Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
> SpaceMarine quoted:
> > On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> with some real downsides too, like not being able
> >> to treat the device as a drive too, and no user replaceable battery.
>
> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for $60 or
whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or three years.
--
"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
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at theiPhone)
Scott wrote:
> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote in news:
>> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
>> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
>> detailed instructions on how to replace your battery.
>
> Fixed.
I said what I meant. Would you feel better if they also
mention that it voids the warranty? Because if history's
any guide, eight of those ten geeks will point that out
right up front.
--
Wes Groleau
"A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature, and as a
firm and unalterable experience has established these laws,
the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact,
is as entire as could possibly be imagined."
-- David Hume, age 37
"There's no such thing of that, 'cause I never heard of it."
-- Becky Groleau, age 4
Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone
In article <1183396357.284764.36730@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>, senna@winning.com wrote:
> On Jun 29, 8:55 am, karlkrand...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:28:53 -0700, Kuriashkin Victor
> >
> > <vk4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >I mean,
> >
> > >http://iphone-msn.comservice.
> >
> > >User with iPhone need just to open this url on her iPhone Safari
> >
> > If it's a him, he might want to download Playboy movies, formatted for
> > the iPhone.
> >
> > http://www.playboy.com/style/feature...boy-video.html
>
Perfect for the geek who needs to perfect his one-handed phone operation
skills.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in news:znu-6A1362.21033102072007
@individual.net:
> In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
>
>> SpaceMarine quoted:
>> > On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> with some real downsides too, like not being able
>> >> to treat the device as a drive too, and no user replaceable battery.
>>
>> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
>> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
>> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
>
> And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for $60 or
> whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or three years.
>
Every two or three years? Try every year or two (at best). Because of the
tweaks they made to extend the charge life and the fact that this is not an
iPod means that battery life will not be as robust as you claim. The GSM
and wifi applications alone will both require much more power than a
siomplew iPod. As a result of this, battery replacement will probably be
an annual event, especially for those living in fringe coverage areas.
Assuming that you are posting from the Mac group, I wouldn't expect you to
understand the technology involved here. This not an iPod or laptop
computer- it is a PDA-wannabe whose main purpose requires power. It would
appear that Apple has sacrificed battery durability for longer talk times.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <u-WdnVy9ktm5LhTbnZ2dnUVZ_qCmnZ2d@adelphia.com>,
Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in news:znu-6A1362.21033102072007
> @individual.net:
>
> > In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
> > Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
> >
> >> SpaceMarine quoted:
> >> > On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> with some real downsides too, like not being able to treat the
> >> >> device as a drive too, and no user replaceable battery.
> >>
> >> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty expires
> >> on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published detailed
> >> instructions on how to replace your own battery.
> >
> > And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for
> > $60 or whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or
> > three years.
> >
>
> Every two or three years? Try every year or two (at best). Because
> of the tweaks they made to extend the charge life and the fact that
> this is not an iPod means that battery life will not be as robust as
> you claim. The GSM and wifi applications alone will both require
> much more power than a siomplew iPod. As a result of this, battery
> replacement will probably be an annual event, especially for those
> living in fringe coverage areas.
With 300-400 charge cycles? The thing has 7-8 hours of talk time on a
charge, now verified by non-Apple testing. Do you use your phone for 8
hours a day, every day?
I've had the same battery in my old Nokia for four years, and still get
decent battery life.
> Assuming that you are posting from the Mac group, I wouldn't expect
> you to understand the technology involved here. This not an iPod or
> laptop computer- it is a PDA-wannabe whose main purpose requires
> power. It would appear that Apple has sacrificed battery durability
> for longer talk times.
You're not making any sense here. Apple presumably put in a larger
battery to sustain those longer talk times. Dissections of the iPhone
reveal that the inside of the thing is, in fact, mostly battery. Adding
more cells doesn't reduce the number of charge cycles those cells can
handle. Anyway, we know how many charge cycles they can handle; Apple
told us. And it seems like enough for at least a couple of years with
normal usage, given the amount of talk time you get from each charge.
