One of the better points I've ever read on this site over the years.
You're kidding right?
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
I for one am never going to buy anything from Samsung, which is my right. I will also do my utmost to trash Samsung's name and reputation ever chance I get in stores online and so on.
SAMSUNG-= SAME SONG,
lets starts a campaign to think up silly stupid same sounding derogatory names for "Samesong"
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
I love many of the examples you give. I haven't a clue how fast the CPU is in my phone, or how much RAM there is, or whether it has "actual" multi-tasking (whatever that is), much less do I care.
I'm a normal consumer, not someone who gets a hard on over how many MHz something can go at.
What I do notice though, is that Samsungs stuff looks like it's been hugely copied from Apple.
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
Well then it's simple - DON'T COPY, or if you do then PAY!
I like Google's tactics though, they want Apple to make these FRAND, funny!
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Only one problem with that logic. If Samsung really believes that their products are significantly better than Apple's, why would they make so much effort to copy Apple? They even went to the trouble of making a bunch of prototypes and then choosing the one that looked most like the iPhone. If Samsung's phone were really superior, they'd want to differentiate it and make it clear that it wasn't an iPhone. So Samsung's own actions suggest that they're not convinced that their phone is better in the things that matter.
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
95% of people don't give a shit about a single thing you mentioned. Amount of RAM? GPU? Never in my life have I met anyone wanting replaceable batteries. NFC? What have been the applications for NFC thus far? How many people use it? You actually think its a selling point? 'Actual' multitasking. LOL. The 'original' notification center. Yeah, when people go buy a phone I'm sure they ask if it has the 'original' notification center. File system access? Yes, clearly so much in demand on a phone. Wireless keyboards and mice? Mice? You're really knocking it out of the park today. Total people I've seen using KB/mouse with their phones in my life...0. But I'm sure they're out there somewhere.
Yeah, you could go 'on and on' and all the items would be just as irrelevant to he buying decision of the vast majority of people. Be as sarcastic as you want, but yes, rubber banding and icons trump all these things, because those and a million other details combine to create a user experience, which is the most critical thing on a phone- and not removable batteries, wireless mice, or any of the other crap you mentioned. For tech geeks on message boards? Maybe. But they're an irrelevant and insignificant part of the consumer public, don't let the internet distort whats actually important for real people. And if you actually dealt with large numbers of real-life people on a daily basis to see how they use their phones, you would have figured this out long ago.
How about Copple? Crapple? The blantant copying for Apple started in iOS 5. iMessage, tabbed browsing, Notification Center, split keyboard, wireless syncing... all amazing and new (unless you had been using Android for years.)
Now iOS6 will get turn by turn navigation and 3d views of cities. So amazing and new (unless you have used Google's Navigation, maps or Earth.) and Oh my god!, I can decline a call with a message now! Revolutionary, (unless you have been using Android for the last few years.) A VIP list in email now too. No way, that has to be new. Nope, been with GMail for a while. Wait, what about saving Safari tabs and favs in the cloud? That's a new feature, right? Nope. Chrome, Maxthone, Firefox all have this.
The sheer amount of copying done by Apple is amazing. It's actually turning iOS into Android, since so many Android features have been stolen. And I didn't even get into the parts Apple stole from Microsoft. Hello lockscreen apps.
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
As opposed to you, someone who enters a thread about a subject he allegedly doesn't care about, to post how everyone has no lives. And you 'love coming in here and reading the comments'- you you admittedly spend time here on a consistent basis - quite the life you seem to have. But unlike you, people here actually post something interesting/worth reading. And yes, you can be a troll regardless of what hardware you own.
Or ore you just too young? to remember that there were touchscreen devices at least 5-7 years before iPhone was introduced.
Touch screen CRT's were around in 1998, so were Touch-screen (used with a stylus, but fingers worked) PDA's. Just no phones. The first touch-screen phones were stylus-based PDA's with cellular functionality, which weren't good at all, but they were around in 2004.
Come to think of it, nearly ALL PDA's weren't terribly useful. It wasn't until you could play music on them that they took off, but the battery life of PDA's even in 2008 was on the level of 6 hours, even if not in use. Compare that to the iPad which doesn't need to charge for three weeks if you only minimally use it for something like music. One could argue that PDA's were the predecessor to the iPad and iPhone, but then Apple still did it first with the Newton.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiker275
One of the better points I've ever read on this site over the years.
You're kidding right?
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
I'm sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but Apple did NOT invent rubber-banding on cellphones.
I like to call them "shamesung"
I wasn't going to buy a Galaxy S a few years ago, but after I saw it had rubber banding, I had to buy one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
I for one am never going to buy anything from Samsung, which is my right. I will also do my utmost to trash Samsung's name and reputation ever chance I get in stores online and so on.
SAMSUNG-= SAME SONG,
lets starts a campaign to think up silly stupid same sounding derogatory names for "Samesong"
Scamsung?
Shamsung?
Scamalong?
Scamwrong?
NoDong?
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doorman.
Is it sarcasm? than a bad one.
Or ore you just too young? to remember that there were touchscreen devices at least 5-7 years before iPhone was introduced.
Yes it is sarcasm (he also used quotes). Also, I've seen him do this several times in other posts. I like it though!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
I love many of the examples you give. I haven't a clue how fast the CPU is in my phone, or how much RAM there is, or whether it has "actual" multi-tasking (whatever that is), much less do I care.
I'm a normal consumer, not someone who gets a hard on over how many MHz something can go at.
What I do notice though, is that Samsungs stuff looks like it's been hugely copied from Apple.
