Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote

> You're responding to individual sentences rather than to my actual points,

Nope.

> and trying to start arguments about who said what to distract from the actual discussion.

Nope.

> We get enough of that sort of thing from our resident CSMA trolls.

Just how many of you are there between those ears ?

> I don't really have the patience for it.

Your problem.

What you really dont have the patience for is having your nose rubbed in your stupiditys.

>>> This implies that people use the platform concept with
>>> respect to music players, which I think is clearly the
>>> case. It doesn't imply they do with respect to phones.

>> They do anyway, just because of the radical
>> differences in how the menus are structured etc.

>> There's plenty that choose to stick with Nokias just because their menus
>> etc are much more intuitive than say with Motorola and LG in spades.

>>> With the except of the small fraction of people who buy
>>> Treo and Windows Mobile devices, the platform concept
>>> is nearly meaningless in the mobile phone market.

>> Not with the UI it aint.

> I haven't gotten the impression most people are
> particularly attached to their user interfaces.

You need to get out more.

> In fact, most people seem to hate the UI of current phones.

Most dont with Nokias.

And you dont know that they will lover the iPhone UI either, particularly
the rather fucked scrolling around when you're using decent legible fonts.

>>> Apple has lots of experience with this.

>>> The iPhone uses an updated version of the iPod syncing mechanism,
>>> and iSync on OS X has been syncing with non-Apple phones for years.

>> And is still the area where most have the most problems.

> OK, but the problems you're talking about
> here are problems with *any* phone switch.

Nope, not when you stick with the same manufacturer.

> They have nothing to do with the iPhone in particular.

Corse they do when its their first.

> Most people, as far as I've seen, just end up manually
> re-entering their contact information anyway.

Only the fools.

In article <5edrb4F35blltU1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
> >> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
>
> > You're responding to individual sentences rather than to my actual points,
>
> Nope.
>
> > and trying to start arguments about who said what to distract from the
> > actual discussion.
>
> Nope.

OK, so we're done here.

[snip]

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote

>>> You're responding to individual sentences rather than to my actual points,

>> Nope.

>>> and trying to start arguments about who said what to distract from the actual discussion.

>> Nope.

> OK, so we're done here.

You've always been done, like a dinner.

On 2007-06-25 19:52:04 -0700, Screw the iPhone <apple@sucks.ass> said:

> On 26 Jun 2007 02:42:55 -0000, meagan34@gmail.com (Meg) wrote:
>
>> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...635816,00.html
>>
>
> I'm gonna laugh my ass off when you whiney little babies get your
> precious i(diot)Phones and discover what a horrible piece of shit it
> actually is.
>
> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!

Say there, prat: have you considered growing up and getting a life?
You really don't have to be this way, you know.

-jcr

Ura Dippschit <URN.Idiot@idiots.com> wrote:

> In article <cn118396f9t98kt0mai9pq62n1ea681diq@4ax.com>,
> Screw the iPhone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>
> > You wish. I just think it's funny as HELL to see everyone wetting
> > their pants over a piece of shit PHONE that NO ONE has yet put their
> > hands on.
>
> Yeah. It's going to work different than all the videos and demos we've
> seen once we actually have one, right shit brain?

Well, I'd hope the displayed time isn't always 9:42 ...
--
Lars T.

In article <1i0e3mr.1xdnrkh1b4g8y2N%Lars.Traeger@epost.de>,
Lars.Traeger@epost.de (Lars Träger) wrote:

> Ura Dippschit <URN.Idiot@idiots.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <cn118396f9t98kt0mai9pq62n1ea681diq@4ax.com>,
> > Screw the iPhone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
> >
> > > You wish. I just think it's funny as HELL to see everyone wetting
> > > their pants over a piece of shit PHONE that NO ONE has yet put their
> > > hands on.
> >
> > Yeah. It's going to work different than all the videos and demos we've
> > seen once we actually have one, right shit brain?
>
> Well, I'd hope the displayed time isn't always 9:42 ...

Heck they already have it so more than one person can call. What do
you want? Blood?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:19:12 -0700, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>In article <dcj283ho2ogj47h5bm02ovo4qis0utq9j7@4ax.com>,
> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>
>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
>
>The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
>dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.

Bullshit, you cow. For example, you said it would supplant the iPod's
UI on the day of its release.

>You, on the other hand, have been badmouthing the iPhone and Apple even
>though you have had zero experience with the phone.

