nemoeac

nolamacguy said:

zimmie said:

Griping about this is like complaining that people use "literally" to mean "figuratively", when that practice started over 200 years ago, and less than fifty years after the word "literally" entered common use. "Literally" has been used to mean "figuratively" for over 80% of its life.

wait, what? id never heard of literally being used for figuratively until the recent wave of stupids. what data did you find to indicate otherwise?

Yep.  It's been a pet peeve of mine for a long time.  Literally is based on the word literature and it's supposed to mean "as it is written"...but rampant misuse has caused the meaning to be updated to "as if it were written".  It kinda leaves us with a gap in our language for describing something that actually is completely true or factual.  It should be "literally".

Things like this used to bother me a lot more than it does now.  If you accept the fact that languages are not static and that they are constantly evolving, it becomes a little bit easier to stomach.  But basically - if a large enough sampling of people misuse a word for a long enough period of time - our language will be updated so that their misuse actually becomes accepted use.

knowitall said:

Prof_Peabody said:

I hate these kinds of articles.  DED I presume?  AppleInsider doesn't do itself any favours by printing this kind of one-sided garbage.  A "year in review" type of article should contain the minuses as well as the plusses.  

A few that come to mind:

- the very, very late debut of the very, very expensive Apple Watch
- Apple TV being so delayed that it actually has last year's internals (for twice the price)
- the most talked about feature of the new Apple TV (skinny cable package) pulled at last second. 
- finally updating the iPad mini after three full years of languor. 
- the new $200 trackpad!  
- the new iPad that's more expensive than a laptop but half as capable.  
- Advertisements in the OS

I know others won't necessarily agree with me on all of these but the point is that there are many points of view and also pros and cons.  

These long, poorly written articles full of bitterness, that praise Apple to the heavens, while jousting against imaginary critics are tiresome, unfair, and uninteresting once you realize how biased they are.  Please stop. Someone knock that chip off Daniel's shoulder so he can write properly.  

For me the lows are the 100(?) billion dollar stock buyback (aka money burn) that is a real insult to its customers and to all people without much financial clout, it also is rather painful to think wat could have been achieved instead: saving Africa from the rhino and elephant poachers, fund the start of the space economy (which is the future of the economy as a whole), to name a few; and Apples distractions into 'political' matters.

The trend you mention: ever increasing prices, demanded by the shareholders, is also very worrisome; at some point - let's say 'Peak Apple' - customers will choose an alternative.

LMAO!  How ridiculous!!!  When did it become my responsibility to save Africa from the poachers???  If it's a worthy cause, perhaps the government can take a portion of the tax revenue they collect from ALL citizens and use it to stop the poaching... But the suggestion that Apple Shareholders should foot the bill is idiotic!  

I'm a shareholder and so far, I'm happy with the way Apple has chosen to spend my money - especially the share repurchaese program.

DanW13 said:

The best thing Tim Cook & Co. could have done was to pull all sales of iPhones from AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and anywhere else iPhones were sold and managed to bring that all under one roof (Apple Stores) and also to offer their own upgrade program, now the iPhone won't be in any more competition with likes of Samsung phones and others so that alone should increase sales of iPhones thru out the US perhaps 5 fold if not more. Regarding the article, Fantastic...best article I've read in a long while and it gets rather tiring reading all at they read and the tripe about Apple this, Apple that, Apple won't this or Apple won't that or Apple can't do this, that or the other....Good God how do their editors allow such to be published ?? It gets so old that sure some will eventually believe some of hate filled articles floating around the WWW but I hope more people believe what they read and Sell Sell Sell as Cramer would Demand them to do knowing that the stock is about to Crash & Burn and leaves more shares for smart people to Buy Buy Buy...I'm a Apple Shareholder and will continue to be a Apple Shareholder, The way I see Apple is that folk's should Buy it for Looks, Buy it for life !! 

Boy I'm sure glad you're not in charge of Apple retail!  Pulling the phone out of the carriers inventories would have a significant negative effect on sales numbers!

Personally, i always buy unlocked - from the Apple Store - but many, many people don't!  Many people are not near an Apple Store and for a number of reasons don't want to order online.  Having the phone available in easy to access partner locations is essential!

Increasing sales in the US five-fold?  By making it more difficult for a large number of people to get one?  Wow.  I would LOVE to try a little bit of whatever it is you're smoking!  

Prof_Peabody said:

I hate these kinds of articles.  DED I presume?  AppleInsider doesn't do itself any favours by printing this kind of one-sided garbage.  A "year in review" type of article should contain the minuses as well as the plusses.  

A few that come to mind:

- the very, very late debut of the very, very expensive Apple Watch
- Apple TV being so delayed that it actually has last year's internals (for twice the price)
- the most talked about feature of the new Apple TV (skinny cable package) pulled at last second. 
- finally updating the iPad mini after three full years of languor. 
- the new $200 trackpad!  
- the new iPad that's more expensive than a laptop but half as capable.  
- Advertisements in the OS

I know others won't necessarily agree with me on all of these but the point is that there are many points of view and also pros and cons.  

These long, poorly written articles full of bitterness, that praise Apple to the heavens, while jousting against imaginary critics are tiresome, unfair, and uninteresting once you realize how biased they are.  Please stop. Someone knock that chip off Daniel's shoulder so he can write properly.  

Boy, I'd rather read DeD articles than the crap in your post.  This article is factual.  He's writing about the health of the company in terms of revenue, market share and earnings.  You are whining about specific products.  From an investors standpoint, I don't see a single negative thing about anything in your list - and it's hilarious that you are attributing a "negative" to Apple for failing to deliver a skinny bundle of channels - claiming that it was pulled at the last minute!  I must have missed the press conference when Tim Cook announced that they were pulling it.  Duh!  It was an unconfirmed rumour!!!  Your list shows just how out of touch with reality you actually are.  Daniels articles may sound one-sided but they are in fact accurate and factual.  You claim that any worthwhile article should be balanced and if its going to include positive things, it should also include negative things - so It's funny/strange that I don't see you commenting on the overwhelmingly negative articles that get posted almost daily.  Why aren't you chastising those writers for not including any pluses?  Oh!  Because you're a troll!  Got it.  Thanks.

ps:  if you're going to say something negative about DED, you should also say something positive as any good comment should contain balance.

Loved this article Daniel - thanks for aggregating and analyzing the data and for sharing it!

ronn said:

IndigoBlueUSA said:

Has anyone truly read the proposal??? Where does the author of that proposal advocate solely awarding positions in senior management or the board of directors based on colour or race?  NOWHERE!!!

[ .. ]

So let's stop w/ the BS statements of reverse discrimination and all other defenses to justify Apple...

No one reads anymore. They just spout nonsense. Apple fanboys just about lose their shit when talk of diversity rears its head. Apple hasn't done enough for diversity, especially given the rhetoric Cook espouses. Talk is cheap. Even if this proposal is rejected, it may spur more concrete efforts on Apple's part.

Forced diversity is bad and it's wrong to enforce.  No decisions anytime anywhere should be based on the colour of somebody's skin.  Proponents of forced diversity are in fact racists.  It doesn't matter if the decision is favourable or unfavourable.

Can anyone on this forum that is pro-diversity explain to me why somebody less-qualified or less-suited for a position be awarded the position because of their skin colour?

No.  You can't.  Because there is no reason that makes sense.