Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 64
  1. #16
    Rod Speed
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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


    >>> It might take a couple of years and a couple of
    >>> price cuts. It did for the iPod. But it will happen.


    >> I doubt it with market penetration, essentially because a phone
    >> is much more locked to the telco than a media player ever is
    >> and most care about what their phone plan is costing them, it aint
    >> just the sticker price on the hardware that matters with phones.


    > The major carriers in the US are all fairly competitive on price.


    Not necessarily on what they offer with a particular phone tho.

    > AT&T isn't at a particular disadvantage there.


    Some dont get effective coverage from them tho.

    You dont get that effect with media players.

    >>>> And those who want to be able to do email etc mostly
    >>>> want a real keyboard, not a touchscreen one too.


    >>> Doubt it.


    >> Have a look at the high end phones.


    > Um. Well, yes, if you assume that people want what
    > existing phones offer, and not what the iPhone offers,


    Wasnt doing that, just looking at what the manufacturers of those
    phones have researched what the buyers want feature wise.

    > then of course the iPhone won't amount to much. But since the issue
    > we're discussing is, basically, whether people want the iPhone,


    That wasnt what was being discussed in this sub thread.

    > assuming at the start that they don't isn't a valid thing to do.


    Pity I never did that.

    >>> And it's not clear to me that the on-screen keyboard doesn't work
    >>> just as well as a physical keyboard. If you mash a couple of adjacent
    >>> keys on a physical keyboard, it has no idea which one you were
    >>> trying to hit. If you do the same on touch-screen keyboard, it can
    >>> probably figure out where the center of your finger was and recover.


    >> That doesnt really happen enough to matter much.


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


    >> Doesnt matter with a GPS where you are only entering a street
    >> and town name and you get to select from a list once you have
    >> typed a couple of letters, but email cant be done like that.


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


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

    > The media player function is,


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

    > and to a lesser extent probably the mapping and web browsing functions.


    More everything in the one device, mapping, browsing, email, camera, media player etc.

    And thats where the iphone may well fail, when you cant run Quicken etc on it etc.

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


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

    > All of these benefit from the fact that almost the entire
    > face of the device is covered with a screen, instead of
    > half of if being taken up by a physical keyboard.


    There's plenty of other phones like that now.

    >>> Even most unlikely concept product UI demos one sees don't look as good.


    >> My main reservation is with the the two finger approach,
    >> cant see that being too viable in a phone where you mostly
    >> hold it in one hand and use the other on the screen.


    >> Maybe you wont do the two finger stuff enough to matter tho.


    > The two-finger stuff is mostly used for resizing images
    > and such, using a pinching motion with the thumb and
    > index finger of the same had. So, it's fine one-handed.


    Maybe.

    >>>> And virtually everyone didnt already have a media player at
    >>>> the time that the ipod showed up. Virtually everyone already
    >>>> has a cellphone now and most of those already have a media
    >>>> player now too if they use one much. Hordes of them have a
    >>>> media player/phone/camera combined already.


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


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


    > Not in my experience, it's not. Many phones sold these days have a
    > music player function. Most users don't even know their phone has it.


    Oh bull****.

    > And even if they did, they wouldn't want to use a media
    > player that didn't sync with iTunes automatically, since
    > that's where they probably have their music.


    Pity about the convenience of both in the one device.

    You're completely off with the fairys on this one.

    >>> Plus, people replace their phone and media
    >>> player every couple of years anyway.


    >> Sure, thats certainly one thing in Apple's favour, but you dont see
    >> too many change platform completely. Thats what ****ed the Mac.


    > Most people don't really think of mobile phones as "platforms", though.


    You just said they do with your iTunes comment above.

    > Switching from a Motorola phone (or whatever) to an
    > iPhone isn't nearly like switching from Windows to the Mac.


    In some ways its worse because the UI is so different
    between a Motorola and a Nokia for example.

    > The vast majority of users have no third-party applications at all


    Correct. But plenty do on their high end phones,
    particularly stuff like TomTom 6 and Quicken etc.

    > and no data beyond contact information and photos, all of which can be
    > ported over (well, if their current phone can sync it to a computer at all).


    It remains to be seen how bullet proof that is with the iphone.

    Bet it turns out to be the area with by far the most problems.

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


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


    > The market has clearly expressed that "media player" does not equal "iPod".


    Not with combined media players and phones it hasnt.

    > I suppose we could compare it to all the other iPod phones.


    Nope.

    > After Apple makes more models. <g>


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





    See More: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition




  2. #17
    ZnU
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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

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


    > >> Have a look at the high end phones.

