Wow, you work for MS, I did not know that. The app store is not open yet, so we do not know it is "rubbish", unless of course this is the same MS = evil drivel.
Look man, I've said it before, you want to post garbage, go to macrumors forums, they have a distinctively low iq and eq in both their management, and posters. Or go to an ms site, but please don't troll here, it's boring.
An app store that's not even open yet is by definition far worse than one that's open for a few years and includes a few hundred thousand apps. Or are you waiting on the Microsoft miracle that somehow as soon as they open they will outshine all the rest of the developers from all other platforms all over the globe that have worked their asses off these past years to actually make app stores a reality? It could be, we might have an ms miracle, counter to all logic, ms will open the store and from day 1 or day 10 it will outpace, outshine and outperform everyone else. Just like the courier sent the ipad to oblivion. Just like that.
What kind of garbage discussion are you involving me in? Please pity me, yourself, and the rest of the posters here.
That would mean that iOS 5 would be incompatible with iPhone 4. That may be possible but seems unlikely IMO. Apple have so far seen to it that each iPhone could get at least one iOS upgrade. I'm not sure I'd expect that to change.
Nothing in my post suggested that iOS 5.0 would only be for the G5 iPhone.
So what are they trying to say? As social commentary I am with them 100%. But what is their point that they 'll make a phone that bad that no one would want to use? Because what exact advantage are they offering so their phones can let you be a quick "in and out" (is that pun intended?) ? People are not addicted to their phones because the phones are so great, but because they are addicted to some uses they offer, they help them waist time, the distract them, they help them avoid things that make them uncomfortable etc. etc. What's ms's solution to that? Rubbish marketing? Oh, but now I get it, it's the same old bs, they don't have an answer....
Bring back Bill, Jerry Seinfeld and stupid smelly shoe ads, they look like something out of the cannes film festival compared to this.
Let me see if I understand you. Apple made the iPhone to sell to a bunch of insecure, lazy, procrastinating, ADHD, repressed individuals? Is that REALLY what you are saying.
Look man, I've said it before, you want to post garbage, go to macrumors forums, they have a distinctively low iq and eq in both their management, and posters. Or go to an ms site, but please don't troll here, it's boring.
An app store that's not even open yet is by definition far worse than one that's open for a few years and includes a few hundred thousand apps. Or are you waiting on the Microsoft miracle that somehow as soon as they open they will outshine all the rest of the developers from all other platforms all over the globe that have worked their asses off these past years to actually make app stores a reality? It could be, we might have an ms miracle, counter to all logic, ms will open the store and from day 1 or day 10 it will outpace, outshine and outperform everyone else. Just like the courier sent the ipad to oblivion. Just like that.
What kind of garbage discussion are you involving me in? Please pity me, yourself, and the rest of the posters here.
I must of hit a nerve to provoke a personal attack, or is that your SOP.
When Android was released, Apple had tens of thousands of apps in its store. By your logic, Android should have failed, not surpassed iPhone in market share and never achieved 100K apps.
There is no MS miracle, nor did I assume a deluge of apps when the app store opened. Given time, the app store will grow, just like it did for Apple, just like it did for Android.
My post was that claiming WP7 is doomed because the app store won't have 200K apps at opening is just wrong.
Apple has been interesting lately, and I think the company is changing a bit. They loosened up on the developer rules?
They?re always changing. The loosening of the dev restrictions are natural just as I?m sure iAds won?t always be regulated to iOS apps if it takes off. This is how a smart company operates. Work with manageable chunks and expand in controlled way that are on your terms.
Quote:
I think we are seeing the beginnings of a tussle for the "living room/house", with both companies converging on a set of core features and trying to flesh things out to create a unified experience.
I thought of this the other day and while it?s somewhat semantics it?s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it?s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I?m talking about the AppleTV, I?m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn?t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
Every meeting I go to has at least one or two people pretending to use their iPad for something or other also.
I don't find this a meaningful statistic or fact other than how it reflects on the current popularity of the device.
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
It?s meaningful for those stats, but it doesn?t say how many are being sold on average to these 80% and 50%.
Also, I think Prof. Peabody ?meaningful? comment was based on it being anecdotal and therefor very limited in scope.
Let me see if I understand you. Apple made the iPhone to sell to a bunch of insecure, lazy, procrastinating, ADHD, repressed individuals? Is that REALLY what you are saying.
How the hell did you get that out of the post you're responding to?
Here, let me explain it again: people have their noses buried in their cell phones because they're caught up in what's in there: texts, internet sites, emails, etc.
Making a phone which claims to make it easier to access those things doesn't address the the problem they claim to be solving, at all. Does anyone believe that the people walking around in their cell bubble are doing so because they're having to spend a lot of time navigating between applications?
It's a pretty odd and misguided bit of marketing, IMO. If this is the theme of the campaign, MS is shooting for a way of differentiating their phone that doesn't actually make any sense-- and worse, most people will immediately see it doesn't make sense, because they're the ones walking around staring at their screens.
It's like marketing a cell phone with a lot of images of people yelling into them in public, with the claim that the phone software is really slick so your conversations can be shorter. Gibberish, in other words.
How the hell did you get that out of the post you're responding to?
Here, let me explain it again: people have their noses buried in their cell phones because they're caught up in what's in there: texts, internet sites, emails, etc.
Making a phone which claims to make it easier to access those things doesn't address the the problem they claim to be solving, at all. Does anyone believe that the people walking around in their cell bubble are doing so because they're having to spend a lot of time navigating between applications?
It's a pretty odd and misguided bit of marketing, IMO. If this is the theme of the campaign, MS is shooting for a way of differentiating their phone that doesn't actually make any sense-- and worse, most people will immediately see it doesn't make sense, because they're the ones walking around staring at their screens.
It's like marketing a cell phone with a lot of images of people yelling into them in public, with the claim that the phone software is really slick so your conversations can be shorter. Gibberish, in other words.
I agree with everything you said about the goal of the ad and how it won?t solve the problem they are claiming, but I think it?s a brilliant ad nonetheless. I think it makes the viewer want to know about WP7 and that is exactly what they need right now.
It’s meaningful for those stats, but it doesn’t say how many are being sold on average to these 80% and 50%.
He's not disputing the sales of the iPhone and iPad. He's saying that iOS devices aren't serious productivity devices and that business users will gravitate towards other devices.
Not only do I disagree with him, but the evidence is also contrary to his claims - that's my point.
Wow. How sad. Win phone 7 looks like a whole bunch of Crayola. Hope they didn't actually PAY someone to "design" this interface.
And the home screen looks "broken." lol
Nothing really new or needed. Just a poorly done rehash of Outlook Express on a phone. Kinda disappointing from what should be a software design powerhouse.
"Start screen with something called Live Tiles for highlighting a user's personal content. "
So what is the difference between a Tile and an Icon. My iPhone email Icon shows how many unread emails I have, my Calendar shows how many new appointments I have? I don't get how this is any different.
<SARCASM>
Com'n, your just not seeing that they gave it a fresh start.
</SARCASM>
Maybe in the next weeks we will see that they gave it a fresh re-start.
I agree with everything you said about the goal of the ad and how it won’t solve the problem they are claiming, but I think it’s a brilliant ad nonetheless. I think it makes the viewer want to know about WP7 and that is exactly what they need right now.
I think it's an interesting ad, well done, but I think what they're selling (we can get you-- or perhaps more pointedly those other dicks who keep ramming into you-- involved in life again by making your phone so easy to use you rarely have to look at it) is nonsensical.
You're right that it might stir some interest, but I can't see that translating into sales. Windows Phone 7 will sink or swim on its merits, not some high concept "this fixes a terrible wrong" campaign.
Now, of course, this might just be an initial teaser piece, with more substantial sales pitches to come, but it sort of sounds like the hook they're going to hang the whole campaign on--"get in and get out fast." But the trouble there is that's not what people want to do with their phones. If it were, they'd already be doing it, because neither iOS or Android actually preclude, say, quickly checking your email and putting your phone away. Compulsively needing to be constantly in touch is not a failure of hardware or software, and pretending like it is really can't build good will.
Perhaps, but the fact that RIM has lost market share doesn't necessarily equate to a losing the business market in that a large portion of Blackberry users are teenage girls who text as well. Also, Microsoft's initial offering (Windows Mobile), is and always has been absolute junk in terms of usability, (and I've used it myself on multiple devices) and both it and Blackberry OS are based on antiquated, almost "pre-smartphone" concepts. The fact that the arrival of multi-touch smartphones from Apple and Google caused them to lose share is not really that surprising.
This is true, but I have yet to see anyone do anything much with the SDK except dip buckets into the goldmine which is mobile gaming.
