those specs? Exciting, right? Gives the iPod Touch something to shoot for for the next update that goes beyond offering white. Nothing wrong with those specs links, I hope.
or we could start with windows and the mouse which were stolen from xerox parc.
Wrong!!
There was an agreement between Apple and Xerox which allowed Xerox to buy Apple shares at a real cheap rate. Apple didn't sneak into the Xerox Parc facilities, they were invited there as part of the deal.
Most likely, a disgruntled employee, combined with lavish control, is the reason for this blatant thievery to slip through.
Before I read this article and its comments, I did not know that there was a difference between the iPhone "Maps" app and the one for Android. I'd assumed they were the same because they both used Google's maps data.
Maybe the person/people who made the promotional image did not understand this either, and just thought they were the same.
Just throwing out the possibility that this whole fiasco was not intentional. I'm not saying it's any less stupid, maybe just less sinister. \
With regard to current day Israel, the western world created it and so it has been our responsibility to defend it. The people who inhabit that country now have no historical or genetic connection to the people who lived there in biblical times. We should just move the entire country to some equal size piece of desert land in Utah where it would be easier to protect them. They could try to get along with the Mormons. Call it New Israel.
Native Americans have been cheated, killed, eradicated, robbed of their land RIGHT HERE in the US.
But, oh, it would be so inconvenient to do justice at home. Therefore, we defend religious claims of people who don't look anything like the people who inhabit these stretches for lands for thousands of years, and suppress the people who used to own the land.
Anyone ever tried to imagine what would happen if a bunch of Native Americans tried to take back Texas? And their claims are much closer. Or what if Germany tries to take back the territories that were theirs before WWI? What if Austria started to collect all possessions of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation again? Of if Austria were modest, tried to get South Tyrol back from Italy? (Sorry, I'm sure at least 50% here don't have the faintest clue of what I'm talking about)
What if some nut case, like the dude who founded the Mormons, has a divine intuition and thinks Manhattan is his people's promised land, and he starts an armed uprising to drive the Inhabitants of Manhattan away based on his flimsy religious claims? How can you argue with God?
Or what if, since we all trace our roots back to Africa, any country in the world lays claim on African soil?
I hope some get the idea of how ludicrous it is to defend the Israel policy with religious arguments.
In reality it's all about one thing: latent anti-semitism: find a place for the Jews, so we get rid of them. That pretty much was the though when support for Israel first started. a time when the Brits could with a few ships and a few guns drive into submission just about any people on the face of the planet.
Later, they of course realized that doesn't work (otherwise there wouldn't still be Jews all over the world), but the Israel policy became intertwined with global resource wars. A stable ally that projects power makes the oil trade reliable.
How ridiculous the whole thing is was illustrated when the NYT years ago reported about how large sections of the wall were built with Egyptian cement sold to Israeli contractors by Palestinian middlemen.
If there's money to be made, there are no principles. You can't roll back history, but the religious fanatics in Israel try to do just that. They could have gone there and bought property on the open market, just like anyone else, and integrate, naturalize, and defend their interests in parliament. But that was obviously too fair a process.
Most of the fanatical Jews in Israel these days have just about no connection to Israel. Many aren't even Jewish, they became Jewish because it was a good way to garner support to escape from Soviet Russia. The Jews who lived in the holy land have generally never had a problem with the Palestinians, they lived side by side peacefully; and similar things hold true for the Califate of Cordoba; it was the Catholic inquisition and the monetary interests behind it, that destroyed a cradle of civilization and put Spain and most of Europe into a dark age.
That Israel has nothing to do with Jews and Jewishness is evident by the fact that when Jewisch scholars, journalists, writers attack Israeli policy, they are labeled "anti-semitic" just as if they were a bunch of Nazis. "Anti-Semetic" has become a taboo-word, which ends any and all discussion on a subject and elicits billions of support payments to Israel every year. In short, it has become a joke.
