Today, Apple allows Verizon to sell the iPhone!

Glad to hear of the Verizon/iPhone announcement today and the official
end of the horrible Android devices.

Google had a tight window to succeed, but now everyone will flock to the
iPhone on Verizon so the Android died today.

Everyone hated Android phones, way too disjointed, (it was much like the
failed Linux platform) so it's good they are now history.

You can sign up for the vPhone here:

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/splash/iphone.jsp

The party starts February 10th!

read more here:

http://support.vzw.com/faqs/iphone/iphone_faq.html

and it's well worth reading over the features of the iPhone, it's
basically a tiny "mac", so you can leave home or office and still be
fully connected, easily the best smartphone ever devised.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/

enjoy!

oxford

On 1/11/2011 4:09 PM, Oxford wrote:
> Glad to hear of the Verizon/iPhone announcement today and the official
> end of the horrible Android devices.

<snip>

> enjoy!
>
> oxford

I still haven't decided yet myself, although I have to admit I am
strongly considering it now that Verizon offers the iPhone. I'm well
past my current Verizon contract and am due for an upgrade, and I was
originally holding off at least until CES this year, but now the
Verizon iPhone just complicated my decision process (or, perhaps
simplified it?).

The real question (for me) is do I really want to go with a
smartphone, or Skype(WiFi only) on an Android tablet, or an iPad...


--
-MFB

On 1/11/2011 1:33 PM, Flint wrote:

> The real question (for me) is do I really want to go with a smartphone,
> or Skype(WiFi only) on an Android tablet, or an iPad...

Wait and see what the pricing is for the Verizon iPhone plans. Are they
going to price service the same as Android devices ($30 for unlimited
data, $15 for 150MB (on top of a minimum $40 a month voice plan)) or are
they going to try to charge more.

Android devices have some advantages over the iPhone and vice-versa.
Personally I use my Droid for the calendar, contact info, and occasional
web use. I use wi-fi when available, and use very little 3G data, so a
$30 a month plan with 1200 minutes/1200 messages/50MB of data on the
Verizon network is sufficient for my needs, and I'm not going to spend
$80 a month for an unlimited data smart phone.

On Jan 11, 6:18*pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 1/11/2011 1:33 PM, Flint wrote:
>
> > The real question (for me) is do I really want to go with a smartphone,
> > or Skype(WiFi only) on an Android tablet, or an iPad...
>
> Wait and see what the pricing is for the Verizon iPhone plans. Are they
> going to price service the same as Android devices ($30 for unlimited
> data, $15 for 150MB (on top of a minimum $40 a month voice plan)) or are
> they going to try to charge more.

And also wait to see what AT&T counter-offers with.


> Android devices have some advantages over the iPhone and vice-versa.

Of course. But on Androids, I was told (verbally...I haven't looked
to confirm this one yet) that VZW mentioned something about how
they're going to accept returns on "Christmas gift" Androids as trade-
in /upgrades for VZW iPhones.


-hh

In article <apony-6CEA7B.14095611012011@news.qwest.net>,
apony@pasture.com says...
>
> Glad to hear of the Verizon/iPhone announcement today and the official
> end of the horrible Android devices.

My god, you're an idiot.

First, Android is a very capable OS. I love my new Android phone (T-
Mobile HTC MyTouch 4G).

There are a couple things it lacks; Steven Scharf mentioned the lack of
a VPN client, and I agree that that is a problem for enterprise
customers, and it's probably Android's biggest drawback. On the other
hand:

http://www.ncp-e.com/en.html

these guys are supposedly working on an Android VPN client. Their
existing VPN client works with Cisco, Sonicwall and other enterprise-
level VPN products.

Second, no one is going to stop buying Android phones.





--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

On 1/11/2011 7:37 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:

> There are a couple things it lacks; Steven Scharf mentioned the lack of
> a VPN client, and I agree that that is a problem for enterprise
> customers, and it's probably Android's biggest drawback. On the other
> hand:
>
> http://www.ncp-e.com/en.html
>
> these guys are supposedly working on an Android VPN client. Their
> existing VPN client works with Cisco, Sonicwall and other enterprise-
> level VPN products.

I heard rumor of the TightVNC folks possibly working on a VPN client.
I haven't been able to confirm this, but it wouldn't surprise me
since there is a TightVNC developmental fork for Android.


