"Verizon is also discovering the far greater demand that sophisticated smartphones with functional web browsers and video streaming services will exact on the network. Byrne told the audience "On [the new Android-based Motorola] Droid X, we’re seeing something like 5x the data usage of any other device." "
That's somewhat to be expected, it's a new device, people are going to use it and test it out, and the Droid X does come pre-loaded with the Blockbuster streaming movies app; that would like an iPhone coming pre-loaded with Netflix.
The first month I had my Pre Plus, I used 2 GB on Verizon, since then, I'm lucky to crack 200-300 MB, all my heavy usage is on Wifi. T
As far as Verizon-branding, the only Verizon app it came pre-loaded with, was VZ Navigator (which I hid when I rooted it), and the mobile hotspot app I had to download from the app catalog.
Assuming your perspective is correct: How come we are not using the mobile devices that were pioneered by Palm or the one shown by Bill Gates, many years ago?
[...]
Can you cite innovations that were initiated by Microsoft that became game changers beyond desktop computing?
DaHarder probably thinks MS paved the way for Apple to make the iPad successful.
To his credit, he actually said something positive about Apple, even though he watered it down to being virtually worthless and encapsulated it in his usual anti-Apple rhetoric, but I'm a positive person so I'll give him an objectivity point.
Assuming your perspective is correct: How come we are not using the mobile devices that were pioneered by Palm or the one shown by Bill Gates, many years ago?
The Palm OS app "market" (I can't even remember what it was called now) wasn't anything like the App Store. I doubt very much that Windows Mobile had anything like the App Store either. As usual, consider the source of the comments.
But, the reason we aren't using mobile devices powered by:
1. Windows Mobile: It sucked, which is why Microsoft finally put a bullet in its head.
2. Palm OS: Palm committed suicide, first with allowing clones, then with spinning off the OS to PalmSource as a separate company.
Google's "Chrome OS" is a silly step backwards. Some folks will lay down for Google, but anyone who values their data and their privacy will not be charmed. Frankly, I think Google has run its course and will begin to decline unless they get back to concentrating on value for users rather than surreptitiously lining their own pockets by selling their users out. A business or individual with valuable data would be irresponsible to make use of most Google services or software.
Just because you are working in a browser does not mean your data is on a 3rd party server. There is an increasing number of business apps which use web based clients. The server software still runs on the company's own servers, but all that is needed on the desktops is a web browser.
Continue this trend and pretty soon we could see large numbers of office workers who never use anything but a browser. At that point, why pay for a full desktop OS with all its support and maintenance costs when you could use ChomeOS instead?
Can't speak for all Android phones, but my Incredible came with crapware mainly from HTC as far as I can tell. The Verizon crap that Daniel talks about here are on the Android store through a special Verizon storefront, but didn't come preinstalled. Either way, not a good sign for the future of Android unless Google exerts more control (don't see how they can apart from offering their own phone, which proved to be a failure). Would this open the door for Microsoft to provide a middle ground between the laissez-faire Google and the draconian (at least according to its critics) Apple? Time will tell.
DRACONIAN IS VILLAINS OF " WALL STREET " MASTERMIND AND CONDUCT THE PLOT OF THIS TIME'S " ANTENNAGATE ", NOT Apple, FOOOOOOOOOOOOL！！！！！！！！！！
Just because you are working in a browser does not mean your data is on a 3rd party server. There is an increasing number of business apps which use web based clients. The server software still runs on the company's own servers, but all that is needed on the desktops is a web browser.
Continue this trend and pretty soon we could see large numbers of office workers who never use anything but a browser. At that point, why pay for a full desktop OS with all its support and maintenance costs when you could use ChomeOS instead?
Well, yes, but the reference to "the cloud" was clearly not to private "clouds" that companies run and manage internally. So, while what you say is true, it's entirely beside the point in relation to his comments about clouds.
Yes, there are large numbers of office workers who could use nothing but a web browser. And some companies have and will develop and manage their own web apps and databases. But, it remains horrendously bad idea for companies to use web apps and cloud storage not under the control of the owner of the data. It's an even worse idea for individuals, in large part for the reasons he mentions.
