Author Topic: iphone  (Read 377339 times)

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: iphone
« Reply #60 on: February 17, 2009, 07:12:00 pm »
man smackie really hates the iphone

Now now, that's an unfair characterization of my stance on the iPhone.

First off, I hate at&t much more than I find the iPhone to be a sub-innovative phone.  Their data network is ridiculously slow and has been behind the rest of the competition for some time.

I also am opposed to Apple's business practices surrounding the iPhone.  A permanent exclusive contract with a carrier is horrible for an industry that already lags behind the rest of the developed world.  I'm not saying they need a CDMA (Sprint/Verizon) and GSM (at&t/T-Mobile) version, but their GSM version should be available on more than one carrier for the sake of competition.  As it is now, you're beholden to at&t and Apple, and that stifles innovation and competition.  We've already seen this process repeated with other new devices on the market, and only the consumer suffers. 

As for the phone itself, I'm opposed in much the same way I was opposed to the iPod when it first came out.  It's hailed as this innovative device that will change the way we use XXX device, when in actuality, the marketing and buzz factor have far outpaced any innovations that are actually in the phone itself.  While I can name a dozen things the iPhone is not capable of doing, I can't name a single thing that the iPhone can do that my WinMo phone can't do EXCEPT play Apple's proprietary songs and sync with Apple's proprietary music player (iTunes). 

Not all is bad though - just the buzz surrounding it has made the smartphone market much more popular.  I have had a smartphone for well over 5 years (first a BBerry, then a Palm and now my second WinMo phone) and I'm glad that it's reaching the masses.  It's easy to use interface has also made manufacturers pressure software developers like Microsoft/RIM/Palm to make their UI more user friendly (or, in some cases they've done it themselves, like HTC amd Samsung) and that's a really good thing.   The App store has moved MS/Google/Palm in that direction and I think that's a fabulous idea for getting these apps to the no-technical users.  But by locking out the phone to apps only provided through the app store, the company has done a huge disservice to both developers and iPhone users.

So, for all of it's good traits, it hasn't done anything to force the industry to better serve it's customers and embrace new REAL innovations.  I would go as far as to argue that it's done more to allow the consumer to be complacent with what we have here in the states, and that's a shame.  I have high hopes for Google in this space as I think they will produce a product that will bring real innovation to a space where MS/Palm/RIM had gotten a little lazy.
27>34

Herr Professor Doktor Doom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3745
    • my blog
Re: iphone
« Reply #61 on: February 17, 2009, 08:36:03 pm »
I don't know.  I've been looking for a phone like this for many years and nothing else has come close.   The Google phone looks promising, and I like the open philosophy so much better than Apple.  But the first entry looks decidedly early-adopter ish.   I think in a couple of years Google's platform will be a force to reckon with, but not yet.


_\|/_

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: iphone
« Reply #62 on: February 18, 2009, 01:13:01 pm »
Why people would stand for such censorship is beyond me....

Apple nixes 'potentially offensive' South Park app

The company has now twice rejected an iPhone application designed to let iPhone owners watch clips of the long-running show featuring the exploits of Stan, Kyle, Cartman, and Kenny. Apple apparently feels that South Park's content is "potentially offensive," according to Boing Boing, and will not allow it onto the App Store.


The article does go on to point that they have no problem with the offensive material as long as they make money off of it, such as when you buy it for $1.99 in the iTunes store, just not when it's offensive and free....
27>34

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: iphone
« Reply #63 on: February 18, 2009, 01:48:28 pm »
man smackie really hates the iphone

Now now, that's an unfair characterization of my stance on the iPhone.

First off, I hate at&t much more than I find the iPhone to be a sub-innovative phone.  Their data network is ridiculously slow and has been behind the rest of the competition for some time.

I also am opposed to Apple's business practices surrounding the iPhone.  A permanent exclusive contract with a carrier is horrible for an industry that already lags behind the rest of the developed world.  I'm not saying they need a CDMA (Sprint/Verizon) and GSM (at&t/T-Mobile) version, but their GSM version should be available on more than one carrier for the sake of competition.  As it is now, you're beholden to at&t and Apple, and that stifles innovation and competition.  We've already seen this process repeated with other new devices on the market, and only the consumer suffers. 

