When I take my iPhone outside all I see is reflection and glare.
When I look at my friend's Nexus One outside all I see is reflection and glare.
Neither work outside so as the OLED looks a generation or two ahead inside, I'll take it. LCD is only still around because it's cheap. It's next on the list for the tech dust bin.
I'd actually be somewhat upset if the iPhone HD came with OLED.
One is considerably more usable in direct sunlight than the other. I, like Apple, tend to prefer the balanced option over the myopic option that tries to excel in one way.
But is the Nexus One's display actually better? The contrast ratio does make things more vivid but is that a good thing for general use? There are plenty disadvantages to OLED, including power usage.
And LCDs aren't cheap. Dare say it?: Check out iSuppi's breakdown of the iPad. That S-IPS panel is costly.
What is long overdue is a higher rez display using a better TFFT.
These are just our personal preferences so it's nothing to butt heads over.
The G4 iPhone has dimensions of 116.8mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm, according to Gizmodo. The Sony Experia X10, for comparison, with a 4" display is 119mm x 63mm x 13mm. It offsets some of the increased display width (in your hand and pocket) by using a wider screen ratio.
I can't see Apple moving from 3:2 to 16:9 ? I should have included that with my original reply ? so a 4" display at the 3:2 ratio would be considerably wider in your hand and pocket. The display, without the framing, would be 84.6mm x 56.4mm compared to the current 73.9mm x 49.3mm at 3:2.
No head butting. Good point about the ratio. I'll love the new iPhone but I'll still be jealous of the bigger screens, probably just until I see one and say to myself, no big deal.
I can only asume you have never seen a Nexus One. When you have come back and tell me it doesn't look better than an LCD. Oh and try to speak less like am angry child too, if you can.
Thanks.
You're ridiculous, man. Give up.
Google already has.
(Hint: For starters, you could read the many posts that have directly addressed your comments).
The real question is what does 24 million units suggest? Is that enough units to satisfy just AT&T consumers or does 24 million suggest a greater supply than usual because Apple is going to need more units when it breaks exclusivity?
AT&T no longer provides the lion's share of Apple iPhone shipments, so there is little to be gleaned from this number (even if we except it as fact and not just a rumor) with respect to exclusivity in the good ole' USA. It would only mean that Apple expects to sell a hell of a lot of units worldwide.
My guess is that Steve has indeed seen Nexus One's display, as well as the displays of all competing smartphones plus displays that aren't being used in currently shipping devices. I suspect that Apple evaluates dozens of sample displays in the prototyping phase and that Steve himself is involved in the final decision process.
The display is the single most expensive component in the iPhone/iPod touch, so it would seem prudent that Apple selects this part for the best combination of qualities, including (but not limited to) size, power requirements, brightness, viewing angle, performance under direct sunlight, refresh rate, durability, longevity, color rendering, part quality, availability, recyclability, and of course, price.
What is your justification in believing that Apple would not behave like the Fortune 500 company that they are and pick such an important part without a thorough investigation of the available components?
Apple have for a long time avoided the cutting edge and have favored out of date, cheap components. That's just the way they work.
I can only assume the decision to stick with LCD for the iPhone 4G was down to cost, nothing more. The Nexus One on the other hand was designed to beat the iPhone on specs, which it did in every department. A money no object device.
And please look at the screen in the current shipping iPhones. It's abysmal. Terrible viewing angles, low resolution, and incredibly washed out in the dark. (even for an LCD) You can't tell me quality was a consideration when that screen was chosen.
Apple have for a long time avoided the cutting edge and have favored out of date, cheap components. That's just the way they work.
I guess you don't have any concept of how Apple really works, so you just throw out random, inane thoughts.
Look at the iPad. tell me about the out of date, cheap components in the iPad. Or pretty much any Apple product for that matter.
In the very rare cases where they are using older technology (C2D in MBP 13", for example), there's always a very good reason for it - and a market which does not demand the latest technology.
I guess you don't have any concept of how Apple really works, so you just throw out random, inane thoughts.
Look at the iPad. tell me about the out of date, cheap components in the iPad. Or pretty much any Apple product for that matter.
