Is the New Iphone 5 really revolutionary
Debate Rounds (3)
Now, my opponent's argument is that there were only four changes that he believes are not special. He talks about the A6 chip, the changing of the software which is available for iPhone 4S, the phone being taller, and the 18% thinner phone. Now, I would like to say that my opponent has no sources and only to his opinion does he believe that Apple releases revolutionary products.
Now, I will be explaining the newest changes. There are several changes instead of only 4.
A) The New Design. The phone is 18% thinner, 20% lighter, and 12% less overall volume. The iPhone 5 is also slighty taller/longer than the iPhone 4S. It is also entirely made out of glass and aluminum. This new design is revolutionary because it is the thinnest and lightest iPhone ever made. It went through a complete and dramatic change which is the very definition of revolutionary.
B) The New Screen and Display. The smartphone features a extra four-inch screen with a 16:9 aspect ratio. It also has total resolution of 1136 x 640 pixels. This has allowed a 5th row of app icons on the screen. Not only that, but the touch sensors have had an entire layer removed allowing touch input to be much sharper and more responsive in this screen. The screen color's saturation is 44% greater than iPhone 4S. The screen and display is revolutionary because it is an absolute new change to the iPhone 5.
C) The A6 Chip. The A6 chip achieves twice the iPhone 4S's CPU and graphics performance and is 22% smaller than the A5 chip. It has better "low light" performance and is 40% faster than the A5 chip. The front camera has a higher resolution at 1.2 megapixels. Its battery (the rechargeable lithium-ion polymer battery) , is rated at 225 hours of standby time, 40 hours of music, 10 hours of video, and nearly 8 hours of talk time before requiring a charge. The operating memory was doubled and the phone takes a nano-SIM which is smaller than all predecessors. This is revolutionary because it is twice as good as before in all areas and is very special.
These are three sections of updates and I have not even talked about wireless connections, the actual software change, and the new Lightning Connector. All of these are revolutionary updates as I've proven and your arguments are full of biased opinion without facts.
1) The new design of iPhone 5 being revolutionary.
2) The new screen and display of iPhone 5 being revolutionary.
3) The A6 chip for the iPhone 5 being revolutionary.
4) That my opponent lied about the updates being only his listed updates.
5) That the iPhone 5 is probably the best smart phone in the world.
My opponent agrees with my definition of revolutionary. However, he states that "Apple has failed to produce the expected innovative product." My opponent does not give any commentary on what expectations were for the iPhone 5 and who expected it. Also we are not arguing on that issue. We are arguing on whether it was revolutionary.
My opponent admits a high probability of it being the best smart phone in the world. He also concedes that it is superbly built. He also states three examples of revolutionary changes which are the iPhone, the iPhone 3G, and the iPhone 4S. However, this does not change the fact that the iPhone 5 undergoed a dramatic change which means that it is revolutionary. These are not three changes/improvements. These are three different sections of changes/improvements. My opponent states that the iPhone 5 failed to make the world say "Wow" but he has no evidence or data to back that up nor does he state why it is not revolutionary. He does have one sources but fails to talk about that source's information.
In the end, I ask for your vote on
1) Sources. (My sources compared to his were on a 9:1 ratio)
3) Spelling & Grammar (Capitalization, punctuation, etc.)
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Hmm, seems to be an empty round three... Anyone who reads this should see why I voted the way I did. Con's arguments weren't pathetic, but they were somewhat lacking compared to Pro's, and Pro did have better S/G and sources.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.