(Well, from a personal point of view, having your privacy invaded, and the potential that you lose access to your data is a huge negative to cloud computing. But, maybe it's not actually worse than the risks companies who fall into this trap face. After all, they risk exposing confidential business information, and loss of access to their data might even be more catastrophic to them than to an individual. So, perhaps "worse" isn't quite the right word. Both situations are intolerable, but the nature of the problem is somewhat different in each case.)
whether we use an iphone or not, we have all benefited from apple's entrance into the marketplace. Hearing this, i am very glad that apple did not submit to verizon's demands in 2007
ihates called that draconian
＞ihates called・・・・
the gay calls the " straight " their own name,
" hey, everyone, this man is gay！ ", when they are refused by straight, you see！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Can't speak for all Android phones, but my Incredible came with crapware mainly from HTC as far as I can tell. The Verizon crap that Daniel talks about here are on the Android store through a special Verizon storefront, but didn't come preinstalled. Either way, not a good sign for the future of Android unless Google exerts more control (don't see how they can apart from offering their own phone, which proved to be a failure). Would this open the door for Microsoft to provide a middle ground between the laissez-faire Google and the draconian (at least according to its critics) Apple? Time will tell.
Speaking of Android... Interesting article over on ars that Gruber linked to about Android in China. Apparently while Android is doing well in China, they aren't using Google's version of Android. They've forked it and are implementing their own versions of the proprietary parts of the OS (yes, that's right, the Android on your smartphone isn't really fully open), cutting Google and the Android Market, and Android Market developers, out of the loop. So Androids biggest market, Asia, won't, it seems, really be the same Android -- talk about fragmentation. (Which raises the question of whether those phones should be counted as Android phones at all, or if they should go into a new category of OPhone (that's what they call it) phones.)
A pretty good choice by the Chinese, I have to say. Take an OS designed as a spyware platform, fork it into your own spyware platform that you control, keep an eye on your citizens more effectively.
For the record, there is another big reason why Apple didn't go with Verizon that's rarely mentioned, and isn't mentioned in this article.
To go with Verizon Apple would have to make a CDMA phone, but there is no way that they would hobble themselves by not selling iPhones in Europe and Japan so they would have to make a second GSM phone in relatively short order.
In other words if they went with Verizon, they would complicate their production line immensely from the get-go because they would be making two versions of every phone every year, or they would have a much shorter exclusivity period with Verizon (like a year or less), or they might even have both problems at once.
I know people love the idea of a Verizon iPhone and so forth but IMO it's much more likely that a Verizon deal was *never* in the cards and that Apple simply played Verizon off of AT&T, to get AT&T to cave on what they wanted them to do.
What they ended up doing (going with GSM and AT&T), makes a thousand percent more sense than any of the alternate theories people like to spin. There has been practically zero downside to the AT&T exclusivity except for the recent lifeline it has given the runner up (Android).
VERY RATIONAL READING！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I ENTIRELY AGREE WITH YOU！
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Well, yes, but the reference to "the cloud" was clearly not to private "clouds" that companies run and manage internally. So, while what you say is true, it's entirely beside the point in relation to his comments about clouds.
Even with native apps, data is increasingly being put in the cloud. This could be private servers or MobileMe. Once you do this, going the final step and switching to web apps with their lower support costs (and eventually something like ChromeOS) starts to make sense.
As for local storage v trusting a 3rd party: considering how poor most people are at managing and backing up their data, they could easily be better off trusting someone like Apple to do it for them.
Im so fedup of waiting for the iphone 4 here in Canada
I am counting the days in switzerland. For the time beeing I enjoy my iPad an iPhone 3G. But there are so many reasons to uprgade my iPhone..... I hope just apple is upscaling it's production line big time.
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I completely agree with both of you, But my ears are still ringing from all this shouting. But anyway, - Well put!
Even with native apps, data is increasingly being put in the cloud. This could be private servers or MobileMe. Once you do this, going the final step and switching to web apps with their lower support costs (and eventually something like ChromeOS) starts to make sense.
As for local storage v trusting a 3rd party: considering how poor most people are at managing and backing up their data, they could easily be better off trusting someone like Apple to do it for them.
I included data in my original response, so yeah, it's a bad idea to put that there too. Backups with a Mac and Time Machine are such a no-brainer that even my mother can do them. It's just an illusion that the cloud offers any really advantages.
