[LeonLei]

does apple invent anything?

[crosswordbob]

LeonLei, on 26 April 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

does apple invent anything?

Yes.

[RiceRyder]

skribbbler, on 26 April 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

Look at smartphones prior to the iPhone.

Look at smartphones after.

The defense rests.

Hey Frankenstein...remind me not to hire you as my lawyer. My 5 year old has more common sense than you.

[RiceRyder]

LeonLei, on 26 April 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

does apple invent anything?

yes..they invented and patented the "art of stealing"

[ginkessler]

anonymousr46j, on 26 April 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

Please don't call me a hater, but what did Apple invent..?

What? Your ignorance outrages me! Apple invented the transistor, the light bulb, the television, the radio, the microprocessor, penicillin, the letter "i", and almost everything else known in the universe, including the atom - and they have bought all the patents to prove it.

[LordInsidious]

crosswordbob, on 26 April 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

traxxion, on 26 April 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 26 April 2012 - 07:57 AM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....e_Inc._products

From the article you linked, I can gather not a single invention.

Then you don't understand the word "invention".

traxxion said:

Home computer? no
GUI? no
Laptop? no
Media player? no
PDA? no
Smartphone? no

Simply listing extremely broad concepts that Apple weren't the first to realise does not demonstrate a lack of inventions. James Dyson's best known invention is a type of vacuum cleaner—we don't tell him it doesn't count because there were vacuum cleaners before it. In exactly the same vein Apple invented variants of the generic devices you listed above that were radical departures from the existing efforts. They invented the first smartphone with mass consumer appeal; the first tablet, frankly, that didn't suck; the first media player your granny could use. They took some basic UI proofs-of-concepts and invented the first fully realised graphical OS. This is not to say I like all these inventions—I don't—but there's no denying they are inventions.

The age-old trick of overgeneralising a market in order to belttle or deny innovation is just that: a trick; sophistry. You can play that game with any invention.

traxxion said:

What I did gather though was:
"Apple's brand's loyalty is considered unusual for any product. At one time, Apple evangelists were actively engaged by the company, but this was after the phenomenon was already firmly established. Apple evangelist Guy Kawasaki has called the brand fanaticism "something that was stumbled upon".[163] Apple has, however, supported the continuing existence of a network of Mac User Groups in most major and many minor centers of population where Mac computers are available."

Sure, though in all honesty that is starting to look out of date. Apple's iDevices are growing at an incredible rate, and with something like 1/3 of new iPhone/iPad customers never having bought from Apple before, the fanboys are quickly being outnumbered by ordinary, non-evangelical, everyday consumers.

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?
yup, I guess you did that sophistry.

[crosswordbob]

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?

Um... nope. I didn't. I think you must have misunderstood.

[LordInsidious]

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?

Um... nope. I didn't. I think you must have misunderstood.

Yes, 'the first tablet, frankly, that didn't suck' is specific, is that a metric value or imperial?

[crosswordbob]

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?

Um... nope. I didn't. I think you must have misunderstood.

Yes, 'the first tablet, frankly, that didn't suck' is specific, is that a metric value or imperial?

That would be elision, not overgeneralisation.

[LordInsidious]

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?

Um... nope. I didn't. I think you must have misunderstood.

Yes, 'the first tablet, frankly, that didn't suck' is specific, is that a metric value or imperial?

That would be elision, not overgeneralisation.

It's actually delusional to say it's anything but an overgeneralisation.

TTFN!

This post has been edited by LordInsidious: 27 April 2012 - 10:53 AM

[nonseq]

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Did you really overgeneralize Apples inventions then criticize someone else for overgeneralizing Apple's competitors inventions as a bad thing in the same post?

Um... nope. I didn't. I think you must have misunderstood.

Yes, 'the first tablet, frankly, that didn't suck' is specific, is that a metric value or imperial?

That would be elision, not overgeneralisation.

Bob how many times do we have to tell you not to elide?

[crosswordbob]

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

It's actually delusional to say it's anything but an overgeneralisation.

Nowhere near as delusional as believing that Apple haven't/don't invent anything, though that doesn't seem to bother you.

[LordInsidious]

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

It's actually delusional to say it's anything but an overgeneralisation.

Nowhere near as delusional as believing that Apple haven't/don't invent anything, though that doesn't seem to bother you.

Didn't say they didn't invent anything, but if you'll notice you just admitted that your point was in fact an overgeneralisation.

[linuxrants7xpg]

Dear Tim Cook: Apple is not the world's tech inventor

[crosswordbob]

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

It's actually delusional to say it's anything but an overgeneralisation.

Nowhere near as delusional as believing that Apple haven't/don't invent anything, though that doesn't seem to bother you.

Didn't say they didn't invent anything, but if you'll notice you just admitted that your point was in fact an overgeneralisation.

Erm... no again. X nowhere near Y does not imply X is non-zero.

My point here was to explain why it is false to claim that Apple have not invented anything. In doing so, I presented my opinion that the iPad was the first tablet not to suck. I stand by that opinion, though I acknowledged that I elided my reasoning for this opinion. I did so for brevity, as I believe the point (Apple invented some stuff) was adequately made. There was no sophistry.

The poster to whom I was replying used the age-old trick of fudging definitions so as to give a misleading view of Apple's innovations. That is sophistry.

Now if, as you say, you aren't contradicting the point I was making, then there is nothing further to discuss.

[LordInsidious]

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 27 April 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

It's actually delusional to say it's anything but an overgeneralisation.

Nowhere near as delusional as believing that Apple haven't/don't invent anything, though that doesn't seem to bother you.

Didn't say they didn't invent anything, but if you'll notice you just admitted that your point was in fact an overgeneralisation.

Erm... no again. X nowhere near Y does not imply X is non-zero.

My point here was to explain why it is false to claim that Apple have not invented anything. In doing so, I presented my opinion that the iPad was the first tablet not to suck. I stand by that opinion, though I acknowledged that I elided my reasoning for this opinion. I did so for brevity, as I believe the point (Apple invented some stuff) was adequately made. There was no sophistry.

The poster to whom I was replying used the age-old trick of fudging definitions so as to give a misleading view of Apple's innovations. That is sophistry.

Now if, as you say, you aren't contradicting the point I was making, then there is nothing further to discuss.

You still don't see it, or maybe you do and just don't want to admit it. Again you, and only you are allowed to fudge points for brevity or whatever other reason but no one else is. That was my original point: you overgeneralized and then call someone out for overgeneralizing.
Have a good one, I'm done.

[crosswordbob]

LordInsidious, on 27 April 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

You still don't see it, or maybe you do and just don't want to admit it. Again you, and only you are allowed to fudge points for brevity or whatever other reason but no one else is. That was my original point: you overgeneralized and then call someone out for overgeneralizing.
Have a good one, I'm done.

Sorry, but that is simply not true. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone fudging details for brevity when the point they're making is valid. I object to people knowingly employing dishonest arguments in order to "prove" that black is white. Perhaps you don't see the difference between these, but it's clear as daylight to me. If it weren't, I wouldn't have made the argument I did.