Umm, the iPod Touch is not marketed solely as a handheld gaming device. People don't buy iPod Touch's to game, they buy them as multifunction devices that are capable of gaming.
Regardless, luis, your point is somewhat negated by the fact that you sound like a rabid fanboy.
Since when is any point "negated" by someone's feelings even if that idiocy had any hint of truth in it?
No, I'm not a fanboy. The only idevice that I own is a 3 year old ipod nano.
But thanks for that idiotic prejudice. Seems that if anyone defends the rational side and tries to refute the silly idea that apple has never innovated is immediately transformed into a "rabid fanboy". This kind of rethoric does you no good.
I don't think anyone disputes that Apple has had a particular flair for marketing devices that are in no way unique or special to the masses; most people just dispute how "superior" they are. What Apple HAS very successfully done is marketed their devices to the lowest common denominator, making ridiculous sums of money and pissing off anyone who wants to use their devices their way instead of Apple's way. That's why you find a lot of technically-savvy people who detest Apple, while people who are more concerned with basic usage and not advanced features or customization are often their biggest fans. There are exceptions to the rule, of course.
I always fail to see how this apple focus on simplicity and "just works" (the apple way) type of thing could possibly annoy anyone. If you don't like that kind of thing, don't buy it. Why are linux fans so hateful of the masses? I don't get it.
Some examples:
-Apple didn't invent the portable MP3 player. They didn't even perfect it (there are a lot of more versatile players, with more features, and larger capacity than the iPod series. I have a Creative Zen Micro which still works, because the battery is replaceable, played FM radio as well, had more storage capacity than comparable iPods, and was $200 cheaper at the time). They did successfully market MP3 players to the widest audience available, and made a fortune in the process.
ipods were sold at reasonable prices, and increasingly so. If you were able to buy cheaper devices from different brands, this just means someone was underselling their own devices due to lack of market share.
-Apple didn't invent, or perfect, the smartphone. In point of fact, early 1st-gen iPhones were junk
This is just silly. The iPhone was revolutionary, and many competitors (like RIM for instance) were even in denial about its feasibility (see
here. Moreover, the iPhone was always a "work in progress". As a first iteration, it was quite good and revolutionary in many ways. It did lack a lot of things that other phones had.
, and newer Android devices are capable of a lot more, with a lot better hardware in them, and are cheaper.
What exactly do u mean "a lot more"? I think this is bollocks. Moreover, current benchmarks place the iphone 4s comfortably at no 1 way north of the competition. By "cheaper", if you mean that there are second-rate phones that do not exactly compete directly with the iphone but with the idea of something "near" the quality of the iphone for cheaper prices, sure. The iphone is built to compete with the top tier, not the rest of the market (I myself am about to buy this weekend an android phone due to exactly that). However, if you compare the galaxy S prices, etc., you'll see that the prices are more or less about the same.
What the iPhone did do is successfully plant the idea of a phone that replaces your phone/camera/MP3 player bunch of devices into one as a "must-have" accessory, and did it with a simplistic user interface so it isn't daunting to use for non-technical people. And again, they made a fortune in the process. But there are still a lot better products out there (particularly the next-generation Android devices, which anyone who has come to want to do things their way and not put up with iTunes/Apple's way has or will be switching to).
The iphone 4s is quite competitive, and I've yet to see a honeycomb phone... It almost seems like the "you'll see the amazing thing we are going to deliver next year". This has been the mantra for what, 10 years already? It started with MS, and now it seems android is doing the same thing. I'm the fanboy one, but it seems I'm not the one buying up the vaporware.
There are many other things out there that I'm really fond of. I despise somewhat android, for it being just a KIRF of the iphone since its very beggining, for the hypocrisy of being "open", etc., but I'll probably buy one. I'm more impressed by the WebOS, which has a very intelligent architecture and a very smooth and beautiful interface. It was botched by the ****ing pricks of HP that sunk the company this last year - I hope they'll give it a more prominent future from now on. Even windows phone 7 is more interesting than android. At least, they took a lesson from apple and decided to make their own vision of what a phone should be. Android just smells like uninspired kirf.
