And I'm supposed to believe in a company that believes that the "Ten Commandments" were actually real?
Im assuming that Motorola must be crazy enough to believe in a God, since they're going to need one when this product flops out onto an uninterested world.
You need to look at the difference between iPhone v1 and iPhone v4. Without any competition they wouldn't have pushed the platform as far and as quickly.
Same goes for the iPad.
For the iPhone that is a guess, not actual knowledge. Only Apple know what they would have done with the iPhone if there had been no competition.
And the iPad? It is unchanged since its introduction. The iOS has indeed been updated (once really) but again, we don't know its alternate development path if there had been no competition. We can speculate all we like, but again, only Apple know.
And what about the iPod touch? Ist, 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation evolution and as far as I'm aware (and I may well be mistaken) I'm not aware that there is any competition to a small, WiFi enabled, browser, mail and plenty of other apps equipped, music playing, camera carrying touch screen device that is not a phone ...
Of course vectors are better here but not this implementation. Look how slow it was in the demo. If they can't rasterize the vectors quickly enough for smooth panning and zooming, I'd take bitmaps any day. It's the experience that matters at the end of the day above all else.
the plus is that you can caches the vector data on the device more easily as it takes up much less space but it will probably come to other devices too. Google isn't going to stop other devices using vector-based maps and Apple will implement it better because they can ensure hardware-acceleration, which just won't be possible on low-spec Android devices.
I agree that the demo was highly unimpressive in terms of responsiveness, there was real lag there. However, let's be fair-minded and remember this is a product still in development with software still in development, perhaps when the dual-core Nvidia graphics card is working with the software better it will be more impressive...
...that said, a dual-core dedicated graphics chip lagging that badly...it's surprising. What will it be like on the lower-end devices with lesser GPUs?
This was an unimpressive video for a couple of reasons but the part I loved most was learning that Google themselves call their APIs 'fragments'!! How utterly ironic.
Some of you here really missed the point of the commercial.
First, it's aimed at the CES crowd, not the general consumer.
Next, the "insult" to Apple is not that bad. They acknowledge the strength of the iPad in the second line by "But it's a giant iPhone." Maybe a bit of a backhanded compliment to a phone OS being on a tablet computer....but worth 4 pages of defensive commentary?
Great post about what drives innovation, completely agreed. History is littered with great people who single-handedly turned around markets, invented things never thought possible, changed science and what we know about the world forever. Competition doesn't lead to innovation, but it does work the other way around I think: no competition stifles innovation.
Apple has been a pretty big force driving innovation in consumer electronics the last decade, but withOut competition, I'm not sure they would have brought so many good products to the market at the pace they have been.
If there is any company out there that should be walking with a swagger in its step and putting down its competitors in the press it should be that Schaumburg, IL based electronics company that's been in terminal decline for more than a decade.
It'll be interesting to see the tablet when they actually deliver it.
I thought it was a very creative Ad. Whether their tablet will be as good waits to be seen. In any case they don't look as stupid as msft and their iphone funeral.
I thought it was incredibly stupid. I also think that it's irrelevant. It's also not an "ad," it's a promotional teaser video. No one that matters will see it (e.g. actual consumers).
Saying the iPad is a giant iPhone is interesting ... that's sort of stange since the iPad is a tablet, it doesn't make cell phone calls, it's not marketed like phone, it's not called a phone, it wasn't designed to fit in your pocket like a phone (shall I continue?).
when the lady said there's only one button on the iPad, Rubin claimed "you still get a little lost".
What's this supposed to mean? LOL
He probably meant that if you have it in portrait mode, the button will be at the bottom, but if you rotate it, the button can move to the right/left or top so it's no longer where you may expect it to be.
I suspect that most people will only ever use two layouts though - I rarely rotate my iPhone clockwise unless I want to avoid the headphone getting in the way of my hand when I hold it.
Apple can get round this by making the bezel a touch strip and to go to the home screen, you would swipe right-to-left any edge. To go to the app switcher, you can swipe left-to-right or even double-tap. A long enough swipe won't be accidentally picked up and it means they don't have to design the bezel width on the button.
For the iPhone that is a guess, not actual knowledge.
Based on the experience of every other product I've ever worked on... when the competition is strong more effort is put into improving the product. When competition is absent feature lists tend to be pretty stagnant. Of course the iPhone could be a totally different case from every other product, but I doubt it.
Of course I'm only talking about the constant smaller innovations that incrementally improve a product. The "game changers" don't always seem to rely on competition, as you said.
XServer and the overall approach to that market. They basically offered one solution, of limited scope, and then sat on it for years. Then after years of neglect they drop the entire line.
2.
The original MBA. Again they sat on this model for years to the point it became a joke.
3.
The OS before Mac OS/X.
4.
The Mini. Apple has most certainly neglected this model from time to time throughout it's life.
