The mental stroking I see here among iPhone lovers are incredible. The Pre is not targeting the iPhone, it is targeting a space above the iPhone. The Cook IP talk is all lawyer-speak. Palm's Pre is not in any serious infringement territory (yes, this is assessment is part of my current job responsibility).
The Pre is in infringement territory with it having been developed by ex-Apple employees and uses the exact same gestures as the iPhone.
Quote:
iPhone is a best-in-class consumer media device. However it is at best, a below average business phone. The Treo, which is generations older than the iPhone, is a superior business device RIGHT NOW. But the iPhone is not in the same class as the Pre
I don't see anyone using the Treo as a business device.
We haven't really seen anything special about the Pre as a business phone. I've seen it said that the Pre's syncing feature is consumer centric and not desirable for business use.
Their is nothing that prevents document editing apps on the iPhone. Seems no developer has felt it was needed.
Quote:
I have to shut down a internet app, in order to answer a text message with the iPhone (assuming I could even learn to easily send SMS messages with that silly screen-only input). Already, that made the iPhone more useful as a paperweight than a phone for me, even if it had thousands of free apps and could run a Powerpoint presentation.
This clearly shows you are not entirely objective on this subject. The iPhone does have a thousand free apps and it can read Power Point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swan
Scenes in movies like "Minority Report" were inspired not by Apple and the iPhone, but by other defense-related apps. Second, that feature is not "make or break". True multi-tasking is a "make or break" feature. iPhone might have that functionality someday.
Minority Report? Are you serious. You do realize that was just make believe. Based on no real working technology.
The iPhone does have true multi tasking. The phone app, SMS, and email run constantly run in the background. This is not an open API to the developers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swan
The Palm OS, not the devices, is what held the Treo from maximizing its capability. The Pre is just the first of dozen devices that will use the Web OS. Palm has known for years it could no longer stay with the limitations of the current Palm OS. The sale of the Palm OS to Access and the interim move to Windows devices were examples of this.
Early Palm PDAs and smartphones excelled mostly because of the superior OS (at the time). The Apple Newton failed because its poor and user-unfriendly OS (I had a Newton). It is obvious the open-source, Linux-based Palm Web OS is key to the Palm strategy, not the device. Devices come and go. Ask anyone with a v1 iPod.
The problem with this strategy is that software built for the Pre will be built for the current hardware. If Palm introduces different Pre phones with different input methods, developers will have to design different software to accommodate these different input methods. Consumers will have make sure they download the software for their phone and not a different phone.
Every iPhone is exactly the same, so developers only have to design their apps for one input method.
I'm very impressed by the mysterious powers of Pre fans, who can intuit, from a demo video, all kinds of things about the likely outcome of any potential litigation, Palm's roadmap 5 years out, and the many, many ways the Pre makes the iPhone look hopelessly out of date.
How can Apple patent multi-touch features/gestures? Doesn't ASUS' Eee PC trackpads have multi-touch? I don't see Apple going after them since MacBooks have the same functionality.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
If they thought they had a winnable case, I'm sure they would have. It may be that your idea of "a direct copy" and the legal systems notions thereof differ.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
Then that would mean that Palm too has dubious IP.
An orthogonal array of icons with a status bar on top is hardly something special, for all I know, that might go back as far as Xerox.
I don't think anyone is laying any exclusive claim to a built-in app store, if something like that got IP protections, then I think that would go against the original intent of allowing IP.
The webOS user interface has the iPhone beat in many areas but Palm doesn't have the integrated ecosystem that Apple does with OS X, notebooks, iPods, iTunes, AppStore etc. Maybe Apple should consider buying them, it might be less expensive than fighting it out in court.
They do require 3rd party software support and good connection with PC & Mac, but I think if they do that nice they can do without complete portfolio...
Agreed. Sadly however, Palm being acquired by Microsoft is also a likely option right now although I would rather see Riim do it if anyone does.
RIM... they already have nice rounded offer in mobile phones, while MS could be tempted to come out with their "own" winPhone. Unfortunately that would be the end of WebOS, and, in the long run, end of Palm...
(... unless MS comes out with pocket version of 7 which is kind of unlikely)
It's not posturing, companies should and will defend their IP. You can't just throw all multi-touch together as one as the method can be very different. Apple's capacitance touchscreen tech was purchased and it's a patent that they need to hold onto vigorously as all other current touchscreen tech, IMO, sucks in comparison. The only downfall of Apple's method is that you can't wear gloves or have wet finger when using it.
