or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone - Page 4

post #121 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

Right, you can't actually successfully argue your point, so you're going to convince us all about how right you are by telling us that you own a Nokia product. Congratulations on your purchase.

Sapporbaby has claimed for awhile to own two Nokia phones, an iPhone, and an iPod Touch.
post #122 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Uhhhh.... Here we go again. Nokia's devices, the IT are positioned for the particular market that they are aimed. They did not develop an iPod then stick a phone on it and call it revolutionary. Nokia developed a Linux tablet that is clearly aimed at a select market.

As far as the third world is concerned, the US seems to fit that bill in regards to Nokia. In the Mid East, Europe, Asia, and parts of South America, Nokia high-end phones are selling and selling quite well. Could you provide a reference as to what you consider a low-end phone. To have a much better idea of the Nokia portfolio, I would suggest you visit: www.nokia.co.uk. Here you will find a plethora of high-end phones that have better specs, and features that the iPhone is sorely lacking. Nokia actually has a smartphone line that performs smartphone functions.

You seem to be so smitten with Nokia that you don't actually bother to read posts or think through your replies. Yes Nokia makes "smart phone" products. They don't sell very many compared to their low end phones and each quarter they sell less. We don't need to define the low and high end, the evidence is in the fact that Nokia's average selling price goes down each quarter. And I've owned many Nokia phones and am very familiar with their product line.

But my point is that Nokia cannot complete with Apple on software and customer satisfaction, and so will eventually cede the high end.
post #123 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You are mostly comparing surface elements. The hardware and the missing functionality that other phones currently have.

What truly is revolutionary about the iPhone is the software. The OS and the API's have not even been used to their fullest potential.

What good is the OS if the rest of the phone is not up to it. As I disclaimed, these are my opinions that I developed after years of using smartphones. In comparison, the iPhone falls way short. Now if you have experience with other phones by all means bring it forth. For many, the iPhone is their first entry into the "smartphone" arena, but for others, the iPhone is just a natural progression.
post #124 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

Right, you can't actually successfully argue your point, so you're going to convince us all about how right you are by telling us that you own a Nokia product. Congratulations on your purchase. I can see that not only does it allow you to surf the net at an amazing 7.2Mbps, but it also lets you be smug and condescending. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to assist the user with respect to intelligence or wisdom. Maybe if you went out and spent more money on some consumer electronics you'd eventually get that? And you'd be more attractive to opposite sex too. Be sure to tell us how you go.

***Sigh***

Before continuing, maybe it would be a good idea to start from the beginning of this thread as many of your statements have been addressed by me and a few others.

As to convincing you. I thought I made it clear that I could not care what you believe or do not believe. I just don't. I did not know a phone was designed to assist with intelligence (can be gained with reading and experiencing new things), wisdom (starts with seeing the world from more than one prospective).
post #125 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Sapporbaby has claimed for awhile to own two Nokia phones, an iPhone, and an iPod Touch.

??????????????????? Not sure what the significance of this is but okay.

BTW, everyone here claims something. I have not seen anyone post a receipt of their devices here online, so it could be assumed that everyone here is: "claiming".
post #126 of 259
Quote:
What good is the OS if the rest of the phone is not up to it. As I disclaimed, these are my opinions that I developed after years of using smartphones. In comparison, the iPhone falls way short. Now if you have experience with other phones by all means bring it forth. For many, the iPhone is their first entry into the "smartphone" arena, but for others, the iPhone is just a natural progression.

Again you are looking at the surface. The underlying code structure is more important. The iPhone is using the same foundation and API's as the desktop OS. This is something no one else has done. This will allow the iPhone to run applications that in ways that other phones will not be able to.

Perhaps you just don't fully grasp what that means and you will have to wait and see what will come from it.
post #127 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Again you are looking at the surface. The underlying code structure is more important. The iPhone is using the same foundation and API's as the desktop OS. This is something no one else has done. This will allow the iPhone to run applications that in ways that other phones will not be able to.

