(1) My cell phone has a built in chip that lets me use the phone for all sorts of daily payments. I can use it to get on the train, subway and buses. I can use it to buy stuff at convenience stores and a lot of other places too, including vending machines. It would be a nuisance to not be able to do that any more.
Sure, that's kind of nice, but it's no big deal to just stick a Suica in your wallet and pull that out instead of your phone when entering or leaving the train station or making a payment at a コンビニ.
I carry both a Japanese phone (no Mobile Suica) and a 2G iPhone, using the latter basically as a PDA and for email and browsing if I happen to find free WiFi. My biggest frustration is not being able to type in Japanese on the iPhone, so I am very much looking forward to the 2.0 software update.
Sure. Symbian was being called the most advanced platform because of the simple fact that you can build 3rd party apps for it.
My refernce is to the sophistication of OS X development tools and API's which are unarguably better than Symbian's efforts.
For evidence of this one only needs to look at the demo apps. Devlopers porting console level gaming graphics that are more common to the Nintendo DS or PSP. These types of games generally aren't on mobile phone platforms. The most impressive were the medical imaging apps. Unless I've missed them I haven't seen anything like that on any mobile phone platform.
Sure. Symbian was being called the most advanced platform because of the simple fact that you can build 3rd party apps for it.
I hope you were not referring to me, because Symbian isn't the most advance platform. It is a pretty good mobile platform for what it does though, and has the ability to become more robust. I am sure with the advent of Mac OS X Mobile (or whatever you want to call it), Symbian will have to adapt or die. The Symbian foundation has too much invested in it let it slip away so, I am guessing that they should step up their game a bit in the very near future.
Quote:
My refernce is to the sophistication of OS X development tools and API's which are unarguably better than Symbian's efforts.
If this is what you meant, you did not say so. Could be a matter of posting on the run, and not filling in all the details. I do this often.
[/quote]For evidence of this one only needs to look at the demo apps. Devlopers porting console level gaming graphics that are more common to the Nintendo DS or PSP. These types of games generally aren't on mobile phone platforms. The most impressive were the medical imaging apps. Unless I've missed them I haven't seen anything like that on any mobile phone platform.[/QUOTE]
Very good point. I expect to see a plethora of similar apps for Symbian. It would be advantageous for software houses to develop a sort of "base" app that can be ported where ever they want (please no Java), and satisfy several markets at one time.
I know what I said. I was asking how you came to your conclusion from it.
Okay. You said>
Quote:
You cannot create apps for Symbian like the ones that will soon be available for the iPhone.
My response was to this quote that I took at face value. For me it means that once these new iPhone apps, seen and unseen, hit the market, Symbian will not be able to create them. I went further to say that there are currently apps running on Symbian that can rival the ones that may or may not appear for the iPhone. Your statement about not being able to create apps for Symbian is quite a bit myopic as you nor I have any idea of what and what can not be created for either platform. If you can, then you are clairvoyant and can you advise me on Apple shares over the next few years?
Also, I hope I cleared this up here and now so we do not have to go back and forth. While I do not mind debating you, I have a bit of cello practice I need to get to, but I do not want you to think that I am ignoring your points.
I'm not sure. I think it was JeffDM taht counted them up, but I honestly can't recall.
edit: Here is the store. It's not easy to count the apps or developers as you have to choose your country and then your phone and your carrier before seeing the apps hat are available. I'm sure most are crossover apps but it's too much work to count. I checked the Netherlands and "Norwegia", I can't see ther being 4000 unique apps or 400 developers available so I must have remembered it incorrectly.
Unless there are non-Nokia sanctioned apps that can be installed since it does require you to connect it to a PC first (PITA). Are there really apps that can't be used on certain networks or is the network info just for data collecting?
PS: Your comment about S60 v2 and v3 and the different phones on the site makes me wonder which device has the most apps and how much. I also wonder which BB or WinMo or Palm device has the most apps available and how many.
Anyone want to start Wiki pages on the apps avaialble for these different mobile OSes. I'll do the iPhone.... next month.
The 4,000 number sounds more than a bit high.
