You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
Apple could make a huge improvements the whole car experience. Imagine an Apple interface in your car. You know it would be so simple to use and yet do all the things you want (well, after drawn out updates dripped to you). But you know it would be great.
Hah! I will never ever buy a Ford again simply because they have this dated clunky system that they proudly proclaim is "Powered by Microsoft." What happens when you get the BSOD in the middle some strange city and you make the wrong turn that takes through your worst nightmare of hoods and gangsters patrolling their 'hood.
Since the iPad was a revolutionary form factor for a Tablet...
No.
It was certainly not the so-called form factor (what an overused and often wrongly-used term). It was the revolutionary design of the entire package. That included the size, shape, mass, and the software running the whole thing.
[New year's Resolution for everyone in the tech sector: Limit the use of such tired and overused terms as "form factor," "price point," and "curated" for 2011. Nobody ever used the term "curated" until Jobs did in some announcement last year, then suddenly it was the buzzword du jour and every tech blogger absolutely had to figure out how to insert it (99% of the time incorrectly) into their writings. A price point is a specific and limiting term not to be confused with "price" or "cost." If you have a form factor, what other factors are involved? All it is is a shape, the dimensions, the case design, any number of decent English words will more accurately describe what it is you're talking about.]
By mid 2011, there should be a plethora of knock-off "also-rans" running Android, Windows 7, WebOS, WP7 to compete with the PlayBook for the scheissegeist of the tablet marketplace.
"Scheißegeist"? Shit-spirit? Now that's rich! Dick's admirable contribution to our lexicon (along with infostructure). Thanks for the laughs, Dick!
Limit the use of such tired and overused terms as "form factor," "price point," and "curated" for 2011.]
The madame curated her product, I then chose a form factor and we agreed upon a price point.
In all seriousness, I think price point is used correctly and don’t know of better terms to describe the price that is set for a particular item to maximize its marketability, and ultimately its total profit. Form factor can depend on the usage. Sure, they’re all flat with side mostly a display, but the form extends beyond that generalization. And I don’t recall curated being used, of which I’m glad as it does seem like an odd term.
Good ideas...jpell, but I must have spent a $100 just on three different docks for my iPhone 1, 2 for the 3Gs and now the iPhone 4's shape. I decided not buy a dock for the iPhone 4. But I fear it will be similar with the iPad....The second gen iPad will no doubt, be thinner....
But I would rather have an iPad on the center console than any of the current screens. I was looking to replace my Jag XK8 a couple of years ago and the $90,000 car's BT could not handle an iPhone.
You're worried about a hundred bux when you're in the market for $90K car with a cheapo battery? I've got a ten-year-old RAV4 ($10K then) whose battery nicely handles two iPods, an iPhone, a GPS and a AA battery charger for my camera. Of course I can't turn on the headlights and the A/C doesn't cool things off very well....
The madame curated her product, I then chose a form factor and we agreed upon a price point.
Hey Soli - points extremely well taken and explained! and thanks for taking me down a peg or two. I just tend to get pedantic at times and vent on these forums.
"Steve Jobs had said Apple wouldn't be making phones?
The title of the article is:
"Steve Jobs: No Tablet, No PDA, No Cell Phone, Lots Of iPods?
You?re inferring that ?No Cell Phones? means no cell phones forever-and-ever-and-ever, when Jobs clearly stated solid reasons why they choose the iPod over other handheld devices.
Here are those reasons, per the article you linked:
"I get a lot of pressure to do a PDA. What people really seem to want to do with these is get the data out . We believe cell phones are going to carry this information. We didn't think we'd do well in the cell phone business. What we've done instead is we've written what we think is some of the best software in the world to start syncing information between devices. We believe that mode is what cell phones need to get to. We chose to do the iPod instead of a PDA."
Let?s recap:
He didn?t want to do a PDA and didn?t.
It?s 2003, so what OS would they use for a 33MHz(?) ARMv4(?) phone? What data was around in 2003 to make it viable? They just released Safari 1.0 that year. Where are the capacitance touchscreens? So saying they wouldn?t do well in that market with none of the things they needed in 2007 is prudent.
