1STnTENDERBITS

mike1 said:

entropys said:

It would have to be a completely different design to have noise cancelation. Ego, they are not airpods. And why not beats?

Not necessarily. If the noise cancellation tech is all electronic, just the internal H1 chip would need to be updated.

Noise cancelling would be the reason I upgraded my AirPods.

Active noise cancellation is all electronic but it still heavily depends on a sound seal.  NC tech uses microphones to algorithmically cancel outside noise.  The mics can't account for the sound bleed around the edges of the AirPods.  An NC model based on Apple In-Ear Headphones could provide the sound seal.  

sapporobabyrtrns said:

AF_Hitt said:

entropys said:

It would have to be a completely different design to have noise cancelation. Ego, they are not airpods. And why not beats?

Apple used to make noise isolating wired buds and the regular wired EarPods at the same time, so there’s no reason to believe they couldn’t have two models of AirPods too.

When was this. Don’t remember this. 

AF_Hitt is referencing the regular EarPods and the In-Ear Headphones.  Apple still sells both.  Notice that Hitt said "noise isolating", not noise cancelling.  In-Ears, with silicone or foam, offer natural noise isolation because they close off the ear canal.  They don't offer noise cancellation.  If Apple does noise cancellation on AirPods and wants to keep the same basic shape, I'd assume the model would be based on the In-Ear Headphones.

radarthekat said:

1STnTENDERBITS said:

corrections said:

1STnTENDERBITS said:

bulk001 said:

It is not being graded on a curve. The financial press is highlighting the issue and the stock got slammed. No need to be overly sensitive and paranoid about it. 

Not only that, every tech site and tech youtuber is reporting on it.  People say DED editorials have a reputation for over the top disproportionate outrage.  After reading this and the last editorial, I'm inclined to agree.  A cursory glance at the internet shows Samsung being handed their ass in a hat.

Ok so this is really simple so I'll just briefly lay it out. But I clearly wasn't actually saying that nobody was critical of Samsung, in a article where I myself am being critical, and in which I quoted various criticisms. I'm noting that big media sites have not been raising alarm that Samsung's phone units went down twice as fast as Apple, etc. And yet for Apple it is spoken of as being in end times. I can really spend any more time making this simpler. If you can't tell some bloggers (including me) from national media coverage, come on.

Second, its not just the presence of criticism, but the extent and interpretation of that. Sure, Apple does get/deserve more attention/criticism because it sells the most and rules profits and is out ahead everywhere that commercial matters. However, if thats the case then Verge et all should dial down their constant equation of Apple and Samsung, or Pixel, or whatever Android talking points they have, and give them as some sort of unbiased opinion. A $999 iPhone X is shocking, but a $2000 Fold prototype is really reasonable given the satisfying click.

 


 

Your observations tend to overlook fundamental truths.  Chief among them is Apple is judged differently because Apple has risen beyond a tech brand to being part of the cultural fabric.  That is not what Samsung is.  Samsung is simply the closest tech competitor that Apple has.  Samsung is typically judged as such; an Apple competitor.  They are not on the same level of cultural significance.  You expecting media to react the same for each company is unrealistic.  I'm pretty sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.   

Your arguments wouldn't be so bad if they didn't come across as petulant and kind of unhinged.  Someone above said it best, you come off as the High Sparrow of Apple.  Your points present as a scattershot collection of badly parsed quotes, shade, outright aggressive negativity, and tenuous logic connections.  An example of the latter is in your last sentence to me:
"A $999 iPhone X is shocking, but a $2000 Fold prototype is really reasonable given the satisfying click. "
The $1000 iPhone was a shock... in 2017  A big part of that shock was being the first mainstream phone to debut with that sticker price.  It was a shock for Apple supporters and detractors alike.  Fast forward in time, more phones break that $1K barrier and no, it's not as shocking.  The Fold at $2K raises and eyebrow, but nearly universally every reviewer says no one should buy it.  

To borrow from your line.  Okay, this is really simple so I'll tl;dr it.  Apple's influence and reach far outstrips Samsung's.  They are never going to be compared the same until either Apple's influence wanes, or Samsung's influence increases.  

  

Your comment made me think you might be onto something.  And I get your point.  However, the bottom line is that the criticism of Apple is not in service to society or cultural advancement, is it?  Just look at it; it’s petty, virtually always proven over time to be fundamentally off base, and outright incorrect.  The motivation doesn’t align with your premise.  And the effect doesn’t serve society.  

