Paralysis

paxman said:

ericthehalfbee said:

Google taking a page out of Samsung's playbook.

Throw anything at the wall and see what sticks.

I can't speak to the confusion caused by the alleged multiple services performing the same or similar functionality, but it makes sense for Google to offer a FaceTime replica that supports Android. There are a lot of Android owners out there and I am sure a good portion of them want FaceTime functionality and easy of use and quality. Given that Duo gives them that any FaceTime user who also communicates with Android user will obviously move over to Duo. This is where proprietary technology becomes a problem rather than a solution.

Thats why I have felt that it would be a smart thing for Apple to release a version for android. I know there are many naysayers to this, but I feel that releasing it for android is a necessity in todays cross platform smartphone world. Having it on android might also make android users more curious to about iOS and iPhone via a traditionally well built iOS app from Apple. As someone who has friends who use android, one video messaging app would be ideal to use. 

Soli said:

Paralysis said:

What does it have to do with anything? Well for one we wouldn't even being having this conversation at all if it weren't for him. Apple would not exist barring some unfathomable miracle and even then it would't be like it is today. There certainly would be no iPhone, probably no iPod or iPad and who knows what OS the mac would be running on? Could have been some variant of windows. Or Dell could have bought them out and sold it back to the shareholders as he once infamously said. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if it weren't for Steve Jobs.

Now in all seriousness I think that people reference Steve Jobs because, because they do it jokingly, and some like to reminisce and some because they feel that Tim Cook is not doing a great job as Apple's CEO. There is probably some truth in all of that.

You're saying that the company co-founded by Steve Jobs wouldn't exist today if it weren't for Steve Jobs co-founding the company. You do see that's a pointless tautology, right? 

Since you read my post then you would know it was tongue in cheek. But you did read it wrong. I was referring to Steve coming back for his second act at Apple making the company greater then anyone could have imagined, not even the most die hard Apple fan, could have imagined.

Basically, and again in all seriousness, I think there is a legitimacy when people bring up Steve Jobs. They may miss his leadership, his ability to vision the future of the tech industry and the future of Apple. Some people who love Apple do think Tim Cook is not the right guy to be the leader of Apple. There is nothing wrong with that point of view.

macxpress said:

Paralysis said:

Apple might be owned by Dell or Microsoft or may not even exist today at all if it weren't for Steve Jobs. So there is that.

So what does that have to do with anything? Steve is gone and people need to give up on this Steve would have done this, or Apple would have done this crap. 

What does it have to do with anything? Well for one we wouldn't even being having this conversation at all if it weren't for him. Apple would not exist barring some unfathomable miracle and even then it would't be like it is today. There certainly would be no iPhone, probably no iPod or iPad and who knows what OS the mac would be running on? Could have been some variant of windows. Or Dell could have bought them out and sold it back to the shareholders as he once infamously said. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if it weren't for Steve Jobs.

Now in all seriousness I think that people reference Steve Jobs because, because they do it jokingly, and some like to reminisce and some because they feel that Tim Cook is not doing a great job as Apple's CEO. There is probably some truth in all of that.

rogifan_new said:

Makes sense as no one ever says I'm going to the Target Store or Walmart Store. But I think the website should say Apple - The Domain, or Apple, The Domain. That clearly identifies it as the store name, then location.

By the same token nobody I know says "I am going to go to Apple". Adding "domain" is not going to help it roll off the tongue any easier. Whenever I hear someone say they want to go to the Apple Store they say "I am going to the Apple store". I can't possibly see them saying "I am going to the Apple Domain". It just doesn't sound right.

I guess it doesn't matter much. But I think that "Apple Store" rolls off the tongue much easier then "Apple Domain"and I dont see a reason to change that. Maybe in the long run this change makes sense.

However I would guess that at least 50% of the people who go to the Apple stores don't know the definition of the word "domain". Add to the fact that the Apple Store is still a store no matter what you call it. Its sole purpose is still to sell you things and help make a profit for Apple.

macxpress said:

bdkennedy said:

Steve would have done something for the person that bought it.

How the hell do you know what Steve would have done? I'm sick of these well if Steve were here, Apple would do this, or Steve would have done this. Steve isn't here anymore...give it a rest already! Steve isn't god and isn't everything some people made him up to be. 

Apple might be owned by Dell or Microsoft or may not even exist today at all if it weren't for Steve Jobs. So there is that.