Also, as you sort of point out, Nokia is restrictive in which apps they allow. It really does seem as though they are much more restrictive than Apple is.
Depends if we are talking all Symbian versions, to include UIQ as well.
Quote:
Also, as you sort of point out, Nokia is restrictive in which apps they allow. It really does seem as though they are much more restrictive than Apple is.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you just making stuff up now? Do you even own an Nokia S60 v1, or v2, or v3 phone? Have you ever? Can you point out (make it easy on yourself) one, just one application that Nokia does not allow. Just one. One tinsy, winsy app.
By all means please explain this, with a link if possible. This is by far the funniest, and wrongest thing I have seen in this forum to date.
Depends if we are talking all Symbian versions, to include UIQ as well.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you just making stuff up now? Do you even own an Nokia S60 v1, or v2, or v3 phone? Have you ever? Can you point out (make it easy on yourself) one, just one application that Nokia does not allow. Just one. One tinsy, winsy app.
By all means please explain this, with a link if possible. This is by far the funniest, and wrongest thing I have seen in this forum to date.
Im just repeating what I've read in a number of places.
Sasly, I'm getting problems like this with several of the links I've saved about this:
A short quote from it which is to the point we're talking about:
Quote:
?For S60 version 3, they have introduced a new security model where it's necessary to sign all apps with VeriSign to even get them to run. Something that costs several hundreds of dollars per year, just for the certificates, and makes shareware and hobby programming almost impossible from now on.
?Some operators are requiring the phones to be locked for any apps not carrying a ?Symbian Signed? certificate. Which means, you have to pay for a certification process where you are checked by Symbian, why you developed the application and why you want to use certain capabilities on the phone, e.g. read and store user data, using the telephony APIs, or the WIFI capabilities etc.
?All in the name of security, but of course it will be very tough to make programs, independently, that use functionality that's not in the interest of the operators, such as non-operator controlled Voice over IP.
?So much for independently third-party software development on Symbian compared to the ?closed? model used on iPhone. In practice the difference is not that big. Apple will, of course, allow close partners to develop apps like they do with iPod Games today.
Check out that cost again. It's much cheaper to develop programs for the iPhone. That leads to less restrictiveness. Apple isn't requiring a Verisign certificate, among other requirements.
I saw the first article the other day. I think the guy was a bit biased against the iPhone. The second article was good as well and I agree. Symbian is okay for what it does but as he said, Nokia would have a hard time dumping it now, and Linux is way to complicated for the masses. I had a Nokia N800, and N810 tablet. Cool devices but not ready for prime time.
The new Nokia's, well the last few that I have owned have the ability to accept the application, signed or not. This was not there before. So, if I create a crap app and someone wants to install it, they still can. In fact all the S60 v3 themes are now installed rather than copied. Some of them are not signed, and are just accepted.
Quote:
A short quote from it which is to the point we're talking about:
Check out that cost again. It's much cheaper to develop programs for the iPhone. That leads to less restrictiveness. Apple isn't requiring a Verisign certificate, among other requirements.
If this is the basis of your argument, then while not very robust, you can say "well Verisgning" makes it more expensive and makes it more restrictive." I can counter with, "just accept the app unsigned". So we are at plus/minus = zero.
Yes, exactly, its a lot of white-blue-grey or white-black (as in the apple TV menu)
I really don't understand at all what you are talking about here.
Quote:
I use the majority of the N95 features, with exeption for some small and unsignifigant tool-apps.
There have been studies that show most people don't use most of those features, and generally find the N95 difficult to use.
Quote:
An example where you are more or less required to is when when you have to retrive a new password when you lost yours for a forum login or similar. Without the possibility of multiple apps running, you'd have to close the web app, open the e-mail-app, writhe down the new pass on a pice of paper (since iPhone didn't have copy-paste?), close the mail-app, open upp the web app, return to the same site, login and throw your pice of paper into a nearby trash can.
Copy and paste would pretty much alleviate that dilemma. The problem with what you describe is that you risk maxing out the CPU and RAM, possibly crashing both apps, and using a fourth of the battery life. Not a very good solution.
