gruvdone
Apr 26, 04:02 PM
I love that argument - who told Apple to only make 1 phone? Nobody it was their decision. This is PC vs Mac all over again - history repeating itself.
That's a narrow and erroneous view. Are there some parallels? Sure. There are however some important differences.
First, market share is not anywhere near as important as revenue share. Apple is absolutely trouncing Google and everyone else in this area.
Second, developers are not making any money on Android, as it's user base appears to be comprised of spend-thrifts. It doesn't matter how many people you have using the platform, if developers can't sell applications that well then the lure isn't as strong. Combine that with the exceedingly frustrating fragmentation and inconsistent experience from device to device that makes the task of even writing an Android application that much harder, and it is less appealing still. Will that slow Android down? No, as there will always be customers for the Wal-Mart of mobile operating systems. It does, however limit them as any sort of real 'threat'.
Third, let us not forget that absolute whoring out of hardware at 2 or even 3 for 1 deals is a huge factor in this surge in usage. It's quite easy to inflate your numbers when you hand stuff out for free. Again, in reference to my previous point, they really aren't doing the platform any favors long term, as it will bring down the revenue curve.
Fourth, these numbers are for the US only. The worldwide picture is very different.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
Why wouldn't he? iPod touch and iPad run the exact same mobile OS. Just because there is no real competition to either of these devices in the Android space, doesn't devalue their presence. Truthfully, I always take a skeptical stance on the motives of any 'report' on mobile OS usage which conveniently leaves these devices out. Smacks of fomenting, it does.
Next up...tablets :D
Yeah, cause that's been working out really well for them so far. Look, you can have your irrational "I hate Apple cause they are cool, and I rail against anything popular, cause I'M NOT A CONFORMIST!!!" BS all you want to. It doesn't change for one second the fact that Apple innovates, and everyone else imitates and tries to make all the money they can on the back of Apple's IP.
Personally, I'd say enjoy it while you can. Apple has been establishing precedent with its patent litigation against smaller targets. Now they are taking on a medium-sized one in Samsung, and once that victory is complete, Google will be the next to fall.
Look, I'm all for good old fashioned competition. But somebody besides Apple has to step up to the plate and actually create something. This whole me-too copycat crap is wearing thin.
That's a narrow and erroneous view. Are there some parallels? Sure. There are however some important differences.
First, market share is not anywhere near as important as revenue share. Apple is absolutely trouncing Google and everyone else in this area.
Second, developers are not making any money on Android, as it's user base appears to be comprised of spend-thrifts. It doesn't matter how many people you have using the platform, if developers can't sell applications that well then the lure isn't as strong. Combine that with the exceedingly frustrating fragmentation and inconsistent experience from device to device that makes the task of even writing an Android application that much harder, and it is less appealing still. Will that slow Android down? No, as there will always be customers for the Wal-Mart of mobile operating systems. It does, however limit them as any sort of real 'threat'.
Third, let us not forget that absolute whoring out of hardware at 2 or even 3 for 1 deals is a huge factor in this surge in usage. It's quite easy to inflate your numbers when you hand stuff out for free. Again, in reference to my previous point, they really aren't doing the platform any favors long term, as it will bring down the revenue curve.
Fourth, these numbers are for the US only. The worldwide picture is very different.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
Why wouldn't he? iPod touch and iPad run the exact same mobile OS. Just because there is no real competition to either of these devices in the Android space, doesn't devalue their presence. Truthfully, I always take a skeptical stance on the motives of any 'report' on mobile OS usage which conveniently leaves these devices out. Smacks of fomenting, it does.
Next up...tablets :D
Yeah, cause that's been working out really well for them so far. Look, you can have your irrational "I hate Apple cause they are cool, and I rail against anything popular, cause I'M NOT A CONFORMIST!!!" BS all you want to. It doesn't change for one second the fact that Apple innovates, and everyone else imitates and tries to make all the money they can on the back of Apple's IP.
Personally, I'd say enjoy it while you can. Apple has been establishing precedent with its patent litigation against smaller targets. Now they are taking on a medium-sized one in Samsung, and once that victory is complete, Google will be the next to fall.
Look, I'm all for good old fashioned competition. But somebody besides Apple has to step up to the plate and actually create something. This whole me-too copycat crap is wearing thin.
