i'm saying that as mobile devices mature MS doesn't have to follow the same path as Apple. they can just take the full Windows OS which starting with 7/2008 R2 is very modular and UNIX like and put it on a mobile device with minimal development effort. they already have experience with the x-box which uses a lot of code from the main Windows OS. starting back in 2002 MS has had a secret project to rewrite Windows almost from scratch and make it more modular.
same as Windows 95 and NT4. with the Pentium CPU Intel had a nice chip to run Windows and that's when it took off.
the A4 has around 260 million transistors. not sure if it includes the PowerVR. the new i core CPU's are at a billion and that includes the IGP.
Well, they "could" do all that, but given how easy it apparently is, why haven't they already? And how is that different from what Apple has already done, in moving OS X to iOS by taking advantage of OS X's modularity?
And that still doesn't address the real issue, which is that "full Windows" on mobile devices has been around for years as Windows Tablets, and it never caught on because the UI is ill suited for touch.
The fact is that full Windows is built on a bunch of UI paradigms that are touch hostile, and to make a viable mobile Windows MS would have to go beyond the bolt on stuff they've done to date and make a Touch Windows that feels designed from the ground up. Modularity and ease of portability aren't really the problem.
Which is precisely what Apple has done with OS X/iOS, which is why I'm not getting your "MS can go its own way" argument. The issue isn't that iOS is some kind of crippled baby OS and if MS could unleash the full might of "Windows" on mobile it would have a strong competitor. iOS is exactly as much of OS X as makes sense for the form factor and can easily scale to utilize more powerful hardware. There's no reason to think iOS won't be every bit as capable as today's Mac in a year or two. OTOH MS could put stock Windows on a phone today and it would be horrible unless they figure out how to make it at least as touch friendly as their Windows Phone 7 OS. The very existence of which is a whole other wrinkle.
1) I don?t think they ever said a word why MMS wasn?t there. I have to assume it was something contractual with AT&T. If true, that sucks but they were also the carrier that allowed the iPhone to take root and make every other cellphone better for consumers because of it so any short-term quirky network reasons AT&T had I consider it the less of two evils. Or it could be that Apple just didn?t care. Meaning they focused on things that were more important to them, like building a new QuickTime framework, getting a mobile version of Safari that would be useful, etc.
Apple and AT&T were no longer sharing revenue for sold iPhones at that time, they wouldn't have been hinged on AT&T contract obligations by then. The original iPhone and the iPhone 3G have the exact same hardware minus a 3G radio and the different baseband for it. There is absolutely no reason the original iPhone couldn't have MMS especially since SwirlyMMS made it not only possible but it worked just fine on either hardware. To get that ability you had to upgrade so it's easily possible it was in conjuction with AT&T's failure, but what about the rest of the world? Why were they left out? AT&T was at fault for not having it available at launch, but saying it couldn't be done and leaving the feature out is a slap in the face for the original iPhone owners. Easiest way to get it? Buy a new handset that had no hardware speed improvements, only a radio upgrade. That's deliberately withholding features to sell new hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
2) The wallpapers you added to your iPhone 3G wasn?t the same that Apple has on theres. There is actually quite a bit going on there. Sure, they could have made it simple like the JB apps but this is Apple we?re talking about. They either do it the right way or not at all. Which of those apps are adding the drop shadows to the text and icons? The iPhone 3G with 128MB RAM was already hurting enough on 4.0 without adding to it.
How is it different? What's different about Apple's implementation versus the jailbreak one? If it worked with a jailbreak tweak perfectly fine, then why couldn't Apple do the same? I had BossPaper rotating backgrounds, long before Apple decided to include a picture background, with minimal performance lag. Not just one simple static image, rotating images from a local folder. The only way to get that feature, upgrade. Buy new hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
3) Game Center isn?t on the 3G and FaceTime isn?t on the 3G or 3GS. Your expectations that every feature should be available is erroneous. Unless you have stats of how much RAM and stability data you can?t really say that they were wrong. Your assumption that it?s to sell new iPhones is also ignoring that you got an update at all. The Sony Xperia with Android 2.1 that came out 6 months ago in August is officially not getting an update. IOW, Apple has no requirement to have giving your 3G an update and based on how poorly 4.0 ran on many of them even with resource heavy features removed I say they should just reduce it to only the previous model if users are feeling an entitlement with a 3 generation old device.
