We have the same situation with the other devices. It isn't the raw power, but what they do that defines them. A featurephone doesn't run programs from an almost unlimited number available. They run a few programs that the provider usually supplies or sells. Their OS doesn't allow freeform programs. There are limitations and restrictions on the functionality. Often features are hardwired in, and you can't add any through software.
Smartphones are different, as they are open ended.
Why not?
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
Open up dictionary and type in "Computer". Just because the use of the world has changed to a more generalised one these days doesn't distract from the fact that a calculator is a computer
No, a calculator may contain a computer that's not programmable. That doesn't qualify the device to be called a computer, and is why it isn't.
One major reason why AT&T's profit went down that 15% was because of them losing 970,000 landline subscribers. Landlines are mostly paid off. Companies make more profits off that. When subscribers leave, those profits are lost.
...
Mel, just out of curiosity, if landlines are so lucrative, why is Verizon attempting to sell its landlines in the west to Frontier?
No, a calculator may contain a computer that's not programmable. That doesn't qualify the device to be called a computer, and is why it isn't.
Right I shall draft a letter to the dictionary people immediately and let them know the new definition Melgross has come up with, I am sure they will change it straight away!!
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
What developers are running to develop for a carrier software platform? Few developers are going to trust that.
Quote:
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
Really? Which carrier has 60,000 apps? Which carrier provides a web app API platform? Or API's for 3rd party hardware?
Quote:
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Which game developer made a game that will only work on 1 million of the 26.4 million iPhones in the world?
Quote:
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
Come on Samab why indulge in the lame ifart argument? Which ever useful apps you are talking about are also on the iPhone.
Quote:
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
You need an OS that can support cloud computing, you need a web browser that supports HTML5/CSS/javascript. I can get push email service to my iPhone for free. POP3 for $5 a month doesn't sound like a great deal to me.
Mel, just out of curiosity, if landlines are so lucrative, why is Verizon attempting to sell its landlines in the west to Frontier?
They are lucrative. but they are also a dying business. As with all dying businesses, after a time they will stop being lucrative, as the customers that make them so, leave for other more interesting, useful to them, and expensive services.
When that happens, what will that business be worth?
So yes, now they are lucrative, but they won't be in a few more years. a smart company divests itself of businesses while they still have enough life in them to have a good value, but before that value erodes too much.
We had that shakeout in my last industry. I was a partner in a mid sized commercial film lab here in NYC. For most of the almost 30 years of that business we saw good growth and profits. but starting in about 2000, digital began to erode traditional areas of the business. We were one of the first to move into digital in a big way, but, over time the loss of film sales and developing, the lifeblood of any photo company, had shrunken to the point that much of the cash flow and profits were walking away.
We sold the business when we were still making a good profit and had sufficient business. but if we had waited two or three more years, the value of the business would have dropped too much.
Only the largest, and smallest players in the industry will survive.
Right I shall draft a letter to the dictionary people immediately and let them know the new definition Melgross has come up with, I am sure they will change it straight away!!
Considering that you're making up your own definition, I don't see how that will work.
You're looking for the wrong definition. You have to look for the definition of "calculator" not the definition of "computer".
In the old days, before electronic computers, a computer was a person, who using mathematical formulas, COMPUTED results. I don't suppose you consider that definition to matter here.
The more important question, if landlines were not a lucrative business why would Frontier be buying it from Verizon?
Because for them, it will be an important business. Frontier is one of those smaller companies that can't compete with the AT&Ts and Verizons out there. They have a business plan that allows for a profit to be squeezed out of customers that the big companies, with their much higher expenses, can't manage.
The 1% that accounts for a quarter of the total operating profits of the entire mobile phone market.
Not really, the majority of those devices are brought and paid for. And going forward focus will be on the new hardware, not the old stuff. And that money is going to Apple, not the game developer.
The point is the iPhone is being bought by people willing to spend money. Is it better to make an app for people who don't spend much money, or the people spending the most money? Looking at the growth of the app store gives an easy answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Not really, the majority of those devices are brought and paid for. And going forward focus will be on the new hardware, not the old stuff. And that money is going to Apple, not the game developer.
That's not a calculator fanning. Do you even know what you're talking about?
Yes I do. There are a lot of calcuators that fit into that definition, have a look around. You may find this hard to believe, but you aren't right all the time.
The point is the iPhone is being bought by people willing to spend money. Is it better to make an app for people who don't spend much money, or the people spending the most money? Looking at the growth of the app store gives an easy answer.
You have missed the point. You said why would game writes target the 3GS when there is less of them around than the other iPhones. iPhones were targeted compared to other platforms when the SDK came out, even though the number of them was minute in comparision to other phones, the situation is the same here, especially if the 3GS are faster and a better platform to target for games.
A game will not have any more succes on the 3GS vs the 3G. Not in the same way a game can have more success on the iPhone vs Windows Mobile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
You have missed the point. You said why would game writes target the 3GS when there is less of them around than the other iPhones. iPhones were targeted compared to other platforms when the SDK came out, even though the number of them was minute in comparision to other phones, the situation is the same here, especially if the 3GS are faster and a better platform to target for games.
