I'm a huge Apple fanboy...it really bothers me when people talk about Apple as a closed, evil system...
Funny, I was just having this conversation with a die hard Windows fanboy. He argues that the iPad's lack of flash is just the latest entry into Apple's closed limited ecosystem that doesn't let it's users do what they want.
That was my perception before I got my first Mac. From my point of view, Apple's switch to Intel chips and the creation of bootcamp was the ultimate attempt to play nice with the rest of the world. That's what gave me the comfort zone to make the switch. Now that Apple is making their own chips, we'll see how long that lasts.
I'm a huge Apple fanboy...it really bothers me when people talk about Apple as a closed, evil system... I think of everything Apple has pioneered in desktop publishing and print and how it continues to dominate in sound and video production....This move against Flash to me is just silly though... Let the user decide!!
1) What in that article discounted anything I stated? Flash 10.1 HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED. I clearly stated they are developing it to deal with the issues of Flash Lite on mobiles that Apple made apparent.
2) Did you miss the part that said "Adobe Flash 10.1: Full Flash is coming"? It's now the last day in March 2010 and yet we are to believe that Full version of Flash which has yet to arrive to any shipping Android phone ? which was a known mobile OS well before Apple announced the iPhone ? is somehow Apple's fault back in January 2007. Does not compute!
3) This all-or-nothing attitude toward Flash is silly. The only one moving to eradicate Flash's market position is MS with Silverlight (BTW, Flash won'y be on WP7, either). Apple, Google and MS are all working to replace Flash video with the HTML5 video tag. This is much more efficient in every way. Why this usage means that Flash is evil is hyperbolism, at best.
4) Let the user decide? So a company should offer anything and everything regardless of how it affects their business? How about understanding that it's a company's product long before you get your hands on it so it's their choice what to put in their products and what to sell in their stores, not yours. The free market will decide the rest. If you don't like it shop elsewhere for the company that does offer the products you want, if none exist and you feel there is a market for it then make your own to capture that market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
Functionality has been taken away if you look at it from a certain point of view. Safari on the Mac has it and Safari on the iPhone and iPad does not.
That isn't a rationale PoV, IMO. But it's a good one to bring up as it shows that Apple doesn't have it out for Flash since it includes it with every Mac sale. The fact is Flash Lite is simply pointless for a mobile device which is why Apple didn't include it on the iPhone and why Adbieb eventually had to get off their asses to make a viable version of Flash for mobiles.
1) What in that article discounted anything I stated? Flash 10.1 HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED. I clearly stated they are developing it to deal with the issues of Flash Lite on mobiles that Apple made apparent.
2) Did you miss the part that said "Adobe Flash 10.1: Full Flash is coming"? It's now the last day in March 2010 and yet we are to believe that Full version of Flash which has yet to arrive to any shipping Android phone — which was a known mobile OS well before Apple announced the iPhone — is somehow Apple's fault back in January 2007. Does not compute!
Actually I DID miss this part, my mistake. I guess in 12 months one of us will be saying "I told you so" to the other.
For me I keep coming back to the iPad keynote...Where SB raised the challenge that this new device would have to do things better than a laptop, better than a smartphone. If I'm on my iPad and someone sends me an email, maybe it's a link to some goofy video on MySpace or Hulu, I have to now boot up my Macbook Pro just to watch a video?! That's not better than anything! I'd take a crappy netbook over that! If the A4 is such a revolutionary chip, at least let me browse the web as I would on my Macbook. Again, if I want to enable a bunch of Flash movies and slow my iPad down, maybe crash it...Let me... Not preferring physical books to ebooks I have no reason to buy the iPad otherwise...
Actually I DID miss this part, my mistake. I guess in 12 months one of us will be saying "I told you so" to the other.