Native Americans have been cheated, killed, eradicated, robbed of their land RIGHT HERE in the US.
But, oh, it would be so inconvenient to do justice at home. Therefore, we defend religious claims of people who don't look anything like the people who inhabit these stretches for lands for thousands of years, and suppress the people who used to own the land.
I'm getting sick of hearing this. How many vanquished nations have been treated as well as our American Indians are today (admittedly, that wasn't always true).
They have free land.
They use government benefits at a MUCH higher rate than non-Indians in most states
They have a monopoly on gambling that generates many billions of dollars per year
They have the right to sell cigarettes and gasoline at far lower prices than anyone else due to their reduced taxes
They receive billions of dollars of oil revenues
They have enormous set-asides worth many billions of dollars that non-Indians don't have a chance at competing.
And, in return, they pull stunts like they've done in my state. They're cheating badly on the small amount of cigarette taxes they must pay (well documented in the press).
Read the book "the Mouse that Roared". The Indians really don't have much to complain about.
People don't want Android music players. I mean, that's what this is, right? I don't see any phone hardware on the list.
I apologize for not making it clear that the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 ($230) and 5.0 ($270) are more advanced iPod Touch 4th Gen. ($200) competitors. I mistakenly assumed that my request to directly compare specs between the products connoted the relationship.
The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 are basically WiFi-only versions of the popular Samsung Galaxy S smartphone, i.e. they don't have a cellular radio. The primary differences are the 4inch and 5inch displays, respectively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Specs don't matter. Experience does.
Some countering examples:
-- Two people are in a WiFi dead zone, the one with Galaxy Player 4.0 and the other with an iPod Touch 4th Gen. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can listen to FM radio to get the latest news on NPR.
-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.
-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.
-- The same two are out camping and want to mark the exact spot for their next trip, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's GPS can do so.
-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.
-- Both want to set a silent alarm, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can set a vibrate-only alarm to avoid blasting the alarm to the general public.
-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.
-- Both want to take a photo. The one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's 3.2MP back camera (plus LED flash for the 5.0) is likely to be happier with the shot than the other one with the ~0.7MP back camera.
Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.
Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?
-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.
It's a shame, then, that the guy with the iPod touch has a 64GB model, larger than the Samsung device could ever be.
Quote:
-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.
The iPod touch owner laughs as he isn't forced to look at ads and kill his battery life while experiencing slowdown of his device.
Seriously, you troll? You think Flash is a SELLING point? It's a selling point NOT to have Flash.
Quote:
-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.
Sounds like whoever this is wants a phone, really.
And is this VoIP call out in the forest where we're camping? WOW, that's some serious Wi-Fi coverage? or maybe I'm confusing your device for something actually useful.
Quote:
-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.
Again, it's a shame that by the time either device's battery is dead, the Android user will have moved on through two hardware revisions to get the new software updates he wants while the iPod touch owner simply shrugs, reminisces about the YEARS of actual use he got out of the device, and either hands it off to a family member or recycles it for a 10% discount on his brand new model iPod touch.
Quote:
Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.
And yet no one buys these. But they do buy iPod touches.
Quote:
Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?
It appears to sell better, as, again, I've never heard of these two monstrosities before now.
And it would certainly seem to get software updates more often. "At all" is the key phrase, I think, given the track record for Android hardware that is "clearly" superior.
Comments
Well, let's see. They call themselves "Fox News". Their web site is foxnews.com. They constantly refer to the "Fox News Channel" on their web site.
Gee, I wonder why anyone would 'mistakenly' assume that they're a news station. I guess in your view, it's better to be blatant liars than to call yourself a news station?
That does not seem to be his view.
HTH.
If they're barely above the poverty level then how the hell are they affording Apple products?
Two answers:
The iPhone is now given away for free. It is the first choice of the impoverished class, because it is MUCH more affordable than the BOGO Android phones, which require you to lay out 2 or 3 hundred bucks in cash.
