Funny, I did the same and came to the opposite conclusion, sort of. I ended up figuring either he was originally from the US and living abroad, or he had immigrated to the US, because he seems to follow both conventions. I didn't see the same message you saw about euthanasia or that would have been a dead giveaway. Either way, it's always fun to sharpen the old analytical skills.
Ugh... Had the flu last month. I need like a year off, work is getting tiring.
A month in the Bahamas is sounding really good right now. You down? I kid, of course, but only because there's no way I could afford to miss the work right now.
The first Android phone was the HTC Dream (neigh T-Mobile G1), released in September 2008. That's not 3 years after the iPhone, but I'll grant you that it is a little over a year.
I didn't even dispute your claims against Samsung, though; I merely pointed out that Samsung is not Android and that they could have made the same phone with a different OS and it would have been just as much of a "copy". However, since you chose to push the issue, the Galaxy S looks a lot more like the Behold (which you also linked to) than the iPhone.
What were they gonna do, put razor-sharp 90 degree corners on every edge and cover the friggin' thing in buttons? No, that would be extremely uncomfortable to hold and unwieldy to use, so they rounded the corners and reduced the buttons to what they thought were necessary (in the Behold), because those choices, simply put, were just logical. They then reduced the buttons further based on market research and seeing how their phones were actually used, resulting in the Galaxy S. Natural progression, my friend.
If they were going to copy the iPhone, they would have done so in 2008 when they released the Behold, not in 2010 with the Galaxy S.
I'm not exactly what you'd call a Samsung fanboy; the first time we went over this, I actually quite disliked the Galaxy line but I did quite enjoy the Nexus 6 I had at the time. That changed with the Galaxy S7, of course; then, there's the Galaxy S8 which, of course, you'll say copied the iPhone X's no home button design more than half a year before the iPhone X even came out.
What you don't see is that Apple and Samsung are the leaders here for a reason. For every example you can come up with of Samsung (which, I'll repeat, is not Android) copying something from Apple, I can provide an example in the other direction as well. They work together, they "steal" from each other (neigh, they have back room agreements) and sue each other for show. Fanboys on both sides love it, so it really is good marketing. Samsung knows that most people prefer Android (look at sales numbers, this is a fact, not an opinion and, certainly, not an attack on iOS or Apple) so they won't be hurt by "losing" a handful of lawsuits to Apple and the pricing they offer Apple on parts they can't really get from anyone else in the quality or quantity that they need reflects the settlements and judgments Samsung ends up paying as part of this process. Apple knows this, as well; they know they paid $584 million more for parts from Samsung after the settlement than they otherwise would have, and they know they paid $1.05 billion more for parts from Samsung after the judgment than they otherwise would have. And both parties are fine with it, because it's just marketing. Samsung gives Apple almost $1.6B and Apple gives it right back because it's all for show.
Do you think the iPhone would be what it was without Samsung RAM and displays? Every time Apple has tried to move away from Samsung for some part or another, be it in the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook lineup, they come back because people complain about the inferior quality of the new part. Think pink screens. That's what happened when they tried to source displays form LG. You think Samsung doesn't know they could destroy Apple by refusing to sell them parts anymore? And it would be a small (and temporary) hit for Samsung because, with Apple gone, their customers would have to go elsewhere and they'd either use those parts in their own consumer products or sell them to smaller competitors. Of course, Apple knows this; they know the iPhone wouldn't be competitive with an inferior display, they know the Mac wouldn't be competitive with an inferior display, they know they can edge a bit more performance out of their soldered-in RAM at a slightly lower voltage if they use Samsung DRAM instead of, say, Micron (look at the the GPU overclocking community discussing the current generation of nVidia cards for an example of this). So
My theory explains all three. Most countries in the world use the . and , in exactly the opposite manner that we do in the US, so what we would write as $1,000.00 might be $1.000,00 elsewhere. Likewise, many countries that use a comma as a radix point also put their currency mark at the end of the number. Further evidence in favor of my theory is that the non-limited version of the device being discussed sells for $30,000, not $30.00.
Of course, nospam007 would have to confirm one way or the other, but I'm partial to theories that explain all of the unknowns, in the absence of concrete proof.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I skipped right over the AC comment he was replying to and, thus, missed the sarcastic tone of his reply. Thanks for making me take a second look.