For me I keep coming back to the iPad keynote...Where SB raised the challenge that this new device would have to do things better than a laptop, better than a smartphone. If I'm on my iPad and someone sends me an email, maybe it's a link to some goofy video on MySpace or Hulu, I have to now boot up my Macbook Pro just to watch a video?! That's not better than anything! I'd take a crappy netbook over that! If the A4 is such a revolutionary chip, at least let me browse the web as I would on my Macbook.
I agree that it would be a nice option to have for those so inclined, but I disagree with the sentiment that Apple should be required to include it because some users want it. That isn't how a free market works. What you're asking for is a socialism that forces a company to include it because a certain number or type of users think it's required.
It's not that simple to just add Flash and have it all work out great. Both Apple and Mozilla has stated that Flash is the number one cause of crashes on their browsers. Mozilla has also disabled Flash from Firefox Mobile on Maemo, though I think this is Flash 10.0 without the HW acceleration. Flash 10.1 is bring HW acceleration, but NOT to Mac OS X. Flash is only now, according to some of their programmers blogs, starting to incorporate the APIs that have been available to them since at least the Leopard Betas. Yeah, that long ago!
With all these things being an issue I can't understand why anyone would think that Apple is the reason Flash is a no go when Adobe has shunned the Mac and shunned the mobile platform for so long. If not for Silverlight getting Adobe to update Flash and Apple shining a spotlight on Flash's shortcomings I doubt that Flash 10.1 would be in the position it is now to be released to any mobile platform this summer.
And while I'm sure it will work okay, we still haven't seen what Adobe has done to make the all Flash elements work with a touch-screen, what Flash devs will have to do to make their sites work with mobiles, and how it will affect the performance, power usage and most importantly, the user experience. Flash video is the most prolific use and that will best handled by HTML and JS sometime this year, IMO, regardless of what else happens to Flash.
If you don't like it shop elsewhere for the company that does offer the products you want, if none exist and you feel there is a market for it then make your own to capture that market.
You obviously missed my point as well. I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here. I also think they’ve made some bad decisions throughout their history. As has been said before, much of this feud with Google echoes the desktop wars with Microsoft. This fight I want to see them win. I feel like their the better company and I prefer their philosophy.
What you're asking for is a socialism that forces a company to include it because a certain number or type of users think it's required.
What?? That's like some kind of strange Tea Party rhetoric...No one here's talking about socialism... we're talking about capitalism.... My fear is that Apple is being too stubborn and that Android will erode their base.
I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here.
I can't say the same. My history with Apple sets a precedence that I trust their product usability, reliability and customer service greatly but they are just a company trying to make money off of me just as i'm just a customer wanting to better my life in some way with their products and just as I'm a stockholder trying to make buttloads of money off them, butt I'll drop them in a heartbeat if I think they have reached their apex.
What?? That's like some kind of strange Tea Party rhetoric...No one here's talking about socialism... we're talking about capitalism.... My fear is that Apple is being too stubborn and that Android will erode their base.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.
soc•iai•sm |ˈsō sh əˌlizəm|
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
If Apple doesn't include Flash and Adobe can make Flash viable for mobiles that it makes Android and other more enticing then Apple will have to rethink their stance. That is a beautiful thing! I don't think it will work out that way, but I wouldn't mind if it did, just as I won't move to Verizon but I'd love for them to get the iPhone.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.
soc?iai?sm |ˈsō sh əˌlizəm|
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
I can't tell if you're just baiting me or not. Are you serious? If there is a great demand from users for a feature that a competitor offers, there is a risk that the company will loose users/customers to the competitor. Does that make sense? Not sure how that's socialism.
"We would not be surprised if volumes drop dramatically as customers flock to a real iPhone as opposed to a mediocre imitation," Wu wrote. "In our view, web surfing, multimedia, apps and multi-touch remain very strong AAPL hallmarks."
If there is a great demand from users for a feature that a competitor offers, there is a risk that the company will loose users/customers to the competitor. Does that make sense? Not sure how that's socialism.
You clearly stated, "Let the user decide!!" thereby implying that the company gets no voice and must follow the community's wishes. That is socialism as i clearly showed in the definition. In Capitalism the company chooses which features to add. Usually ones that consumers are asking for, sometimes they offer it before they even know they want it, but the company makes the decision, NOT the users These are the fundamental differences.
Quote:
Congrats on using a dictionary!
Thanks, but I think my use of the markup to make it more appealing to the eye is more impressive than my ability to copy/paste.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.
soc?iai?sm |ˈsō sh əˌlizəm|
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
If Apple doesn't include Flash and Adobe can make Flash viable for mobiles that it makes Android and other more enticing then Apple will have to rethink their stance. That is a beautiful thing! I don't think it will work out that way, but I wouldn't mind if it did, just as I won't move to Verizon but I'd love for them to get the iPhone.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
Can someone please explain how Verizon still insists upon controlling the customer experience? I know they used to be painfully awful in this regard, but am I missing something with what they're doing in regards to controlling the customer experience with say the Droid?
Well.... Clearly you ARE just bored and looking for an argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Thanks, but I think my use of the markup to make it more appealing to the eye is more impressive than my ability to copy/paste.
Can I guess? Bored, unemployed graphic designer? If the base of my argument is that Apple needs to maintain a competative edge to succeed, then of course I'm talking about capitalism... If I were arguing for socialism, then Apple wouldn't have to innovate anything... they could focus on contributing to web forums... on "making mark up more appealing". Good luck on the rest of your day.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
1) I'm sure that is what he meant, but the only to get to that "option" state is to force Apple to supply Flash or open up the iPhone against their will. That is not a free market methodology.
2) Clearly I'm focusing on the economic side of things, not politics. BTW, I dislike socialism having such a negative connotation to it. No one system is perfect and socialism isn't evil, in fact it's quite idealistic, which is a large part of my mentioning it.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
Of course that's what I meant.....Thank you Dfiler!
You obviously missed my point as well. I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here.
I've been visiting this site for over a year now and in my opinion most people here are not Apple fans. They are stockholders looking for inside information so they can manipulate the stock. Perhaps that's why every thread disintegrates into a slug fest. As this one has.
By the way, if you are a Tea Party member, you will need a flash enabled device to visit Glenn Beck's site!
When the first iMac came out, it abandoned the floppy drive which I'm sure freaked a lot of people out. But it did come with a CD drive so you could copy files and back up your work.
The iMac came out in 1998 without a floppy drive and without a writable CD drive. It wasn't until 2001 that they shipped with writable optical drives.
Worse, it didn't initially include FireWire, and USB was only 1.1. This meant that while there were a few external USB 1.1 CD drives available, they were painfully slow and very unreliable.
You could buy an external USB 1.1 floppy drive, and it worked quite well...as far as floppy drives went. For the most part, people were buying ZIP drives, and Apple even shipped PowerMac G3s with ZIP drives as an option for a while. In fact, the first writable removable media drives that Apple shipped after dropping the floppy was the ZIP drive, not CD-R/RW.
Don't get me wrong, I was happy to see the floppy die. I bought a PowerMac G3 B&W when it first came out and decided that I would buy an external floppy drive the first time it every came up to have any use for one whatsoever. I never did.
Apple correctly saw that email was the replacement for the floppy, and that a larger capacity format that was writable and removable had not yet evolved in price/performance/reliability, but would be soon enough.
I say Apple just comes out with a phone, that they can offer to all or any carries that choose to grow their business and get on board the mother ship. Not just 1 or 2 carriers - ALL of them.
Once they open the door to another carrier, they should do so, with all of them. If they did this, then they could worry about something other then market share, or folks complaining they wish they could get an iPhone from ?
Comments
I'm a huge Apple fanboy...it really bothers me when people talk about Apple as a closed, evil system...