Perhaps you just don't fully grasp what that means and you will have to wait and see what will come from it.

Perhaps I do. Perhaps others have thought of this, but it did not seem applicable for their applications. Maybe SE and Nokia, and some of the other manufacturers do not see this as being important for their business. At the moment, many still don't. For Apple this is the right thing to do. Fine. Just because Apple thinks it is good, does not mean it the best thing in the world. Nokia and SE will still continue to do well with reincarnated versions of Symbian and beyond. This seems to be lost on anyone other than the most diehard Apple fans.

Personally, my money goes with what works. If it is Apple, Steve can buy a new mock-turtle neck on my dime. If Nokia fits the bill, then they get my money as well. I do not fall for the old Jedi Mind Trick.
post #128 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadisawesome View Post

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

This is not true. The CPU on the iPhone is more than capable of handling the extra speed. We're not talking 100Mbps here - just maybe 1 Mbps or so, depending on network conditions.

One of the reasons that web site loads are not as fast on 3G as a straight download test would imply is that 3G latency is not significantly improved compared to 2.5G. A web page load of cnn.com will establish half a dozen TCP connections and send out maybe a hundred or more individual HTTP GET requests. Loading a web page quickly, therefore, requires good bandwidth *and* low latency. 3G gives the former, but still lacks in latency. A good latency with 3G is maybe 60-80ms compared with 10-30ms that you might get from your cable broadband.
post #129 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Perhaps I do. Perhaps others have thought of this, but it did not seem applicable for their applications. Maybe SE and Nokia, and some of the other manufacturers do not see this as being important for their business. At the moment, many still don't. For Apple this is the right thing to do. Fine. Just because Apple thinks it is good, does not mean it the best thing in the world. Nokia and SE will still continue to do well with reincarnated versions of Symbian and beyond. This seems to be lost on anyone other than the most diehard Apple fans.

Those are a lot of maybe's. You fail to recognize what Apple has done is not easy. That is why no one else has done it.

MS cannot port XP or Vista for mobile devices. Symbian in its many forms and Blackberry were designed for mobile devices by their nature were easier to create than a desktop OS. Linux mobile in its many forms is not necessarily directly associated with desktop Linux. No one else has directly ported a desktop OS and its API's to an embedded mobile device.

Now your argument is that Apple may have a superior OS and development platform. In a highly competitive market others may have thought about it and decided they did not want to go the superior route. You do realize the OS and software platform are what directly control the hardware, functionality, and user interface. Its a very important part of the phone.

It does not really work to continue to reinvent old code. When faced with competition from newer more advanced code. Apple learned this in the 90's deciding to abandon OS 9 and its 18 year old API's. Started all over again with OS X. MS is also learning this lesson but is taking much longer to do anything about it.

Quote:
Personally, my money goes with what works. If it is Apple, Steve can buy a new mock-turtle neck on my dime. If Nokia fits the bill, then they get my money as well. I do not fall for the old Jedi Mind Trick.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. All of the mobile platforms "work". What works for you is up to you.
post #130 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

??????????????????? Not sure what the significance of this is but okay.

You say you own an iPhone, admit you rarely use it. Many of your comments sound as if you've never touched one.

Quote:
BTW, everyone here claims something. I have not seen anyone post a receipt of their devices here online, so it could be assumed that everyone here is: "claiming".

Yes anyone can claim anything but there is a limit on what sounds believable. Most of the time people sound believable, sometimes they don't.
post #131 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You say you own an iPhone, admit you rarely use it. Many of your comments sound as if you've never touched one.

And your point is? I can use it as little or as much as I like. I paid for it. I do not use it as much simply because it is a crippled device (my opinion). I use the iPod functions mostly. Would you like me to chart my usage and report back to you?



Quote:
Yes anyone can claim anything but there is a limit on what sounds believable. Most of the time people sound believable, sometimes they don't.