I would also argue that while the iPad currently dominates the landscape, it's not geared for any kind of serious productivity. It's a netbook replacement aimed almost solely at passive consumption of media and social activities which can just as easily be done on a phone. There is a serious danger IMO that the shine will wear off the iPad as quickly as it arrived and people will figure out that aside from the bigger screen, they can do almost anything they want to on an iPad, on a phone. Additionally, there hasn't been time for any competitors to the iPad to even come on sale yet, so the question of what is happening in the tablet market is really completely up in the air at this point.
What I see in the tablet market, is that lots of other competitors are coming out with products over the holiday season and in the first quarter of next year. Many of these are extremely focussed on productivity using the 7" form factor. Apple hasn't announced anything in that area, and there are no rumours of them even testing different form factors for the iPad at this stage.
Even if you just look at software, obvious boosts to the productivity side of the equation for iOS like providing a home screen with "at a glance information" or providing an integrated package of calendaring/email for the end user don't even seem to be on the horizon for Apple, and no developers that I've heard of are working on this kind of thing through the SDK either. Notifications still barely work on iOS. Even email is problematic in that I still can't rely on having access to all my email from an iOS device at all times even though I only use MobileMe for my email. Using the Apple mail app requires you getting your head around a lot of confusing duplication of mail folders as well. Many just give up on trying to figure it out and trust that everything is okay without really being in control of it at all. I never get that feeling when I use a more corporate based email system like Exchange. There is also no file system on iOS devices and no easy or intuitive way to transfer documents to an iOS device or back again. Even a simple "My documents" folder is seemingly out of the question for Apple. This just makes no sense at all to most end users.
Apple has a way of surprising us so they might pull it off yet, but I'm definitely worried about this state of affairs. I think Apple is moving too slow given the rapid development of the new mobile platform and (especially in the area of productivity), they aren't really offering much at this point. If they get enough iPads in peoples hands for watching TV shows with, they can still bolt on some productivity improvements later on and perhaps win the day, but I think they should be doing this now, instead of waiting for an entire summer of new Android (and now WinPhone 7) devices showing just how poor Apple's offering is in that regard. It's always better to strike first, rather than respond to a competitors product IMO.
I'm sorry I thought this article was about WP7 smart phones... oh wait IT IS! Maybe you should speak to the topic.
i expect WP 7 will do ok. not great, but ok. because it is aimed at the same commodity phone market of unsophisticated consumers (not dumb, just not tech-wise) that Android has had to itself up to now. they are asking $200 to start, but the $50 rebates and 2-for-1 deals will come in January. and they have a modest base of likely buyers to start with - Zune and XBox owners. so if it is at all a decent product, it will do ok.
add to this new global, if not US, competition from Nokia's new Symbian 3 smartphones and the iPhone's expansion to other US telcos, and Android's rapid growth is over. Android was filling the vacuum left by the obsolescence of WinMobile 6 and Symbian 2. now that is over.
but it will be fun to watch the fanDroids sneer at WP 7.
PS: it will not, however, make any money for MS. another no-profit product like the Zune and XBox.
They’re always changing. The loosening of the dev restrictions are natural just as I’m sure iAds won’t always be regulated to iOS apps if it takes off. This is how a smart company operates. Work with manageable chunks and expand in controlled way that are on your terms.
I thought of this the other day and while it’s somewhat semantics it’s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it’s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I’m talking about the AppleTV, I’m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn’t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
apple has in no way won the 'living room'. and they aren't going to with that lame apple tv that just came out. that was the biggest let down of the year.
watching the old 'think different' ad on youtube the other day, i realized that apple today is not counterculture, it isn't 'revolutionary' (in the way they portray it) and it is about as relevant as Paul Mccartney (you admire him for what he did in the past but he isn't really doing much except entertaining the old folks at this point).
i should add the young too. its the computer made by Disney....
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
I don't think there's enough information to know whether or not it's a meaningful figure. My own products are used somewhere in several Fortune 100 companies, but that's not really meaningful if they might have one or two units each company. There's no information telling us exactly how widespread the device is used.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I thought of this the other day and while it?s somewhat semantics it?s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it?s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I?m talking about the AppleTV, I?m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn?t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
That sounds contradictory to me. I gather that when most people say "the living room" in terms of electronics, they mean the TV and entertainment center. Rejiggering the meaning to also include iPad and iPhone smacks of newspeak to me.
Comments
Wow, you work for MS, I did not know that. The app store is not open yet, so we do not know it is "rubbish", unless of course this is the same MS = evil drivel.
