Apple iPad

I could have a painting/art application that takes full advantage of the multi-touch.

I don't see a professional using that and no standard user either unless they just wanted to waste their time with scribbles.

I don't know

I could have a painting/art application that takes full advantage of the multi-touch.

I don't see a professional using that and no standard user either unless they just wanted to waste their time with scribbles.

Wacom Tablet.

Are you telling me that my opinions are wrong? I *prefer* reading off of LCDs, and your opinion can't change that. I get eye strains trying to read off of paper all the time. The text on paper doesn't pop out like the text on LCDs do, and the dim lighting in my room doesn't make it any better. Not to mention I have bad eyesight, even with glasses. Being able to resize and change the font is also a win for the iPad.

You didn't phrase it as an opinion. You gave two very specific reasons. You did not say, "x is better for me", you said "x is better for me because of fact y and fact z". I stated that they y and z were both objectively false, based on my assumption that you had no relevant physical disability such as bad eyesight or an allergy to paper. The weight reason was total bullshit. However, I was mistaken about the bad eyesight. I am sorry for that.

In answer to your question: No, I did not tell you, "your opinion is wrong". I couldn't have, as I was unaware that it was an opinion. I thought it was a statement based on two specified facts. I challenged the factual basis as unsound.

For greater clarity, you did say "in my opinion", but only with reference to the aforementioned facts. Placing the words, "in my opinion", in a statement of fact does not make it an opinion that is thereby immune from all critique. "The acceleration due to gravity is approximately 10000000 m/s², in my opinion", is also not an opinion.

Are you telling me that my opinions are wrong? I *prefer* reading off of LCDs, and your opinion can't change that. I get eye strains trying to read off of paper all the time. The text on paper doesn't pop out like the text on LCDs do, and the dim lighting in my room doesn't make it any better. Not to mention I have bad eyesight, even with glasses. Being able to resize and change the font is also a win for the iPad.

You didn't phrase it as an opinion. You gave two very specific reasons. You did not say, "x is better for me", you said "x is better for me because of fact y and fact z". I stated that they y and z were both objectively false, based on my assumption that you had no relevant physical disability such as bad eyesight or an allergy to paper. The weight reason was total bullshit. I was mistaken about the bad eyesight, however. I am sorry for that.

In answer to your question: No, I did not tell you, "your opinion is wrong", because I was unaware that it was an opinion. I thought it was a statement based on an factual basis. I challenged the factual basis as unsound. There's a difference.

I said: "I generally don't like reading off of paper. Having to hold a heavy book and find good lighting is a pain, in my opinion." - This implies that I do not like reading off of paper. It also implies that having to hold a heavy book and find good lighting is a pain for me. I in no way, shape, or form implied my opinions as fact. I only stated my opinion. (Also, I didn't mean heavy. I meant thick, but I wasn't thinking clearly)

"An LCD is best for me." - This implies that, for me, an LCD screen is best. I am clearly not implying that my preference is fact. Opinions can not be fact, and I never state them as such.

"I don't really like electronic ink stuff, and I wouldn't pay for a device that *only* does books." - This implies that I do not like electronic ink stuff. This statement is true because it is a fact that I do not like electronic ink stuff. I in no way implied that electronic ink stuff is inferior. I only implied that I do not like it. The second part of the sentence implies that I myself would not pay for a device that only does books. This is a fact, because I would not buy a device that only does books. I am not stating that nobody would. I am speaking for myself.

I did not say: "Reading off of paper is terrible. Having to hold a heavy book and find good lighting is considered a pain. An LCD is best. Electronic ink stuff is inferior. Nobody would pay for a device that *only* does books"

I don't see how you could have confused me stating my opinions as me trying to state facts. Opinions can't be facts, and everything I said is opinion. I very well did phrase everything I said as an opinion.

I generally don't like chimpanzees. The average chimpanzee is seventeen feet tall and eats humans, in my opinion. Gorillas are best for me.

Your only point is that I described books as heavy instead of thick, which I shouldn't have. I already addressed that. It was one mistake. Everything else is valid.

Let me debunk what you said.

Also, reading books off of an LCD is a terrible way to read a book.

I prefer LCDs. Stop stating your opinion as fact.

It's not at all difficult to find good lighting unless you live and travel in caves

"Good lighting" is an opinion, and varies from person to person and place to place.

If you don't read books now, you won't with an ipad because it is inferior to a book in every way except that it can contain multiple books at once.

It's better for me. Stop stating your opinion as fact.

And if you don't like reading single books, why read multiple books?

