bigness

It's not clear to me how "bigness" matters.

You can say that, but then you have to own up to the fact that the two dimensions of "bigness" are unrelated.

I was always under the impression that bigness was used to justify a higher price point.

I don't know how big the company is, but after a certain bigness, all of the people who could fix problems like this have moved on.

That way, you're still framing the "bigness" but without mentioning a possible salary first.

> you have to own up to the fact that the two dimensions of "bigness" are unrelatedYou're mistaken - they have much in common.

My only point is that it's almost impossible to grow a complex entity to the point of "bigness" and retain total control.

That's a case where "bigness" actually imposes complexity reduction.

Their bigness, at times, can be a virtue when you're trying to get an understanding of the overall layout of building, and extract key dimensions from it.

Well.. depending on how pervasive it gets, I would put Google Glasses on the same scale as the iPhone when the consideration is the bigness of "big problem".So, how big was the iPhone?

A toddler may have never seen an elephant before, but it may have seen cars, trucks, birds, dogs, people, trees, skies, buildings etc, giving it concepts for bigness, smallness, aliveness, humanness and much else.

Similarly, having big deal features like those are reasonable expectations for comparison to the original Iphone for "bigness" which I interpret as "important new features that will change how most people use phones in a radical way".And I'm disappointed that Apple isn't giving everyone a pony.

Similarly, having big deal features like those are reasonable expectations for comparison to the original Iphone for "bigness" which I interpret as "important new features that will change how most people use phones in a radical way".It would in fact be a really big deal if Apple included those - NFC is a fantastic idea that the Iphone could really launch into big-time use.