The argument your making is for a separate tangential point.  The premise DED argued was Samsung isn't judged as harshly as Apple.  I'd agree.  They also aren't as effusively praised as Apple either.  This is where cultural relevance comes into play.  People care more about Apple - be it positive or negative - and it elicits magnified responses.  I seriously doubt Samsung will ever grow to have that level of influence.  The bottom line isn't whether or not criticism of Apple is in service to society or cultural advancement.  My premise has nothing to do with that.  If I'm honest, I don't even know what that even means.  But I do know it has nothing to do with my premise.  My premise is pretty simple.  Samsung and Apple operate on different levels of expectation in the public eye.  

Maybe this analogy will help sum up my premise.  Tiger Woods is Apple.  No matter what he does, good or bad, it's going to move the needle in dramatic ways.  Dustin Johnson is Samsung.  Even though he is the world's #1 ranked golfer and Samsung is the world's #1 seller of phones, there's nothing either of those two can do to move the needle like Tiger and Apple.  To expect that to be the case - as DED argues - makes no sense and is unrealistic.

corrections said:

1STnTENDERBITS said:

bulk001 said:

It is not being graded on a curve. The financial press is highlighting the issue and the stock got slammed. No need to be overly sensitive and paranoid about it. 

Not only that, every tech site and tech youtuber is reporting on it.  People say DED editorials have a reputation for over the top disproportionate outrage.  After reading this and the last editorial, I'm inclined to agree.  A cursory glance at the internet shows Samsung being handed their ass in a hat.

Ok so this is really simple so I'll just briefly lay it out. But I clearly wasn't actually saying that nobody was critical of Samsung, in a article where I myself am being critical, and in which I quoted various criticisms. I'm noting that big media sites have not been raising alarm that Samsung's phone units went down twice as fast as Apple, etc. And yet for Apple it is spoken of as being in end times. I can really spend any more time making this simpler. If you can't tell some bloggers (including me) from national media coverage, come on.

Second, its not just the presence of criticism, but the extent and interpretation of that. Sure, Apple does get/deserve more attention/criticism because it sells the most and rules profits and is out ahead everywhere that commercial matters. However, if thats the case then Verge et all should dial down their constant equation of Apple and Samsung, or Pixel, or whatever Android talking points they have, and give them as some sort of unbiased opinion. A $999 iPhone X is shocking, but a $2000 Fold prototype is really reasonable given the satisfying click.

 


 

Your observations tend to overlook fundamental truths.  Chief among them is Apple is judged differently because Apple has risen beyond a tech brand to being part of the cultural fabric.  That is not what Samsung is.  Samsung is simply the closest tech competitor that Apple has.  Samsung is typically judged as such; an Apple competitor.  They are not on the same level of cultural significance.  You expecting media to react the same for each company is unrealistic.  I'm pretty sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.   

Your arguments wouldn't be so bad if they didn't come across as petulant and kind of unhinged.  Someone above said it best, you come off as the High Sparrow of Apple.  Your points present as a scattershot collection of badly parsed quotes, shade, outright aggressive negativity, and tenuous logic connections.  An example of the latter is in your last sentence to me:
"A $999 iPhone X is shocking, but a $2000 Fold prototype is really reasonable given the satisfying click. "
The $1000 iPhone was a shock... in 2017  A big part of that shock was being the first mainstream phone to debut with that sticker price.  It was a shock for Apple supporters and detractors alike.  Fast forward in time, more phones break that $1K barrier and no, it's not as shocking.  The Fold at $2K raises and eyebrow, but nearly universally every reviewer says no one should buy it.  

To borrow from your line.  Okay, this is really simple so I'll tl;dr it.  Apple's influence and reach far outstrips Samsung's.  They are never going to be compared the same until either Apple's influence wanes, or Samsung's influence increases.  

  

bulk001 said:

It is not being graded on a curve. The financial press is highlighting the issue and the stock got slammed. No need to be overly sensitive and paranoid about it. 

Not only that, every tech site and tech youtuber is reporting on it.  People say DED editorials have a reputation for over the top disproportionate outrage.  After reading this and the last editorial, I'm inclined to agree.  A cursory glance at the internet shows Samsung being handed their ass in a hat.