I've never said that FaceTime should be included on the 3G and 3GS. The reason it's not is obvious, there's no camera on the front. That is a legtimite hardware upgrade feature, not what they've done with the other gripes I've had. I don't expect them to include something that depends solely on the hardware having it. I can see Game Center sucking up performance when logging an achievement, it stutters on my iPhone 4 (very rarely anyway, and only when I'm stuck on EDGE) when the popup drops down to say welcome back, but not having the basic app can't be that big a performance hit. I don't see how anyway. It's just another app that connects to a network and it doesn't have to be running when you are playing a game. The achievements can be logged and not written until after the app is closed, or even have a switch in settings not to log in as soon as you start a game. Hell almost half of my games aren't showing the things I've completed anyway, so I guess it's still broken. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems that Game Center isn't a very hardware intensive app to not include. 4.0 quibbles aside of course, heard horror stories about how bad it was on a 3G, but Apple should be better at that. After all, it isn't uncommon for them to remove features in the middle of a hardware refresh. I don't believe that every generation of handsets needs every feature, Apple has withheld features that work perfectly fine on previous gen hardware for no reason other than 'it's not done right' or 'we aren't happy with the way we have gotten it to work'. Jailbreak tweaks are proof that it does work and pretty well at that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
4) As previous stated, MS isn?t having to figure out the logistics of cut/copy/paste the way Apple did. Those silly comments people made that it?s been around for decades and all you need are a clipboard are asinine. Even the first iOS App Store developer that created an app that allowed for it stated that Apple would have a much harder time of it since it would have to be universal to the OS, not something that could alter between apps. Again, Android still doesn?t have it figured out.
Starting over from scratch on a mobile OS and rapidly updating it rather than waiting 2 years isn't that bad to me. They are already moving on performance increases and feature additions and it's been out since the end of October. They could follow Apples pattern and wait until end of 2012 to do so. WP7 is damn near completely different presentation wise than any other mobile OS out there and it's a great 1.0 release after the misery that was Windows Mobile. I'd say they are doing a pretty good job so far.An Android is pretty crappy all around to me, I agree on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
5) You?re again ignoring that MS had touch-based mobile OSes with cut/copy/paste for many, many years and now they release a new version without it and yet you aren?t saying MS held off on this feature so they can sell more WP7 licenses a year later. In fact, you?ve completely ignored MS coming in years later, covering no new ground, having this be an extension of WinCE at the foundation, but Apple starting from scratch was holding out the whole time. Do you realize how that makes you look?
Proof they are going to charge you again to update for the features when they hit? Proof MS is going to charge you to update to a point release to get them on your fancy new phone? Proof it's going to require a whole new hardware change to get them? WP7 hasn't shown any indication of needing a whole new HTC handset to get this feature. Not one tech site I've seen has stated that MS is going to wait until October 2011 to implement these features and require that you buy new hardware to get them. Apple has done this with MMS, with Game Center and wallpapers. Game Center is probably the exception but the MMS is BS because there was no hardware improvement and wallpapers work just fine on the 3G if Apple would care to make it work like jailbreakers did. Three things that Apple has done that MS is showing absolutely no signs of doing themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
6) Apple has never led any pack on having the most features. If you judge CE by the length of the spec sheet then no Apple product will ever be for you. I bet you are crying foul on Apple for talking up Safari on the iPhone and yet it?s still the best mobile browser I?ve used. Scrolling, tap to zoom, etc. But hey, phones had WAP browsers before the iPhone came along so they get no credit for releasing something that technically existed on some level.
Mobile Safari is by far and away the best browser. Far and away. I have no qualms with that at all, nor do I find and fault with the touchscreen performance of any iPhone. I've said nothing that would indicate I don't like Safari, all I've said is that Apple was missing basic features from the start and every one of them being released coincided with new hardware releases. WP7 is a fresh start and they are rapidly updating it unlike Apple. That's all I'm getting at. You can't fault one and not the other, especially when the development cycle was so slow and without reason on Apples side. I applaud Apple for iOS, it's fantastic. But there are a few features it does need, better notifications for one, and it's matured massively over the 4 years it's been around. Still needs some improvements that don't necessarily require new hardware to achieve.
Quite a few of those features had been done just fine by jailbreakers long before Apple did them and they worked just fine. We still can't set SMS tones, still can't do bluetooth file transfer (pictures, docs), still can't set received email tones, still can't use it as an external disk. Jailbreakers can and there is absolutely no reason stock iPhones can't other than what I suspect is brand recognition. Apple seems to want everyone to know you have an iPhone when the 'ding ding' chime sounds when you recieve a text or email. Nearly every story/article I read was flabbergasted that the new text tones were way too long and way too lame to use. Why is Apple holding out on this? I suspect again that it's brand recognition. There can't be any other reasonable explanation for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I truncated your post there. I think a half-dozen body slams is enough.
