Times Magazine you suck.

Ok well I never had a problem with Times Magazine until today. Those Idiots declared a prize to the most undeserved piece of s***.


Yesterday, Times Magazine decided (probably by bribes) to declare.... wait... wait for it... the IPHONE as "Invention of The Year".

full story

That's probably the biggest piece of s*** I've ever seen in my life, and I've seen some big s***ty articles out there. What the f*** were they thinking when they declared the iphone invention of the year? did a monkey seriously write the article? Obviously it was 150% undeserved, and for many many reasons. The iphone is not a good phone, it is a failure.

The iphone, I repeat, is not an invention. Just because you add a 'i' at the beginning it does not mean it's something else. Further more there are other mobile devices out there that get no credit, and most have more features. there are many mobile pc's and other mobiles which I've tried myself, and I prefer personaly.

The iphone is also dreadfully expensive, before it's release people were already upset with the price for the iphone, but aswell as it's monthly 70$ fee PLUS other phone bills. And the iphone has very little memory for it's price. Making it.... NOT WORTH IT.

I can see that some people like the iphone, and some people hate it. But to give it "invention of the year" when it CLEARLY does NOT deserved is going way too far. I've descussed the issue with many others, and I'm sure I have many who agree with me when I say;

WHAT THE f***?


discuss.

i agree with u on that one iphones suck out loud

i thought the iphones gave u full net access 40gb memory and the ability to make it into an ipod! i find that pretty cool! and you said s*** alot!

Ehehehe,


this sorta proved your point to me

s*** yes










oh and f***.

i wouldn't pay 400 dollars for it, but i wouldn't get a chance too anyway, as it will most likely cost a lot more when it releases here.

but anyway.

its a phone which has a built in internet browser plus a mp3 player.
which is.....not exactly amazing.
my 90 quid phone does all those things (although the browser sucks on it)

so that leaves the touch screen thing, must say i really don't see the benefits of touchscreens.
lets face it, buttons are a lot easier, which is probably why the majority of devices use them.

so i'd say the iphone is a pretty toy for people with too much money.

i was right it seems
the iphone will cost 269 pounds.

which is about 559 dollars, meaning it costs 159 dollars less than, in the uk.

why is all technology dearer over hear?

Indeed it is just a load of different technology put into one device, so not exactly an invention.



But who on earth gets mad about that sort of thing?