In article <Rh60m.354$j84.334@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> > It's a couple orders of magnatude faster then that (which largely shows
> > off how slow the iPhone 3G 2.x was, but that's another story)
>
> The iPhone 3G wasn't limited by the 3G network, it was limited by the
> processor, so even on WiFi it wasn't all that fast. The browser didn't
> help either.

except that they made existing devices faster so it wasn't the
processor.

> The iPhone 3GS looks like a very good product. As I said at the start,
> the 3rd generation is where companies, not just Apple, generally get the
> feature set and performance up to an acceptable level for the discerning
> buyer, and move beyond the early adopter market. But since many of the
> new 3GS features have been available on other smart phones for many
> years, it's kind of surprising that it's taken Apple three generations
> of the iPhone to implement those features, but better late than never.

except that it does things other phones don't.

> Alas, according to reviewers, even though some of those features have
> finally arrived on the iPhone, they don't work very well.

how amusing. you slam them for not having a feature then when they add
it you slam them for not doing a good job, completely ignoring the
things they do well.

and which reviewers say the new features don't work well? and which
features?

> We may have to
> wait for generation 4, or at least an OS update, for these features to
> work at a level equal to competing smart phones. But at least Apple is
> making solid progress, and we can applaud them for that.

they work just fine, some with minor issues like with any product.