    >
    > > Um. Well, yes, if you assume that people want what
    > > existing phones offer, and not what the iPhone offers,

    >
    > Wasnt doing that, just looking at what the manufacturers of those
    > phones have researched what the buyers want feature wise.


    IOW, you're assuming current phones get it right and the iPhone gets it
    wrong.

    [snip]

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

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


    OK, this shows that you've seriously missed the point.

    [snip]

    > > Not in my experience, it's not. Many phones sold these days have a
    > > music player function. Most users don't even know their phone has it.

    >
    > Oh bull****.


    Just posted elsewhere:
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/techno...ne_0624jun24,1
    ,751030.story?page=2&coll=chi-technologylocal-hed

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Motorola and other phonemakers have been stuffing their wares with
    Web-browsing and music- and video-playing capabilities. But U.S.
    consumers still don't seem to choose their phones based on such features.

    "I don't think many people go out and buy a phone and say, 'I'm going
    for the music part of it, I'm going for the video part of it,'" said
    Neil Strother, a wireless industry analyst at Jupiter Research. But if
    the iPhone succeeds, such multimedia phones should really take root,
    spurring more innovation, too, at established phonemakers, he said.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    > > And even if they did, they wouldn't want to use a media
    > > player that didn't sync with iTunes automatically, since
    > > that's where they probably have their music.

    >
    > Pity about the convenience of both in the one device.


    Yes, which is exactly what will sell iPhones. If you want an iPod as
    opposed to a "music player" (and most people do), and you want phone
    features in the same device, the iPhone is your only option.

    > >> Sure, thats certainly one thing in Apple's favour, but you dont see
    > >> too many change platform completely. Thats what ****ed the Mac.

    >
    > > Most people don't really think of mobile phones as "platforms", though.

    >
    > You just said they do with your iTunes comment above.


    I was discussing how many people had iPods in addition to "music player"
    phones because they wanted iPods as opposed to generic "music player"
    functionality. This implies that people use the platform concept with
    respect to music players, which I think is clearly the case. It doesn't
    imply they do with respect to phones.

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

    > > Switching from a Motorola phone (or whatever) to an
    > > iPhone isn't nearly like switching from Windows to the Mac.

    >
    > In some ways its worse because the UI is so different
    > between a Motorola and a Nokia for example.


    People are almost certainly going to have an easier time using an iPhone
    than their current phone. The iPhone is designed so much better than
    other phones that it will offset any lack of familiarity. Most people
    barely know how to use their phones to begin with.

    > > The vast majority of users have no third-party applications at all

    >
    > Correct. But plenty do on their high end phones,
    > particularly stuff like TomTom 6 and Quicken etc.


    "Plenty" being probably 1% of the overall market.

    Again, this isn't necessarily a phone designed for people who already
    buy high-priced smart phones. It's a phone designed for people who buy
    *iPods*.

    > > and no data beyond contact information and photos, all of which can be
    > > ported over (well, if their current phone can sync it to a computer at
    > > all).

    >
    > It remains to be seen how bullet proof that is with the iphone.
    >
    > Bet it turns out to be the area with by far the most problems.


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

    [snip]

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



  3. #18
    Rod Speed
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    Michelle Steiner <[email protected]> wrote
    > Screw the i(diot)Phone <[email protected]> wrote


    >> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
    >> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored
    >> view of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.


    > The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
    > dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself,


    Bare faced lie.

    > moron.


    Wota stunningly rational line of argument you have there, child.

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


    You in spades.

    >>> You're not skeptical, you're on the attack, pretending
    >>> that your biased and baseless opinion is fact.


    >> You have no facts to back up anything being said about the
    >> i(diot)Phone other than what the suits at Crapple want you to know.


    > That is the reason that I haven't said anything about the phone itself.


    Bare faced lie.

    > You on the other hand, have absolutely no facts
    > to back your baseless and worthless attacks.


    You two make a good pair then.

    None of the rest of your juvenile rant worth bothering with, all flushed where it belongs.





  4. #19
    Rod Speed
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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


    >>>> Have a look at the high end phones.


    >>> Um. Well, yes, if you assume that people want what
    >>> existing phones offer, and not what the iPhone offers,


    >> Wasnt doing that, just looking at what the manufacturers of those
    >> phones have researched what the buyers want feature wise.


    > IOW, you're assuming current phones get it right and the iPhone gets it wrong.


    Nope. Just that its a tad unlikely that those manufacturers who included
    a full physical keyboard didnt do that for a reason and that Apple may
    well have decided that the iPhone wont be used for email much and so it
    doesnt matter if its got a much more limited touch screen keyboard instead.

