Prevailing pomaceous protectionism

You might have seen hidden away in the press recently that Apple, a US computer hardware manufacturer, will shortly release a new version of its mobile telephone.  For those living under a rock, it's called the iPhone 5. 

As with seemingly every pomaceous product which is launched nowadays the sycophant fanbois have been getting very excited because, well, it's a new product and it's made by Apple.  That slavish attitude can be irksome.  If you are pleased that the latest model offers some technological feature which is unavailable on any other product and, key, you will actually use it, then that's fine.  But eulogising about a product you've not even used simply based on its manufacturer?  Hello Mr Obsequious.

Something's not quite right here

  It's not as if the features of the new phone are that exciting.  Or that anyone can tell what they are.  Its users can still play whichever game is de rigueur, fiddle about on Facebook and even communicate aurally.  It seems the main difference to mere mortals is that it is an inch longer [since when did that ever make a difference to anything?]. 

But maybe the general public's insouciance is misplaced.  Maybe the brand automata should not be mocked so readily.  Maybe more respect should be given to the power of the trade mark.  After all, Apple is fairly successful.  Rather than resent that accomplishment, Apple should be applauded for the development of a deified brand with loyalty strong enough to override any rational assessment as to the merits of its products.  Android users are entitled to disagree.

This Kat is tempted to upgrade but, as with any forbidden fruit, that could prove to be a very costly decision.

Cat versus apples here