Fair point. However, would you say the internet connectivity is the major drawcard, or is it the devices ability to place the user at the centre of their own universe? I would say the latter, with internet connectivity being a convenience which simply facilitates the person centred focus.DanDare wrote: ↑Sat Nov 28, 2020 3:11 amIts irrelevant to the rest of your argument but you have no basis for claiming this. My wife was working at apple at the time. The big discussion was whether to call it the "ephone", similar to "email" or something else. Somebody suggested that since it could access the web we call it the "web phone" and somebody else suggested "what about 'internet phone'?". That was abbreviated to iPhone. Marketing basically just got given the name and went with it.Dimebag wrote: ↑Sun Nov 08, 2020 2:09 am It’s no real surprise, and I think big tech knew this, and even intentionally planned it.
Just look at the product names of apples lineup: IPhone, IPod, IMac.
The ‘I’ I believe is actually an intentional marketing too which was both a self fulfilling tool, which both predicted and reinforced with its design principles and end goal, the amplification of the ego, or the “I”.
Furthermore, IPod never had internet connectivity for some time, so this tells me that the I actually stood for something else. If you look it up, it also stood for individuality, and thus, the person centred device.
Maybe they should have called it the e-phone though, for ego.