In article <486f83d2$0$7347$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
<crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> Well, while it's hard to deny these days that Apple's products are perhaps
> "great", let us not forget that Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy perhaps
> 5 years ago. Macs weren't selling and few people were interested.

nonense. apple has had continuous profitable quarterly earnings for
the last decade. prior to that they did have some unprofitable
quarters, but they had (and still have) a huge amount of cash in the
bank and were in no danger of bankrupcy.

> I believe
> it was Microsoft who bailed them out (I'm open to correction on the
> specifics) because they would have been left as a "monopoly", a bad thing
> with government regulation.

microsoft paid apple $150 million in exchange for non-voting stock ten
years ago for an out of court settlement regarding patent disputes and
other intellectual property. since apple's stock went up in value by
quite a bit, the 'punishment' turned out to be quite lucrative for
microsoft.

> Then the iPod came along and Apple's fortunes
> changed, almost overnight.

again wrong. the ipod was introduced in 2001 and it wasn't until 2003
with the introduction of the itunes music store when sales of the ipod
started to dramatically increase. in 2004, with the introduction of
the ipod mini and later, the 4th generation ipod, sales really started
to climb. that's hardly overnight.

> While I love gadgets, and really want to own an iPhone just because I'm a
> gadget nut, I still find them to be more hype than substance when it comes
> to business use. Apple is still up to its old tricks of limiting what the
> device is allowed to do.

how are they limiting anything? apple released an iphone software
development kit and anyone is free to write whatever apps they want.
there is a restriction for selling (not writing) certain types of apps
in the apple store, such as porn or hacking utilities, but that's to be
expected. those types of apps will have to find an alternate
distribution method.

> Its failure to sync completely, easily, and
> INEXPENSIVELY with Outlook on a PC, for example, is a major drawback for me.

actually, that should work.

> The fact that software "fixes" for a problem like that add significant
> additional cost to the device is arrogant to me,

what significant additional cost?

> and, I think, is what did
> Apple in in the first place. And those "fixes" are not even complete fixes,
> which makes it even worse.

what's incomplete about it?

> I am sorry that Apple is not, and never has been. more consumer-friendly.

and microsoft is?

> Explain to me why my Blackberry Curve (on Verizon) isn't a "better" device
> than the iPhone for practical use?

in some ways it's better and in other ways it isn't. pick the device
that best suits your needs.

> It's a great phone, plays all my mp3s
> and iTunes, has a good camera with a flash, and a video recorder, is more
> compact, does email very well (though not all attachments), syncs 100% with
> MS Outlook on a PC for FREE, has very usable, and fast internet access,
> albeit not with all that pinch and slide techno-gimmickry. Tell me, who's
> really going to sit on their iPhone and do internet access all day? No
> matter how cool the iPhone appears to do it, the device is still too small
> for the kind of comfort you get from a laptop or desktop for long-term
> browsing.

obviously. that's true for all pocket sized devices. on the other
hand, there's the comfort in not having to lug a laptop or a desktop
everywhere.

> I wonder if the iPhone is really going to take over and change the cell
> phone industry or whether it will crash and burn with time as most consumers
> will find they really don't want or need to do the stuff the iPhone offers?
> And that is not to diminish my admittedly own personal fascination with the
> device while it's relatively new. Time will tell.

yes, time will tell.