The iPhone's Top Pros and Cons

zeez wrote:
> At the peice this is being sold at, I expect an uncrippled pocket
> computer and no less.

What you want, apparently, is the Neo.
What it has isn't as nice as what iPhone has,
but what it doesn't have is what you call "draconian."

http://www.djlosch.com/article_Compa...200_vs_Neo1973
http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/...ry/000997.html

To change the subject:
http://www.iovene.com/steve-ballmer-...hone-pathetic/

--
Wes Groleau
------
"The reason most women would rather have beauty than brains is
they know that most men can see better than they can think."
-- James Dobson

---

› See More: The iPhone's Top Pros and Cons

Mitch <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>> Mitch <[email protected]> wrote

>>>> No prenup: Purchasing an iPhone will force you to sign a two-year
>>>> contract with AT&T, which will provide voice and data service.

>>> People keep harping on this, like they want a phone without any
>>> service contract. Aren't you going to expect to use it for two years?

>> Anyone with a clue prefers no contract so you can use the phone
>> with whoever currently provides the best value service and you
>> can change to a better value one when one of those shows up.

> No need to get insulting;

That wasnt insulting.

> I can follow.

We'll see...

> The point you are making is against an exclusive
> carrier contract, not against two years of service.

Nope. Many prefer to be able to change the provider of the service in the
first 2 years if a better service provider shows up. Better in terms of
coverage, price, etc etc etc instead of being locked in for 2 years even if
you decide that the original service provider is less than the best available.

Many will have changed the phone after 2 years.

> People use the same reason to make two entirely
> different points against the device, which is invalid.

Nope.

> Certainly exclusivity is undesirable for consumers; it also happens to
> have been entirely necessary. But having a contract is not the bad part.

Yes it is if you find a better service provider in that 2 years and
that is academic because you are locked into a 2 year contract.

>>> Not on the fastest, but on a fast network.
>>> The fastest isn't also the only one.

>> It would be better if it could use that too tho.

> Sure, but this doesn't seem to be far off. Apple may even be
> planning for it, and enable it in firmware, like with 802.11N.

It would be even better if they made that clear right from the outset.

>>>> unless you happen to be at a coffee shop with free WiFi.
>>>> But the WiFi can't be used to connect to other iPhones,

>>> Whoa -- don't know that yet. But why? What do you want to move or exchange?

>> Anything anyone is likely to want to move or exchange, any of the content.

>>> Isn't Bluetooth much more likely to connect to other devices, anyway?

>> Much more limited range.

>>> Are you sure you know all of what will be possible in the wireless arena?

>>>> unlike the Microsoft Zune,

>>> This is silliness embodied.

>> Nope.

>>> The Zune can do almost NOTHING with its wireless, and has almost
>>> nothing to compare to. Who wants to send anything for just three days?

>> Irrelevant to whether that feature is useful.

> Is it?

Corse it is.

> That feature specifically builds in the limitation. It has no other uses.
> It prevents the usefulness of such a feature in other ways.

Nope.

>> He didnt say its worse than the Zune, just that the Zune can do THAT.

> He DID say it was worse; he was making a comparison.
> And since it's something the Zune does very horribly, and
> most people think it's an embarassment, it's a weird example.

Irrelevant to whether that feature would be useful in the iPhone.

>>>> Unfriendliness: Apple won't let software developers write their own

>>> I still think it's stupid to complain about not using third-party
>>> tools when you haven't tried the built-in tools.

>> I want to be able to use the best tools available.

>>> This isn't a PDA in that sense; it's supposed to be a finished
>>> product for which you won't _want_ to add anything more.

>> How odd that so many other high end phones can do that.

> Not really;

Yes, really.

> none of the other companies are renowned for software development.

Irrelevant to whether they allow you to run other software than what is provided.

> Most analysts suggest they aren't very skilled
> at making it work better (Palm notwithstanding.)

Irrelevant to whether they allow you to run other software than what is provided.

> Many suggest Apple's lead may focus them on how
> to develop better software and a consistent OS.

I want to be able to use the best tools available.

They're welcome to do that other stuff as well.

> In any case, Apple deserves at least respect now for what they have done;

Nope, it remains to be seen if that philosophy is its major downside or not.