In the very rare cases where they are using older technology (C2D in MBP 13", for example), there's always a very good reason for it - and a market which does not demand the latest technology.
Please show me an Apple product with cutting edge components in it.
As a few examples of Apple's backwards stance - the Apple TV cannot play 1080p or output Dolby True HD/DTS Master, the entire Mac range still uses DVD drives instead of Blu-Ray, the iPhone uses 802.11g instead of n, Apple have never offered high end GPUs in any of their Macs (even the Mac Pros), there is still no option for 10,000 RPM hard drives in Macs, no Mac supports USB 3, no mac supports eSATA, the iPad uses LCD instead of OLED and has a screen which is not even 720p capable. And if you want to talk iPad cost cutting I can't believe you seriously need that explaining to you. (hint: you can start with a lack of USB and memory card slots and a MONO (!!) speaker)
We'll see how good the next iPhone is soon enough, but I bet it will fall short in more places than just using LCD screens. Will there be a 4G/WI-MAX version for example? (presumably not due to Apple's carrier choices) Will it support USB 3? 802.11n? Will it finally have a high-end phone camera in it? Place your bets.
Please show me an Apple product with cutting edge components in it..
I already gave you one - the iPad. Name another $500 tablet with IPS display.
Or look at the cases and power supplies used in Macs. Or the 27" screen on the iMac - which is completely unmatched in the industry.
You play the same game as all the other Apple bashers. You look at one component and automatically assume that the specs for that one component define the computer.
Maybe not OLED. But why not Super OLED which has overcome all of the deficiencies of OLED and is definitively better than LCD?
Admittedly, cost could be an issue. But then there are smartphones coming out with Super OLED screens now. And I can't see why Apple's supplier couldn't scale up to produce these things cheaply when they know they have a customer with a guaranteed orderbook of nearly 50 million devices (iPhone+iTouch).
I will buy an iPhone 4G, regardless the new features they will include. Why? Because I own a Mac and have a MobileMe subscription. The integration of the iPhone into that alone is worth the money, IMO. My current phone has no updated contacts or calendar, simply because I would have do it twice every time (implicit message: I'm lazy ).
The apps you talk about is another great feature I'm looking forward to. For me it will also be my GPS and music player. Stuff I would have to by separately otherwise.
I like the iPhone very much, but what I do outside of the house at the moment does not justify using the iPhone and be forced to pay the expensive data plan of AT&T. As to phone usage itself, I get a very cheap deal with Sprint for just about $30 plus tax and fees, with unlimited evening (starting at 6pm) and anytime weekends. A very good deal for me because most of my relatives are either in Asia, West and Central US, Europe and Middle East. It will be very costly through the AT&T basic plans because they don't have unlimited minutes during the evenings and weekends.
More than likely, I would eventually migrate to the iPhone when I can persuade other family members to join in an unlimited family plan. Anything less would be too expensive.
Otherwise, if I access the internet, do email or most other things, I would prefer either my notebook computer or eventually an iPad (outside) for these purposes (larger screen is the best), as well as Skype or similar plans, using the wifi of the iPad, or the 3G, if I travel in case I do not have access to a free wifi, where I visit. The rest of my phone calls would be through ordinary phones.
Maybe not OLED. But why not Super OLED which has overcome all of the deficiencies of OLED and is definitively better than LCD?
Admittedly, cost could be an issue. But then there are smartphones coming out with Super OLED screens now. And I can't see why Apple's supplier couldn't scale up to produce these things cheaply when they know they have a customer with a guaranteed orderbook of nearly 50 million devices (iPhone+iTouch).
So you have no idea what it would cost nor whether a supplier of Super OLED could meet the demand. Yet you insist that Apple should just choose Super OLED.
Can we just assume that Apple knows more about what's available and what the price would be than you do?
I agree that the ecosystem is a feature to beat all features.
That's why lots of people went with Windows back in the day. I know that WRT me, when I finally outgrew my //c, I took a long time to decide between a new Mac and a new '486. It was when I walked down the software aisles at the local 'puter store that I finally made up my mind. DOS/Win3.1 had the Mac beat hands down. No contest. Game over.