--
-MFB

On 1/11/2011 4:58 PM, Flint wrote:
> On 1/11/2011 7:37 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
>
>> There are a couple things it lacks; Steven Scharf mentioned the lack of
>> a VPN client, and I agree that that is a problem for enterprise
>> customers, and it's probably Android's biggest drawback. On the other
>> hand:
>>
>> http://www.ncp-e.com/en.html
>>
>> these guys are supposedly working on an Android VPN client. Their
>> existing VPN client works with Cisco, Sonicwall and other enterprise-
>> level VPN products.
>
> I heard rumor of the TightVNC folks possibly working on a VPN client. I
> haven't been able to confirm this, but it wouldn't surprise me since
> there is a TightVNC developmental fork for Android.

From what I've read about this, the problem is inherent to the Android
OS, and not Cisco's fault. The IPSEC VPN clients that have appeared have
required rooting the phone and adding some kernel features to the OS,
something no enterprise is going to accept. Every IPSEC VPN solution so
far is phone specific. Steve Jobs was right, the Android market is
fragmented.

As one person wrote about this issue: "I carry an iphone (with VPN) and
an Incredible. The incredible is 100 times the device the 3GS is. But
we're totally frustrated because no one seems to be hearing what we're say."

On 1/11/2011 9:36 PM, SMS wrote:

> From what I've read about this, the problem is inherent to the
> Android OS, and not Cisco's fault. The IPSEC VPN clients that have
> appeared have required rooting the phone and adding some kernel
> features to the OS, something no enterprise is going to accept. Every
> IPSEC VPN solution so far is phone specific. Steve Jobs was right, the
> Android market is fragmented.
>
> As one person wrote about this issue: "I carry an iphone (with VPN)
> and an Incredible. The incredible is 100 times the device the 3GS is.
> But we're totally frustrated because no one seems to be hearing what
> we're say."

I believe I read the same user comment.

That aside, if rooting the client is what it takes to get it to work,
this should be easily done via sandboxing the client. Normally, this
wouldn't be a big deal on a desktop linux distro, but on an Android
phone's resources???? I dunno.


--
-MFB

On 1/11/2011 7:23 PM, -hh wrote:
> On Jan 11, 6:18 pm, SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/11/2011 1:33 PM, Flint wrote:
>>
>>> The real question (for me) is do I really want to go with a smartphone,
>>> or Skype(WiFi only) on an Android tablet, or an iPad...
>>
>> Wait and see what the pricing is for the Verizon iPhone plans. Are they
>> going to price service the same as Android devices ($30 for unlimited
>> data, $15 for 150MB (on top of a minimum $40 a month voice plan)) or are
>> they going to try to charge more.
>
> And also wait to see what AT&T counter-offers with.

I thought the same thing - for all but 5 seconds. AT&T (along with
Sprint and TMobile) coverage in my area is simply just not as good as
Verizon. Verizon is a tad pricier, but it's superior coverage (in my
terrain affected area) justifies it, IMO.

--
-MFB

On Jan 12, 2:37*am, Steve Sobol <sjso...@JustThe.net> wrote:
> In article <apony-6CEA7B.14095611012...@news.qwest.net>,
> ap...@pasture.com says...
>
>
>
> > Glad to hear of the Verizon/iPhone announcement today and the official
> > end of the horrible Android devices.
>
> My god, you're an idiot.
>
> First, Android is a very capable OS. I love my new Android phone (T-
> Mobile HTC MyTouch 4G).
>
> There are a couple things it lacks; Steven Scharf mentioned the lack of
> a VPN client, and I agree that that is a problem for enterprise
> customers, and it's probably Android's biggest drawback. On the other
> hand:
>
> http://www.ncp-e.com/en.html
>
> these guys are supposedly working on an Android VPN client. Their
> existing VPN client works with Cisco, Sonicwall and other enterprise-
> level VPN products.
>
> Second, no one is going to stop buying Android phones.
>
And that's good: in the US customers would typically have full two
years
to learn what a piece of crap it is. Once dissent have reached an
avalanche
like proportions they would run screaming for Apple.

It's a question of the goodwill depreciation over extended period of
time.
Current android sales are future sales opportunities for Apple.

If you ever tried to concoct something resembling an image picker on
android
you'd surely know :-)

Steve Sobol wrote:
> There are a couple things it lacks; Steven Scharf mentioned the lack of
> a VPN client, and I agree that that is a problem for enterprise
> customers, and it's probably Android's biggest drawback. On the other
> hand:
>
> http://www.ncp-e.com/en.html
>
> these guys are supposedly working on an Android VPN client. Their
> existing VPN client works with Cisco, Sonicwall and other enterprise-
> level VPN products.