ChromeOS only makes any sense for companies that are creating their own web apps and managing their own data, and have employees doing very specific tasks who never need to step outside the sandbox. Anyone else adopting it is putting themselves at risk for compromised security and privacy, as well as lowered productivity. And, I doubt very much that companies are going to realize any significant savings from supposed (unsubstantiated) lower costs associated with this model of computing.
ChromeOS isn't anything new or special. It's just the latest iteration in a long string of "thin clients" pushed by those who believe that data and computing should be centrally controlled. It's an attempt to take us back to the "green screen" paradigm of computing. It's been rejected over and over again, and there's no reason to think it will end up being more successful on this go-round. There's every reason for it to be rejected, once again.
I think it is more: Mac Pros are a temporary solution until bandwidth increases enough and all your data moves into the cloud.
Well, you're going to have a long wait for that, especially now that wireless carriers and ISPs are starting to impose data caps and increased charges. Control your own data, and you control your own costs, and destiny. Give it to someone else, and they control you.
BTW, I notice you are pretty much a single issue poster. We have a few of those around here, like samab, who shows up anytime the merits of CDMA are questioned, and is obviously paid to do so. So, since you are all, rah rah cloud, and pretty much nothing else, it makes one wonder if there isn't a high degree of self interest involved in the content of your posts.
Web Apps vs Native Apps is like subscribing to music vs owning it. The iTunes of model is far more popular because that's what people want. Just like cloud storage, it limited in appeal compared to local ownership of data.
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Hey... how did you get your number of posts here to match your age?
Comments
2010 Verizon = 2007 AT&T
Verizon's network is about to be tested.
"Verizon is also discovering the far greater demand that sophisticated smartphones with functional web browsers and video streaming services will exact on the network. Byrne told the audience "On [the new Android-based Motorola] Droid X, we’re seeing something like 5x the data usage of any other device." "
That's somewhat to be expected, it's a new device, people are going to use it and test it out, and the Droid X does come pre-loaded with the Blockbuster streaming movies app; that would like an iPhone coming pre-loaded with Netflix.
The first month I had my Pre Plus, I used 2 GB on Verizon, since then, I'm lucky to crack 200-300 MB, all my heavy usage is on Wifi. T
As far as Verizon-branding, the only Verizon app it came pre-loaded with, was VZ Navigator (which I hid when I rooted it), and the mobile hotspot app I had to download from the app catalog.
Assuming your perspective is correct: How come we are not using the mobile devices that were pioneered by Palm or the one shown by Bill Gates, many years ago?
[...]
Can you cite innovations that were initiated by Microsoft that became game changers beyond desktop computing?
DaHarder probably thinks MS paved the way for Apple to make the iPad successful.
To his credit, he actually said something positive about Apple, even though he watered it down to being virtually worthless and encapsulated it in his usual anti-Apple rhetoric, but I'm a positive person so I'll give him an objectivity point.
Assuming your perspective is correct: How come we are not using the mobile devices that were pioneered by Palm or the one shown by Bill Gates, many years ago?
The Palm OS app "market" (I can't even remember what it was called now) wasn't anything like the App Store. I doubt very much that Windows Mobile had anything like the App Store either. As usual, consider the source of the comments.
But, the reason we aren't using mobile devices powered by:
1. Windows Mobile: It sucked, which is why Microsoft finally put a bullet in its head.
2. Palm OS: Palm committed suicide, first with allowing clones, then with spinning off the OS to PalmSource as a separate company.
"The Cloud" is a tool, not a destination!
Google's "Chrome OS" is a silly step backwards. Some folks will lay down for Google, but anyone who values their data and their privacy will not be charmed. Frankly, I think Google has run its course and will begin to decline unless they get back to concentrating on value for users rather than surreptitiously lining their own pockets by selling their users out. A business or individual with valuable data would be irresponsible to make use of most Google services or software.
Just because you are working in a browser does not mean your data is on a 3rd party server. There is an increasing number of business apps which use web based clients. The server software still runs on the company's own servers, but all that is needed on the desktops is a web browser.
Continue this trend and pretty soon we could see large numbers of office workers who never use anything but a browser. At that point, why pay for a full desktop OS with all its support and maintenance costs when you could use ChomeOS instead?