-Tablets. The sole reason the iPad took off is because of fanboyism and pricing.
Why keep the insults? It's just the cheapest way to piss off any interlocutor: "hey look what I say isn't being confirmed by the market coz people are stoopid". Couldn't it be the other way round? People are impressed and enjoying their apple products and thus have a lot of trust to what the ipad is. Moreover, they made it so that everybody already knew how to use one, since it was equal to the ipod touch and the iphone.
The fact of the matter is that Apple's tablets are massively inferior to tablet PCs that were on the market 6 years ago in terms of what they're capable of.
Name me one tablet before the ipad that could be on for more than 4 hours, let alone 10. Name me one that had the multitouch easyness of the ipad that is filled with apps that are thought to be used in that form factor?
You can't.
And why do you think people should want an oven in their hands to use software that was built towards keyboards and mouse? All the windows tablets before this were junk, failed to understand what a tablet should be. Apple showed the way. See what android tablets are now? See where windows is headed with W8? And how is this not innovating, leading the industry?
But, because Apple made the pricing look accessible (and a lot of people didn't know there were better alternative out there in terms of portable, interactive, multifunction devices) they sold a bunch. Then they released the iPad2 with very little in the way of actual tangible improvement less than a year later and sold a bunch more, even to owners of the original iPad.
How is the huge improvement of speed (specially in graphics) "very little in the way of actual tangible improvements"? And why should it have more improvements, if the first product is already a winner? You lot think with a list of specs in your head. I have a laptop that is an hp filled with "specs" and ports and stuff that I never use.
I see the appeal of Apple to people who just want things to work - but I hate how they cater to people who just don't want to learn about technology, and in the process narrow the abilities and features of the products they release, which in turn affects the entire tech sector.
What? If the rest of the industry is unable to give you what you want, then that's apple's fault? That's just ridiculous.
Couple that with some extremely shady business practices (ridiculous patent lawsuits)
Shady? Well, I don't like patents. Hell, I don't like copyright! However, I fail to see the shadiness of this. Apple thinks that Samsung has abused its position of being a supplier of parts for the iphone to make industrial espionage and copycat its design. Therefore, they sued Samsung. The courts will decide the rest.
If we were talking about corporations suing normal people for millions of dollars, you'd get my attention. As it is, I'm really apathetic to your appeal.
, misleading advertising (Yeah, macs don't get viruses... HA!)
It's not they are unable to. It's not even that they do not exist. It's just that they
don't get viruses. And it's true. 99% of the time, at least (which is 98% better than the competition if you don't use AVs, btw).
, and restriction of the user experience to the "Apple experience," and I won't touch their products.
But that's the beauty of the market! You choose what you want. I personally am enjoying windows 7 - it hasn't pissed me off since I bought it, and many apps that I have are for pcs so I'm forced to use it (gee, the oppression these microsofties are putting myself in!). However, if I just want a device to see the internet, my mail, so on, I would see myself buying an air (which is a very impressive innovating machine in itself) or just an ipad. If you don't like the products for these or other reasons don't buy them. What's there to hate? I don't like Sony Vaios because they are fugly and stupid (full hd in 17 inch laptops? REALLY??!?), but I don't despise sony, nor do I write "buahahah sony fanboys kickk my ass", etc.
Because it's stupid.
Some I'm kinda with bobb here - I really do hope that Apple's influence in the tech sector wanes.
It will eventually. It all hinges on the competition not doing stupid things, like botching Web OS, making confusing operating systems like Windows 8 (I smell a vista there), and just failing to see how the future is shaped, like Android which is unable to figure itself out (the closed source of honeycomb just cost them the fact that Amazon is instead using Froyo 2.2 in its tablet, which will stagnate the android OS more than a year with the obvious fragmentation that is about to occur and be mantained).
If however the competition is able to have visionaires with the ability to actually ship its products, then we will see progress. Just watch Amazon: they will compete with the ipad pretty well (yeah I know it's probably not to your taste....)