--
"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
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>> but if only 5% cell-phone-owners bother w/ the in-phone media player,
>>> one can get an idea of how many fart around w/ two devices.
>> Not really, you just dont know how many actually use a media player at all much.
> we know that media players are very popular.
Yes, but we also know that phones are much more popular than media players.
> do some googling and you can probably find out how many millions
> on millions of stand alone media players have been sold.
Dont need to do that to know that its a lot less than the number of phones sold.
> id bet theyre nearly as ubiquitous as cells.
Bet they arent.
> so we know people have both cell phones & stand alone media players.
But you still have no idea how many have a phone which is also
a media player and a separate media player they bother to use
because they prefer it for media playing that in the one in their
phone and how many carry both most of the time either.
>>>> Sure, certainly even the biggest klutz should be able to
>>>> update iTunes and just keep using that with their iphone.
>>> designing for klutzes is what good UI is all about.
>> Not in this case, thats more locking in the suckers.
> not really.
Yes, really. If it wasnt for locking in the suckers, they'd
have allowed the ipod to be treated as a drive too, just
like virtually all the other media players can be.
> the itunes music manager doesnt lock anyone into it.
It does in a practical sense when you need to be a lot more than
the average klutz to use anything else with your ipod and even when
you do use something else to load your ipod, the alternative will still
normally only load ipods, not all ipods and all other media players.
> its just a file manager.
Its a lot more than just a file manager when
suckers cant load their ipod without it.
> buying proprietary DRM is what locks you to a platform.
Nope, you're still locked in to the platform if you use iTunes
to load your CDs into your ipod and want to be able to avoid
having to load all the CDs again when you replace that ipod.
> just dont do it.
>> Sure, but the main purpose of iTunes is to lock
>> the suckers into sticking with Apple products.
> wheres your data?
Dont need any data, its obvious that you need to know what you
are doing to load your ipod with anything else because it doesnt
just appear as a drive like virtually all the other media players do.
> ive read more than once that most music on ipods is *not* itunes
> store DRM content, but regular content the users own (ripping cds).
Yes, but thats a separate issue to whether those who have already
done that will be biased towards a second media player that can use
the existing iTunes library, so you dont have to fart around and ripp
all the CDs again, or convert them to another format etc. Thats more
than the average sucker can manage easily and so there is a real
tendency to lock them into ipods or ipod compatible devices like the iphone.
> what data do you have that sustains your claim?
What data do you have that sustains yours ?
>>>>> its media playing is one big reason many
>>>>> customers are even interested in the iphone.
>>>> You dont know that.
>>> did you watch the macworld announcement?
>> Thats just the spin/bullshit, you dont know
>> what the customers are actually interested in.
> not at all.
Fraid so.
> macworld is a product launch event for a targeted market.
And only a microscopic percentage of the buyers of ipod and iphones
have ever bothered with macworld, even just watching the announcement.
The absolute vast bulk of them buy one because they have
seen someone else with one and the product appeals to
them so they get one themselves or they see it advertised
at an acceptible price and they recognise the brand etc.
> i think they know what their customers want to see announced
They can never know that with all those who buy their products
over the long haul. They most they can do is guess and sometimes
guess right, and sometimes dont like with the newton etc.
> more than some random guy on usenet.
Nothing random about it.
>>> as for absolute, quantitative Knowing, of course nobody on
>>> this groups is a swami or industry executive, so half the shit
>>> we talk about is unsubstantiated, your own posts included.
>> There's a difference between discussing particular features
>> like a removable battery and lack of it, cut and paste and
>> lack of it, and pontificating about why most of those who are
>> buying the iphone choose the iphone over something else.
> ...but have you forgotten -- my initial response was to your
> assertion that iPhone has come to the market "VERY late".