They wrote software for a PMP that had a clickwheel, monochrome display and did a simple task well. Note the usage of ?that mode? referring to the mode of syncing your cellphone like an iPod, so they clearly had ideas for it if this still tiny iPod market and iTunes as a digital hub actually panned out.
So again, what part of that is Jobs, in 2003, statements mention they?ll never make a cell phone of any kind, at any time in the future. Zero!
"the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it," the post read.
What does that mean? The phone was battery with a tiny logic board attached"
These RIM people are morons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
An alleged former employee of Research in Motion has revealed that RIM was incredulous over the original iPhone when Apple first unveiled the smartphone in January of 2007, according to a new report.
The BlackBerry maker reportedly held multiple "all-hands meetings" the day after the first-generation iPhone was announced, MacNN reports.
According to Shacknews poster Kentor, employees at RIM and Microsoft were "utterly shocked" by the iPhone. RIM was allegedly "in denial" about the iPhone, claiming "it couldn't do what they were demonstrating without an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life, etc" Kentor wrote.
"Imagine their surprise when they disassembled an iPhone for the first time and found that the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it," the post read.
Apple introduced the revolutionary mobile phone on January 9, 2007. At the time, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs asserted that the smartphone was "literally five years ahead of any other mobile phone."
RIM has struggled to keep up with the iPhone's tremendous growth. During an earnings call in October, Jobs announced that Apple had passed RIM in units sold. "I don't see them catching up with us in the foreseeable future."
Verbal shots have been fired between the two companies' CEOs as the rivalry between Apple and RIM has increased. Most recently, RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie asserted that RIM, with its unreleased PlayBook tablet, was "way ahead" of Apple and its iPad. Though the BlackBerry maker beat Wall Street estimates with its latest quarterly earnings, the company also announced that it will no longer reveal new subscriber numbers, which have slowed in recent quarters.
According to RIM co-CEO Mike Lazaridis, the PlayBook tablet OS will "set up BlackBerry for the next decade." Earlier this month, Lazaridis revealed in an interview that the QNX-based tablet OS will eventually be used in multi-core BlackBerry smartphones.
Sales of the BlackBerry Torch, RIM's answer to the iPhone, have been steady, but the device has failed to gain the traction that Apple's smartphone has established.
Comments
You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
Apple could make a huge improvements the whole car experience. Imagine an Apple interface in your car. You know it would be so simple to use and yet do all the things you want (well, after drawn out updates dripped to you). But you know it would be great.
Hah! I will never ever buy a Ford again simply because they have this dated clunky system that they proudly proclaim is "Powered by Microsoft." What happens when you get the BSOD in the middle some strange city and you make the wrong turn that takes through your worst nightmare of hoods and gangsters patrolling their 'hood.
Since the iPad was a revolutionary form factor for a Tablet...
No.
It was certainly not the so-called form factor (what an overused and often wrongly-used term). It was the revolutionary design of the entire package. That included the size, shape, mass, and the software running the whole thing.
[New year's Resolution for everyone in the tech sector: Limit the use of such tired and overused terms as "form factor," "price point," and "curated" for 2011. Nobody ever used the term "curated" until Jobs did in some announcement last year, then suddenly it was the buzzword du jour and every tech blogger absolutely had to figure out how to insert it (99% of the time incorrectly) into their writings. A price point is a specific and limiting term not to be confused with "price" or "cost." If you have a form factor, what other factors are involved? All it is is a shape, the dimensions, the case design, any number of decent English words will more accurately describe what it is you're talking about.]
By mid 2011, there should be a plethora of knock-off "also-rans" running Android, Windows 7, WebOS, WP7 to compete with the PlayBook for the scheissegeist of the tablet marketplace.
"Scheißegeist"? Shit-spirit? Now that's rich! Dick's admirable contribution to our lexicon (along with infostructure). Thanks for the laughs, Dick!
What's this: "4Hautarztin"
Limit the use of such tired and overused terms as "form factor," "price point," and "curated" for 2011.]
The madame curated her product, I then chose a form factor and we agreed upon a price point.
