There isn't much to look up, if you have been in an Apple Store which has more than just a Genius Bar: http://www.apple.com/retail/learn/. Apple seems to already have several options in place for educating current and potential customers.
That's all well and good if someone has already set foot in the Apple Store. The problem is getting people to do that in the first place, or to go Apple's website or otherwise investigate it as a platform. This is the sort of thing that Apple needs to focus on, pushing that kind of information in their advertising and through other means so people are even aware of Mac as a viable platform that does what they need. They also need to overcome the general public perception of it being too expensive; sure, the computers work great, have tons of features and last for a long time, with cheap OS upgrades vs Microsoft's expensive releases, but the general public doesn't really realize this.
Finally of course is games. Almost literally everyone in my age bracket, at least judging from my extended social network, uses Steam for gaming. Many of my friends have said they like the "look and feel" of Mac better but are going to stick with Windows for gaming. Sure, Valve's own games are ported to Mac, but what about all the third party titles? Apple could do a lot more as far as working with developers and encouraging them to code for their own system, if they weren't so focused on iOS.
...I've worked in the smartphone industry for 14 years...
As someone who's written software for more than 40 years, nobody in tech takes you seriously once your experience exceeds 2 digits of years (>9) - because they figure you're too old school to know better.
Thing is, I remember when IT employed normal folks (with 55% men and 45% women):
Today, not so much, though I understand that Ritalin and Adderall prescriptions are covered in most Silicon Valley health plans...
In this case, you would insert rather than append an apostrophe—people's
Because "people" is already plural, you wouldn't write peoples'.
But there's a reason apostrophes can drive people crazy. If you consider the backgrounds of the many and varied peoples who now speak and write in English, it's no suprise that you will find wide disparity in these different peoples' use of details like the apostrophe.
That's an excellent take on the why part. Me, I simply want to be accurate, and always appreciate it if someone points me to a grammatical error. So, thanks.
To anyone who has been watching Google over the years, it is clear that these are basically a bunch of kids who are pursuing costly distractions, frittering away a lot of money on their bad case of ADD. Steve Jobs emphasized the need to stay focused. Google is not. They don't seem to appreciate that their stream of income has a narrow source, and is tenuous. It is likely that their party will eventually end, at which point they will wonder, "What happened??"
I cannot understand why stockholders don't complaint on Google's expensive endeavours. Or maybe they do, but I haven't seen an article on the topic.
There isn't much to look up, if you have been in an Apple Store which has more than just a Genius Bar: http://www.apple.com/retail/learn/. Apple seems to already have several options in place for educating current and potential customers.
Very true. They have excellent informative sessions. I took all 4 "Pro Labs" on Aperture, FCP etc. and thought they were pretty good. I even learned new things from the Aperture sessions, a program I use almost daily.
Great article. I am no tech guru, but I think Google and MS have similar problems by not focusing on a just a few key items, and perfecting those, before releasing them to the general user. Someone mentioned that on here as well, and I think the article writer did too. Google massive 'Skunkworks' like factory, where they are seemingly working on all kinds of stuff, might be good & bad. After Jobs came back into the Apple fold he cut all the dead-end projects and had the company refocus on what it was good at doing from the beginning. PC's. He then expanded and had the company create new mobile tech devices that had some good R&D behind them before they were announced. Granted Apple has had a few misses, but over-all more hits. It will be interesting to see what they have in store next, a TV? Watch? As long as they focus on quality innovative products, and not market share to drive their innovations, I think they have a long life ahead of them. Only time will tell.
Basic problem with MS: its core businesses are dependedent on upgrading out of date lagacy code with newer technology (mobile) to stay relevent. The last couple of years has shown just how problmeatic that has been for them. Any software developer will tell you it is 10 times more time consuming to made modifications than re-writing from scratch.
Same basic problem for Google: it's core search business must make sure that its portal to get hits i.e. its "free" client is relevent(not so old as the windows kernel but getting worse every year).
The desktop/mobile split will probabaly settle down to 20/80 market share or some similar ratio.
Meaning that MS will have to operate in future at about 15-20% OS market share, the other mobile part will be split between IOS/Android/Tizen? and Windows Phone OS or some other conbinatuion as we enter the middle game.
Added to that Core problem for both: each is making its money from is slipping (DESKTOP) and is dropping to aband being replaced by mobile
In MS case their OS market share has gone from 95% to less than 40% in 5 years. In google's case (ads) they went from something like 80% to now under 50% in just 2 years. And they have lost China as well!
