4 ms·
Wait... so your definition of whether something is "a ripoff" is based upon how commercially successful it is? So then android would by definition not be a ripo
by baconner 15y ago
Wait... so your definition of whether something is "a ripoff" is based upon how commercially successful it is? So then android would by definition not be a ripoff. I must be misunderstanding your point.
- zerotype 15y agoI think I didn't explain myself as well as I could have. What I was saying (mean, whatever) is that when apple comes out with a device that is the first successful one of its kind they do that by doing something different. After they do that then other companies ripoff the now successful product. Sure, tablets had existed before the ipad, but not like the ipad. After the ipad came out tablets changed and the cries of everyone at first was "it is just a big ipod touch" and things of that nature. Then, the people that just don't want apple devices despite never trying them became excited about android tablets that most likely wouldn't exist with out the ipad. I know that tablets came before the ipad, but they changed that entire market. Even though they didn't make the first tablet I don't think they ripped off previous ones since they were typically bulky, used a stylus, etc...
- lemieux 15y agoSo basicaly, when someone is successful with a product, others should not do the same thing because they were not first? Way to go to stimulate competition and innovation.