I would not say I don't like either of them. I like Apple, and I dislike Microsoft. But I use Windows 7 on my PC for gaming, and Macbook Aluminium for everything else. Like you said, choosing a lesser product purely on brand will result in frustration. I could have tried to game on a MacBook and I would have thrown it out the window. Conversely, trying to enjoy my daily digital life on Windows would probably lead me to Harakiri.
I've been using PDAs since the early 90's (a simple Sharp model), to the brilliant PalmPilot and Handspring, then cut my teeth in the mobile world on Nokias and Sony Ericsson. With the iPhone, once I started using it since August last year, everything just came together. iPod, phone, Internet, PDA. Sure the brand is appealing (suddenly Apple is super hip in the mobile market) but the iPhone, just works.
I agree. The iPhone is a great cellphone and has a great OS. The main two problems I have with it is the network it is on, and that development is restricted to a Mac.
Yes, a touch interface so good they felt compelled to add a trackball
Much like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize for simply not being Bush, Android is the current tech pundit gadget to be fawned over simply because it's not an iPhone.
As usual, the market will speak, and the pundits, bloggers and forum trolls will ignore or marginalize Apple's success.
Success which derives from one simple thing - focusing on the end user experience. Not on being "Open", having a gazillion manufacturers to choose from, or by having a longer checklist of features then their competitors (a trackball? Really?)
Until that happens, Apple has little to worry about from the "competitors"
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
You cannot be any more wrong in your post. Most displays are horrible out in the direct sun. The iPhone and iPod displays are no exception. A display that is brighter than direct sunlight isn't something you'd want to look directly at anyway.
The Zune HD absolutely does not need a dark room to view. I have one and it's screen is magnificent in normal lighting. The OLED screen produces colors that are much more vibrant than other LED displays I can compared it to (my roommates' iPhones, for one). Pictures and video just look much better. In all light conditions. Except direct sunlight, where everything was washed out.
I feel like you got your information from that article that was released at AI attacking the Zune HD before it was released.
Actually multiple sights reported on the OLED washed out displays in direct sunlight. Engadget is unbiased and not a bunch of Apple fanboys. I'm not against the Zune HD, and if its display is superior in most lighting conditions then that's great. I'd like a device with an OLED for its other attribute (i.e. low power consumption).
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
I'm not saying its unfair, and I can definitely see where Apple comes from with this, but it's just a con for me.
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
Symbian is absolutely horrible to work with. And WinMo is nearly non-existent at this point.
Currently the Apple ecosystem (unsurprisingly), is the ideal, with a few caveats the vast majority of user and devs can live with well enough.
This is also BS. You're getting desperate here and just pulling stuff out of thin air. One report said that Android might sell more handsets than iPhones next year due to the number of companies jumping on the platform.
It's a prediction based on current trends and numbers (i.e.- it could be completely off base). This is no where near to equating to "most ... industry analysts agree," and no where near being a fact of any kind.
This is a stupid comment. He is posting objective facts, and you equate that to "worshipping?"
If he was the type to "worship" things he wouldn't be making Jesus jokes probably. Unless you are actually trying to suggest that he formerly worshiped this Jesus person, and has now switched his allegiance to an inanimate object? That's just crazy talk.
Quadra is anything but objective. And please don't try and subject your analysis on me. It just makes you sound like Quadra and the way it was phrased it was no joke. He compared the iPhone to Jesus. That is just wrong.
You cannot be any more wrong in your post. Most displays are horrible out in the direct sun. The iPhone and iPod displays are no exception.
Spoken by someone that doesn't own one.
Quote:
A display that is brighter than direct sunlight isn't something you'd want to look directly at anyway.
It doesn't have to be brighter if it's simply reflective, like the display in the iPhone. It's how it's readable an not totally washed out in full sunlight. Not ideal, but you can at least use it.
Quote:
The Zune HD absolutely does not need a dark room to view. I have one and it's screen is magnificent in normal lighting. The OLED screen produces colors that are much more vibrant than other LED displays I can compared it to (my roommates' iPhones, for one). Pictures and video just look much better. In all light conditions. Except direct sunlight, where everything was washed out.