I've told you my reasons for not reading, and the iPad solves my issues.

Phrasing a statement of fact as an opinion doesn't make it an opinion.  Through its structure, this is how your post logically reads:

I don't like books because they are heavier than an iPad and it is not easy to find good enough lighting. Therefore, the iPad is better for me.

In the above, "heavier than an iPad" and "not easy to find good enough lighting" are the reasons (factual basis) you preferred the iPad over a book (opinion). Those are not opinions. They are a factual basis for your opinion. Challenging the factual basis for an opinion is not subject to the "opinion immunity" whine.


EDIT::
good lighting is no more an opinion than gravity. It may vary from person to person based on eyesight, but it is a question of fact whether lighting is good enough for a person to comfortably read in. I incorrectly assumed you had good eyesight, but that still doesn't make it an opinion - it means I incorrectly assumed a fact that I shouldn't have based on the fact that I had never seen you wear glasses in any of your pictures in the Post Your Picture thread.

I think it's been established by now that Irock would buy a sun-dried turd if Steve Jobs was the one who shat it out, so there's really nothing more to say to him about this product. As for my opinions;

1. A Nook is the best e-book/pdf/cbz reading device available, so I'd rather have that for books.
2. It's too awkward to have for a music device, so I'd rather have an iPod.
3. No flash makes the internet boring and half as useful, so forget that.

My overall opinion is that this is something that three types of people will get: People that use material goods as status symbols, people with their mouths hermetically sealed to Steve Jobs' sphincter, and people too cheap and/or dumb to buy a real piece of electronics.

Phrasing a statement of fact as an opinion doesn't make it an opinion.  Through its structure, this is how your post logically reads:

I don't like books because they are heavier than an iPad and it is not easy to find good enough lighting. Therefore, the iPad is better for me.

In the above, "heavier than an iPad" and "not easy to find good enough lighting" are the reasons (factual basis) you preferred the iPad over a book (opinion). Those are not opinions. They are a factual basis for your opinion. Challenging the factual basis for an opinion is not subject to the "opinion immunity" whine.


EDIT::
good lighting is no more an opinion than gravity. It may vary from person to person based on eyesight, but it is a question of fact whether lighting is good enough for a person to comfortably read in. I incorrectly assumed you had good eyesight, but that still doesn't make it an opinion - it means I incorrectly assumed a fact that I shouldn't have based on the fact that I had never seen you wear glasses in any of your pictures in the Post Your Picture thread.

I already told you that I meant thick, not heavy. Get over it.

Good lighting is an opinion, because "good" is an opinion. There is no factual way to describe something as good. If you describe something as good, you're giving your opinion.

"This restaurant is good" - Opinion
"The president gave a good speech" - Opinion
"The lighting here is good" - Opinion

It's hilarious that you can't tell the difference between fact and opinion. Aren't you like 20?

My overall opinion is that this is something that three types of people will get: People that use material goods as status symbols, people with their mouths hermetically sealed to Steve Jobs' sphincter, and people too cheap and/or dumb to buy a real piece of electronics.

Oh, recommend an electronic that does everything the iPad does equally well or better.

... you're an idiot Irock.

To say something is good doesn't necessarily mean it's an opinion. Especially where "good" is used as a synonym for sufficient. To say "good lighting" in a context of reading, means that the lighting is sufficient for the purposes of reading. This means that your eyes will not be strained while reading in that lighting. Whether or not reading in a particular lighting will strain your eyes is a biological fact, not an opinion.

So by that logic, if Windows is sufficient for you and your needs, then the statement "Windows is good" is indeed a fact and not an opinion.

Apple marketing meeting


So guise, we need a new product to release for our sheep..

How 'bout a netbook? it's the most sensible option. After all, our smallest laptops sell the most. People love the small compact iphone but our most common complaints about it are that it's too locked down and restricted. An apple netbook (obviously we can't call it a "netbook", we need to be different, but we have another marketing department for that) would be right in the middle of these two products. Small and compact, powerful, (more) open and fully functional like our laptops.

Sounds good, though if we made a netbook we would have to sell it very cheap. We horrendously overprice our higher end laptops, but we just can't go charging more than $500 for an apple netbook!

Hmm..

Why don't we just make a huge iphone? Make it like a tablet. That company out there makes those "modbooks" and they're not doing that badly.

Somebody out there already does it? Well we can't then! We have to be hip and first to the post!

We could have it run the iphone OS then maybe? Hey, then we could keep the locked down style and make more profits! I mean, we suckered $50 billion out of our herd this year, in a recession! I should send a memo to steve, maybe he'll mention that in the keynote. Is he out of hospital yet?