I hope you were not referring to me, because Symbian isn't the most advance platform.
No it was a respose to Cbswe.
Quote:
Very good point. I expect to see a plethora of similar apps for Symbian. It would be advantageous for software houses to develop a sort of "base" app that can be ported where ever they want (please no Java), and satisfy several markets at one time.
That is essentially what I am saying. Its not simply the hardware its the software. Symbian is not OS X. Symbian does not have API's as sophisticated as Cocoa Touch and the Core API's. Developers won't just suddenly be able to make more advanced apps without serious improvements in the development code.
That is essentially what I am saying. Its not simply the hardware its the software. Symbian is not OS X. Symbian does not have API's as sophisticated as Cocoa Touch and the Core API's. Developers won't just suddenly be able to make more advanced apps without serious improvements in the development code.
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
It'll be interesting to see.
The iPhone began as a closed platform from the start and Apple is slowly opening and relaxing rules as they figure their way around problems and performance.
Google seems to be coming from the other direction. At first announcing Android as completely open and over time adding some restrictions as they discover potential future problems with being too open.
I really don't understand at all what you are talking about here.
I don't know what the hell it is called, but the interface, like Aqua is in OS X, is making the phone UI look rather limited and repetitive. Since you don't use windows (as in computer windows, not microsoft windows) it feel as if you use a computer but can only see one window at a time and at the same time you can only use one app at a time etc. Concept-wise it feels unsatisfying. But this note is just a personal opinion, not to take as some eccentric statement, heh.
Quote:
There have been studies that show most people don't use most of those features, and generally find the N95 difficult to use.
depends how you count the features I guess, by numer of apps or actual functions. It doesn't hurt to have potential access to function you just might occasionally use
Quote:
Copy and paste would pretty much alleviate that dilemma. The problem with what you describe is that you risk maxing out the CPU and RAM, possibly crashing both apps, and using a fourth of the battery life. Not a very good solution.
Haven't have those kind of problems, because I know the phones limitations and haven't have problems with battery life ether
I don't know what the hell it is called, but the interface, like Aqua is in OS X, is making the phone UI look rather limited and repetitive. Since you don't use windows (as in computer windows, not microsoft windows) it feel as if you use a computer but can only see one window at a time and at the same time you can only use one app at a time etc. Concept-wise it feels unsatisfying. But this note is just a personal opinion, not to take as some eccentric statement, heh.
Probably personal taste. A UI does need to be consistent to some degree. Its bad design to have every app designed too differently. That has been a big complaint about Windows apps that Apple and its developers have been better at.
Quote:
depends how you count the features I guess, by numer of apps or actual functions. It doesn't hurt to have potential access to function you just might occasionally use
Its been shown in numerous surveys that email, sms/mms, and voice are the top used functions on the smartphone. The problem is as you add more functions you begin to compromise the usability of all of the apps. Especially attempting to force every app to work with a fixed key board.
Quote:
Haven't have those kind of problems, because I know the phones limitations and haven't have problems with battery life ether
Which is another key Apple design philosophy. They don't want people to have to learn how to allocate CPU cycles and manage RAM. They just want users to freely use the phone with little thought for its internal functions.
I saw the first article the other day. I think the guy was a bit biased against the iPhone. The second article was good as well and I agree. Symbian is okay for what it does but as he said, Nokia would have a hard time dumping it now, and Linux is way to complicated for the masses. I had a Nokia N800, and N810 tablet. Cool devices but not ready for prime time.
The new Nokia's, well the last few that I have owned have the ability to accept the application, signed or not. This was not there before. So, if I create a crap app and someone wants to install it, they still can. In fact all the S60 v3 themes are now installed rather than copied. Some of them are not signed, and are just accepted.
If this is the basis of your argument, then while not very robust, you can say "well Verisgning" makes it more expensive and makes it more restrictive." I can counter with, "just accept the app unsigned". So we are at plus/minus = zero.
I have seen the other articles. I am dumbfounded why they use DER certs as opposed to using CER's which everyone uses.