Can't speak for all Android phones, but my Incredible came with crapware mainly from HTC as far as I can tell. The Verizon crap that Daniel talks about here are on the Android store through a special Verizon storefront, but didn't come preinstalled. Either way, not a good sign for the future of Android unless Google exerts more control (don't see how they can apart from offering their own phone, which proved to be a failure). Would this open the door for Microsoft to provide a middle ground between the laissez-faire Google and the draconian (at least according to its critics) Apple? Time will tell.
DRACONIAN IS VILLAINS OF " WALL STREET " MASTERMIND AND CONDUCT THE PLOT OF THIS TIME'S " ANTENNAGATE ", NOT Apple, FOOOOOOOOOOOOL！！！！！！！！！！
Just because you are working in a browser does not mean your data is on a 3rd party server. There is an increasing number of business apps which use web based clients. The server software still runs on the company's own servers, but all that is needed on the desktops is a web browser.
Continue this trend and pretty soon we could see large numbers of office workers who never use anything but a browser. At that point, why pay for a full desktop OS with all its support and maintenance costs when you could use ChomeOS instead?
Well, yes, but the reference to "the cloud" was clearly not to private "clouds" that companies run and manage internally. So, while what you say is true, it's entirely beside the point in relation to his comments about clouds.
Yes, there are large numbers of office workers who could use nothing but a web browser. And some companies have and will develop and manage their own web apps and databases. But, it remains horrendously bad idea for companies to use web apps and cloud storage not under the control of the owner of the data. It's an even worse idea for individuals, in large part for the reasons he mentions.
(Well, from a personal point of view, having your privacy invaded, and the potential that you lose access to your data is a huge negative to cloud computing. But, maybe it's not actually worse than the risks companies who fall into this trap face. After all, they risk exposing confidential business information, and loss of access to their data might even be more catastrophic to them than to an individual. So, perhaps "worse" isn't quite the right word. Both situations are intolerable, but the nature of the problem is somewhat different in each case.)
whether we use an iphone or not, we have all benefited from apple's entrance into the marketplace. Hearing this, i am very glad that apple did not submit to verizon's demands in 2007
ihates called that draconian
＞ihates called・・・・
the gay calls the " straight " their own name,
" hey, everyone, this man is gay！ ", when they are refused by straight, you see！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Can't speak for all Android phones, but my Incredible came with crapware mainly from HTC as far as I can tell. The Verizon crap that Daniel talks about here are on the Android store through a special Verizon storefront, but didn't come preinstalled. Either way, not a good sign for the future of Android unless Google exerts more control (don't see how they can apart from offering their own phone, which proved to be a failure). Would this open the door for Microsoft to provide a middle ground between the laissez-faire Google and the draconian (at least according to its critics) Apple? Time will tell.
Speaking of Android... Interesting article over on ars that Gruber linked to about Android in China. Apparently while Android is doing well in China, they aren't using Google's version of Android. They've forked it and are implementing their own versions of the proprietary parts of the OS (yes, that's right, the Android on your smartphone isn't really fully open), cutting Google and the Android Market, and Android Market developers, out of the loop. So Androids biggest market, Asia, won't, it seems, really be the same Android -- talk about fragmentation. (Which raises the question of whether those phones should be counted as Android phones at all, or if they should go into a new category of OPhone (that's what they call it) phones.)
A pretty good choice by the Chinese, I have to say. Take an OS designed as a spyware platform, fork it into your own spyware platform that you control, keep an eye on your citizens more effectively.
For the record, there is another big reason why Apple didn't go with Verizon that's rarely mentioned, and isn't mentioned in this article.
To go with Verizon Apple would have to make a CDMA phone, but there is no way that they would hobble themselves by not selling iPhones in Europe and Japan so they would have to make a second GSM phone in relatively short order.
In other words if they went with Verizon, they would complicate their production line immensely from the get-go because they would be making two versions of every phone every year, or they would have a much shorter exclusivity period with Verizon (like a year or less), or they might even have both problems at once.
I know people love the idea of a Verizon iPhone and so forth but IMO it's much more likely that a Verizon deal was *never* in the cards and that Apple simply played Verizon off of AT&T, to get AT&T to cave on what they wanted them to do.