In any event there are many examples of Apple neglecting or stagnating parts of it's lineup. Often to the detriment of those products, as we often see in these forums when ligitimate upgrades take far to long to arrive.
Comments
Im assuming that Motorola must be crazy enough to believe in a God, since they're going to need one when this product flops out onto an uninterested world.
If you only look at iPhone v1 perhaps.
You need to look at the difference between iPhone v1 and iPhone v4. Without any competition they wouldn't have pushed the platform as far and as quickly.
Same goes for the iPad.
For the iPhone that is a guess, not actual knowledge. Only Apple know what they would have done with the iPhone if there had been no competition.
And the iPad? It is unchanged since its introduction. The iOS has indeed been updated (once really) but again, we don't know its alternate development path if there had been no competition. We can speculate all we like, but again, only Apple know.
And what about the iPod touch? Ist, 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation evolution and as far as I'm aware (and I may well be mistaken) I'm not aware that there is any competition to a small, WiFi enabled, browser, mail and plenty of other apps equipped, music playing, camera carrying touch screen device that is not a phone ...
Of course vectors are better here but not this implementation. Look how slow it was in the demo. If they can't rasterize the vectors quickly enough for smooth panning and zooming, I'd take bitmaps any day. It's the experience that matters at the end of the day above all else.
the plus is that you can caches the vector data on the device more easily as it takes up much less space but it will probably come to other devices too. Google isn't going to stop other devices using vector-based maps and Apple will implement it better because they can ensure hardware-acceleration, which just won't be possible on low-spec Android devices.
I agree that the demo was highly unimpressive in terms of responsiveness, there was real lag there. However, let's be fair-minded and remember this is a product still in development with software still in development, perhaps when the dual-core Nvidia graphics card is working with the software better it will be more impressive...
...that said, a dual-core dedicated graphics chip lagging that badly...it's surprising. What will it be like on the lower-end devices with lesser GPUs?
This was an unimpressive video for a couple of reasons but the part I loved most was learning that Google themselves call their APIs 'fragments'!! How utterly ironic.
First, it's aimed at the CES crowd, not the general consumer.
Next, the "insult" to Apple is not that bad. They acknowledge the strength of the iPad in the second line by "But it's a giant iPhone." Maybe a bit of a backhanded compliment to a phone OS being on a tablet computer....but worth 4 pages of defensive commentary?
It's all in good fun. Relax. Geez.
Of course, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
LOL, nice one;-)
@KiltedGreen
Great post about what drives innovation, completely agreed. History is littered with great people who single-handedly turned around markets, invented things never thought possible, changed science and what we know about the world forever. Competition doesn't lead to innovation, but it does work the other way around I think: no competition stifles innovation.
Apple has been a pretty big force driving innovation in consumer electronics the last decade, but withOut competition, I'm not sure they would have brought so many good products to the market at the pace they have been.
It'll be interesting to see the tablet when they actually deliver it.
I thought it was a very creative Ad. Whether their tablet will be as good waits to be seen. In any case they don't look as stupid as msft and their iphone funeral.
I thought it was incredibly stupid. I also think that it's irrelevant. It's also not an "ad," it's a promotional teaser video. No one that matters will see it (e.g. actual consumers).
Motorola has already failed.
What's this supposed to mean? LOL
when the lady said there's only one button on the iPad, Rubin claimed "you still get a little lost".
What's this supposed to mean? LOL
He probably meant that if you have it in portrait mode, the button will be at the bottom, but if you rotate it, the button can move to the right/left or top so it's no longer where you may expect it to be.
I suspect that most people will only ever use two layouts though - I rarely rotate my iPhone clockwise unless I want to avoid the headphone getting in the way of my hand when I hold it.
Apple can get round this by making the bezel a touch strip and to go to the home screen, you would swipe right-to-left any edge. To go to the app switcher, you can swipe left-to-right or even double-tap. A long enough swipe won't be accidentally picked up and it means they don't have to design the bezel width on the button.
For the iPhone that is a guess, not actual knowledge.
Based on the experience of every other product I've ever worked on... when the competition is strong more effort is put into improving the product. When competition is absent feature lists tend to be pretty stagnant. Of course the iPhone could be a totally different case from every other product, but I doubt it.
Of course I'm only talking about the constant smaller innovations that incrementally improve a product. The "game changers" don't always seem to rely on competition, as you said.
Could you be more specific?
1.
XServer and the overall approach to that market. They basically offered one solution, of limited scope, and then sat on it for years. Then after years of neglect they drop the entire line.
2.
The original MBA. Again they sat on this model for years to the point it became a joke.
3.
The OS before Mac OS/X.
4.
The Mini. Apple has most certainly neglected this model from time to time throughout it's life.
In any event there are many examples of Apple neglecting or stagnating parts of it's lineup. Often to the detriment of those products, as we often see in these forums when ligitimate upgrades take far to long to arrive.