Same to you I think I provided enough proof on my own considering all the gripes I've got are fixed, and very well done, by jailbreaking with absolute minimal impact to performance, and without buying new hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism;1779338PS
PS: I?m a fan of WP7 and think MS is doing a great job with it, but your claims that Apple is lying with no proof to back it up and common sense refute your claims, well I just can?t let that slide.
If you've ever jailbroken an iPhone that's all the proof you'd need that Apple is withholding features to get you to upgrade. I think either you've never jailbroken an iPhone or been around someone that has to improve the experience, your common sense argument and proof argument would probably change. I think WP7 is a great mobile OS that needs improving, and I think the same of iOS. iOS is by far and away the best mobile OS and Apple has done great things with it but to criticize WP7 for missing features from an OS written from scratch is not fair to iOS either. They were missing basic features that handsets that weren't touchscreen and fancy had for years. I'm saying that if people are going to hold WP7's feet to the fire then the same needs to be done to iOS. That's all.
I love my iPhone 4, it's the best hardware on the market right now by a long shot, the OS needs improving and it will be improved. But until then I'll be a jailbreaker to have things like biteSMS with quick replying, my own SMS and email tones so I know that it's my phone making a noise, SBSettings to quickly change various things and having disk storage among many others. All improvements that don't necessarily fit every users need but they fit mine. Can't wait to see what Apple does about the extremely stupid notification system though. Unfortunately that can't be fixed by jailbreaking.
The previous claim that it would outsell the iPad look to be correct, and by a large margin.
It's still slightly false though. Apple was selling a $500+ tablet to people without one, Microsoft was selling a $150 accessory to a games console with 50 million owners. It would be like Apple selling a $150 10" screen to the 100 million iPhone/iPod users.
The Kinect sales however are still good at 8 million and they have made a great piece of hardware, designed and marketed well. It just won't make much profit.
I think Microsoft have done ok in some recent endeavours but they should have been doing it years ago. The people running the show are old, tired and desperate for relevance.
It's still slightly false though. Apple was selling a $500+ tablet to people without one, Microsoft was selling a $150 accessory to a games console with 50 million owners. It would be like Apple selling a $150 10" screen to the 100 million iPhone/iPod users.
The Kinect sales however are still good at 8 million and they have made a great piece of hardware, designed and marketed well. It just won't make much profit.
I think Microsoft have done ok in some recent endeavours but they should have been doing it years ago. The people running the show are old, tired and desperate for relevance.
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect. They made a wild claim about unit sales and they actually met it. I guess we could compare it to the AppleTV which is in the living room, it an accessory device for a TV, and costs ⅔ of the Kinect but that wouldn?t have served MS? purpose as well, and it makes the achievement seem even smaller despite outselling the AppleTV by 8x despite the AppleTV sales are for a 50% longer duration. MS did good with the Kinect.
Apple and AT&T were no longer sharing revenue for sold iPhones at that time, they wouldn't have been hinged on AT&T contract obligations by then.
Well, since Apple ended the profit sharing I guess that means there has been no contract for the past 3 years¡
Quote:
The original iPhone and the iPhone 3G have the exact same hardware minus a 3G radio and the different baseband for it.
Take a look at their logic boards. The whole thing was redesigned. Even the model number on the CPUs are different even though they were the same type of chip.
Take a look at their logic boards. The whole thing was redesigned. Even the model number on the CPUs are different even though they were the same type of chip.
Doesn't matter how they fit in the case if it's the exact same hardware with different numbers or different packaging, they are still exactly the same performance wise. Since the chips were the same, which they were down to the CPU/GPU/RAM, how does that mean the 3G with it's renumbered chips had the horsepower and the 2G didn't? Answer: it didn't.
Way to miss the part that states "New Agreement With Apple?. So again, where is the part that says there has been no contract with Apple since both agreed to eliminate profit sharing.
Quote:
Doesn't matter how they fit in the case if it's the exact same hardware with different numbers or different packaging, they are still exactly the same performance wise. Since the chips were the same, which they were down to the CPU/GPU/RAM, how does that mean the 3G with it's renumbered chips had the horsepower and the 2G didn't? Answer: it didn't.
So they had same CPU clock speed and RAM, You really should look up what the word exact means, especially when you?re referencing the entirety of a device, not one or two aspects of it.
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect. They made a wild claim about unit sales and they actually met it. I guess we could compare it to the AppleTV which is in the living room, it an accessory device for a TV, and costs ⅔ of the Kinect but that wouldn?t have served MS? purpose as well, and it makes the achievement seem even smaller despite outselling the AppleTV by 8x despite the AppleTV sales are for a 50% longer duration. MS did good with the Kinect.
I agree mostly... Remember though that Kinect is bundled with the Xbox in one of two Xbox models offered (Xbox360 4GB with Kinect).
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect.
The falseness is in the importance of the sales. If I sell a computer mouse at a break-even price of $50, does it have any relevance to selling a profitable $99 video streaming box? It's a different market with different demands and different price points and different manufacturing costs and yields.
It was an off-the-cuff remark by Kudo Tsunoda who gets upset by the amount of coverage Apple's products get in the media. As a form of vindication, he used a false comparison between different products to say 'yay, we beat Apple in sales'.
I don't really think it was a serious remark though. It's just one of those types of comments that seems to be an important statement in the context of the great Apple vs Microsoft war.
If he wasn't an Apple hater, he would have said 'Kinect sales will blow away the PS3 Move', as that is their direct competitor but he knew it wouldn't. Sony sold around the same amount albeit over a longer period of time and that's even despite Sony's product looking like a giant dildo.
For tablets I would expect MS to have WP7 for tablets by next CES, if not earlier.
Do you mean WP7 ported to tablet or Windows 8 on ARM with a WP7 shell? I think it would be really interesting if they released a WP7 tablet port... but I have a feeling CE is dead (or dying).
Which brings me to...
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
PS: I wonder if Win8 on ARM may indicate MS is planning to use the same kernel across the board for smartphones, tablets, desktops, servers.
I think that might be what they are aiming for. Don't forget the next Xbox though. For various reasons I stated in an earlier post I think the Xbox is a major platform for Microsoft (at least in the consumer space) and they see it - and are treating it - more like a living room entertainment hub than a games console.
Way to miss the part that states "New Agreement With Apple”. So again, where is the part that says there has been no contract with Apple since both agreed to eliminate profit sharing.
Way to miss the part where I didn't say there was no contract between to two. I stated that since profit sharing was gone, which is a huge deal, they didn't seem to big on what AT&T was wanting contract wise. By that point Apple and AT&T were at odds, and it was known. There is nothing there to indicate anything that would prevent Apple from including MMS features in every phone model at that time due to what AT&T said contractually. They didn't provide that on networks that weren't AT&T worldwide and they could handle that feature if AT&T's failure is the reason why it wasn't introduced from the get go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
So they had same CPU clock speed and RAM, You really should look up what the word exact means, especially when you’re referencing the entirety of a device, not one or two aspects of it.
Why am I even bothering.
So having the same CPU, the same GPU, and the same amount of RAM isn't exactly the same hardware? Maybe you should look up common sense. Having the same core hardware arranged in a different orientation is still exactly the same hardware. The chip maker Apple used for the 2g's radio said themselves there was no limitation on MMS functionality hardware wise (it was down to software) compared to the 3G's radio and it worked just fine with the 2G. Tell me, how does a different shaped contour on the back make the 3G magically able to do things that the 2G couldn't do? The shape of the phone doesn't make any difference, the internals do. It would have been slower over EDGE, and where I live that's all I get and it works perfectly fine, not because it isn't capable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
Quit while you're ahead before you get dragged down into HKZ's intellectual mud.
I've provided facts in rebuttal to saying that Apple said it wasn't possible to do what in fact can be done and very well at that. All of the things that couldn't be done were somehow possible when 'new' hardware came out. I'm not stupid, the majority believes that what Apple says it the truth and it's not. I'm sorry if I don't blindly believe everything that Apple PR says and I'm sorry if the facts fly in the face of PR speak.
Why are people so obsessed with MS making a tablet os as if the future of the company depends on it. There aim is to get windows into everything literally everything! Even if it doesn't have a screen there's a version for it. Think cars, tvs, petrol pumps, ticket machines, screens at bus stops telling you when the next bus will come. Did you know there's even a version of the .net framework that's small enough to fit in a digitol watch! A tablet is just one product, its an important one but given you can already get a tablet for £99 the revenue for just doing the os might not be that big.
I agree mostly... Remember though that Kinect is bundled with the Xbox in one of two Xbox models offered (Xbox360 4GB with Kinect).
Exactly. Imagine if Apple offered an iPad/Apple TV bundle. Does anyone think that would not boost Apple TV sales? But why are we comparing Apple TV to the 360/Kinect anyway? Just because they both exist "in the living room"?
Comments
PS: I wonder if Win8 on ARM may indicate MS is planning to use the same kernel across the board for smartphones, tablets, desktops, servers.