Yes I do. There are a lot of calcuators that fit into that definition, have a look around. You may find this hard to believe, but you aren't right all the time.
You're giving a definition of a computer and calling it a calculator? Why don't you read the definitions on the Google list I gave you, or don't you really want to know?
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
Nobody even knows if what Verizon is doing, which is to attempt as much as possible to keep control of the profits from software, will ever work. Too much resistance to that these days. Look at how they had to quickly back down on their own store concept. After stating that all software would have to be sold through their own store for all phones, the criticism generated forced them to backstep and say that manufacturers could also maintain their own stores.
Apple doesn't control more than other carriers. If anything, they control less. And Apple isn't a carrier, so I don't know why you would describe them as one.
It's wrong to say that graphics in the iPhone is hardwired. Do you know what that means? Even the 3D graphics chip on the first two iPhones are programmable to a decent extent in that they use Open GL. The new phone is far more programmable than that. It's certainly no less so than what you find on 9400 chipset computers which, along with the Intel 950, resides on most of the worlds computers.
now I just have to say that your statement about fart apps is just plain dumb. You love to mention that as though it's of any importance, which you know very well it is not.
And by the way, it does show that you are wrong about Apple's control. Maybe you forgot that. It doesn't appear that Apple has limited very many apps all. We'll see what happens when apps with certain content comes to the other new platforms as well.
And you do know, of course, that both Google and Palm have "kill switches" as well, right? And Amazon isn't above using theirs as we see.
But there are 65,000 apps in the app store covering all sorts of topics. If you don't have an idea of what is there, as you apparently do not, then you shouldn't make inane remarks about what is there, which you are doing.
Keep this to a sensible discussion, and don't talk nonsense.
Nobody knows how well "cloud" computing will do. It may do well, and it mat flop over the next couple of years. Do you really like all of your person data spread out into systems owned by companies and governments around the world that you don't even know have it?
Comments
We have the same situation with the other devices. It isn't the raw power, but what they do that defines them. A featurephone doesn't run programs from an almost unlimited number available. They run a few programs that the provider usually supplies or sells. Their OS doesn't allow freeform programs. There are limitations and restrictions on the functionality. Often features are hardwired in, and you can't add any through software.
Smartphones are different, as they are open ended.
Why not?
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
Open up dictionary and type in "Computer". Just because the use of the world has changed to a more generalised one these days doesn't distract from the fact that a calculator is a computer
No, a calculator may contain a computer that's not programmable. That doesn't qualify the device to be called a computer, and is why it isn't.
...
One major reason why AT&T's profit went down that 15% was because of them losing 970,000 landline subscribers. Landlines are mostly paid off. Companies make more profits off that. When subscribers leave, those profits are lost.
...
Mel, just out of curiosity, if landlines are so lucrative, why is Verizon attempting to sell its landlines in the west to Frontier?
No, a calculator may contain a computer that's not programmable. That doesn't qualify the device to be called a computer, and is why it isn't.
Right I shall draft a letter to the dictionary people immediately and let them know the new definition Melgross has come up with, I am sure they will change it straight away!!
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
What developers are running to develop for a carrier software platform? Few developers are going to trust that.
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
Really? Which carrier has 60,000 apps? Which carrier provides a web app API platform? Or API's for 3rd party hardware?
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Which game developer made a game that will only work on 1 million of the 26.4 million iPhones in the world?
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
Come on Samab why indulge in the lame ifart argument? Which ever useful apps you are talking about are also on the iPhone.
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
You need an OS that can support cloud computing, you need a web browser that supports HTML5/CSS/javascript. I can get push email service to my iPhone for free. POP3 for $5 a month doesn't sound like a great deal to me.
Mel, just out of curiosity, if landlines are so lucrative, why is Verizon attempting to sell its landlines in the west to Frontier?
They are lucrative. but they are also a dying business. As with all dying businesses, after a time they will stop being lucrative, as the customers that make them so, leave for other more interesting, useful to them, and expensive services.
When that happens, what will that business be worth?
So yes, now they are lucrative, but they won't be in a few more years. a smart company divests itself of businesses while they still have enough life in them to have a good value, but before that value erodes too much.
We had that shakeout in my last industry. I was a partner in a mid sized commercial film lab here in NYC. For most of the almost 30 years of that business we saw good growth and profits. but starting in about 2000, digital began to erode traditional areas of the business. We were one of the first to move into digital in a big way, but, over time the loss of film sales and developing, the lifeblood of any photo company, had shrunken to the point that much of the cash flow and profits were walking away.
We sold the business when we were still making a good profit and had sufficient business. but if we had waited two or three more years, the value of the business would have dropped too much.
Only the largest, and smallest players in the industry will survive.
Mel, just out of curiosity, if landlines are so lucrative, why is Verizon attempting to sell its landlines in the west to Frontier?
Right I shall draft a letter to the dictionary people immediately and let them know the new definition Melgross has come up with, I am sure they will change it straight away!!
Considering that you're making up your own definition, I don't see how that will work.
You're looking for the wrong definition. You have to look for the definition of "calculator" not the definition of "computer".
