The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
6 Points

Is the New Iphone 5 really revolutionary

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/18/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,724 times Debate No: 25687
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




So about a week ago, Apple released a new Iphone, known as the Iphone 5. Apple has always been known for releasing revolutionary products, however i would argue that that they havent lived up to their reputation with this new installment of the Iphone. The only adjustments which they have made include the changing of the software, which available for Iphone 4S, and also the addition of A6 chip, which isn't all that special. This is the only mildly decent addition. Other than these two changes, there has only been the change which made the phone taller, and making it 18% thinner.


My opponent has not actually defined revolutionary which is a key word in today's discussion. I define revolutionary as "involving or causing a complete or dramatic change". Now, I will be arguing how the iPhone 5 is really revolutionary.

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.










Debate Round No. 1


Primarily, I would like to agree with the definition of revolutionary. Revolutionary does indeed involve a complete dramatic change. This debate does not doubt that the Iphone 5 is probably the best smart phone on the market at the moment but rather that apple have failed to produce the expected innovative product, which they have failed to produce. There is no doubt that yet again the product is superbly built, however with the Iphone 4S there was the introduction of Siri, with the Iphone 3g, 3g was introduced for the first time, revolutionising the smartphone you and I know. These are quite substantional revolutionary steps into the future of electronics. Rival companies like Samsung, Lg and Nokia, will be able to sleep at night. If you want one more example of a revolutionary item, is the original Iphone itself, it changed the smartphone of this generation. What my opposition has failed to realise is that these 3 new specs to the iphone 5 are slight improvements on the old iphone, this is what we expected. The Iphone 5 still failed to make the world say wow.


Conceded Arguments:

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)
2) Arguments.
3) Spelling & Grammar (Capitalization, punctuation, etc.)

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
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.