Bon appetite.
There's a lot more stuff out there, but I didn't want to overdo it. Signing is just part of the problem, but it is a big part. The costs are also several times what it costs for an iPhone developer, and I'm not sure if those giving away free programs can do it for free as they can do for the iPhone.
We get people here complaining that $99 is too much.
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
I agree with you here. Symbian is not in the same league to compete against the iPhone, however it does work quite well on the devices that utilize it. I think with a bit more horse power under the hood, hardware wise, Nokia Symbian phones would really be stellar. They are feature packed and perform very well in most tests, as well as user satisfaction. The biz community seems to embrace Symbian quite well also. Android should shake up things quite a bit though. From a consumer stand point my loyalty does not simply fall in line behind Apple but with where my wallet will see the best performance for price.
Comments
(1) My cell phone has a built in chip that lets me use the phone for all sorts of daily payments. I can use it to get on the train, subway and buses. I can use it to buy stuff at convenience stores and a lot of other places too, including vending machines. It would be a nuisance to not be able to do that any more.
Sure, that's kind of nice, but it's no big deal to just stick a Suica in your wallet and pull that out instead of your phone when entering or leaving the train station or making a payment at a コンビニ.
I carry both a Japanese phone (no Mobile Suica) and a 2G iPhone, using the latter basically as a PDA and for email and browsing if I happen to find free WiFi. My biggest frustration is not being able to type in Japanese on the iPhone, so I am very much looking forward to the 2.0 software update.
東京持夢
I have no idea what you are talking about. Where did I say these apps would no longer be available for Symbian once they are available for the iPhone.
Start at your post #122, then spin forward to my reply of post #128. Then we can go forward. This way it saves us alot of going back and forth.
Can you please more specific?
Sure. Symbian was being called the most advanced platform because of the simple fact that you can build 3rd party apps for it.
My refernce is to the sophistication of OS X development tools and API's which are unarguably better than Symbian's efforts.
For evidence of this one only needs to look at the demo apps. Devlopers porting console level gaming graphics that are more common to the Nintendo DS or PSP. These types of games generally aren't on mobile phone platforms. The most impressive were the medical imaging apps. Unless I've missed them I haven't seen anything like that on any mobile phone platform.
Start at your post #122, then spin forward to my reply of post #128. Then we can go forward. This way it saves us alot of going back and forth.
I know what I said. I was asking how you came to your conclusion from it.
Sure. Symbian was being called the most advanced platform because of the simple fact that you can build 3rd party apps for it.
I hope you were not referring to me, because Symbian isn't the most advance platform. It is a pretty good mobile platform for what it does though, and has the ability to become more robust. I am sure with the advent of Mac OS X Mobile (or whatever you want to call it), Symbian will have to adapt or die. The Symbian foundation has too much invested in it let it slip away so, I am guessing that they should step up their game a bit in the very near future.
My refernce is to the sophistication of OS X development tools and API's which are unarguably better than Symbian's efforts.
If this is what you meant, you did not say so. Could be a matter of posting on the run, and not filling in all the details. I do this often.
[/quote]For evidence of this one only needs to look at the demo apps. Devlopers porting console level gaming graphics that are more common to the Nintendo DS or PSP. These types of games generally aren't on mobile phone platforms. The most impressive were the medical imaging apps. Unless I've missed them I haven't seen anything like that on any mobile phone platform.[/QUOTE]
Very good point. I expect to see a plethora of similar apps for Symbian. It would be advantageous for software houses to develop a sort of "base" app that can be ported where ever they want (please no Java), and satisfy several markets at one time.
I know what I said. I was asking how you came to your conclusion from it.
Okay. You said>
You cannot create apps for Symbian like the ones that will soon be available for the iPhone.
My response was to this quote that I took at face value. For me it means that once these new iPhone apps, seen and unseen, hit the market, Symbian will not be able to create them. I went further to say that there are currently apps running on Symbian that can rival the ones that may or may not appear for the iPhone. Your statement about not being able to create apps for Symbian is quite a bit myopic as you nor I have any idea of what and what can not be created for either platform. If you can, then you are clairvoyant and can you advise me on Apple shares over the next few years?