You dont need to be a swami or industry exec to have noticed that.
> certainly not a discussion on a particular feature or lack thereof.
Sure, but something that is completely obvious to anyone with a
clue when its their first phone, DECADES after virtually everyone
else who was around at that time had their first phone.
Looks very like the success of the ipod surprised even apple and Jobs and
they've decided that there might well be a market for a decent phone that
combines ipod, phone and browser capability in a decent innovative design.
VERY late to market.
> then we got side-tracked into the validity of my suggestion
> that its consolidated nature is one of its big draw (unspoken
> & understood is apples good UI for making the consolidation
> work for a mass market, where others have failed).
There's plenty of products in that market space, others havent failed.
It remains to be seen if the iphone will even dominate that particular market.
I doubt it myself, mainly because there is so much missing and its
in a price range that ensure it isnt just a whimsical impulse purchase
with little to lose if it turns out to be less than it promises to be.
>>> certainly, we know that is a large part of why consumers are interested in it.
>> No you dont. You dont even know that with the suckers
>> stupid enough to queue to buy it in the first week.
> since its a consolidated device that doesnt beat stand-alone
> feature sets, theres no reason not to suggest its the consolidated
> nature that is a big, big feature. it does 3 things:
> - cell: bigger than most, no tactile buttons, everyone
> already owns or can own a cheaper handset
> - media: not as large, cheap, or portable as an iPod
> - internet: doesnt do it very quickly (browsing on EDGE,
> slower typing than notebook), definitely not a primary device
And you have absolutely no idea how many are
buying it just because it does one or two of those
well and they dont plan to use the third much at all.
You have absolutely no way of knowing just how many
want a well designed media player and phone in the one
device and dont give a damn about the size because they
dont like how small phones have become anyway and who
find the price acceptible even if they can get a phone and
media player combined much more cheaply elsewhere.
> ...ok, we've established it doesnt excel at any one of the 3 primary
> features when compared to stand-alone devices of same type.
Thats arguable with the phone and ipod capability.
Many already think that current phones are much too small to be
convenient to use, and are more irritated by having to cart around
two separate devices than the size of a single device instead.
Yes, the internet capability is likely to be a bonus for quite a few,
but there are also likely to be a considerable number, including me,
who finds full laptops/notebooks are too big to be convenient to have
with you all the time, and cant fit in your pocket, and who do use the
net often enough when out and about to find it a useful product for that.
> therefore, its reasonable to believe its being sold, and
> is desired by, people who want a consolidated device;
Yes, but there are plenty of those available long before the iphone ever showed up.
> and since there are only two non-talk things being consolidated
> (music & inet), its reasonable to believe lots of their expected
> customer base is interested in a consolidated music/cell device.
You dont know that. I dont bother with media players at all and dont bother
with music even in a static situation either, but do use the pda capability even
more than the phone capability and would love to be able to do all the net
stuff on something a lot more portable than a laptop/notebook.
You have absolutely no idea how many feel the same way.
> its also reasonable to believe these same interested
> customers are not being served by the current market.
No it isnt, there are a host of products out there that do all that right now.
> thus, its reasonable to believe theres no pity in apple
> coming to the market "VERY late", as you profess...
Corse they are very late to market when there have
been devices that can do all that for years now.
In spades if you dont actually need the wifi internet capability.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> with some real downsides too, like not being able to treat the device as a drive too, and no user
>> replaceable battery.
> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
Still not acceptible, I much prefer the Nokia approach where they
have a user replaceable battery that anyone can replace AND
have so few battery models that they are dirt cheap to replace too.
Even the LG phones are a complete pain in the arse to replace
the batterys on, because virtually every phone has its own unique
battery and you cant even find anyone on ebay flogging them etc.
I couldnt even find any one in the entire country flogging one and
had to import one instead.