I think this is exactly what MS will do.
From what I've seen I agree that WP7 is nice. I'd take it over Android, which my wife already has.
i'm saying that as mobile devices mature MS doesn't have to follow the same path as Apple. they can just take the full Windows OS which starting with 7/2008 R2 is very modular and UNIX like and put it on a mobile device with minimal development effort. they already have experience with the x-box which uses a lot of code from the main Windows OS. starting back in 2002 MS has had a secret project to rewrite Windows almost from scratch and make it more modular.
same as Windows 95 and NT4. with the Pentium CPU Intel had a nice chip to run Windows and that's when it took off.
the A4 has around 260 million transistors. not sure if it includes the PowerVR. the new i core CPU's are at a billion and that includes the IGP.
Well, they "could" do all that, but given how easy it apparently is, why haven't they already? And how is that different from what Apple has already done, in moving OS X to iOS by taking advantage of OS X's modularity?
And that still doesn't address the real issue, which is that "full Windows" on mobile devices has been around for years as Windows Tablets, and it never caught on because the UI is ill suited for touch.
The fact is that full Windows is built on a bunch of UI paradigms that are touch hostile, and to make a viable mobile Windows MS would have to go beyond the bolt on stuff they've done to date and make a Touch Windows that feels designed from the ground up. Modularity and ease of portability aren't really the problem.
Which is precisely what Apple has done with OS X/iOS, which is why I'm not getting your "MS can go its own way" argument. The issue isn't that iOS is some kind of crippled baby OS and if MS could unleash the full might of "Windows" on mobile it would have a strong competitor. iOS is exactly as much of OS X as makes sense for the form factor and can easily scale to utilize more powerful hardware. There's no reason to think iOS won't be every bit as capable as today's Mac in a year or two. OTOH MS could put stock Windows on a phone today and it would be horrible unless they figure out how to make it at least as touch friendly as their Windows Phone 7 OS. The very existence of which is a whole other wrinkle.
1) I don?t think they ever said a word why MMS wasn?t there. I have to assume it was something contractual with AT&T. If true, that sucks but they were also the carrier that allowed the iPhone to take root and make every other cellphone better for consumers because of it so any short-term quirky network reasons AT&T had I consider it the less of two evils. Or it could be that Apple just didn?t care. Meaning they focused on things that were more important to them, like building a new QuickTime framework, getting a mobile version of Safari that would be useful, etc.
Apple and AT&T were no longer sharing revenue for sold iPhones at that time, they wouldn't have been hinged on AT&T contract obligations by then. The original iPhone and the iPhone 3G have the exact same hardware minus a 3G radio and the different baseband for it. There is absolutely no reason the original iPhone couldn't have MMS especially since SwirlyMMS made it not only possible but it worked just fine on either hardware. To get that ability you had to upgrade so it's easily possible it was in conjuction with AT&T's failure, but what about the rest of the world? Why were they left out? AT&T was at fault for not having it available at launch, but saying it couldn't be done and leaving the feature out is a slap in the face for the original iPhone owners. Easiest way to get it? Buy a new handset that had no hardware speed improvements, only a radio upgrade. That's deliberately withholding features to sell new hardware.
2) The wallpapers you added to your iPhone 3G wasn?t the same that Apple has on theres. There is actually quite a bit going on there. Sure, they could have made it simple like the JB apps but this is Apple we?re talking about. They either do it the right way or not at all. Which of those apps are adding the drop shadows to the text and icons? The iPhone 3G with 128MB RAM was already hurting enough on 4.0 without adding to it.
How is it different? What's different about Apple's implementation versus the jailbreak one? If it worked with a jailbreak tweak perfectly fine, then why couldn't Apple do the same? I had BossPaper rotating backgrounds, long before Apple decided to include a picture background, with minimal performance lag. Not just one simple static image, rotating images from a local folder. The only way to get that feature, upgrade. Buy new hardware.
3) Game Center isn?t on the 3G and FaceTime isn?t on the 3G or 3GS. Your expectations that every feature should be available is erroneous. Unless you have stats of how much RAM and stability data you can?t really say that they were wrong. Your assumption that it?s to sell new iPhones is also ignoring that you got an update at all. The Sony Xperia with Android 2.1 that came out 6 months ago in August is officially not getting an update. IOW, Apple has no requirement to have giving your 3G an update and based on how poorly 4.0 ran on many of them even with resource heavy features removed I say they should just reduce it to only the previous model if users are feeling an entitlement with a 3 generation old device.