Also, I hope I cleared this up here and now so we do not have to go back and forth. While I do not mind debating you, I have a bit of cello practice I need to get to, but I do not want you to think that I am ignoring your points.
I'm not sure. I think it was JeffDM taht counted them up, but I honestly can't recall.
edit: Here is the store. It's not easy to count the apps or developers as you have to choose your country and then your phone and your carrier before seeing the apps hat are available. I'm sure most are crossover apps but it's too much work to count. I checked the Netherlands and "Norwegia", I can't see ther being 4000 unique apps or 400 developers available so I must have remembered it incorrectly.
Unless there are non-Nokia sanctioned apps that can be installed since it does require you to connect it to a PC first (PITA). Are there really apps that can't be used on certain networks or is the network info just for data collecting?PS: Your comment about S60 v2 and v3 and the different phones on the site makes me wonder which device has the most apps and how much. I also wonder which BB or WinMo or Palm device has the most apps available and how many.
Anyone want to start Wiki pages on the apps avaialble for these different mobile OSes. I'll do the iPhone.... next month.
The 4,000 number sounds more than a bit high.
Also, as you sort of point out, Nokia is restrictive in which apps they allow. It really does seem as though they are much more restrictive than Apple is.
The 4,000 number sounds more than a bit high.
Depends if we are talking all Symbian versions, to include UIQ as well.
Also, as you sort of point out, Nokia is restrictive in which apps they allow. It really does seem as though they are much more restrictive than Apple is.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you just making stuff up now? Do you even own an Nokia S60 v1, or v2, or v3 phone? Have you ever? Can you point out (make it easy on yourself) one, just one application that Nokia does not allow. Just one. One tinsy, winsy app.
By all means please explain this, with a link if possible. This is by far the funniest, and wrongest thing I have seen in this forum to date.
Depends if we are talking all Symbian versions, to include UIQ as well.
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you just making stuff up now? Do you even own an Nokia S60 v1, or v2, or v3 phone? Have you ever? Can you point out (make it easy on yourself) one, just one application that Nokia does not allow. Just one. One tinsy, winsy app.
By all means please explain this, with a link if possible. This is by far the funniest, and wrongest thing I have seen in this forum to date.
Im just repeating what I've read in a number of places.
Sasly, I'm getting problems like this with several of the links I've saved about this:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/featu...ia_N95_8GB.php
And while I know this article will get you annoyed, I'll poost it anyway:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM...AF3BD8B30.html
A short quote from it which is to the point we're talking about:
?For S60 version 3, they have introduced a new security model where it's necessary to sign all apps with VeriSign to even get them to run. Something that costs several hundreds of dollars per year, just for the certificates, and makes shareware and hobby programming almost impossible from now on.
?Some operators are requiring the phones to be locked for any apps not carrying a ?Symbian Signed? certificate. Which means, you have to pay for a certification process where you are checked by Symbian, why you developed the application and why you want to use certain capabilities on the phone, e.g. read and store user data, using the telephony APIs, or the WIFI capabilities etc.
?All in the name of security, but of course it will be very tough to make programs, independently, that use functionality that's not in the interest of the operators, such as non-operator controlled Voice over IP.
?So much for independently third-party software development on Symbian compared to the ?closed? model used on iPhone. In practice the difference is not that big. Apple will, of course, allow close partners to develop apps like they do with iPod Games today.
Check out that cost again. It's much cheaper to develop programs for the iPhone. That leads to less restrictiveness. Apple isn't requiring a Verisign certificate, among other requirements.
But, read the entire article.
Here's a fun Symbian/Nokia thing:
http://www.jacco2.dds.nl/networking/...rt_import.html
Old, but from when this mess started:
http://www.newlc.com/Unsigned-Symbia...ations-to.html
This isinteresting though not directly related:
http://www.symbian-guru.com/welcome/...should-be.html
A little bit of info you may want to know;
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/0...l-phone-virus/
A bit more about signing:
http://symbianwebblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/8/
My wife came home, so it's going to be us making dinner now, so I'll see you, metaphorically, later.