LarryC
May 6, 01:49 AM
If my understanding of processor architectures are correct, the CISC processors have become a hybrid. There's a core part that is probably more similar to a RISC and a pre-processor that translates the CISC operations to the core. At least this was my understanding of the AMD Thunderbird chips from 10+ years ago. RISC chips moved in a similar and opposite direction, adding more instructions. Kind of counter to the original idea of RISC.
Thank you.
Thank you.
rjohnstone
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Apple *have* patented the look of icons: http://www.edibleapple.com/apple-granted-eu-patents-on-24-ios-icon-designs/ and Samsung clearly infringes on them.
(I'm not sure if a similar, US patent exists.)
You can't patent the "look" of an icon in the U.S.
You copyright it. :rolleyes:
And I'd seriously doubt many of them would survive a court challenge.
(I'm not sure if a similar, US patent exists.)
You can't patent the "look" of an icon in the U.S.
You copyright it. :rolleyes:
And I'd seriously doubt many of them would survive a court challenge.
wclyffe
Jan 9, 10:49 AM
it definitely is a strong consideration with a few add'l features for $10 more ... including that it works w/ both iphone and ipod touch, works w/ cases/skins, rotation notches seem firmer, and bluetooth works while off mount ... if you can get over the overall cost, the extra $10 is probably worth it.
i received the TT car kit as a gift ... and enjoying it every day :D
Yeah, the cost is not a huge issue for me as with either car kit, I get a permanent dock that I can pop my phone into and get enhanced gps service, charging, bluetooth speakerphone, and line out to my stereo system. It's pretty good from one unit. Glad yours is working out for you!
i received the TT car kit as a gift ... and enjoying it every day :D
Yeah, the cost is not a huge issue for me as with either car kit, I get a permanent dock that I can pop my phone into and get enhanced gps service, charging, bluetooth speakerphone, and line out to my stereo system. It's pretty good from one unit. Glad yours is working out for you!
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 02:51 PM
That's the nice thing about the equallogic, right? ;)
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
ucfgrad93
May 4, 12:16 PM
We can spend our time insulting him until then. :)
Sweet!:D
Sweet!:D
DTphonehome
Jul 29, 09:29 PM
Up until about a year or so ago, Cingular used to have the worst network. And the Verizon network was mint. Great signal everywhere on earth and never lost a call. Now I have to try every call 4 times before it goes through. I'd rather see Apple buy up another carrier and own them. How much does a small cellular carrier cost to buy? :-)
They wouldn't have to do that. You know ESPN Mobile, Boost Mobile, and AMP'd mobile? They are all "virtual" networks that lease bandwidth from other providers who actually have a physical network. These "virtual" wireless companies are called MVNOs. Apple could become an MVNO (and it has been rumored in the past that would do so), so that they could offer all the features they want, and ensure a consistent experience across the entire user base.
They wouldn't have to do that. You know ESPN Mobile, Boost Mobile, and AMP'd mobile? They are all "virtual" networks that lease bandwidth from other providers who actually have a physical network. These "virtual" wireless companies are called MVNOs. Apple could become an MVNO (and it has been rumored in the past that would do so), so that they could offer all the features they want, and ensure a consistent experience across the entire user base.
lucabrasi
Mar 30, 07:08 PM
I can confirm that Preview 2 works w/ the 2011 MBPs.
Chupa Chupa
Aug 4, 12:45 PM
Apple never was a part of Mhz rat-race. Look at its bestselling Powerbook. How fast was it compared to the then PC laptops. Anyways, WWDC is suppose to be developers conference, so we should speculate more about Leopard and hopefuly MacPros (because they are long due) insted of iPods and MBPs.
Apple liked to downplay Mhz/Ghz because it knew there was no way the G3 and G4 PPCs could keep up with the P*. But when the G5 came along, what did Steve announce...that a 3Ghz chip would be ready in a year. Of course that never happened. The G5 never made it out of the high 2 GHz even three years after he made that statement. And THAT is the reason why we now have Intel Macs.
Moreover, now that PCs and Macs use the same chips Apple HAS to use the latest and greatest chips to keep up. It's not really a matter of playing the Ghz game. That game is over now that there is chip parity. But the first thing a company like Apple that basks in it's "cutting edge"/"trendy" glow must have is computers with the best chips.
