1STnTENDERBITS

About

Banned
Username
1STnTENDERBITS
Joined
Visits
20
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
1,331
Badges
1
Posts
460

Reactions

734Like0Dislike101Informative

  • Galaxy Watch Active, Galaxy Fit & Galaxy Buds are Samsung's new wearables

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    clarker99 said:
    1STnTENDERBITS said:
    clarker99 said:
    clarker99 said:
    clarker99 said:
    Are they doing fit bit ripoffs now?

    The AirPod ripoffs were always going to happen. 

    But...But But Apple isn't innovating!!!
    Are they actually AirPod ripoffs or the 2nd iterative advance of the Gear IconX they introduced Jul 2016?  Also isn't the Galaxy Fit just the most up to date version of the Gear Fit they brought out in Apr 2014?
    Umm, they are complete ripoffs. 

    They dont have single original design thought from TVs to refrigerators. Their successes are directly from ripping off designs from other manufacturers.

    What does that have to do with the fit bit and airpods?  Neither the buds nor the fitness band ripoff Apple or Fitbit. 
    The Galaxy Fit looks just a little bit like a fitbit... 


    Or, and bear with me here, does the Galaxy Fit look suspiciously like the Gear Fit from 2014?  Now I'm no Inspector Clouseau, but if I was to judge I'd say Sammy iterated their own product.  Wouldn't you?   Btw, the Fitbit Charge 2 you have pictured?  It came out 2 years after the Gear Fit,  So unless Samsung copied time travel from someone...
    Related image
    Gear Fit from 2014,
    Do we ignore the 2013 Fitbit Force?  In the end, Fibit sold some product and the design is far more recognized as a Fitbit. As for the ear buds, no one bought them. Being first doesnt really matter if no one buys them. Also, they are ugly.


    Do me a favor.  Add an image of the Fitbit Force and try to come up with a cogent argument of copying.  As for the buds, what does it matter if no one bought them or if they're ugly (both your opinion btw, not fact)?  You claimed they were ripoffs, nothing about whether they sold or looked good.  That's just deflecting.  We should stop.  It's obvious you were wrong and you're going to try to move the goalposts until you reach something close to being right.  It ain't gonna happen.
    muthuk_vanalingamAppleExposed

  • Apple's 'modular' Mac Pro design may mean units that connect like Lego bricks

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    Reminds me of Razer's Project Christine concept.
    Related image
    longpathqwweradoozydozenapplesnorangeswatto_cobra

  • 5G iPhone might have Samsung or MediaTek modems, says Apple's Tony Blevins

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    Alongside Intel?  Didn't Intel recently reveal they wouldn't have viable 5G modems until 2020?  If that's the case, it would be less alongside and more instead of.
    As for Samsung and MediaTek... Exynos chips have a good rep and we know the 5100 is a thing.  MediaTek's M70 is at least a completed.  The only thing I know of MediaTek is their reputation for the the chip of choice for lower tier devices.  Not sure how I feel about that.  Questionable business practices aside, there's been enough Samsung tech in Apple's devices for me to not worry about the modem quality too much.
    muthuk_vanalingam

  • Apple's Dan Riccio responds to bent iPad Pro reports, says device 'meets or exceeds' produ...

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    sflocal said:
    1STnTENDERBITS said:
    racerhomie3 said:
    mikethemartian said:
    Maybe the case meets that spec when it is milled but gets deformed during the rest of the assembly process?
    What are you even talking about. Return the thing if it appears bent to you.Why is this something you have to tell people.
    Why are you repeatedly saying "just return it"?  I think everyone here knows to return it if it bent.  But you seem hell bent (intented) on trying to down play the issue.  People hold Apple to higher standards because Apple holds themselves to higher standards.  They're responses to this issue, thus far don't reflect a high standard.  It smacks of legalese.  
    It's pretty obvious some of the bending is beyond 400 microns.  That's not explained by "tolerances".  The issue should be addressed properly so that people have confidence in the products they're buying.  "Return 'til you get a good one" isn't the solution.
    Nonsense.  Quit making stuff up to suit your narrative.  People DO expect higher standards from Apple because they're a premium company.  If something doesn't suit your standard, return it.  Case closed.  Apple isn't perfect but I wouldn't skewer the company because of some ridiculously small percentage of a product that is sold by the millions does has some kind of manufacturing issue.  

    It IS a non-issue.  YOU are WANTING it to be a bigger issue than it really is.  Nonsense like this makes for grand headlines, brings in troll-clicks to all the media sites, and in the end is forgotten about after people like you get your 15 minutes of fame.

    Returning it till you get a good one IS the solution.  If it's a bigger issue, Apple will address it in a redesign, and then people like you will then criticize Apple fixing it and not giving you lip-service.
    Calm down Susan.  Your all caps emphasis does not add gravitas to your rant. Return it until you get a good one is not a solution to the issue.  It's a remedy for one person's bent iPad.  It's not a solution to the issue of the bending. There's a difference.  Might I suggest you project your insecurities elsewhere.  How the hell would I get 15 minutes of fame from this?  You sound unhinged.
    elijahg

  • Apple's Dan Riccio responds to bent iPad Pro reports, says device 'meets or exceeds' produ...

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    randominternetperson said:
    1STnTENDERBITS said:
    racerhomie3 said:
    mikethemartian said:
    Maybe the case meets that spec when it is milled but gets deformed during the rest of the assembly process?
    What are you even talking about. Return the thing if it appears bent to you.Why is this something you have to tell people.
    Why are you repeatedly saying "just return it"?  I think everyone here knows to return it if it bent.  But you seem hell bent (intented) on trying to down play the issue.  People hold Apple to higher standards because Apple holds themselves to higher standards.  They're responses to this issue, thus far don't reflect a high standard.  It smacks of legalese.  
    It's pretty obvious some of the bending is beyond 400 microns.  That's not explained by "tolerances".  The issue should be addressed properly so that people have confidence in the products they're buying.  "Return 'til you get a good one" isn't the solution.
    That's not "pretty obvious" at all.

    The statement says that the tolerances are 400 microns.  That's an interesting fact.  If you get one that is off by more than 400 microns then Apple considers it defective, just like they would if you get one that has a screen that doesn't work.  They ship millions of devices; some will be defective.  Now we know where that line is.  We have no data about what percentage of new iPod pros are > 400 microns versus 100-399 microns versus <99 microns (none are 0 microns).  Without data, we have no idea if this is a problem or the typical internet mountain out of a molehill.
    Really not sure what you're disagreeing with.  Based on the pics floating around it is pretty obvious some of the bending is beyond 400 microns.  400 microns is almost visually imperceptible.  The bending we've seen pictured is not that.  You and I agree that bending beyond 400 microns is defective.  I said nothing about percentages.  I said some were obviously beyond 400 microns.  There's nothing to disagree with on that point.
    elijahg