Your comments about the iPhone have been negative to an extreme.
Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.
The truth likely lies somewhere between Sapporo's "negativism" and your overly positive statements. And that's the great thing about AI... I can hear both PoVs, weigh them against each other, draw upon what's valuable in each of them, and come to my own opinion, or modify my existing one.
But, to call someone else's PoV "extreme" is silly. The same could easily be said about you, me, or a great many of the posters here.
Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.
The Apple party line:
"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."
"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."
"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."
I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.
"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."
I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.
I have played up what I thought were good features of the iPhone. I have said what I think its advantages are, but I also see its glaring deficiencies. I consider myself a power user when it comes to phones as I have been using them since Motorola had the black banana looking thing with the 4 inch antenna. Not to mention consulting Vodafone Germany (was Mannesmann) on the build out of their GSM network, o.tel.o (Germany), E-Plus (Germany), Sonera (Finland), Telecom Italia (guess where), and a few others. I have an idea or seven about what I feel is a good phone and what isn't. I did not fall over myself with the smoke and mirrors that Apple used to sell the iPhone. As an iPod it is outstanding and without an equal. As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.
As to what I do with it is well not really your concern as you did not pay for it, so I do not have to justify how I do and do not use it to least of all you. For the most part, I use my iPhone as my work phone. I tether it to my N82 via the Gear4 BluEye, so I can have my iPod and phone with me at all times if I choose to.
Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.
I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.
I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
Before continuing, maybe it would be a good idea to start from the beginning of this thread as many of your statements have been addressed by me and a few others.
As to convincing you. I thought I made it clear that I could not care what you believe or do not believe. I just don't. I did not know a phone was designed to assist with intelligence (can be gained with reading and experiencing new things), wisdom (starts with seeing the world from more than one prospective).
Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.
Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.
I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably. Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.
Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.
Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.
My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking. It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these. To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequitors? Most biz users don't. Descerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.
The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.
Quote:
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.
Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?
Quote:
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.
As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.
I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably.
Uhhhhh... Failed how exactly? As much as I detest all things M$, they are right now the on top but their market share is declining. So which decade are you talking about where M$ failed to catch Apple?
Quote:
Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.
Are you saying that neither Nokia nor SE has the skills to deliver, and if so to deliver what? Right now, it appears that Nokia has the technological advantage over Apple in terms of specifications. Apple has the software high ground. Which do you think will be easier to overcome with a few million thrown around here and there? Nokia has made no attempt, at least that I know of, to put a desktop on their phones as they didn't need to. They did however make the conduits and links to those desktops. This suited their biz model and bottom line. I have visited Nokia's R&D facilities, and spoken with their engineers. They are not worried in the least about what the iPhone has to offer technically as they can match it and in many cases deliver better performance. What is of no interest to them is putting a desktop OS on their phones.
You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.
We are going round and round. The lack of some to do something does not mean they can't. Unlike many here who seem to live in Stever Jobs' basement, I do not have access into the inner workings of Nokia, or their biz strategy. I can only talk to my friends, and other resources and get an idea about what is in the pipe. For Nokia S60 or Symbian is the future of where they will go (currently). The switched from S80 and S40, and are building on S60. So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.
Quote:
A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?
Quote:
Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?
I meant GSM/Cell base stations.
Quote:
What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.
Head over to the Symbian developers community forum and see another "development platform".
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.
Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
Huh? I thought it was pretty much settled that Apple is going to have to improve their feature-set to appeal to the business-user/Blackberry crowd.
Do you really want to try to sell to those guys with the argument of, "Well, we don't have close to everything you want, but what we do have is really kewl?"
My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking.
It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.
To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequiturs? Most biz users don't. Discerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.
The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.
Well said.
Though I am hoping that the iPhone 2.0 software and 3rd party apps will plug many of the holes in Apple's current feature set, for consumers and business users alike.
So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.
From what I've seen Symbian has no equivalent to Cocoa Touch, Core Video, Core Audio, Core Image, or Core Animation.
Quote:
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?
Yes but listing features and applications tells you little about how Symbian works or its development platform.
Quote:
Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.
Its unreasonable to be disappointed with Apple for not including features that were never listed. The iPhone version 1 was not developed as a business device. I seriously doubt many consumers are making common use of OBEX or SyncML.
It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.
This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.
Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.
Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.
Comments
Your comments about the iPhone have been negative to an extreme.
Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.
The truth likely lies somewhere between Sapporo's "negativism" and your overly positive statements. And that's the great thing about AI... I can hear both PoVs, weigh them against each other, draw upon what's valuable in each of them, and come to my own opinion, or modify my existing one.
But, to call someone else's PoV "extreme" is silly. The same could easily be said about you, me, or a great many of the posters here.
.
Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above?
People on both sides of the debate need to chill.
.
Yep. Chill, Tenobell.
Continue the discussion - it's a good one.
Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above? .
Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.
I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.
Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.
The Apple party line:
"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."
"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."
"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."
I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.
The Apple party line:
"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."
"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."
"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."
I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.
I have played up what I thought were good features of the iPhone. I have said what I think its advantages are, but I also see its glaring deficiencies. I consider myself a power user when it comes to phones as I have been using them since Motorola had the black banana looking thing with the 4 inch antenna. Not to mention consulting Vodafone Germany (was Mannesmann) on the build out of their GSM network, o.tel.o (Germany), E-Plus (Germany), Sonera (Finland), Telecom Italia (guess where), and a few others. I have an idea or seven about what I feel is a good phone and what isn't. I did not fall over myself with the smoke and mirrors that Apple used to sell the iPhone. As an iPod it is outstanding and without an equal. As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.
As to what I do with it is well not really your concern as you did not pay for it, so I do not have to justify how I do and do not use it to least of all you. For the most part, I use my iPhone as my work phone. I tether it to my N82 via the Gear4 BluEye, so I can have my iPod and phone with me at all times if I choose to.
Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.
I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.
I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
***Sigh***
Before continuing, maybe it would be a good idea to start from the beginning of this thread as many of your statements have been addressed by me and a few others.
As to convincing you. I thought I made it clear that I could not care what you believe or do not believe. I just don't. I did not know a phone was designed to assist with intelligence (can be gained with reading and experiencing new things), wisdom (starts with seeing the world from more than one prospective).
Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.
Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.
I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably. Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.
Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.
Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.
My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking. It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these. To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequitors? Most biz users don't. Descerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.
The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.
I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.
You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.
* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't
A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.
Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?
As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.
What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.
As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.
I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably.
Uhhhhh... Failed how exactly? As much as I detest all things M$, they are right now the on top but their market share is declining. So which decade are you talking about where M$ failed to catch Apple?
Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.
Are you saying that neither Nokia nor SE has the skills to deliver, and if so to deliver what? Right now, it appears that Nokia has the technological advantage over Apple in terms of specifications. Apple has the software high ground. Which do you think will be easier to overcome with a few million thrown around here and there? Nokia has made no attempt, at least that I know of, to put a desktop on their phones as they didn't need to. They did however make the conduits and links to those desktops. This suited their biz model and bottom line. I have visited Nokia's R&D facilities, and spoken with their engineers. They are not worried in the least about what the iPhone has to offer technically as they can match it and in many cases deliver better performance. What is of no interest to them is putting a desktop OS on their phones.
NICE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.
We are going round and round. The lack of some to do something does not mean they can't. Unlike many here who seem to live in Stever Jobs' basement, I do not have access into the inner workings of Nokia, or their biz strategy. I can only talk to my friends, and other resources and get an idea about what is in the pipe. For Nokia S60 or Symbian is the future of where they will go (currently). The switched from S80 and S40, and are building on S60. So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.
A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?
Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?
I meant GSM/Cell base stations.
What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.
Head over to the Symbian developers community forum and see another "development platform".
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......................!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.
A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.
Huh? I thought it was pretty much settled that Apple is going to have to improve their feature-set to appeal to the business-user/Blackberry crowd.
Do you really want to try to sell to those guys with the argument of, "Well, we don't have close to everything you want, but what we do have is really kewl?"
Or is Apple just not going to take on RIM?
.
My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking.
It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.
To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequiturs? Most biz users don't. Discerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.
The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.
Well said.
Though I am hoping that the iPhone 2.0 software and 3rd party apps will plug many of the holes in Apple's current feature set, for consumers and business users alike.
.
So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.
From what I've seen Symbian has no equivalent to Cocoa Touch, Core Video, Core Audio, Core Image, or Core Animation.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?
Yes but listing features and applications tells you little about how Symbian works or its development platform.
Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.
Its unreasonable to be disappointed with Apple for not including features that were never listed. The iPhone version 1 was not developed as a business device. I seriously doubt many consumers are making common use of OBEX or SyncML.
It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.
This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.
Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.
Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.