I'd wager that nowadays, lots of people feel the same way about the availability of apps on iPhone OS.
But I think that this time around things may be different, given that Android now has a critical mass of apps, with most of the popular titles avialable on either platform, and many exclusive popular titles as well.
What I wonder is whether the platform with the most apps will win this time or not. It could be that history will repeat itself, or it could be that the competition will have sufficient quantities of compelling apps available, so that the raw numbers matter less today than in the days of the desktop wars.
My preference is a market where there are strong competitions to all the Apple mobile computing devices -- iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad, for now. Such a state will invigorate Apple to keep on innovating.
In telecommunications industry, the carriers serve as gatekeepers. They may prevent Apple from achieving a dominance the way Microsoft dominated the PC market, or how Apple reigned supreme in digital music.
To counteract Apple, companies with deep pockets must step forward to lead their system. In the case of Android, if it is to be predominantly free source, as claimed, Google must step up to lead the effort. This will require more effort and investment to create the support ecosystem, for example, to create components like the ease of purchase developed by Apple.
From my own experience using Open Source products, its very desired nature, open source, could become its own albatross. Forking is inevitable to allow the exploration of competing ideas and strategies.
I would prefer it if the competitors would be more bold in presenting more innovative designs and features rather than simply copying Apple. On the other hand, embracing a technology or feature because it was not adapted by Apple, may not be a prudent strategy either. A case in point is the issue involving Adobe Flash. If it is true that Flash does indeed hog CPU, drain too much energy, laden with security leaks and not nimble enough (slower upgrade) to keep up with advances in technology, then the competition must consider these flaws because if they are valid, Flash could drag them down. I may discount these charges, if it is only Steve Jobs making the charges. However, I read even a PC "evangelist" concurring to the observations of SJ. This is substantiated further when Microsoft announced that Internet Explorer 9 signaled its support behind HTML5.
I like the iPhone very much, but what I do outside of the house at the moment does not justify using the iPhone and be forced to pay the expensive data plan of AT&T. As to phone usage itself, I get a very cheap deal with Sprint for just about $30 plus tax and fees, with unlimited evening (starting at 6pm) and anytime weekends. A very good deal for me because most of my relatives are either in Asia, West and Central US, Europe and Middle East. It will be very costly through the AT&T basic plans because they don't have unlimited minutes during the evenings and weekends.
More than likely, I would eventually migrate to the iPhone when I can persuade other family members to join in an unlimited family plan. Anything less would be too expensive.
Otherwise, if I access the internet, do email or most other things, I would prefer either my notebook computer or eventually an iPad (outside) for these purposes (larger screen is the best), as well as Skype or similar plans, using the wifi of the iPad, or the 3G, if I travel in case I do not have access to a free wifi, where I visit. The rest of my phone calls would be through ordinary phones.
CGC
I agree that probably I wouldn't get one either in the US. Here in the UK we get pretty decent plans starting at £25, and thats ok for me. I'm mostly interested in the internet connection, so that I can check mails and communicate with my friends and family through skype or other applications, as they are not in the UK.
I already gave you one - the iPad. Name another $500 tablet with IPS display.
Or look at the cases and power supplies used in Macs. Or the 27" screen on the iMac - which is completely unmatched in the industry.
You play the same game as all the other Apple bashers. You look at one component and automatically assume that the specs for that one component define the computer.
And yet you completely ignore all the deficiencies I listed.
Frankly I have no interest in a cutting edge case (if there is such a thing), it's what's inside that matters. (and what on earth is a cutting edge power supply?!) At least Apple have FINALLY adopted the i7 in a few models, but the lack of blu-ray support is simply absurd. You pretty much have to go out of your way not to get a BD drive in PCs these days. Care to explain that? Without BD, how exactly would you get 1080p movies onto an iMac screen? Certainly not from the ultra compressed 720p iTunes store... I guess you could always go to Pirate Bay? Is that the Apple approved method?
Getting back to the iPhone, I hope it goes the extra mile and beats the N1. I have a lot of iPhone apps and would stay in the walled Apple garden if the 4G is good enough, but it will have to be something pretty spectacular to beat the Nexus. The current 3GS falls well short. If it fails, I guess I'll be the latest HTC customer.
