Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Feb 2013 11:40 UTC
Permalink for comment 553407
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-10-13
And the argument was made about bluetooth headsets and nothing changed there: it looks douchey (of course, that doesn't apply to everyone). But I'm not aware of such arguments around cell phones in general...maybe when phones were the size of 24 oz beer can and not *that* portable, OK... And even if you're right, well then the argument has come back to life: just look at the divide around "phablets" like the Galaxy Note.
Looks matter, period. To those who suggest they shouldn't matter when it comes to Glass, then why doesn't that apply to fashion choices? If we always prioritized utility over looks, then wearing "fanny packs" would be cool and our universal dress code would be cargo pants and SWAT team vests.