I'm pretty sure Opta Touch and some other smartphones have multitouch and it seem to be working fine. Is it different technology..?
This looks like pathetic whingeing from Palm now that their market is threatened...and well it should be! If multi-touch has been around for 20 years, why didn't Palm release it...say 10 years ago??? I'd hope that their failure to capitalise on their supposed "IP" would mean something but it all looks like smoke and mirrors to me.
For all those who didn't click on the above link. I highly recommend it. Best entertainment I've had in a while.
UN-PHUKIN-BELIEVABLE
Truly.
It truly is staggering! I have to assume Hugh Griffiths had only worked for M$ for a few days when he was interviewed to have come across as so totally clueless.
That is exactly how I use the iPhone with gloves on. I lick the fingertip of the glove, which works just well enough to answer the phone but not much more than that, otherwise I agree, that is a disadvantage of the capacitance implementation. Salt water also works if you happen to have any handy.
lol lick the finger tip of your glove!! Classic!
I wonder if Steve Jobs have thought of that one
Apple should include that tip in the user manual : rolf
Q: Why has Microsoft gone back to DRM when the vast majority of music services have ditched it?
A: It's a first step. We're doing this in conjunction with a third-party provider. We'll be looking to enhance the service if we get some interest from consumers. They certainly tell us that they like listening to music while they are out and about, on their mobile phones.
At the moment, to be honest with you, we don't have the functionality in-house to provide a mechanism for transferring between mobile phones and PC. We don't have that functionality available.
Q: With the likes of iTunes and Amazon offering DRM-free music that you can play on any device, why would anyone choose the MSN Mobile service?
A: There may well be people who just want to listen to the track on their mobile alone.
Q: They can do that with iTunes and Amazon.
A: We will see what the outcome of this is. We'll see whether customers find it an acceptable proposition or not. We've been encouraged by the results in the first couple of weeks. It's ultimately down to consumer choice. We'd like to have offered a fuller service, we weren't in a position to do so for a number of reasons.
Q: What is your message to consumers - why should I come to you instead of Amazon or iTunes? What do you offer that none of your competitors do?
A: There's a whole bunch of people who are very loyal to MSN on the web and there's now almost a million users of MSN Mobile every month, within the space of 12 months of it being launched.
So there's a whole bunch of people who are using MSN on their mobile phone for a whole variety of reasons. And we're saying to them, if you want to download music, it's available here. If you don't, that's fine.
It's a consumer's choice and they will decide if they're happy with the MSN Music service or if they want to go somewhere else.
Q: The fee for downloading tracks - £1.50 - is relatively high compared to 79p on iTunes and less than that on certain Amazon tracks. Why is that?
A: We're constantly reviewing our pricing and if we feel this price point is incorrect, we'll look to amend it.
Q: If I buy these songs on your service - and they're locked to my phone - what happens when I upgrade my phone in six months' time?
A: Well, I think you know the answer to that.
Q: Can you really expect people to buy music that's locked to a device they upgrade every 12 to 18 months?
A: I didn't realise phones were churning that quickly in the marketplace these days. I'm sure there are some users who change their phone every year. This is an introduction - it's a toe in the water for MSN Mobile and we'll see how the service develops and we'll keep a very close eye on it, and we'll look to amend and change it as necessary as time progresses.
The Pre is in infringement territory with it having been developed by ex-Apple employees and uses the exact same gestures as the iPhone.
Wow. Bold statements with zero (no, none, NADA) evidence to back them up. But I forget, Apple fanboys don't need evidence to accuse other people of being horrible nasty bad people.
Let me tell this to you straight: Apple is *EVIL*. Evil evil evil. Apple Corporation does nasty, dirty, filthy immoral things every day, they treat their customers like shit, they're as bad as Microsoft, they just have better PR.
They also make kick-ass computers and a great telephone. Which is their only saving grace and why I own a MacBook and an iPhone.
I just don't "get" these "Anything Apple does is right, anything someone else does is wrong, and no evidence is needed" fanboys. Apple is a CORPORATION. As in, INHERENTLY a psychopathic institution with no conscience and no goal other than to extract as much money from people's pockets as possible. It's written into the LAW that they can't have a conscience, they'd get sued by their shareholders if they ran the company as if it were a normal decent human being that enjoys helping others and sharing with those in need. It is to Apple's credit that they make kick-ass products as their primary method of extracting money from people's pockets, but that doesn't mean they're the *only* corporation capable of making kick-ass products.