That's a pretty significant shortcoming unless you are going to stay indoors forever or only go outside at night or on a cloudy day. While I don't dispute OLED screens are gorgeous in subdued lighting, they are still pretty expensive and unless there has been a stealth update the blue still doesn't last that long causing some pretty bad color shifting over time.
Enjoy it while it lasts. When the technology has matured, you can guarantee Apple will adopt it - but certainly not to just be a checklist feature on some list.
Quadra is anything but objective. And please don't try and subject your analysis on me. It just makes you sound like Quadra and the way it was phrased it was no joke. He compared the iPhone to Jesus. That is just wrong.
He needs help in a very serious way.
The iPhone to the mobile industry was like Jesus to the apostles.
Exactly, I knew there was some intelligence around here. If you only try to beat the competition you will just be running in circles and lagging behind. Innovation doesn't happen by theft it happens with ingenuity. There will be something better eventually and actually some of the concept ideas people came up with before the iphone came out were quite impressive, maybe it will be one of those.
Android's seem impressive, I can't just help feeling I'd be disappointed owning one.
Dude innovation does happen by theft and with ingenuity. Just ask Steve Jobs who stole from XEROX. What completely new product has Apple invented? Zero. They just improve on products that already exist in one form or another. Of course cell phones are gonna look alike. Just like all TVs look alike. How much different can a phone be made? And some of you need some reading comprehension courses. The article states the phone doesn't have a PHYSICAL keyboard but a VIRTUAL one.
Awww, both techstud and extremeskater banned within a 2 day time span.
Guys, who really cares? Android is nice to have in our market where Linux based phones never existed. That OS has a nice share overseas.
All I care is seeing WinMob die (and that was the only real goal of Android, not to ever take over Apple). Seriously, it's the worst OS ever made. The billions MS loses each year on it confirms that view.
Dude innovation does happen by theft and with ingenuity. Just ask Steve Jobs who stole from XEROX. What completely new product has Apple invented? Zero. They just improve on products that already exist in one form or another. Of course cell phones are gonna look alike. Just like all TVs look alike. How much different can a phone be made? And some of you need some reading comprehension courses. The article states the phone doesn't have a PHYSICAL keyboard but a VIRTUAL one.
Please, educate yourself better than that; Apple never stole anything from Xerox. They took a 16,000 concept from Xerox, paid them in the form of stock to legally turn it into something marketable, a $2500 computer called the Macintosh that people could actually buy.
You need serious counseling. Your comments are disturbing to say the least.
Think about what Jesus might have meant to his apostles, assuming there is *some* historicity to the figure of Jesus. Now think of what the iPhone meant to the mobile industry. It was a complete sea change in almost no time at all. A profound transformation.
What's the difference whether I reference Jesus or some other influential figure or object? It's obviously an exaggeration, but the exaggeration illustrates the point.
Jesus is holy and central to Christians. In some other faiths he is simply a prophet. For Hindus, for example, he was at best a great inspiration for social teaching, but many would question his very divinity. Pay attention to the underlying comparison as it might relate to tech and leave Christian morality out of it. it's a harmless but very apt comparison. No, the iPhone isn't divine, LOL, but it did inititate a profound transformation of the mobile industry in almost no time at all.
I never deem anything a failure. However even you can't deny that if ATT caps iPhone data and Apple needs to go to TMobile which is the only place they can go besides ATT that doesn't exactly spell a great future. At least in the US.
Actually touch screen are nice if you didn't think so you wouldn't like the iPhone. Just because its on a laptop or desktop does't make it a gimmick. However you are certainly allowed your opinion.
When it comes to the MBP Apple will do what is always does and that is disappoint users when it comes to their hardware offerings. Remember this is the company that milked the G4 in its notebooks forever. They needed to finally build an AIO large enough when they could start to use desktop chips in something that was a desktop. Also I think its wishful thinking that Apple will go with the Arrandales. When was the last time Apple ever updated thier new products with the very lastest chip offering?
ATT gives you a 5GB cap. Realistically you can only reach that limit if you are tethering, and their TOS says you need to pay extra for that. Really, only T-Mobile encourages tethering. This is not an issue with the iPhone so I don't know why you'd bring it up. You aren't exactly better off with Verizon or Sprint (I don't remember if Sprint is still lax on tethering but nobody wants to be a Sprint customer).
