Why iPhone Wannabes Don't Cut It

BUSINESSWEEK
Tech & You June 18, 2008, 10:19PM EST
Why iPhone Wannabes Don't Cut It
Handset giants are playing catch-up to Apple's design, but their
software still lags badly
by Stephen H. Wildstrom

Apple's influence on high-tech markets has long exceeded the company's
relatively small market share, and nowhere is that more obvious than
in the wireless phone market. Barely a year after it introduced the
original iPhone, Apple (AAPL) has redefined the wireless handset.

SNIP
http://www.businessweek.com/print/ma...0000134565.htm

If you want to read the whole Newsweek article go to their website or
buy the Magazine.


But look at the bottom line about that Sprint phone which is going to
be a $100 a month...

BUSINESSWEEK

"Such efforts largely miss the point. Certainly, the beautiful
hardware design adds tremendously to the emotional appeal of Apple
products. But it's the software that makes the iPhone, the Mac, and
the iPod stand out from the pack of wannabes.

Problems Magnified
Consider how you explore the Net on an iPhone compared with on the
Instinct ($130 after rebate with a two-year contract). The iPhone's
Mobile Safari browser is in a class by itself: It is the only handheld
browser I have used that makes it pleasant to view Web pages designed
for big computer displays. The Instinct browser benefits from a big
screen, but it is otherwise typical of the lame software found on
other non-Apple handhelds. It offers a choice of displaying a page at
magnifications labeled 1/2x, 1x, or 2x, a dramatically inferior option
compared with the iPhone's ability to smoothly enlarge and shrink the
page with a gesture. As a result, full-size Web pages that the iPhone
handles easily are very difficult to read or navigate around on the
Instinct.

The problems go deeper. Sprint**—and just about everyone else*—
lacks..."


SNIP


BUSINESSWEEK

Gut Reaction: The Instinct's Good, But…
The Instinct shows that Samsung and Sprint have learned a lot, too.
It's a handsome product—maybe Samsung's best ever. Its no-*button
face, with a display just a bit smaller than the iPhone's, makes it
look like the Apple handset's brother, and it even comes packed in an
iPhone-like box.

Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply Everything
plan, which includes unlimited voice and high-speed data plus
unlimited streaming music and video, navigation service, and more. For
some users, this may be a better deal than AT&T's (T) cheapest
unlimited 3G iPhone data plan at $70 a month plus à la carte iTunes
music and videos.

Yet despite its strong multimedia capabilities, the Instinct offers
little more than the typical cell phone, and nothing near the iPhone's
computerlike capabilities. Yes, good hardware design is critical. But
in the end, it's the software that really makes the difference.

Wildstrom is Technology & You columnist for BusinessWeek.

You can contact him at techandyou@businessweek.com .

4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

>
> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply Everything
> plan,

And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire article.
The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as $69.99/month. This is no
secret and even mentioned on the webpage for the phone. Customers are not
required to have the $99.99 plan.

If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
contained in ti?

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:39:43 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:

>4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply Everything
>> plan,
>
>And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire article.
>The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as $69.99/month. This is no
>secret and even mentioned on the webpage for the phone. Customers are not
>required to have the $99.99 plan.
>
>If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>contained in ti?

The review I read on the Sprint wannabe phone panned the Browser in no
uncertain terms.

The Safari Browser that Apple uses can zoom to any position to make it
trivially easy to navigate and read regular web pages. The Sprint
phone only has 3 size settings. Large (showing way too little of any
web page), Medium, some what better but still hard to use, and small,
better yet,but now illegibly small text.

Ron <ronclifford@peoplepc.com> amazed us all with the following in
news:q9ll54pd7kbmf50ft2hlp2lhu0bbu8a4mb@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:39:43 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>
>>4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>
>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>> Everything plan,
>>
>>And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>>article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>>$69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage for
>>the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>
>>If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>>contained in ti?
>
> The review I read on the Sprint wannabe phone panned the Browser in no
> uncertain terms.

That is the review in question. They couldn't even get the basic facts
right. Why would anyone believe their opinion?

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:59:14 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:

>Ron <ronclifford@peoplepc.com> amazed us all with the following in
>news:q9ll54pd7kbmf50ft2hlp2lhu0bbu8a4mb@4ax.com :
>
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:39:43 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>>
>>>4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>>news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>>> Everything plan,
>>>
>>>And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>>>article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>>>$69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage for
>>>the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>>
>>>If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>>>contained in ti?
>>
>> The review I read on the Sprint wannabe phone panned the Browser in no
>> uncertain terms.
>
>That is the review in question. They couldn't even get the basic facts
>right. Why would anyone believe their opinion?


The review is spot-on in regard to Browsers.

And besides, any Sprint phone is stuck with the Sprint Network, and
Sprint Customer Service.

The Bob wrote:
> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply Everything
>> plan,
>
> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire article.
> The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as $69.99/month. This is no
> secret and even mentioned on the webpage for the phone. Customers are not
> required to have the $99.99 plan.


As cheap as?

The Bob wrote:
> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>> Everything plan,
>
> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
> article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
> $69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage
> for the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>
> If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
> contained in ti?
>
No offense, but if a single factual error negates an entire article full of
information, then why doesn't the fact that you spelled "it" as "ti" negate
your entire post? The question really being, can you live with your own
standard?