I'm badmouthing it based on what is known now. A non-removable
battery? A non-removable SIM card? Are you fucking serious? I'm
also taking shots at EVERYONE who has "got to have this phone the day
its released" without any real user experiences. What you see as
baseless criticism is really a condemnation of all the hype based
solely on what Crapple's and Stinkular's marketing departments have
released thus far. Go back to chewing your cud, cow.

>> >You're not skeptical, you're on the attack, pretending that your
>> >biased and baseless opinion is fact.
>>
>> You have no facts to back up anything being said about the
>> i(diot)Phone other than what the suits at Crapple want you to know.
>
>That is the reason that I haven't said anything about the phone itself.
>You on the other hand, have absolutely no facts to back your baseless
>and worthless attacks.

See above, liar. I could find other examples you've forgotten, but
you aren't worth the effort, cow.

>> What is so hard for you to understand it's a fucking PHONE, for gods
>> sake!?!?
>
>What makes you think that I don't understand that? Oh yes, your rabid
>anti-Apple bigotry is what makes you think that.

Your continued defense of it non-phone functions, that's what, cow.

>> Anyone who feels they *need* the i(diot)Phone is sorely lacking in
>> the self-respect department.
>
>I didn't say anything about needing the phone, illiterate moron. Learn
>to read for comprehension.

What part of the word 'anyone' do you not understand, cow?

>> >Got a clue for you: the world doesn't revolve around you--it really
>> >doesn't.
>>
>> Really? I'd imagine most people who didn't drink the Kool-aid feels
>> the same way I do bout the i(diot)Phone
>
>That's right; you imagine it, because you're too self-centered to accept
>reality.

Try 'I'm too centered in reality to go all ga-ga over a stupid ass
PHONE!'

>> An overpriced, overhyped piece of junk.
>
>What evidence do you have that it is a piece of junk? Absolutely no
>evidence at all. And "overpriced, overhyped" is merely your opinion.

It has two names on it, Crapple, and worse, Stinkular. My long
experience with the cellular industry has shown me that a device's
worthiness is often inversely proportionate to its pre-market hype.

>> >> All I need a PHONE to do is make and receive PHONE CALLS, not
>> >> watch stupid YouTube videos or listen to music. That's what
>> >> computers and CD players are for.
>> >
>> >So you would rather carry three items than one item? Well, I'm not
>> >a big strong, brainless musclebound he man like you; I'd rather
>> >carry just one thing that does all of those functions.
>>
>> If you have to carry that much shit around just to keep you
>> entertained, your problems go much deeper than any "PHONE" can
>> resolve.
>
>That's what you said that you do. I didn't say it.

No, I never said I do. Please take a course in reading comprehension,
you stupid fat cow. When I'm listening to music, the phone can go to
hell. Same when I'm on a computer, the rest isn't necessary. You are
probably one of those big ass bitches who listens to an MP3 player
while talking on the phone and putting on makeup and cramming a Big
Mac in your fat face while driving your big ass SUV down the road.

>> >> You Kool-aid drinking lemmings who want to be the de facto guinea
>> >> pig beta testers for Crapple and Stinkular are candidates for
>> >> psychological experiments in mass mind control (read: cults).
>> >
>> >Yeah, right; anyone who doesn't think like you is a lemming. Last
>> >time I looked, you're not Big Brother.
>>
>> And I never pretended to be.
>
>In this thread, you most certainly act as if you believe that you are.
>I believe that you haven't pretended to be him, but only because you act
>as if you believe that you are him.

Again, the reading comprehension bites your big ass. Do you even know
what the term "Big Brother" actually means? I didn't think so. See
above, you dumb cow.

>> Now you'll have to sit in your shanty and cry to yourself about your
>> bad decision to buy an i(diot)Phone because you'll be too afraid of
>> being told "I told you so" to complain here.
>
>I don't know where your "here" is, but it certainly isn't my "here".
>
>But the bottom line is that you are a liar and a hypocrite with
>delusions of adequacy, so just fuck off.

We'll find out who the liar and hypocrite is when you buy your dumbass
i(diot)Phone and have buyers regret within six months. I think it's
funny as hell!!