> we should criticize it when we know of a real problem,

That is a real problem. I already use other software on my high end phone.

> not just because we assume there will be a problem.

I know there is a problem because I already use other software
on my high end phone that the iPhone does not provide.

In news:[email protected],
none <[email protected]> typed:
> Bob Fry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Link didn't work.
>
> yes, it did... but try this:
>
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/usingiphone/guidedtour.html
>
> You are still trying to use Windows, so that's probably part of the
> problem.

Sure hope the phone works better than their website describing it ;-)

In article <[email protected]>,
Larry <[email protected]> wrote:

> [email protected] (Avery) wrote in news:ZDNZ0GV339255.7951273148
> @anonymous.poster:
>
> > which is all the more
> > surprising since it's a touch-screen
>
> I can't WAIT to see that first cellphone bill after the touch screen has
> been in a shirt pocket touching the pens and glasses or the stuff it
> touched on a holster/pouch...(c;
>
> No WONDER cellphone companies want us to have it....REVENUES!
>
> Larry

It's got a lock. I don't understand the problem.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

Michelle Steiner <[email protected]> wrote in news:michelle-
[email protected]:

> The touchscreen can easily be disabled.
>
>

Who will remember to do that before pocketing it....until that first bill
hits 'em...(c;

Larry
--
http://www.spp.gov/
The end of the USA and its Constitution....RIP

Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
> Michelle Steiner <[email protected]> wrote in news:michelle-
> [email protected]:
>
>> The touchscreen can easily be disabled.
>>
>>
>
> Who will remember to do that before pocketing it....until that first
> bill hits 'em...(c;

The same ones that remember to do that with other phones.

Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] (Avery) wrote in news:ZDNZ0GV339255.7951273148
>> @anonymous.poster:
>>
>>> which is all the more
>>> surprising since it's a touch-screen
>>
>> I can't WAIT to see that first cellphone bill after the touch screen
>> has been in a shirt pocket touching the pens and glasses or the
>> stuff it touched on a holster/pouch...(c;
>>
>> No WONDER cellphone companies want us to have it....REVENUES!
>>
>> Larry
>
> It's got a lock. I don't understand the problem.

The problem is remembering to lock it.

Kurt <[email protected]> wrote in news:labolide-
[email protected]:

> It's got a lock. I don't understand the problem.
>
>

I stand corrected. The video has a graphic that says:
Works like Magic
No Stylus
Far More Accurate
>>>IGNORES UNINTENDED TOUCHES<<<<
Multi-finger gestures
Patented! (though I don't see how that is a feature..(c

We'll see how "Ignores Unintended Touches" plays out after the first bill
comes in...(c;

I've never seen any device that, touching the glasses in my pocket,
"ignores unintended touches", like dialing Bangledesh Parliament at
$2.50/minute.

It'll be interesting to watch.... Sorry I put the hawkers panties in a
wad....well, NOT.

Wes Groleau <[email protected]> wrote in news:99cfi.395$YS.167
@trnddc03:

> Especially we shouldn't criticize the lack of features
> Apple has clearly advertised, such as the ability to
> lock the touch-screen.
>
>

Lock not needed! Apple promises "ignores unintended touches" on the big
video. So, you don't need to lock it as it "ignores unintended touches".
Just tell ATT it "ignores unintended touches" when that $864 cellphone
bill comes in with 4 hours connected to Bangledesh Parliament's hotline
on it. They'll understand, right, and take off the "unintended charge
from the unintended touches".

Larry
--
http://www.spp.gov/
The end of the USA and its Constitution....RIP

StevieRay <[email protected]> wrote in news:230620070626473976%shirsh98
@yahoo.com:

> http://www.apple.com/iphone/usingiph...our_large.html

He's quite a salesman, isn't he? Very well presented.

Tell you what....let's turn 10 over to the posters on this thread that
DON'T own a MAC and are convinced nothing Apple does has flaws for
"product testing".

We'll return the destroyed carcass so Apple's lab can see some more of
the flaws they forgot....like what's gonna happen when its very-thin
carcass gets flexed by some body pressure, just for instance.

"Flimsy" comes to mind...just looking at it.