Funny, I was just having this conversation with a die hard Windows fanboy. He argues that the iPad's lack of flash is just the latest entry into Apple's closed limited ecosystem that doesn't let it's users do what they want.
That was my perception before I got my first Mac. From my point of view, Apple's switch to Intel chips and the creation of bootcamp was the ultimate attempt to play nice with the rest of the world. That's what gave me the comfort zone to make the switch. Now that Apple is making their own chips, we'll see how long that lasts.
So is this simply untrue?
http://gizmodo.com/5374115/flash-101...ayable-hd-vids
I'm a huge Apple fanboy...it really bothers me when people talk about Apple as a closed, evil system... I think of everything Apple has pioneered in desktop publishing and print and how it continues to dominate in sound and video production....This move against Flash to me is just silly though... Let the user decide!!
1) What in that article discounted anything I stated? Flash 10.1 HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED. I clearly stated they are developing it to deal with the issues of Flash Lite on mobiles that Apple made apparent.
2) Did you miss the part that said "Adobe Flash 10.1: Full Flash is coming"? It's now the last day in March 2010 and yet we are to believe that Full version of Flash which has yet to arrive to any shipping Android phone ? which was a known mobile OS well before Apple announced the iPhone ? is somehow Apple's fault back in January 2007. Does not compute!
3) This all-or-nothing attitude toward Flash is silly. The only one moving to eradicate Flash's market position is MS with Silverlight (BTW, Flash won'y be on WP7, either). Apple, Google and MS are all working to replace Flash video with the HTML5 video tag. This is much more efficient in every way. Why this usage means that Flash is evil is hyperbolism, at best.
4) Let the user decide? So a company should offer anything and everything regardless of how it affects their business? How about understanding that it's a company's product long before you get your hands on it so it's their choice what to put in their products and what to sell in their stores, not yours. The free market will decide the rest. If you don't like it shop elsewhere for the company that does offer the products you want, if none exist and you feel there is a market for it then make your own to capture that market.
Functionality has been taken away if you look at it from a certain point of view. Safari on the Mac has it and Safari on the iPhone and iPad does not.
That isn't a rationale PoV, IMO. But it's a good one to bring up as it shows that Apple doesn't have it out for Flash since it includes it with every Mac sale. The fact is Flash Lite is simply pointless for a mobile device which is why Apple didn't include it on the iPhone and why Adbieb eventually had to get off their asses to make a viable version of Flash for mobiles.
1) Let the user decide? So a company should offer anything and everything regardless of how it affects their business?
Yep. Works for me. In the context of this thread's topic, A Verizon iPhone would have a positive affect on Apple's business.
1) What in that article discounted anything I stated? Flash 10.1 HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED. I clearly stated they are developing it to deal with the issues of Flash Lite on mobiles that Apple made apparent.
2) Did you miss the part that said "Adobe Flash 10.1: Full Flash is coming"? It's now the last day in March 2010 and yet we are to believe that Full version of Flash which has yet to arrive to any shipping Android phone — which was a known mobile OS well before Apple announced the iPhone — is somehow Apple's fault back in January 2007. Does not compute!
Actually I DID miss this part, my mistake. I guess in 12 months one of us will be saying "I told you so" to the other.
For me I keep coming back to the iPad keynote...Where SB raised the challenge that this new device would have to do things better than a laptop, better than a smartphone. If I'm on my iPad and someone sends me an email, maybe it's a link to some goofy video on MySpace or Hulu, I have to now boot up my Macbook Pro just to watch a video?! That's not better than anything! I'd take a crappy netbook over that! If the A4 is such a revolutionary chip, at least let me browse the web as I would on my Macbook. Again, if I want to enable a bunch of Flash movies and slow my iPad down, maybe crash it...Let me... Not preferring physical books to ebooks I have no reason to buy the iPad otherwise...
Actually I DID miss this part, my mistake. I guess in 12 months one of us will be saying "I told you so" to the other.