Frankly, I find that the iPhone's user interface is a big rip-off of the old PalmOS. The only thing it has UI-wise that the old PalmOS doesn't have is the pinching stuff. Everything else -- the rows of icons in Springboard, the four icons across the bottom, etc. -- is a blatant rip-off of PalmOS, even to the on-screen keyboard (which Palm did in all of their pre-Treo PDA's if you touched the right place on the screen). Even the single-tasking UI is identical to what PalmOS did. So if Apple decides to sue Palm over some nonsense (the Pre doesn't even use gestures on the screen, it uses gestures in a dedicated "gesture area" like the old PalmOS had a specific "writing area"), I'm quite sure that Palm has grounds to sue and get the iPhone taken off the market.
But you know, this is all bullsh*t. Let the products meet in the marketplace, and may the best product win.
Quote:
I don't see anyone using the Treo as a business device.
Treos and Crackberries are the only things I *do* see used as business devices. I got my Treo because my boss had one. Still a better phone than the iPhone, just not as good as an Internet device (the Palm email and web clients suck the big one). Internet on the road is important to me so I have an iPhone. But every day I run into things the iPhone won't do that the Palm *would* do -- such as, for example, allow me to have sorted 'ToDo' lists by category so I can have personal ToDo's, business ToDo's, shopping ToDo's etc. each sorted by priority and/or due date. Or allow me to write a memo that is sync'ed with the computer so I can edit the memo with a real keyboard. Or ... anyhow. The notion that the iPhone is this somehow perfect entity is utter nonsense. I've used every smartphone available on the American continent and as a business smartphone, the iPhone is pretty mediocre -- other than its Internet capabilities, where it is utterly brilliant. Which is important to me, because I often need usable Internet capabilities on the road, but it is still frustrating that the iPhone is so mediocre for business purposes. Can't even sync memos. (*SNORT*). How pathetic.
Quote:
Their is nothing that prevents document editing apps on the iPhone. Seems no developer has felt it was needed.
Uhm, iPhone applications are required by the developer agreement (and by Apple's own vetting) to run in a sandbox. Sandboxed applications by definition aren't allowed to access documents stored outside of the sandbox. DOH! I looked into writing a document editing application on the iPhone. My conclusion is that it would only work if I leveraged Google Docs and saved the documents on the Internet, not on the phone. Otherwise if I e.g. downloaded a document off the Internet onto the phone via Safari then later wanted to edit the document, I wouldn't be able to access the document because it would be outside my sandbox. Needless to say, requiring documents to be exported to Google Docs before being able to edit them on the iPhone doesn't exactly work as a business model, because businesses do not allow their critical business documents to be stored on third party servers not under their control. (This is the same problem the Android phone has -- yes, they can edit documents, but no, it' s not usable for business purposes because you have to export the documents to Google Docs first).
And then you go on further to show you have absolutely no (zero) idea of how to write iPhone applications, or that you can run 1999 PalmOS applications on a 2009 Treo despite the two having entirely different hardware including a different processor, or etc., so I'll leave it here. I haven't seen a Pre personally, and am not convinced that it's going to be significantly better than the iPhone. As for the notion that one phone or the other rips off concepts from the other company, from where I sit there are no innocent parties there, so I frankly hold no truck with such idiotic arguments. Let the phones meet in the marketplace, and may the best phone win. The only people who win legal arguments are lawyers, not consumers. Consumers are *always* the losers when the lawyers get involved, because then it's lawyers, not the best product, which wins.
Hey look, it must be time for me to drag out Addabox's corollary to Goodwin's Law, which as I originally posted went like this:
Quote:
I propose an Apple Insider specific variant of Goodwin's Law: as the length of a thread increases, the probability that a poster will begin to shriek about "Apple fan boys" approaches one.
It follows that the first poster to do so has lost the argument and the thread is over.
Hey look, it must be time for me to drag out Addabox's corollary to Goodwin's Law, which as I originally posted went like this:
Like in the evolution vs creation threads, no matter what happens, no matter how long it gets, the evolution side (the side of good) must always be the last to post. I'd say keep going.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
Wow. Bold statements with zero (no, none, NADA) evidence to back them up. But I forget, Apple fanboys don't need evidence to accuse other people of being horrible nasty bad people.