Im just repeating what I've read in a number of places.
Sasly, I'm getting problems like this with several of the links I've saved about this:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/featu...ia_N95_8GB.php
And while I know this article will get you annoyed, I'll poost it anyway:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM...AF3BD8B30.html
I saw the first article the other day. I think the guy was a bit biased against the iPhone. The second article was good as well and I agree. Symbian is okay for what it does but as he said, Nokia would have a hard time dumping it now, and Linux is way to complicated for the masses. I had a Nokia N800, and N810 tablet. Cool devices but not ready for prime time.
The new Nokia's, well the last few that I have owned have the ability to accept the application, signed or not. This was not there before. So, if I create a crap app and someone wants to install it, they still can. In fact all the S60 v3 themes are now installed rather than copied. Some of them are not signed, and are just accepted.
A short quote from it which is to the point we're talking about:
Check out that cost again. It's much cheaper to develop programs for the iPhone. That leads to less restrictiveness. Apple isn't requiring a Verisign certificate, among other requirements.
If this is the basis of your argument, then while not very robust, you can say "well Verisgning" makes it more expensive and makes it more restrictive." I can counter with, "just accept the app unsigned". So we are at plus/minus = zero.
But, read the entire article.
Here's a fun Symbian/Nokia thing:
http://www.jacco2.dds.nl/networking/...rt_import.html
Old, but from when this mess started:
http://www.newlc.com/Unsigned-Symbia...ations-to.html
This isinteresting though not directly related:
http://www.symbian-guru.com/welcome/...should-be.html
A little bit of info you may want to know;
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/0...l-phone-virus/
A bit more about signing:
http://symbianwebblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/8/
My wife came home, so it's going to be us making dinner now, so I'll see you, metaphorically, later.
I have seen the other articles. I am dumbfounded why they use DER certs as opposed to using CER's which everyone uses.
Bon appetite.
Yes, exactly, its a lot of white-blue-grey or white-black (as in the apple TV menu)
I really don't understand at all what you are talking about here.
I use the majority of the N95 features, with exeption for some small and unsignifigant tool-apps.
There have been studies that show most people don't use most of those features, and generally find the N95 difficult to use.
An example where you are more or less required to is when when you have to retrive a new password when you lost yours for a forum login or similar. Without the possibility of multiple apps running, you'd have to close the web app, open the e-mail-app, writhe down the new pass on a pice of paper (since iPhone didn't have copy-paste?), close the mail-app, open upp the web app, return to the same site, login and throw your pice of paper into a nearby trash can.
Copy and paste would pretty much alleviate that dilemma. The problem with what you describe is that you risk maxing out the CPU and RAM, possibly crashing both apps, and using a fourth of the battery life. Not a very good solution.
I hope you were not referring to me, because Symbian isn't the most advance platform.
No it was a respose to Cbswe.
Very good point. I expect to see a plethora of similar apps for Symbian. It would be advantageous for software houses to develop a sort of "base" app that can be ported where ever they want (please no Java), and satisfy several markets at one time.
That is essentially what I am saying. Its not simply the hardware its the software. Symbian is not OS X. Symbian does not have API's as sophisticated as Cocoa Touch and the Core API's. Developers won't just suddenly be able to make more advanced apps without serious improvements in the development code.
That is essentially what I am saying. Its not simply the hardware its the software. Symbian is not OS X. Symbian does not have API's as sophisticated as Cocoa Touch and the Core API's. Developers won't just suddenly be able to make more advanced apps without serious improvements in the development code.
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
It'll be interesting to see.
The iPhone began as a closed platform from the start and Apple is slowly opening and relaxing rules as they figure their way around problems and performance.
Google seems to be coming from the other direction. At first announcing Android as completely open and over time adding some restrictions as they discover potential future problems with being too open.
I really don't understand at all what you are talking about here.
