Ok I will agree with you on that to a certain extent. I do think that people would like to have a GPS if it was cheap and they didn't have to pay monthly. But like you hear on this apple forum a lot people do want Turn by Turn. So for the few that do want it I think they atleast want it to work. The blue dot... if its going to be a stupid blue dot that doesnt even have an arrow showing which direction your going then the least they could do is make it accurate. I have tried using it a thousand times and always I would miss the street because the names on the map are too small to read and the dot gets there 3-5 seconds after I do. Anyway... I hope this new phone is cool... sad its on t-mobile... I wish it was on verizon. I like the 3g but it just lacks too many basic features I really want a different phone.
I agree with you that the GPS navigation on the iPhone is mediocre at best. But I don't think they designed it to compete with Garmin or TomTom.
If the iPhone were on Verizon they would not allow iTunes or Google Maps. You would be charged extra for navigation, media downloads, visual voice mail, the location of a phone number with no contact name.
Which is why I said such patents are bogus. Yes, the US Patent Office gives these bogus patents out. Yes, I would be quite happy to appear as an expert witness in front of USPTO officials or a court of law and explain why they're bogus.
That's assuming you are an expert in the technology. Are you?
I agree with you that the GPS navigation on the iPhone is mediocre at best. But I don't think they designed it to compete with Garmin or TomTom.
What's being forgotten here is that there is NO navagation in the iPhone at this time. Google maps doesn't qualify, as it was never meant for that purpose.
We really have to wait until the two companies that are developing it for the iPhone release their software. Then we can make a proper comparison.
I said nothing of the sort. Apple's implementation of multi-touch on iPhone would be the extent of their protected patents.
Maybe.
It's more complex than that. It's HOW it's implemented that matters most. There are often several methodologies available to implement a technology with equal success. They can all be patented.
Sometimes there is only one. Other methods may work, but may be inferior in one or more ways.
If Apple has patents on Multitouch that implement this for relatively small screens (smaller than the huge screens used on the networks already), then there may not be equally good methods available. Apple could have the best tech sewed up. I'm not saying this is the case, but it could be.
I wasn't sure where to drop this bit of info. For those who aren't already aware of it, with this app, Air Sharing, you can use the iPhone/iTouch to:
Quote:
Mount your iPhone or iPod Touch as a wireless drive on any Mac, Windows or Linux computer.
Drag-drop files between your iPhone/Touch and your computer.
View documents in many common formats "
Right now it's free, but will go to $6.99.
I know we discuss this lack on the new units. Well, here's something that Apple seems to be allowing that they haven't done themselves, that they have done on older iPods.
i have my iphone and i think its the neatest little gadget.. but i can hardly get over excited about the thing.. every one talks about how advanced it is and blah blah blah .. its jumped ahead a bit i guess .. but i got to say people have ben sending multi media text msg's for years now... why cant this bad a$$ iphone? and the way i get them is just a hassil from hell it makes me want to puke ever time some one sends me a pic and i get that crappy old "someone has sent you a multimedia message " "gotto vewmmymsg.com and enter a0s9d8f09as8df for the user name and hairy4butts for the password"
and the apps are pretty useless ... sure theres 30000 of them ... but 90% are the same app does the same thing just with a color changed ..
the ipod on the thing blows .. i get random skips to the next song in the middle of one ?>?
my mp3 player never did that and my old phone never jacked me over on getting a pic..
and the gps could use alot of work .. less powerfull cell fones do better gps then this thing..
and i have an 8 gig version .. i only have 7 gigs free.. wtf
[QUOTE=ipat2007;1311595]I would go with Android anyday. The iPhone is too demented when it comes to basic features.
Check out why?
Google Android (HTC Dream) vs Apple iPhone 3G -A Comparision
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
The Bluetooth support, for example, will be limited to the standard headphone with mike. This is from Google. At some point in the future, but they dont know when, that will be expanded.
Application developers are not too happy with the situation either, and support in number of programs is expected to be much smaller than for the iPhone, certainly at first.
The HTC device hardware isn't known too well yet either. Which features of the OS it will support isn't completely understood.
Sales of the phone are expected to be very slow when compared to the iPhone, which will keep developers on the sidelines until take-up is significant.
I would go with Android anyday. The iPhone is too demented when it comes to basic features.
Check out why?
Google Android (HTC Dream) vs Apple iPhone 3G -A Comparision
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
The Bluetooth support, for example, will be limited to the standard headphone with mike. This is from Google. At some point in the future, but they dont know when, that will be expanded.
Application developers are not too happy with the situation either, and support in number of programs is expected to be much smaller than for the iPhone, certainly at first.
The HTC device hardware isn't known too well yet either. Which features of the OS it will support isn't completely understood.
Sales of the phone are expected to be very slow when compared to the iPhone, which will keep developers on the sidelines until take-up is significant.
Overall, I wouldn't bet too much on this yet.
I wouldn't bet much on it at all. Google made its fortune from click-adds, not any of its software, which quite frankly tend to suck with very few exceptions. Not only that, the good ones are still subpar with compared to apple. Compare, for instance, picasa with iphoto. Picasa is not bad but iphoto is almost perfect. Hardware-wise there is also no comparison. There is nothing new or appealing about Android. It is just the same piece of crap sliding keyboard nonsense which will become obsolete and will be the object of mockery in 5 years just like the very first 3 pound cell phones are right now.
Open source = idiotic madness. Open source has a place and a time but it is not on a phone where consistency and polish are key. There will be no coherent user interface, no quality control, no nothing. It will be like a miniature windows PC with all its malware, crapware, bloatware, and unstable software which never seem to do what it is supposed to do unless you also download 10 other third party addons which update themselves once very 15 minutes.
Google doesn't care as long as its core business is moving. The android is just a capricious pastime for Sergei and Larry because they are so bored traveling around in the party plane (TM).
I wouldn't bet much on it at all. Google made its fortune from click-adds, not any of its software, which quite frankly tend to suck with very few exceptions. Not only that, the good ones are still subpar with compared to apple. Compare, for instance, picasa with iphoto. Picasa is not bad but iphoto is almost perfect. Hardware-wise there is also no comparison. There is nothing new or appealing about Android. It is just the same piece of crap sliding keyboard nonsense which will become obsolete and will be the object of mockery in 5 years just like the very first 3 pound cell phones are right now.
Open source = idiotic madness. Open source has a place and a time but it is not on a phone where consistency and polish are key. There will be no coherent user interface, no quality control, no nothing. It will be like a miniature windows PC with all its malware, crapware, bloatware, and unstable software which never seem to do what it is supposed to do unless you also download 10 other third party addons which update themselves once very 15 minutes.
Google doesn't care as long as its core business is moving. The android is just a capricious pastime for Sergei and Larry because they are so bored traveling around in the party plane (TM).
Despite what Google says, this isn't true "open source". Anytime a company writes the entire thing, and does almost all of the updates itself, it isn't open source, even if it adheres to the GPL.
It's only when the company gives the software to a totally independent organization for development, is it really open source.
Comments
Ok I will agree with you on that to a certain extent. I do think that people would like to have a GPS if it was cheap and they didn't have to pay monthly. But like you hear on this apple forum a lot people do want Turn by Turn. So for the few that do want it I think they atleast want it to work. The blue dot... if its going to be a stupid blue dot that doesnt even have an arrow showing which direction your going then the least they could do is make it accurate. I have tried using it a thousand times and always I would miss the street because the names on the map are too small to read and the dot gets there 3-5 seconds after I do. Anyway... I hope this new phone is cool... sad its on t-mobile... I wish it was on verizon. I like the 3g but it just lacks too many basic features I really want a different phone.
I agree with you that the GPS navigation on the iPhone is mediocre at best. But I don't think they designed it to compete with Garmin or TomTom.
If the iPhone were on Verizon they would not allow iTunes or Google Maps. You would be charged extra for navigation, media downloads, visual voice mail, the location of a phone number with no contact name.
I would have a difficult time believing Apple could patent the entire concept of multi-touch. Apple didn't invent it.
I would believe Apple could only patent the technology it uses for its own implementation of multi-touch.
I said nothing of the sort. Apple's implementation of multi-touch on iPhone would be the extent of their protected patents.
Which is why I said such patents are bogus. Yes, the US Patent Office gives these bogus patents out. Yes, I would be quite happy to appear as an expert witness in front of USPTO officials or a court of law and explain why they're bogus.
That's assuming you are an expert in the technology. Are you?
I agree with you that the GPS navigation on the iPhone is mediocre at best. But I don't think they designed it to compete with Garmin or TomTom.
What's being forgotten here is that there is NO navagation in the iPhone at this time. Google maps doesn't qualify, as it was never meant for that purpose.
We really have to wait until the two companies that are developing it for the iPhone release their software. Then we can make a proper comparison.
I said nothing of the sort. Apple's implementation of multi-touch on iPhone would be the extent of their protected patents.
Maybe.
It's more complex than that. It's HOW it's implemented that matters most. There are often several methodologies available to implement a technology with equal success. They can all be patented.
Sometimes there is only one. Other methods may work, but may be inferior in one or more ways.
If Apple has patents on Multitouch that implement this for relatively small screens (smaller than the huge screens used on the networks already), then there may not be equally good methods available. Apple could have the best tech sewed up. I'm not saying this is the case, but it could be.