Given this I am long Apple with its mid teens P/E ratio. I have no plans to invest in Google or MS because I believe there is downside significant risk. In Google's case it is far riskier given it really only has one franchise (search) where as MS has a more diverse revenue stream.
When I saw the iPad introduction, which was the first Apple intro I've seen, it blew me away and I thought it was going to replace or take over the business industry. Then I started touring businesses and noticed a lot of NEW computers being delivered even just this year. The employees were ecstatic to have a lap top. They were Lenovo "Tonka" style laptops that came complete with a docking station and external monitor. I asked the Director of Business why they were not using Apple laptops which had an obvious better build quality and I was told that the business had a 10 year deal with Lenovo to support all of the business functions required of the computer.
MS is going to be around for a long time to come.
Your attitude is exactly why MS will fade away into non relevence glorying in the past. Indeed the more people like you who spread the word that the Desktop is not dead the more it will hasten its slow slide into a niche market. It won't go away it will just become a back office system and people in 10 years will smile nostagically at them. Most tasks can be done on a tablet, we don't need a PC or laptop to do most things. That's what it will become, get used to it.
Its people like you who make statements like Balmer - "$500, fully subsidized, with a plan! That is the most expensive phone in the world and it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard, which makes it not a very good email machine."
As someone who's written software for more than 40 years, nobody in tech takes you seriously once your experience exceeds 2 digits of years (>9) - because they figure you're too old school to know better.
Thing is, I remember when IT employed normal folks (with 55% men and 45% women):
Today, not so much, though I understand that Ritalin and Adderall prescriptions are covered in most Silicon Valley health plans...
Just last week I came a cross a "cool" hot shot new 20 something java programmer who made the classic rookie mistake of not initilaizing his variables inside his functions and relying on them being initialized at on opening the app! when his fucntion went wrong he couldn't figure out why his varaibles were all screwed up. Of course his "excuse": I initialized them "here" in the calls - it should be fine " the rest of us rolled our eyes at his ignorance. I still don't think the guy gets it. And this is what we have to deal with!!!! And they still think they are better than their older more experienced workers!
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
You want specifics? How about the time you claimed to have interviewed Steve Jobs? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Or how this Maemo (the predecessor to Tizen) powered internet tablet is in fact not a tablet but a netbook:
I love you get so worked up about people assassinating your character when you spend so must effort doing it to other people. Someone calls you out on your bullshit and you get incredibly defensive.
On reading the headline, I was extremely skeptical of the article (Google is like 90s Apple? Surely not). I am still not convinced, but DED makes some really good points.
The massive issue for Google is that its entire operations are bankrolled by web ads. These can be vulnerable to several fronts:
1) Monopoly accusations like those faced by MS.
2) Increased regulations preventing them from capturing as much user data.
3) Customers shifting to no -Google search due to privacy concerns (DuckDuckGo) or because browsers replacing Google search with alternates.
4) A new revolutionary competitor who slowly erodes Google's lead
5) Apple and MS eliminating the need for Google searches through better and more prevalent apps.
While I don't think any of these are likely, the point is that Google as a business has a Death Star like single point of failure. One which may be attacked by the natural and ongoing desktop to mobile transition even if none of the revolutionary scenarios above come into play.
That being said, Larry Page is a smart guy and I am sure aware of this issue. Google must be actively involved in fighting this off.
I would add,
6) Google doesn't get any search revenue from social media links, even though many (most?) ultimately came from Google searches. The more people get their links from Facebook and Twitter, the fewer Google ads they see.
To anyone who has been watching Google over the years, it is clear that these are basically a bunch of kids who are pursuing costly distractions, frittering away a lot of money on their bad case of ADD. Steve Jobs emphasized the need to stay focused. Google is not. They don't seem to appreciate that their stream of income has a narrow source, and is tenuous. It is likely that their party will eventually end, at which point they will wonder, "What happened??"
You hit the nail on its head. Google lacks discipline and focus. Under the guise of "investing in the future" and "making the world a better place," the founders have thrown money at project after project, some with large amounts of risk. There are probably many projects into which large sums of money have been sunk with little to show for it.