Look man, I've said it before, you want to post garbage, go to macrumors forums, they have a distinctively low iq and eq in both their management, and posters. Or go to an ms site, but please don't troll here, it's boring.
An app store that's not even open yet is by definition far worse than one that's open for a few years and includes a few hundred thousand apps. Or are you waiting on the Microsoft miracle that somehow as soon as they open they will outshine all the rest of the developers from all other platforms all over the globe that have worked their asses off these past years to actually make app stores a reality? It could be, we might have an ms miracle, counter to all logic, ms will open the store and from day 1 or day 10 it will outpace, outshine and outperform everyone else. Just like the courier sent the ipad to oblivion. Just like that.
What kind of garbage discussion are you involving me in? Please pity me, yourself, and the rest of the posters here.
That would mean that iOS 5 would be incompatible with iPhone 4. That may be possible but seems unlikely IMO. Apple have so far seen to it that each iPhone could get at least one iOS upgrade. I'm not sure I'd expect that to change.
Nothing in my post suggested that iOS 5.0 would only be for the G5 iPhone.
So what are they trying to say? As social commentary I am with them 100%. But what is their point that they 'll make a phone that bad that no one would want to use? Because what exact advantage are they offering so their phones can let you be a quick "in and out" (is that pun intended?) ? People are not addicted to their phones because the phones are so great, but because they are addicted to some uses they offer, they help them waist time, the distract them, they help them avoid things that make them uncomfortable etc. etc. What's ms's solution to that? Rubbish marketing? Oh, but now I get it, it's the same old bs, they don't have an answer....
Bring back Bill, Jerry Seinfeld and stupid smelly shoe ads, they look like something out of the cannes film festival compared to this.
Let me see if I understand you. Apple made the iPhone to sell to a bunch of insecure, lazy, procrastinating, ADHD, repressed individuals? Is that REALLY what you are saying.
Look man, I've said it before, you want to post garbage, go to macrumors forums, they have a distinctively low iq and eq in both their management, and posters. Or go to an ms site, but please don't troll here, it's boring.
An app store that's not even open yet is by definition far worse than one that's open for a few years and includes a few hundred thousand apps. Or are you waiting on the Microsoft miracle that somehow as soon as they open they will outshine all the rest of the developers from all other platforms all over the globe that have worked their asses off these past years to actually make app stores a reality? It could be, we might have an ms miracle, counter to all logic, ms will open the store and from day 1 or day 10 it will outpace, outshine and outperform everyone else. Just like the courier sent the ipad to oblivion. Just like that.
What kind of garbage discussion are you involving me in? Please pity me, yourself, and the rest of the posters here.
I must of hit a nerve to provoke a personal attack, or is that your SOP.
When Android was released, Apple had tens of thousands of apps in its store. By your logic, Android should have failed, not surpassed iPhone in market share and never achieved 100K apps.
There is no MS miracle, nor did I assume a deluge of apps when the app store opened. Given time, the app store will grow, just like it did for Apple, just like it did for Android.
My post was that claiming WP7 is doomed because the app store won't have 200K apps at opening is just wrong.
Apple has been interesting lately, and I think the company is changing a bit. They loosened up on the developer rules?
They?re always changing. The loosening of the dev restrictions are natural just as I?m sure iAds won?t always be regulated to iOS apps if it takes off. This is how a smart company operates. Work with manageable chunks and expand in controlled way that are on your terms.
I think we are seeing the beginnings of a tussle for the "living room/house", with both companies converging on a set of core features and trying to flesh things out to create a unified experience.
I thought of this the other day and while it?s somewhat semantics it?s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it?s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I?m talking about the AppleTV, I?m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn?t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
Every meeting I go to has at least one or two people pretending to use their iPad for something or other also.
I don't find this a meaningful statistic or fact other than how it reflects on the current popularity of the device.
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
It?s meaningful for those stats, but it doesn?t say how many are being sold on average to these 80% and 50%.
Also, I think Prof. Peabody ?meaningful? comment was based on it being anecdotal and therefor very limited in scope.
Let me see if I understand you. Apple made the iPhone to sell to a bunch of insecure, lazy, procrastinating, ADHD, repressed individuals? Is that REALLY what you are saying.
How the hell did you get that out of the post you're responding to?
Here, let me explain it again: people have their noses buried in their cell phones because they're caught up in what's in there: texts, internet sites, emails, etc.