What they ended up doing (going with GSM and AT&T), makes a thousand percent more sense than any of the alternate theories people like to spin. There has been practically zero downside to the AT&T exclusivity except for the recent lifeline it has given the runner up (Android).
VERY RATIONAL READING！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I ENTIRELY AGREE WITH YOU！
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Kiss and make up already!! There are millions waiting for the iPhone "4v"...
Are you still waiting?..........good......
Well, yes, but the reference to "the cloud" was clearly not to private "clouds" that companies run and manage internally. So, while what you say is true, it's entirely beside the point in relation to his comments about clouds.
Even with native apps, data is increasingly being put in the cloud. This could be private servers or MobileMe. Once you do this, going the final step and switching to web apps with their lower support costs (and eventually something like ChromeOS) starts to make sense.
As for local storage v trusting a 3rd party: considering how poor most people are at managing and backing up their data, they could easily be better off trusting someone like Apple to do it for them.
I think it is more: Mac Pros are a temporary solution until bandwidth increases enough and all your data moves into the cloud.
well put
Im so fedup of waiting for the iphone 4 here in Canada
I am counting the days in switzerland. For the time beeing I enjoy my iPad an iPhone 3G. But there are so many reasons to uprgade my iPhone..... I hope just apple is upscaling it's production line big time.
VERY RATIONAL READING！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I ENTIRELY AGREE WITH YOU！
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I completely agree with both of you, But my ears are still ringing from all this shouting. But anyway, - Well put!
Even with native apps, data is increasingly being put in the cloud. This could be private servers or MobileMe. Once you do this, going the final step and switching to web apps with their lower support costs (and eventually something like ChromeOS) starts to make sense.
As for local storage v trusting a 3rd party: considering how poor most people are at managing and backing up their data, they could easily be better off trusting someone like Apple to do it for them.
I included data in my original response, so yeah, it's a bad idea to put that there too. Backups with a Mac and Time Machine are such a no-brainer that even my mother can do them. It's just an illusion that the cloud offers any really advantages.
ChromeOS only makes any sense for companies that are creating their own web apps and managing their own data, and have employees doing very specific tasks who never need to step outside the sandbox. Anyone else adopting it is putting themselves at risk for compromised security and privacy, as well as lowered productivity. And, I doubt very much that companies are going to realize any significant savings from supposed (unsubstantiated) lower costs associated with this model of computing.
ChromeOS isn't anything new or special. It's just the latest iteration in a long string of "thin clients" pushed by those who believe that data and computing should be centrally controlled. It's an attempt to take us back to the "green screen" paradigm of computing. It's been rejected over and over again, and there's no reason to think it will end up being more successful on this go-round. There's every reason for it to be rejected, once again.
I think it is more: Mac Pros are a temporary solution until bandwidth increases enough and all your data moves into the cloud.
Well, you're going to have a long wait for that, especially now that wireless carriers and ISPs are starting to impose data caps and increased charges. Control your own data, and you control your own costs, and destiny. Give it to someone else, and they control you.
BTW, I notice you are pretty much a single issue poster. We have a few of those around here, like samab, who shows up anytime the merits of CDMA are questioned, and is obviously paid to do so. So, since you are all, rah rah cloud, and pretty much nothing else, it makes one wonder if there isn't a high degree of self interest involved in the content of your posts.
VERY RATIONAL READING！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
I ENTIRELY AGREE WITH YOU！
WHAT AMAZE ME IS TOO MANY EVEN GEEKS, WHETHER HERE OR ANY OTHER SITE, HAVE " NAIIVE " ILLUSION ON VERISON LIKE PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS.
I'M SURE THEY ARE THE FIRST PEOPLE THAT DUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED, WHEN IT OCCURS ( i-Phone ON VERIZON ), FINGERPOINT AND ACCUSE BOTH VERISON AND Apple！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
SO THAT'S VERY CLEVER AND WISE OF Apple " NOT " TO LISTEN TO GEEKS' FRENZY NOISE！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Hey... how did you get your number of posts here to match your age?
Verizon's executive management have more foreskin than foresight. They missed the biggest 'new thing' in the last 20 years! Fire them all!
Best
Considering that Verizon beat AT&T in the postpaid net adds in a iphone launch quarter --- the whole AT&T management should be fired.