Apple held an event on Thursday and in the days leading up to that the New York Times was asking the important questions that people wanted answered.
Like this one:
Does anyone need anything that costs more than a few dollars? What do people “need” other than the basic sustenance of life?
What’s the point of an iPad?
We’re all going to die someday. So, really, what’s the point of anything?!
Who needs a tablet in this era of big phones and ultraportable laptops?
Who needs trombones in this era of flutes and tubas?
If you use your tablet mainly for watching media, for instance, Amazon will sell you a very good one that does just that for less than $100. Apple’s cheapest iPad goes for $299.
You like 6-inch, 8GB devices that show ads, right? Oh, you don’t? OK, then these two things that I just said are exactly the same except for price aren’t the same at all. Apple’s cheapest iPad is $249 as of Thursday, by the way. It features a larger screen, twice the memory, and no ads. And while Apple admits to a decline in iPad sales in recent quarters, Amazon has never given Kindle Fire sales figures. Ever.
So maybe you didn’t like that piece. That’s OK. The Times has you covered.
Just askin’ is all.
It’s funny how the question “ARE THESE TECHNOLOGICAL CONVENIENCES LITERALLY RUINING EVERYTHING?” only come up when Apple implements them. The Macalope doesn’t remember the Times railing against the societal impacts of NFC when Android OEMs soldered it onto their devices.
Admittedly, probably because they all failed to make it popular.
So, you don’t like that article, either? There’s just no pleasing you, is there?
OK. OK. OK. OK.
Look, maybe you just got off on the wrong foot with the Times. The horny one is sure we can still work this out. We’re gonna try this one more time, OK?
OK, here we go.
“This Emperor Needs New Clothes—For Tim Cook of Apple, The Fashion of No Fashion” (tip o’ the antlers to @JonyIveParody)
Is it time for Tim Cook to tuck in his shirt?
OK, you’re right. The Macalope gives up. Because, no, you’re not reading that wrong. The Times really did devote over a thousand words to the issue of whether or not Tim Cook should tuck his shirt in. It was at least in the Fashion section, possibly because the Times doesn’t have a section titled “Extreme Foppishness.”
As if this all weren’t enough, the Times‘s Joe Nocera, who recently railed against Apple’s lawsuits against Samsung, took a look at Amazon’s thuggish tactics in dealing with book publishers. His conclusion?
Strong-arming publishers is just the way the game is played. Suing to protect your patents, however, is a sign you’re a “spent force.”
The New York Times often does terrific reporting. It’s sad that virtually none of it is about Apple.