Touch screens on desktops/laptops are absolutely a gimmick. Where's the advantage? Typing is faster on the keyboard, and UI interaction is faster with a mouse. You would need extremely radical software innovation for touch screens on desktops/laptops to be worth squat, and it still wouldn't make up for the ergonomic disadvantage of having to suspend your arms all day, or in the case of a tablet, look even further downward all day. Where did all the tablet PCs go that were all over the place years ago?
Touch screens make sense for ultra portables because you can't carry around a mouse and keyboard. Additionally they have only seen mainstream success since capacitive touch screens eliminated the stylus.
Apple didn't milk the G4s. They were waiting for IBM to come out with new notebook solutions, and IBM came up short. They had to be hesitant - you can't just switch your whole platform without being sure about it being the right choice. The Intel switch was something that could have screwed Apple if not done correctly and smoothly. If it took a 6 month wait and IBM reached a breakthrough, we could still be seeing PowerPC Apples today.
I do wish that Apple's hardware was more competitive. I can also see why Apple doesn't want to destroy their profit margins like the rest of the PC industry by competing solely on spec/price value. When you compete on perceived value and on perfecting the little things that make the experience unmatchable, you don't need to be on the same level as your competitor.
I see an awful lot of jealous Verizon customers, Google geeks, and Microserfs posting here, and not much meaningful content presented. It would be very interesting if people were required to disclose their conflicts of interest... and did so truthfully.
Comments
And what in the hell are "beautifying steroids?"
Digital Botox? Binary Surgery? Eloquent Implants? Flirty Firmware? Virtual Voluptuousness?
I would not say I don't like either of them. I like Apple, and I dislike Microsoft. But I use Windows 7 on my PC for gaming, and Macbook Aluminium for everything else. Like you said, choosing a lesser product purely on brand will result in frustration. I could have tried to game on a MacBook and I would have thrown it out the window. Conversely, trying to enjoy my daily digital life on Windows would probably lead me to Harakiri.
I've been using PDAs since the early 90's (a simple Sharp model), to the brilliant PalmPilot and Handspring, then cut my teeth in the mobile world on Nokias and Sony Ericsson. With the iPhone, once I started using it since August last year, everything just came together. iPod, phone, Internet, PDA. Sure the brand is appealing (suddenly Apple is super hip in the mobile market) but the iPhone, just works.
I agree. The iPhone is a great cellphone and has a great OS. The main two problems I have with it is the network it is on, and that development is restricted to a Mac.
The Android OS is actually free. Google makes money from ads within its services. Google makes money from its iPhone apps.
Google business model is very different from what MS has done with Windows.
Do any of the Android phones actually have ads in them? That would be weird. Is that happening yet?
very original, google, keep up the good work
Yes, a touch interface so good they felt compelled to add a trackball
Much like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize for simply not being Bush, Android is the current tech pundit gadget to be fawned over simply because it's not an iPhone.
As usual, the market will speak, and the pundits, bloggers and forum trolls will ignore or marginalize Apple's success.
Success which derives from one simple thing - focusing on the end user experience. Not on being "Open", having a gazillion manufacturers to choose from, or by having a longer checklist of features then their competitors (a trackball? Really?)
Until that happens, Apple has little to worry about from the "competitors"
and that development is restricted to a Mac.
That's actually a benefit.
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
You cannot be any more wrong in your post. Most displays are horrible out in the direct sun. The iPhone and iPod displays are no exception. A display that is brighter than direct sunlight isn't something you'd want to look directly at anyway.
The Zune HD absolutely does not need a dark room to view. I have one and it's screen is magnificent in normal lighting. The OLED screen produces colors that are much more vibrant than other LED displays I can compared it to (my roommates' iPhones, for one). Pictures and video just look much better. In all light conditions. Except direct sunlight, where everything was washed out.
I feel like you got your information from that article that was released at AI attacking the Zune HD before it was released.
Actually multiple sights reported on the OLED washed out displays in direct sunlight. Engadget is unbiased and not a bunch of Apple fanboys. I'm not against the Zune HD, and if its display is superior in most lighting conditions then that's great. I'd like a device with an OLED for its other attribute (i.e. low power consumption).
That's actually a benefit.
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
I'm not saying its unfair, and I can definitely see where Apple comes from with this, but it's just a con for me.