Hey yeah, and if we just make it an oversized iphone we can manufacture it for alot less than a complete tablet and still sell it for a high price!

Yeah, but I'm still not happy with these profit margins, they're not large enough.. I want to make $100 billion next year, not $50bn!

We can add 40GB of flash memory and charge $200 extra for it? And put in a $15 3G chipset and charge $130 for it?

Yeah, they'll eat that right up. Ship it.




yeah I cant be bothered to write anymore :|

I think the touch screen tablet idea is nice, but not apple's implementation. It's way too closed. You are forced to use the app store. I find it genuinely funny that you cannot multi task. My phone was made in 2005 has a 70mhz processor IC and it can multi task such as playing music and running 3D java games.

I'd wait for a superior "copy" to come out that is open and has more freedom. It will be superior, and it will cost less. And it will have something so simple as a memory card slot. It's obvious why apple didn't put that in, you could just buy your own reasonably priced 64GB SDHC card and use that instead.

I think over 90% of applications are approved, and the large majority of applications that are denied are denied because of bugs. I really don't have any issues with the app store. I know everything there is going to work, and there's really not anything I want that I can't get from there.

About the multi-tasking. You don't seem to think you can play music and run other applications. You can play and change music from anywhere on the device. While multi-tasking would be nice in some instances, I rarely ever find myself needing or wanting it on my iPod Touch.

The device isn't without its downsides, but the pros outweigh the cons for me.

So by that logic, if Windows is sufficient for you and your needs, then the statement "Windows is good" is indeed a fact and not an opinion.

No, because it's uncontextualized and nobody would assume that good means "sufficient" if all that was stated was "Windows is good"

To say, "Windows is sufficient," is indeed a statement of fact which could then be rebutted. However, "Windows is good" alone is too ambiguous - you would not, without context, assume that good was to mean sufficient. Where it is clear that good does mean sufficient, however, then it is indeed a statement of fact, which can be proven or disproven because there is an objective marker for it to be measured by. It either does what you need it to do or it does not do what you need it to do.

In the case where you ae talking about reading and lamenting the light source, then it is clear that "good lighting" means "sufficient lighting for the purpose of reading". It is a statement of fact because it is true or false.

"Windows is sufficient" is a completely subjective statement and varies from person to person based on their own individual needs.

"Windows is sufficient for my needs" is a fact.

Yes, "Windows is sufficient" is competely subjective, but that doesn't mean it is a statement of opinion. "Windows is sufficient" is ambiguous because it does not specify an object; without a reference for the word sufficient, the statement has no meaning unless an object is implied. If someone says, "Windows is sufficient", then it only gains meaning if you imply an object. No matter what object you implied, however, it would be a statement of fact, either true or untrue. "Windows is sufficient (for all people)" (untrue). "Windows is sufficient (for me)" (likely true). "Windows is sufficient (for you)" (likely untrue).

The fact that "Windows is sufficient" is true or untrue depending on what object you imply doesn't make it an opinion.

Stop arguing semantics. It doesn't matter.

OK, but I suspect that will be at your loss since your inability to distinguish between an opinion and a fact is predicated on an inadequate understanding of the English language. Arguing semantics would likely benefit you in the future.

Your entire reasoning for arguing English semantics was to direct my attention away from your loss on the iPad related discussion.

let's all argue about a product that we all know is going to sell well regardless of its technological and massive functional downfalls.

If you don't want don't buy one.
If someone asks if they should buy one, and another device is better for them, then don't suggest it to them.
If someone buys it just because it has an apple logo, lol it up.
If someone buys it because they think it looks useful, whatever.
If someone can actually genuinely use it for something, or for some personal convenience and actually have a good reason for it, then shut up.

</neutrality>

I agree with NAMKCOR.

Your entire reasoning for arguing English semantics was to direct my attention away from your loss on the iPad related discussion.

That doesn't make any sense; I don't care at all about the iPad - I care that you accused me of "telling you your opinions were wrong" when I did no such thing. There is, in fact, a pertinent distinction between disputing the factual basis for an opinion and disputing something that is purely preferential. Without such a distinction, no logical debate on any issue whatsoever could occur. It is, in fact, the difference between a "you're wrong; no you're wrong" argument and a debate that actually has the potential of changing people's minds.

I resorted to semantics only because without an adequate knowledge of the English language, you seemed unable to grasp that difference, and I believe that it is an important difference.

You flat out told me that reading books off of an LCD is a terrible way to read a book.

Are you really this dumb?