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


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


    > OK, this shows that you've seriously missed the point.


    Nope, you have.

    >>> Not in my experience, it's not. Many phones sold these days have a
    >>> music player function. Most users don't even know their phone has it.


    >> Oh bull****.


    > Just posted elsewhere:
    > http://www.chicagotribune.com/techno...ne_0624jun24,1
    > ,751030.story?page=2&coll=chi-technologylocal-hed


    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Motorola and other phonemakers have been stuffing their wares with
    > Web-browsing and music- and video-playing capabilities. But U.S.
    > consumers still don't seem to choose their phones based on such features.


    Separate matter entirely to your claim above.

    > "I don't think many people go out and buy a phone and say, 'I'm going
    > for the music part of it, I'm going for the video part of it,'" said
    > Neil Strother, a wireless industry analyst at Jupiter Research.


    Nothing like your silly claim above.

    > But if the iPhone succeeds, such multimedia phones should really take
    > root, spurring more innovation, too, at established phonemakers, he said.


    That might well happen with the touch screen UI, but its already
    happened YEARS ago now with media players and cameras etc,
    LONG before the iPhone ever showed up.
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------


    >>> And even if they did, they wouldn't want to use a media
    >>> player that didn't sync with iTunes automatically, since
    >>> that's where they probably have their music.


    >> Pity about the convenience of both in the one device.


    >> You're completely off with the fairys on this one.


    >>> And even if they did, they wouldn't want to use a media
    >>> player that didn't sync with iTunes automatically, since
    >>> that's where they probably have their music.


    >> Pity about the convenience of both in the one device.


    > Yes, which is exactly what will sell iPhones.


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

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


    No they dont. In spades with those who have a media player in their phone.

    > and you want phone features in the same device, the iPhone is your only option.


    No it isnt.

    >>>> Sure, thats certainly one thing in Apple's favour, but you dont see
    >>>> too many change platform completely. Thats what ****ed the Mac.


    >>> Most people don't really think of mobile phones as "platforms", though.


    >> You just said they do with your iTunes comment above.


    > I was discussing how many people had iPods in addition
    > to "music player" phones because they wanted iPods as
    > opposed to generic "music player" functionality.


    That wasnt your iTunes comment.

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


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

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

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


    Not with the UI it aint.

    >>> Switching from a Motorola phone (or whatever) to an
    >>> iPhone isn't nearly like switching from Windows to the Mac.


    >> In some ways its worse because the UI is so different
    >> between a Motorola and a Nokia for example.


    > People are almost certainly going to have an easier
    > time using an iPhone than their current phone.


    We'll see with Nokias particularly.

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


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

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


    Most can use it for what they bought it for.

    >>> The vast majority of users have no third-party applications at all


    >> Correct. But plenty do on their high end phones,
    >> particularly stuff like TomTom 6 and Quicken etc.


    > "Plenty" being probably 1% of the overall market.


    Thats why I said 'correct'

    > Again, this isn't necessarily a phone designed for
    > people who already buy high-priced smart phones.
    > It's a phone designed for people who buy *iPods*.


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

    >>> and no data beyond contact information and photos, all of which can be
    >>> ported over (well, if their current phone can sync it to a computer at all).


    >> It remains to be seen how bullet proof that is with the iphone.


    >> Bet it turns out to be the area with by far the most problems.


    > Why?


    Because thats always a major problem when changing phones
    except with the real dinosaurs that have everything in the sim.

    > Apple has lots of experience with this.


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


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





  5. #20
    ZnU
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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

    > ZnU <[email protected]> wrote


    [snip]

    You're responding to individual sentences rather than to my actual
    points, and trying to start arguments about who said what to distract
    from the actual discussion.

    We get enough of that sort of thing from our resident CSMA trolls. I
    don't really have the patience for it.

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

    >
    > They do anyway, just because of the radical differences in how the
    > menus are structured etc.
    >
    > There's plenty that choose to stick with Nokia's just because their
    > menus etc are much more intuitive than say with Motorola and LG in
    > spades.
    >
    > > With the except of the small fraction of people who buy Treo and
    > > Windows Mobile devices, the platform concept is nearly meaningless
    > > in the mobile phone market.

    >
    > Not with the UI it aint.


    I haven't gotten the impression most people are particularly attached
    to their user interfaces. In fact, most people seem to hate the UI of
    current phones.

    [snip]

    > > Apple has lots of experience with this.