As for the phone itself, I'm opposed in much the same way I was opposed to the iPod when it first came out.  It's hailed as this innovative device that will change the way we use XXX device, when in actuality, the marketing and buzz factor have far outpaced any innovations that are actually in the phone itself.  While I can name a dozen things the iPhone is not capable of doing, I can't name a single thing that the iPhone can do that my WinMo phone can't do EXCEPT play Apple's proprietary songs and sync with Apple's proprietary music player (iTunes). 

Not all is bad though - just the buzz surrounding it has made the smartphone market much more popular.  I have had a smartphone for well over 5 years (first a BBerry, then a Palm and now my second WinMo phone) and I'm glad that it's reaching the masses.  It's easy to use interface has also made manufacturers pressure software developers like Microsoft/RIM/Palm to make their UI more user friendly (or, in some cases they've done it themselves, like HTC amd Samsung) and that's a really good thing.   The App store has moved MS/Google/Palm in that direction and I think that's a fabulous idea for getting these apps to the no-technical users.  But by locking out the phone to apps only provided through the app store, the company has done a huge disservice to both developers and iPhone users.

So, for all of it's good traits, it hasn't done anything to force the industry to better serve it's customers and embrace new REAL innovations.  I would go as far as to argue that it's done more to allow the consumer to be complacent with what we have here in the states, and that's a shame.  I have high hopes for Google in this space as I think they will produce a product that will bring real innovation to a space where MS/Palm/RIM had gotten a little lazy.
i was just teasing, but sometimes it reads like youre a cable user telling me that directv is terrible. i dont get the copy/paste thing at all though
o/\o

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: iphone
« Reply #64 on: February 18, 2009, 02:05:30 pm »
I can certainly see where someone could object to the closed nature of the App Store.  But it has its plusses too - I'm talking QC.  Back in my palm OS days many people were developing apps for it, they usually weren't free and 90% of them were utter crap which would often kill the phone, requiring factory resets etc.  I'll agree that the fact that apple decides what gets into its store is unfortunate but the business model is not completely without its plusses.

I do think it's unfortunate that it is exclusive to ATT though.  However, I'm happy with ATT as a carrier.  It doesn't hurt that I get a company discount for ATT, but I like that they are unionized, their customer service is far and away better than any previous carrier I've had.  This is the 1st 3g phone I've had so i can't compare there, but it certainly blows the other Edge/Sprint Vision phones I've used.

Did I mention it has an Ipod built in?


vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: iphone
« Reply #65 on: February 18, 2009, 08:35:09 pm »
I can certainly see where someone could object to the closed nature of the App Store.  But it has its plusses too - I'm talking QC. 

So why not do both?  Have a guarantee that any application that is provided via the app store will not break your phone (for the kids and moms and pops out there) and let the rest of us more risky folks who are competent and want to test stuff have access to other apps that have the potential to improve our user experience (like a better browser, camera app, video app, or streaming media that is not provided by iTunes)?  There are many answers to this, but an easy one is that Apple is afraid to be shown by any other developer on it's own hardware.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: iphone
« Reply #66 on: February 18, 2009, 08:40:07 pm »
Did I mention it has an Ipod built in?

This is one of the more ridiculous reasons to love the iPhone.  It simply perpetuates Apple's our way or no way mentality.  Many phones, long before the iPhone have had the ability to play music, but only one has the ability to sync with proprietary software and play protected songs that can only be purchased through that proprietary software.  Please don't perpetuate that business model as it's clearly slowing down innovation in the industry - and it's hard for me to defend this industry in particular, but they're right in this case.