Also, WWDC is about DEVELOPERS. Developers of software and hardware for all Apple products. So I think it's silly to limit speculation (especially since its all speculation) to only a few products. Theoretically every piece of Apple hardware is up for revision, not to mention possible new ones.
Apple liked to downplay Mhz/Ghz because it knew there was no way the G3 and G4 PPCs could keep up with the P*. But when the G5 came along, what did Steve announce...that a 3Ghz chip would be ready in a year. Of course that never happened. The G5 never made it out of the high 2 GHz even three years after he made that statement. And THAT is the reason why we now have Intel Macs.
Moreover, now that PCs and Macs use the same chips Apple HAS to use the latest and greatest chips to keep up. It's not really a matter of playing the Ghz game. That game is over now that there is chip parity. But the first thing a company like Apple that basks in it's "cutting edge"/"trendy" glow must have is computers with the best chips.
Also, WWDC is about DEVELOPERS. Developers of software and hardware for all Apple products. So I think it's silly to limit speculation (especially since its all speculation) to only a few products. Theoretically every piece of Apple hardware is up for revision, not to mention possible new ones.
Brometheus
Apr 25, 09:23 AM
This may simply be a case of unintended consequences. Apple may have a reason for collecting approximate location data based on cell towers. That reason is not yet clear. It's also not clear whether this information is uploaded to Apple. Even if it's uploaded to Apple, that doesn't mean that Apple is tracking individuals. I can't think of a compelling reason why Apple would want to track each of their millions of customers based on very approximate location data. One unintended consequence is what we're seeing now. As usual everyone jumps to a conclusion before we have any information.
It would be great if Apple clarifies what's going on, but that's unlikely. What's likely is that this will blow over in a week or so. What will not blow over however, is the sudden tension in many relationships now that spouses and other partners have a way to tell where their significant other has been for the past 6 months. That's the other unintended consequence of this.
It would be great if Apple clarifies what's going on, but that's unlikely. What's likely is that this will blow over in a week or so. What will not blow over however, is the sudden tension in many relationships now that spouses and other partners have a way to tell where their significant other has been for the past 6 months. That's the other unintended consequence of this.
Nuvi
Nov 6, 02:23 PM
Bought TomTom car kit and although I still think its too expensive its handy if you travel a lot by air, rent cars and try to keep everything compact. If you don't have a need to switch you GPS from car to car a stand alone unit would be better due to bigger screen and more features.
Regarding the software Navigon works perfectly with the car kit. The features are close to those you could find in high end stand alone unit meaning its light years a ahead of TomTom's iPhone app, which is just as basic as you can get. In some way its funny how TomTom has a "high end" car dock but their iPhone app is more basic then in their entry level stand alone unit.
Regarding the software Navigon works perfectly with the car kit. The features are close to those you could find in high end stand alone unit meaning its light years a ahead of TomTom's iPhone app, which is just as basic as you can get. In some way its funny how TomTom has a "high end" car dock but their iPhone app is more basic then in their entry level stand alone unit.
matznentosh
Jul 30, 06:49 PM
...Verizon was reliable, although their network has been terrible. As I've said, I never get 3 bars or above, and I live in Denver! The service will constantly go out whenever I'm in NYC. The phones do seem to be cheap. My Samsung A670 is probably the only non-joke phone they had, and I've been pretty happy with it.
I have Verizon, my wife T-Mobile. T-Mobile works fine in New York City, and so does Verizon. Especially in the past year Verizon has spent literally a fortune improving their reception, so that dead spots are much fewer than they used to be. I believe this is why they ignore "cool" phones, they are going for reliability with companies who buy in bulk for their employees, not really for consumers - go to a Verizon store if you want to be convinced they don't really care about the common man -
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I have Verizon, my wife T-Mobile. T-Mobile works fine in New York City, and so does Verizon. Especially in the past year Verizon has spent literally a fortune improving their reception, so that dead spots are much fewer than they used to be. I believe this is why they ignore "cool" phones, they are going for reliability with companies who buy in bulk for their employees, not really for consumers - go to a Verizon store if you want to be convinced they don't really care about the common man -
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
Rdclark
Mar 29, 01:38 PM
...obviously, is the rollout of a "Kindle Tablet" running Honeycomb.