School systems generally are the ones who buy iPads if their students are impoverished.
But the OP seemingly would deprive not only the rural schoolchildren, but would also deny even the struggling working class. If he were to accomplish what he wishes for, the advantages that Apple brings to people's lives would be denied even to the most deserving.
OK. So because some Koreans are underserving of Apple's blessings, then the impoverished schoolchildren struggling to just keep their heads above poverty should also be denied the chance to advance themselves with using Apple products.
Yes, that would be one consequence of my policies if I were in charge. And people in poverty shouldn't be buying or using Apple products. They can get by with a much cheaper netbook. That makes much more economic sense.
Granted, Samsung's naming convention, "50" vs. "5.0", is confusing because the "5.0" is the newer and more advanced product. Granted, Samsung should have caught the mistake back in 2008... 2008 folks. This is really old news. The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...1CWY/XAA-specs) and 5.0 (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3...0CWY/XAA-specs) both have hardware features that trump the iPod Touch 4th Gen . Compare those specs to the iPod Touch's and see for yourself (http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/specs.html). Not even an old "scandal" can hide that fact.
The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.
Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.
Reminds me greatly of The Jerusalem Duality (S01E12 Big Bang Theory) where Sheldon was trying to talk people into creating an exact replica of Jerusalem in the Mexican desert
Wow coincidence. I don't watch much sit-com TV, but I just recently saw one of their episodes for the first time and that was actually the one, however I came in in the middle of the program after that Jerusalem scene. I just watched it online right now. Pretty funny show. I'll have to try to watch it more often.
Or we could start with Windows and the Mouse which were stolen from Xerox PARC. At the time Jobs' attitude was: "You can't patent gravity" meaning: there's only one way of doing something naturally right, because it's the nature of the thing, and there can't be patents on such things.
How things change when the company is no longer the underdog, but a company with one of the highest market caps, even beating Exxon at times (not sure where they stand right now, but it doesn't really matters, since underdog is hardly the way to label Apple at this stage of the game.)
I just wish the people who are so quick to decent Apple on ethical grounds would also be equally quick on ethical grounds to condemn Apple for retaining ownership of a device you lawfully bought by preventing the lawful owner of having root-access to the device, and treating users like chattel by deciding for them what they may or may not do on a computer with internal phone peripheral that they own.
A non-jailbroken phone is essentially unusable, for a variety of reasons, not least of which because the proximity sensor doesn't work properly with dry skin or longer hair. On a jailbroken phone I can install CallLock, and the problem is solved. And that's just the one feature that's the most relevant to the thing being a phone. There are plenty of other things that require a jailbreak, too, and no, piracy isn't one of them. I don't have a single pirated app, and have no intention of owning any, either.
The thing is, Apple rips off small developers who don't have the resources to stage that kind of legal offense/defense like Samsung, so you never hear anything about it.
When I had some ideas that I would have liked to discuss with Apple, they said, patent it first, or if we like it, we'll simply do it without you. (That's pretty much a verbatim quote).
If you have any idea of how expensive it is to apply for a patent, and even more so, to defend it, then you start to realize that patents have long ceased to protect and support small inventors, but have become weapons in the arsenal of large industrial conglomerates to duke it out with each other; just as we now see it between Apple and Samsung.
Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.
Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.
Thank you for your response. You are correct that the link appears to be broken. It is not. Rather, Samsung redirected that ancient 2008 page for the ancient Galaxy Player 50 to prevent people unwilling to do research from mistakenly thinking that that 2008 page for the Galaxy Player 50 has some connection with the new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 released in the US on Oct/16/2011.
How about those specs? Exciting, right? Gives the iPod Touch something to shoot for for the next update that goes beyond offering white. Nothing wrong with those specs links, I hope.
A much bigger one than you even imagine. The post said that ALL Korean people don't deserve Apple products.
The Korean Doctors do not deserve Apple products. The Korean Buddhist Monks do not deserve Apple products.