The rubber banding is cool but is there a way to disable it?
Originally Posted by drobforever
You're kidding right?
"...companies like Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry..." these are companies FAILING to compete with the iPhone. That exactly shows why you have to copy the UI of the iPhone to compete, because if you don't copy, you end up being those companies.
Well then it's simple - DON'T COPY, or if you do then PAY!
I like Google's tactics though, they want Apple to make these FRAND, funny!
Specs.
Specs.
SPECS.
Only one problem with that logic. If Samsung really believes that their products are significantly better than Apple's, why would they make so much effort to copy Apple? They even went to the trouble of making a bunch of prototypes and then choosing the one that looked most like the iPhone. If Samsung's phone were really superior, they'd want to differentiate it and make it clear that it wasn't an iPhone. So Samsung's own actions suggest that they're not convinced that their phone is better in the things that matter.
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM, camera of equal or better quality, replaceable batteries on the go, NFC capability, picture in picture video, actual multi-tasking, the original notification center and banners, ability to access your file system, ability to use wireless keyboards AND mice, faster web browsing, ability to attach any type of file to an email, etc...I could go on and on.
You think maybe, just maybe, features like these might have something to do with Samsung's success over say the look of an icon or a rubber banding effect? Why are Nokia and RIM phones fowling their companies. Because they are slow, lack many features and more importantly, don't run Android or iOS. People choose not to buy phones like that.
95% of people don't give a shit about a single thing you mentioned. Amount of RAM? GPU? Never in my life have I met anyone wanting replaceable batteries. NFC? What have been the applications for NFC thus far? How many people use it? You actually think its a selling point? 'Actual' multitasking. LOL. The 'original' notification center. Yeah, when people go buy a phone I'm sure they ask if it has the 'original' notification center. File system access? Yes, clearly so much in demand on a phone. Wireless keyboards and mice? Mice? You're really knocking it out of the park today. Total people I've seen using KB/mouse with their phones in my life...0. But I'm sure they're out there somewhere.
Yeah, you could go 'on and on' and all the items would be just as irrelevant to he buying decision of the vast majority of people. Be as sarcastic as you want, but yes, rubber banding and icons trump all these things, because those and a million other details combine to create a user experience, which is the most critical thing on a phone- and not removable batteries, wireless mice, or any of the other crap you mentioned. For tech geeks on message boards? Maybe. But they're an irrelevant and insignificant part of the consumer public, don't let the internet distort whats actually important for real people. And if you actually dealt with large numbers of real-life people on a daily basis to see how they use their phones, you would have figured this out long ago.
How about Copple? Crapple? The blantant copying for Apple started in iOS 5. iMessage, tabbed browsing, Notification Center, split keyboard, wireless syncing... all amazing and new (unless you had been using Android for years.)
Now iOS6 will get turn by turn navigation and 3d views of cities. So amazing and new (unless you have used Google's Navigation, maps or Earth.) and Oh my god!, I can decline a call with a message now! Revolutionary, (unless you have been using Android for the last few years.) A VIP list in email now too. No way, that has to be new. Nope, been with GMail for a while. Wait, what about saving Safari tabs and favs in the cloud? That's a new feature, right? Nope. Chrome, Maxthone, Firefox all have this.
The sheer amount of copying done by Apple is amazing. It's actually turning iOS into Android, since so many Android features have been stolen. And I didn't even get into the parts Apple stole from Microsoft. Hello lockscreen apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewGavin
I love coming in here and reading the comments these days. Most of you people have no lives. You come here every day to say how much you hate samsung when you could actually be doing something worth while with your lives. It is not like any of this is could be important to most of you...it is a stupid cell phone. Why do you care that a company might have mimicked the iPhone? Any of you guys losing money over the deal? I doubt it.
Let the people that actually built the thing worry about it.
...and I own a iPhone4 and a 2011 MBP, so I am not a troll.
As opposed to you, someone who enters a thread about a subject he allegedly doesn't care about, to post how everyone has no lives. And you 'love coming in here and reading the comments'- you you admittedly spend time here on a consistent basis - quite the life you seem to have. But unlike you, people here actually post something interesting/worth reading. And yes, you can be a troll regardless of what hardware you own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
Or maybe if you have a phone with a faster cpu, better gpu, 4 times the amount of RAM...
What's sad is up until Android 4.1, those phones REQUIRED those things in order to get the same smooth UI that Apple produced in the original iPhone.
being a global moderator and all, is this the official appleinsider position?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doorman.
Is it sarcasm? than a bad one.
Or ore you just too young? to remember that there were touchscreen devices at least 5-7 years before iPhone was introduced.
Touch screen CRT's were around in 1998, so were Touch-screen (used with a stylus, but fingers worked) PDA's. Just no phones. The first touch-screen phones were stylus-based PDA's with cellular functionality, which weren't good at all, but they were around in 2004.
Come to think of it, nearly ALL PDA's weren't terribly useful. It wasn't until you could play music on them that they took off, but the battery life of PDA's even in 2008 was on the level of 6 hours, even if not in use. Compare that to the iPad which doesn't need to charge for three weeks if you only minimally use it for something like music. One could argue that PDA's were the predecessor to the iPad and iPhone, but then Apple still did it first with the Newton.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And here come the trolls, copying and pasting their posts from all the other sites where this article has been posted.
Copy and Paste. Copy and Paste. http://copyandpaste.net http://copyandpaste.net http://copyandpaste.net http://copyandpaste.net http://copyandpaste.net. All over the trolls. welcome all redecorates.