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:13:52 -0400, "MuahMan" <muahman@aol.com> wrote:

>
>"Screw the i (diot) Phone" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote in message
>news:h2j283d298o0fm909v5p4po8gmfvbdlpjt@4ax.com.. .
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:33:18 GMT, Ura Dippschit <URN.Idiot@idiots.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <t9b183dk8gn76qiqg2l5pbf0lubdos1qaq@4ax.com>,
>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's a PHONE, goddammit.
>>>
>>>No it's NOT, goddammit. Since you are too fucking dense to know WHAT it
>>>actually is, maybe it's time you shut the fuck up!
>>
>> Says the lemming. It's a phone, which is why it's being sold by a
>> PHONE COMPANY for use with a PHONE COMPANY'S service. Get it? Good.
>> Next.
>>
>
>
>Ura doesn't care what it is. He just know Steve Jobs told him he can't live
>without one. So, he can't live without one.

What is he, retarded?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:20:23 -0500, George Kerby
<ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
>michelle-CCC585.14191226062007@news.east.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner"
><michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <dcj283ho2ogj47h5bm02ovo4qis0utq9j7@4ax.com>,
>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
>>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
>>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
>>
>> The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
>> dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
>>
>Don't insult my German Shepherd.
>
>His breath doesn't smell of reeking shit like this asshole.

You seem awfully familiar with the smell of your dog's breath and
feces. Does the ASPCA know what you are up to?

"Screw the i (diot) Phone" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote in message
news:j86683l59doa09spu2bdv637clbot1ud67@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:13:52 -0400, "MuahMan" <muahman@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Screw the i (diot) Phone" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote in message
>>news:h2j283d298o0fm909v5p4po8gmfvbdlpjt@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:33:18 GMT, Ura Dippschit <URN.Idiot@idiots.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <t9b183dk8gn76qiqg2l5pbf0lubdos1qaq@4ax.com>,
>>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's a PHONE, goddammit.
>>>>
>>>>No it's NOT, goddammit. Since you are too fucking dense to know WHAT it
>>>>actually is, maybe it's time you shut the fuck up!
>>>
>>> Says the lemming. It's a phone, which is why it's being sold by a
>>> PHONE COMPANY for use with a PHONE COMPANY'S service. Get it? Good.
>>> Next.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Ura doesn't care what it is. He just know Steve Jobs told him he can't
>>live
>>without one. So, he can't live without one.
>
> What is he, retarded?
>

He's mactarded.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:27:42 -0700, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>In article <vl6683dghugijr49trlh1ai7e07h1n1lkn@4ax.com>,
> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>
>> You are probably one of those big ass bitches who listens to an MP3
>> player while talking on the phone and putting on makeup and cramming
>> a Big Mac in your fat face while driving your big ass SUV down the
>> road.
>
>Wrong again, dogbreath; I am not your mother.
>
>You are a turd. You have always been a turd. You will always be a turd.

Mooo! Mooo! Mooo! Tell me, when you get your i(diot)Phone, are you
going to load up the contact list with the numbers of every takeout
joint in town? Mooo! Mooo! Get on back to the barn, Bessie, it's
milkin' time!

BTW, your followup trick didn't work. I'm no novice, you dumb cow.

On 6/27/07 9:21 PM, in article jv5683hruo2vfvovh2rkiiet9ve5ccgdt1@4ax.com,
"Screw the iPhone (diot)" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:20:23 -0500, George Kerby
> <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
>> michelle-CCC585.14191226062007@news.east.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner"
>> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <dcj283ho2ogj47h5bm02ovo4qis0utq9j7@4ax.com>,
>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
>>>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
>>>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
>>>
>>> The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
>>> dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
>>>
>> Don't insult my German Shepherd.
>>
>> His breath doesn't smell of reeking shit like this asshole.
>
> You seem awfully familiar with the smell of your dog's breath and
> feces. Does the ASPCA know what you are up to?
>
Fuck off Zero.

<ding>


(Watch this folks)

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:06:36 -0500, George Kerby
<ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>On 6/27/07 9:21 PM, in article jv5683hruo2vfvovh2rkiiet9ve5ccgdt1@4ax.com,
>"Screw the iPhone (diot)" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:20:23 -0500, George Kerby
>> <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
>>> michelle-CCC585.14191226062007@news.east.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner"
>>> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <dcj283ho2ogj47h5bm02ovo4qis0utq9j7@4ax.com>,
>>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
>>>>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
>>>>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
>>>>
>>>> The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
>>>> dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
>>>>
>>> Don't insult my German Shepherd.
>>>
>>> His breath doesn't smell of reeking shit like this asshole.
>>
>> You seem awfully familiar with the smell of your dog's breath and
>> feces. Does the ASPCA know what you are up to?
>>
>Fuck off Zero.
>
><ding>
>
>
>(Watch this folks)

Watch what? You blow your dog while talking on your i(diot)Phone? Or
is Michelle going to show us her "extra" equipment? <shudder>

On Jun 26, 12:50 pm, Screw the i(diot)Phone <a...@sucks.ass> wrote:

> >No it's NOT, goddammit. Since you are too fucking dense to know WHAT it
> >actually is, maybe it's time you shut the fuck up!
>
> Says the lemming. It's a phone, which is why it's being sold by a
> PHONE COMPANY for use with a PHONE COMPANY'S service. Get it? Good.
> Next.

actually tardo, it isnt a phone. its a computer, designed by a
computer manufacturer. this computer runs a unix variant for an OS.
this computer can decode compressed music, much like another non-phone
product called an "iPod". this computer can receive wireless network
signals, and its users can surf the web in a common piece of computer
software called a "web browser". this computer also comes bundled w/
other applications programmed by its manufacturer.

oh, and this computer can make phone calls.


sm

On Jun 26, 1:56 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nope, nothing like it. You dont need much controls wise for a media
> player

and yet, there were so many piss poor implementations of those few
controls, until apple.

> the ipod showed up. Virtually everyone already has a cellphone now and
> most of those already have a media player now too if they use one much.

i have never had a media player on any of my cellphones, first one in
1999. my phones continue to be small, cluttered, difficult to use
devices that often leave me frustrated.

> Hordes of them have a media player/phone/camera combined already.

and w/ those implementations, most (like previous mp3 players) suck.

there is a definite market for easy-to-use devices. the functionality
neednt be new, but the implementation thereof does.


sm

On Jun 26, 3:08 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure, its not going to appeal to too many of those, just because it has no keyboard.

but...it does have a keyboard. a qwerty keyboard, right there. its on
the screen. still a keyboard.

> The problem is more that the screen is filled with the
> touchscreen keyboard on those tiny screens and so you
> cant read the email you are replying too at the same time.

that may be true. but i havent tried it yet. you have, then?

> And anyone with a clue uses favourites with browsing anyway

interesting. and how do you enter in these favorites in the first
place? dunno about you, but i often type in new URLs that friends tell
me about.

> > However, most of those people don't use the media player
> > functions of their phones, because they use iPods instead.
>
> That is just plain wrong when their phone has a media player.

i dont think its wrong. i think even people who have cell phones w/
media players still use ipods. why? because the ipod performs its task
better. why? because its easier to use.


> > And the iPhone isn't all that expensive compared
> > with the cost of an iPod + a phone.
>
> Thats not a valid comparison, you should be comparing it with other media player phones.

why? when you buy an iphone, you essentially get an ipod. why? the
defining characteristics of the ipod are its style and its ease of
use. both of which are present in the iphone version.


sm

On Jun 26, 4:38 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The media player function is,
>
> Nope, because that wont kill a damned thing given that there are hordes of
> phones with media players and cameras that have been around for years now.

most phones apps suck, including media players. if my phone sported
one, i wouldnt use it -- i dont want more crapware on my computer to
load it, and it doesnt sync w/ itunes. my ipod does. so id continue
using my ultraslim ipod nano.

> > Not to mention just the slick all-around UI, for everything
> > from SMS to contact management to conference calling.
>
> Sure, but the UI on most phones is already quite adequate in those areas.

HA! funny. good one.

> There's plenty of other phones like that now.

theyre plenty of phones w/ many of the iphone features -- but none w/
all.

> Even later to market. Bet its too late and they never do as well as the ipod did.

of course. this is a different product than an ipod -- thats like
saying AppleTV wont sell as many units as ipods. pointless. first, as
a mobile pc/PDA its much more expensive than an ipod, and is thusly in
a different product category..not a whimsical $79 purchase. second,
its tied to a contract. third, its tied to various packages, limited
in conjunction w/ their data partner.

sm

tony <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote

>>> Apple introduced the iPod into a market that was in a similar state.

>> Nope, nothing like it. You dont need much controls wise for a media player

> and yet, there were so many piss poor implementations of those few controls, until apple.

What I said in the bit you chose to delete from the quoting. Here it is again.

> and the ipod design is rather elegant and well done in that regard.

And its not relevant to that claim about the market in a similar
state that I was clearly commenting on there, in more that
you deleted from the quoting and I have restored at the top.

>> Virtually everyone already has a cellphone now and most of those
>> already have a media player now too if they use one much.

> i have never had a media player on any of my cellphones, first one in 1999.

I wasnt talking about media players in cellphones there.

> my phones continue to be small, cluttered, difficult
> to use devices that often leave me frustrated.

There's plenty that arent, most obviously with the Nokias that do have a decent UI.

>> Hordes of them have a media player/phone/camera combined already.

> and w/ those implementations, most (like previous mp3 players) suck.

No they dont, particularly the Nokias.

> there is a definite market for easy-to-use devices.

Yes, but the iphone isnt the only one of those,
its in fact very late to market with one that is that.

> the functionality neednt be new, but the implementation thereof does.

Pity that that isnt new either. Its just a bit better on the touch
screen side. There's plenty of other touchscreens out there now.

And its significantly worse in some areas like using the fucked AT&T EDGE
network too. Most of the rest are GSM 3G network, where they should all be.

On 6/28/07 1:55 PM, in article uv08835q80nv22r382iq8c04vre2s5k6u7@4ax.com,
"Screw the iPhone (diot)" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:06:36 -0500, George Kerby
> <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/07 9:21 PM, in article jv5683hruo2vfvovh2rkiiet9ve5ccgdt1@4ax.com,
>> "Screw the iPhone (diot)" <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:20:23 -0500, George Kerby
>>> <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
>>>> michelle-CCC585.14191226062007@news.east.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner"
>>>> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <dcj283ho2ogj47h5bm02ovo4qis0utq9j7@4ax.com>,
>>>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <apple@sucks.ass> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
>>>>>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
>>>>>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
>>>>> dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
>>>>>
>>>> Don't insult my German Shepherd.
>>>>
>>>> His breath doesn't smell of reeking shit like this asshole.
>>>
>>> You seem awfully familiar with the smell of your dog's breath and
>>> feces. Does the ASPCA know what you are up to?
>>>
>> Fuck off Zero.
>>
>> <ding>
>>
>>
>> (Watch this folks)
>
> Watch what? You blow your dog while talking on your i(diot)Phone? Or
> is Michelle going to show us her "extra" equipment? <shudder>
>
Up yours, drooling canine!

<ding>

Here goes...

On Jun 26, 6:20 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nope, there are fuck all silly enough to have
> both a phone thats a media player and an ipod.

rubbish. people arent going to give up their itunes playlists and easy-
as-pie syncing, just to use their latest random cellphone's media
player. it makes far more sense to stick to what ya know, and keep
using your managed itunes system.

cell phone makers have shown they arent very good at making media
players that people care about. and certainly never one people would
abandon itunes in favor of. why learn a whole new system when you have
one that works very well?

> > If you want an iPod as opposed to a "music player" (and most people do),
>
> No they dont.

but they do. see ipod sales. its about the UI, the syncing, and the
style. ipod != "random media player"


> > The iPhone is designed so much better than other
> > phones that it will offset any lack of familiarity.
>
> Easy to claim. It remains to be seen how valid that claim actually is.

the track record is in apples favor, here. see Mac, and iPod. they
would appear to know how to "do" design. popular design. pay-a-premium
design (tho now of course, due to immense popularity & mass
production, ipods are down to trinket cost).

> > Most people barely know how to use their phones to begin with.
>
> Most can use it for what they bought it for.

....which has historically been talking. but for people looking to
consolidate devices, which is who i believe the iphone is marketed to,
then "what they bought it for" becomes talking, media, internet.

> > It's a phone designed for people who buy *iPods*.
>
> Pity so many buy phones with media players and cameras too.

pfft. media players & cameras are bundled trinkets in today's
cellphones. the majority of everyday phones w/ them are not purchased
due to their inclusion; these phones were bought (or promo-ed) for
talking. not so w/ iPhone.


sm

tony <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote

>>> OK, but unlike for the Blackberry, e-mail is not the "killer app" for the iPhone.

>> There is no "killer app" for the iPhone, there are hordes of phones
>> with media players and cameras that have been around for years now.

>>> The media player function is,

>> Nope, because that wont kill a damned thing given
>> that there are hordes of phones with media players
>> and cameras that have been around for years now.

> most phones apps suck, including media players.

I cant see too many spending $5/600 and locking themselves
into a 2 year contract and a fucked EDGE network for that.

Specially when those that do care about a decent media
player UI will already have an ipod or a properly implemented
phone with integraged media player like a Nokia.