Ron <ronclifford@peoplepc.com> amazed us all with the following in
news:roql54lbt3iie2j9mgrh5tqjmn11ujmerq@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:59:14 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>
>>Ron <ronclifford@peoplepc.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>news:q9ll54pd7kbmf50ft2hlp2lhu0bbu8a4mb@4ax.co m:
>>
>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:39:43 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>>>news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>>>> Everything plan,
>>>>
>>>>And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>>>>article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>>>>$69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage for
>>>>the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>>>
>>>>If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>>>>contained in ti?
>>>
>>> The review I read on the Sprint wannabe phone panned the Browser in no
>>> uncertain terms.
>>
>>That is the review in question. They couldn't even get the basic facts
>>right. Why would anyone believe their opinion?
>
>
> The review is spot-on in regard to Browsers.

When did you get to play with the Samusing? You know, the phone that
doesn't go on sale until tomorrow.

You don't know crap about it.

>
> And besides, any Sprint phone is stuck with the Sprint Network, and
> Sprint Customer Service.
>

Anthony Guzzi <dukeofurl@sonic.net> amazed us all with the following in
news:485b0464$0$17160$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> The Bob wrote:
>> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com
>> :
>>
>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>> Everything plan,
>>
>> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>> article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>> $69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage
>> for the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>
>
> As cheap as?
>

Do I need to go a little slower for you?

For $69.99, you get unlimited data, internet, GPS navigation and texting.

So yes, as cheap as.

"Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> amazed us all with the following
in news:485b0e35$0$11638$607ed4bc@cv.net:

> The Bob wrote:
>> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>> Everything plan,
>>
>> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>> article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>> $69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage
>> for the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>
>> If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>> contained in ti?
>>
> No offense, but if a single factual error negates an entire article
> full of information, then why doesn't the fact that you spelled "it"
> as "ti" negate your entire post? The question really being, can you
> live with your own standard?
>
>
>

Because I am not a professional selling my opinion to the highest bidder
while not doing proper research. If you feel the need to base your opinion
on a simple spelling mistake, go for it.

And if this is was the first spelling mistake you've seen, you obviously
never read anything on cnn.com.

The Bob wrote:
> "Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> amazed us all with the following
> in news:485b0e35$0$11638$607ed4bc@cv.net:
>
>> The Bob wrote:
>>> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>>> Everything plan,
>>>
>>> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>>> article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>>> $69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage
>>> for the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>>
>>> If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything else
>>> contained in ti?
>>>
>> No offense, but if a single factual error negates an entire article
>> full of information, then why doesn't the fact that you spelled "it"
>> as "ti" negate your entire post? The question really being, can you
>> live with your own standard?
>>
>>
>>
>
> Because I am not a professional selling my opinion to the highest
> bidder while not doing proper research. If you feel the need to base
> your opinion on a simple spelling mistake, go for it.
>
> And if this is was the first spelling mistake you've seen, you
> obviously never read anything on cnn.com.
>
Your first paragraph implies that you got my point, though you're adamant
about defending yours.

Your second paragraph, however, implies that you've missed my point, or,
that you feel the need to defend yours by going on some sort of offensive.
In the vernacular, we call that "being defensive".

Even the most "professional" of writers make typos or make factual errors.
If you follow this site along to its conclusion, for example, it leads you
to believe The Instinct comes only with a $99 Plan. It's only when you dig
further, and know what you're looking for, that you can find the $69 option.
http://www.instinctthephone.com/

"Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> amazed us all with the following
in news:48638fc8$0$11616$607ed4bc@cv.net:

> The Bob wrote:
>> "Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> amazed us all with the
>> following in news:485b0e35$0$11638$607ed4bc@cv.net:
>>
>>> The Bob wrote:
>>>> 4phun <vic.healey@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
>>>> news:e26b015b-b57f-4d4e-887f-d560584f5c03
@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.c
>>>> om
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sprint offers the Instinct only with its $99-a-month Simply
>>>>> Everything plan,
>>>>
>>>> And this single statement invalidates the accuracy of the entire
>>>> article. The phone is being offered with plans as cheap as
>>>> $69.99/month. This is no secret and even mentioned on the webpage
>>>> for the phone. Customers are not required to have the $99.99 plan.
>>>>
>>>> If the facts in an article are inaccurate, why believe anything
>>>> else contained in ti?
>>>>
>>> No offense, but if a single factual error negates an entire article
>>> full of information, then why doesn't the fact that you spelled "it"
>>> as "ti" negate your entire post? The question really being, can you
>>> live with your own standard?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Because I am not a professional selling my opinion to the highest
>> bidder while not doing proper research. If you feel the need to base
>> your opinion on a simple spelling mistake, go for it.
>>
>> And if this is was the first spelling mistake you've seen, you
>> obviously never read anything on cnn.com.
>>
> Your first paragraph implies that you got my point, though you're
> adamant about defending yours.

Actually, I don't think you had a point, other than to pull the Spelling
Police bit ewhen you have no other way to respond.

>
> Your second paragraph, however, implies that you've missed my point,
> or, that you feel the need to defend yours by going on some sort of
> offensive. In the vernacular, we call that "being defensive".

No- in the vernacular, we call it "responding to a child."

>
> Even the most "professional" of writers make typos or make factual
> errors. If you follow this site along to its conclusion, for example,
> it leads you to believe The Instinct comes only with a $99 Plan.

It doesn't lead you to believe it- there is nothing subtle about. It
states it as fact.

> It's
> only when you dig further, and know what you're looking for, that you
> can find the $69 option. http://www.instinctthephone.com/
>
>

Or read any of the press releases, or do any kind of basic investigation
about it. You know- the things an amateur can do and a professional
should do.


>