 Re: Breaking Rumor: Apple iPhone goes enterprise on Jan. 21
In article <alpine.OSX.1.00.0801262303290.21314@pangtzu.panda .com>,
Mark Crispin <mrc@Washington.EDU> wrote:
> According to Mitch, it is unfair
No, Supermoron.
I wrote that it's unfair to compare USE without using one.
I didn't write that it's unfair to compare SPECS.
> to point out that:
> . iPhone is locked to the worst network in the USA
I've never seen anything but whining about networks -- and about ALL of
them. I am certain if Apple had attached to Verizon YOU would have been
just as whiny about it.
> and Apple aggressively
> attacks unlocked iPhones.
This is being written awfully soon after release (a time when you
should expect them to be making sure everything works properly!) and
you are making policy and aggression judgments? You could as easily say
that Apple is working hard to make sure everyone got everything they
built in and more, making sure it all works as advertised, making sure
it develops into a larger platform than it was at release.
Any problem with doing those? (Sure you have -- it isn't negative and
against something you decry!)
> . iPhone lacks 3G - hence poor sales in Europe and no chance of sales in
> Japan.
This is a prediction, I guess? Why shouldn't I object to an extreme and
agressively annoying person's ignorant prediction?
> . iPhone's GSM performance is average; it is not the best-performing GSM
> phone on the market.
Since when is that a problem?
I'm not reading any more: this is a long list trying to tie in as many
points as possible, without considering how meaningful or significant
or even sensible they are. It's BS, and not worth my time.
Yes, it is different from other phones.
Yes, it might not fit what YOU need, or specific buyers. When did each
model of phone have to fit everybody? When did you complain about all
of the others with such vigor?
However, there were better points further on in Crispin's post:
> I namecall mindless fanboys like you who deny the truth when it fails
> to jive with your beliefs.
I do no such thing, and have not here. I have no _beliefs_ about iPhone.
I am not a supporter of it specifically. But you are definitely a
specific, unfair and unreasonable critic of it. That's the opposite,
but it's still exactly wrong behavior.
It doesn't make you look smart to call me a fanboy, when I am no fan of
the product and certainly not one of the people you'd spit on so.
I am sure I am much smarter than yourself.
> >> However, a simple Google search, which apparently is beyond the
> capability
> >> of fanboy Mitch in Hawaii, shows that people have been having this
> problem
> >> with iPhone too.
> > I didn't claim that no one was having the problem, or that it was with
> > just one version of the devices. I suggested it wasn't usual.
>
> Here's a hint to you and all other fanboys: a proper product test
> includes
> letting your most hostile critics at it. If they can break it, doing
> something perfectly ordinary, then the product needs to be fixed.
That is one approach. It isn't necessary by any means.
But your conclusion is proper; when something does not meet it's
design, it needs to be fixed.
So why are people complaining about third-party software?
> > Hah! Has Mark decided that Windows isn't the cause of the horrendous
> > Windows problems permeating all of business world?
>
> It's better than the horrendous Macintosh problems that existed 20
> years ago.
Meaningless; no reference to ANY problems. He's expecting people to
accept the statement without actually having to come up with Mac
problems that caused users/companies horrendous expense.
> Or perhaps you are too young to remember that there was a time
> when Macintosh was far ahead of Windows.
IN MARKET SHARE? We're not discussing market share. We're discussing
design, which Mac has always been far ahead of all other builders.
> There's a reason why it lost that
> position, and that reason is far more based upon what Apple did than
> what Microsoft did.
WRONG. The reason is because of their positional differences.
Microsoft built a component for all IBM clones, and then took advantage
of that to take over that side of the industry.
Apple built products they would be proud of, and didn't try to take
over industries. It may be a huge mistake if you plan to become
powerful, hated industry giants, but it isn't saying anything about
their products.
 | 
Linear Mode
