I don't consider most Android-based devices being sold today as smartphones simply because they were not designed to be a modern smartphone and subsequently not used as such.
If you're implying Jobs didn't want to call it a smartphone because it wasn't smart enough, you're wrong. This is no difference than saying the Mac is not a PC after the rise of the IBM PC. It was simply a way of differentiating their product. The original iPhone is a modern smartphone due to the capacitive, multitouchscreen, advanced OS and the App Store that arrived in iOS 2.0. Have you noticed that people with phones typically refer to them in the generic phone, cellphone, celly, mobile, but those with iPhones usually efer to them by iPhones?
You're giving your own private reason for something which doesn't match today's agreed upon meaning. You can do that, but you're out in nowhere's land.
I didn't say the iPhone wasn't powerful enough, you just did. Jobs didn't like it being referred to as a smartphone. He said that several times. And the reason why, according to today's standards, that it might not have been, had nothing to do with power, as it was as powerful as anything else at the time. It was because it didn't have third party apps, and to a lesser extent, used Edge rather than the far more useful 3G. Jobs liked to refer it to a pocket computer with phone capability. Not exactly a snappy term though.
For a number of years, there had been a dispute as to what constituted a smartphone. Symbian phones covered a very large ground. Today, we wouldn't consider some of them "real" smartphones, but back then, they were. In fact the first iPhone, today, wouldn't be considered to be a real smartphone, and indeed, Steve Jobs said that he didn't want it to be called that.
But even if you don't want to consider that Nokia phone a real smartphone, and a feature phone instead, the question still, is where Blackberry would be. At best, they would have showed up at the bottom of that list.
I joined a conversation in post #13 by replying to someone who was talking about the Blackberry and 2007. I assumed we were talking about the US since this article is about the US.
We were not talking about the rest of the world.
However... in that same post #13... I did acknowledge that Symbian held the worldwide title.
Symbian did not have a big foothold in the US... so that leaves Palm, Blackberry and Windows Mobile.
And to the best of my knowledge... Blackberry was not in the "bottom of the list" in the United States in 2007.
You even agreed with that in post #15... Blackberry had 40% smartphone market share in the US in 2007.
You're giving your own private reason for something which doesn't match today's agreed upon meaning. You can do that, but you're out in nowhere's land.
I didn't say the iPhone wasn't powerful enough, you just did. Jobs didn't like it being referred to as a smartphone. He said that several times. And the reason why, according to today's standards, that it might not have been, had nothing to do with power, as it was as powerful as anything else at the time. It was because it didn't have third party apps, and to a lesser extent, used Edge rather than the far more useful 3G. Jobs liked to refer it to a pocket computer with phone capability. Not exactly a snappy term though.
1) I'd like to see this quote from Jobs where he said it's not a smartphone because it didn't allow 3rd-party apps and where he started calling it a smartphone in 2008 when that became a reality.
2) I neither used nor implied the words power or powerful in my comment. I used the word smart, against your use of the word smartphone, and gave the only reasonable answer as to why Jobs didn't want to market it as the same thing as their competitors… just like saying the Mac isn't a PC when it mostly was.
I joined a conversation in post #13 by replying to someone who was talking about the Blackberry and 2007. I assumed we were talking about the US since this article is about the US.
We were not talking about the rest of the world.
However... in that same post #13... I did acknowledge that Symbian held the worldwide title.
Symbian did not have a big foothold in the US... so that leaves Palm, Blackberry and Windows Mobile.
And to the best of my knowledge... Blackberry was not in the "bottom of the list" in the United States in 2007.
You even agreed with that in post #15... Blackberry had 40% smartphone market share in the US in 2007.
1) I'd like to see this quote from Jobs where he said it's not a smartphone because it didn't allow 3rd-party apps and where he started calling it a smartphone in 2008 when that became a reality.
2) I neither used nor implied the words power or powerful in my comment. I used the word smart, against your use of the word smartphone, and gave the only reasonable answer as to why Jobs didn't want to market it as the same thing as their competitors… just like saying the Mac isn't a PC when it mostly was.
You need to read more carefully.
I said that the reason TODAY is because it didn't have third party apps and 3G. That means that today, a phone wouldn't be considered to be a smartphone if it didn't at least have those features.
I thought you would understand that, since I said today. I should have been clearer. I do t know why Jobs didn't like the term smartphone for the iPhone. He did say something about it being so much more than a phone, but I don'tt remember his exact reason.
I'm equating "smart" with "powerful", because you can't have one without the other in the sense that the phone can't be smart (for the time it's out, when compared to lesser phones) without also being powerful. Today, most smartphones are much more powerful, and smarter, than they were back in 2007.
Comments
You're giving your own private reason for something which doesn't match today's agreed upon meaning. You can do that, but you're out in nowhere's land.
I didn't say the iPhone wasn't powerful enough, you just did. Jobs didn't like it being referred to as a smartphone. He said that several times. And the reason why, according to today's standards, that it might not have been, had nothing to do with power, as it was as powerful as anything else at the time. It was because it didn't have third party apps, and to a lesser extent, used Edge rather than the far more useful 3G. Jobs liked to refer it to a pocket computer with phone capability. Not exactly a snappy term though.
I joined a conversation in post #13 by replying to someone who was talking about the Blackberry and 2007. I assumed we were talking about the US since this article is about the US.
We were not talking about the rest of the world.
However... in that same post #13... I did acknowledge that Symbian held the worldwide title.
Symbian did not have a big foothold in the US... so that leaves Palm, Blackberry and Windows Mobile.
And to the best of my knowledge... Blackberry was not in the "bottom of the list" in the United States in 2007.
You even agreed with that in post #15... Blackberry had 40% smartphone market share in the US in 2007.
1) I'd like to see this quote from Jobs where he said it's not a smartphone because it didn't allow 3rd-party apps and where he started calling it a smartphone in 2008 when that became a reality.
2) I neither used nor implied the words power or powerful in my comment. I used the word smart, against your use of the word smartphone, and gave the only reasonable answer as to why Jobs didn't want to market it as the same thing as their competitors… just like saying the Mac isn't a PC when it mostly was.
The list I showed was for the USA.
You need to read more carefully.
I said that the reason TODAY is because it didn't have third party apps and 3G. That means that today, a phone wouldn't be considered to be a smartphone if it didn't at least have those features.
I thought you would understand that, since I said today. I should have been clearer. I do t know why Jobs didn't like the term smartphone for the iPhone. He did say something about it being so much more than a phone, but I don'tt remember his exact reason.
I'm equating "smart" with "powerful", because you can't have one without the other in the sense that the phone can't be smart (for the time it's out, when compared to lesser phones) without also being powerful. Today, most smartphones are much more powerful, and smarter, than they were back in 2007.
You also said Blackberry had 40% market share in the US... which would have made them the #1 platform in the US...
Which is exactly what I've been saying this whole time...
The Blackberry was, in fact, popular in the US... including with consumers.