Larry
--
Of course, I don't own a MAC so can't give an informed opinion....

zeez <[email protected]> wrote in news:1182595011.544149.207130
@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:

> <rant mode on> The one thing that really bothers me about cell phones
> is that they are being used
> to get users used to the idea that the phone (i'll call it a computer
> for now on scince that's what modern
> cellphones basicly are) isn't really theirs, and that companies and
> only companies have the right to
> decide what you are allowed to run on the computer you bought, down to
> the very programs on it in some
> cases. Anything else is forbidden, and anybody who tries to use the
> computer for anything other that
> what the companies explicity says must be an evil hacker or an outlaw.
> This is like the Trusted Computing
> bull****, but even more draconian. <rant mode off>
>
>
>

One fine post. Very well said.

Remember when we were all going to be running JAVA programs from some
central (read that metered) server? They've never given up on that
idea....centralized control.

Larry
--
http://www.spp.gov/
The end of the USA and its Constitution....RIP

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Pegleg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Jun 2007 01:04:59 -0000, [email protected] (Avery) wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...oscons_print.h
>>> tm
>>>
>>> The iPhone's Top Pros and Cons
>>
>> Why is this **** here?
>
> Where is "here"?

Alt.Cellular. VERIZON

It's not a CDMA phone, so why is it here (in this newsgroup)

> Remember when we were all going to be running JAVA programs from some
> central (read that metered) server? They've never given up on that
> idea....centralized control.

The danger here is that governments have already started making
laws that forbid manufacturers from making certain types of
hardware (think DMCA etc). At the moment companies are free to
produce hardware that does not attempt to get around DRM etc,
but other compaies are not obliged to licence stuff for it.
For anyone who is only interested in handling audio, video etc
in open standard formats without DRM, hardware is available
that allows them full freedom to tinker, at the cost of not
being able to view certain certain restrictively licenced
content.

The problem is that lots of people want that content and given
the choice of sane open hardware that does not allow them to
access it and locked down treacherous hardware that does, they
are buying the treacherous hardware. If it gets to the point
where people are unhappy with what they can/can't do on such
hardware they can throw it away and buy open harware but
since the market for such open hardware is relatively small
(restricted basically to geeks and hackers and open source
zealots) it is not receiving quite the investment and development
effort that it deserves. This is unfortunate because if it falls
by the wayside then there will be no alternative to treacherous
hardware and the manufacturers will have us by the short and curlies.

There are now open graphics cards where the entire card design
is open sourced, hardware interface fully specified etc. That
means people can write their own drivers to do what they want
with the card, but it also means the card won't work properly
with VISTA because VISTA will of course not trust it to stop
the user copying things etc. That doesn't matter because they
are designed for people running open systems and as long as
there is enough open content being produced some people will
forgo the Hollywood stuff in favour of having hardware that
is under their own control.

Ian

--
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/ian/

In article <[email protected]>,
"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> [email protected] (Avery) wrote in news:ZDNZ0GV339255.7951273148
> >> @anonymous.poster:
> >>
> >>> which is all the more
> >>> surprising since it's a touch-screen
> >>
> >> I can't WAIT to see that first cellphone bill after the touch screen
> >> has been in a shirt pocket touching the pens and glasses or the
> >> stuff it touched on a holster/pouch...(c;
> >>
> >> No WONDER cellphone companies want us to have it....REVENUES!
> >>
> >> Larry
> >
> > It's got a lock. I don't understand the problem.
>
> The problem is remembering to lock it.

A lot easier than the logistical nightmare for functionality for
performing tasks on any of the smartphones and PDAs out there (and I
have a Treo).
I'll take this any day.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <[email protected]>,
Larry <[email protected]> wrote:

> StevieRay <[email protected]> wrote in news:230620070626473976%shirsh98
> @yahoo.com:
>
> > http://www.apple.com/iphone/usingiph...our_large.html
>
> He's quite a salesman, isn't he? Very well presented.
>
> Tell you what....let's turn 10 over to the posters on this thread that
> DON'T own a MAC and are convinced nothing Apple does has flaws for
> "product testing".
>
> We'll return the destroyed carcass so Apple's lab can see some more of
> the flaws they forgot....like what's gonna happen when its very-thin
> carcass gets flexed by some body pressure, just for instance.
>
> "Flimsy" comes to mind...just looking at it.
>
> Larry

Sorry about your hard on for Jobs.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"