Really? Some of the things people say here sound very myopic and provincial, but then again, who cares? I surly don't. I only have to worry about a few people in my chain of command. I come to AI simply for entertainment and nothing else. There are some people here I respect greatly, even if I disagree with them. I do not waste my time riding the middle line so people will like or believe me one way or another.
post #132 of 259
Quote:
And your point is? I can use it as little or as much as I like. I paid for it. I do not use it as much simply because it is a crippled device (my opinion). I use the iPod functions mostly. Would you like me to chart my usage and report back to you?

Your comments about the iPhone have been negative to an extreme. You basically say nothing good about it at all. When pointing out its marketshare accomplishments. Its glowing reviews and high customer satisfaction numbers. You find some way to dismiss it all. There are many people on AI who say they will not buy one until it as some type of missing feature they feel they must have. But generally they all admit that the phone currently does what it is designed to do exceedingly well.

Myself and other regular iPhone users point out parts of its functionality that you seem to not have experience with. Which means you really have not given it a fair and exhaustive chance.

I don't see the wisdom of using the iPhone as an iPod when for the price of it could buy two or three iPods.
post #133 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Again you are looking at the surface. The underlying code structure is more important. The iPhone is using the same foundation and API's as the desktop OS. This is something no one else has done. This will allow the iPhone to run applications that in ways that other phones will not be able to.

Perhaps you just don't fully grasp what that means and you will have to wait and see what will come from it.


Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Apple and others have been Nokia killers for as long as there were phones. At one time Ericsson was one paycheck away from buying Nokia, and look where things are now. If you are deluded enough to think that Nokia will simply sit by and not make a fight of the game proves that you lack the understanding involved to see products on a global scale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundy

NO MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. Last warning.


People on both sides of the debate need to chill.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #134 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by notabull View Post

One of the reasons that web site loads are not as fast on 3G as a straight download test would imply is that 3G latency is not significantly improved compared to 2.5G. A web page load of cnn.com will establish half a dozen TCP connections and send out maybe a hundred or more individual HTTP GET requests. Loading a web page quickly, therefore, requires good bandwidth *and* low latency. 3G gives the former, but still lacks in latency. A good latency with 3G is maybe 60-80ms compared with 10-30ms that you might get from your cable broadband.


EDGE latency seems to be quite a lot higher than 3G's, at least on ATT's EDGE network:

The main finding of the test is that EDGE really is a relatively slow wireless network in terms of bandwidth. The 5,805 iPhone users who took the speed test were getting an average download speed of 109 kilobits per second (Kbps) on the EDGE network. EV-DO wireless networks consistantly deliver between 400 Kbps to 700 Kbps download speeds, with bursts up to 2 megabits per second (Mbps). Your broadband connection at home is likely to be in the 1 Mbps range, or about 10 times the speed of EDGE. AT&T's more advanced 3G wireless network is also capable of delivering download speeds of around 1 Mbps.

BBR's [Broadband Reports] speed test also reveals high levels of "latency" in the EDGE network. Latency is a measure, in milliseconds, of how long it takes a single small packet of data to travel from the iPhone through the network to a target location on the Web (a Yahoo server, for example) and back again. Mind you, that's before the network actually starts sending data down.

Anyway, the speed test shows that even for the smallest data request, iPhone users can expect 500 milliseconds of latency no matter how close they are to the server they're trying to access.

EDGE's high latency times and narrow bandwidth add up to painfully long page loads for iPhone users. So why did Apple and AT&T choose EDGE and not the AT&T 3G network for the iPhone? Because EDGE covers 90 percent of the country, while the 3G network covers just a few markets. Until AT&T builds out its 3G network to reach the rest of us, the iPhone will remain a 21st century device running on a 20th century network. Too bad.


http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/004847.html


(Note: ATT's 3G coverage is improving. And HSDPA devices also do EDGE.)

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #135 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Your comments about the iPhone have been negative to an extreme.


Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.

The truth likely lies somewhere between Sapporo's "negativism" and your overly positive statements. And that's the great thing about AI... I can hear both PoVs, weigh them against each other, draw upon what's valuable in each of them, and come to my own opinion, or modify my existing one.

But, to call someone else's PoV "extreme" is silly. The same could easily be said about you, me, or a great many of the posters here.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #136 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above?
People on both sides of the debate need to chill.

.

Yep. Chill, Tenobell.

Continue the discussion - it's a good one.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #137 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above? .

Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.

I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.
post #138 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.

The Apple party line:

"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."

"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."

"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."

I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.
post #139 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The Apple party line:

"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."

"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."

"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."

I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.

I have played up what I thought were good features of the iPhone. I have said what I think its advantages are, but I also see its glaring deficiencies. I consider myself a power user when it comes to phones as I have been using them since Motorola had the black banana looking thing with the 4 inch antenna. Not to mention consulting Vodafone Germany (was Mannesmann) on the build out of their GSM network, o.tel.o (Germany), E-Plus (Germany), Sonera (Finland), Telecom Italia (guess where), and a few others. I have an idea or seven about what I feel is a good phone and what isn't. I did not fall over myself with the smoke and mirrors that Apple used to sell the iPhone. As an iPod it is outstanding and without an equal. As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.

As to what I do with it is well not really your concern as you did not pay for it, so I do not have to justify how I do and do not use it to least of all you. For the most part, I use my iPhone as my work phone. I tether it to my N82 via the Gear4 BluEye, so I can have my iPod and phone with me at all times if I choose to.
post #140 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.

I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.

I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.

I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.

* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.

* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't

As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
post #141 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

***Sigh***

Before continuing, maybe it would be a good idea to start from the beginning of this thread as many of your statements have been addressed by me and a few others.

As to convincing you. I thought I made it clear that I could not care what you believe or do not believe. I just don't. I did not know a phone was designed to assist with intelligence (can be gained with reading and experiencing new things), wisdom (starts with seeing the world from more than one prospective).

Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.

Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.
post #142 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.

I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.

* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.

* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't

As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.

I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably. Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.
post #143 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.

Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.

My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking. It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these. To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequitors? Most biz users don't. Descerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.

The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.
post #144 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.

You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.


Quote:
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't

A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.

Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?



Quote:
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.

What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.
post #145 of 259
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #146 of 259
Quote:
As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.

A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.

That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.
post #147 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably.

Uhhhhh... Failed how exactly? As much as I detest all things M$, they are right now the on top but their market share is declining. So which decade are you talking about where M$ failed to catch Apple?


Quote:
Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.

Are you saying that neither Nokia nor SE has the skills to deliver, and if so to deliver what? Right now, it appears that Nokia has the technological advantage over Apple in terms of specifications. Apple has the software high ground. Which do you think will be easier to overcome with a few million thrown around here and there? Nokia has made no attempt, at least that I know of, to put a desktop on their phones as they didn't need to. They did however make the conduits and links to those desktops. This suited their biz model and bottom line. I have visited Nokia's R&D facilities, and spoken with their engineers. They are not worried in the least about what the iPhone has to offer technically as they can match it and in many cases deliver better performance. What is of no interest to them is putting a desktop OS on their phones.
post #148 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


NICE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
post #149 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.

We are going round and round. The lack of some to do something does not mean they can't. Unlike many here who seem to live in Stever Jobs' basement, I do not have access into the inner workings of Nokia, or their biz strategy. I can only talk to my friends, and other resources and get an idea about what is in the pipe. For Nokia S60 or Symbian is the future of where they will go (currently). The switched from S80 and S40, and are building on S60. So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.

Quote:
A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?

Quote:
Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?

I meant GSM/Cell base stations.

Quote:
What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.


Head over to the Symbian developers community forum and see another "development platform".
post #150 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.

That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......................!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.
post #151 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.


Huh? I thought it was pretty much settled that Apple is going to have to improve their feature-set to appeal to the business-user/Blackberry crowd.