I don't know what the hell it is called, but the interface, like Aqua is in OS X, is making the phone UI look rather limited and repetitive. Since you don't use windows (as in computer windows, not microsoft windows) it feel as if you use a computer but can only see one window at a time and at the same time you can only use one app at a time etc. Concept-wise it feels unsatisfying. But this note is just a personal opinion, not to take as some eccentric statement, heh.
There have been studies that show most people don't use most of those features, and generally find the N95 difficult to use.
depends how you count the features I guess, by numer of apps or actual functions. It doesn't hurt to have potential access to function you just might occasionally use
Copy and paste would pretty much alleviate that dilemma. The problem with what you describe is that you risk maxing out the CPU and RAM, possibly crashing both apps, and using a fourth of the battery life. Not a very good solution.
Haven't have those kind of problems, because I know the phones limitations and haven't have problems with battery life ether
I don't know what the hell it is called, but the interface, like Aqua is in OS X, is making the phone UI look rather limited and repetitive. Since you don't use windows (as in computer windows, not microsoft windows) it feel as if you use a computer but can only see one window at a time and at the same time you can only use one app at a time etc. Concept-wise it feels unsatisfying. But this note is just a personal opinion, not to take as some eccentric statement, heh.
Probably personal taste. A UI does need to be consistent to some degree. Its bad design to have every app designed too differently. That has been a big complaint about Windows apps that Apple and its developers have been better at.
depends how you count the features I guess, by numer of apps or actual functions. It doesn't hurt to have potential access to function you just might occasionally use
Its been shown in numerous surveys that email, sms/mms, and voice are the top used functions on the smartphone. The problem is as you add more functions you begin to compromise the usability of all of the apps. Especially attempting to force every app to work with a fixed key board.
Haven't have those kind of problems, because I know the phones limitations and haven't have problems with battery life ether
Which is another key Apple design philosophy. They don't want people to have to learn how to allocate CPU cycles and manage RAM. They just want users to freely use the phone with little thought for its internal functions.
When asked about features, he said video recording and TV would be a plus, but did not seem to be deterring interest.
I saw the first article the other day. I think the guy was a bit biased against the iPhone. The second article was good as well and I agree. Symbian is okay for what it does but as he said, Nokia would have a hard time dumping it now, and Linux is way to complicated for the masses. I had a Nokia N800, and N810 tablet. Cool devices but not ready for prime time.
The new Nokia's, well the last few that I have owned have the ability to accept the application, signed or not. This was not there before. So, if I create a crap app and someone wants to install it, they still can. In fact all the S60 v3 themes are now installed rather than copied. Some of them are not signed, and are just accepted.
If this is the basis of your argument, then while not very robust, you can say "well Verisgning" makes it more expensive and makes it more restrictive." I can counter with, "just accept the app unsigned". So we are at plus/minus = zero.
I have seen the other articles. I am dumbfounded why they use DER certs as opposed to using CER's which everyone uses.
Bon appetite.
There's a lot more stuff out there, but I didn't want to overdo it. Signing is just part of the problem, but it is a big part. The costs are also several times what it costs for an iPhone developer, and I'm not sure if those giving away free programs can do it for free as they can do for the iPhone.
We get people here complaining that $99 is too much.
I'm sure many will disagree with me but Android?while still in it's infancy?is the best option I've seen for competing with the OS X iPhone. A few power frameworks and more solid and well tested core and I think it will be used by most manufacturers, sans Apple. The software is free, it appears to be easy to develop for, and they can make it their own in any way they want. What i think will help Android gain ground more quickly is the iPhone as manufacturers are being made aware just how stunted their software platform really is. (speculation)
I agree with you here. Symbian is not in the same league to compete against the iPhone, however it does work quite well on the devices that utilize it. I think with a bit more horse power under the hood, hardware wise, Nokia Symbian phones would really be stellar. They are feature packed and perform very well in most tests, as well as user satisfaction. The biz community seems to embrace Symbian quite well also. Android should shake up things quite a bit though. From a consumer stand point my loyalty does not simply fall in line behind Apple but with where my wallet will see the best performance for price.
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...6_FORTUNE5.htm
They should be pretty popular.