Making a phone which claims to make it easier to access those things doesn't address the the problem they claim to be solving, at all. Does anyone believe that the people walking around in their cell bubble are doing so because they're having to spend a lot of time navigating between applications?
It's a pretty odd and misguided bit of marketing, IMO. If this is the theme of the campaign, MS is shooting for a way of differentiating their phone that doesn't actually make any sense-- and worse, most people will immediately see it doesn't make sense, because they're the ones walking around staring at their screens.
It's like marketing a cell phone with a lot of images of people yelling into them in public, with the claim that the phone software is really slick so your conversations can be shorter. Gibberish, in other words.
How the hell did you get that out of the post you're responding to?
Here, let me explain it again: people have their noses buried in their cell phones because they're caught up in what's in there: texts, internet sites, emails, etc.
Making a phone which claims to make it easier to access those things doesn't address the the problem they claim to be solving, at all. Does anyone believe that the people walking around in their cell bubble are doing so because they're having to spend a lot of time navigating between applications?
It's a pretty odd and misguided bit of marketing, IMO. If this is the theme of the campaign, MS is shooting for a way of differentiating their phone that doesn't actually make any sense-- and worse, most people will immediately see it doesn't make sense, because they're the ones walking around staring at their screens.
It's like marketing a cell phone with a lot of images of people yelling into them in public, with the claim that the phone software is really slick so your conversations can be shorter. Gibberish, in other words.
I agree with everything you said about the goal of the ad and how it won?t solve the problem they are claiming, but I think it?s a brilliant ad nonetheless. I think it makes the viewer want to know about WP7 and that is exactly what they need right now.
It’s meaningful for those stats, but it doesn’t say how many are being sold on average to these 80% and 50%.
He's not disputing the sales of the iPhone and iPad. He's saying that iOS devices aren't serious productivity devices and that business users will gravitate towards other devices.
Not only do I disagree with him, but the evidence is also contrary to his claims - that's my point.
And the home screen looks "broken." lol
Nothing really new or needed. Just a poorly done rehash of Outlook Express on a phone. Kinda disappointing from what should be a software design powerhouse.
"Start screen with something called Live Tiles for highlighting a user's personal content. "
So what is the difference between a Tile and an Icon. My iPhone email Icon shows how many unread emails I have, my Calendar shows how many new appointments I have? I don't get how this is any different.
<SARCASM>
Com'n, your just not seeing that they gave it a fresh start.
</SARCASM>
Maybe in the next weeks we will see that they gave it a fresh re-start.
Wow. How sad. Win phone 7 looks like a whole bunch of Crayola. Hope they didn't actually PAY someone to "design" this interface.
When MS comes along and offers organizations one free WP7 device for every desktop Windows or Office install, looks aren't going to matter much.
I agree with everything you said about the goal of the ad and how it won’t solve the problem they are claiming, but I think it’s a brilliant ad nonetheless. I think it makes the viewer want to know about WP7 and that is exactly what they need right now.
I think it's an interesting ad, well done, but I think what they're selling (we can get you-- or perhaps more pointedly those other dicks who keep ramming into you-- involved in life again by making your phone so easy to use you rarely have to look at it) is nonsensical.
You're right that it might stir some interest, but I can't see that translating into sales. Windows Phone 7 will sink or swim on its merits, not some high concept "this fixes a terrible wrong" campaign.
Now, of course, this might just be an initial teaser piece, with more substantial sales pitches to come, but it sort of sounds like the hook they're going to hang the whole campaign on--"get in and get out fast." But the trouble there is that's not what people want to do with their phones. If it were, they'd already be doing it, because neither iOS or Android actually preclude, say, quickly checking your email and putting your phone away. Compulsively needing to be constantly in touch is not a failure of hardware or software, and pretending like it is really can't build good will.
Perhaps, but the fact that RIM has lost market share doesn't necessarily equate to a losing the business market in that a large portion of Blackberry users are teenage girls who text as well. Also, Microsoft's initial offering (Windows Mobile), is and always has been absolute junk in terms of usability, (and I've used it myself on multiple devices) and both it and Blackberry OS are based on antiquated, almost "pre-smartphone" concepts. The fact that the arrival of multi-touch smartphones from Apple and Google caused them to lose share is not really that surprising.
This is true, but I have yet to see anyone do anything much with the SDK except dip buckets into the goldmine which is mobile gaming.