Perhaps you simply don't know the evidence. Pre was unarguably developed by ex-Apple employees. Apple unarguably has patents on the iPhone's touch screen gestures. What other evidence do you need?
I didn't say Palm were horrible nasty people.
Quote:
Let me tell this to you straight: Apple is *EVIL*. Evil evil evil. Apple Corporation does nasty, dirty, filthy immoral things every day, they treat their customers like shit, they're as bad as Microsoft, they just have better PR.
Exactly what evil has Apple perpetuated?
Quote:
I just don't "get" these "Anything Apple does is right, anything someone else does is wrong, and no evidence is needed" fanboys. Apple is a CORPORATION. As in, INHERENTLY a psychopathic institution with no conscience and no goal other than to extract as much money from people's pockets as possible. It's written into the LAW that they can't have a conscience, they'd get sued by their shareholders if they ran the company as if it were a normal decent human being that enjoys helping others and sharing with those in need. It is to Apple's credit that they make kick-ass products as their primary method of extracting money from people's pockets, but that doesn't mean they're the *only* corporation capable of making kick-ass products.
No one has said everything Apple does is right. We don't even know if Apple would attempt to sue Palm or not. I myself am not sure I would support Apple suing Palm. Its simply a fact that if Apple is awarded patents for iPhone gestures it can sue someone for using those gestures without permission.
And yes corporations are in business to make money. That in of itself is not inherently evil or against humanity.
Quote:
Frankly, I find that the iPhone's user interface is a big rip-off of the old PalmOS. The only thing it has UI-wise that the old PalmOS doesn't have is the pinching stuff. Everything else -- the rows of icons in Springboard, the four icons across the bottom, etc. -- is a blatant rip-off of PalmOS, even to the on-screen keyboard (which Palm did in all of their pre-Treo PDA's if you touched the right place on the screen). Even the single-tasking UI is identical to what PalmOS did. So if Apple decides to sue Palm over some nonsense (the Pre doesn't even use gestures on the screen, it uses gestures in a dedicated "gesture area" like the old PalmOS had a specific "writing area"), I'm quite sure that Palm has grounds to sue and get the iPhone taken off the market.
The icon based UI did not originate with Palm. Many products used the UI long before Palm existed, including Apple's Newton.
Quote:
Treos and Crackberries are the only things I *do* see used as business devices.
All of the business people I see are only using BlackBerry's. Clearly Palms current marketshare shows that it is not a common business device.
Quote:
The notion that the iPhone is this somehow perfect entity is utter nonsense.
This only reveals you own bias, no one called the iPhone the perfect entity.
Quote:
Uhm, iPhone applications are required by the developer agreement (and by Apple's own vetting) to run in a sandbox. Sandboxed applications by definition aren't allowed to access documents stored outside of the sandbox. DOH! I looked into writing a document editing application on the iPhone. My conclusion is that it would only work if I leveraged Google Docs and saved the documents on the Internet, not on the phone. (This is the same problem the Android phone has -- yes, they can edit documents, but no, it' s not usable for business purposes because you have to export the documents to Google Docs first).
Still it is possible to create an app that edits documents on the iPhone. Whether or not you find the implementation of that solution useful is a different matter.
Quote:
And then you go on further to show you have absolutely no (zero) idea of how to write iPhone applications, or that you can run 1999 PalmOS applications on a 2009 Treo despite the two having entirely different hardware including a different processor, or etc., so I'll leave it here
What I talked about was the design of the input method not the hardware. The basic design and input methods of Palm devices mostly remained the same, as the OS hasn't really changed that much either.
Developing apps for very different phones is a problem with various different Windows Mobile phones and Nokia phones.
Quote:
I haven't seen a Pre personally, and am not convinced that it's going to be significantly better than the iPhone. As for the notion that one phone or the other rips off concepts from the other company, from where I sit there are no innocent parties there, so I frankly hold no truck with such idiotic arguments. Let the phones meet in the marketplace, and may the best phone win. The only people who win legal arguments are lawyers, not consumers. Consumers are *always* the losers when the lawyers get involved, because then it's lawyers, not the best product, which wins.
You are only looking at this from one view point. Palm also has patents that it has aggressively protected and don't allow others to infringe upon. So they don't participate in the notion of letting others freely use their IP and simply compete.