And there is some evidence that the battery may not last the warranty
with the iphone too, particularly when heavily used and so heavily recharged,
so you void the warranty if you replace it yourself and are without your
iphone for more than an acceptible time with a warranty claim too.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
> In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
>
>> SpaceMarine quoted:
>>> On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> with some real downsides too, like not being able
>>>> to treat the device as a drive too, and no user replaceable
>>>> battery.
>>
>> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
>> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
>> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
>
> And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for $60
> or whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or three
> years.
Still a lot easier to replace a user replaceable battery thats readily available like with the
Nokias.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in news:znu-FC244F.22411602072007
@individual.net:
>
> With 300-400 charge cycles? The thing has 7-8 hours of talk time on a
> charge, now verified by non-Apple testing. Do you use your phone for 8
> hours a day, every day?
No, but it stays on 24/7. And the times it is used for internet access or
to play music, it sucks way more battery than a comparable phone call.
They may boast 7-8 hours of talk time, but that does not equate to 7-8
hours of total use.
>
> I've had the same battery in my old Nokia for four years, and still get
> decent battery life.
And your four-year old Nokia does not act as an mp3 player or use a high
speed connection to the internet. It also doesn't get 7 hours of talk time
from a single charge (and never did).
>
>> Assuming that you are posting from the Mac group, I wouldn't expect
>> you to understand the technology involved here. This not an iPod or
>> laptop computer- it is a PDA-wannabe whose main purpose requires
>> power. It would appear that Apple has sacrificed battery durability
>> for longer talk times.
>
> You're not making any sense here. Apple presumably put in a larger
> battery to sustain those longer talk times.
Presumably? Not quite. Presumably, they used firmware to extend talk
time- the phone had been designed and approved by the FCC by the time they
announced the battery breakthrough and did not go through further review.
> Dissections of the iPhone
> reveal that the inside of the thing is, in fact, mostly battery. Adding
> more cells doesn't reduce the number of charge cycles those cells can
> handle.
It does if it generates more heat.
> Anyway, we know how many charge cycles they can handle; Apple
> told us.
And they always get it right, don't they? The Lisa computer says hello.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <Tdbii.190403$dC2.13244@newsfe13.lga>,
IMHO IIRC <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>Actually Xerox invented the GUI. Apple implemented it in the Lisa but it
>was way to expensive. So they created the cheap version and called it the
>Mac.
An overly simplified, and essentially inaccurate, version of
events. Keep on trollin'
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <5ets9bF39rklkU1@mid.individual.net>,
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>And there is some evidence that the battery may not last the warranty
>with the iphone too, particularly when heavily used and so heavily recharged,
>so you void the warranty if you replace it yourself and are without your
>iphone for more than an acceptible time with a warranty claim too.
"Some evidence"? You mean something you just made up?
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone
On 2007-07-02, senna@winning.com <senna@winning.com> wrote:
> On Jun 30, 1:09 pm, George <geo...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Randall Ainsworth wrote:
>> > In article <620a8392vep88e74cavj2pi0t6hrvu1...@4ax.com>,
>> > <karlkrand...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> In a vain attempt to stop the churn of 1 million users to the iPhone
>> >> before years end, Verizon is waiving activation fees
>> >> untill July 9 at Circuit City locations.
>>
>> > Who in their right mind would want a crippled Verizon phone?
>>
>> Whats crippled? My phones makes and receives calls just fine and in a
>> lot more places than at&t.
>
> Have you taken your Verizon phone to Europe or Canada? Enjoy your new
> paperweight. Because that's all it will be good for.
Canada? I take my Verizon phone to Canada (and Mexico) very frequently.
It works just fine. The CDMA coverage in Canada is generally better than
the GSM coverage. Also, my plan with Verizon includes service in Canada
and Mexico at no additional cost so I don't need to bother with the cost
and inconvenience of having to buy and maintain a local prepaid SIM.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
Matthew T. Russotto <russotto@grace.speakeasy.net> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> And there is some evidence that the battery may not last the warranty
>> with the iphone too, particularly when heavily used and so heavily
>> recharged, so you void the warranty if you replace it yourself and
>> are without your iphone for more than an acceptible time with a
>> warranty claim too.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at theiPhone)
Scott wrote:
> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in news:znu-6A1362.21033102072007
> @individual.net:
>
>> In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
>> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>
>>> SpaceMarine quoted:
>>>> On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> with some real downsides too, like not being able
>>>>> to treat the device as a drive too, and no user replaceable battery.
>>> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
>>> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
>>> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
>> And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for $60 or
>> whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or three years.
>>
>
> Every two or three years? Try every year or two (at best). Because of the
> tweaks they made to extend the charge life and the fact that this is not an
> iPod means that battery life will not be as robust as you claim. The GSM
> and wifi applications alone will both require much more power than a
> siomplew iPod. As a result of this, battery replacement will probably be
> an annual event, especially for those living in fringe coverage areas.
Even with deep discharge, the Li-Ion battery will last 300-500 cycles.
If the owner is discharging the battery completely every day, then yeah,
a year or so, but I suspect that most users won't be doing that after
the initial excitement wears off. If they're doing only a partial
discharge every day, then a recharge, they should get 1000 cycles out of
the battery, which is about three years. After three years you usually
have to replace a Li-Ion battery no matter how many charge cycles it's
gone through.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
news:4689cf7a$0$27174$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
> Scott wrote:
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in news:znu-6A1362.21033102072007
>> @individual.net:
>>
>>> In article <9Pgii.1344$Np2.1143@trnddc07>,
>>> Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SpaceMarine quoted:
>>>>> On Jul 1, 9:57 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> with some real downsides too, like not being able
>>>>>> to treat the device as a drive too, and no user replaceable
>>>>>> battery.
>>>> It's an irritating "feature" but long before the warranty
>>>> expires on the first iPhone sold, ten geeks will have published
>>>> detailed instructions on how to replace your own battery.
>>> And Apple will probably offer an official replacement service for
>>> $60 or whatever, same as for the iPod. Not a huge deal every two or
>>> three years.
>>>
>>
>> Every two or three years? Try every year or two (at best). Because
>> of the tweaks they made to extend the charge life and the fact that
>> this is not an iPod means that battery life will not be as robust as
>> you claim. The GSM and wifi applications alone will both require
>> much more power than a siomplew iPod. As a result of this, battery
>> replacement will probably be an annual event, especially for those
>> living in fringe coverage areas.
>
> Even with deep discharge, the Li-Ion battery will last 300-500 cycles.
> If the owner is discharging the battery completely every day, then
> yeah, a year or so, but I suspect that most users won't be doing that
> after the initial excitement wears off. If they're doing only a
> partial discharge every day, then a recharge, they should get 1000
> cycles out of the battery, which is about three years. After three
> years you usually have to replace a Li-Ion battery no matter how many
> charge cycles it's gone through.
>
In theory, yes. In this application, unlikely due to the rapid
discharge from internet and music applications and the heat generated by
the larger battery with no place to dissipate it. Heat may be the
ultimate killer here. In the current cellular world, those using
advanced functions (more than making calls) start to see deterioration
of the battery performance at some point during the second year.
Of course, Apple finds the need to treat their customer like idiots- we
are too stupid to replace our own batteries. I wonder if the lockdown
is to hide some kind of potential patent problem?
The real test will be over the next year- it will be hard to hide mass
defections by those frustrated by the interface, functionality, design
and limitations of the phone. Neither company is going to admit how
many are returned within 30 days, but the press is hot on the story and
tales of dissatisfaction will certainly get the limelight.
Little did I realize when programming in Apple Basic more than 25 years
ago that the innovator would become such an unfriendly company.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
At 02 Jul 2007 13:10:17 +0000 Davoud wrote:
> Todd Allcock:
> > All the articles in the trades I've read call the iTunes store a dud
> > profit wise. Apple only claimed it was profitable in one quarterly
report,
> > IIRC, and has said little about it since.
