Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to pump new Apple products...
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to pump
new Apple products...
they aren't
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to >> pump new Apple products...
they aren't
And yet, you claim DXOMark was "bribed" to rate iPhones lower than others...
In article <1538d621-8041-45bc...@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to pumpthey aren't
new Apple products...
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to pump new Apple products...they aren't
Sure they are.
All underpaid tech reporters are.
A long time ago, a writer
for a Toronto paper exposed massive junkets held by movie studios for critics (back when their opinions mattered). They were ALL on the take. Some of them are truly enthusiastic about the product, owing to its performance for them. But it's a fine line between that and weird loyalties.
In article <355a17f9-9194-40b5...@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off tothey aren't
pump new Apple products...
Sure they are.nope
All underpaid tech reporters are.dpreview journalists are not underpaid.
A long time ago, a writerwhatever may have happened there has absolutely nothing whatsoever to
for a Toronto paper exposed massive junkets held by movie studios for critics
(back when their opinions mattered). They were ALL on the take. Some of them are truly enthusiastic about the product, owing to its performance for them. But it's a fine line between that and weird loyalties.
do with apple.
apple doesn't need to pay people to write about them.
everyone wants to write about apple because it brings in the clicks, especially when the stories are false and misleading, as they often
are.
In article<shrvdd$u3o$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to
pump new Apple products...
they aren't
And yet, you claim DXOMark was "bribed" to rate iPhones lower than others...
no, what i said was those who pay dxomark get better ratings than those
who don’t.
apple doesn't need to pay people to write about them.
Those who don't advertise are doomed to perish.
everyone wants to write about apple because it brings in the clicks, especially when the stories are false and misleading, as they often
are.
Anything technical that's false is easily disproven.
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to
pump new Apple products...
they aren't
And yet, you claim DXOMark was "bribed" to rate iPhones lower than others...
no, what i said was those who pay dxomark get better ratings than those
who don¹t.
It is also worth noting that DxO is limited in its testing methodology, and as a result excludes products that they do not have the capability to test. Just look to their inability to test Fujifilm X- series cameras.
no, what i said was those who pay dxomark get better ratings than those
who don¹t.
It is also worth noting that DxO is limited in its testing methodology, and >> as a result excludes products that they do not have the capability to test. >> Just look to their inability to test Fujifilm X- series cameras.
that too.
*Nobody lies like me.*
It's worth noting that there is nothing better than DXOMark for
comprehensive testing of _smartphone_ camera quality of results.
people want to write about apple, and will
do so for free.
*Nobody lies like me.*
ftfy
It's worth noting that there is nothing better than DXOMark for
comprehensive testing of _smartphone_ camera quality of results.
those who actually use cameras know this to be very much false.
dxomark's *tests* are interesting, but their scores are worthless.
Case in point is that you refuse to understand Apple puts expensive cheap batteries
The only iOS-based cameras that can last a PG&E outage
It's worth noting that there is nothing better than DXOMark for
comprehensive testing of _smartphone_ camera quality of results.
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> asked
*Nobody lies like me.*
ftfyIt's telling that nospam has no _adult_ response to facts about Apple.
It's worth noting that there is nothing better than DXOMark for
comprehensive testing of _smartphone_ camera quality of results.
those who actually use cameras know this to be very much false.Name an available comprehensive smartphone camera QOR outfit that is better.
dxomark's *tests* are interesting, but their scores are worthless.
--
The apologists always prove their belief system is based on zero (0) facts.
most I've ever paid for a watch is £40, why spend
thousands, do the tell the time better ?
No sooner had the UofT and Apple announce a new, horrific vulnerability, Apple announces new products.
Now, I don't want to say that a lot of these tech people are paid-off to pump new Apple products...
In article <f42ad7c1-84b5-4b09...@googlegroups.com>,
Whisky-dave <whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:
most I've ever paid for a watch is £40, why spendit's jewelry.
thousands, do the tell the time better ?
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 285 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 65:38:46 |
Calls: | 6,488 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,096 |
Messages: | 5,274,929 |