Apple iWatch reports

ave said:
No I'm trying to refute your argument that people are largely rational when it comes to their purchases and that media/hype/trends don't play a significant part in those choices.


Be careful :p
Click to expand...

What I am telling you is that people are rational. The difference is that the reasons you consider when buying a phone are not the reasons someone else buys a phone. Your reasons are not wrong or stupid, and neither are theirs
 
bwana said:
But surely you understand why they would want to protect their IP, esp if what you said earlier is true? :confused:
Click to expand...

Patent trolling isn't the same as trying to protect their IP
As for the second quote, I'm certainly not implying that consumers couldn't distinguish between the two brands. I'm sure even the ANC youth league could figure that one out... After a few debates.
 
ave said:
Patent trolling isn't the same as trying to protect their IP
As for the second quote, I'm certainly not implying that consumers couldn't distinguish between the two brands. I'm sure even the ANC youth league could figure that one out... After a few debates.
Click to expand...

Patent trolling is a very defined term. It doesn't apply to Apple.
You can't redefine the term to suit your agenda.

What you seemingly meant to say was that Apple is very litigious when it comes to protecting their IP
 
JStrike said:
Patent trolling is a very defined term. It doesn't apply to Apple.
You can't redefine the term to suit your agenda.

What you seemingly meant to say was that Apple is very litigious when it comes to protecting their IP
Click to expand...

no, what Im trying to say is that Apple is very enthusiastic when it comes manipulating the grey areas of the IP laws to get one up on their competitors. :p
 
ave said:
no, what Im trying to say is that Apple is very enthusiastic when it comes manipulating the grey areas of the IP laws to get one up on their competitors. :p
Click to expand...

Ok. Manipulating grey areas is called litigation. Apple is very litigious when it comes to protecting their IP
 
You know there is not and will never be an iWatch right? And you also know that Apple doesn't feel particularly pressured to do anything given that they had the 2 biggest selling smartphones in the world last quarter, as well as the biggest selling computer, and 20% of consumer tech revenues overall.
 
cerebus said:
as well as the biggest selling computer
Click to expand...
So apt

A tablet is not a computer.

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-lenovo-hp-biggest-pc-maker.html
GARTNER: Worldwide: Lenovo Group Ltd., 13.8 million shipped worldwide, 15.7 percent share Hewlett-Packard Co., 13.6 million shipped, 15.5 percent Dell Inc., 9.2 million, 10.5 percent Acer Group, 8.6 million, 9.9 percent AsusTek Computer Inc., 6.4 million, 7.3 percent Others, 36.0 million, 41.1 percent. Total: 87.5 million United States: Hewlett-Packard Co., 4.1 million shipped in U.S., 27.0 percent share Dell Inc., 3.3 million, 21.4 percent Apple Inc., 2.1 million, 13.6 percent Lenovo Group Ltd., 1.4 million, 8.9 percent Acer Group, 989,725, 6.5 percent. Toshiba, 989,600, 6.5 percent Others, 2.5 million, 16.2 percent. Total: 15.3 million

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-lenovo-hp-biggest-pc-maker.html#jCp
Click to expand...
http://www.statista.com/statistics/12734/sales-of-pc-manufacturers-by-quarter/
 
Crowley said:
So apt
Click to expand...
Splitting hairs on definitions of consumer electronics is evidence of a reality distortion field?

A tablet is not a computer.
Click to expand...
Is the Surface a computer? Is a tablet a computer when it has a keyboard case? Is a Chromebook a computer, or an eeepc? Does size dictate computerness, or is it operating system, or software run? One thing can be said with certainty though - computer or not, it's devouring the profits of 'real' computer sales.
 
JStrike said:
Huh? Why on earth is an iPad not a computer?
Or are you trying to redefine what a computer is to suit your agenda
Click to expand...

cerebus said:
Splitting hairs on definitions of consumer electronics is evidence of a reality distortion field?


Is the Surface a computer? Is a tablet a computer when it has a keyboard case? Is a Chromebook a computer, or an eeepc? Does size dictate computerness, or is it operating system, or software run? One thing can be said with certainty though - computer or not, it's devouring the profits of 'real' computer sales.
Click to expand...

By your definition my cellphone is also a computer then in witch case Samsung has sold more "computers" than Apple.
 
Crowley said:
By your definition my cellphone is also a computer then in witch case Samsung has sold more "computers" than Apple.
Click to expand...

Smartphones are von Neumann machines, so yes they are computers. There is no disputing that.
They are however, also phones, and they are still classified as such. Should they be? Now that is an interesting question. But at the moment they are classified as phones
 
Crowley said:
By your definition my cellphone is also a computer then in witch case Samsung has sold more "computers" than Apple.
Click to expand...

No, that's not my definition either. There's a demarcation between phones and computers which I'd say is probably best articulated as non-substitionary. A car and a bicycle are not competing very strongly against each other because people aren't likely to substitute one for the other in making a purchasing decision. Whereas someone would buy an iPad or a Surface over a laptop and perform similar tasks on both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X