Welcome Guest | Sign In
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider

MacNewsWorld Talkback

ECT News Community   »   MacNewsWorld Talkback   »   Re: iPhone 5 Is New, and That's All It Has to Be

Re: iPhone 5 Is New, and That's All It Has to Be
Posted by: Richard Adhikari 2012-09-12 15:20:02
See Full Story

Apple unveiled the iPhone 5, two new iPods and a greatly revamped iOS 6 on Wednesday to mixed reactions. The iPhone 5 did not beat expectations, but it's expected to sell well nonetheless. The new iPod touch and nano sparked more interest among observers. The iPhone 5 is the thinnest and lightest such device. It has a 4-inch Retina display, an Apple-designed quad-core A6 processor and ultrafast wireless technology coupled with improved battery life.

Re: iPhone 5 Is New, and That's All It Has to Be
Posted by: jescott418 2012-09-12 15:26:44 In reply to: Richard Adhikari
My question lately with these Apple events is if the products introduced are worthy of a event? I realize many Apple fans will obviously think so. But in my own observation I do not see any real need for such events unless Apple truly intro's a NEW product. Not a refresh or re design but a brand new product. To me that is what a event is for. If you do too many and you do not impress the masses. Then your refreshes begin to look bland and average. Apple has already lost the surprise part of their even as most leaks done weeks or months before already show what most people want to know. This leaves me wondering other then a possible marketing angle. What good is a event? I know Apple sales are based around consumers impulse buying traits because Apple get's a huge spike in sales of any new product in the first week or two. But beyond that is when you discover if the product has legs. Apple is not without duds but finding this ability through these events to excite buyers is I guess the only real reason for them. They certainly do not excite me in terms of technology or design.
Jump to:
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ RSS
How urgent is the need to provide broadband services for rural U.S. communities?
It's critical to the entire economy, and everyone should share the cost.
If rural residents really want high-speed Internet, they should foot the bill.
Internet providers will benefit -- they should build out their own networks.
The government should ensure that everyone is connected, but broadband isn't necessary.
People who choose to live off the grid do so for a reason -- leave them alone.
Providers should improve broadband services in heavily populated areas first.