I've never said that FaceTime should be included on the 3G and 3GS. The reason it's not is obvious, there's no camera on the front. That is a legtimite hardware upgrade feature, not what they've done with the other gripes I've had. I don't expect them to include something that depends solely on the hardware having it. I can see Game Center sucking up performance when logging an achievement, it stutters on my iPhone 4 (very rarely anyway, and only when I'm stuck on EDGE) when the popup drops down to say welcome back, but not having the basic app can't be that big a performance hit. I don't see how anyway. It's just another app that connects to a network and it doesn't have to be running when you are playing a game. The achievements can be logged and not written until after the app is closed, or even have a switch in settings not to log in as soon as you start a game. Hell almost half of my games aren't showing the things I've completed anyway, so I guess it's still broken. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems that Game Center isn't a very hardware intensive app to not include. 4.0 quibbles aside of course, heard horror stories about how bad it was on a 3G, but Apple should be better at that. After all, it isn't uncommon for them to remove features in the middle of a hardware refresh. I don't believe that every generation of handsets needs every feature, Apple has withheld features that work perfectly fine on previous gen hardware for no reason other than 'it's not done right' or 'we aren't happy with the way we have gotten it to work'. Jailbreak tweaks are proof that it does work and pretty well at that.
4) As previous stated, MS isn?t having to figure out the logistics of cut/copy/paste the way Apple did. Those silly comments people made that it?s been around for decades and all you need are a clipboard are asinine. Even the first iOS App Store developer that created an app that allowed for it stated that Apple would have a much harder time of it since it would have to be universal to the OS, not something that could alter between apps. Again, Android still doesn?t have it figured out.
Starting over from scratch on a mobile OS and rapidly updating it rather than waiting 2 years isn't that bad to me. They are already moving on performance increases and feature additions and it's been out since the end of October. They could follow Apples pattern and wait until end of 2012 to do so. WP7 is damn near completely different presentation wise than any other mobile OS out there and it's a great 1.0 release after the misery that was Windows Mobile. I'd say they are doing a pretty good job so far.An Android is pretty crappy all around to me, I agree on that.
5) You?re again ignoring that MS had touch-based mobile OSes with cut/copy/paste for many, many years and now they release a new version without it and yet you aren?t saying MS held off on this feature so they can sell more WP7 licenses a year later. In fact, you?ve completely ignored MS coming in years later, covering no new ground, having this be an extension of WinCE at the foundation, but Apple starting from scratch was holding out the whole time. Do you realize how that makes you look?
Proof they are going to charge you again to update for the features when they hit? Proof MS is going to charge you to update to a point release to get them on your fancy new phone? Proof it's going to require a whole new hardware change to get them? WP7 hasn't shown any indication of needing a whole new HTC handset to get this feature. Not one tech site I've seen has stated that MS is going to wait until October 2011 to implement these features and require that you buy new hardware to get them. Apple has done this with MMS, with Game Center and wallpapers. Game Center is probably the exception but the MMS is BS because there was no hardware improvement and wallpapers work just fine on the 3G if Apple would care to make it work like jailbreakers did. Three things that Apple has done that MS is showing absolutely no signs of doing themselves.
6) Apple has never led any pack on having the most features. If you judge CE by the length of the spec sheet then no Apple product will ever be for you. I bet you are crying foul on Apple for talking up Safari on the iPhone and yet it?s still the best mobile browser I?ve used. Scrolling, tap to zoom, etc. But hey, phones had WAP browsers before the iPhone came along so they get no credit for releasing something that technically existed on some level.
Mobile Safari is by far and away the best browser. Far and away. I have no qualms with that at all, nor do I find and fault with the touchscreen performance of any iPhone. I've said nothing that would indicate I don't like Safari, all I've said is that Apple was missing basic features from the start and every one of them being released coincided with new hardware releases. WP7 is a fresh start and they are rapidly updating it unlike Apple. That's all I'm getting at. You can't fault one and not the other, especially when the development cycle was so slow and without reason on Apples side. I applaud Apple for iOS, it's fantastic. But there are a few features it does need, better notifications for one, and it's matured massively over the 4 years it's been around. Still needs some improvements that don't necessarily require new hardware to achieve.
Quite a few of those features had been done just fine by jailbreakers long before Apple did them and they worked just fine. We still can't set SMS tones, still can't do bluetooth file transfer (pictures, docs), still can't set received email tones, still can't use it as an external disk. Jailbreakers can and there is absolutely no reason stock iPhones can't other than what I suspect is brand recognition. Apple seems to want everyone to know you have an iPhone when the 'ding ding' chime sounds when you recieve a text or email. Nearly every story/article I read was flabbergasted that the new text tones were way too long and way too lame to use. Why is Apple holding out on this? I suspect again that it's brand recognition. There can't be any other reasonable explanation for it.
