Yeah, but rubber boots are also less prone to damage than smart leather shoes and still people prefer leather.

This is no different as with many other things. Plastic cups don't shatter that easily, people still prefer glass and china.

It's only people who think that smartphones are nothing but tools or small computers or office machinery who think that plastic is the best choice. For most people though they are more like furniture or shoes or clothing or a nice car. Ugly, cheap plastic just isn't going to win them over.

"This is no different as with many other things. Plastic cups don't shatter that easily, people still prefer glass and china." - Do you keep glasses and mugs in your pocket? Or do they tend to sit on a desk / in a cupboard where they're not particularly prone to damage?

rubber?

Yeah, but rubber boots are also less prone to damage than smart leather shoes and still people prefer leather.

Rubber makes feet sweaty and cold, hence the example sucks.

huh?

Don't know about that, It has won me over from iphone. I couldn't care about the back of phone which I am not looking at and no one else can see either as my hand is covering it when I use phone or it's on table, What I care about is the front in all it's glory. Not on some small shitty sized screen such as iphone 5 but the splendour of the mighty Galaxy Note II. Not concerned at all about scratches as the back is easily replaced, Also if I get sick of one colour I can change it not that I care but the option is there, More choice wins me over. For most people I think a smart phone is a SMART PHONE only minority would think of it as fashion, Unless you are referring to 16 year old pimply kids who want to look "cool" with the latest toy. You see some teenagers and even adults in tracksuits and hoodies with the latest and greatest phone, You think to yourself geez mate if I were you I wouldn't be worrying about what the phone looks like,That's the least of your worries people are looking at you not the phone. :)

As for iphones I no longer see them as a fashionable thing to have as EVERY one and their dog has one, Want fashion get something different.

My, only just earlier was I commenting on the "cheap plastic" fallacy (see my comment above in the thread), and here we see it yet again.

You're like the snob who says he likes his furniture made out of oak, looking down on the masses who buy good quality and functional furniture from IKEA. But you're worse than that - you're not only showing that snobbish attitude, but you're doing so in an area where the argument is ludicrous.

If phones are like things like furniture and crockery and shoes, then when is the wooden or china or leather variant of the iphone coming out?

There are plenty of good reasons for not having rubber boots or plastic cups, that aren't simply about what things look like. But also, plastic on technology looks great - it makes it a modern product, rather than outdated wood or metal. For some reason, looking old and traditional is to be preferred on things like furniture, but not on technology where people want a modern look for other things. If you want an old look, then you should buy the cheapest oldest biggest dumb phone you can find.

If you think plastic looks ugly, then we're just arguing opinions on purely aesthetic things - and good luck with your china iphone.

Re: huh?

"get something different"

Indeed - whatever happened to "Think Different"?

The pattern so far seems to be:

Mac - "Think Different", it's better and cool to use something different to most other people.

ipod - Apparently it's suddenly only cool to use what everyone else uses.

iphone - Lie about the state of the market, and *pretend* it's the most popular platform, then say it's only cool to be what everyone else uses...

Aside from the inconsistency, it's that last one that perplexes me in particular. At least be honest, and say they're not using the most popular platform (Android, or Symbian before that) because they like to think different. On the plus side, I suppose someone using Android can claim to both be using what most other people use, and thinking different to Apple users...

Re: Contradicting It's Own Stories

IIRC correctly, it was a spoof article. But yeah, IMHO spoofs should be either so ridiculous that you can't confuse them for a real story (London Bus Found on Moon, My Son is a Fishfinger) or else be published on the 1st of April.

Tooling up purely to meet spikes in demand is a fools game.

Re: Contradicting It's Own Stories

I thought it was pretty obvious it was a spoof from the outset. Surprised the claim they were playing jenga with them might have been a giveaway to anyone who hadn't figured this by the end!

Re: Contradicting It's Own Stories

Obvious bollox does not a spoof make. A spoof should have an original story it spoofs. However there was no original story here. Just the made-up story the writer wanted to suggest so as to engage in a kind of mutual masturbation with the increasingly fandrone core readership they are going for. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a good wank every now and then, so long as enough awareness remains that when the mirror is used, the truth is recognised.

Re: Contradicting It's Own Stories

I'm not sure spoof is the correct word, I agree with you there. I'd say it was satirical though (wouldn't go as far as to call it a good satire mind).

However there was no original story here

Do you know what? There's almost never an original story about Apple, it's always the same hyped up bollocks. Or, as you say, over compensating in the other direction. When you consider how often Apple are mentioned in the media, and then look at the importance of half of what's being reported, you realise just how un-newsworthy they actually are a lot of the time.

Personally I'd prefer to only hear about any company when they do something newsworthy, but an Apple story (whether pro or anti) is good clickbait so we get lumped with it.