In all seriousness, I think price point is used correctly and don’t know of better terms to describe the price that is set for a particular item to maximize its marketability, and ultimately its total profit. Form factor can depend on the usage. Sure, they’re all flat with side mostly a display, but the form extends beyond that generalization. And I don’t recall curated being used, of which I’m glad as it does seem like an odd term.
Good ideas...jpell, but I must have spent a $100 just on three different docks for my iPhone 1, 2 for the 3Gs and now the iPhone 4's shape. I decided not buy a dock for the iPhone 4. But I fear it will be similar with the iPad....The second gen iPad will no doubt, be thinner....
But I would rather have an iPad on the center console than any of the current screens. I was looking to replace my Jag XK8 a couple of years ago and the $90,000 car's BT could not handle an iPhone.
You're worried about a hundred bux when you're in the market for $90K car with a cheapo battery? I've got a ten-year-old RAV4 ($10K then) whose battery nicely handles two iPods, an iPhone, a GPS and a AA battery charger for my camera. Of course I can't turn on the headlights and the A/C doesn't cool things off very well....
The madame curated her product, I then chose a form factor and we agreed upon a price point.
Hey Soli - points extremely well taken and explained!
deleted
deleted
But even if this weren't four years late, Steve Jobs had said Apple wouldn't be making phones, so how could it be in any way newsworthy that someone simply believed that?
Must be another slow news day at AI....
A little reading comprehension, please.
You wrote:The title of the article is:You?re inferring that ?No Cell Phones? means no cell phones forever-and-ever-and-ever, when Jobs clearly stated solid reasons why they choose the iPod over other handheld devices.
Here are those reasons, per the article you linked: Let?s recap:
- He didn?t want to do a PDA and didn?t.
- It?s 2003, so what OS would they use for a 33MHz(?) ARMv4(?) phone? What data was around in 2003 to make it viable? They just released Safari 1.0 that year. Where are the capacitance touchscreens? So saying they wouldn?t do well in that market with none of the things they needed in 2007 is prudent.
- They wrote software for a PMP that had a clickwheel, monochrome display and did a simple task well. Note the usage of ?that mode? referring to the mode of syncing your cellphone like an iPod, so they clearly had ideas for it if this still tiny iPod market and iTunes as a digital hub actually panned out.
So again, what part of that is Jobs, in 2003, statements mention they?ll never make a cell phone of any kind, at any time in the future. Zero!What does that mean? The phone was battery with a tiny logic board attached"
These RIM people are morons.
An alleged former employee of Research in Motion has revealed that RIM was incredulous over the original iPhone when Apple first unveiled the smartphone in January of 2007, according to a new report.
The BlackBerry maker reportedly held multiple "all-hands meetings" the day after the first-generation iPhone was announced, MacNN reports.
According to Shacknews poster Kentor, employees at RIM and Microsoft were "utterly shocked" by the iPhone. RIM was allegedly "in denial" about the iPhone, claiming "it couldn't do what they were demonstrating without an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life, etc" Kentor wrote.
"Imagine their surprise when they disassembled an iPhone for the first time and found that the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it," the post read.
Apple introduced the revolutionary mobile phone on January 9, 2007. At the time, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs asserted that the smartphone was "literally five years ahead of any other mobile phone."
RIM has struggled to keep up with the iPhone's tremendous growth. During an earnings call in October, Jobs announced that Apple had passed RIM in units sold. "I don't see them catching up with us in the foreseeable future."
Verbal shots have been fired between the two companies' CEOs as the rivalry between Apple and RIM has increased. Most recently, RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie asserted that RIM, with its unreleased PlayBook tablet, was "way ahead" of Apple and its iPad. Though the BlackBerry maker beat Wall Street estimates with its latest quarterly earnings, the company also announced that it will no longer reveal new subscriber numbers, which have slowed in recent quarters.
According to RIM co-CEO Mike Lazaridis, the PlayBook tablet OS will "set up BlackBerry for the next decade." Earlier this month, Lazaridis revealed in an interview that the QNX-based tablet OS will eventually be used in multi-core BlackBerry smartphones.
Sales of the BlackBerry Torch, RIM's answer to the iPhone, have been steady, but the device has failed to gain the traction that Apple's smartphone has established.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]