That's actually a benefit.
Why don't you go see how inefficient it is to develop for Symbian, Andriod, Windows/Windows Mobile, (If your a developer). If your approaching it from a user standpoint then good luck.
Don't fall into the pile of whiners who can't comprehend how the Apple Ecosystem is a better platform to create and to profit from.
Symbian is absolutely horrible to work with. And WinMo is nearly non-existent at this point.
Currently the Apple ecosystem (unsurprisingly), is the ideal, with a few caveats the vast majority of user and devs can live with well enough.
This is also BS. You're getting desperate here and just pulling stuff out of thin air. One report said that Android might sell more handsets than iPhones next year due to the number of companies jumping on the platform.
It's a prediction based on current trends and numbers (i.e.- it could be completely off base). This is no where near to equating to "most ... industry analysts agree," and no where near being a fact of any kind.
Your being a total cheerleader here.
Would you accept a posting from the forum?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...e_by_2012.html
If not, I can pull up many other postings.
That doesn't include Search, Music, Video, Books and everything else Google has their hands into these days.
Accept it, or follow Quadra's theory. Although looking at both postins I'd say you were born form the same Apple seed.
This is a stupid comment. He is posting objective facts, and you equate that to "worshipping?"
If he was the type to "worship" things he wouldn't be making Jesus jokes probably. Unless you are actually trying to suggest that he formerly worshiped this Jesus person, and has now switched his allegiance to an inanimate object? That's just crazy talk.
Quadra is anything but objective. And please don't try and subject your analysis on me. It just makes you sound like Quadra and the way it was phrased it was no joke. He compared the iPhone to Jesus. That is just wrong.
He needs help in a very serious way.
You cannot be any more wrong in your post. Most displays are horrible out in the direct sun. The iPhone and iPod displays are no exception.
Spoken by someone that doesn't own one.
A display that is brighter than direct sunlight isn't something you'd want to look directly at anyway.
It doesn't have to be brighter if it's simply reflective, like the display in the iPhone. It's how it's readable an not totally washed out in full sunlight. Not ideal, but you can at least use it.
The Zune HD absolutely does not need a dark room to view. I have one and it's screen is magnificent in normal lighting. The OLED screen produces colors that are much more vibrant than other LED displays I can compared it to (my roommates' iPhones, for one). Pictures and video just look much better. In all light conditions. Except direct sunlight, where everything was washed out.
That's a pretty significant shortcoming unless you are going to stay indoors forever or only go outside at night or on a cloudy day. While I don't dispute OLED screens are gorgeous in subdued lighting, they are still pretty expensive and unless there has been a stealth update the blue still doesn't last that long causing some pretty bad color shifting over time.
Enjoy it while it lasts. When the technology has matured, you can guarantee Apple will adopt it - but certainly not to just be a checklist feature on some list.
Symbian is absolutely horrible to work with. And WinMo is nearly non-existent at this point.
Currently the Apple ecosystem (unsurprisingly), is the ideal, with a few caveats the vast majority of user and devs can live with well enough.
And by your very technical analysis you've tried all of the mobile devices that you are considering not worthy of your Jesus Phone?
If not, then please leave the comparison to someone that doesn't pray to Apple.
By the way, according to the spreadsheet shown in 2012 Symbian will still lead the industry.
Quadra is anything but objective. And please don't try and subject your analysis on me. It just makes you sound like Quadra and the way it was phrased it was no joke. He compared the iPhone to Jesus. That is just wrong.
He needs help in a very serious way.
The iPhone to the mobile industry was like Jesus to the apostles.
Absolutely. It's true.
The iPhone to the mobile industry was like Jesus to the apostles.
Absolutely. It's true.
You need serious counseling. Your comments are disturbing to say the least.
Exactly, I knew there was some intelligence around here. If you only try to beat the competition you will just be running in circles and lagging behind. Innovation doesn't happen by theft it happens with ingenuity. There will be something better eventually and actually some of the concept ideas people came up with before the iphone came out were quite impressive, maybe it will be one of those.
Android's seem impressive, I can't just help feeling I'd be disappointed owning one.