I truncated your post there. I think a half-dozen body slams is enough.
Same to you
PS: I?m a fan of WP7 and think MS is doing a great job with it, but your claims that Apple is lying with no proof to back it up and common sense refute your claims, well I just can?t let that slide.
If you've ever jailbroken an iPhone that's all the proof you'd need that Apple is withholding features to get you to upgrade. I think either you've never jailbroken an iPhone or been around someone that has to improve the experience, your common sense argument and proof argument would probably change. I think WP7 is a great mobile OS that needs improving, and I think the same of iOS. iOS is by far and away the best mobile OS and Apple has done great things with it but to criticize WP7 for missing features from an OS written from scratch is not fair to iOS either. They were missing basic features that handsets that weren't touchscreen and fancy had for years. I'm saying that if people are going to hold WP7's feet to the fire then the same needs to be done to iOS. That's all.
I love my iPhone 4, it's the best hardware on the market right now by a long shot, the OS needs improving and it will be improved. But until then I'll be a jailbreaker to have things like biteSMS with quick replying, my own SMS and email tones so I know that it's my phone making a noise, SBSettings to quickly change various things and having disk storage among many others. All improvements that don't necessarily fit every users need but they fit mine. Can't wait to see what Apple does about the extremely stupid notification system though. Unfortunately that can't be fixed by jailbreaking.
The previous claim that it would outsell the iPad look to be correct, and by a large margin.
It's still slightly false though. Apple was selling a $500+ tablet to people without one, Microsoft was selling a $150 accessory to a games console with 50 million owners. It would be like Apple selling a $150 10" screen to the 100 million iPhone/iPod users.
The Kinect sales however are still good at 8 million and they have made a great piece of hardware, designed and marketed well. It just won't make much profit.
I think Microsoft have done ok in some recent endeavours but they should have been doing it years ago. The people running the show are old, tired and desperate for relevance.
It's still slightly false though. Apple was selling a $500+ tablet to people without one, Microsoft was selling a $150 accessory to a games console with 50 million owners. It would be like Apple selling a $150 10" screen to the 100 million iPhone/iPod users.
The Kinect sales however are still good at 8 million and they have made a great piece of hardware, designed and marketed well. It just won't make much profit.
I think Microsoft have done ok in some recent endeavours but they should have been doing it years ago. The people running the show are old, tired and desperate for relevance.
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect. They made a wild claim about unit sales and they actually met it. I guess we could compare it to the AppleTV which is in the living room, it an accessory device for a TV, and costs ⅔ of the Kinect but that wouldn?t have served MS? purpose as well, and it makes the achievement seem even smaller despite outselling the AppleTV by 8x despite the AppleTV sales are for a 50% longer duration. MS did good with the Kinect.
Apple and AT&T were no longer sharing revenue for sold iPhones at that time, they wouldn't have been hinged on AT&T contract obligations by then.
Well, since Apple ended the profit sharing I guess that means there has been no contract for the past 3 years¡
The original iPhone and the iPhone 3G have the exact same hardware minus a 3G radio and the different baseband for it.
Take a look at their logic boards. The whole thing was redesigned. Even the model number on the CPUs are different even though they were the same type of chip.
Well, since Apple ended the profit sharing I guess that means there has been no contract for the past 3 years¡
Who's the troll?
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pi...rticleid=25791
Take a look at their logic boards. The whole thing was redesigned. Even the model number on the CPUs are different even though they were the same type of chip.
Doesn't matter how they fit in the case if it's the exact same hardware with different numbers or different packaging, they are still exactly the same performance wise. Since the chips were the same, which they were down to the CPU/GPU/RAM, how does that mean the 3G with it's renumbered chips had the horsepower and the 2G didn't? Answer: it didn't.
Who's the troll?
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pi...rticleid=25791
Way to miss the part that states "New Agreement With Apple?. So again, where is the part that says there has been no contract with Apple since both agreed to eliminate profit sharing.
Doesn't matter how they fit in the case if it's the exact same hardware with different numbers or different packaging, they are still exactly the same performance wise. Since the chips were the same, which they were down to the CPU/GPU/RAM, how does that mean the 3G with it's renumbered chips had the horsepower and the 2G didn't? Answer: it didn't.
So they had same CPU clock speed and RAM, You really should look up what the word exact means, especially when you?re referencing the entirety of a device, not one or two aspects of it.
