- Last Active
- unconfirmed, member
EsquireCats said:This is why you can't just drop evidence in at the last minute. The evidence too must go through legal rigour and not just be accepted at face value. As an exaggerated example, the previous slide could say "Things we won't do", but the court would never know this if this practice was allowed.
It's like when Samsung showed photos of a "Sony" smart phone which looked identical to the iPhone 4. Samsung were attempting to make it seem like Apple had copied a poorly sold or unreleased Sony concept, when in fact it was just Apple adding a bunch of sliders and buttons to their existing iPhone 4 design as a design experiment for how they would envisage Sony would style such a device.
That Samsung case was embarrassing for Sammy every step of the way. Another funny part was when their lawyers couldn't distinguish an iPad from the Samsung knockoff.
AppleExposed said:chasm said:I’m not sure how Avon B7 was unaware that indeed, dozens if not hundreds of units shipped ... to reviewers. In the US, at least, the majority of them “broke” (had catastrophic failures). Um, that’s sorta the reason the review units were recalled and the preorders cancelled and the official launch delayed, Avon ...
Here is the quote as is from the poster in question (and in this thread):
"100% were defective. No PR disaster."
Perhaps you were unaware of that claim?
I am perfectly aware that dozens or hundreds of units shipped. That isn't being questioned.
In fact, I stated (again in this thread) that units were shipped worldwide and only a handful had problems. Many of those were due to a communication issue (they tried to peel off the plastic covering thinking it was removeable).
I also provided a link to a major review site that had to return their unit which had had no problems whatsoever. It was functioning as intended.
Here are two more major sites that returned their units undamaged:
It is more than clear that the original claim is false.
However, moving on from that irrefutable conclusion I think it's reasonable to assume that, apart from the big name commentators who did have problems, most simply didn't. The logic being that if they had failed they would have reported on it.
How are you reaching the conclusion of the majority of them broke when we only know of a handful of cases and no one knows how many were shipped in the first place?
Remember though, my comment was countering the claim that the 100% were defective.
100% of them were defective which is why they pulled them off the market.
Some defective products take 5 years to break, these were breaking within DAYS, so to deny that they were defected or pretend like the ones shipped back worked fine is delusional.
I also find it funny that the media had a frenzy over less than 1% of iPhones bending (most with people forcing them to bend) while a product like the Galaxy Fold which is designed to bend, breaks when it does. No PR disaster.crowley said:9secondkox2 said:Um... yes. 100% of reviewers broke their Folds on accident. There was no one with a perfect device. It was a dismal failure. A flop.
A number of them certainly failed, and some design flaws were publicised. But 100% failure, or even the majority? I'm not sure I've seen that claim backed up, though it's being thrown around a lot in this thread.
Let's not move the goalposts. I did not say 100% broke, someone else did and I wouldn't doubt that either. If one review unit was shipped back without being opened that doesn't mean the product wasn't defected. They were all breaking while using the selling point function(folding).jeffythequick said:Good on Samsung!The road to innovation is not a smooth one. It's rocky, has cliffs on either side, and is narrow.or, from T. Roosevelt:
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly;
who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming;
but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
who knows great enthusiasms,
the great devotions;
who spends himself in a worthy cause;
who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly,
so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.
Told you people would make Samsung out to be some hero. Didn't know it would be this soon.
Samsung copied an Apple patent. Threw crap at the wall before it was finished and failed.
THE END.ericthehalfbee said:You guys are spending too much time talking about the display and folding issues.The real problem with the Galaxy Fold is it runs Android. The operating system that's complete and utter garbage on a tablet. So you have a clunky Android phone with a small screen that folds out into a useless Android tablet. You don't get the best of both worlds - you get the worst. A regular large screen Android phone (like the S10+ or Note) is substantially better than the Fold.
What would you prefer, a single 'small' screen and the need to make it smaller by 'splitting'' it, or the possibility of have the 'split' screens on there own phone sized screens?
That's a complete no brainer.
Forget tablet use. A larger screen is better and moreso if it is flexible (pun intended). Browsing your gallery, photo retouching, text editing, even viewing video and in spite of tje aspect ratio.
Call it a folding phablet if you wish but don't try to label it uniquely as a tablet because it is more than that and I think Apple will apply the exact same approach to what Huawei and Samsung have done when the Apple folding phone finally appears.
Delusional. Apple has been perfecting this tech for years. IF Apple decides to release it, it will be nothing like this garbage.
Maybe you need a history lesson?
1. The only way a 100% defective claim can hold up is if Samsung itself confirms it.
Yeah that's gonna happen. /s
Way to move the goalposts to something you know will never happen.
They DID confirm it by recalling the product. This is what companies do when a product is defective.
There’s a reason Apple doesn’t go after that sort of customer. I used to suggest that if you absolutely had to get an Android tablet, at least get the Google one for a relatively better experience, but now ... it’s pretty much Surface (nobody IME buys a Surface because it’s a tablet, they buy it as an expensive but very lightweight Windows laptop) or iPad, and I think we all know which one is a better experience."
Forum won't allow me to quote you but:
My sister actually bought a few Amazon tablets for 50 bucks each. They were in the trash weeks later. This skews sales data and now "Android" gained 3 tablet users. So some tablets do start below 100 bucks (which only proves your point).
Surface is also a bad idea because it's a Windows device pretending to be an iPad. My mom got one thinking it would be as easy to use and it's a nightmare. She stopped using it.
rezwits said:Just my 2¢
I thinking making 5 OSes (iOS, tvOS, macOS, iPadOS, and watchOS), is pretty hard. I mean I understand they share a "core" but...
I mean it's not just as easy as creating an OS on an image with Chrome...
And not to mention the HARDWARE for 5 OSes to run on...
This is HARD, have your ever said to yourself "The world needs a new OS?" haha
I wondered if iPadOS would be too much of a distraction. Adding another OS seems like a lot of extra work.
Although hypocritically, I'd love to see HomepodOS, CarOS and AirPodOS.