I agree that probably I wouldn't get one either in the US. Here in the UK we get pretty decent plans starting at £25, and thats ok for me. I'm mostly interested in the internet connection, so that I can check mails and communicate with my friends and family through skype or other applications, as they are not in the UK.
The cheapest way to run an iPhone in the UK is on O2 pay as you go with the £10/month web bolt on. Unlimited data with 12000 texts a month. No minutes but for me that doesn't matter as I rarely call anyone. (I use IM mostly with some email on the side)
And yet you completely ignore all the deficiencies I listed.
Frankly I have no interest in a cutting edge case (if there is such a thing), it's what's inside that matters. (and what on earth is a cutting edge power supply?!) At least Apple have FINALLY adopted the i7 in a few models, but the lack of blu-ray support is simply absurd. You pretty much have to go out of your way not to get a BD drive in PCs these days. Care to explain that? Without BD, how exactly would you get 1080p movies onto an iMac screen? Certainly not from the ultra compressed 720p iTunes store... I guess you could always go to Pirate Bay? Is that the Apple approved method?
Then don't buy a Mac. No one is making you.
Apple is about the entire package. That's why their customer satisfaction and reliability are top of the charts.
Your argument that you have to go out of the way to not get BR is BS. It's certainly not standard, nor is it being widely demanded by Apple customers. If you're watching a movie on a 15" screen, you don't need 1080p. If you're doing it on your desktop, you probably have a big screen TV nearby. Apple learned a long time ago that you can't make everyone happy.
The cheapest way to run an iPhone in the UK is on O2 pay as you go with the £10/month web bolt on. Unlimited data with 12000 texts a month. No minutes but for me that doesn't matter as I rarely call anyone. (I use IM mostly with some email on the side)
Comments
When I take my iPhone outside all I see is reflection and glare.
When I look at my friend's Nexus One outside all I see is reflection and glare.
Neither work outside so as the OLED looks a generation or two ahead inside, I'll take it. LCD is only still around because it's cheap. It's next on the list for the tech dust bin.
I'd actually be somewhat upset if the iPhone HD came with OLED.
One is considerably more usable in direct sunlight than the other. I, like Apple, tend to prefer the balanced option over the myopic option that tries to excel in one way.
But is the Nexus One's display actually better? The contrast ratio does make things more vivid but is that a good thing for general use? There are plenty disadvantages to OLED, including power usage.
And LCDs aren't cheap. Dare say it?: Check out iSuppi's breakdown of the iPad. That S-IPS panel is costly.
What is long overdue is a higher rez display using a better TFFT.
Upgrade RAM?
First of all, upgrading your computer with more RAM is not harder/more expensive up (north) here.
But better yet, how the hell would you do it?
I meant upgrade my phone when a new one comes out with more RAM, not upgrading the RAM in my existing phone.
Do you even get cell reception out there in the 'peg? I thought the cell towers all froze and toppled.
They often do, but we do our best to keep them up with bail twine, or get a few friends to hold one up when we need to make a call.
It's tough up here but WE LIKE IT!
These are just our personal preferences so it's nothing to butt heads over.
The G4 iPhone has dimensions of 116.8mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm, according to Gizmodo. The Sony Experia X10, for comparison, with a 4" display is 119mm x 63mm x 13mm. It offsets some of the increased display width (in your hand and pocket) by using a wider screen ratio.
I can't see Apple moving from 3:2 to 16:9 ? I should have included that with my original reply ? so a 4" display at the 3:2 ratio would be considerably wider in your hand and pocket. The display, without the framing, would be 84.6mm x 56.4mm compared to the current 73.9mm x 49.3mm at 3:2.
No head butting. Good point about the ratio. I'll love the new iPhone but I'll still be jealous of the bigger screens, probably just until I see one and say to myself, no big deal.
Thanks for doing the math!
I can only asume you have never seen a Nexus One. When you have come back and tell me it doesn't look better than an LCD. Oh and try to speak less like am angry child too, if you can.
Thanks.
You're ridiculous, man. Give up.
Google already has.