It is a miracle that Google has remained a Wall Street darling despite such an unimpressive record of project execution. It is even more of a miracle that in spite of the founders creating a voteless class of shares that give the founders complete freedom to spend money however they want, Wall Street has rewarded Google with a relatively high P/E ratio.
IMO, if Apple had made decisions like Google, Apple would have been punished severely in the markets. The only reason the markets have largely left Google alone is because search continues to generate tons of cash flow. As long as search stays strong, the market is content to let Google throw money at pie-in-the-sky ideas. As Warren Buffett once said, "we will know who is swimming naked when the tide goes out." If search shows signs of a sustained slowdown, then we will see what they're really made of.
Microsoft faces challenges from all sides but there's something that you've failed to mention - they're making more money now than they did 10 years ago. They aren't anywhere near the state that Apple was in the mid-90s.
Point is Apple was top of market in 90s, in which they where the ones who created the market. In 2000s Microsoft was top of same but much bigger market, but 2010s google is top of a new market, which is already bigger then what the old one was(however created by Apple). So Microsoft is losing more and more too both Apple and Google each day(either Desktop OS or mobile OS).
I love that Apple has gotten such vindication for its business strategies lately.
Does anyone remember that Apple *used* to be cited as THE classroom example of one of the biggest business blunders in history? You know, Harvard Business school used to teach that Apple was so foolish to try to make the hardware when the money was obviously all in making and selling the software like Microsoft did. Lol.
Methinks a lot of the analysts still think this crap. Not me, I never thought it. I saw with my own two open eyes what happens when you have ninety million vendors making interchangeable parts for the PC , which then fought with each other for control of the Windows OS resources. One of the many reasons I bought a bunch of AAPL stock.
I wanted to DO things with a computer, not solve arbitrary, arcane little puzzles with the conflicting parts.
I was glad to come home to a Mac after a long frustrating day with Windows. (Watching a Computer Science degree person spend a couple hours trying to install a printer driver...typical.)
Watching a baby, an autistic person, and a 90 year old use an iPad intuitively. Yeah. Writing music and medical apps, etc etc. Yeah, go hardware! And software too! If not Apple, then Who else would bring us this joy? 8-)
Another great op-ed. It mentions something that is worth repeating. Wall street is BAD for business. Cook is smart and wise not to care, as was Jobs. Ballmer is a suit who accomplished nothing and milked the MSFT stock for all it was worth just to please other suits.
I love that Apple has gotten such vindication for its business strategies lately.
Does anyone remember that Apple *used* to be cited as THE classroom example of one of the biggest business blunders in history? You know, Harvard Business school used to teach that Apple was so foolish to try to make the hardware when the money was obviously all in making and selling the software like Microsoft did. Lol.
Methinks a lot of the analysts still think this crap. Not me, I never thought it. I saw with my own two open eyes what happens when you have ninety million vendors making interchangeable parts for the PC , which then fought with each other for control of the Windows OS resources. One of the many reasons I bought a bunch of AAPL stock.
I wanted to DO things with a computer, not solve arbitrary, arcane little puzzles with the conflicting parts.
I was glad to come home to a Mac after a long frustrating day with Windows. (Watching a Computer Science degree person spend a couple hours trying to install a printer driver...typical.)
Watching a baby, an autistic person, and a 90 year old use an iPad intuitively. Yeah. Writing music and medical apps, etc etc. Yeah, go hardware! And software too! If not Apple, then Who else would bring us this joy? 8-)
Except that you're forgetting that many more companies making hardware have failed than succeeded. Just because Apple made it work doesn't make it the magical formula for success.
I refuse to read this DED opinion based on previous submissions, but I congratulate AI on finally labeling his work "editorial". Perhaps there is still hope.
More fool you to miss out on the finest writing AI has to offer.
When have DED's specials not been editorial? Speaking for myself I would add, I have yet to read one that wasn't spot on either, having lived and worked through the entire history of Apple with close connections to the industry myself. As you obviously take the opposite view would you care to explain on what basis and your personal qualifications / experience on which you base this to find them untrue?
I've worked in the smartphone industry for over 14 years. Every time I read something about the pre-iPhone smartphone industry written by DED, I find it riddled with factual inaccuracies. When I've pointed these inaccuracies out in the past, DED gets very defensive and has tried to argue that up is down or that red is blue. I've given up trying as it often takes a long time to dig up evidence to support what I'm saying.
So, if DED is knowingly writing bullshit about a subject area that I know a lot about then I'm going to assume that he does it every subject.