> if my phone sported one, i wouldnt use it -- i dont
> want more crapware on my computer to load it,

You dont need that with a properly implemented
media player, it appears as a drive on the computer.

Thats always been one major downside with the ipod,
it needs its own rather fucked crapware to load it and
even that cant copy stuff from one ipod to another either.

> and it doesnt sync w/ itunes. my ipod does.
> so id continue using my ultraslim ipod nano.

So you are unlikely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year
$50/90 per month against the wall on an iphone now.

>>> Not to mention just the slick all-around UI, for everything
>>> from SMS to contact management to conference calling.

>> Sure, but the UI on most phones is already quite adequate in those areas.

> HA! funny. good one.

HA!! pathetic. silly one.

>> There's plenty of other phones like that now.

> theyre plenty of phones w/ many of the iphone features -- but none w/ all.

Wrong. The Nokia N series has even more like built in GPS too.

And plenty have a much better camera than the iphone,
and a removable battery, and a sim and memory cards too.

>> Even later to market. Bet its too late and they never do as well as the ipod did.

> of course. this is a different product than an ipod

What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

> -- thats like saying AppleTV wont sell as many units as ipods. pointless.

Pity he was the one mindlessly claiming the iphone have as much effect
on the market as the ipod did, in the quoting you carefully deleted.

> first, as a mobile pc/PDA its much more expensive than an ipod, and
> is thusly in a different product category..not a whimsical $79 purchase.

What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

> second, its tied to a contract. third, its tied to various
> packages, limited in conjunction w/ their data partner.

What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

On Jun 28, 4:28 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Nope, nothing like it. You dont need much controls wise for a media player
> >
> > and yet, there were so many piss poor implementations of those few controls, until apple.
>
> What I said in the bit you chose to delete from the quoting.

evidently your quoting style eludes me, then. it appears to me you
said the ipods good UI design was due to media players being
uncomplicated to begin with. to which i responded the above.


> >> Virtually everyone already has a cellphone now and most of those
> >> already have a media player now too if they use one much.
> >
> > i have never had a media player on any of my cellphones, first one in 1999.
>
> I wasnt talking about media players in cellphones there.

again, i must be confused. it *appears* in the quote above that youre
saying most of todays cellphones have a media player.

> There's plenty that arent, most obviously with the Nokias that do have a decent UI.

keyword being decent. not good. my current phone is a nokia, after
having tried samsung, sony, and nokias prior. best part about it? i
can use the same charger i had years ago.

> > and w/ those implementations, most (like previous mp3 players) suck.
>
> No they dont, particularly the Nokias.

they do. herein lies our disagreement. further, i like itunes &
syncing w/ my itunes. i cant do that w/ a nokia.

> > the functionality neednt be new, but the implementation thereof does.
>
> Pity that that isnt new either. Its just a bit better on the touch

from what ive seen in the videos, the UI improvements i like go beyond
touch screen. they are inline w/ my mac user experience, which i like.


sm

tony <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote

>> Sure, its not going to appeal to too many
>> of those, just because it has no keyboard.

> but...it does have a keyboard. a qwerty keyboard,
> right there. its on the screen. still a keyboard.

What I said in the next bit.

>> The problem is more that the screen is filled with the
>> touchscreen keyboard on those tiny screens and so you
>> cant read the email you are replying too at the same time.

> that may be true. but i havent tried it yet. you have, then?

Dont need to on that particular question, nothing else is even possible.

And it cant cut and paste either, pretty fucked with email.

>> And anyone with a clue uses favourites with browsing anyway

> interesting. and how do you enter in these favorites in the first place?

Hit the tool that saves the current site as a favorite.

Even you should be able to manage that if someone was actually
stupid enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane.

> dunno about you, but i often type in new URLs that friends tell me about.

More fool you, I click on the link they include in the email,
even if I am talking to them on the phone at the time.

Leaves manually typing it in for dead.

>>> However, most of those people don't use the media player
>>> functions of their phones, because they use iPods instead.

>> That is just plain wrong when their phone has a media player.

> i dont think its wrong. i think even people who have
> cell phones w/ media players still use ipods.

Only the fools.

> why? because the ipod performs its task
> better. why? because its easier to use.

Pity that you have to fart around with two separate devices.

Anyone with a clue gets a cellphone with an
integrated media player with a decent UI instead.

>>> And the iPhone isn't all that expensive compared with the cost of an iPod + a phone.

