Was he stroking a cat when he said this? With a straight face?
ATT didn't quite finish embarrassing themselves at the Macworld Keynote, eh?
Remember, it has to be a fluffy, white cat (though Dr. Evil's hairless cat was a cute parody of the original):
Typical ATT excecutive
And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.
i don't care about surfing the web on the iPhone. i just want to have a single item in my pocket instead of my iPod and my phone. my phone can only hold 100 songs and i can't wait to toss out the moto UI. i'm definately NOT in the 1% you speak of, but i can afford 50 - 60 a month for a plan. [i don't want to spend that much, but i can definately afford it.] still if i can pay per use for the net, that's what i'll do. i would only want it for google maps when i'm lost wandering around the north end of boston.
HOW ABOUT GPS VOICE GUIDED TRIPS (as in GARMIN) ???
This thing does have wi-fi right? I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.
It would also be nice if it had user changeable batteries and supported SD cards. And i'm still waiting for word on 3rd party apps. Would be nice to have a reader app for my ebooks and also skype.
Here we are, talking about WiFi vs. 3G, and other technologies such as WiMax, which I'm invested in.
But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.
Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.
I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.
I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter. If Safari on iPhone is fast enough and smart enough, it might be interesting to make widget-sized web apps instead of actual widgets (Lord knows those sometimes take longer to refresh than an actual web page).
I'm pretty sure they meant actual Widgets. Remember, the iPhone has Cocoa and it has Widgets, therefore you can develop for it. Further making my point, in Leopard you'll be able to sync Widgets to a .Mac account, not only that, but Google is Apple's partner in the iPhone, so even if Apple never releases an SDK to the public, Google still has their own.
If you want my guess, Google is probably going to be pushing their current mobile offerings onto the iPhone. I doubt we'll see their Gmail Java App since Mail is already there and it would be completely redundant. Google Calendar will likely integrate with the Calendar app, so straight from their mobile page, Search and Maps is already there, so that leaves News, SMS, and Blogger, SMS is there just because the iPhone has SMS messaging, They'll probably have a Blogger widget, and News? Either integrated into Search or in a Widget of it's own.
Yahoo may be developing for iPhone as well, although if you ask me I think the only reason they got in is because of their partnership with AT&T. They talked a bit about OneSearch so that may be the Yahoo search engine they actually implement (Google will be the default period) they might develop a Local widget as an alternative to Google's widget, IM probably won't exist on the iPhone. So the other tabs on their mobile page are Flickr, News, Sports, Finance, and Entertainment. Flickr I see as a shoe in, and I'd rather not see the others or guess at them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.
.
I absolutely agree. I mean the man actually pulled out NOTE CARDS!!
It's not a pipe dream, it's just not needed because WiMax is just around the corner. Personally I'd take WiMax to the last mile or better yet, directly to my Macbook rather than DSL or WiFi any day. I'd cut my Airport Express/2WIRE from the Internet altogether and build a local network based around WiFi and Bluetooth, and WiMax for Internet.
I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.
Here we are, talking about WiFi vs. 3G, and other technologies such as WiMax, which I'm invested in.
But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.
Oh, the patent-pissing between the various 'fathers of 3G' has been going on for some time, Mel. And in all such battles, its mostly about money.
But it won't derail 3G, simply because there's too much money invested worldwide in 3G. In Europe, in the US, in Japan, etc., many carriers have all plunked down several billion a piece (and in Europe, have bought some TREMENDOUSLY expensive [by US standards] 3G spectrum that cost them many billions more). No one is going to lets those investments just get flushed down the toilet.
When one of the patent bully boys says "this could help WiMax" its more a PR tactic (designed to get a settlement) than reality. They're hoping to score points, they're not truly that worried about Wi-Max, at least not yet.
Don't get me wrong, WiMax could still make an impact, especially in certain developing nations that don't have huge, rich, established carriers who are heavily invested in 3G. But in most rich nations, 3G just has trememendous inertia on its side. AND WiMax is a bit late to the party, as most rich nations have 3G widely-deployed already.