For me I keep coming back to the iPad keynote...Where SB raised the challenge that this new device would have to do things better than a laptop, better than a smartphone. If I'm on my iPad and someone sends me an email, maybe it's a link to some goofy video on MySpace or Hulu, I have to now boot up my Macbook Pro just to watch a video?! That's not better than anything! I'd take a crappy netbook over that! If the A4 is such a revolutionary chip, at least let me browse the web as I would on my Macbook.
I agree that it would be a nice option to have for those so inclined, but I disagree with the sentiment that Apple should be required to include it because some users want it. That isn't how a free market works. What you're asking for is a socialism that forces a company to include it because a certain number or type of users think it's required.
It's not that simple to just add Flash and have it all work out great. Both Apple and Mozilla has stated that Flash is the number one cause of crashes on their browsers. Mozilla has also disabled Flash from Firefox Mobile on Maemo, though I think this is Flash 10.0 without the HW acceleration. Flash 10.1 is bring HW acceleration, but NOT to Mac OS X. Flash is only now, according to some of their programmers blogs, starting to incorporate the APIs that have been available to them since at least the Leopard Betas. Yeah, that long ago!
With all these things being an issue I can't understand why anyone would think that Apple is the reason Flash is a no go when Adobe has shunned the Mac and shunned the mobile platform for so long. If not for Silverlight getting Adobe to update Flash and Apple shining a spotlight on Flash's shortcomings I doubt that Flash 10.1 would be in the position it is now to be released to any mobile platform this summer.
And while I'm sure it will work okay, we still haven't seen what Adobe has done to make the all Flash elements work with a touch-screen, what Flash devs will have to do to make their sites work with mobiles, and how it will affect the performance, power usage and most importantly, the user experience. Flash video is the most prolific use and that will best handled by HTML and JS sometime this year, IMO, regardless of what else happens to Flash.
If you don't like it shop elsewhere for the company that does offer the products you want, if none exist and you feel there is a market for it then make your own to capture that market.
You obviously missed my point as well. I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here. I also think they’ve made some bad decisions throughout their history. As has been said before, much of this feud with Google echoes the desktop wars with Microsoft. This fight I want to see them win. I feel like their the better company and I prefer their philosophy.
What you're asking for is a socialism that forces a company to include it because a certain number or type of users think it's required.
What?? That's like some kind of strange Tea Party rhetoric...No one here's talking about socialism... we're talking about capitalism.... My fear is that Apple is being too stubborn and that Android will erode their base.
I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here.
I can't say the same. My history with Apple sets a precedence that I trust their product usability, reliability and customer service greatly but they are just a company trying to make money off of me just as i'm just a customer wanting to better my life in some way with their products and just as I'm a stockholder trying to make buttloads of money off them, butt I'll drop them in a heartbeat if I think they have reached their apex.
What?? That's like some kind of strange Tea Party rhetoric...No one here's talking about socialism... we're talking about capitalism.... My fear is that Apple is being too stubborn and that Android will erode their base.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.If Apple doesn't include Flash and Adobe can make Flash viable for mobiles that it makes Android and other more enticing then Apple will have to rethink their stance. That is a beautiful thing! I don't think it will work out that way, but I wouldn't mind if it did, just as I won't move to Verizon but I'd love for them to get the iPhone.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.
I can't tell if you're just baiting me or not. Are you serious? If there is a great demand from users for a feature that a competitor offers, there is a risk that the company will loose users/customers to the competitor. Does that make sense? Not sure how that's socialism.
Congrats on using a dictionary!
"We would not be surprised if volumes drop dramatically as customers flock to a real iPhone as opposed to a mediocre imitation," Wu wrote. "In our view, web surfing, multimedia, apps and multi-touch remain very strong AAPL hallmarks."
Nexus One = mediocre imitation
absolutely agree
If there is a great demand from users for a feature that a competitor offers, there is a risk that the company will loose users/customers to the competitor. Does that make sense? Not sure how that's socialism.