>> Thats not a valid comparison, you should be comparing it with other media player phones.

> why?

Because most arent stupid enough to have two separate devices.

> when you buy an iphone, you essentially get an ipod. why?
> the defining characteristics of the ipod are its style and its
> ease of use. both of which are present in the iphone version.

You dont know that yet.

And few will be silly enough to piss $5/600 and $50/90/month on a 2
year contract against the wall when they already have an ipod anyway.

On Jun 28, 4:45 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:

> What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

....drop the paranoia thing. theres no careful deleting here, i just
hit reply, quote your latest statement, and respond to it. if there is
confusion, it may be your posts are convoluted and difficult to work
with.

> You dont need that with a properly implemented
> media player, it appears as a drive on the computer.

....oh, and it syncs w/ my music library telepathically, sans software?
how does it load up my desired playlists?

> > and it doesnt sync w/ itunes. my ipod does.
> > so id continue using my ultraslim ipod nano.
>
> So you are unlikely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year
> $50/90 per month against the wall on an iphone now.

not sure what youre referring to. i said i wouldnt use my cellphone's
(hypothetical) media player, because it doesnt sync as well as my
nano; both of which fit in my pocket.

however, id still prefer one device, if it did. $50/90 is less and not
much more than what i spend now on my non-data plan. 500 isnt bad for
a PDA, mobile email, mobile full web browser, ipod, and cell phone. so
yeah, id pay that. except, i dont buy first versions. but in theory,
or down the road, you bet.

> > HA! funny. good one.
>
> HA!! pathetic. silly one.

...? wheres the counter point... i decried typical cell UIs, and youve
already agreed its commonly bad. so why is that silly?

> > theyre plenty of phones w/ many of the iphone features -- but none w/ all.
>
> Wrong. The Nokia N series has even more like built in GPS too.

does the nokia does not have non-linear email, as the iphone? and rich
UIs inline w/ my mac experience? nope. i stand by it -- there are many
good features out there, but no other product has everything the
iphone promises. i do hope they add GPS in v2 tho.

sm

On Jun 28, 4:52 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hit the tool that saves the current site as a favorite.
>
> Even you should be able to manage that if someone was actually
> stupid enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane.

huh? whats w/ the smackdown, jack? further, if someone in my carpool
is talking about a url, what tool should i "hit" to save their words
into a favorite? i am very intrigued by this tool.

> More fool you, I click on the link they include in the email,
> even if I am talking to them on the phone at the time.

oh? so your chums will email you a link, even when theyre sitting
right next to you in the car, w/o a computer? so they actually load
their cell's email program, somehow forward a url in it, and you check
that in your cell, click it, and added it as a favorite -- all instead
of speaking? wow. very organized system you have in place. impressive.

> > why? because the ipod performs its task
> > better. why? because its easier to use.
>
> Pity that you have to fart around with two separate devices.

two devices, yes. but two devices that each do one thing really well.
thus, no farting.

if i could one device to do them both -- again, really well -- i
would. and it so would you, by your own admission (to you, the nokia N
performs these taks very well. to others...perhaps not).

> integrated media player with a decent UI instead.

why settle for decent? i dont mind paying for better than decent. see
ipod success.

> Because most arent stupid enough to have two separate devices.

actually, apparently most are "stupid" enough -- i think the number of
cell + primary-mp3 (non-stupid, by your rules) users are much smaller
than you think; and certainly do not qualify for the 'most'
designator.


> > when you buy an iphone, you essentially get an ipod. why?
> > the defining characteristics of the ipod are its style and its
> > ease of use. both of which are present in the iphone version.
>
> You dont know that yet.

based on apples track record, its a safe bet. they arent going to re-
invent a new ipod UI for the iphone. and it certainly hasnt been
mentioned in the early reviews if they had. so im going to stick w/
that assertion.

> And few will be silly enough to piss $5/600 and $50/90/month on a 2
> year contract against the wall when they already have an ipod anyway.

if youre right, then this will all just be an unpleasant memory years
from now.....a silly fad that lasted, what, 6 mos? yep.


sm

tony <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote

>> Nope, there are fuck all silly enough to have
>> both a phone thats a media player and an ipod.

> rubbish. people arent going to give up their itunes playlists and easy-
> as-pie syncing, just to use their latest random cellphone's media player.

There's plenty that do playlists too, in fact almost all of them do.

Plenty that are just as easy to synch too.