(Hint: For starters, you could read the many posts that have directly addressed your comments).
"better wording"
Less like an angry child, perhaps?
Just kidding! I had to!
The real question is what does 24 million units suggest? Is that enough units to satisfy just AT&T consumers or does 24 million suggest a greater supply than usual because Apple is going to need more units when it breaks exclusivity?
AT&T no longer provides the lion's share of Apple iPhone shipments, so there is little to be gleaned from this number (even if we except it as fact and not just a rumor) with respect to exclusivity in the good ole' USA. It would only mean that Apple expects to sell a hell of a lot of units worldwide.
Thompson
My guess is that Steve has indeed seen Nexus One's display, as well as the displays of all competing smartphones plus displays that aren't being used in currently shipping devices. I suspect that Apple evaluates dozens of sample displays in the prototyping phase and that Steve himself is involved in the final decision process.
The display is the single most expensive component in the iPhone/iPod touch, so it would seem prudent that Apple selects this part for the best combination of qualities, including (but not limited to) size, power requirements, brightness, viewing angle, performance under direct sunlight, refresh rate, durability, longevity, color rendering, part quality, availability, recyclability, and of course, price.
What is your justification in believing that Apple would not behave like the Fortune 500 company that they are and pick such an important part without a thorough investigation of the available components?
Apple have for a long time avoided the cutting edge and have favored out of date, cheap components. That's just the way they work.
I can only assume the decision to stick with LCD for the iPhone 4G was down to cost, nothing more. The Nexus One on the other hand was designed to beat the iPhone on specs, which it did in every department. A money no object device.
And please look at the screen in the current shipping iPhones. It's abysmal. Terrible viewing angles, low resolution, and incredibly washed out in the dark. (even for an LCD) You can't tell me quality was a consideration when that screen was chosen.
Apple have for a long time avoided the cutting edge and have favored out of date, cheap components. That's just the way they work.
I guess you don't have any concept of how Apple really works, so you just throw out random, inane thoughts.
Look at the iPad. tell me about the out of date, cheap components in the iPad. Or pretty much any Apple product for that matter.
In the very rare cases where they are using older technology (C2D in MBP 13", for example), there's always a very good reason for it - and a market which does not demand the latest technology.
I guess you don't have any concept of how Apple really works, so you just throw out random, inane thoughts.
Look at the iPad. tell me about the out of date, cheap components in the iPad. Or pretty much any Apple product for that matter.
In the very rare cases where they are using older technology (C2D in MBP 13", for example), there's always a very good reason for it - and a market which does not demand the latest technology.
Please show me an Apple product with cutting edge components in it.
As a few examples of Apple's backwards stance - the Apple TV cannot play 1080p or output Dolby True HD/DTS Master, the entire Mac range still uses DVD drives instead of Blu-Ray, the iPhone uses 802.11g instead of n, Apple have never offered high end GPUs in any of their Macs (even the Mac Pros), there is still no option for 10,000 RPM hard drives in Macs, no Mac supports USB 3, no mac supports eSATA, the iPad uses LCD instead of OLED and has a screen which is not even 720p capable. And if you want to talk iPad cost cutting I can't believe you seriously need that explaining to you. (hint: you can start with a lack of USB and memory card slots and a MONO (!!) speaker)
We'll see how good the next iPhone is soon enough, but I bet it will fall short in more places than just using LCD screens. Will there be a 4G/WI-MAX version for example? (presumably not due to Apple's carrier choices) Will it support USB 3? 802.11n? Will it finally have a high-end phone camera in it? Place your bets.
Please show me an Apple product with cutting edge components in it..
I already gave you one - the iPad. Name another $500 tablet with IPS display.
Or look at the cases and power supplies used in Macs. Or the 27" screen on the iMac - which is completely unmatched in the industry.
You play the same game as all the other Apple bashers. You look at one component and automatically assume that the specs for that one component define the computer.
Admittedly, cost could be an issue. But then there are smartphones coming out with Super OLED screens now. And I can't see why Apple's supplier couldn't scale up to produce these things cheaply when they know they have a customer with a guaranteed orderbook of nearly 50 million devices (iPhone+iTouch).
Great post!