Why not use SSH for Android to create/join a VPN?

SSH VPN/proxy/tunneling has the advantage of being very network friendly,
using a normal IP/TCP connection, and easy to setup.

Regards.

On 1/11/2011 9:11 PM, Flint wrote:
> On 1/11/2011 7:23 PM, -hh wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 6:18 pm, SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 1/11/2011 1:33 PM, Flint wrote:
>>>
>>>> The real question (for me) is do I really want to go with a smartphone,
>>>> or Skype(WiFi only) on an Android tablet, or an iPad...
>>>
>>> Wait and see what the pricing is for the Verizon iPhone plans. Are they
>>> going to price service the same as Android devices ($30 for unlimited
>>> data, $15 for 150MB (on top of a minimum $40 a month voice plan)) or are
>>> they going to try to charge more.
>>
>> And also wait to see what AT&T counter-offers with.
>
> I thought the same thing - for all but 5 seconds. AT&T (along with
> Sprint and TMobile) coverage in my area is simply just not as good as
> Verizon. Verizon is a tad pricier, but it's superior coverage (in my
> terrain affected area) justifies it, IMO.

No, I meant wait to see what Verizon's iPhone versus Verizon's Android
pricing is. No one in my area would choose AT&T to save a few bucks,
they chose it because they could get an iPhone.

SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 1/11/2011 9:11 PM, Flint wrote:
> > On 1/11/2011 7:23 PM, -hh wrote:
> >>
> >> And also wait to see what AT&T counter-offers with.
>
> > I thought the same thing - for all but 5 seconds. AT&T (along with
> > Sprint and TMobile) coverage in my area is simply just not as good as
> > Verizon. Verizon is a tad pricier, but it's superior coverage (in my
> > terrain affected area) justifies it, IMO.

Not to dismiss it, but adequacy of coverage is a regional issue. I'm
using my AT&T phone more than my VZW one, and haven't been
particularly concerned about dropped calls / etc. This isn't to say
that I don't get dropped calls ... I do ... but that's more due to all
the carriers having a weak spot in conjunction with RF shielding from
a metal roof, etc, which happens on all the networks.

Similarly, GSM works in more regions outside the USA than CDMA, so if
one's needs include international travel, VZW isn't really a good
option. From this perspective of infrastructure, there's cellular
coverage inside the underground stations on the Paris Metro... whereas
the Washington DC Metro has only very recently ended its monopoly with
VZW...a monopoly which should never have been allowed in the first
place.


> No, I meant wait to see what Verizon's iPhone versus Verizon's Android
> pricing is. No one in my area would choose AT&T to save a few bucks,
> they chose it because they could get an iPhone.

This is an interesting point too, since VZW coudn't have not known
that the iPhone was coming and thus, would have had all of their
website "Rates" pages ready for instant release yesterday ... but they
did not.

As such, the inference is that there's some "News" that VZW did not
want to be released as the same day of the iPhone announcement --- and
higher rates would be a prime example of something to suppress for the
moment. Of course, the potential for utter hypocrisy of this is that
for a data-constrained service plan, there's no justification for
discriminating based on the hardware too.


-hh

On 1/12/2011 6:36 AM, -hh wrote:

> As such, the inference is that there's some "News" that VZW did not
> want to be released as the same day of the iPhone announcement --- and
> higher rates would be a prime example of something to suppress for the
> moment. Of course, the potential for utter hypocrisy of this is that
> for a data-constrained service plan, there's no justification for
> discriminating based on the hardware too.

But the whole issue was that Verizon was not going to eliminate
unlimited data like AT&T did, but unlimited data prices would go up for
_all_ hardware activated on new plans. Already Android users were using
more data per month than iPhone users.

If I had to predict anything it'd be that all new Verizon smart phone
activations with unlimited data will have higher rates, but that there
will be two tiers of limited data, i.e. 150MB (which they offer now),
and something between 2GB and 5GB. Of course most people would probably
choose the lower cost plans because their data usage doesn't require the
unlimited plan. A lot of data usage on 3G these days is _because_ it's
unlimited--even when Wi-Fi is available no one bothers with it because
there's no economic incentive to use it, and it's not secure at public
Wi-Fi spots (unless you have VPN service, which you can't have on
Android yet).