Its just going to be tremendously hard for WiMax to dislodge that, which is part of why we've seen a steady ratcheting down of pro-WiMax hype in the past year or so. That and the fact that WiMax has been slower to get to market than anticipated.
This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.
I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.
Bleh, I haven't been following it as long, but I do know that Sprint-Nextel is working on it right now, so that's at least one service provider (but we do need more then that) and Intel did delay their WiMax offering in Santa Rosa... which pissed me off but none the less, AMD isn't even trying. Hopefully it'll be widespread by the time I start looking for a new laptop in about 18 months (I artificially limit the life span of any computer to 2 years)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowenbrown
I just noticed my customized google home page is now "iGoogle".
So that they can tell their grandchildren, when stuff such as haptics is all the rage: "Look, here's the brick that started it all" (much as it was the case with the original 5GB iPod, which is now a museum piece on my mantelpiece, and a regular conversation piece!).
Haptic... Most devices called haptic devices that I've seen are force feedback type, or that the feedback is through the sense of touch. I've never thought of iPhone as potentially being called haptic.
Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.
Good point
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevenmrgan
I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.
I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter.
I'm really against the heavy bandwidth requirements of web apps. I'd like to think I can download a series of apps (widgets?) optimised for the iPhone, and then have them update their data with minimal bandwidth (and thus high speed).
I expect that some parts of the iPhone will really shine - particularly the iPod music & video and the phone itself. The custom apps & web apps will need fine tuning, and I suspect the custom apps will be reasonably good. Apple will learn ALOT in the next few months about Web 2.0.
This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.
I think 3G is really sorting out it's data abilities. WiMax seems to still promise cheaper data (though this may be changing... is one inherently cheaper?).
I'd be happy with
* Standard 2G phone
* Free/cheap High speed Wifi from local access points
* Cheap/Slower WiMax when away from local access points.
I don't think it'll happen, but I'd be happy.
And I'm pretty certain Apple will not be the one to do that combo!
I think 3G is really sorting out it's data abilities. WiMax seems to still promise cheaper data (though this may be changing... is one inherently cheaper?).
Well, that's the problem with WiMax... its mostly promises, and little substance, thus far. \
There's a good recent article from The Economist that I'd recommend for anyone who's interested in the whole '3G vs WiMax' situation. It assesses the competing technologies pretty soberly and places them on more of a level playing field, as opposed to what we were hearing a couple of years ago, a la the 'WiMax will conquer all' hype that hasn't really been backed by reality. An excerpt:
But the economics of WiMax do not look as promising as the technology. In developed countries, it will struggle to compete with telephone or cable broadband on cost, except in remote areas. It will also be difficult for WiMax to compete with mobile-phone networks, given that operators have already signed up millions of customers, have strong brands and can upgrade their existing networks to provide roughly the same service, notes Alastair Brydon of Analysys, a consultancy. And in poor countries, the high initial cost of WiMax devices compared with mobile phones will make it a hard sell, he says.
Some of the claims made about WiMax are more myth than reality, says Mike Roberts of Informa Telecoms & Media, a market-research firm. Although it offers faster speeds than mobile networks, it consumes more battery power and requires more base stations to achieve coverage and penetrate building walls. Most networks will need licensed (ie, paid-for) spectrum to ensure good-quality service. The “one-tenth of the cost” estimate is based on rosy assumptions. And the latest enhancements of 3G technology, such as HSDPA and EV-DO, are improving fast. In a recent report Pyramid Research described the claims made for WiMax as “largely speculative and desperately theoretical”.
Comments
Was he stroking a cat when he said this? With a straight face?
ATT didn't quite finish embarrassing themselves at the Macworld Keynote, eh?
Remember, it has to be a fluffy, white cat (though Dr. Evil's hairless cat was a cute parody of the original):
Typical ATT excecutive
And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.
.
i don't care about surfing the web on the iPhone. i just want to have a single item in my pocket instead of my iPod and my phone. my phone can only hold 100 songs and i can't wait to toss out the moto UI. i'm definately NOT in the 1% you speak of, but i can afford 50 - 60 a month for a plan. [i don't want to spend that much, but i can definately afford it.] still if i can pay per use for the net, that's what i'll do. i would only want it for google maps when i'm lost wandering around the north end of boston.
HOW ABOUT GPS VOICE GUIDED TRIPS (as in GARMIN) ???
This thing does have wi-fi right? I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.
It would also be nice if it had user changeable batteries and supported SD cards. And i'm still waiting for word on 3rd party apps. Would be nice to have a reader app for my ebooks and also skype.
Why is a rat's ass so underrated?
HOW ABOUT GPS VOICE GUIDED TRIPS (as in GARMIN) ???
I'm pretty sure it has A-GPS.
Why is a rat's ass so underrated?
Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................
Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................
Is that with butter and garlic?
But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ad-for-3g.html
Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.
I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.
I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter. If Safari on iPhone is fast enough and smart enough, it might be interesting to make widget-sized web apps instead of actual widgets (Lord knows those sometimes take longer to refresh than an actual web page).
I'm pretty sure they meant actual Widgets. Remember, the iPhone has Cocoa and it has Widgets, therefore you can develop for it. Further making my point, in Leopard you'll be able to sync Widgets to a .Mac account, not only that, but Google is Apple's partner in the iPhone, so even if Apple never releases an SDK to the public, Google still has their own.
If you want my guess, Google is probably going to be pushing their current mobile offerings onto the iPhone. I doubt we'll see their Gmail Java App since Mail is already there and it would be completely redundant. Google Calendar will likely integrate with the Calendar app, so straight from their mobile page, Search and Maps is already there, so that leaves News, SMS, and Blogger, SMS is there just because the iPhone has SMS messaging, They'll probably have a Blogger widget, and News? Either integrated into Search or in a Widget of it's own.
Yahoo may be developing for iPhone as well, although if you ask me I think the only reason they got in is because of their partnership with AT&T. They talked a bit about OneSearch so that may be the Yahoo search engine they actually implement (Google will be the default period) they might develop a Local widget as an alternative to Google's widget, IM probably won't exist on the iPhone. So the other tabs on their mobile page are Flickr, News, Sports, Finance, and Entertainment. Flickr I see as a shoe in, and I'd rather not see the others or guess at them.
And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.
.
I absolutely agree. I mean the man actually pulled out NOTE CARDS!!
Sebastian
It's not a pipe dream, it's just not needed because WiMax is just around the corner. Personally I'd take WiMax to the last mile or better yet, directly to my Macbook rather than DSL or WiFi any day. I'd cut my Airport Express/2WIRE from the Internet altogether and build a local network based around WiFi and Bluetooth, and WiMax for Internet.
I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.
when did that happen?
Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................
Is that with butter and garlic?
Uhhh... suuure, yeah, that's what we meant. Heh. As food. Yes. The other way would be disgusting. Heh.
*runs*
.
Here we are, talking about WiFi vs. 3G, and other technologies such as WiMax, which I'm invested in.
But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ad-for-3g.html
Oh, the patent-pissing between the various 'fathers of 3G' has been going on for some time, Mel. And in all such battles, its mostly about money.
But it won't derail 3G, simply because there's too much money invested worldwide in 3G. In Europe, in the US, in Japan, etc., many carriers have all plunked down several billion a piece (and in Europe, have bought some TREMENDOUSLY expensive [by US standards] 3G spectrum that cost them many billions more). No one is going to lets those investments just get flushed down the toilet.
When one of the patent bully boys says "this could help WiMax" its more a PR tactic (designed to get a settlement) than reality. They're hoping to score points, they're not truly that worried about Wi-Max, at least not yet.
Don't get me wrong, WiMax could still make an impact, especially in certain developing nations that don't have huge, rich, established carriers who are heavily invested in 3G. But in most rich nations, 3G just has trememendous inertia on its side. AND WiMax is a bit late to the party, as most rich nations have 3G widely-deployed already.
Its just going to be tremendously hard for WiMax to dislodge that, which is part of why we've seen a steady ratcheting down of pro-WiMax hype in the past year or so. That and the fact that WiMax has been slower to get to market than anticipated.
This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.
.
I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.
Bleh, I haven't been following it as long, but I do know that Sprint-Nextel is working on it right now, so that's at least one service provider (but we do need more then that) and Intel did delay their WiMax offering in Santa Rosa... which pissed me off but none the less, AMD isn't even trying. Hopefully it'll be widespread by the time I start looking for a new laptop in about 18 months (I artificially limit the life span of any computer to 2 years)
I just noticed my customized google home page is now "iGoogle".
when did that happen?
4/30/07 at 8:59 PM Pacific Standard Time.
In other words, almost a month ago.
Sebastian
Why? It's a dupe. Here's the real deal.
-=|Mgkwho
I don't know, Digg is so stupid that I now regret posting there after I've sworn off it. It's not really worth arguing on or about.
So that they can tell their grandchildren, when stuff such as haptics is all the rage: "Look, here's the brick that started it all" (much as it was the case with the original 5GB iPod, which is now a museum piece on my mantelpiece, and a regular conversation piece!).
Haptic... Most devices called haptic devices that I've seen are force feedback type, or that the feedback is through the sense of touch. I've never thought of iPhone as potentially being called haptic.
Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.
Good point
I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.
I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter.
I'm really against the heavy bandwidth requirements of web apps. I'd like to think I can download a series of apps (widgets?) optimised for the iPhone, and then have them update their data with minimal bandwidth (and thus high speed).
I expect that some parts of the iPhone will really shine - particularly the iPod music & video and the phone itself. The custom apps & web apps will need fine tuning, and I suspect the custom apps will be reasonably good. Apple will learn ALOT in the next few months about Web 2.0.
This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.
I think 3G is really sorting out it's data abilities. WiMax seems to still promise cheaper data (though this may be changing... is one inherently cheaper?).
I'd be happy with
* Standard 2G phone
* Free/cheap High speed Wifi from local access points
* Cheap/Slower WiMax when away from local access points.
I don't think it'll happen, but I'd be happy.
And I'm pretty certain Apple will not be the one to do that combo!
Uhhh... suuure, yeah, that's what we meant. Heh. As food. Yes. The other way would be disgusting. Heh.
*runs*
.
Speak for yourself
Speak for yourself
Hey, you brought it up. I just exploited it for comedic purposes.
.
I think 3G is really sorting out it's data abilities. WiMax seems to still promise cheaper data (though this may be changing... is one inherently cheaper?).
Well, that's the problem with WiMax... its mostly promises, and little substance, thus far.
There's a good recent article from The Economist that I'd recommend for anyone who's interested in the whole '3G vs WiMax' situation. It assesses the competing technologies pretty soberly and places them on more of a level playing field, as opposed to what we were hearing a couple of years ago, a la the 'WiMax will conquer all' hype that hasn't really been backed by reality. An excerpt:
But the economics of WiMax do not look as promising as the technology. In developed countries, it will struggle to compete with telephone or cable broadband on cost, except in remote areas. It will also be difficult for WiMax to compete with mobile-phone networks, given that operators have already signed up millions of customers, have strong brands and can upgrade their existing networks to provide roughly the same service, notes Alastair Brydon of Analysys, a consultancy. And in poor countries, the high initial cost of WiMax devices compared with mobile phones will make it a hard sell, he says.
Some of the claims made about WiMax are more myth than reality, says Mike Roberts of Informa Telecoms & Media, a market-research firm. Although it offers faster speeds than mobile networks, it consumes more battery power and requires more base stations to achieve coverage and penetrate building walls. Most networks will need licensed (ie, paid-for) spectrum to ensure good-quality service. The “one-tenth of the cost” estimate is based on rosy assumptions. And the latest enhancements of 3G technology, such as HSDPA and EV-DO, are improving fast. In a recent report Pyramid Research described the claims made for WiMax as “largely speculative and desperately theoretical”.
From Article: WhyMax?
http://globaltechforum.eiu.com/index...1&doc_id=10181
.