>
> You read the wrong trades. It is not the purpose of the iTunes store to
> make a few pennies on every item sold. The purpose of the iTunes store
> is to sell iPods/iPhones.
Which is EXACTLY what I wrote in a prior post! Someone then responded
that Apple makes 30-odd cents per song and therefore must be making a ton
of money on the downloads.
> By any reasonable measure -- absolute
> numbers, market share, mind-share -- it has been an enormously
> successful retail venture.
Again, I never said otherwise- the purpose of the iTunes store is to
facilitate and support the sale of very profitable iPod hardware.
> > It's possible it makes a pile of money and Apple says mum on the
subject,
> > but that seems unlikely- most companies like bragging about success.
>
> Apple has not spared the ink when playing up this phenomenal success. A
> press release dated April 9, 2007, is entitled "100 Million iPods Sold"
You must have come into the thread late- we're not in disagreement.
If you re-read what I wrote, I said Apple is mum on how profitable the
iTunes store ITSELF is.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <Tdbii.190403$dC2.13244@newsfe13.lga>,
"IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
> Actually Xerox invented the GUI. Apple implemented it in the Lisa but it
> was way to expensive. So they created the cheap version and called it the
> Mac.
Apple made _substantial_ changes to the Xerox GUI.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In news:nMydnQJieo4DIRTbnZ2dnUVZ_oqmnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t,
Matthew T. Russotto <russotto@grace.speakeasy.net> typed:
> In article <Tdbii.190403$dC2.13244@newsfe13.lga>,
> IMHO IIRC <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
>>
>> Actually Xerox invented the GUI. Apple implemented it in the Lisa but it
>> was way to expensive. So they created the cheap version and called it
>> the Mac.
>
> An overly simplified, and essentially inaccurate, version of
> events. Keep on trollin'
Less simplified version:
In December, 1979, Steve Jobs and a group of Apple Computer engineers toured
the Xerox PARC laboratories and witnessed Xerox's research into the GUI as
demonstrated on the Alto computer. It was this moment that Steve Jobs
decided the future of computers was in the GUI, rather than the standard
text-based interface.
In return for $1,000,000 USD of pre-IPO stock, Xerox granted Apple Computer
three days access to the PARC facilities. During this time, Apple Computer
engineers studied the intricacies of the GUI or "WIMP" interface, and came
away with the basis for Apple Computer's first GUI computer, the Apple LISA.
The Lisa was introduced in 1983 at a cost of $10,000.
The Lisa project was removed from Jobs' control midway through development
to prevent another Apple III incident and Jobs soon turned his attention to
the Macintosh Project. The Macintosh was originally envisioned by Jef Raskin
as a truly personal computer with everything the end-user would ever need
built right in. It was a research project at the time Jobs came along in the
very early development stages. Being somewhat upset about the exile from
Lisa he set out to mold the Macintosh into a device that would surpass Lisa.
The Mac was introduced in 1984 at a cost of $2,495. No color. No hard drive.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In newsroto-AD888C.01154903072007@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net,
Walter Bushell <proto@oanix.com> typed:
> In article <Tdbii.190403$dC2.13244@newsfe13.lga>,
> "IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> Actually Xerox invented the GUI. Apple implemented it in the Lisa but it
>> was way to expensive. So they created the cheap version and called it
>> the Mac.
>
> Apple made _substantial_ changes to the Xerox GUI.
Changed - yes.
Improved - yes
Actually imlemented in a computer - yes
Invented - NO
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <Q8lii.6782$IK1.5507@newsfe23.lga>,
"IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
> In newsroto-AD888C.01154903072007@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net,
> Walter Bushell <proto@oanix.com> typed:
> > In article <Tdbii.190403$dC2.13244@newsfe13.lga>,
> > "IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
> >
> >> Actually Xerox invented the GUI. Apple implemented it in the Lisa but it
> >> was way to expensive. So they created the cheap version and called it
> >> the Mac.
