NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 22:32 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:27:30 -0400, in <znu-73FD16.22273009082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <re4u56d4gi4ejkg9slfkn82lhrdm3ia9lf(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> Software problems are easy to fix in the field. >> Hardware problems are not. > >Ironically, the single biggest "software problem" with Android right now >is probably that handset vendors have inserted themselves into the >update process (by "customizing" Android -- usually making it worse) and >are fallow down on the job when it comes to making updates available to >users. Nothing of the sort. Customizations by HTC and Motorola are popular improvements. >> How so? Apple got a jump on them, but both are doing very well with >> their Android devices, rapidly gaining share. > >By "Apple got the jump on them" I assume you mean "Apple entered a >market they'd already been in for years, with a product that was better >than anything they'd managed to produce to that point." I did not mean that. Kindly refrain from childish argumentation. >> And smartphones are still >> only a small part of the overall phone market. > >Smartphones are pretty much the entire future of the market. ... I disagree. >> It is what it is. ;) > >Yeah. And it's 1/3 of Apple's. Irrelevant. >> That doesn't follow, but it's a pointless debate regardless. > >I like how the debate became pointless as soon as you got cornered. I'm not cornered. The issue is that any debate with you is pointless. You've become a good candidate for my kill file. -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 22:35 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:18:56 -0400, in <znu-D6430C.22185609082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <nr4u565rdetqc85fkplhjqcoqv26tomig3(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> They can and do. Evidence abounds. >> Suggest you inform yourself _before_ taking positions. > >Except that I asked you for specific examples, and you gave me vague >nonsense. I actually gave you specific data, but you're in denial as usual. >> So it's OK as long as it doesn't have a big hit on the bottom line? ;) > >It would have been inconsequential both in terms of Apple's financials >and Apple's long-term success in this market. Looks to me like Apple has taken a big hit, but only time will tell. >> Evidence says just the opposite. > >No, it doesn't. Read some of the many reports in Engadget's roundup: Yes, it does. Jeff is a real expert, and his data is unambiguous. Case closed. -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 22:36 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:29:53 -0400, in <znu-FA7830.22295309082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <164u561i94um3buf9ptjp2ooa2ekmj6e3i(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >[snip] > >> >This is a battle for the future of mobile computing. ... >> >> It's a battle for the mobile phone market. >> The iPad market is a different market and battle. >> If you disagree, try making a phone call with an iPad, >> and let me know how well it's "working for you". ;) > >The iPad is arguably a different market. I would say it was definitely a >different market, except that it's possible to 'universal' apps. > >The iPod Touch is absolutely _not_ a different market in any meaningful >sense, despite the number of people who'd like to frame it that way to >make Android look better. Wrong. -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 22:36 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:20:47 -0400, in <znu-7077B6.22204709082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <v9bu5618p0gou9kevekfsef4hrm3jtomad(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> If that were true, then the principal engineer would still have a job, >> yet he was fired. Oops! > >The WSJ disagrees with you about why. Nope. -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: ZnU on 9 Aug 2010 23:00
In article <fje1661id7hd9fghk8r66r639pg52j8igh(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:18:56 -0400, in > <znu-D6430C.22185609082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <nr4u565rdetqc85fkplhjqcoqv26tomig3(a)4ax.com>, > > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > >> They can and do. Evidence abounds. Suggest you inform yourself > >> _before_ taking positions. > > > >Except that I asked you for specific examples, and you gave me vague > >nonsense. > > I actually gave you specific data, but you're in denial as usual. You cited the entire history of the mobile lines of two major cell phone vendors. That's sort of like pointing someone to "the Internet" when they ask you for a source for some data you've posted. > >> So it's OK as long as it doesn't have a big hit on the bottom > >> line? ;) > > > >It would have been inconsequential both in terms of Apple's > >financials and Apple's long-term success in this market. > > Looks to me like Apple has taken a big hit, but only time will tell. Please produce evidence for this claim. > >> Evidence says just the opposite. > > > >No, it doesn't. Read some of the many reports in Engadget's roundup: > > Yes, it does. Jeff is a real expert, and his data is unambiguous. > Case closed. The issue was real-world performance; the Engadget reports are more relevant. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes |