It's been a while since we've seen a Foxconn story around here. No, I'm not being sarcastic. Since the focus is on Apple, the story died down, just waiting for a story like this to come along. Dead story == Workers not getting relief.
So can we finally start raking the numerous other companies that are using Foxconn over the coals already?
> I have to ask: why is only Apple fanbots who profess not to care about market share?
Apple isn't hurting for cash, developers, or new customers. An alternative question is why, exactly, are the Haterade Addicts so fixated on marketshare? Is it because there's a really good reason, or is it just interesting because it's a number that went down?
I really do wish people around here would understand what fuck 'marketshare' actually means. Apple could sell 20% more iPads this year than last and still fall in marketshare. Why? Because their marketshare was 100% until their competitors came along.
If you want to experess doom and gloom, go by how much their sales of dropped, not marketshare. Derr.
At face value, this sounds pretty slick. Kinda like Netflix for blinkie things. I do hope their 'completely sanitized' procedure actually works, though. The last thing I would want is to rent a tablet then find somebody's snooping my email.
I don't like the BSA, and I'm pretty neutral about Microsoft, but what is the point of saying the BSA is "Microsoft-backed"? They're also Adobe-, Apple-, and Dell- backed, among many others.
The real reason is everybody hates Microsoft. It grabs eyeballs and gets a good debate going.
What people will claim the 'real reason' is is that Microsoft is a high profile target and if you focus on them it'll cause them to change and everybody else will magically fall into line. The same thing happened with Apple and Foxconn. So far it has proven to be an effective way to cause short-term change with one company, but you'll notice that there hasn't been any real hubub on Slashdot about the Chinese workers there. That died down, so the other companies can merrily go about their routine. Looks like there's a downside to focusing all that rage on one target.
So, yes, maybe a little more attention should be directed at everybody backing the BSA.
The lawsuit's content? Repetitive Stress Injury, from using a tablet for more than an hour a day. With a regular computer, you have a mechanical or membrane keyboard cushioning your fingers, allowing you to work for hours without ill-effects (allowing for a standard positioning of hands). Tablets, on the other hand, have a hard glass screen which you are tapping away at. It will later be revealed that the executives of these prominent companies had performed studies that showed RSI would become an issue after too much use, but went ahead with the product's launch anyway.
There's a little-known business phrase out there called 'best tool for the job'. Where I work, for example, many people have Wacom Tablets even though the vast majority of the world only has a keyboard and mouse.
I really don't understand this attitude towards tablets. We all love our smartphones to the point that we've maintained a flame war for 5 years, but a bigger version of that device comes, it turns out to be really popular, but no no no it must be doomed.
...normal people would make the fair assumption that it could mean ' approximately as much' and that this has virtually no bearing on the statement whatsoever.
"...if one were to suggest Samsung copied Apple's iPad design for their Tab but that Apple didn't copy the WD Elements design in the case of the Apple TV. "
"But the clear and obvious fact is that Apple copied the AppleTV design from WD so it's pretty damn hypocritical to launch into lawsuits when someone copies their designs. "
"And the AppleTV looks very much like a WD Elements. Samsung copied Apple and Apple copied WD..."
This: "...it looks as much like an ipad as an Apple TV looks like a WD elements."
If you had've just said that in the first place...
Said it in several places.
Anyway, to wrap this up: You didn't really mean that Elements and Apple TV are as similar to each other as the Tab and the iPad, you just misspoke. Got it. That's clear. Have a good night.
This is a different question from the last one you asked but I'll answer.
The Tab and the iPad look alike. I don't have an Apple TV or a WD Elements so I cannot tell you if they're so similar they're confusing. And, no, that's not a cop-out. You can take photos of the Tab and the iPad that make them look dissimilar, handling them in real life makes a big difference. My opinion on their similarity wouldn't be educated or useful. That's why I need your help, since you say you've handled these devices.
Now, if you can say: "The radius of the corners is identical on both, and two of its three dimensions are identical, and the material they used is identical", etc, you can make a pretty darned good case. In fact, you'd be making the same sort of case Apple was making against Samsung. You would then be able to say: "They are just as similar to each other as the Tab and the iPad" and your point would be on solid footing.
I mean if you believed that both iPad and Tab look alike and that the AppleTV and the WD Elements look alike then this conversation would have no purpose other than you arguing over the definition of the term 'as much'.
You're trying to pin this failure on me and it isn't working. "As much" requires an apples to apples comparison and you haven't provided that. This is not my failure.
Let's try this again, I'm clearly writing far too many words and you can't comprehend them, given your failed attempt at 'translation'.
You should have used the example where I took exactly what you said at face value and you... well then you couldn't blame me for your failings. It's a pity, though, I really was hoping you'd produce a specific list. Apple is an arrogant company that needs to be taken down a peg once in a while.
You would say that it is true that a Tab looks very much like an iPad but that it is not true that an AppleTV looks very much like a WD Elements?
It's supported by the obviousness of simply looking at it. You say: Yes, that would be because the Tab looks very much like an iPad.