In this case, you would insert rather than append an apostrophe—people's
Because "people" is already plural, you wouldn't write peoples'.
But there's a reason apostrophes can drive people crazy. If you consider the backgrounds of the many and varied peoples who now speak and write in English, it's no suprise that you will find wide disparity in these different peoples' use of details like the apostrophe.
I've worked in the smartphone industry for over 14 years. Every time I read something about the pre-iPhone smartphone industry written by DED, I find it riddled with factual inaccuracies. When I've pointed these inaccuracies out in the past, DED gets very defensive and has tried to argue that up is down or that red is blue. I've given up trying as it often takes a long time to dig up evidence to support what I'm saying.
So, if DED is knowingly writing bullshit about a subject area that I know a lot about then I'm going to assume that he does it every subject.
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
Yeah; it's kind of ironic to see RichL criticising historic accuracy; he has quite enough 'history' himself.
In your last paragraph, you briefly allude to Google's focus on low-end devices, odd though it is to use the words Google and focus in the same sentence. I would like to you examine why Google has decided to go in this direction and what the implications are, because I think it's a very revealing move by Google.
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
Interesting conception of cowardly and being stabbed in the back you have. This is a public accessible forum directly linked to the site that you write for. You're not being stabbed in the back. If you're being stabbed at all (you've not) it's from the front.
You really need to work on your approach to criticism Dan. Have a little grace.
Comments
There isn't much to look up, if you have been in an Apple Store which has more than just a Genius Bar: http://www.apple.com/retail/learn/. Apple seems to already have several options in place for educating current and potential customers.
That's all well and good if someone has already set foot in the Apple Store. The problem is getting people to do that in the first place, or to go Apple's website or otherwise investigate it as a platform. This is the sort of thing that Apple needs to focus on, pushing that kind of information in their advertising and through other means so people are even aware of Mac as a viable platform that does what they need. They also need to overcome the general public perception of it being too expensive; sure, the computers work great, have tons of features and last for a long time, with cheap OS upgrades vs Microsoft's expensive releases, but the general public doesn't really realize this.
Finally of course is games. Almost literally everyone in my age bracket, at least judging from my extended social network, uses Steam for gaming. Many of my friends have said they like the "look and feel" of Mac better but are going to stick with Windows for gaming. Sure, Valve's own games are ported to Mac, but what about all the third party titles? Apple could do a lot more as far as working with developers and encouraging them to code for their own system, if they weren't so focused on iOS.
As someone who's written software for more than 40 years, nobody in tech takes you seriously once your experience exceeds 2 digits of years (>9) - because they figure you're too old school to know better.
Thing is, I remember when IT employed normal folks (with 55% men and 45% women):
Today, not so much, though I understand that Ritalin and Adderall prescriptions are covered in most Silicon Valley health plans...
That's an excellent take on the why part. Me, I simply want to be accurate, and always appreciate it if someone points me to a grammatical error. So, thanks.
I cannot understand why stockholders don't complaint on Google's expensive endeavours. Or maybe they do, but I haven't seen an article on the topic.
Very true. They have excellent informative sessions. I took all 4 "Pro Labs" on Aperture, FCP etc. and thought they were pretty good. I even learned new things from the Aperture sessions, a program I use almost daily.
Great article. I am no tech guru, but I think Google and MS have similar problems by not focusing on a just a few key items, and perfecting those, before releasing them to the general user. Someone mentioned that on here as well, and I think the article writer did too. Google massive 'Skunkworks' like factory, where they are seemingly working on all kinds of stuff, might be good & bad. After Jobs came back into the Apple fold he cut all the dead-end projects and had the company refocus on what it was good at doing from the beginning. PC's. He then expanded and had the company create new mobile tech devices that had some good R&D behind them before they were announced. Granted Apple has had a few misses, but over-all more hits. It will be interesting to see what they have in store next, a TV? Watch? As long as they focus on quality innovative products, and not market share to drive their innovations, I think they have a long life ahead of them. Only time will tell.
Same basic problem for Google: it's core search business must make sure that its portal to get hits i.e. its "free" client is relevent(not so old as the windows kernel but getting worse every year).
The desktop/mobile split will probabaly settle down to 20/80 market share or some similar ratio.
Meaning that MS will have to operate in future at about 15-20% OS market share, the other mobile part will be split between IOS/Android/Tizen? and Windows Phone OS or some other conbinatuion as we enter the middle game.