The Korean schoolchildren struggling to learn and improve their lives, perhaps, ESPECIALLY do not DESERVE Apple products.
"Apple should pull out of Korea completely!"
That's collective punishment, and one of the most archaic, outdated and primitive notions.
By consequence, if a single American ever murders a non American, all Americans deserve to die, without exception.
That was your point, right?
or we could start with windows and the mouse which were stolen from xerox parc.
Wrong!!
There was an agreement between Apple and Xerox which allowed Xerox to buy Apple shares at a real cheap rate. Apple didn't sneak into the Xerox Parc facilities, they were invited there as part of the deal.
How about those specs? Exciting, right?
Not? in the least.
Nothing wrong with those specs links, I hope.
Other than the fact that they're meaningless in terms of sales, I guess there's nothing wrong with them.
People don't want Android music players. I mean, that's what this is, right? I don't see any phone hardware on the list.
Before your links, I hadn't even heard of this thing. I had no idea they they existed. I have never seen anyone with one nor any of them in any store.
Specs don't matter. Experience does.
Most likely, a disgruntled employee, combined with lavish control, is the reason for this blatant thievery to slip through.
Before I read this article and its comments, I did not know that there was a difference between the iPhone "Maps" app and the one for Android. I'd assumed they were the same because they both used Google's maps data.
Maybe the person/people who made the promotional image did not understand this either, and just thought they were the same.
Just throwing out the possibility that this whole fiasco was not intentional. I'm not saying it's any less stupid, maybe just less sinister.
With regard to current day Israel, the western world created it and so it has been our responsibility to defend it. The people who inhabit that country now have no historical or genetic connection to the people who lived there in biblical times. We should just move the entire country to some equal size piece of desert land in Utah where it would be easier to protect them. They could try to get along with the Mormons. Call it New Israel.
Native Americans have been cheated, killed, eradicated, robbed of their land RIGHT HERE in the US.
But, oh, it would be so inconvenient to do justice at home. Therefore, we defend religious claims of people who don't look anything like the people who inhabit these stretches for lands for thousands of years, and suppress the people who used to own the land.
Anyone ever tried to imagine what would happen if a bunch of Native Americans tried to take back Texas? And their claims are much closer. Or what if Germany tries to take back the territories that were theirs before WWI? What if Austria started to collect all possessions of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation again? Of if Austria were modest, tried to get South Tyrol back from Italy? (Sorry, I'm sure at least 50% here don't have the faintest clue of what I'm talking about)
What if some nut case, like the dude who founded the Mormons, has a divine intuition and thinks Manhattan is his people's promised land, and he starts an armed uprising to drive the Inhabitants of Manhattan away based on his flimsy religious claims? How can you argue with God?
Or what if, since we all trace our roots back to Africa, any country in the world lays claim on African soil?
I hope some get the idea of how ludicrous it is to defend the Israel policy with religious arguments.
In reality it's all about one thing: latent anti-semitism: find a place for the Jews, so we get rid of them. That pretty much was the though when support for Israel first started. a time when the Brits could with a few ships and a few guns drive into submission just about any people on the face of the planet.
Later, they of course realized that doesn't work (otherwise there wouldn't still be Jews all over the world), but the Israel policy became intertwined with global resource wars. A stable ally that projects power makes the oil trade reliable.
How ridiculous the whole thing is was illustrated when the NYT years ago reported about how large sections of the wall were built with Egyptian cement sold to Israeli contractors by Palestinian middlemen.
If there's money to be made, there are no principles. You can't roll back history, but the religious fanatics in Israel try to do just that. They could have gone there and bought property on the open market, just like anyone else, and integrate, naturalize, and defend their interests in parliament. But that was obviously too fair a process.
Most of the fanatical Jews in Israel these days have just about no connection to Israel. Many aren't even Jewish, they became Jewish because it was a good way to garner support to escape from Soviet Russia. The Jews who lived in the holy land have generally never had a problem with the Palestinians, they lived side by side peacefully; and similar things hold true for the Califate of Cordoba; it was the Catholic inquisition and the monetary interests behind it, that destroyed a cradle of civilization and put Spain and most of Europe into a dark age.