And I'll just go on record as saying that when Apple finally goes to a subscription model (and they will have no choice but to do so), it will be haled as the greatest thing to happen to the industry since the invention of the iPod.  As ridiculous as that sounds.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: iphone
« Reply #67 on: February 18, 2009, 08:45:56 pm »
it reads like youre a cable user telling me that directv is terrible. i dont get the copy/paste thing at all though

I'd like to think that my reputation on tech allows me to speak openly and freely about devices, even one's that I have chosen not to buy myself.  But please don't confuse not purchasing a device with not thoroughly vetting a device - I have spent my fair share of time with an iPhone.  I have no problem admitting that I am simply a tech dork and will test anything....
27>34

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: iphone
« Reply #68 on: February 19, 2009, 10:07:46 am »
the list of problems taken from the comments section of a windows mobile article sounded kind of silly is all
o/\o

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: iphone
« Reply #69 on: February 19, 2009, 12:37:06 pm »
Palm is just dated and old, we'll see how the new OS and the Pre is and whether or not there is much 3rd party development for it.   If so, it could be a contender.

Blackberry is just boring.  Good for work and not much else.

WinMo phones have always been the buggiest pieces of tech I've ever owned or supported.  Memory leaks, constant crashes, reboots.  mulithreaded is nice but they way they handle it is imo retarded.  All apps just keep running until you go into task manager and kill it.   And not a lot of 3rd party development for it, at least compared to the salad days of Palm OS and Iphone.

I don't see any google phone supporting Active Sync so it is out for me on the basis of that alone.

However I stack it up Iphone comes on top for me everytime . 

Smackie I respectfully agree to disagree with you on this one!

« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 12:40:48 pm by chaz »

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: iphone
« Reply #70 on: February 19, 2009, 12:40:04 pm »
I can certainly see where someone could object to the closed nature of the App Store.  But it has its plusses too - I'm talking QC. 

So why not do both?  Have a guarantee that any application that is provided via the app store will not break your phone (for the kids and moms and pops out there) and let the rest of us more risky folks who are competent and want to test stuff have access to other apps that have the potential to improve our user experience (like a better browser, camera app, video app, or streaming media that is not provided by iTunes)?  There are many answers to this, but an easy one is that Apple is afraid to be shown by any other developer on it's own hardware.

That, and the fact that they don't get a cut of the action if it doesn't come from the app store.
I agree it's not perfect, but little is, except for the Baby Jesus of course.  And perhaps Husker Du's Zen Arcade.

Herr Professor Doktor Doom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3745
    • my blog
Re: iphone
« Reply #71 on: February 19, 2009, 07:19:20 pm »
Interesting article today about how Apple is trying to assert that "jailbreaking" an Iphone to run non-approved apps should carry legal penalties for users.  Sounds like they're interested in more than just quality control:

http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/18/could-jailbreaking-your-iphone-land-you-in-jail/

It's been an interesting experience owning this phone.  I like the phone more than any I've owned.  But I also dislike Apple more than ever.

_\|/_

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: iphone
« Reply #72 on: February 20, 2009, 12:46:17 am »
Interesting article today about how Apple is trying to assert that "jailbreaking" an Iphone to run non-approved apps should carry legal penalties for users.  Sounds like they're interested in more than just quality control:

http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/18/could-jailbreaking-your-iphone-land-you-in-jail/

It's been an interesting experience owning this phone.  I like the phone more than any I've owned.  But I also dislike Apple more than ever.


Yeah of course they are interested in way more than qc....as i said above they're interested in a cut of the action for every single app sold through the app store....

walkonby

  • Guest
Re: iphone
« Reply #73 on: February 20, 2009, 05:18:59 pm »
wow . . . now even phones hate gay people.

http://www.lesbilicious.co.uk/campaigns-politics/google-defends-gay-test-phone-app/

i wonder if they substituted any other "group" instead of gays, if it would be considered a "fun app"?

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: iphone
« Reply #74 on: February 20, 2009, 05:26:12 pm »
wow . . . now even phones hate gay people.

http://www.lesbilicious.co.uk/campaigns-politics/google-defends-gay-test-phone-app/

i wonder if they substituted any other "group" instead of gays, if it would be considered a "fun app"?
I'm suprised you are just now getting wise to the long standing anti-gay agenda that most phones have.