Added to that Core problem for both: each is making its money from is slipping (DESKTOP) and is dropping to aband being replaced by mobile
In MS case their OS market share has gone from 95% to less than 40% in 5 years.
In google's case (ads) they went from something like 80% to now under 50% in just 2 years. And they have lost China as well!
Given this I am long Apple with its mid teens P/E ratio. I have no plans to invest in Google or MS because I believe there is downside significant risk. In Google's case it is far riskier given it really only has one franchise (search) where as MS has a more diverse revenue stream.
When I saw the iPad introduction, which was the first Apple intro I've seen, it blew me away and I thought it was going to replace or take over the business industry. Then I started touring businesses and noticed a lot of NEW computers being delivered even just this year. The employees were ecstatic to have a lap top. They were Lenovo "Tonka" style laptops that came complete with a docking station and external monitor. I asked the Director of Business why they were not using Apple laptops which had an obvious better build quality and I was told that the business had a 10 year deal with Lenovo to support all of the business functions required of the computer.
MS is going to be around for a long time to come.
Your attitude is exactly why MS will fade away into non relevence glorying in the past. Indeed the more people like you who spread the word that the Desktop is not dead the more it will hasten its slow slide into a niche market. It won't go away it will just become a back office system and people in 10 years will smile nostagically at them. Most tasks can be done on a tablet, we don't need a PC or laptop to do most things. That's what it will become, get used to it.Its people like you who make statements like Balmer - "$500, fully subsidized, with a plan! That is the most expensive phone in the world and it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard, which makes it not a very good email machine."
As someone who's written software for more than 40 years, nobody in tech takes you seriously once your experience exceeds 2 digits of years (>9) - because they figure you're too old school to know better.
Thing is, I remember when IT employed normal folks (with 55% men and 45% women):
Today, not so much, though I understand that Ritalin and Adderall prescriptions are covered in most Silicon Valley health plans...
Just last week I came a cross a "cool" hot shot new 20 something java programmer who made the classic rookie mistake of not initilaizing his variables inside his functions and relying on them being initialized at on opening the app! when his fucntion went wrong he couldn't figure out why his varaibles were all screwed up. Of course his "excuse": I initialized them "here" in the calls - it should be fine " the rest of us rolled our eyes at his ignorance. I still don't think the guy gets it. And this is what we have to deal with!!!! And they still think they are better than their older more experienced workers!Originally Posted by Corrections
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
You want specifics? How about the time you claimed to have interviewed Steve Jobs?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Or how this Maemo (the predecessor to Tizen) powered internet tablet is in fact not a tablet but a netbook:
I love you get so worked up about people assassinating your character when you spend so must effort doing it to other people. Someone calls you out on your bullshit and you get incredibly defensive.
Also, please learn how to use quotation marks.
On reading the headline, I was extremely skeptical of the article (Google is like 90s Apple? Surely not). I am still not convinced, but DED makes some really good points.
The massive issue for Google is that its entire operations are bankrolled by web ads. These can be vulnerable to several fronts:
1) Monopoly accusations like those faced by MS.
2) Increased regulations preventing them from capturing as much user data.
3) Customers shifting to no -Google search due to privacy concerns (DuckDuckGo) or because browsers replacing Google search with alternates.
4) A new revolutionary competitor who slowly erodes Google's lead
5) Apple and MS eliminating the need for Google searches through better and more prevalent apps.
While I don't think any of these are likely, the point is that Google as a business has a Death Star like single point of failure. One which may be attacked by the natural and ongoing desktop to mobile transition even if none of the revolutionary scenarios above come into play.
That being said, Larry Page is a smart guy and I am sure aware of this issue. Google must be actively involved in fighting this off.
I would add,
6) Google doesn't get any search revenue from social media links, even though many (most?) ultimately came from Google searches. The more people get their links from Facebook and Twitter, the fewer Google ads they see.
To anyone who has been watching Google over the years, it is clear that these are basically a bunch of kids who are pursuing costly distractions, frittering away a lot of money on their bad case of ADD. Steve Jobs emphasized the need to stay focused. Google is not. They don't seem to appreciate that their stream of income has a narrow source, and is tenuous. It is likely that their party will eventually end, at which point they will wonder, "What happened??"