Dude innovation does happen by theft and with ingenuity. Just ask Steve Jobs who stole from XEROX. What completely new product has Apple invented? Zero. They just improve on products that already exist in one form or another. Of course cell phones are gonna look alike. Just like all TVs look alike. How much different can a phone be made? And some of you need some reading comprehension courses. The article states the phone doesn't have a PHYSICAL keyboard but a VIRTUAL one.
Guys, who really cares? Android is nice to have in our market where Linux based phones never existed. That OS has a nice share overseas.
All I care is seeing WinMob die (and that was the only real goal of Android, not to ever take over Apple). Seriously, it's the worst OS ever made. The billions MS loses each year on it confirms that view.
Dude innovation does happen by theft and with ingenuity. Just ask Steve Jobs who stole from XEROX. What completely new product has Apple invented? Zero. They just improve on products that already exist in one form or another. Of course cell phones are gonna look alike. Just like all TVs look alike. How much different can a phone be made? And some of you need some reading comprehension courses. The article states the phone doesn't have a PHYSICAL keyboard but a VIRTUAL one.
Please, educate yourself better than that; Apple never stole anything from Xerox. They took a 16,000 concept from Xerox, paid them in the form of stock to legally turn it into something marketable, a $2500 computer called the Macintosh that people could actually buy.
You need serious counseling. Your comments are disturbing to say the least.
Think about what Jesus might have meant to his apostles, assuming there is *some* historicity to the figure of Jesus. Now think of what the iPhone meant to the mobile industry. It was a complete sea change in almost no time at all. A profound transformation.
What's the difference whether I reference Jesus or some other influential figure or object? It's obviously an exaggeration, but the exaggeration illustrates the point.
Jesus is holy and central to Christians. In some other faiths he is simply a prophet. For Hindus, for example, he was at best a great inspiration for social teaching, but many would question his very divinity. Pay attention to the underlying comparison as it might relate to tech and leave Christian morality out of it. it's a harmless but very apt comparison. No, the iPhone isn't divine, LOL, but it did inititate a profound transformation of the mobile industry in almost no time at all.
I never deem anything a failure. However even you can't deny that if ATT caps iPhone data and Apple needs to go to TMobile which is the only place they can go besides ATT that doesn't exactly spell a great future. At least in the US.
Actually touch screen are nice if you didn't think so you wouldn't like the iPhone. Just because its on a laptop or desktop does't make it a gimmick. However you are certainly allowed your opinion.
When it comes to the MBP Apple will do what is always does and that is disappoint users when it comes to their hardware offerings. Remember this is the company that milked the G4 in its notebooks forever. They needed to finally build an AIO large enough when they could start to use desktop chips in something that was a desktop. Also I think its wishful thinking that Apple will go with the Arrandales. When was the last time Apple ever updated thier new products with the very lastest chip offering?
ATT gives you a 5GB cap. Realistically you can only reach that limit if you are tethering, and their TOS says you need to pay extra for that. Really, only T-Mobile encourages tethering. This is not an issue with the iPhone so I don't know why you'd bring it up. You aren't exactly better off with Verizon or Sprint (I don't remember if Sprint is still lax on tethering but nobody wants to be a Sprint customer).
Touch screens on desktops/laptops are absolutely a gimmick. Where's the advantage? Typing is faster on the keyboard, and UI interaction is faster with a mouse. You would need extremely radical software innovation for touch screens on desktops/laptops to be worth squat, and it still wouldn't make up for the ergonomic disadvantage of having to suspend your arms all day, or in the case of a tablet, look even further downward all day. Where did all the tablet PCs go that were all over the place years ago?
Touch screens make sense for ultra portables because you can't carry around a mouse and keyboard. Additionally they have only seen mainstream success since capacitive touch screens eliminated the stylus.
Apple didn't milk the G4s. They were waiting for IBM to come out with new notebook solutions, and IBM came up short. They had to be hesitant - you can't just switch your whole platform without being sure about it being the right choice. The Intel switch was something that could have screwed Apple if not done correctly and smoothly. If it took a 6 month wait and IBM reached a breakthrough, we could still be seeing PowerPC Apples today.
I do wish that Apple's hardware was more competitive. I can also see why Apple doesn't want to destroy their profit margins like the rest of the PC industry by competing solely on spec/price value. When you compete on perceived value and on perfecting the little things that make the experience unmatchable, you don't need to be on the same level as your competitor.
no conflicts to disclose here.