Comments
The mental stroking I see here among iPhone lovers are incredible. The Pre is not targeting the iPhone, it is targeting a space above the iPhone. The Cook IP talk is all lawyer-speak. Palm's Pre is not in any serious infringement territory (yes, this is assessment is part of my current job responsibility).
The Pre is in infringement territory with it having been developed by ex-Apple employees and uses the exact same gestures as the iPhone.
iPhone is a best-in-class consumer media device. However it is at best, a below average business phone. The Treo, which is generations older than the iPhone, is a superior business device RIGHT NOW. But the iPhone is not in the same class as the Pre
I don't see anyone using the Treo as a business device.
We haven't really seen anything special about the Pre as a business phone. I've seen it said that the Pre's syncing feature is consumer centric and not desirable for business use.
Their is nothing that prevents document editing apps on the iPhone. Seems no developer has felt it was needed.
I have to shut down a internet app, in order to answer a text message with the iPhone (assuming I could even learn to easily send SMS messages with that silly screen-only input). Already, that made the iPhone more useful as a paperweight than a phone for me, even if it had thousands of free apps and could run a Powerpoint presentation.
This clearly shows you are not entirely objective on this subject. The iPhone does have a thousand free apps and it can read Power Point.
Scenes in movies like "Minority Report" were inspired not by Apple and the iPhone, but by other defense-related apps. Second, that feature is not "make or break". True multi-tasking is a "make or break" feature. iPhone might have that functionality someday.
Minority Report? Are you serious. You do realize that was just make believe. Based on no real working technology.
The iPhone does have true multi tasking. The phone app, SMS, and email run constantly run in the background. This is not an open API to the developers.
The Palm OS, not the devices, is what held the Treo from maximizing its capability. The Pre is just the first of dozen devices that will use the Web OS. Palm has known for years it could no longer stay with the limitations of the current Palm OS. The sale of the Palm OS to Access and the interim move to Windows devices were examples of this.
Early Palm PDAs and smartphones excelled mostly because of the superior OS (at the time). The Apple Newton failed because its poor and user-unfriendly OS (I had a Newton). It is obvious the open-source, Linux-based Palm Web OS is key to the Palm strategy, not the device. Devices come and go. Ask anyone with a v1 iPod.
The problem with this strategy is that software built for the Pre will be built for the current hardware. If Palm introduces different Pre phones with different input methods, developers will have to design different software to accommodate these different input methods. Consumers will have make sure they download the software for their phone and not a different phone.
Every iPhone is exactly the same, so developers only have to design their apps for one input method.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
If they thought they had a winnable case, I'm sure they would have. It may be that your idea of "a direct copy" and the legal systems notions thereof differ.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
And the fact that Palm has had their app-store on their phones for 5+ years, I think Palm should have went after Apple along time ago.
Then that would mean that Palm too has dubious IP.
An orthogonal array of icons with a status bar on top is hardly something special, for all I know, that might go back as far as Xerox.
I don't think anyone is laying any exclusive claim to a built-in app store, if something like that got IP protections, then I think that would go against the original intent of allowing IP.
The webOS user interface has the iPhone beat in many areas but Palm doesn't have the integrated ecosystem that Apple does with OS X, notebooks, iPods, iTunes, AppStore etc. Maybe Apple should consider buying them, it might be less expensive than fighting it out in court.
They do require 3rd party software support and good connection with PC & Mac, but I think if they do that nice they can do without complete portfolio...
Agreed. Sadly however, Palm being acquired by Microsoft is also a likely option right now although I would rather see Riim do it if anyone does.
RIM... they already have nice rounded offer in mobile phones, while MS could be tempted to come out with their "own" winPhone. Unfortunately that would be the end of WebOS, and, in the long run, end of Palm...
(... unless MS comes out with pocket version of 7 which is kind of unlikely)
It's not posturing, companies should and will defend their IP. You can't just throw all multi-touch together as one as the method can be very different. Apple's capacitance touchscreen tech was purchased and it's a patent that they need to hold onto vigorously as all other current touchscreen tech, IMO, sucks in comparison. The only downfall of Apple's method is that you can't wear gloves or have wet finger when using it.
I'm pretty sure Opta Touch and some other smartphones have multitouch and it seem to be working fine. Is it different technology..?
Oh, they still have some brilliant ideas on how to make WinMo the best user experience evar!
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/245859/q...rn-to-drm.html
For all those who didn't click on the above link. I highly recommend it. Best entertainment I've had in a while.
UN-PHUKIN-BELIEVABLE
Truly.
For all those who didn't click on the above link. I highly recommend it. Best entertainment I've had in a while.
UN-PHUKIN-BELIEVABLE
Truly.
It truly is staggering! I have to assume Hugh Griffiths had only worked for M$ for a few days when he was interviewed to have come across as so totally clueless.
That is exactly how I use the iPhone with gloves on. I lick the fingertip of the glove, which works just well enough to answer the phone but not much more than that, otherwise I agree, that is a disadvantage of the capacitance implementation. Salt water also works if you happen to have any handy.
lol lick the finger tip of your glove!! Classic!
I wonder if Steve Jobs have thought of that one
Apple should include that tip in the user manual : rolf
Oh, they still have some brilliant ideas on how to make WinMo the best user experience evar!
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/245859/q...rn-to-drm.html
lol Microsoft has lost the plot!
Q: Why has Microsoft gone back to DRM when the vast majority of music services have ditched it?
A: It's a first step. We're doing this in conjunction with a third-party provider. We'll be looking to enhance the service if we get some interest from consumers. They certainly tell us that they like listening to music while they are out and about, on their mobile phones.
At the moment, to be honest with you, we don't have the functionality in-house to provide a mechanism for transferring between mobile phones and PC. We don't have that functionality available.
Q: With the likes of iTunes and Amazon offering DRM-free music that you can play on any device, why would anyone choose the MSN Mobile service?
A: There may well be people who just want to listen to the track on their mobile alone.
Q: They can do that with iTunes and Amazon.
A: We will see what the outcome of this is. We'll see whether customers find it an acceptable proposition or not. We've been encouraged by the results in the first couple of weeks. It's ultimately down to consumer choice. We'd like to have offered a fuller service, we weren't in a position to do so for a number of reasons.
Q: What is your message to consumers - why should I come to you instead of Amazon or iTunes? What do you offer that none of your competitors do?
A: There's a whole bunch of people who are very loyal to MSN on the web and there's now almost a million users of MSN Mobile every month, within the space of 12 months of it being launched.
So there's a whole bunch of people who are using MSN on their mobile phone for a whole variety of reasons. And we're saying to them, if you want to download music, it's available here. If you don't, that's fine.
It's a consumer's choice and they will decide if they're happy with the MSN Music service or if they want to go somewhere else.
Q: The fee for downloading tracks - £1.50 - is relatively high compared to 79p on iTunes and less than that on certain Amazon tracks. Why is that?
A: We're constantly reviewing our pricing and if we feel this price point is incorrect, we'll look to amend it.
Q: If I buy these songs on your service - and they're locked to my phone - what happens when I upgrade my phone in six months' time?
A: Well, I think you know the answer to that.
Q: Can you really expect people to buy music that's locked to a device they upgrade every 12 to 18 months?
A: I didn't realise phones were churning that quickly in the marketplace these days. I'm sure there are some users who change their phone every year. This is an introduction - it's a toe in the water for MSN Mobile and we'll see how the service develops and we'll keep a very close eye on it, and we'll look to amend and change it as necessary as time progresses.
. I lick the fingertip of the glove, which works just well enough to answer the phone but not much more than that
Nasty!
The Pre is in infringement territory with it having been developed by ex-Apple employees and uses the exact same gestures as the iPhone.
Wow. Bold statements with zero (no, none, NADA) evidence to back them up. But I forget, Apple fanboys don't need evidence to accuse other people of being horrible nasty bad people.
Let me tell this to you straight: Apple is *EVIL*. Evil evil evil. Apple Corporation does nasty, dirty, filthy immoral things every day, they treat their customers like shit, they're as bad as Microsoft, they just have better PR.
They also make kick-ass computers and a great telephone. Which is their only saving grace and why I own a MacBook and an iPhone.
I just don't "get" these "Anything Apple does is right, anything someone else does is wrong, and no evidence is needed" fanboys. Apple is a CORPORATION. As in, INHERENTLY a psychopathic institution with no conscience and no goal other than to extract as much money from people's pockets as possible. It's written into the LAW that they can't have a conscience, they'd get sued by their shareholders if they ran the company as if it were a normal decent human being that enjoys helping others and sharing with those in need. It is to Apple's credit that they make kick-ass products as their primary method of extracting money from people's pockets, but that doesn't mean they're the *only* corporation capable of making kick-ass products.
Frankly, I find that the iPhone's user interface is a big rip-off of the old PalmOS. The only thing it has UI-wise that the old PalmOS doesn't have is the pinching stuff. Everything else -- the rows of icons in Springboard, the four icons across the bottom, etc. -- is a blatant rip-off of PalmOS, even to the on-screen keyboard (which Palm did in all of their pre-Treo PDA's if you touched the right place on the screen). Even the single-tasking UI is identical to what PalmOS did. So if Apple decides to sue Palm over some nonsense (the Pre doesn't even use gestures on the screen, it uses gestures in a dedicated "gesture area" like the old PalmOS had a specific "writing area"), I'm quite sure that Palm has grounds to sue and get the iPhone taken off the market.
But you know, this is all bullsh*t. Let the products meet in the marketplace, and may the best product win.
I don't see anyone using the Treo as a business device.
Treos and Crackberries are the only things I *do* see used as business devices. I got my Treo because my boss had one. Still a better phone than the iPhone, just not as good as an Internet device (the Palm email and web clients suck the big one). Internet on the road is important to me so I have an iPhone. But every day I run into things the iPhone won't do that the Palm *would* do -- such as, for example, allow me to have sorted 'ToDo' lists by category so I can have personal ToDo's, business ToDo's, shopping ToDo's etc. each sorted by priority and/or due date. Or allow me to write a memo that is sync'ed with the computer so I can edit the memo with a real keyboard. Or ... anyhow. The notion that the iPhone is this somehow perfect entity is utter nonsense. I've used every smartphone available on the American continent and as a business smartphone, the iPhone is pretty mediocre -- other than its Internet capabilities, where it is utterly brilliant. Which is important to me, because I often need usable Internet capabilities on the road, but it is still frustrating that the iPhone is so mediocre for business purposes. Can't even sync memos. (*SNORT*). How pathetic.
Their is nothing that prevents document editing apps on the iPhone. Seems no developer has felt it was needed.
Uhm, iPhone applications are required by the developer agreement (and by Apple's own vetting) to run in a sandbox. Sandboxed applications by definition aren't allowed to access documents stored outside of the sandbox. DOH! I looked into writing a document editing application on the iPhone. My conclusion is that it would only work if I leveraged Google Docs and saved the documents on the Internet, not on the phone. Otherwise if I e.g. downloaded a document off the Internet onto the phone via Safari then later wanted to edit the document, I wouldn't be able to access the document because it would be outside my sandbox. Needless to say, requiring documents to be exported to Google Docs before being able to edit them on the iPhone doesn't exactly work as a business model, because businesses do not allow their critical business documents to be stored on third party servers not under their control. (This is the same problem the Android phone has -- yes, they can edit documents, but no, it' s not usable for business purposes because you have to export the documents to Google Docs first).
And then you go on further to show you have absolutely no (zero) idea of how to write iPhone applications, or that you can run 1999 PalmOS applications on a 2009 Treo despite the two having entirely different hardware including a different processor, or etc., so I'll leave it here. I haven't seen a Pre personally, and am not convinced that it's going to be significantly better than the iPhone. As for the notion that one phone or the other rips off concepts from the other company, from where I sit there are no innocent parties there, so I frankly hold no truck with such idiotic arguments. Let the phones meet in the marketplace, and may the best phone win. The only people who win legal arguments are lawyers, not consumers. Consumers are *always* the losers when the lawyers get involved, because then it's lawyers, not the best product, which wins.
I propose an Apple Insider specific variant of Goodwin's Law: as the length of a thread increases, the probability that a poster will begin to shriek about "Apple fan boys" approaches one.
It follows that the first poster to do so has lost the argument and the thread is over.
Hey look, it must be time for me to drag out Addabox's corollary to Goodwin's Law, which as I originally posted went like this:
Like in the evolution vs creation threads, no matter what happens, no matter how long it gets, the evolution side (the side of good) must always be the last to post. I'd say keep going.
Apple Newton OS 3 years before the Palm Pilot.
Considering the OSx interface on the iphone is a DIRECT COPY of the Palm OS that has been around since Lincoln was president. All Apple did was spruce up the icons.