Why am I even bothering.
Why am I even bothering.
Quit while you're ahead before you get dragged down into HKZ's intellectual mud.
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect. They made a wild claim about unit sales and they actually met it. I guess we could compare it to the AppleTV which is in the living room, it an accessory device for a TV, and costs ⅔ of the Kinect but that wouldn?t have served MS? purpose as well, and it makes the achievement seem even smaller despite outselling the AppleTV by 8x despite the AppleTV sales are for a 50% longer duration. MS did good with the Kinect.
I agree mostly... Remember though that Kinect is bundled with the Xbox in one of two Xbox models offered (Xbox360 4GB with Kinect).
There is nothing false about it. They were using the most popular CE on the market to advance the press on their Kinect.
The falseness is in the importance of the sales. If I sell a computer mouse at a break-even price of $50, does it have any relevance to selling a profitable $99 video streaming box? It's a different market with different demands and different price points and different manufacturing costs and yields.
It was an off-the-cuff remark by Kudo Tsunoda who gets upset by the amount of coverage Apple's products get in the media. As a form of vindication, he used a false comparison between different products to say 'yay, we beat Apple in sales'.
I don't really think it was a serious remark though. It's just one of those types of comments that seems to be an important statement in the context of the great Apple vs Microsoft war.
If he wasn't an Apple hater, he would have said 'Kinect sales will blow away the PS3 Move', as that is their direct competitor but he knew it wouldn't. Sony sold around the same amount albeit over a longer period of time and that's even despite Sony's product looking like a giant dildo.
For tablets I would expect MS to have WP7 for tablets by next CES, if not earlier.
Do you mean WP7 ported to tablet or Windows 8 on ARM with a WP7 shell? I think it would be really interesting if they released a WP7 tablet port... but I have a feeling CE is dead (or dying).
Which brings me to...
PS: I wonder if Win8 on ARM may indicate MS is planning to use the same kernel across the board for smartphones, tablets, desktops, servers.
I think that might be what they are aiming for. Don't forget the next Xbox though. For various reasons I stated in an earlier post I think the Xbox is a major platform for Microsoft (at least in the consumer space) and they see it - and are treating it - more like a living room entertainment hub than a games console.
Well, since Apple ended the profit sharing I guess that means there has been no contract for the past 3 years¡
Wouldn't any remaining iPhone 2G contracts still be subject to that?
Way to miss the part that states "New Agreement With Apple”. So again, where is the part that says there has been no contract with Apple since both agreed to eliminate profit sharing.
Way to miss the part where I didn't say there was no contract between to two. I stated that since profit sharing was gone, which is a huge deal, they didn't seem to big on what AT&T was wanting contract wise. By that point Apple and AT&T were at odds, and it was known. There is nothing there to indicate anything that would prevent Apple from including MMS features in every phone model at that time due to what AT&T said contractually. They didn't provide that on networks that weren't AT&T worldwide and they could handle that feature if AT&T's failure is the reason why it wasn't introduced from the get go.
So they had same CPU clock speed and RAM, You really should look up what the word exact means, especially when you’re referencing the entirety of a device, not one or two aspects of it.
Why am I even bothering.
So having the same CPU, the same GPU, and the same amount of RAM isn't exactly the same hardware? Maybe you should look up common sense. Having the same core hardware arranged in a different orientation is still exactly the same hardware. The chip maker Apple used for the 2g's radio said themselves there was no limitation on MMS functionality hardware wise (it was down to software) compared to the 3G's radio and it worked just fine with the 2G. Tell me, how does a different shaped contour on the back make the 3G magically able to do things that the 2G couldn't do? The shape of the phone doesn't make any difference, the internals do. It would have been slower over EDGE, and where I live that's all I get and it works perfectly fine, not because it isn't capable.
Quit while you're ahead before you get dragged down into HKZ's intellectual mud.
I've provided facts in rebuttal to saying that Apple said it wasn't possible to do what in fact can be done and very well at that. All of the things that couldn't be done were somehow possible when 'new' hardware came out. I'm not stupid, the majority believes that what Apple says it the truth and it's not. I'm sorry if I don't blindly believe everything that Apple PR says and I'm sorry if the facts fly in the face of PR speak.
I agree mostly... Remember though that Kinect is bundled with the Xbox in one of two Xbox models offered (Xbox360 4GB with Kinect).
Exactly. Imagine if Apple offered an iPad/Apple TV bundle. Does anyone think that would not boost Apple TV sales? But why are we comparing Apple TV to the 360/Kinect anyway? Just because they both exist "in the living room"?