Which has nothing to do with anything of the above, and also is without evidence.
Bullshit. 1) The iPhone 4 started the race for better pixel density. Screen specs were so important to Apple that they had to redefine 'Retina' twice afterwards just to be able to milk the concept for tablets and laptops. 2) Samsung's 2Q2013 smartphone market share was about 30%, with LG, Lenovo and ZTE hovering around 5%, and 'others' (mostly not Nokia) taking 40%, according to IDC (sauce). I'm no mathmagician, but that makes Samsung holding a 90% of the Android market somewhat unlikely. 3) Go to Samsung's web page for the Galaxy Note 3. What are they pushing? Specs? No, the pen and its software interface. Sony's Xperia Z1? Water resistance, then camera. In fact, specs are so alike these days that they're impossible to differentiate by.
So you got everything wrong, except perhaps your last point, which merely lacks any credible evidence.
HL2 isn't beta any more. But yeah, I'd buy more Valve games if I didn't already own them. I played through Portal again (with the open source Radeon driver), and have been playing HL2 now and then, but I usually end up booting to Windows for gaming, just because I'd rather play Bioshock Infinite or whatever. The next big Linux game coming up seems to be Football Manager 2014, but that's just a glorified spreadsheet. I remember playing it under Wine when it was Championship Manager 10 years ago, and it actually ran faster than under Windows.
Highly likely, as weird beliefs about food seem all too fashionable, all the time. I'm sure today's low-carb diets would instantly kill a creature from the eighties, due to the cholesterol.
What? I don't think the DSM is about to redefine delusion, as a psychiatric term, to include truthers, chemtrail-believers and AGW denialists.
The original iPhone was pretty groundbreaking for what it was (usable touchscreen input), and the iPhone 4 introduced really nice screens, probably the main reason why resolution has been pushed by all other manufacturers since then. Both technologies were available to other manufacturers, but they all followed Apple's lead. Same with tablets, although I think no one in their right mind would get it blown away by the iPad (or any other tablet since then).
The original MacBook Air probably started the whole race to thinness, too. Even though they're no great innovators, Apple certainly have been leading the industry the last ten years. It's a bit funny that it probably started with the iPod, which Apple delivered late to a market in which everyone else insisted on producing utter crap.
Like they said, it's a fashion accessory. Did you see the presenter at the event, with those hideous white glasses? Fashion. So they made a giant, cumbersome watch with insultingly poor battery life and some crazy advanced technology that they couldn't find any practical use for. Fashion. You wouldn't understand. Neither do I.
I'm close when saying you know nothing about science, yes. I'll add that you don't know how to make an argument.
True, psychology, like any other science, isn't about individuals. But seriously, you know nothing about science. Educate yourself, preferably not on Slashdot.
Your ad-hoc definition of science invented to exclude psychology fails due to the fact that you evidently know nothing about psychology, dictionaries, English majors and pretty much everything else you wrote about.
My idea of roughing it is when room service is late.