Judging by the placement of the dollar sign at the end of the number, I'd wager that nospam007 hails from a country where , is the decimal and . is the separator. That's actually most of the world, mind you.
It wasn't long ago that Apple made machines that suited those needs. They hooked many of us and many of us have invested heavily in their platform, only to have them decide half a decade ago that "Pro" meant "spends enough time on Facebook they care if it loads a little faster".
I don't think a PC laptop will fit in my wallet, but that's where I'm arguing from.
That sounds pretty insulting to me. Pointing out a error is not an insult. The word "incompetent" is an insult.
and I replied:
If the theory it wrong, it is incompetent. That doesn't say anything about the person who applied the theory, of course.
I left the typo because it's a quote (since I know you'll pick at that next), but that's the context (from about 8 comments up, now) here. The definition of incompetent was never relevant to the point I was making when I posted that yesterday, and I'm pretty sure I understand the point being made since I was the one making it.
I was just pointing out that a smartphone probably isn't the best choice for someone who just wants their phone to be a phone. Apple has never made any other kind of phone, so if that's what someone truly wants (as west claims he does), they wouldn't want any of Apple's offerings. Of course, they also wouldn't want Android, but most Android manufacturers still make basic dumbphones, as well.
Link 1: There's no way they laid all the groundwork for switching from Java to the Java-derived DALVIK and whipped together the Android API and SDK based on DALVIK (which would have needed to be created from scratch given that Danger used native Java APIs and the Java SDK) in the handful of months between the iPhone being unveiled and the first Android phone coming to market. There wasn't even enough time to get FCC approval and tool for production in that time, and the addition of a touch interface would have necessitated both re-approval and re-tooling.
Link 2: That's Samsung, not Android. Samsung could well have done the same with Windows Phone, or even their own OS.
My nearest locker is 5 minutes away at the grocery store I go to twice a week, but that's a moot point because I've gotten returns with free shipping as recently as 2 weeks ago. The return that's being picked up today I'm paying to ship back because of the reason for the return, but that's my fault for not researching better before buying and the $10 and change is still cheaper than gas and wear/tear on my car (and my back) to drive to the nearest Best Buy (10min), Walmart (20min), or Fry's (30min), the hour or more of my time waiting in the returns line, and the stress of arguing with the minimum-wage clerk who's looking for any excuse to not take it back.
Many things are worth more than money. The lower the amount, the longer that list becomes.
That said, I didn't know Amazon actually charged return shipping ever until yesterday. In literally two decades, I have not once paid return shipping.
And none of that negates the needs of the professional power user, nor of the gamer. Go ahead and make a low-end model for people who don't need the power (and if we're talking about a laptop, that probably is most people, as most people who need that power have a dedicated workstation and very few of them actually do need that full power while mobile (though many of them do need considerably more than the average user). But what Apple has done is make that low-end model, then remix it, add a better screen, little faster CPU (but certainly not a workhorse), little more RAM (but certainly not enough for the kinds of things professional power users use their machines for), and call it PRO.
The MacBook Pro used to be what that user wanted. That hasn't been the case for about 5 years now, in no small part because everything Apple does to the lower Mac lines ends up making its way to the Pro lines in a release cycle or two; and that includes the dumbing down beyond the point of usefulness for most tasks beyond typical office use, web browsing, and maybe a bit of development.
Hell, the 2016 MacBook Pro I'm typing this on has trouble keeping up with a Twitch stream. Neither my 17" 2011, my 13" 2012, nor the 15" 2014 retina I passed along to my wife have trouble with that, but they put a "PRO" GPU in this model that is bested by workstation GPUs from 7 years ago and it just can't keep up with h.264 decoding. Disabling hardware acceleration and rendering on the CPU is a no-go, as well, because the poor thermal design of this machine causes it to throttle in mere seconds if I do that.
To be honest, that's not even acceptable for the average user's Facebook machine; there's plenty of h.264 to be found there.
Thin and light are considerations for some types of work. The ability to render a scene or compile a project without thermal throttling to hell and back and taking an entire workday are considerations for other types of work. The latter tends to appeal to the type of customer who would have a dedicated workstation (not the Mac Pro since 2013, though) for the real heavy lifting, but still needs some mobility.
Remember when Apple's whole thing was how much faster the PPC CPUs they used were than Intel's offerings? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system loved their platform. Remember when, even after the switch to Intel, Apple still sold at least one system with the fastest of Intel's CPUs in it, plenty of RAM, and the ability to expand the system to fit the workload you were throwing at it? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system loved their platform. Remember when Apple started soldering things in, using 2-or-3-generation-old CPUs, dumbing down the graphics on even their desktop and PRO systems, removing ports, and hindering expandability and compatibility to a degree most professional users who might need to connect to something off-site during their travels simply cannot abite? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system left their platform.
I bought this laptop thinking "it can't be as bad as I keep hearing it is." I mean, after all, I didn't have any trouble getting real work done on my older Macs, so why should this newer one with a better battery, better screen, and faster CPU be worse?
being called incompetent... I really need to stop posting early in the morning... or at all, given how far average reading comprehension seems to have fallen around here.
My friend, you miss the point. First of all, the phrase "incompetent theory" is from TFA. Second, my point doesn't in any way hing on the definition of incompetent or whether it applies to the theory being called incompetent. Rather, my point was that the adjective was being applied to the theory, rather than the person applying the theory and, thus, was not an insult. It doesn't matter what the word means or how appropriate its use was, if it was not being applied to a person, it was not insulting a person. Period.
I'm not the one who initially used that word, I was simply using it to avoid further confusing the issue by introducing yet more terminology. The reality is that none of that has anything at all to do with my point, which was that it was the theory that was being called incompetent, and not the person applying the theory; therefore, the person was not being insulted.
The phrase "incompetent theory" came from TFA, by the way.
And a theory that goes against what we already know does, in fact, lack the "skill" (neigh, property, but I digress) of even potentially being correct. Incompetent is actually a pretty decent word to use to describe that, IMO. Not what I would have chosen, personally, but clear enough in intent.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, I did the same and came to the opposite conclusion, sort of. I ended up figuring either he was originally from the US and living abroad, or he had immigrated to the US, because he seems to follow both conventions. I didn't see the same message you saw about euthanasia or that would have been a dead giveaway. Either way, it's always fun to sharpen the old analytical skills.
It's hard to tell with you sometimes, especially via text. Try a sarcasm tag next time?
Ugh... Had the flu last month. I need like a year off, work is getting tiring.
A month in the Bahamas is sounding really good right now. You down? I kid, of course, but only because there's no way I could afford to miss the work right now.
The first Android phone was the HTC Dream (neigh T-Mobile G1), released in September 2008. That's not 3 years after the iPhone, but I'll grant you that it is a little over a year.
I didn't even dispute your claims against Samsung, though; I merely pointed out that Samsung is not Android and that they could have made the same phone with a different OS and it would have been just as much of a "copy". However, since you chose to push the issue, the Galaxy S looks a lot more like the Behold (which you also linked to) than the iPhone.
What were they gonna do, put razor-sharp 90 degree corners on every edge and cover the friggin' thing in buttons? No, that would be extremely uncomfortable to hold and unwieldy to use, so they rounded the corners and reduced the buttons to what they thought were necessary (in the Behold), because those choices, simply put, were just logical. They then reduced the buttons further based on market research and seeing how their phones were actually used, resulting in the Galaxy S. Natural progression, my friend.
If they were going to copy the iPhone, they would have done so in 2008 when they released the Behold, not in 2010 with the Galaxy S.
I'm not exactly what you'd call a Samsung fanboy; the first time we went over this, I actually quite disliked the Galaxy line but I did quite enjoy the Nexus 6 I had at the time. That changed with the Galaxy S7, of course; then, there's the Galaxy S8 which, of course, you'll say copied the iPhone X's no home button design more than half a year before the iPhone X even came out.
What you don't see is that Apple and Samsung are the leaders here for a reason. For every example you can come up with of Samsung (which, I'll repeat, is not Android) copying something from Apple, I can provide an example in the other direction as well. They work together, they "steal" from each other (neigh, they have back room agreements) and sue each other for show. Fanboys on both sides love it, so it really is good marketing. Samsung knows that most people prefer Android (look at sales numbers, this is a fact, not an opinion and, certainly, not an attack on iOS or Apple) so they won't be hurt by "losing" a handful of lawsuits to Apple and the pricing they offer Apple on parts they can't really get from anyone else in the quality or quantity that they need reflects the settlements and judgments Samsung ends up paying as part of this process. Apple knows this, as well; they know they paid $584 million more for parts from Samsung after the settlement than they otherwise would have, and they know they paid $1.05 billion more for parts from Samsung after the judgment than they otherwise would have. And both parties are fine with it, because it's just marketing. Samsung gives Apple almost $1.6B and Apple gives it right back because it's all for show.
Do you think the iPhone would be what it was without Samsung RAM and displays? Every time Apple has tried to move away from Samsung for some part or another, be it in the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook lineup, they come back because people complain about the inferior quality of the new part. Think pink screens. That's what happened when they tried to source displays form LG. You think Samsung doesn't know they could destroy Apple by refusing to sell them parts anymore? And it would be a small (and temporary) hit for Samsung because, with Apple gone, their customers would have to go elsewhere and they'd either use those parts in their own consumer products or sell them to smaller competitors. Of course, Apple knows this; they know the iPhone wouldn't be competitive with an inferior display, they know the Mac wouldn't be competitive with an inferior display, they know they can edge a bit more performance out of their soldered-in RAM at a slightly lower voltage if they use Samsung DRAM instead of, say, Micron (look at the the GPU overclocking community discussing the current generation of nVidia cards for an example of this). So
My theory explains all three. Most countries in the world use the . and , in exactly the opposite manner that we do in the US, so what we would write as $1,000.00 might be $1.000,00 elsewhere. Likewise, many countries that use a comma as a radix point also put their currency mark at the end of the number. Further evidence in favor of my theory is that the non-limited version of the device being discussed sells for $30,000, not $30.00.
Of course, nospam007 would have to confirm one way or the other, but I'm partial to theories that explain all of the unknowns, in the absence of concrete proof.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I skipped right over the AC comment he was replying to and, thus, missed the sarcastic tone of his reply. Thanks for making me take a second look.
Judging by the placement of the dollar sign at the end of the number, I'd wager that nospam007 hails from a country where , is the decimal and . is the separator. That's actually most of the world, mind you.
If the VPN is not based in RI, it doesn't matter, actually. It can still be in any of the other 49 states.
Security cameras record videos of crimes all day long. I don't think it works the way you think it works.
And if we want a Mac?
It wasn't long ago that Apple made machines that suited those needs. They hooked many of us and many of us have invested heavily in their platform, only to have them decide half a decade ago that "Pro" meant "spends enough time on Facebook they care if it loads a little faster".
I don't think a PC laptop will fit in my wallet, but that's where I'm arguing from.
That sounds pretty insulting to me. Pointing out a error is not an insult. The word "incompetent" is an insult.
and I replied:
If the theory it wrong, it is incompetent. That doesn't say anything about the person who applied the theory, of course.
I left the typo because it's a quote (since I know you'll pick at that next), but that's the context (from about 8 comments up, now) here. The definition of incompetent was never relevant to the point I was making when I posted that yesterday, and I'm pretty sure I understand the point being made since I was the one making it.
AFAIK they haven't. I was being a bit snarky.
You got a bug up your butt today buddy? I don't hear from you for a while, then this?
But really, how have you been? I've missed this...
I was just pointing out that a smartphone probably isn't the best choice for someone who just wants their phone to be a phone. Apple has never made any other kind of phone, so if that's what someone truly wants (as west claims he does), they wouldn't want any of Apple's offerings. Of course, they also wouldn't want Android, but most Android manufacturers still make basic dumbphones, as well.
Link 1: There's no way they laid all the groundwork for switching from Java to the Java-derived DALVIK and whipped together the Android API and SDK based on DALVIK (which would have needed to be created from scratch given that Danger used native Java APIs and the Java SDK) in the handful of months between the iPhone being unveiled and the first Android phone coming to market. There wasn't even enough time to get FCC approval and tool for production in that time, and the addition of a touch interface would have necessitated both re-approval and re-tooling.
Link 2: That's Samsung, not Android. Samsung could well have done the same with Windows Phone, or even their own OS.
I feel like we've had this conversation before.
I see what you did there.
Didn't they claim better than 1:1,000,000 at launch? I see they've revised that now...
If you want your phone to be a phone, Apple has never made a phone you would buy.
What has Android copied from iOS?
My nearest locker is 5 minutes away at the grocery store I go to twice a week, but that's a moot point because I've gotten returns with free shipping as recently as 2 weeks ago. The return that's being picked up today I'm paying to ship back because of the reason for the return, but that's my fault for not researching better before buying and the $10 and change is still cheaper than gas and wear/tear on my car (and my back) to drive to the nearest Best Buy (10min), Walmart (20min), or Fry's (30min), the hour or more of my time waiting in the returns line, and the stress of arguing with the minimum-wage clerk who's looking for any excuse to not take it back.
Many things are worth more than money. The lower the amount, the longer that list becomes.
That said, I didn't know Amazon actually charged return shipping ever until yesterday. In literally two decades, I have not once paid return shipping.
And none of that negates the needs of the professional power user, nor of the gamer. Go ahead and make a low-end model for people who don't need the power (and if we're talking about a laptop, that probably is most people, as most people who need that power have a dedicated workstation and very few of them actually do need that full power while mobile (though many of them do need considerably more than the average user). But what Apple has done is make that low-end model, then remix it, add a better screen, little faster CPU (but certainly not a workhorse), little more RAM (but certainly not enough for the kinds of things professional power users use their machines for), and call it PRO.
The MacBook Pro used to be what that user wanted. That hasn't been the case for about 5 years now, in no small part because everything Apple does to the lower Mac lines ends up making its way to the Pro lines in a release cycle or two; and that includes the dumbing down beyond the point of usefulness for most tasks beyond typical office use, web browsing, and maybe a bit of development.
Hell, the 2016 MacBook Pro I'm typing this on has trouble keeping up with a Twitch stream. Neither my 17" 2011, my 13" 2012, nor the 15" 2014 retina I passed along to my wife have trouble with that, but they put a "PRO" GPU in this model that is bested by workstation GPUs from 7 years ago and it just can't keep up with h.264 decoding. Disabling hardware acceleration and rendering on the CPU is a no-go, as well, because the poor thermal design of this machine causes it to throttle in mere seconds if I do that.
To be honest, that's not even acceptable for the average user's Facebook machine; there's plenty of h.264 to be found there.
Thin and light are considerations for some types of work. The ability to render a scene or compile a project without thermal throttling to hell and back and taking an entire workday are considerations for other types of work. The latter tends to appeal to the type of customer who would have a dedicated workstation (not the Mac Pro since 2013, though) for the real heavy lifting, but still needs some mobility.
Remember when Apple's whole thing was how much faster the PPC CPUs they used were than Intel's offerings? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system loved their platform. Remember when, even after the switch to Intel, Apple still sold at least one system with the fastest of Intel's CPUs in it, plenty of RAM, and the ability to expand the system to fit the workload you were throwing at it? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system loved their platform. Remember when Apple started soldering things in, using 2-or-3-generation-old CPUs, dumbing down the graphics on even their desktop and PRO systems, removing ports, and hindering expandability and compatibility to a degree most professional users who might need to connect to something off-site during their travels simply cannot abite? That's when creative professionals, engineers, and anyone else who needed a powerful system left their platform.
I bought this laptop thinking "it can't be as bad as I keep hearing it is." I mean, after all, I didn't have any trouble getting real work done on my older Macs, so why should this newer one with a better battery, better screen, and faster CPU be worse?
Let me tell you: It is.
being called incompetent... I really need to stop posting early in the morning... or at all, given how far average reading comprehension seems to have fallen around here.
Which still doesn't affect whether it was the theory or the person applying it that was being incompetent, but thanks for playing.
My friend, you miss the point. First of all, the phrase "incompetent theory" is from TFA. Second, my point doesn't in any way hing on the definition of incompetent or whether it applies to the theory being called incompetent. Rather, my point was that the adjective was being applied to the theory, rather than the person applying the theory and, thus, was not an insult. It doesn't matter what the word means or how appropriate its use was, if it was not being applied to a person, it was not insulting a person. Period.
Now feel free to carry on with your pedantry.
I'm not the one who initially used that word, I was simply using it to avoid further confusing the issue by introducing yet more terminology. The reality is that none of that has anything at all to do with my point, which was that it was the theory that was being called incompetent, and not the person applying the theory; therefore, the person was not being insulted.
The phrase "incompetent theory" came from TFA, by the way.
And a theory that goes against what we already know does, in fact, lack the "skill" (neigh, property, but I digress) of even potentially being correct. Incompetent is actually a pretty decent word to use to describe that, IMO. Not what I would have chosen, personally, but clear enough in intent.
My typo aside, we both agree on this point. A competent theory would be correct.