BigBloke, if you read the post, you'll see that the Engadget writer didn't once mention Apple, iPod, "iPod killer," or anything that sounded biased. All he said was that it looks like a boring device. Opinion? Yes. Biased? It doesn't sound like it. $70 for a 4 GB music player with nothing we haven't seen before? I tend to agree with him.
@MEAT! If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to.
Opinion? No explanation, just an adjective based on nothing. Just "boring". Do you call that an "opinion"?
Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default.
"If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to."
Read this line, written by BigBloke:
"Endgadget - No wonder you are looking for new writers. The totally bisaed $hit you guys have dishing up lately..."
He is referring to this post on Engadget and thus this post's author, and accusing him of being biased.
@giuliop "Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default."
I agree. You will see, however, that this post's author, Joshua, does not once negatively compare the device to an iPod or even mention Apple. How can we conclude that he is biased against anything that is non-Apple?
There's a bit of confusion here. You mentioned "Apple, iPod, iPod killer" in conjunction with the author's biased opinion, while BigBloke was criticising the guy above, which in fact said something about "iPod killer". So yes, he was accusing the author of being biased, but not because he said something about Apple. In fact, he (and we) can conclude that Engadget is biased simply by looking at all the other posts: there is no need to mention Apple if you bash everything that isn't Apple - although they have other random preferences, just look at the other MP3 player by Samsung in a later post.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
This isn't an iPod killer
Nope... it's an mp3 player... it plays music.
i think it looks kinda cool.
What is it with these a$$holes that immediately have to make a comment that such and such 'isn't an iPod killer'.
By the look of it, this actually $hits all over the Shuffle, whereby you can acutally read what is going, FM tuner and all.
Endgadget - No wonder you are looking for new writers. The totally bisaed $hit you guys have dishing up lately...
Ok, rant is now finished...
BigBloke, if you read the post, you'll see that the Engadget writer didn't once mention Apple, iPod, "iPod killer," or anything that sounded biased. All he said was that it looks like a boring device. Opinion? Yes. Biased? It doesn't sound like it. $70 for a 4 GB music player with nothing we haven't seen before? I tend to agree with him.
@MEAT!
If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to.
Opinion? No explanation, just an adjective based on nothing. Just "boring". Do you call that an "opinion"?
Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default.
@giuliop
"If you read BigBloke's post, you'll see that the he didn't once mention the Engadget writer. In fact, he was talking about the guy he replied to."
Read this line, written by BigBloke:
"Endgadget - No wonder you are looking for new writers. The totally bisaed $hit you guys have dishing up lately..."
He is referring to this post on Engadget and thus this post's author, and accusing him of being biased.
@giuliop
"Biased? Yes, if anything that does not come from Apple is "boring" by default."
I agree. You will see, however, that this post's author, Joshua, does not once negatively compare the device to an iPod or even mention Apple. How can we conclude that he is biased against anything that is non-Apple?
There's a bit of confusion here. You mentioned "Apple, iPod, iPod killer" in conjunction with the author's biased opinion, while BigBloke was criticising the guy above, which in fact said something about "iPod killer". So yes, he was accusing the author of being biased, but not because he said something about Apple. In fact, he (and we) can conclude that Engadget is biased simply by looking at all the other posts: there is no need to mention Apple if you bash everything that isn't Apple - although they have other random preferences, just look at the other MP3 player by Samsung in a later post.