> >
> > Apple made _substantial_ changes to the Xerox GUI.
>
> Changed - yes.
> Improved - yes
> Actually imlemented in a computer - yes
> Invented - NO
So?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at theiPhone)
Scott wrote:
> Little did I realize when programming in Apple Basic more than 25 years
> ago that the innovator would become such an unfriendly company.
Look at the original Mac. A closed system. Yet Apple has its reasons for
not wanting the casual user poking around inside their products, and the
reasons go beyond money. They looked in horror at what was going on with
third-party products affecting the stability and reliability of the IBM
PC, and decided that a closed architecture was more stable. Of course
what they didn't realize is that the open architecture is what drove
people to the PC over the Mac, despite the Mac's superiority (at the time).
The original Mac resulted in big sales of very long screwdrivers (size
15 Torx screwdriver with 12" shaft) so people could open them.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
Todd Allcock:
> >> All the articles in the trades I've read call the iTunes store a dud
> >> profit wise. Apple only claimed it was profitable in one quarterly
> >> report, IIRC, and has said little about it since...
Davoud:
> > You read the wrong trades. It is not the purpose of the iTunes store to
> > make a few pennies on every item sold. The purpose of the iTunes store
> > is to sell iPods/iPhones.
Todd Allcock:
> You must have come into the thread late- we're not in disagreement...
My apologies. I hate it when an dodo like me comes in late and gets it
all wrong.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
Walter Bushell:
> > Apple made _substantial_ changes to the Xerox GUI.
IMHO IIRC:
> Changed - yes.
> Improved - yes
> Actually imlemented in a computer - yes
> Invented - NO
So what? Xerox didn't change the computing world with the GUI -- Apple
did. Windoze users would be staring at the C: prompt today if Apple had
not perfected the GUI. (Of course, given how user-friendly Windoze is,
it wouldn't matter much.)
And, by the way, I *used* a Xerox Star System for an some months. It
was OK, but it weren't no Mac!
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
In article <030720070736123529%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net>
wrote:
> Davoud:
> > > 72 hours and he's got data on battery longevity?
> > > Do you suppose we could get him to give us a couple of stock tips?
>
> Rod Speed:
> > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you two fools
> > have never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Did that guy really claim to know something about battery longevity?
If he was using it quickly, he must not have given it a full charge (it
does recommend a full charge for first use, I suppose?)
Battery-use evaluation (especially for a variable-demand device like
this) requires extremely detailed and comprehensive tracking.
I don't suppose "Rod Speed" knows that.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at theiPhone)
Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> In article <5ets9bF39rklkU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> And there is some evidence that the battery may not last the warranty
>> with the iphone too, particularly when heavily used and so heavily recharged,
>> so you void the warranty if you replace it yourself and are without your
>> iphone for more than an acceptible time with a warranty claim too.
>
> "Some evidence"? You mean something you just made up?
There is no evidence, just a prediction based on the typical number of
charge cycles of a Li-Ion battery.
If you completely discharged the battery, twice a day, then charged it,
you'd probably wear out the battery in less than a year, but even a
heavy user would rarely do this. A heavy user would likely wear out the
battery in about two years. If you don't deep discharge the Li-Ion
battery you can easily get 1000 cycles out of it. In most cases, the
Li-Ion battery wears out because of time, not the number of cycles.
After three years it begins to rapidly lose capacity.
A lot depends on how hot it is inside the iPhone, as the life of Li-Ion
batteries is significantly reduced due to heat.
One of the reasons given for the lack of 3G (HSDPA) on the iPhone is
that including 3G would have not only affected the operating time per
charge, but also the battery life because the battery would be
discharged further and more often than on 2G (EDGE). It was amusing to
see Verizon announcing the higher speed version of their 3G network
right after all the complaints about the iPhone's web browsing speed on
AT&T's EDGE network began to be publicized.