I will buy an iPhone 4G, regardless the new features they will include. Why? Because I own a Mac and have a MobileMe subscription. The integration of the iPhone into that alone is worth the money, IMO. My current phone has no updated contacts or calendar, simply because I would have do it twice every time (implicit message: I'm lazy
The apps you talk about is another great feature I'm looking forward to. For me it will also be my GPS and music player. Stuff I would have to by separately otherwise.
I like the iPhone very much, but what I do outside of the house at the moment does not justify using the iPhone and be forced to pay the expensive data plan of AT&T. As to phone usage itself, I get a very cheap deal with Sprint for just about $30 plus tax and fees, with unlimited evening (starting at 6pm) and anytime weekends. A very good deal for me because most of my relatives are either in Asia, West and Central US, Europe and Middle East. It will be very costly through the AT&T basic plans because they don't have unlimited minutes during the evenings and weekends.
More than likely, I would eventually migrate to the iPhone when I can persuade other family members to join in an unlimited family plan. Anything less would be too expensive.
Otherwise, if I access the internet, do email or most other things, I would prefer either my notebook computer or eventually an iPad (outside) for these purposes (larger screen is the best), as well as Skype or similar plans, using the wifi of the iPad, or the 3G, if I travel in case I do not have access to a free wifi, where I visit. The rest of my phone calls would be through ordinary phones.
CGC
Maybe not OLED. But why not Super OLED which has overcome all of the deficiencies of OLED and is definitively better than LCD?
Admittedly, cost could be an issue. But then there are smartphones coming out with Super OLED screens now. And I can't see why Apple's supplier couldn't scale up to produce these things cheaply when they know they have a customer with a guaranteed orderbook of nearly 50 million devices (iPhone+iTouch).
So you have no idea what it would cost nor whether a supplier of Super OLED could meet the demand. Yet you insist that Apple should just choose Super OLED.
Can we just assume that Apple knows more about what's available and what the price would be than you do?
I agree that the ecosystem is a feature to beat all features.
That's why lots of people went with Windows back in the day. I know that WRT me, when I finally outgrew my //c, I took a long time to decide between a new Mac and a new '486. It was when I walked down the software aisles at the local 'puter store that I finally made up my mind. DOS/Win3.1 had the Mac beat hands down. No contest. Game over.
I'd wager that nowadays, lots of people feel the same way about the availability of apps on iPhone OS.
But I think that this time around things may be different, given that Android now has a critical mass of apps, with most of the popular titles avialable on either platform, and many exclusive popular titles as well.
What I wonder is whether the platform with the most apps will win this time or not. It could be that history will repeat itself, or it could be that the competition will have sufficient quantities of compelling apps available, so that the raw numbers matter less today than in the days of the desktop wars.
My preference is a market where there are strong competitions to all the Apple mobile computing devices -- iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad, for now. Such a state will invigorate Apple to keep on innovating.
In telecommunications industry, the carriers serve as gatekeepers. They may prevent Apple from achieving a dominance the way Microsoft dominated the PC market, or how Apple reigned supreme in digital music.
To counteract Apple, companies with deep pockets must step forward to lead their system. In the case of Android, if it is to be predominantly free source, as claimed, Google must step up to lead the effort. This will require more effort and investment to create the support ecosystem, for example, to create components like the ease of purchase developed by Apple.
From my own experience using Open Source products, its very desired nature, open source, could become its own albatross. Forking is inevitable to allow the exploration of competing ideas and strategies.
I would prefer it if the competitors would be more bold in presenting more innovative designs and features rather than simply copying Apple. On the other hand, embracing a technology or feature because it was not adapted by Apple, may not be a prudent strategy either. A case in point is the issue involving Adobe Flash. If it is true that Flash does indeed hog CPU, drain too much energy, laden with security leaks and not nimble enough (slower upgrade) to keep up with advances in technology, then the competition must consider these flaws because if they are valid, Flash could drag them down. I may discount these charges, if it is only Steve Jobs making the charges. However, I read even a PC "evangelist" concurring to the observations of SJ. This is substantiated further when Microsoft announced that Internet Explorer 9 signaled its support behind HTML5.