> it makes far more sense to stick to what ya know,
> and keep using your managed itunes system.

There's fuck all likely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90
per month against the wall on an iphone just for that.

And plenty dont even like iTunes too.

> cell phone makers have shown they arent very good
> at making media players that people care about.

Easy to claim...

> and certainly never one people would abandon itunes in favor of.

Easy to claim...

> why learn a whole new system when you have one that works very well?

Why piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90 per month against the wall
on an iphone just to keep that ? And end with a rather shitty camera,
a completely fucked cellphone network, no way to run 3rd party
apps, no removable battery, no sim, etc etc etc.

>>> If you want an iPod as opposed to a "music player" (and most people do),

>> No they dont.

> but they do. see ipod sales.

See the sales of all those phones with media players and non ipod media players.

> its about the UI, the syncing, and the style. ipod != "random media player"

None of the are JUST random media players and most
dont mindlessly play the same playlist all the time anyway.

>>> The iPhone is designed so much better than other
>>> phones that it will offset any lack of familiarity.

>> Easy to claim. It remains to be seen how valid that claim actually is.

> the track record is in apples favor, here.

Nope.

> see Mac,

Useless, sweet fuck all of the market even bother with it.

> and iPod. they would appear to know how to "do" design.

Doesnt mean that it ever takes off tho. Look at the Newton.

> popular design.

The Mac and Newton clearly arent.

> pay-a-premium design (tho now of course, due to immense
> popularity & mass production, ipods are down to trinket cost).

And the Mac and the Newton never were except when
the Newtons were being flushed where they belonged.

>>> Most people barely know how to use their phones to begin with.

>> Most can use it for what they bought it for.

> ...which has historically been talking. but for people looking to
> consolidate devices, which is who i believe the iphone is marketed
> to, then "what they bought it for" becomes talking, media, internet.

Plenty of phone can do that, YEARS before the iphone.

>>> It's a phone designed for people who buy *iPods*.

>> Pity so many buy phones with media players and cameras too.

> pfft.

You're not supposed to fart in usenet.

> media players & cameras are bundled trinkets in today's cellphones.

Nope, plenty have enough of a clue to want that stuff in one device.

> the majority of everyday phones w/ them are not purchased due to
> their inclusion; these phones were bought (or promo-ed) for talking.

Wrong with the high end phones and pdas.

> not so w/ iPhone.

Pity its so pathetically late to market.

Pity its on such a fucked cellphone network.

Pity about how fucked the camera is.

Pity that it doesnt even have a removable battery.

Pity that it cant even use cards.

Pity it doesnt even have a GPS.

tony <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote

>> What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

> ...drop the paranoia thing.

Work on your bullshitting 'skills'

> theres no careful deleting here, i just hit reply,
> quote your latest statement, and respond to it.

Liar, you deleted quite a bit of the quoting.

> if there is confusion, it may be your posts
> are convoluted and difficult to work with.

Never ever could bullshit and lie it way out of a wet paper bag.

> most phones apps suck, including media players.
> if my phone sported one, i wouldnt use it -- i dont
> want more crapware on my computer to load it,

>> You dont need that with a properly implemented
>> media player, it appears as a drive on the computer.

> ...oh, and it syncs w/ my music library telepathically, sans software?

Nope, using the file manager you use for everything else.

> how does it load up my desired playlists?

Using the file manager you use for everything else.

>>> and it doesnt sync w/ itunes. my ipod does.
>>> so id continue using my ultraslim ipod nano.

>> So you are unlikely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year
>> $50/90 per month against the wall on an iphone now.

> not sure what youre referring to.

The cost of the iphone.

> i said i wouldnt use my cellphone's (hypothetical)
> media player, because it doesnt sync as well as
> my nano; both of which fit in my pocket.

And you are unlikely to to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90
per month against the wall on an iphone now, like I said.

> however, id still prefer one device, if it did. $50/90 is less and
> not much more than what i spend now on my non-data plan.

More fool you.

> 500 isnt bad for a PDA, mobile email,
> mobile full web browser, ipod, and cell phone.

Pity about when you already have all that capability.

> so yeah, id pay that. except, i dont buy first versions.
> but in theory, or down the road, you bet.

Yeah, but you're just another Apple lemming.

>>>>> Not to mention just the slick all-around UI, for everything
>>>>> from SMS to contact management to conference calling.

>>>> Sure, but the UI on most phones is already quite adequate in those areas.

>>> HA! fun