We're now talking about a calculator.
http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
In the old days, before electronic computers, a computer was a person, who using mathematical formulas, COMPUTED results. I don't suppose you consider that definition to matter here.
The more important question, if landlines were not a lucrative business why would Frontier be buying it from Verizon?
Because for them, it will be an important business. Frontier is one of those smaller companies that can't compete with the AT&Ts and Verizons out there. They have a business plan that allows for a profit to be squeezed out of customers that the big companies, with their much higher expenses, can't manage.
Considering that you're making up your own definition, I don't see how that will work.
You are some piece of work, I got my definition out of the OS X Dictionary.
"an electronic device for storing and processing data, typically in binary form, according to instructions given to it in a variable program"
Which game developer made a game that will only work on 1 million of the 26.4 million iPhones in the world?
The same game developer that will only develop a game for a phone that only makes up 1% of the mobile sales
The same game developer that will only develop a game for a phone that only makes up 1% of the mobile sales
The 1% that accounts for a quarter of the total operating profits of the entire mobile phone market.
Not really, the majority of those devices are brought and paid for. And going forward focus will be on the new hardware, not the old stuff. And that money is going to Apple, not the game developer.
You are some piece of work, I got my definition out of the OS X Dictionary.
"an electronic device for storing and processing data, typically in binary form, according to instructions given to it in a variable program"
That's not a calculator fanning. Do you even know what you're talking about?
Not really, the majority of those devices are brought and paid for. And going forward focus will be on the new hardware, not the old stuff. And that money is going to Apple, not the game developer.
That's not a calculator fanning. Do you even know what you're talking about?
Yes I do. There are a lot of calcuators that fit into that definition, have a look around. You may find this hard to believe, but you aren't right all the time.
The point is the iPhone is being bought by people willing to spend money. Is it better to make an app for people who don't spend much money, or the people spending the most money? Looking at the growth of the app store gives an easy answer.
You have missed the point. You said why would game writes target the 3GS when there is less of them around than the other iPhones. iPhones were targeted compared to other platforms when the SDK came out, even though the number of them was minute in comparision to other phones, the situation is the same here, especially if the 3GS are faster and a better platform to target for games.
You have missed the point. You said why would game writes target the 3GS when there is less of them around than the other iPhones. iPhones were targeted compared to other platforms when the SDK came out, even though the number of them was minute in comparision to other phones, the situation is the same here, especially if the 3GS are faster and a better platform to target for games.
Yes I do. There are a lot of calcuators that fit into that definition, have a look around. You may find this hard to believe, but you aren't right all the time.
You're giving a definition of a computer and calling it a calculator? Why don't you read the definitions on the Google list I gave you, or don't you really want to know?
Why not?
Verizon and 4 other big carriers in the world (with a billion subscribers) --- created a single hardware independent software API platform for their phones.
The selection of smartphone apps --- iphone in particular --- isn't open ended. Apple controls far more than the carriers.
The iphone features are hardwired as well --- the 3D graphics in particular. Games designed for 3GS iphones won't run on older 3G iphones.
Running a handful of really useful apps is a lot more better than having 30 ifart apps, thousands of e-books described as individual apps, and thousands of template apps described as individual apps.
There are things like cloud computing and Microsoft Office web apps --- you don't need a full smartphone to do things. Carriers will have the ability to do all the computing in their servers for your tiny zero dollar feature phone. You can get POP3 emails on your featurephone right now --- via a carrier subscription service at $5 a month.
Nobody even knows if what Verizon is doing, which is to attempt as much as possible to keep control of the profits from software, will ever work. Too much resistance to that these days. Look at how they had to quickly back down on their own store concept. After stating that all software would have to be sold through their own store for all phones, the criticism generated forced them to backstep and say that manufacturers could also maintain their own stores.
Apple doesn't control more than other carriers. If anything, they control less. And Apple isn't a carrier, so I don't know why you would describe them as one.
It's wrong to say that graphics in the iPhone is hardwired. Do you know what that means? Even the 3D graphics chip on the first two iPhones are programmable to a decent extent in that they use Open GL. The new phone is far more programmable than that. It's certainly no less so than what you find on 9400 chipset computers which, along with the Intel 950, resides on most of the worlds computers.
now I just have to say that your statement about fart apps is just plain dumb. You love to mention that as though it's of any importance, which you know very well it is not.
And by the way, it does show that you are wrong about Apple's control. Maybe you forgot that. It doesn't appear that Apple has limited very many apps all. We'll see what happens when apps with certain content comes to the other new platforms as well.
And you do know, of course, that both Google and Palm have "kill switches" as well, right? And Amazon isn't above using theirs as we see.
But there are 65,000 apps in the app store covering all sorts of topics. If you don't have an idea of what is there, as you apparently do not, then you shouldn't make inane remarks about what is there, which you are doing.
Keep this to a sensible discussion, and don't talk nonsense.
Nobody knows how well "cloud" computing will do. It may do well, and it mat flop over the next couple of years. Do you really like all of your person data spread out into systems owned by companies and governments around the world that you don't even know have it?
Many people don't. I don't.
Maybe you are just very trusting.