Didja notice why I said that? I'll give you a hint, it's about a lawsuit that's going on right now. That's the context you set your argument in, that's the context you need to make your case in.
Yet for some reason you're going to these desperate and ridiculous lengths to suggest that my assertion that the 'AppleTV looks very much like the WD Elements' is not correct and that you need some detailed specifics on how they look alike because for some reason you are unable to see it just by simply looking at the 2 devices... Are you that impaired...
Translation:" I cannot make the case I put forth earlier."
I bet if you could go back in time you'd change your post to read: "The Elements device is pretty similar to the Apple TV, but I don't remember anybody griping at them about it." instead of saying "It looks as much like a iPad as an Apple TV looks like a WD Elements.".
If you require detailed descriptions it means you can't see the similarities in the devices themselves, and if you claim you can't see them in the devices themselves you are being deliberately obtuse because no-one with the gift of sight could be that stupid.
Actually, it's my gift of memory, when you said the differences between the Apple TV and the WD Elements were pretty much the same.
Are you saying you cannot see the obvious design elements that have been copied?
I'm saying you haven't met your own standards of the case you're trying to make. You're saying a case with a lot of specifics is exactly the same as something with a couple of broad generals (which, in light of the evolution of the product, isn't that compelling), and claiming that there's a bias in Apple's direction.
What I can or cannot see is not at issue. You made the claim, now support it. I'm not doing your homework for you.
I realize you are really busy calling an Android Tablet owner an Apple Apologist and compiling a list of all those design elements Apple stole from WD, but you really should stop and look at what an Apple TV that predates the WD Elements by two years looks like. But you said I've never seen one, so I'll still require detailed descriptons of Apple's specific ripoffs.
No fair getting mad at me, I actually went into detail while making my point,
Apple's complaint was that Samsung duplicated 25 details of the iPad. If you wish to claim that Apple did exactly the same, you have to produce a similar list. So let's see it!
Slashdot Mirror
Whatever you do, don't mix sarcasm with good clip-art. I worked with a sales exec who wanted to ship laptopa that shot lightning.
It's been a while since we've seen a Foxconn story around here. No, I'm not being sarcastic. Since the focus is on Apple, the story died down, just waiting for a story like this to come along. Dead story == Workers not getting relief.
So can we finally start raking the numerous other companies that are using Foxconn over the coals already?
> I have to ask: why is only Apple fanbots who profess not to care about market share?
Apple isn't hurting for cash, developers, or new customers. An alternative question is why, exactly, are the Haterade Addicts so fixated on marketshare? Is it because there's a really good reason, or is it just interesting because it's a number that went down?
Long-term, if that doesn't change, it will prove to be unsustainable
Why? Apple has millions of units out there and plenty of software to support it.
I wouldn't mind, but this is the exact same rationale people have been using to predict Nintendo's death for over 10 years.
I really do wish people around here would understand what fuck 'marketshare' actually means. Apple could sell 20% more iPads this year than last and still fall in marketshare. Why? Because their marketshare was 100% until their competitors came along.
If you want to experess doom and gloom, go by how much their sales of dropped, not marketshare. Derr.
It depends on the device, it depends on the customer, and it depends on the company who claims they'll be sanitizing it.
What's wrong with that?
Shock! Horror! And... a good way for their business to dry up in a hurry.
Incidentally, if you lose your cable box you'll be out $500, too.
At face value, this sounds pretty slick. Kinda like Netflix for blinkie things. I do hope their 'completely sanitized' procedure actually works, though. The last thing I would want is to rent a tablet then find somebody's snooping my email.
I don't like the BSA, and I'm pretty neutral about Microsoft, but what is the point of saying the BSA is "Microsoft-backed"? They're also Adobe-, Apple-, and Dell- backed, among many others.
The real reason is everybody hates Microsoft. It grabs eyeballs and gets a good debate going.
What people will claim the 'real reason' is is that Microsoft is a high profile target and if you focus on them it'll cause them to change and everybody else will magically fall into line. The same thing happened with Apple and Foxconn. So far it has proven to be an effective way to cause short-term change with one company, but you'll notice that there hasn't been any real hubub on Slashdot about the Chinese workers there. That died down, so the other companies can merrily go about their routine. Looks like there's a downside to focusing all that rage on one target.
So, yes, maybe a little more attention should be directed at everybody backing the BSA.
You're on a site that mainly talks about blinkie devices that cost money. Your daily life must be hell.
The lawsuit's content? Repetitive Stress Injury, from using a tablet for more than an hour a day. With a regular computer, you have a mechanical or membrane keyboard cushioning your fingers, allowing you to work for hours without ill-effects (allowing for a standard positioning of hands). Tablets, on the other hand, have a hard glass screen which you are tapping away at. It will later be revealed that the executives of these prominent companies had performed studies that showed RSI would become an issue after too much use, but went ahead with the product's launch anyway.
There's a little-known business phrase out there called 'best tool for the job'. Where I work, for example, many people have Wacom Tablets even though the vast majority of the world only has a keyboard and mouse.
I really don't understand this attitude towards tablets. We all love our smartphones to the point that we've maintained a flame war for 5 years, but a bigger version of that device comes, it turns out to be really popular, but no no no it must be doomed.
Nerd Hipsterism. Gotta love it.
My bad, the GPS cable was loose.
"Apple used black plastic, they're hypocrites!"
I'm afraid it is, I'm sorry.
Right. It's just all the bits I quoted and responded to it affects.
...normal people would make the fair assumption that it could mean ' approximately as much' and that this has virtually no bearing on the statement whatsoever.
"...if one were to suggest Samsung copied Apple's iPad design for their Tab but that Apple didn't copy the WD Elements design in the case of the Apple TV. "
"But the clear and obvious fact is that Apple copied the AppleTV design from WD so it's pretty damn hypocritical to launch into lawsuits when someone copies their designs. "
"And the AppleTV looks very much like a WD Elements. Samsung copied Apple and Apple copied WD..."
Mmm hmm.
Case for what?
This: "...it looks as much like an ipad as an Apple TV looks like a WD elements."
If you had've just said that in the first place...
Said it in several places.
Anyway, to wrap this up: You didn't really mean that Elements and Apple TV are as similar to each other as the Tab and the iPad, you just misspoke. Got it. That's clear. Have a good night.
This is a different question from the last one you asked but I'll answer.
The Tab and the iPad look alike. I don't have an Apple TV or a WD Elements so I cannot tell you if they're so similar they're confusing. And, no, that's not a cop-out. You can take photos of the Tab and the iPad that make them look dissimilar, handling them in real life makes a big difference. My opinion on their similarity wouldn't be educated or useful. That's why I need your help, since you say you've handled these devices.
Now, if you can say: "The radius of the corners is identical on both, and two of its three dimensions are identical, and the material they used is identical", etc, you can make a pretty darned good case. In fact, you'd be making the same sort of case Apple was making against Samsung. You would then be able to say: "They are just as similar to each other as the Tab and the iPad" and your point would be on solid footing.
I mean if you believed that both iPad and Tab look alike and that the AppleTV and the WD Elements look alike then this conversation would have no purpose other than you arguing over the definition of the term 'as much'.
You're trying to pin this failure on me and it isn't working. "As much" requires an apples to apples comparison and you haven't provided that. This is not my failure.
Let's try this again, I'm clearly writing far too many words and you can't comprehend them, given your failed attempt at 'translation'.
You should have used the example where I took exactly what you said at face value and you... well then you couldn't blame me for your failings. It's a pity, though, I really was hoping you'd produce a specific list. Apple is an arrogant company that needs to be taken down a peg once in a while.
You would say that it is true that a Tab looks very much like an iPad but that it is not true that an AppleTV looks very much like a WD Elements?
Nope.
It's supported by the obviousness of simply looking at it. You say:
Yes, that would be because the Tab looks very much like an iPad.
Didja notice why I said that? I'll give you a hint, it's about a lawsuit that's going on right now. That's the context you set your argument in, that's the context you need to make your case in.
Yet for some reason you're going to these desperate and ridiculous lengths to suggest that my assertion that the 'AppleTV looks very much like the WD Elements' is not correct and that you need some detailed specifics on how they look alike because for some reason you are unable to see it just by simply looking at the 2 devices... Are you that impaired ...
Translation:" I cannot make the case I put forth earlier."
I bet if you could go back in time you'd change your post to read: "The Elements device is pretty similar to the Apple TV, but I don't remember anybody griping at them about it." instead of saying "It looks as much like a iPad as an Apple TV looks like a WD Elements.".
Didja notice
If you require detailed descriptions it means you can't see the similarities in the devices themselves, and if you claim you can't see them in the devices themselves you are being deliberately obtuse because no-one with the gift of sight could be that stupid.
Actually, it's my gift of memory, when you said the differences between the Apple TV and the WD Elements were pretty much the same.
Are you saying you cannot see the obvious design elements that have been copied?
I'm saying you haven't met your own standards of the case you're trying to make. You're saying a case with a lot of specifics is exactly the same as something with a couple of broad generals (which, in light of the evolution of the product, isn't that compelling), and claiming that there's a bias in Apple's direction.
What I can or cannot see is not at issue. You made the claim, now support it. I'm not doing your homework for you.
I realize you are really busy calling an Android Tablet owner an Apple Apologist and compiling a list of all those design elements Apple stole from WD, but you really should stop and look at what an Apple TV that predates the WD Elements by two years looks like. But you said I've never seen one, so I'll still require detailed descriptons of Apple's specific ripoffs.
No fair getting mad at me, I actually went into detail while making my point,
So.... you're saying Apple copied WD but really cannot list how. Bummer, I wanted to hear about this.
Apple's complaint was that Samsung duplicated 25 details of the iPad. If you wish to claim that Apple did exactly the same, you have to produce a similar list. So let's see it!
You said it's the same as the tablet case. So get to listin'!