You clearly stated, "Let the user decide!!" thereby implying that the company gets no voice and must follow the community's wishes. That is socialism as i clearly showed in the definition. In Capitalism the company chooses which features to add. Usually ones that consumers are asking for, sometimes they offer it before they even know they want it, but the company makes the decision, NOT the users These are the fundamental differences.
Congrats on using a dictionary!
Thanks, but I think my use of the markup to make it more appealing to the eye is more impressive than my ability to copy/paste.
You stated that the users should decide what a company includes in their product, taking away the right for the company to best decide how to market their product.If Apple doesn't include Flash and Adobe can make Flash viable for mobiles that it makes Android and other more enticing then Apple will have to rethink their stance. That is a beautiful thing! I don't think it will work out that way, but I wouldn't mind if it did, just as I won't move to Verizon but I'd love for them to get the iPhone.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
Thanks, but I think my use of the markup to make it more appealing to the eye is more impressive than my ability to copy/paste.
Can I guess? Bored, unemployed graphic designer? If the base of my argument is that Apple needs to maintain a competative edge to succeed, then of course I'm talking about capitalism... If I were arguing for socialism, then Apple wouldn't have to innovate anything... they could focus on contributing to web forums... on "making mark up more appealing". Good luck on the rest of your day.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
1) I'm sure that is what he meant, but the only to get to that "option" state is to force Apple to supply Flash or open up the iPhone against their will. That is not a free market methodology.
2) Clearly I'm focusing on the economic side of things, not politics. BTW, I dislike socialism having such a negative connotation to it. No one system is perfect and socialism isn't evil, in fact it's quite idealistic, which is a large part of my mentioning it.
I read "let the users decide" as meaning that the product would be better if users could optionally run flash on their phone or not. It would be their decision to run it or not. That may or may not have been what the poster meant. Either way, it was just one person offering their opinion on how the iPhone could be a better product.
Throwing a controversial political analogy into this discussion won't help make any point regarding the iPhone. All that will happen is that we'll get side tracked on that political topic.
Of course that's what I meant.....Thank you Dfiler!
You obviously missed my point as well. I love Apple. I feel like they have innovated more than any other computer company. I feel a MASSIVE loyalty to them like so many people here.
I've been visiting this site for over a year now and in my opinion most people here are not Apple fans. They are stockholders looking for inside information so they can manipulate the stock. Perhaps that's why every thread disintegrates into a slug fest. As this one has.
By the way, if you are a Tea Party member, you will need a flash enabled device to visit Glenn Beck's site!
...
When the first iMac came out, it abandoned the floppy drive which I'm sure freaked a lot of people out. But it did come with a CD drive so you could copy files and back up your work.
The iMac came out in 1998 without a floppy drive and without a writable CD drive. It wasn't until 2001 that they shipped with writable optical drives.
Worse, it didn't initially include FireWire, and USB was only 1.1. This meant that while there were a few external USB 1.1 CD drives available, they were painfully slow and very unreliable.
You could buy an external USB 1.1 floppy drive, and it worked quite well...as far as floppy drives went. For the most part, people were buying ZIP drives, and Apple even shipped PowerMac G3s with ZIP drives as an option for a while. In fact, the first writable removable media drives that Apple shipped after dropping the floppy was the ZIP drive, not CD-R/RW.
Don't get me wrong, I was happy to see the floppy die. I bought a PowerMac G3 B&W when it first came out and decided that I would buy an external floppy drive the first time it every came up to have any use for one whatsoever. I never did.
Apple correctly saw that email was the replacement for the floppy, and that a larger capacity format that was writable and removable had not yet evolved in price/performance/reliability, but would be soon enough.
Once they open the door to another carrier, they should do so, with all of them. If they did this, then they could worry about something other then market share, or folks complaining they wish they could get an iPhone from ?
Just do it, and get on with things!
Skip