Originally Posted by addabox
Because Apple is interested in getting getting it right-- they'll include functionality if it's genuinely useful and if the implementation is pretty seamless and it doesn't negatively impact another area that Apple deems important. Sometimes, that means waiting until the supporting tech is mature enough to make the trade-offs worth it, as in the case of 3G and battery life.
That doesn't mean I agree with their every choice; it does mean that I can be pretty certain that when Apple does offer a particular feature it will be well thought out and easy to use. I can also be pretty confident that Apple won't lard their devices with "features" that do little more than add a bullet-point to the box copy.
Who gives a shit, at this point, if a given Windows phone had video recording? It apparently sucked, since nobody used it. Why worry about RIM multitasking, if there were no tasks worth doing beyond email? What use is a Nokia phone with copy and paste, if it's too hard to use, or the functionality is lost in a sea of terrible design decisions?
You want to claim that Apple was somehow "behind the curve" on these things while blithely ignoring just how poorly they performed on competing platforms at the time of the iPhone's release. A feature isn't a feature just because you can describe it or it exists, it has to be genuinely useful, function well, be reasonably easy to access, and not have undue negative consequences. "Smart phones" prior to the iPhone, were such a swamp of engineer driven "features", unencumbered by basic standards of usability, as to render these types of comparison meaningless. They were that way because there was no competition with a better idea, and because it was simply accepted that these devices were the provenance of über-geeks, with a steep learning curve and absurd UI conventions the price of admission. Or have you forgotten? It's easy to forget, in that the inexplicably feature starved iPhone has completely swept that model aside.
Let me turn this around, since you seem to think this is an Apple specific issue: why did everyone else wait so long to make a touch based phone with a dead simple app delivery system, an excellent web browser and fun, easy to use UI? Those are the features that strike me as pertinent, why did every other phone manufacturer withhold those
features for so long?
MS and RIM and Nokia and Palm had many, many years to add the features people apparently really wanted (given the explosion in smart phone use once everyone signed onto the Apple model). Why no iPhone equivalent? Why so far behind the curve? Doesn't it frustrate you, how all those other manufacturers do that?
What I see in your argument, is that you seem to feel that the features that I mentioned that were lacking on the Iphone, just didn't work well on the other smartphones. Well, first and foremost, to me, Windows Mobile sucked badly, so I won't even argue about them. However, Palm and RIM didn't suck. And they offered the video recording, picture messaging, copy n paste, custom ringtones, that Apple didn't offer in 3G, and those features didn't suck at all. RIM also offered multitasking, and 3G, and those didn't suck either, infact, RIM was the number one smartphone maker in America. So, I don't get your point at all.
Regarding the point you made that it took others soo long to make such an excellent touch, and easy to use os/ui, simplistic os, and great browser? Well, it seems that Apple was more innovative and just did it better than everyone else, and before everyone else. And I agree with that, but that doesn't have anything to do with the features that I mentioned that they do lack, and the fact that they always lack certain features that are standard on other leading smartphones. I will tell you, I own an Iphone and and android, and I like things about both. Iphone has the smoothest touchscreen, the smoothest os, and the easiest os to use. However, Android, offers all of the features that I want, and contrary to your argument, android has done a pretty good job with all of the features that they have. So, I am actually saying that I like the Iphone, but pointing out obvious negative things that are factual, such as the lack of features compared to the competitor's feature set. And yes, a feature set is nothing to brag about, unless it works properly, but from my experiences with RIM and Android, their feature sets do work very well, as noted in their reviews and in the success that they've had. It's not to say that they are without their issues as well, but my complaint here, was with Apple, because to me, if they only kept up with the competition's fully featured options, there probably would be NO competition.