The custom Amazon front end would have icons for:
Kindle Reading App (and Kindle Store)
Amazon Music Player (with cloud storage) and MP3 Store
Amazon Prime Streaming Video (and the Amazon Video Store)
Amazon Android App Store
Cloud Storage Manager
Some sort of Web Browser
And underneath that is Honeycomb. Maybe they throw in a free Amazon Prime subscription with purchase (free 2-day shipping on Amazon purchases).
Here would be Amazon leveraging all their strengths into a physical device that could seriously challenge the iPad in ways that no other vendor can, because it creates an Amazon "ecosystem" with the worlds biggest store for physical goods attached.
People like to shop.
The custom Amazon front end would have icons for:
Kindle Reading App (and Kindle Store)
Amazon Music Player (with cloud storage) and MP3 Store
Amazon Prime Streaming Video (and the Amazon Video Store)
Amazon Android App Store
Cloud Storage Manager
Some sort of Web Browser
And underneath that is Honeycomb. Maybe they throw in a free Amazon Prime subscription with purchase (free 2-day shipping on Amazon purchases).
Here would be Amazon leveraging all their strengths into a physical device that could seriously challenge the iPad in ways that no other vendor can, because it creates an Amazon "ecosystem" with the worlds biggest store for physical goods attached.
People like to shop.
Tonsko
Dec 14, 02:21 AM
No, we do NOT have any responsibility to protect Windows users from viruses. It is each computer user's responsibility to protect themselves. Even if every Mac ran antivirus, Windows users are still at a much greater risk from other sources of malware. The common sense approach is for every Windows user to run their own antivirus to protect themselves from malware, whether that malware comes from a Mac user or another source. Mac users do not have a responsibility to burden their computers with AV apps, just because some Windows users may be careless enough to run without AV protection.
Speak for yourself mate. It's easy enough to say that, but what happens if I go to a small client's site, and they're not on the case: I end up with a virus nestled on my hard disk. Then I end up going to a data centre, plugging in and... OOPS! The virus gets into the DC. I would be liable. I am insured, but it's easier to prevent than deal with the fallout. Additionally, as a security consultant, it might not look to competant, if you follow :)
Speak for yourself mate. It's easy enough to say that, but what happens if I go to a small client's site, and they're not on the case: I end up with a virus nestled on my hard disk. Then I end up going to a data centre, plugging in and... OOPS! The virus gets into the DC. I would be liable. I am insured, but it's easier to prevent than deal with the fallout. Additionally, as a security consultant, it might not look to competant, if you follow :)
spiralstairs
Mar 30, 09:15 PM
Don't get me wrong.. I'm excited for Lion. But I don't want a ton of iOS in my Mac OS.
I don't care what you want. Apple decides that.
I don't care what you want. Apple decides that.
Eraserhead
Apr 14, 03:30 PM
I want line items on every single thing spent.
You actually have to be sensible about these things. Doing that would require a giant bureaucracy to verify.
Its quite clear that the UK government has far too much paperwork to fill in. If they (say) spend 20% of their time doing paperwork, and they instead spent 20% of their time down the pub we wouldn't really be any worse off.
You actually have to be sensible about these things. Doing that would require a giant bureaucracy to verify.
Its quite clear that the UK government has far too much paperwork to fill in. If they (say) spend 20% of their time doing paperwork, and they instead spent 20% of their time down the pub we wouldn't really be any worse off.
dbit
Sep 16, 02:45 PM
Quick question,
Is it possible to order online and pick up in a specified store when available?
This would be the most convinient way for me to purchase when the new MBP's come out.
Is it possible to order online and pick up in a specified store when available?
This would be the most convinient way for me to purchase when the new MBP's come out.
baxterbrittle
Nov 22, 01:29 AM
They do know whom they're talking about right? I mean they say PC manufacturers yet palm are producing windows mobile pieces of junk. Windows mobile is the biggest piece of shite operating system - it would not be hard to come up with something a lot better (for Apple at least). And the Palm OS is very dear to my heart, but not exactly cutting edge and palm don't even own that anymore.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
Medanthro
May 7, 10:35 AM
While I agree, MobileMe is still in my eyes the best of the bunch. That's how they get away with charging $99/year. However, if it became free, they could really talk up how great owning a Mac is because of MobileMe.
Some of you may remember way back in the day, before Mobileme was .mac, it was known as itools and it was free. It was a perk that came with buying a Mac.