You hit the nail on its head. Google lacks discipline and focus. Under the guise of "investing in the future" and "making the world a better place," the founders have thrown money at project after project, some with large amounts of risk. There are probably many projects into which large sums of money have been sunk with little to show for it.
It is a miracle that Google has remained a Wall Street darling despite such an unimpressive record of project execution. It is even more of a miracle that in spite of the founders creating a voteless class of shares that give the founders complete freedom to spend money however they want, Wall Street has rewarded Google with a relatively high P/E ratio.
IMO, if Apple had made decisions like Google, Apple would have been punished severely in the markets. The only reason the markets have largely left Google alone is because search continues to generate tons of cash flow. As long as search stays strong, the market is content to let Google throw money at pie-in-the-sky ideas. As Warren Buffett once said, "we will know who is swimming naked when the tide goes out." If search shows signs of a sustained slowdown, then we will see what they're really made of.
Does anyone remember that Apple *used* to be cited as THE classroom example of one of the biggest business blunders in history? You know, Harvard Business school used to teach that Apple was so foolish to try to make the hardware when the money was obviously all in making and selling the software like Microsoft did. Lol.
Methinks a lot of the analysts still think this crap. Not me, I never thought it. I saw with my own two open eyes what happens when you have ninety million vendors making interchangeable parts for the PC , which then fought with each other for control of the Windows OS resources. One of the many reasons I bought a bunch of AAPL stock.
I wanted to DO things with a computer, not solve arbitrary, arcane little puzzles with the conflicting parts.
I was glad to come home to a Mac after a long frustrating day with Windows. (Watching a Computer Science degree person spend a couple hours trying to install a printer driver...typical.)
Watching a baby, an autistic person, and a 90 year old use an iPad intuitively. Yeah. Writing music and medical apps, etc etc. Yeah, go hardware! And software too! If not Apple, then Who else would bring us this joy? 8-)
Except that you're forgetting that many more companies making hardware have failed than succeeded. Just because Apple made it work doesn't make it the magical formula for success.
I refuse to read this DED opinion based on previous submissions, but I congratulate AI on finally labeling his work "editorial". Perhaps there is still hope.
More fool you to miss out on the finest writing AI has to offer.
When have DED's specials not been editorial? Speaking for myself I would add, I have yet to read one that wasn't spot on either, having lived and worked through the entire history of Apple with close connections to the industry myself. As you obviously take the opposite view would you care to explain on what basis and your personal qualifications / experience on which you base this to find them untrue?
I've worked in the smartphone industry for over 14 years. Every time I read something about the pre-iPhone smartphone industry written by DED, I find it riddled with factual inaccuracies. When I've pointed these inaccuracies out in the past, DED gets very defensive and has tried to argue that up is down or that red is blue. I've given up trying as it often takes a long time to dig up evidence to support what I'm saying.
So, if DED is knowingly writing bullshit about a subject area that I know a lot about then I'm going to assume that he does it every subject.
We're all crying.
In this case, you would insert rather than append an apostrophe—people's
Because "people" is already plural, you wouldn't write peoples'.
But there's a reason apostrophes can drive people crazy. If you consider the backgrounds of the many and varied peoples who now speak and write in English, it's no suprise that you will find wide disparity in these different peoples' use of details like the apostrophe.
Only sheep don't follow such rules ... ????
I've worked in the smartphone industry for over 14 years. Every time I read something about the pre-iPhone smartphone industry written by DED, I find it riddled with factual inaccuracies. When I've pointed these inaccuracies out in the past, DED gets very defensive and has tried to argue that up is down or that red is blue. I've given up trying as it often takes a long time to dig up evidence to support what I'm saying.
So, if DED is knowingly writing bullshit about a subject area that I know a lot about then I'm going to assume that he does it every subject.
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
Yeah; it's kind of ironic to see RichL criticising historic accuracy; he has quite enough 'history' himself.
Classic DED; such a pleasure to read.
In your last paragraph, you briefly allude to Google's focus on low-end devices, odd though it is to use the words Google and focus in the same sentence. I would like to you examine why Google has decided to go in this direction and what the implications are, because I think it's a very revealing move by Google.
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
Interesting conception of cowardly and being stabbed in the back you have. This is a public accessible forum directly linked to the site that you write for. You're not being stabbed in the back. If you're being stabbed at all (you've not) it's from the front.
You really need to work on your approach to criticism Dan. Have a little grace.