On Jan 12, 11:21*am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 1/12/2011 6:36 AM, -hh wrote:
>
> > As such, the inference is that there's some "News" that VZW did not
> > want to be released as the same day of the iPhone announcement --- and
> > higher rates would be a prime example of something to suppress for the
> > moment. * Of course, the potential for utter hypocrisy of this is that
> > for a data-constrained service plan, there's no justification for
> > discriminating based on the hardware too.
>
> But the whole issue was that Verizon was not going to eliminate
> unlimited data like AT&T did, but unlimited data prices would go up for
> _all_ hardware activated on new plans. Already Android users were using
> more data per month than iPhone users.
>
> If I had to predict anything it'd be that all new Verizon smart phone
> activations with unlimited data will have higher rates...

This is my expectation too: instead of cutting the monthly costs, the
carriers will tend to increase the (real or perceived) "size" of the
bundled services so as to keep the monthly cost high.

> ..., but that there
> will be two tiers of limited data, i.e. 150MB (which they offer now),
> and something between 2GB and 5GB. Of course most people would probably
> choose the lower cost plans because their data usage doesn't require the
> unlimited plan. A lot of data usage on 3G these days is _because_ it's
> unlimited--even when Wi-Fi is available no one bothers with it because
> there's no economic incentive to use it, and it's not secure at public
> Wi-Fi spots (unless you have VPN service, which you can't have on
> Android yet).

A good point, particularly in conjunction with how these sorts of
devices are set up in terms of what I'll call is their "ease-of-
changeover" from celluar to WiFi. Simply put, if it isn't easy (let
alone actively encouraged by providers) for the consumer, the expected
behavior is to be lazy... particularly when (as you point out) there's
no meaningful carrot or stick to guide behavior to make there be a
reason for the consumer to make any effort to do it.


-hh

On 1/12/2011 8:49 AM, -hh wrote:

> A good point, particularly in conjunction with how these sorts of
> devices are set up in terms of what I'll call is their "ease-of-
> changeover" from celluar to WiFi. Simply put, if it isn't easy (let
> alone actively encouraged by providers) for the consumer, the expected
> behavior is to be lazy... particularly when (as you point out) there's
> no meaningful carrot or stick to guide behavior to make there be a
> reason for the consumer to make any effort to do it.

I have a big stick on my Droid on PagePlus. Right now I'm on pay as you
go data, and when my Verizon contract expires I'm porting my Verizon
number to PagePlus and the Droid and switching to the $30 ($27)
1200/1200/50MB plan.

Still, even now I don't hesitate to use data when I actually need it for
something. But I'm not watching YouTube videos or streaming Pandora over
3G. The limited data plans are a big problem for companies whose whole
business plan is dependent on unlimited (or high limit) data, and
they've admitted as much. Pandora said that AT&T going from unlimited to
2GB was not a problem, but they didn't want to talk about the 200MB plan
on AT&T, or the 150MB plan on Verizon (and certainly they didn't want to
talk about pay as you go data).

In article <83c948b1-48e1-46bf-8a29-2cc5934da232
@l17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, isquat@gmail.com says...

(Yeah, AD is an idiot fanboy like Oxford, but I'm going to try to make
some rational counter-arguments anyhow).

> > Second, no one is going to stop buying Android phones.

> And that's good: in the US customers would typically have full two
> years
> to learn what a piece of crap it is. Once dissent have reached an
> avalanche
> like proportions they would run screaming for Apple.

I refuse to use AT&T or Verizon. AT&T screwed me hard, or tried to, when
my DSL broke back in 2002. I had to get the state regulators involved,
and the fight got kinda nasty (but the state made AT&T credit me every
penny for the service they failed to provide).

So regardless of how good AT&T's wireless network is, there is zero
chance I will ever use them. The only AT&T service I use is their wifi,
and only in places where I don't get charged to use it.

Verizon's network broke in front of their Victorville, CA retail store
and for six months they lied to me, before finally admitting that they
had network problems. (They wanted me to buy a new phone.) So, it is
unlikely I'll go back to them.

Therefore, I can't use an iPhone, since I don't believe in rooting or
jailbreaking smartphones for which I just paid a lot of money; sure, I
could jailbreak an AT&T iPhone and use it on T-Mo, but I am not going
to.