Some of you may remember way back in the day, before Mobileme was .mac, it was known as itools and it was free. It was a perk that came with buying a Mac.
Wolfpup
Nov 5, 11:48 AM
I don't know anything about this product in particular (other than the reassurance from two people so far that it's well made :) ) but well made anti-malware software has essentially no performance impact at all. I.e. with Microsoft's security essentials there's an average of zero percent CPU use, and ditto for Avira or the like.
On the other hand, some of these giant bloated programs are pretty scary LOL!
On the other hand, some of these giant bloated programs are pretty scary LOL!
ender land
Apr 10, 11:39 AM
Please go back and read my previous posts.
Oh wow, your previous arguments about how "because spotlight says 2 therefore it is true no matter what" are just so convincing!
Oh wow, your previous arguments about how "because spotlight says 2 therefore it is true no matter what" are just so convincing!
KnightWRX
Mar 28, 10:05 AM
It's the usual geek misconception of what a device needs. They are all about checklist items. And thus they are missing the fact that a major paradigm shift is occurring in this world where the far larger non-tech audience is now buying tech toys. This audience does not know much about specs, and cares even less. All they care about is cost (Apple is right there in phones), how their apps work (just great on the iPhone), choice of apps (no one has more choice than Apple), and what they have read or heard about (Apple is the advertising leader).
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
And you're missing the fact that it's the Geeks who write the apps that work on the iPhone.
If the geeks decide the larger customer base elsewhere is more enticing, then you'll start hemorraging developers. Same if the geeks decide that their new project is going to be aimed at more robust hardware.
In the end, it's all tied together. The specs are an important part of the device, even if the person buying it has no clue what they mean. Developers are Apple's main focus (or should be) as far as iOS goes, and some of the lay people here chanting on and on about paradigms seem to be ignoring it.
So? Do any of those phones have 1/10th the user experience of the iPhone? Who is standing in line for them? Do you question the speed of the electronics in your TV set? No because it does what it's supposed to do.
I was talking about Developers, not users. While you may not care your iPhone has a single core SoC, ChAir software might for their next game and decide to simply forgo releasing it on iOS. Again, we're at a tipping point right now, Android has gained fast and offers devices right now that outperform the iOS devices, which might put Apple on the back burner.
Especially considering that their user base, while not on a single handset, is right now bigger or close to being than iOS's.
From a developer's perspective, Android is looking good right now. If these trends continue, iOS won't be looking as good as it used to.
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
And you're missing the fact that it's the Geeks who write the apps that work on the iPhone.
If the geeks decide the larger customer base elsewhere is more enticing, then you'll start hemorraging developers. Same if the geeks decide that their new project is going to be aimed at more robust hardware.
In the end, it's all tied together. The specs are an important part of the device, even if the person buying it has no clue what they mean. Developers are Apple's main focus (or should be) as far as iOS goes, and some of the lay people here chanting on and on about paradigms seem to be ignoring it.
So? Do any of those phones have 1/10th the user experience of the iPhone? Who is standing in line for them? Do you question the speed of the electronics in your TV set? No because it does what it's supposed to do.
I was talking about Developers, not users. While you may not care your iPhone has a single core SoC, ChAir software might for their next game and decide to simply forgo releasing it on iOS. Again, we're at a tipping point right now, Android has gained fast and offers devices right now that outperform the iOS devices, which might put Apple on the back burner.
Especially considering that their user base, while not on a single handset, is right now bigger or close to being than iOS's.
From a developer's perspective, Android is looking good right now. If these trends continue, iOS won't be looking as good as it used to.
ChrisNM
Apr 25, 09:13 AM
It's just the way you are holding your iPhone.
j26
Nov 22, 12:35 PM
Okay, I've heard here a lot, that people want simple integration/syncronization with iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, & Address Book. These are all, (minus iTunes) 100% Mac-Centric. PC users would only get integration/syncronization with iTunes. What good is that to them? At that point you only have iPod + Phone.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
There's no reason why they will choose to exclude syncing with mac applications. iTunes for everyone, and extras for mac users. And really they would only have to write something that would deal with Outlook to cover most Windows users to keep everyone happy.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
There's no reason why they will choose to exclude syncing with mac applications. iTunes for everyone, and extras for mac users. And really they would only have to write something that would deal with Outlook to cover most Windows users to keep everyone happy.