SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Road Walker who wrote (166686)2/28/2014 3:34:37 PM
From: HerbVic  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 213172
 
Arguably though, it was old FUD, and very useless. Had it been new FUD… who knows?



To: Road Walker who wrote (166686)2/28/2014 5:29:17 PM
From: MGV  Respond to of 213172
 
It was intent that is patently clear in the aggregate of the messages that did it, not any one message. He has no interest in rational discussion. No one needs to play the fool.



To: Road Walker who wrote (166686)2/28/2014 10:39:31 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik2 Recommendations

Recommended By
HerbVic
MGV

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 213172
 
I thought it was more for that lame claim about fingerprint sensors being old hat:

"Fingerprint sensors on phones are a fresh idea in the public mind!"
"Impossible!! Motorola came out with one two years ago!"
"But it was lame and nobody bought it."
"Doesn't matter! Apple knew about it!"
"That is totally not the poi.."
"Hey, look at how much better Google stock has been doing than Apple lately!"

That'd be about where I'd start looking for the block link if the issue hadn't been resolved another way.

By the basic reasoning above, Apple shouldn't bother with an iWatch because the market for that was spoiled by Samsung's lame attempt at one last year.

Also, any fingerprint scanner is vulnerable if the hackers get access to your fingerprints. That article was like saying a computer is vulnerable because it can be hacked if someone steals your passwords.