The non-user replaceable battery is a minor issue compared to the lack
of 3G, and the inability to use foreign prepaid SIM cards when
traveling. Paying a one time charge, every few years, for a new battery
is not a big deal. Painfully slow web browsing and painfully expensive
overseas roaming are issues that will surface once the hype wears off in
a few months, and once similar phones, less crippled, are introduced by
competitors.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
At 03 Jul 2007 08:11:51 -0500 Justin wrote:
> So, why does Apple keep releasing new OSes if they perfected the GUI in
> 1984?
One could easily argue new releases are for new features.
Car makers perfected the car "GUI" decades ago- steering wheel, pedals
for brake, gas, and clutch, and a gear-shifting stick, with dashboard
display for speed and engine condition, but they didn't stop building new
cars when they got it right!
>
> Oh yeah, they didn't.
I'm not a Mac user, but get over it- it's generally accepted that Apple
got it right and everyone else took their Cues from it and went in their
own direction from there. Give credit to where credit's due and move on.
Edison invented the lightbulb- users of modern CFL tubes don't run
around denying that.
> There were plenty of other GUIs available in 1984 and 1985 that we still
> see remnants of today.
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone)
On Jul 2, 9:52 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > the itunes music manager doesnt lock anyone into it.
>
> It does in a practical sense when you need to be a lot more than
> the average klutz to use anything else with your ipod and even when
one doesnt *have* to use "anything else" -- even using iTunes doesnt
lock you to it. itunes rips your cds to MP3s, stores them on your file
system. just how are you getting locked into anything?
purchasing itunes-only music on the store is a completely different
matter.
> > buying proprietary DRM is what locks you to a platform.
>
> Nope, you're still locked in to the platform if you use iTunes
> to load your CDs into your ipod and want to be able to avoid
> having to load all the CDs again when you replace that ipod.
wrong. you dont know anything about itunes, evidently. your library is
managed from your computer's file system. it lives there, open, and
can be manipulated however you like -- if you get another ipod, you
can sync the new ipod via itunes. if you get a non-ipod, you can drag
files to its drive letter. in absolutely NO WAY are you "stuck" w/
apple & itunes. *your music lives on the file system*. itunes is a
file manager.
> >> Sure, but the main purpose of iTunes is to lock
> >> the suckers into sticking with Apple products.
> > wheres your data?
>
> Dont need any data, its obvious that you need to know what you
> are doing to load your ipod with anything else because it doesnt
> just appear as a drive like virtually all the other media players do.
see above. itunes doesnt lock anyone to it. DRM music does lock people
to ipod.
> Yes, but thats a separate issue to whether those who have already
> done that will be biased towards a second media player that can use
> the existing iTunes library, so you dont have to fart around and ripp
> all the CDs again, or convert them to another format etc.
wrong, wrong, wrong. sorry, but you dont know anything about itunes.
> > what data do you have that sustains your claim?
> What data do you have that sustains yours ?
im not the one talking out of my ill-informed ass. so again i ask --
wheres your data?
> > macworld is a product launch event for a targeted market.
>
> And only a microscopic percentage of the buyers of ipod and iphones
> have ever bothered with macworld, even just watching the announcement.
irrelevant. you intentionally miss the point -- the launch itself
doesnt matter, i was citing that they know theyre market. better than
random people on usenet.
> They can never know that with all those who buy their products
> over the long haul. They most they can do is guess and sometimes
> guess right,
yeah, "sometimes" -- see birth of personal computing. then see
explosion of media players. checkback w/ me in a couple years on
whether they guessed right on the iphone.
> and sometimes dont like with the newton etc.
theres your newton again. actually, since they invented a market that
didnt exist before (the PDA) and is doing very well, id say they
pegged the market just fine. the tech implementa
Re: stop crying (was Re: Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone) 
roto-AD888C.01154903072007@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net,