tycho_macuser

holyone said:

StrangeDays said:

holyone said:

Revolutionary things come from revolutionary people, and sadly Apple lost theirs having first fired him then got him back, there more one looks around beyond Apple fandom the more noticeable how intrinsic and inseparable dynamic leaders are to the companies they lead. What is Tesla if not Musk, what is Amazon if not Bezos and if this assertion hold true then what is Apple if not Jobs, how much of these companies is essentially the will and vision of these guys and can they be the same with out them.

It's nice rhetoric, but not law. Disney is still cranking out magic despite losing its founder. I'm sure there are others if you look for it.

Man SrangeDays you enjoy posting on other's post but I'm great full you challenged my points instead of some dismissive and condescending comment, thanks.  


To the excellent point you raise, true Disney is still cranking up the magic and Ford still makes cars, but when Walt ran things Disney created Mikey mouse and Lion king nothing recently comes anywhere close to those in endurance and cultural relevance, and there's nothing much to be said about morden Ford really other then they're still around. I'm not saying the death of the leader means the company withers and die, that would mean that those companies were not that impressive to begin with, Disney won't just die, Walts' efforts like Steve's were just too monumental and heculian to be so easily squandered, even by the most incompetent successor. what I'm saying is that these companies are never ever going to be the same as what made them so special was so closely link to the people who in many cases founded them, and lead them to great success and how that in many ways is the way of nature, like how there have been many musicians who've come and many to come still but there'll only be one Mickael Jackson

nhughes said:

Rayz2016 said:

nhughes said:

radarthekat said:

nhughes said:

tycho_macuser said:

Lol.
Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...

I read this blurb on 9to5:
“The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”

Buuuuut, on this site:

“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”

I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. 
Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.

sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!

You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it. 

4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners. 

None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.

A higher price is not a corner cut. 

The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.

Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.

Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut.  The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it.  If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all?  Makes no sense to call this a cut corner. 

Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review. 

I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost. 

If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad. 

It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly. 

I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'

The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner.
A hike in price is not a cut corner. 
The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.

Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out. 

Thanks. The input is genuinely appreciated. I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy." Taking a complex, lengthy take on a product and boiling it down to a headline or single tl;dr paragraph is difficult. We do the best we can, but obviously some efforts will be better than others. I hope that a prospective buyer -- one who maybe doesn't have the time/patience  to read the full review -- at least sees the opening paragraphs and gets a good feel for my sentiment on this product and its strengths and shortcomings. I maintain that most buyers will be well served by the $330 iPad for years to come. 

spacekid said:

tycho_macuser said:

boltsfan17 said:

jungmark said:

Excellent. Just because Donnie doesn't understand science, doesn't mean we roll back progress. 

Science isn't always right. They still can't figure out how much carbon emissions are from humans vs the environment. 

Oh good point.... if we don’t have EXACT answers- f the whole thing. Throw the whole world in the crapper.

I admire the cut of your jib sir!

On the contrary, your view would be we think we understand it so let's bankrupt our country. Then China just waits and takes over even more.

boltsfan17 said:

jungmark said:

Excellent. Just because Donnie doesn't understand science, doesn't mean we roll back progress. 

Science isn't always right. They still can't figure out how much carbon emissions are from humans vs the environment.