That Israel has nothing to do with Jews and Jewishness is evident by the fact that when Jewisch scholars, journalists, writers attack Israeli policy, they are labeled "anti-semitic" just as if they were a bunch of Nazis. "Anti-Semetic" has become a taboo-word, which ends any and all discussion on a subject and elicits billions of support payments to Israel every year. In short, it has become a joke.
Native Americans have been cheated, killed, eradicated, robbed of their land RIGHT HERE in the US.
But, oh, it would be so inconvenient to do justice at home. Therefore, we defend religious claims of people who don't look anything like the people who inhabit these stretches for lands for thousands of years, and suppress the people who used to own the land.
I'm getting sick of hearing this. How many vanquished nations have been treated as well as our American Indians are today (admittedly, that wasn't always true).
They have free land.
They use government benefits at a MUCH higher rate than non-Indians in most states
They have a monopoly on gambling that generates many billions of dollars per year
They have the right to sell cigarettes and gasoline at far lower prices than anyone else due to their reduced taxes
They receive billions of dollars of oil revenues
They have enormous set-asides worth many billions of dollars that non-Indians don't have a chance at competing.
And, in return, they pull stunts like they've done in my state. They're cheating badly on the small amount of cigarette taxes they must pay (well documented in the press).
Read the book "the Mouse that Roared". The Indians really don't have much to complain about.
I request that the mods erase all political posts and the people can go over to the political section and discuss there if they want to.
People don't want Android music players. I mean, that's what this is, right? I don't see any phone hardware on the list.
I apologize for not making it clear that the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 ($230) and 5.0 ($270) are more advanced iPod Touch 4th Gen. ($200) competitors. I mistakenly assumed that my request to directly compare specs between the products connoted the relationship.
The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 are basically WiFi-only versions of the popular Samsung Galaxy S smartphone, i.e. they don't have a cellular radio. The primary differences are the 4inch and 5inch displays, respectively.
Specs don't matter. Experience does.
Some countering examples:
-- Two people are in a WiFi dead zone, the one with Galaxy Player 4.0 and the other with an iPod Touch 4th Gen. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can listen to FM radio to get the latest news on NPR.
-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.
-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.
-- The same two are out camping and want to mark the exact spot for their next trip, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's GPS can do so.
-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.
-- Both want to set a silent alarm, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can set a vibrate-only alarm to avoid blasting the alarm to the general public.
-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.
-- Both want to take a photo. The one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's 3.2MP back camera (plus LED flash for the 5.0) is likely to be happier with the shot than the other one with the ~0.7MP back camera.
Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.
Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?
-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.
It's a shame, then, that the guy with the iPod touch has a 64GB model, larger than the Samsung device could ever be.
-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.
The iPod touch owner laughs as he isn't forced to look at ads and kill his battery life while experiencing slowdown of his device.
Seriously, you troll? You think Flash is a SELLING point? It's a selling point NOT to have Flash.
-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.
Sounds like whoever this is wants a phone, really.
And is this VoIP call out in the forest where we're camping? WOW, that's some serious Wi-Fi coverage? or maybe I'm confusing your device for something actually useful.
-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.
Again, it's a shame that by the time either device's battery is dead, the Android user will have moved on through two hardware revisions to get the new software updates he wants while the iPod touch owner simply shrugs, reminisces about the YEARS of actual use he got out of the device, and either hands it off to a family member or recycles it for a 10% discount on his brand new model iPod touch.
Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.
And yet no one buys these. But they do buy iPod touches.
Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?
It appears to sell better, as, again, I've never heard of these two monstrosities before now.
And it would certainly seem to get software updates more often. "At all" is the key phrase, I think, given the track record for Android hardware that is "clearly" superior.