CGC
I like the iPhone very much, but what I do outside of the house at the moment does not justify using the iPhone and be forced to pay the expensive data plan of AT&T. As to phone usage itself, I get a very cheap deal with Sprint for just about $30 plus tax and fees, with unlimited evening (starting at 6pm) and anytime weekends. A very good deal for me because most of my relatives are either in Asia, West and Central US, Europe and Middle East. It will be very costly through the AT&T basic plans because they don't have unlimited minutes during the evenings and weekends.
More than likely, I would eventually migrate to the iPhone when I can persuade other family members to join in an unlimited family plan. Anything less would be too expensive.
Otherwise, if I access the internet, do email or most other things, I would prefer either my notebook computer or eventually an iPad (outside) for these purposes (larger screen is the best), as well as Skype or similar plans, using the wifi of the iPad, or the 3G, if I travel in case I do not have access to a free wifi, where I visit. The rest of my phone calls would be through ordinary phones.
CGC
I agree that probably I wouldn't get one either in the US. Here in the UK we get pretty decent plans starting at £25, and thats ok for me. I'm mostly interested in the internet connection, so that I can check mails and communicate with my friends and family through skype or other applications, as they are not in the UK.
I already gave you one - the iPad. Name another $500 tablet with IPS display.
Or look at the cases and power supplies used in Macs. Or the 27" screen on the iMac - which is completely unmatched in the industry.
You play the same game as all the other Apple bashers. You look at one component and automatically assume that the specs for that one component define the computer.
And yet you completely ignore all the deficiencies I listed.
Frankly I have no interest in a cutting edge case (if there is such a thing), it's what's inside that matters. (and what on earth is a cutting edge power supply?!) At least Apple have FINALLY adopted the i7 in a few models, but the lack of blu-ray support is simply absurd. You pretty much have to go out of your way not to get a BD drive in PCs these days. Care to explain that? Without BD, how exactly would you get 1080p movies onto an iMac screen? Certainly not from the ultra compressed 720p iTunes store... I guess you could always go to Pirate Bay? Is that the Apple approved method?
Getting back to the iPhone, I hope it goes the extra mile and beats the N1. I have a lot of iPhone apps and would stay in the walled Apple garden if the 4G is good enough, but it will have to be something pretty spectacular to beat the Nexus. The current 3GS falls well short. If it fails, I guess I'll be the latest HTC customer.
I agree that probably I wouldn't get one either in the US. Here in the UK we get pretty decent plans starting at £25, and thats ok for me. I'm mostly interested in the internet connection, so that I can check mails and communicate with my friends and family through skype or other applications, as they are not in the UK.
The cheapest way to run an iPhone in the UK is on O2 pay as you go with the £10/month web bolt on. Unlimited data with 12000 texts a month. No minutes but for me that doesn't matter as I rarely call anyone. (I use IM mostly with some email on the side)
And yet you completely ignore all the deficiencies I listed.
Frankly I have no interest in a cutting edge case (if there is such a thing), it's what's inside that matters. (and what on earth is a cutting edge power supply?!) At least Apple have FINALLY adopted the i7 in a few models, but the lack of blu-ray support is simply absurd. You pretty much have to go out of your way not to get a BD drive in PCs these days. Care to explain that? Without BD, how exactly would you get 1080p movies onto an iMac screen? Certainly not from the ultra compressed 720p iTunes store... I guess you could always go to Pirate Bay? Is that the Apple approved method?
Then don't buy a Mac. No one is making you.
Apple is about the entire package. That's why their customer satisfaction and reliability are top of the charts.
Your argument that you have to go out of the way to not get BR is BS. It's certainly not standard, nor is it being widely demanded by Apple customers. If you're watching a movie on a 15" screen, you don't need 1080p. If you're doing it on your desktop, you probably have a big screen TV nearby. Apple learned a long time ago that you can't make everyone happy.
The cheapest way to run an iPhone in the UK is on O2 pay as you go with the £10/month web bolt on. Unlimited data with 12000 texts a month. No minutes but for me that doesn't matter as I rarely call anyone. (I use IM mostly with some email on the side)
And, as less would answer.