I think the iPhone is a neat phone. I can see that it is useful to many
of my friends. Furthermore, I don't know a single person who has an
iPhone that doesn't love it. Steve Jobs and Apple's marketing team are
*really* good at what they do, and they seem to really have a handle on
delivering products that consumers want.

But even if I was a customer of Verizon or AT&T, I'd *still* prefer not
to use an iPhone. I own an HTC MyTouch 4G. The 4G is T-Mobile's flagship
smartphone, and it is also HTC's (at least for now). It runs Android
2.2. It has a few capabilities that the iPhone 4 does not, I like the
UI, and there are plenty of apps available for it.

More importantly, I can install apps that aren't available on the
official app store. This is a big deal to me. I don't like Apple's
control over the App Store, either from a developer's point of view (we
may reject your app, but we won't tell you why, nor will we be
consistent in our decisions), or from and end-user's point of view
(because the control means fewer choices for the consumer).


> It's a question of the goodwill depreciation over extended period of
> time.
> Current android sales are future sales opportunities for Apple.
>
> If you ever tried to concoct something resembling an image picker on
> android
> you'd surely know :-)

So, you've developed Android apps before?



--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

On Jan 11, 4:09*pm, Oxford <ap...@pasture.com> wrote:
> Glad to hear of the Verizon/iPhone announcement today and the official
> end of the horrible Android devices.

Or possibly the demise of the iPhone :-)

> Google had a tight window to succeed, but now everyone will flock to the
> iPhone on Verizon so the Android died today.

That didn't work so well at AT&T, where buyers had the choice of
iPhone and Android, and a substantial portion of the market went to
Android.

It's possible that it is BECAUSE Android took such a big share of the
AT&T user base, that Apple now wants to expand to Verizon.

> Everyone hated Android phones, way too disjointed, (it was much like the
> failed Linux platform) so it's good they are now history.

Apparently not, since 300,000 users a DAY were activating new Android
phones.

And many who may have been holding off buying an Android phone in
hopes of getting the iPhone on Verizon - may end up going forward with
the Android purchase anyway.

iPhones will not give you:
Any kind of physical keypad - Android phones are available with or
without keypads.
Applications through independent distributors - iPhone apps - only
through Apple.
Adult entertainment - Apple will block distribution of an application
if it shows a book that used a "four letter word".
Java Applications - lots available for Android - not for iPhone.
Multiple development platforms - have to use special tools for iPhone.

With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
links to web sites - developers have less incentive to do real
innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
profits to the software makers.

Android on the other hand, lets you get apps through the carrier, from
Google, and download directly via the Web. This means that
applications for Android can provide services to lots of different
phones in a platform independent way.

> You can sign up for the vPhone here:

> http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/splash/iphone.jsp

Typical Apple maneuver - let lots of people sign up in advance and
commit themselves to iPhones - before they actually come out - so they
can hype the daylights out of selling 1 million iPhones in a day -
(actually orders built up over 30 days) - while during the same 30 day
period, 300,000 Android phones PER DAY - a total of 9 million phones -
were sold.

And of course, many of those who pre-ordered their iPhone 4 units are
still struggling with limited power supply, bad antenna, and dropped
calls because they put their hand in the wrong place.

> The party starts February 10th!
> read more here:
> http://support.vzw.com/faqs/iphone/iphone_faq.html

> and it's well worth reading over the features of the iPhone, it's
> basically a tiny "mac", so you can leave home or office and still be
> fully connected, easily the best smartphone ever devised.

Does it do multitasking? Can I enter information using a keyboard or
keypad? Can I connect to an external full HD display? Can it do
speech recognition? Can it act as a WiFi hub to the cellular carrier?

These, and more are possible with certain models of the Android 2.x
phones.

> http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/

http://developer.android.com/sdk/and...ighlights.html

http://developer.android.com/sdk/and...ighlights.html

http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.1.html

http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.1.html#apps

Want to be a developer?

http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html

http://developer.android.com/sdk/eclipse-adt.html


> enjoy!
> oxford

Enjoy
Rex

In article
<4f130a7d-4ac1-4219-9568-0ef045b7b82a@f20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Google had a tight window to succeed, but now everyone will flock to the
> > iPhone on Verizon so the Android died today.
>
> That didn't work so well at AT&T, where buyers had the choice of
> iPhone and Android, and a substantial portion of the market went to
> Android.

actually they didn't. android's growth was high but iphone still sold
more. android sales have leveled off too.

