4 ms·
Most of this response was ad hominem. You didn't really respond to the author's point-by-point critique of the article and Samsung's actual lack of innovation.
by dylangs1030 14y ago
Most of this response was ad hominem. You didn't really respond to the author's point-by-point critique of the article and Samsung's actual lack of innovation.
- makomk 14y agoHis "point-by-point critique" looks to me like yet another Apple fanboy loudly yelling about how any functionality Apple hardware doesn't have is both un-innovative and useless and how no-one could possibly need it. Particularly this part: "Split screen apps? I think that split screen apps wouldn’t work well on a phone, where you don’t want your focus to be diverted. But lets assume that you want such a feature–do you call that innovation?" (Some common tasks you might want to do on a smartphone require interacting with more than one app - but no, obviously it's completely useless!) Most of Apple's "innovations" in iOS weren't terribly innovative by that standard either, from what I recall.