Mount your iPhone or iPod Touch as a wireless drive on any Mac, Windows or Linux computer.
Drag-drop files between your iPhone/Touch and your computer.
View documents in many common formats "
Right now it's free, but will go to $6.99.
I know we discuss this lack on the new units. Well, here's something that Apple seems to be allowing that they haven't done themselves, that they have done on older iPods.
I jut downloaded it, but haven't tried it yet.
and the apps are pretty useless ... sure theres 30000 of them ... but 90% are the same app does the same thing just with a color changed ..
the ipod on the thing blows .. i get random skips to the next song in the middle of one ?>?
my mp3 player never did that and my old phone never jacked me over on getting a pic..
and the gps could use alot of work .. less powerfull cell fones do better gps then this thing..
and i have an 8 gig version .. i only have 7 gigs free.. wtf
{Spamming Blog}
Check out why?
Google Android (HTC Dream) vs Apple iPhone 3G -A Comparision
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
The Bluetooth support, for example, will be limited to the standard headphone with mike. This is from Google. At some point in the future, but they dont know when, that will be expanded.
Application developers are not too happy with the situation either, and support in number of programs is expected to be much smaller than for the iPhone, certainly at first.
The HTC device hardware isn't known too well yet either. Which features of the OS it will support isn't completely understood.
Sales of the phone are expected to be very slow when compared to the iPhone, which will keep developers on the sidelines until take-up is significant.
Overall, I wouldn't bet too much on this yet.
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
An that author would be.... the aforementioned iPat2007!
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
[..]
HEHE You replied to a spammer.
HEHE You replied to a spammer.
The blog is still a blog. People will read it. If they believe what it says, what's the difference?
Some of the information presented is still wrong.
I would go with Android anyday. The iPhone is too demented when it comes to basic features.
Check out why?
Google Android (HTC Dream) vs Apple iPhone 3G -A Comparision
What the article doesn't say, because the author doesn't seem to know it, it that a number of those features won't be there.
The Bluetooth support, for example, will be limited to the standard headphone with mike. This is from Google. At some point in the future, but they dont know when, that will be expanded.
Application developers are not too happy with the situation either, and support in number of programs is expected to be much smaller than for the iPhone, certainly at first.
The HTC device hardware isn't known too well yet either. Which features of the OS it will support isn't completely understood.
Sales of the phone are expected to be very slow when compared to the iPhone, which will keep developers on the sidelines until take-up is significant.
Overall, I wouldn't bet too much on this yet.
I wouldn't bet much on it at all. Google made its fortune from click-adds, not any of its software, which quite frankly tend to suck with very few exceptions. Not only that, the good ones are still subpar with compared to apple. Compare, for instance, picasa with iphoto. Picasa is not bad but iphoto is almost perfect. Hardware-wise there is also no comparison. There is nothing new or appealing about Android. It is just the same piece of crap sliding keyboard nonsense which will become obsolete and will be the object of mockery in 5 years just like the very first 3 pound cell phones are right now.
Open source = idiotic madness. Open source has a place and a time but it is not on a phone where consistency and polish are key. There will be no coherent user interface, no quality control, no nothing. It will be like a miniature windows PC with all its malware, crapware, bloatware, and unstable software which never seem to do what it is supposed to do unless you also download 10 other third party addons which update themselves once very 15 minutes.
Google doesn't care as long as its core business is moving. The android is just a capricious pastime for Sergei and Larry because they are so bored traveling around in the party plane (TM).
I wouldn't bet much on it at all. Google made its fortune from click-adds, not any of its software, which quite frankly tend to suck with very few exceptions. Not only that, the good ones are still subpar with compared to apple. Compare, for instance, picasa with iphoto. Picasa is not bad but iphoto is almost perfect. Hardware-wise there is also no comparison. There is nothing new or appealing about Android. It is just the same piece of crap sliding keyboard nonsense which will become obsolete and will be the object of mockery in 5 years just like the very first 3 pound cell phones are right now.
Open source = idiotic madness. Open source has a place and a time but it is not on a phone where consistency and polish are key. There will be no coherent user interface, no quality control, no nothing. It will be like a miniature windows PC with all its malware, crapware, bloatware, and unstable software which never seem to do what it is supposed to do unless you also download 10 other third party addons which update themselves once very 15 minutes.
Google doesn't care as long as its core business is moving. The android is just a capricious pastime for Sergei and Larry because they are so bored traveling around in the party plane (TM).
Despite what Google says, this isn't true "open source". Anytime a company writes the entire thing, and does almost all of the updates itself, it isn't open source, even if it adheres to the GPL.
It's only when the company gives the software to a totally independent organization for development, is it really open source.
And that's when the problems start.