I would also argue that while the iPad currently dominates the landscape, it's not geared for any kind of serious productivity. It's a netbook replacement aimed almost solely at passive consumption of media and social activities which can just as easily be done on a phone. There is a serious danger IMO that the shine will wear off the iPad as quickly as it arrived and people will figure out that aside from the bigger screen, they can do almost anything they want to on an iPad, on a phone. Additionally, there hasn't been time for any competitors to the iPad to even come on sale yet, so the question of what is happening in the tablet market is really completely up in the air at this point.
What I see in the tablet market, is that lots of other competitors are coming out with products over the holiday season and in the first quarter of next year. Many of these are extremely focussed on productivity using the 7" form factor. Apple hasn't announced anything in that area, and there are no rumours of them even testing different form factors for the iPad at this stage.
Even if you just look at software, obvious boosts to the productivity side of the equation for iOS like providing a home screen with "at a glance information" or providing an integrated package of calendaring/email for the end user don't even seem to be on the horizon for Apple, and no developers that I've heard of are working on this kind of thing through the SDK either. Notifications still barely work on iOS. Even email is problematic in that I still can't rely on having access to all my email from an iOS device at all times even though I only use MobileMe for my email. Using the Apple mail app requires you getting your head around a lot of confusing duplication of mail folders as well. Many just give up on trying to figure it out and trust that everything is okay without really being in control of it at all. I never get that feeling when I use a more corporate based email system like Exchange. There is also no file system on iOS devices and no easy or intuitive way to transfer documents to an iOS device or back again. Even a simple "My documents" folder is seemingly out of the question for Apple. This just makes no sense at all to most end users.
Apple has a way of surprising us so they might pull it off yet, but I'm definitely worried about this state of affairs. I think Apple is moving too slow given the rapid development of the new mobile platform and (especially in the area of productivity), they aren't really offering much at this point. If they get enough iPads in peoples hands for watching TV shows with, they can still bolt on some productivity improvements later on and perhaps win the day, but I think they should be doing this now, instead of waiting for an entire summer of new Android (and now WinPhone 7) devices showing just how poor Apple's offering is in that regard. It's always better to strike first, rather than respond to a competitors product IMO.
I'm sorry I thought this article was about WP7 smart phones... oh wait IT IS! Maybe you should speak to the topic.
add to this new global, if not US, competition from Nokia's new Symbian 3 smartphones and the iPhone's expansion to other US telcos, and Android's rapid growth is over. Android was filling the vacuum left by the obsolescence of WinMobile 6 and Symbian 2. now that is over.
but it will be fun to watch the fanDroids sneer at WP 7.
PS: it will not, however, make any money for MS. another no-profit product like the Zune and XBox.
They’re always changing. The loosening of the dev restrictions are natural just as I’m sure iAds won’t always be regulated to iOS apps if it takes off. This is how a smart company operates. Work with manageable chunks and expand in controlled way that are on your terms.
I thought of this the other day and while it’s somewhat semantics it’s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it’s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I’m talking about the AppleTV, I’m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn’t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
apple has in no way won the 'living room'. and they aren't going to with that lame apple tv that just came out. that was the biggest let down of the year.
watching the old 'think different' ad on youtube the other day, i realized that apple today is not counterculture, it isn't 'revolutionary' (in the way they portray it) and it is about as relevant as Paul Mccartney (you admire him for what he did in the past but he isn't really doing much except entertaining the old folks at this point).
i should add the young too. its the computer made by Disney....
And exactly how is this is different from Apple approved software on iOS devices?
I think it is exactly the same.
According to Apple's COO, Tim Cook, 80% of fortune 100 companies are using the iPhone and 50% are using the iPad. Would you consider that meaningful or just hot air?
I don't think there's enough information to know whether or not it's a meaningful figure. My own products are used somewhere in several Fortune 100 companies, but that's not really meaningful if they might have one or two units each company. There's no information telling us exactly how widespread the device is used.
I thought of this the other day and while it?s somewhat semantics it?s also a change in the way we use computers in the home so I think it?s relevant: Apple already owns the living room.
I?m talking about the AppleTV, I?m talking about iDevices like the iPhone, Touch and iPad being in the hands of people who are in the living room. What Apple hasn?t won is the TV or entertainment center in the living room.
That sounds contradictory to me. I gather that when most people say "the living room" in terms of electronics, they mean the TV and entertainment center. Rejiggering the meaning to also include iPad and iPhone smacks of newspeak to me.