The Instigator
TommyCakes
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

Apple better than Andriod

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 8 votes the winner is...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 630 times Debate No: 72174
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (8)

 

TommyCakes

Pro

Apple is better because it's better for the environment, and doesn't have ANY hassles
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept.

Resolved: Apple is better than Android

Because PRO is making a positive claim, only he has the burden of proof to prove that Apple phones are objectively better than Android phones. In the process, he must be able to prove that one can be objectively better than another. In other words, he needs to lay out a criteria for evaluation that allows us to rank one objectively above another. In the absence of that, all of his arguments fall flat -- and his burden remains unfulfilled -- because everything he provides us is making the implicit assumption that X, Y, and Z quality are desirable, one of which is without warrant. In the absence of a warrant, all of his remarks boil down to subjective opinion, in which case he doesn't establish his burden.

To further expand on PRO's burden, he must be able to prove the following in order to win this debate. If he fails to so, you vote CON by default.

P1) X, Y, and Z criteria establish objective superiority
P2) Apples trump Androids in all three of these categories
C1) Therefore, Apples are objectively superior to Androids

P1 is establishing an objective framework for evaluation -- without that, his arguments have no warrant.

P2 is evidencing that Apples actually fulfill these criteria, whilst Androids do not.

C1 follows only if he can prove both P1 and P2. If he fails to do so, or there's the slightest bit of ambiguity remaining by the end of this debate, you vote CON -- because PRO will have failed to fulfill his burden of proof.

To summarize what I must do in order to win this debate:

(1) If PRO fails to establish both P1 and P2, you vote for me.
(2) If by the end of the debate, it is even possible that either Androids are better than Apples, that they are equal, or that we can't judge which is better, you vote for me.

So far, PRO has provided us with two unwarranted claims -- no evidence to even back up that they are true, or reason that they establish objective superiority. Therefore, he hasn't made a single move toward establishing his BOP.
Debate Round No. 1
TommyCakes

Pro

TommyCakes forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
TommyCakes

Pro

Well, the system that it uses can handle much more games, the iPhones, now, have accelerometers, gyroscopes, and other awesome sensors, the software that it uses is not 3 years old (the most popular software, i mean).
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

Vote CON for several reasons:

(1) PRO forfeited the last round

(2) My entire case -- and burden analysis -- has been dropped, meaning you have to buy it

(3) PRO has done nothing to contest his burden, but he hasn't taken any steps to advance it

(4) He's trying to offer arguments in the last round, which is a conduct violation


I'm going to briefly respond to his arguments and show you why he doesn't fulfill his burden, even though you should disregard what he has written, anyway, and vote CON.

PRO writes, "Well, the system that it uses can handle much more games, the iPhones, now, have accelerometers, gyroscopes, and other awesome sensors, the software that it uses is not 3 years old (the most popular software, i mean)."

There is (1) no evidence for any of these claims, so you're not going to buy them; (2) no framework for gauging an objective criteria for superiority; and (3) no engagement of my burden analysis, or contesting of my point that he is doing nothing more than offering his subjective opinion. Even if these things were true -- and you have no reason to buy that they are, because PRO has the burden of proof and hasn't demonstrated as much -- they would not fulfill PRO's burden.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by FreedomEagle 2 years ago
FreedomEagle
Android is master race. thus is clearly stated in the 2nd amendment. therefore God=Android. Plus its far easier to prirate my freedum with android.
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
Change the voting period to 10 days or something, and I'll accept.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: "Well, the system that it uses can handle much more games, the iPhones, now, have accelerometers, gyroscopes, and other awesome sensors, the software that it uses is not 3 years old (the most popular software, i mean)." - this is the *sole* argument of Pro's and is a bare assertion, with no demonstration or proof whatsoever. Pro failed to fulfill their BoP or address Con's arguments. Pro also forfeited a round, so conduct to Con. Pro failed to rebut a huge majority, if not every, of the arguments raised by Con. On the other hand, Con refuted every argument raised by Pro while also going unchallenged for a majority of the debate.
Vote Placed by Hunts 2 years ago
Hunts
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Lee001 2 years ago
Lee001
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by AngelofDeath 2 years ago
AngelofDeath
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF and because i feel like this was more a troll debate than an actual debate, and Con trolled Pro out
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited a round which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to rebut a huge majority, if not every, argument raised by Con. On the flip side, Con crushed every argument raised by Pro while also going unchallenged for a majority of the debate. For these reason, Con wins arguments. Sources - Tie. Neither utilized sources in this debate. This is a clear win for Con.
Vote Placed by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: It saddens me that I must vote this way, but forfeiture and lack of arguments pushes me beyond my will.
Vote Placed by Illegalcombatant 2 years ago
Illegalcombatant
TommyCakesResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con put Pro in a corner to present an objective standard to determine "better". Pro did not provide one.