It’s the same problem google glass had. It can be the most information rich and user friendly device in the world but if you look like a dingus wearing it, it will never catch on.
Lol. So Gen 2 they were finally like “let’s shape this thing more like someone’s ear”. Then Gen 3 “Fuck it, ears are apparently different shapes let’s just go with the tried and true method that’s been around on $5 earphones for a decade”
I’m kind of surprised people felt that way about AirPods. I don’t remember that at the time. They seem quite mild to me at this point - people didn’t mind wearing regular earbuds around, why worry if there’s a cord or not?
It’s the same problem google glass had. It can be the most information rich and user friendly device in the world but if you look like a dingus wearing it, it will never catch on.
That’s what I thought about the elephant tusk looking AirPods yet here we are.
The Reality Distortion Field sometimes makes things hard to predict when it comes to Apple products.
People on here are wired.
Air pods just look like regular apple headphones just without wires.
They sure as shit look less goofy than my huge pixel buds that stuck an inch out of my ear.
You’re probably thinking of the current gen AirPods rather than the original (comparison).
Lol. So Gen 2 they were finally like “let’s shape this thing more like someone’s ear”. Then Gen 3 “Fuck it, ears are apparently different shapes let’s just go with the tried and true method that’s been around on $5 earphones for a decade”
Only “pros” have human ears. Everyone else must be mutants.
I’m kind of surprised people felt that way about AirPods. I don’t remember that at the time. They seem quite mild to me at this point - people didn’t mind wearing regular earbuds around, why worry if there’s a cord or not?
I thought they looked like uncooked long macaroni.
What if I already look like a dingus?
Then if you wear it you’ll be an even bigger dingus and make other dinguses look less dingusy. It would kinda be a public service of sorts I guess.
The lesser known brother of the Overton window - the Dingerton window.
Two dingi don’t make a right. Or something.
Dingi.
Pronounced ding eye? Dingii? Ding gee eye?
My brain hurts now.
It rhymes with dinghy.
But thats just a single dinghy.
If you pluralize that its either dinghies or dingii?
Meh, my autistic brain gets stuck on weird stupid shit like this.
Its like… If you have a donut, then a second donut, you have two donuts.
You can say two donut to be cutesy i guess?
Very hard for me to tell when being cutesy is appropriate.
One dingus, two dingi.
If the root singular word is dingus, this makes sense.
If the root singular word is dinghy, as I guess I have always said, then it does not.
Well at least I partially understand my own confusion now, thanks!
Don’t they cancel each other out?
Unfortunately they multiply instead of cancel
One times one is still one
i times i is -1, though. Imagine that!
That’s too complex for me.
Hmm. They might. Hadn’t thought of that.
This requires more research. You must buy one - for science! And, I guess, for “science “.
No, if you touch two dingii together you still have two dingii.
Two sexy, sexy dingii
Now the singular is “dingius?”