Note: that's not to say that the speaker is being in any way deceptive. People naturally evolve and reinvent more effective speech patterns, often unconsciously.
The post further down (well, up now) that's calling attention to the fact that the guy should replace his helmet because he used it (something that is common knowledge for most people young enough to only have worn single use helmets and is literally printed on the helmet and packaging) is a better example of virtue signaling since it states something basically everyone already accepts as fact and is only tangentially related to the article in the first place.
Unfortunately, the term virtue signaling has taken on a political meaning so you can't say it and expect the internet even if you mean it in the technical sense.
This second characteristic really grates on me when it comes in the form "I don't even know anything about X and even I know this is bad!" -- wherein people somehow leverage their lack of credibility on a subject as a source of authority.
But I think it works because it makes the claim bigger by changing what it's being compared to.
So I completely understand why someone would qualify their opinion that this is a nifty good feature by stating as much. Automatic emergency dialing is one feature that my Galaxy Watch doesn't have, that I'd like to have.
Going back to my first paragraph: Appled "claimed" AoD in their launch, however the Galaxy Watch has a great always on display with battery that lasts for days - even longer than the S3 Frontier I had before it. Pebble was the original gangster of course, pretty much inventing the whole market - screen always on for 10 days in the PTS! - but now that they're gone (RIP - all of my Pebbles broke several times so I know why) Garmin has the #1 best battery life by far. I really, really like Tizen however so went with that being a Samsung S-series owner and appreciating the fantastic integration.
Ahem ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
They have better PR, arguably better products, and a more likeable CEO than other tech hyper-corporations. But they are fundamentally no different than any other self-aware pile of cash.
Not by any vaguely reasonable metric when compared to other companies its size
Why don’t we judge Apple for Apple’s words and actions and compare them to other’s words and actions, then see how each stacks up.
Size seems less relevant than the image Apple’s projected and its profits.
Despite thing-X’s flaws it does a good job of outcome-Y?
Apple’s detractors fit this bill far more than its fans do. The online hate Apple gets is nothing short of ridiculous compared to how responsible a corporate citizen they’ve been for as long as I can remember. Most of the time when I see Apple fans in a conversation, it’s countering badly informed anti-Apple circlejerking. One example that comes to mind is the whole Foxconn thing. Apple got massive amounts of backlash for the working conditions there, when virtually every other manufacturer uses them too and received only a handful of the same criticism. Apple dramatically tightened their standards and expanded their vetting process for third-party suppliers (which were already in place). Everyone else? Next to nothing or actually nothing.
It’s completely backward in the same way as the stereotype of vegans. As someone who spent some time as a vegetarian, I quickly realized that most vegans/vegetarians try not to make a big deal out of their dietary choices. On the off chance someone does ask about it, they quickly explain their motivations and hope to move on. Then the next hour of conversation involves something like the omnivores trying to list off every animal type they’ve ever eaten, alphabetically. Alligator, beef (wait, does beef count? Probably not, okay let’s say bison), cuttlefish (wait do individual fish count or no?), etc.
Apple fans (and vegans) get a bad rap because they’re in the minority and those in the majority are simply used to the status quo.