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

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


    OK, but the problems you're talking about here are problems with *any*
    phone switch. They have nothing to do with the iPhone in particular.

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

    --
    "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



  6. #21
    George Kerby
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition




    On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
    [email protected], "Michelle Steiner"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Screw the i(diot)Phone <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
    >> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
    >> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.

    >
    > The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
    > dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
    >

    Don't insult my German Shepherd.

    His breath doesn't smell of reeking **** like this asshole.




  7. #22
    Wes Groleau
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    ZnU quoted:
    > Motorola and other phonemakers have been stuffing their wares with
    > Web-browsing and music- and video-playing capabilities. But U.S.
    > consumers still don't seem to choose their phones based on such features.


    Of course not. Video (or web) on a postage stamp ?!?
    Audio that kills the battery so you can't use the PHONE ?!?

    --
    Wes Groleau

    Don't get even -- get odd!



  8. #23
    ZnU
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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

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

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

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

    >
    > Nope.


    OK, so we're done here.

    [snip]

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



  9. #24
    Rod Speed
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

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


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


    >> Nope.


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


    >> Nope.


    > OK, so we're done here.


    You've always been done, like a dinner.





  10. #25
    John C. Randolph
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    On 2007-06-25 19:52:04 -0700, Screw the iPhone <[email protected]> said:

    > On 26 Jun 2007 02:42:55 -0000, [email protected] (Meg) wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...635816,00.html
    >>

    >
    > I'm gonna laugh my ass off when you whiney little babies get your
    > precious i(diot)Phones and discover what a horrible piece of **** it
    > actually is.
    >
    > HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!


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

    -jcr




  11. #26
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    Ura Dippschit <[email protected]> wrote:

    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Screw the iPhone <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > You wish. I just think it's funny as HELL to see everyone wetting
    > > their pants over a piece of **** PHONE that NO ONE has yet put their
    > > hands on.

    >
    > Yeah. It's going to work different than all the videos and demos we've
    > seen once we actually have one, right **** brain?


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



  12. #27
    Kurt Ullman
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    In article <1i0e3mr.1xdnrkh1b4g8y2N%[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Lars Träger) wrote:

    > Ura Dippschit <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <[email protected]>,
    > > Screw the iPhone <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > > You wish. I just think it's funny as HELL to see everyone wetting
    > > > their pants over a piece of **** PHONE that NO ONE has yet put their
    > > > hands on.

    > >
    > > Yeah. It's going to work different than all the videos and demos we've
    > > seen once we actually have one, right **** brain?

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


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



  13. #28
    MuahMan
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition


    "Screw the i (diot) Phone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:13:52 -0400, "MuahMan" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"Screw the i (diot) Phone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>news:[email protected]...
    >>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:33:18 GMT, Ura Dippschit <[email protected]>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In article <[email protected]>,
    >>>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> It's a PHONE, goddammit.
    >>>>
    >>>>No it's NOT, goddammit. Since you are too ****ing dense to know WHAT it
    >>>>actually is, maybe it's time you shut the **** up!
    >>>
    >>> Says the lemming. It's a phone, which is why it's being sold by a
    >>> PHONE COMPANY for use with a PHONE COMPANY'S service. Get it? Good.
    >>> Next.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>Ura doesn't care what it is. He just know Steve Jobs told him he can't
    >>live
    >>without one. So, he can't live without one.

    >
    > What is he, retarded?
    >


    He's mactarded.




  14. #29
    George Kerby
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition




    On 6/27/07 9:21 PM, in article [email protected],
    "Screw the iPhone (diot)" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:20:23 -0500, George Kerby
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> On 6/26/07 4:19 PM, in article
    >> [email protected], "Michelle Steiner"
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article <[email protected]>,
    >>> Screw the i(diot)Phone <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I'm so sorry, it appears you are on the rag. That must explain why
    >>>> you are so touchy when someone disagrees with your rose colored view
    >>>> of stupid ass PHONE. Damn, you are one sad little person.
    >>>
    >>> The only opinion I've expressed is about you and your hypocrisy,
    >>> dogbreath; I haven't expressed any opinion about the phone itself, moron.
    >>>

    >> Don't insult my German Shepherd.
    >>
    >> His breath doesn't smell of reeking **** like this asshole.

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

    **** off Zero.

    <ding>


    (Watch this folks)




  15. #30
    tony
    Guest

    Re: Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

    On Jun 26, 1:56 pm, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Nope, nothing like it. You dont need much controls wise for a media
    > player


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

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


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

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


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

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


    sm




  • Similar Threads




  • Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast