Closest thing to iPhone

It may have been hyperbole for Steve Jobs to say the iPhone is 5 years
ahead of anything out there.

It may be 5 years ahead of Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Sanyo or
Microsoft, but there is a phone out there thats maybe only 2 years
behind.

http://www.dynamism.com/n908/specs.shtml

Of course Steve did mention Apple has applied for over 200 patents on
the iPhone:, the hardware, the software and the User Inrerface.

---

› See More: Closest thing to iPhone

[email protected] wrote:
> It may have been hyperbole for Steve Jobs to say the iPhone is 5 years
> ahead of anything out there.
> Of course Steve did mention Apple has applied for over 200 patents on
> the iPhone:, the hardware, the software and the User Inrerface.

I don't see what's so innovative about the iPhone. Sure the user
interface is probably very innovative, creative, and cool. But as far
the technology, what's the difference compared to a pocketpc with
cellular addon? I've seen one of those 3-4 years ago. The only diff is
that the iPhone is packaged into a slim, sleek form factor. But of
course electronics get smaller after 3-4 years.

At 10 Jan 2007 14:45:27 -0800 Bucky wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > It may have been hyperbole for Steve Jobs to say the iPhone is 5 years
> > ahead of anything out there.
> > Of course Steve did mention Apple has applied for over 200 patents on
> > the iPhone:, the hardware, the software and the User Inrerface.
>
> I don't see what's so innovative about the iPhone. Sure the user
> interface is probably very innovative, creative, and cool. But as far
> the technology, what's the difference compared to a pocketpc with
> cellular addon?


Besides the goofy stuff like the position sensors, I suspect the
difference is that the iPhone might be the first product to actually
deliver on the promise of PDA phones. My Dell Axim had a faster
processor and as much memory as my first Win95 laptop, yet it ran
ridiculously crippled versions of Office and Internet Explorer, that have
less capabilities than versions made for Win 3.1!

The PPC hardware is very capable, but it's hampered by an OS created by a
mindset that considers it a "mobile companion" to a PC- a glorified USB
drive with a display and file viewering software. If the designers had
treated it more like a "real" computer that could sync with a PC rather
than just a peripheral, it'd have a better OS.

In addition, although the PPC platform is six years old, it's still
akward to use, and current devices have little more computing power or
capability than those made several years ago. Web browsing on a PPC is
still a chore, the mail client doesn't support HTML, and my current unit
(which is also a phone) has the most akward phone UI I could imagine.
(Tiny on-screen buttons, the virtual keypad "hides itself" for no good
reason when any call connects, forcing you to tap a button to bring it
back up to make a touch-tone selection, etc.)

But, like I always tell people, as akward and kludgy as PPC phones can
be, they're still the best option out there (IMHO) in convergence
devices. The iPhone just might change that, or at least get other phone
manufacturers to look at things innovatively again rather than simply
stick a phone chip in a PDA...

> I've seen one of those 3-4 years ago. The only diff is
> that the iPhone is packaged into a slim, sleek form factor. But of
> course electronics get smaller after 3-4 years.

If it's that simple, why did it take this long to figure some of this
out? Why not shove 4 or 8MB of RAM in, particularly when the first thing
most of us PDA users do is buy the biggest flash RAM card we can find.
Why not use the entire front for a display. PPC phone makers figure I
don't need a real dialpad to call someone, but thought I couldn't
possibly live without a pair of giant "Talk" and "End" hardware buttons
taking up 10-15% of the device's front case?

I'm certainly not saying the iPhone will be the perfect device, nor am I
calling other devices pure crap. I'm just happy to see a new "ground up"
design, rather than the two Windows Mobile designs; the PPC Phone ("Hey,
let's stick a phone chip in a PPC!") and the MS Smartphone ("Hey, let's
add some hobbled PDA software in a phone, but don't make it quite
powerful enough to replace a PPC!")



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

I appreciate your insightful comments. I think the summary is that
Apple didn't necessarily invent anything new or terribly innovative
(aside from sleek user interface). But that they made everything that
was attempted in the past better. Kind of like Toyota did to cars.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/01...e_prada_phone/





<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It may have been hyperbole for Steve Jobs to say the iPhone is 5 years
> ahead of anything out there.
>
> It may be 5 years ahead of Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Sanyo or
> Microsoft, but there is a phone out there thats maybe only 2 years
> behind.
>
> http://www.dynamism.com/n908/specs.shtml
>
> Of course Steve did mention Apple has applied for over 200 patents on
> the iPhone:, the hardware, the software and the User Inrerface.

Gary wrote:
> http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/01...e_prada_phone/

No WiFi. Forget it.

Samsung's F700, another device claimed to be close to the iPhone, has no
Wi-Fi, and is not quad-band, it's GSM Triband 900/1800/1900 , UMTS 2100.

However it does have HSDPA so it's a better choice if you want to tether
to a notebook, and it's a better device for doing e-mail.

I guess it's not intended for the U.S. market since it doesn't have GSM
800 (850) MHz.

Gary wrote:
> http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/01...e_prada_phone/

No doubt part of the Cingular deal with Apple was that nothing like the
F700 be offered. Without Cingular, there's no reason for Samsung to do a
U.S. version of this handset.