Wow. Bold statements with zero (no, none, NADA) evidence to back them up. But I forget, Apple fanboys don't need evidence to accuse other people of being horrible nasty bad people.
Perhaps you simply don't know the evidence. Pre was unarguably developed by ex-Apple employees. Apple unarguably has patents on the iPhone's touch screen gestures. What other evidence do you need?
I didn't say Palm were horrible nasty people.
Let me tell this to you straight: Apple is *EVIL*. Evil evil evil. Apple Corporation does nasty, dirty, filthy immoral things every day, they treat their customers like shit, they're as bad as Microsoft, they just have better PR.
Exactly what evil has Apple perpetuated?
I just don't "get" these "Anything Apple does is right, anything someone else does is wrong, and no evidence is needed" fanboys. Apple is a CORPORATION. As in, INHERENTLY a psychopathic institution with no conscience and no goal other than to extract as much money from people's pockets as possible. It's written into the LAW that they can't have a conscience, they'd get sued by their shareholders if they ran the company as if it were a normal decent human being that enjoys helping others and sharing with those in need. It is to Apple's credit that they make kick-ass products as their primary method of extracting money from people's pockets, but that doesn't mean they're the *only* corporation capable of making kick-ass products.
No one has said everything Apple does is right. We don't even know if Apple would attempt to sue Palm or not. I myself am not sure I would support Apple suing Palm. Its simply a fact that if Apple is awarded patents for iPhone gestures it can sue someone for using those gestures without permission.
And yes corporations are in business to make money. That in of itself is not inherently evil or against humanity.
Frankly, I find that the iPhone's user interface is a big rip-off of the old PalmOS. The only thing it has UI-wise that the old PalmOS doesn't have is the pinching stuff. Everything else -- the rows of icons in Springboard, the four icons across the bottom, etc. -- is a blatant rip-off of PalmOS, even to the on-screen keyboard (which Palm did in all of their pre-Treo PDA's if you touched the right place on the screen). Even the single-tasking UI is identical to what PalmOS did. So if Apple decides to sue Palm over some nonsense (the Pre doesn't even use gestures on the screen, it uses gestures in a dedicated "gesture area" like the old PalmOS had a specific "writing area"), I'm quite sure that Palm has grounds to sue and get the iPhone taken off the market.
The icon based UI did not originate with Palm. Many products used the UI long before Palm existed, including Apple's Newton.
Treos and Crackberries are the only things I *do* see used as business devices.
All of the business people I see are only using BlackBerry's. Clearly Palms current marketshare shows that it is not a common business device.
The notion that the iPhone is this somehow perfect entity is utter nonsense.
This only reveals you own bias, no one called the iPhone the perfect entity.
Uhm, iPhone applications are required by the developer agreement (and by Apple's own vetting) to run in a sandbox. Sandboxed applications by definition aren't allowed to access documents stored outside of the sandbox. DOH! I looked into writing a document editing application on the iPhone. My conclusion is that it would only work if I leveraged Google Docs and saved the documents on the Internet, not on the phone. (This is the same problem the Android phone has -- yes, they can edit documents, but no, it' s not usable for business purposes because you have to export the documents to Google Docs first).
Still it is possible to create an app that edits documents on the iPhone. Whether or not you find the implementation of that solution useful is a different matter.
And then you go on further to show you have absolutely no (zero) idea of how to write iPhone applications, or that you can run 1999 PalmOS applications on a 2009 Treo despite the two having entirely different hardware including a different processor, or etc., so I'll leave it here
What I talked about was the design of the input method not the hardware. The basic design and input methods of Palm devices mostly remained the same, as the OS hasn't really changed that much either.
Developing apps for very different phones is a problem with various different Windows Mobile phones and Nokia phones.
I haven't seen a Pre personally, and am not convinced that it's going to be significantly better than the iPhone. As for the notion that one phone or the other rips off concepts from the other company, from where I sit there are no innocent parties there, so I frankly hold no truck with such idiotic arguments. Let the phones meet in the marketplace, and may the best phone win. The only people who win legal arguments are lawyers, not consumers. Consumers are *always* the losers when the lawyers get involved, because then it's lawyers, not the best product, which wins.
You are only looking at this from one view point. Palm also has patents that it has aggressively protected and don't allow others to infringe upon. So they don't participate in the notion of letting others freely use their IP and simply compete.