> It's possible that it is BECAUSE Android took such a big share of the
> AT&T user base, that Apple now wants to expand to Verizon.

apple and verizon were planning on it for a while. according to
statements made yesterday, negotiations go back to 2008, well before
android had any share, let alone big.

> > Everyone hated Android phones, way too disjointed, (it was much like the
> > failed Linux platform) so it's good they are now history.
>
> Apparently not, since 300,000 users a DAY were activating new Android
> phones.

apple was quoted in activating that many per day a few months ago. it's
probably more by now, and with verizon offering the iphone, it will be
even more next month.

> And many who may have been holding off buying an Android phone in
> hopes of getting the iPhone on Verizon - may end up going forward with
> the Android purchase anyway.

some will, some won't.

> iPhones will not give you:
> Any kind of physical keypad - Android phones are available with or
> without keypads.

so what? some people prefer an on screen keyboard, others don't, plus
some of the physical keyboards on android phones suck.

> Applications through independent distributors - iPhone apps - only
> through Apple.

big deal. most people aren't interested in dealing with multiple app
stores and multiple payment methods.

> Adult entertainment - Apple will block distribution of an application
> if it shows a book that used a "four letter word".

big deal. if you need to watch **** on a 3" screen, you have other
problems than worrying about android versus iphone.

> Java Applications - lots available for Android - not for iPhone.

no loss, java apps generally suck.

> Multiple development platforms - have to use special tools for iPhone.

you have to use special tools for android too.

> With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
> iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
> links to web sites

absolutely wrong. iphone apps are *much* more than links to web sites.

> - developers have less incentive to do real
> innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
> profits to the software makers.

actually developers have a huge incentive to focus on iphones because
that's where the money is and android apps can't be sold in all
countries in which android is offered.

> Android on the other hand, lets you get apps through the carrier, from
> Google, and download directly via the Web. This means that
> applications for Android can provide services to lots of different
> phones in a platform independent way.

yes that's an advantage but not one that most people care about.

> > You can sign up for the vPhone here:
>
> > http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/splash/iphone.jsp
>
> Typical Apple maneuver - let lots of people sign up in advance and
> commit themselves to iPhones - before they actually come out - so they
> can hype the daylights out of selling 1 million iPhones in a day -
> (actually orders built up over 30 days) - while during the same 30 day
> period, 300,000 Android phones PER DAY - a total of 9 million phones -
> were sold.

big deal. apple is *already* activating 300,000 ios devices a day
(probably more).

> And of course, many of those who pre-ordered their iPhone 4 units are
> still struggling with limited power supply, bad antenna, and dropped
> calls because they put their hand in the wrong place.

nonsense. the power supply is fine, the antenna issue is overblown
(funny how you don't hear much about it anymore, even though millions
more iphone 4s have been sold since last summer) and the only reason
there are dropped calls is because at&t sucks.

how about the antenna problems that plague android and windows phone 7
phones:
<http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/08/...-units-having-
signal-issues/>

<http://www.computerweekly.com/Articl...HTC-defends-HD
7-handsets-after-antenna-problems-reported.htm>

> > The party starts February 10th!
> > read more here:
> > http://support.vzw.com/faqs/iphone/iphone_faq.html
>
> > and it's well worth reading over the features of the iPhone, it's
> > basically a tiny "mac", so you can leave home or office and still be
> > fully connected, easily the best smartphone ever devised.
>
> Does it do multitasking?

absolutely

> Can I enter information using a keyboard or
> keypad?

yes

> Can I connect to an external full HD display?

external displays are supported

> Can it do speech recognition?

yes

> Can it act as a WiFi hub to the cellular carrier?

the verizon iphone can do that and an update to the rest of the iphones
should also have it.

can android devices watch netflix? nope
<http://blog.netflix.com/2010/11/netflix-on-android.html>

On 1/12/2011 11:24 AM, Rex Ballard wrote:

> That didn't work so well at AT&T, where buyers had the choice of
> iPhone and Android, and a substantial portion of the market went to
> Android.

That's very true. Everyone assumes that given the choice between a
Verizon iPhone and and one of many Android phones on Verizon that
everyone will automatically pick the iPhone. But that's not how it
worked out on AT&T. There are pros and cons to each device.

iPhone
------
-Wide availability of aftermarket accessories, including speaker
docks--none for Android
-IPSEC VPN, a very big deal to enterprises--not available on Android,
which makes Android phones unusable at many companies, and very insecure
at hot spots (of course most people use the iPhone's WiFi without VPN at
hot spots even though they shouldn't with apps like Firesheep out there!)
-Works with iTunes
-Wider selection of applications, including many extremely useful ones
not yet on Android
-Better user interface

Android
-------
-Flash support
-User replaceable battery
-MicroSD slot (a very big deal if you want to e-mail photos or videos
from a digital camera)
-Physical keyboards available
-CDMA/GSM world phone available (Droid 2) which gives you GSM outside
the U.S. if the country you visit doesn't have CDMA (all of Europe)
-Phones with HDMI ports coming soon

In article
<4f130a7d-4ac1-4219-9568-0ef045b7b82a@f20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

> With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
> iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
> links to web sites - developers have less incentive to do real
> innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
> profits to the software makers.

LOL! 'lower profits to the software makers'? You can't be serious.

So far for developers, iOS has been manna from heaven!

--
Lloyd

On Jan 12, 2:24*pm, Rex Ballard <rex.ball...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That didn't work so well at AT&T, where buyers had the choice of
> iPhone and Android, and a substantial portion of the market went to
> Android.

If by "substantial" you mean "less than 7%"

http://www.asymco.com/2011/01/11/for...io-at-verizon/



>
> It's possible that it is BECAUSE Android took such a big share of the
> AT&T user base, that Apple now wants to expand to Verizon.
>

It would help your argument a great deal if you had numbers -- oh wait
-- the numbers *don't* back up your claim. They do just the
opposite.

> > Everyone hated Android phones, way too disjointed, (it was much like the
> > failed Linux platform) so it's good they are now history.
>
> Apparently not, since 300,000 users a DAY were activating new Android
> phones.

And most of those are coming from cheap phones sold overseas that
barely measure up to the original iPhone in terms of hardware...



>
> And many who may have been holding off buying an Android phone in
> hopes of getting the iPhone on Verizon - may end up going forward with
> the Android purchase anyway.
>
> iPhones will not give you:
> Any kind of physical keypad - Android phones are available with or
> without keypads.
> Applications through independent distributors - iPhone apps - only
> through Apple.
> Adult entertainment - Apple will block distribution of an application
> if it shows a book that used a "four letter word".
> Java Applications - lots available for Android - not for iPhone.
> Multiple development platforms - have to use special tools for iPhone.
>
> With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
> iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
> links to web sites - developers have less incentive to do real
> innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
> profits to the software makers.
>
> Android on the other hand, lets you get apps through the carrier, from
> Google, and download directly via the Web. *This means that
> applications for Android can provide services to lots of different
> phones in a platform independent way.
>
> > You can sign up for the vPhone here:
> >http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/splash/iphone.jsp
>
> Typical Apple maneuver - let lots of people sign up in advance and
> commit themselves to iPhones - before they actually come out - so they
> can hype the daylights out of selling 1 million iPhones in a day -
> (actually orders built up over 30 days) - while during the same 30 day
> period, 300,000 Android phones PER DAY - a total of 9 million phones -
> were sold.
>
> And of course, many of those who pre-ordered their iPhone 4 units are
> still struggling with limited power supply, bad antenna, and dropped
> calls because they put their hand in the wrong place.
>
> > The party starts February 10th!
> > read more here:
> >http://support.vzw.com/faqs/iphone/iphone_faq.html
> > and it's well worth reading over the features of the iPhone, it's
> > basically a tiny "mac", so you can leave home or office and still be
> > fully connected, easily the best smartphone ever devised.
>
> Does it do multitasking? *Can I enter information using a keyboard or
> keypad? *Can I connect to an external full HD display? *Can it do
> speech recognition? *Can it act as a WiFi hub to the cellular carrier?
>
> These, and more are possible with certain models of the Android 2.x
> phones.
>
> >http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/and...ighlights.html
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/and...ighlights.html
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.1.html
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.1.html#apps
>
> Want to be a developer?
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html
>
> http://developer.android.com/sdk/eclipse-adt.html
>
> > enjoy!
> > oxford
>
> Enjoy
> Rex

On Jan 12, 3:10*pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Android
> -------
> -Flash support
> -User replaceable battery

They have to be, the battery life is so poor....
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3891/s...ndroid-phone/8


> -MicroSD slot (a very big deal if you want to e-mail photos or videos
> from a digital camera)

1. How many cameras use MicroSD cards?
2. Use the EyeFi and send pictures directly from your camera (with the
new mobile hot spot feature)
3. Aren't most people using their phone as their cameras anyway.

In article
<e17200c9-f714-43ac-8237-055034e74dad@k11g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
KDT <scarface_74@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > Apparently not, since 300,000 users a DAY were activating new Android
> > phones.
>
> And most of those are coming from cheap phones sold overseas that
> barely measure up to the original iPhone in terms of hardware...

good point. some android devices ship with firmware that's over a year
old (1.6) and are basically, crap.

In article <4f130a7d-4ac1-4219-9568-
0ef045b7b82a@f20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, rex.ballard@gmail.com
says...

> Java Applications - lots available for Android - not for iPhone.

Yeah, that kinda sucks for me. I can write Java apps for PC, Linux, Mac,
Android and BlackBerry. (And I do write Java apps for all of those
platforms, except BlackBerry, at least for now.)

But not iPhone.

And I'm not really interested in learning Objective-C just so I can
develop iOS apps. Sure, learning Objective-C will also allow me to write
native Mac apps, but why? I can already leverage my investment in Java
to develop Mac apps.


--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

In article <120120111544491964%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
nospam@nospam.invalid says...
>
> In article
> <e17200c9-f714-43ac-8237-055034e74dad@k11g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
> KDT <scarface_74@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Apparently not, since 300,000 users a DAY were activating new Android
> > > phones.
> >
> > And most of those are coming from cheap phones sold overseas that
> > barely measure up to the original iPhone in terms of hardware...
>
> good point. some android devices ship with firmware that's over a year
> old (1.6) and are basically, crap.

Which devices still ship with 1.6? Give me some examples.

--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

In article <4d2e0ab8$0$43993$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
scharf.steven@geemail.com says...


> -Phones with HDMI ports coming soon

There's at least one Android phone with an HDMI output already. It's
just not a Verizon phone. (It's the HTC Evo, Sprint's flagship Android
handset.)

And I am dead sure I saw an HDMI jack on my mom's new Droid X when she
visited a month ago.

--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

In article <lloydparsons-7F1B8C.14275412012011@port80.individual.net>,
lloydparsons@mac.com says...
>
> In article
> <4f130a7d-4ac1-4219-9568-0ef045b7b82a@f20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
> > iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
> > links to web sites - developers have less incentive to do real
> > innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
> > profits to the software makers.
>
> LOL! 'lower profits to the software makers'? You can't be serious.
>
> So far for developers, iOS has been manna from heaven!

So - you develop iPhone apps, and have some insight into profit margins?

--
Steve Sobol - Programming/Web Dev/IT Support
Apple Valley, CA
sjsobol@JustThe.net

In article <MPG.2797c4f45f8e6cd898973f@news.justthe.net>,
Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> In article <lloydparsons-7F1B8C.14275412012011@port80.individual.net>,
> lloydparsons@mac.com says...
> >
> > In article
> > <4f130a7d-4ac1-4219-9568-0ef045b7b82a@f20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
> > Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > With all these limitations and restrictions on what Apple will allow
> > > iPhone users to use as "Applications" - most of which are more like
> > > links to web sites - developers have less incentive to do real
> > > innovations on iPhone - which is a restricted market with lower
> > > profits to the software makers.
> >
> > LOL! 'lower profits to the software makers'? You can't be serious.
> >
> > So far for developers, iOS has been manna from heaven!
>
> So - you develop iPhone apps, and have some insight into profit margins?

Nope, but I know a few that do. They're tickled pink.

--
Lloyd

In article <MPG.2797c43d326d9b2798973c@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> > Java Applications - lots available for Android - not for iPhone.
>
> Yeah, that kinda sucks for me. I can write Java apps for PC, Linux, Mac,
> Android and BlackBerry. (And I do write Java apps for all of those
> platforms, except BlackBerry, at least for now.)
>
> But not iPhone.

an app that runs on a pc or mac is going to suck on an iphone. the
whole way of interacting with it, not to mention the screen size is
totally different.

> And I'm not really interested in learning Objective-C just so I can
> develop iOS apps. Sure, learning Objective-C will also allow me to write
> native Mac apps, but why? I can already leverage my investment in Java
> to develop Mac apps.

java apps on the mac tend to suck. they don't look right and they don't
feel right. plus java will be user installed in future versions of os
x.