Do you really want to try to sell to those guys with the argument of, "Well, we don't have close to everything you want, but what we do have is really kewl?"

Or is Apple just not going to take on RIM?


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #152 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking.

It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.

To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequiturs? Most biz users don't. Discerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.

The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.


Well said.

Though I am hoping that the iPhone 2.0 software and 3rd party apps will plug many of the holes in Apple's current feature set, for consumers and business users alike.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #153 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.

From what I've seen Symbian has no equivalent to Cocoa Touch, Core Video, Core Audio, Core Image, or Core Animation.

Quote:
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?

Yes but listing features and applications tells you little about how Symbian works or its development platform.

Quote:
Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.

Its unreasonable to be disappointed with Apple for not including features that were never listed. The iPhone version 1 was not developed as a business device. I seriously doubt many consumers are making common use of OBEX or SyncML.
post #154 of 259
Quote:
It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.

This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.

Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.

Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.
post #155 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

From what I've seen Symbian has no equivalent to Cocoa Touch, Core Video, Core Audio, Core Image, or Core Animation.

It was never intended to. It is not what Symbian is about. It is a mobile phone platform, not a desktop extension/replacement OS.

Quote:
Yes but listing features and applications tells you little about how Symbian works or its development platform.

Who cares? Do you need to know about Cocoa Touch, Core Video, etc.... to operate your iPhone? I don't. This is a very, very weak argument put forth on your part. You are arguing vaper here.

Quote:
Its unreasonable to be disappointed with Apple for not including features that were never listed. The iPhone version 1 was not developed as a business device. I seriously doubt many consumers are making common use of OBEX or SyncML.

It is not unreasonable to expect a device marketed as a phone to fullfill even the most basic phone features. The iPhone simply does not do this. Surely you can see that the software is lacking here Tenobell.
post #156 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Who cares? Do you need to know about Cocoa Touch, Core Video, etc.... to operate your iPhone? I don't. This is a very, very weak argument put forth on your part. You are arguing vaper here.

I think his point is that Mobile OS X foundation has the ability to grow faster and farther than other mobile platforms by allowing greater expandability with less limitations therein.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #157 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.

Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.

Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.

Did you know that most Finns, arguably some of the smartest people on the planet had no idea that their phones were 3G capable and that they were using 3G connections when checking email and surfing the web? Reason being: IT JUST WORKS. They had no idea how it worked just that it does. Of course the techies knew. But basic things like email using 3G was so ubiqutous (no spell checker but you understand) that they had no idea they were using it, and many simply answered no that they weren't.

As for the features, does the fact that not everyone is using make them any less valuable? I do not use vid conferencing daily but when I use it, it is because of a need. I do use VoIP almost daily but does the lack of it in an iPhone mean I should find other means until Apple deems it important enough to include?
post #158 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

I do use VoIP almost daily but does the lack of it in an iPhone mean I should find other means until Apple deems it important enough to include?

Apple won't be including VoIP, but according to the SDK rules 3rd-party developers can create them so long as it only works over WiFi. This will probably be altered as soon as Apple no longer has profit-sharing partners with the carriers.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #159 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think his point is that Mobile OS X foundation has the ability to grow faster and farther than other mobile platforms by allowing greater expandability with less limitations therein.

Thanks for explaining this, and to this end he is correct, I guess. I am not a developer so I would not know how fast Symbian or OS X can scale. For me, it comes down to which one works. Right now, at this moment in time, today, heute, paiva, my combination of N82 and iPhone meet my needs. Maybe Nokia or Apple will develop the device that I need and for sure it will reside in my pocket.
post #160 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.

Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.

Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.


Not used much by consumers... sure. But how about business users? Hmm...

Again, is Apple just not going to take on RIM or any of the other business-oriented smartphone makers anymore, is that the plan?

Or is much of that stuff going to show up in June with the 2.0 software, in which case, citing consumer surveys (only) as a way to judge what Apple deems important in their feature set may seem a tad silly, in retrospect? Guess we'll know in a few weeks.


.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone