Time Magazine: The iPhone Dials Up the Competition

On Jun 28, 6:07 pm, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > it appears to me you said the ipods good UI design was
> > due to media players being uncomplicated to begin with.
>
> Nope, those comments were about the STATE
> OF THE MARKET when the ipod showed up.

dunno dude...you: "You dont need much controls wise for a media
player" ...you were talking about media players, i was talking about
media players.

> >> I wasnt talking about media players in cellphones there.
> > again, i must be confused.
> No surprises there.

....and he doesnt even *thank* me for the setup. geeze.

> >>> my phones continue to be small, cluttered, difficult
> >>> to use devices that often leave me frustrated.
> >> There's plenty that arent, most obviously
> >> with the Nokias that do have a decent UI.
> > keyword being decent. not good.
>
> Wrong. Its good in your terms.

hell no, it isnt.


> > my current phone is a nokia,
>
> Then that claim of yours is a lie or you are a klutz.

oh? so if i dont like nokia, then im lying or a klutz? wow. then i
guess if weve peaked w/ nokias, nobody else should bother making
phones, eh? let me just tell em... "Shut 'er down, boys. Seems Nokia's
got the game won. Nothing better out there....Yep, me too. Ok. K,
thanks."

> itunes aint the only way to synch a media player.

but for many, its the easiest. which is a selling point to those
people. how can ya argue against that? if it is, then it is. you &
your dreamy nokia play no bearing in that.

> >> Pity that that isnt new either. Its just a bit better on the touch
> >> screen side. There's plenty of other touchscreens out there now.
> > from what ive seen in the videos, the UI improvements i like go beyond
> > touch screen. they are inline w/ my mac user experience, which i like.
>
> Sure, but thats nothing like your previous claim.

which was? let me tell you: my claim was that its UI is vastly
superior to any other cell's. thats my claim, right there.


sm

---

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

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

>> There's plenty that do playlists too, in fact almost all
>> of them do. Plenty that are just as easy to synch too.

> so you can sync w/ your itunes managed music collection?

Nope, you synch with its own music collection and
that can use the itunes managed music collection.

> it will auto sync based on your prefs, load desired playlists, etc?

Yep.

> and all w/o software (as you claim)!

Never ever said anything remotely resembling anything like that.

> amazing. er wait, they do use software? so why would i want
> to abandon my ipod for a new random cell+media system?

It aint random and it will do anything itunes can do, and you get
everything in the one device instead of in separate devices.

> wouldnt.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

You're just another mindless apple sucker.

>> There's **** all likely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90
>> per month against the wall on an iphone just for that.

> i like how you copy & paste the same crap.

Fools like you cant manage to comprehend even the simplest stuff the
first time around. Just like with a dog or a small child, the key is repetition.

>>> cell phone makers have shown they arent very good
>>> at making media players that people care about.

>> Easy to claim...

> yep. it sure is.

Hell of a lot harder to substantiate that claim.

>>> why learn a whole new system when you have one that works very well?

>> Why piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90 per month against the wall

> actually, its 60/80, according to the NYT.

>> no way to run 3rd party apps,

> crazy thing about computers -- updates. its this thing called "software"...
> they call it "soft" because it changes. usually does, in fact.

Useless if they choose not to offer what you need.

>> no removable battery,

> that is lame.

Nope, it means that you can replace that cheaply when it inevitably dies.

>> no sim,

> not according to the NYT:

They're wrong, the EDGE system doesnt use sims.

> http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/...E_GRAPHIC.html

>> etc etc etc.

> what etc etc?

No storage cards, no decent camera, no video recording,

Plenty more at the bottom of that post that you carefully deleted from the quoting.

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

>>>> No they dont.

>>> but they do. see ipod sales.

>> See the sales of all those phones with media players and non ipod media players.

> youve lost the context.

Nope.

> the orig quote was saying that apple's superior UI is marketworthy

No it didnt.

> -- the proof being that folks prefer ipods to any other mp3 player.

No they dont.

> nothing to do w/ phones here, skippy.

Everything to do with what other media players get bought, monkey.

>>>>> 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.

>>> the track record is in apples favor, here.

>> Nope.

> um, but it is.

Nope. Apple had ONE real success, the ipod, and host of complete duds too.

> everyone knows apple does UI best.

No they dont, the Newton had a completely ****ed UI.

> even developers at competing companies say so. look it up.

Look up the netwon.

>>> see Mac,

>> Useless, sweet **** all of the market even bother with it.

> popularity and superior product arent always relational.

Doesnt make it a superior product just claiming that it is either.

> toyoto is far more popular than lamborghini, but.. well, you get the idea.

That complete wank isnt a superior product.

>>> and iPod. they would appear to know how to "do" design.

>> Doesnt mean that it ever takes off tho. Look at the Newton.

> look at ipod.

You made the stupid claim that all apple products take off, they clearly dont.

>> The Mac and Newton clearly arent.

> the mac is, and continues to sell well

Nope, its just a tiny niche market product that hardly
anyone even considers except previous suckers.

> -- remember apple has billions in the bank, and has had billions in the bank.

And it would have sunk beneath the waves if it hadnt been for the ipod.

> the newton. well... youve picked one weak product out of two decades.

There's been a lot more than one dud in those two decades.

> congrats.

Pffft.

>>> ...which has historically been talking. but for people looking to
>>> consolidate devices, which is who i believe the iphone is marketed
>>> to, then "what they bought it for" becomes talking, media, internet.

>> Plenty of phone can do that, YEARS before the iphone.

> oh?

Yep.

> what other phones sport a full web browser,
> standards based, javascript/ajax apps, etc...?

Utterly bogus slipping in that standards based, and plenty do anyway.

> and what other phones support itunes?

They all support other ways of loading their media player.

Much more intuitive ways like appearing as a drive on
the computer for that too, something the ipod cant do.

> cuz see, to me, those things are a requirement of doing what i want well.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

>>> media players & cameras are bundled trinkets in today's cellphones.

>> Nope, plenty have enough of a clue to want that stuff in one device.

> oh, i see

Nope, you never ever do.

> -- so youve given up your digital camera in favor of your phone?

Nope, I have a camera in the phone where its convenient to use
for the usual unplanned camera use that happens all the time.

> you dont want a regular cam, w/ good glass & optics,
> superior censor quality, image stabilization, etc?

I want the convenience of the camera in the phone too.

> interesting.

Pathetic.

> me, ill keep my regular camera handy, and use my phonecam for
> taking pictures of....hmm. let me get back to you on that one.

Plenty of things like whats on offer when looking around for a particular
item and seeing who is offering what. Evidence after some fool runs into
your car. The model plate on an appliance when you are hunting for parts
for it. The old part you need to replace. The problem with the current one.
Etc etc etc.

>>> the majority of everyday phones w/ them are not purchased due to
>>> their inclusion; these phones were bought (or promo-ed) for talking.

>> Wrong with the high end phones and pdas.

> which are not the majority of "everyday" phones. thus the label "high end".

True in spades of the iphone.

>> Pity it doesnt even have a GPS.

> you mean user-accessible gps...

Yep, or app accessible, anyway.

> all cell handset hardware has them as per the e911 requirement. bet
> a future version lets you use it. cuz you know, apple is clever like that.

Pity its so late to market on that.

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

>>>> What I said in what you carefully deleted from the quoting.

>>> ...drop the paranoia thing.

>> Work on your bull****ting 'skills'

> huh?

You deaf ?

> i see your taking this down the insult route...

Corse you never ever did anything like that yourself, eh ?

> good tactic for ya, when arguing the points gets tough, is it?

Ask yourself, you're the one with that problem.

>>> theres no careful deleting here, i just hit reply,
>>> quote your latest statement, and respond to it.

>> Liar, you deleted quite a bit of the quoting.

> i never said i didnt delete.

Liar, you said just that.

> i delete the garbage, and reply to whats left. which is usually not much.

Never ever could bull**** and lie its way out of a wet paper bag.

>>>>> most phones apps suck, including media players.
>>>>> if my phone sported one, i wouldnt use it -- i dont
>>>>> want more crapware on my computer to load it,

>>>> You dont need that with a properly implemented
>>>> media player, it appears as a drive on the computer.

>>> ...oh, and it syncs w/ my music library telepathically, sans software?

>> Nope, using the file manager you use for everything else.

> oh! so you mean i have to manage it all *myself*, manually...

Nope.

> ok, see, to many, thats a step *backward*, not a feature.

True in spades of iTunes. It cant even shift stuff from one ipod to another.

> i rather like autosync.

You get that with any decent file manager.

> and i like the rest of the ipod UI for track/playlist nav,

You get that with any decent media player too.

> and i actually think its better than your glorious nokia or whatnot.

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought.

> just me tho.

Yep, just another stupid apple sucker.

>>> however, id still prefer one device, if it did. $50/90 is less and
>>> not much more than what i spend now on my non-data plan.

>> More fool you.

> hey, blame verizone.

Nope, you for being stupid enough to sign up for that.

> i didnt invent their plans.

You were stupid enough to sign up for that.

> id much rather pay 60, or 80, w/ unlimited data.

Yep, lot more than one stupid sucker a minute.

>>> 500 isnt bad for a PDA, mobile email,
>>> mobile full web browser, ipod, and cell phone.

>> Pity about when you already have all that capability.

> er, but i dont. unless youre surprising me w/ a lovely gift?

Pity about most candidates for the iphone who do.

>>> so yeah, id pay that. except, i dont buy first versions.
>>> but in theory, or down the road, you bet.

>> Yeah, but you're just another Apple lemming.

> but...im not.

Corse you are, you were stupid enough to buy iTunes.

> ive been a windows man since 3.11, and i make my living programming
> .NET applications (windows specific), on windows software. i just bought
> a mac recently, because i liked how easier i found my personal tasks to be.
> so, i think im a pretty open-minded guy in that sense.

Still stupid enough to buy iTunes. One of the most ****ed apps around.

And an ipod which cant even appear as a drive just by plugging it in.

> i do like how all of a sudden you gotta turn
> on me/posters who disagree w/ ya tho.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>>>>>> 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.

>>>>> HA! funny. good one.

>>>> HA!! pathetic. silly one.

>>> ..? wheres the counter point...

>> Where was yours ?

> that cellphone software & UI are pretty ****ty.

Not for those particular functions that you carefully
deleted from the quoting and I have restored they arent.

> but dont take my word for it -- you can google that assertion.

Not for those particular functions that you carefully
deleted from the quoting and I have restored you cant.

>>> i decried typical cell UIs,

>> And I decried your pathetic excuse for juvenile bull****.

> yeah, theres that corner-backing stuff again.

Nope, just more of your flagrant dishonesty.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>> and youve already agreed its commonly bad.

>> No I didnt. I in fact said the exact opposite.

> actually, you said in another post that most cell UI is crummy.

No I didnt.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>> There's plenty that have lots more than the iphone
>> has, like a removable battery, a sim, a decent camera,
>> GSM 3G, video capture, cut and paste etc etc etc

> i havent seen one phone that can do it all.

You need to get out more.

> certainly none w/ visual voicemail, or mac-like ease of use.

There's plenty that have lots more than the iphone
has, like a removable battery, a sim, a decent camera,
GSM 3G, video capture, cut and paste etc etc etc

> still waiting for you to name that one.

More of your flagrant dishonesty, you never asked previously.

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

>>>>>> And anyone with a clue uses favourites with browsing anyway

>>>>> interesting. and how do you enter in these favorites in the first place?

>>>> Hit the tool that saves the current site as a favorite.

>>>> Even you should be able to manage that if someone was actually
>>>> stupid enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane.

>>> huh? whats w/ the smackdown, jack?

>> Just what you deserve, jill.

>>> further, if someone in my carpool is talking about a url,
>>> what tool should i "hit" to save their words into a favorite?

>> The voice recorder, child.

> oh wait -- so you *record* the conversation, then listen to it later, and then...? type it?

Only if they are so ****ed they cant email it to you child.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>> And anyone with a clue gets urls from emails anyway, even
>> if they are talking to the individual that is talking about it.

> sure. cuz uh, email has repleaced impromptu speaking. yeah.

Its in addition to the conversation, ****wit child.

>> Its clearly too hard for someone as stupid as you.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>>>>>> 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.

>>>>> i dont think its wrong. i think even people who have
>>>>> cell phones w/ media players still use ipods.

>>>> Only the fools.

>>>>> why? because the ipod performs its task
>>>>> better. why? because its easier to use.

>>>> Pity that you have to fart around with two separate devices.

>>> two devices, yes. but two devices that each do one thing really well.

>> Plenty of phones that do the phone function really well and the media player too.

> not really.

Yes, really.

>>> thus, no farting.

>> Corse it is on the two separate devices alone.

> yep. if a device doesnt do it well, i dont use it.

More fool you, farting around with separate
devices when you can all the functionality in one.

> still own a digital camera, even tho i have
> this crummy one built into my nokia. useless.

You dont always need the high quality camera and its much more
convenient to have another in your phone for when you need it.

>>> i dont mind paying for better than decent. see ipod success.

>> Its ****ed for loading the ipod compared with the media
>> player in a properly implemented phone/media player.

> cant understand ya, man.

It doesnt appear as a drive just by plugging the ipod into the computer.

>>> -- i think the number of cell + primary-mp3 (non-stupid,
>>> by your rules) users are much smaller than you think;

>> Nope.

> oh, so youre saying *most* people depend on their cellphone-and-media-
> player combo device as their *primary* mp3 player or whatnot?

Nope.

> bah!> total rubbish.

Having **** thrashing that straw man are you child ?

>>>>> when you buy an iphone, you essentially get an ipod. why?
>>>>> the defining characteristics of the ipod are its style and its
>>>>> ease of use. both of which are present in the iphone version.

>>>> You dont know that yet.

>>> based on apples track record, its a safe bet.

>> Nope, look at the Newton some time.

> ok, so youre saying one flopped product means "apple sucks at UI".

Nope, that it isnt necessarily a SAFE BET yet.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>> they arent going to reinvent a new ipod UI for the iphone.

>> They dont have any choice on that, it doesnt have any physical buttons.

>>> and it certainly hasnt been mentioned in the early reviews if they had.

>> Yes it has, it doesnt have any physical buttons.

> in the previews i read, they didnt say they came up w/ a lousy new UI.

They dont have any choice on that, it doesnt have any physical buttons.

> quote me different.

Even someone as stupid as you should have notice
that they all say it doesnt have any physical buttons.

>>>> And few will be silly enough to piss $5/600 and $50/90/month on a 2
>>>> year contract against the wall when they already have an ipod anyway.

>>> if youre right, then this will all just be an unpleasant memory
>>> years from now.....a silly fad that lasted, what, 6 mos? yep.

>> Yep, just like with the Newton that didnt even manage that long.

> heh, theres that newton again...

You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist mindless lemmings ?

> '93-95, dude.

Irrelevant, dud.

> theyve gotten better at stuff since then.

It wasnt their last dud, dud.

> see smash hits of macs & ipods.

The mac was no smash hit, almost no one is stupid enough to use it.

> just pop into an apple store.

Most of which went bust. Funny that. Hilarous actually.

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

>>>>>>> Apple introduced the iPod into a market that was in a similar state.

>>>>>> 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.

>>>> What I said in the bit you chose to delete from the quoting.

>>> it appears to me you said the ipods good UI design was
>>> due to media players being uncomplicated to begin with.

>> Nope, those comments were about the STATE
>> OF THE MARKET when the ipod showed up.

> dunno dude...

You did manage to get that bit right, dud. Presumably by accident.

> you: "You dont need much controls wise for a media player"
> ...you were talking about media players,

I was commenting on the previous bit that even someone as
stupid as you should have noticed includes the word MARKET.

> i was talking about media players.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

That bit back right at the top wasnt even yours.

>>>> I wasnt talking about media players in cellphones there.

>>> again, i must be confused.

>> No surprises there.

> ...and he doesnt even *thank* me for the setup. geeze.

I never thank scum like you, child.

>>>>> my phones continue to be small, cluttered, difficult
>>>>> to use devices that often leave me frustrated.

>>>> There's plenty that arent, most obviously

>>>> with the Nokias that do have a decent UI.

>>> keyword being decent. not good.

>> Wrong. Its good in your terms.

> hell no, it isnt.

Hell yes it is.

I just use the word decent instead of your use of good, cretin.

>>> my current phone is a nokia,

>> Then that claim of yours is a lie or you are a klutz.

> oh? so if i dont like nokia, then im lying or a klutz?

Nope, if you are often frustrated by a nokia.

> wow. then i guess if weve peaked w/ nokias,
> nobody else should bother making phones, eh?

Having fun thrashing that straw man, child ?

>> itunes aint the only way to synch a media player.

> but for many, its the easiest.

Easy to claim.

> which is a selling point to those people.

Easy to claim.

> how can ya argue against that?

Easy, you just dont know how many buy ipods because of the elegant
physical design and swear at iTunes when they have to use it.

> if it is, then it is.

And if it isnt, it isnt.

> you & your dreamy nokia play no bearing in that.

You and your lemming like behaviour in spades.

>>>> Pity that that isnt new either. Its just a bit better on the touch
>>>> screen side. There's plenty of other touchscreens out there now.

>>> from what ive seen in the videos, the UI improvements i like go beyond
>>> touch screen. they are inline w/ my mac user experience, which i like.

>> Sure, but thats nothing like your previous claim.

> which was?

If you hadnt carefully deleted it from the quoting, you'd be able to see, child.

> let me tell you: my claim was that its UI is vastly superior to any other cell's.

Lying again.

> thats my claim, right there.

Thats actually a third claim and you have absolutely no idea if its true anyway.

At 29 Jun 2007 09:39:27 +1000 Rod Speed wrote:

> They're wrong, the EDGE system doesnt use sims.

EDGE is enhanced GPRS, which is GSM, which uses SIMs.

The "no SIM" misconception stems from the lack of obvious opening in the
case in the preproduction demos to insert/remove one.

I assume it's simply preinstalled and/or inserts/removes via a less-than-
obvious opening.

Every other Cingular GSM phone uses a SIM- so will this one, "child."



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

tony wrote:
> On Jun 26, 12:50 pm, Screw the i(diot)Phone <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> 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.
>
> actually tardo, it isnt a phone. its a computer, designed by a
> computer manufacturer. this computer runs a unix variant for an OS.
> this computer can decode compressed music, much like another non-phone
> product called an "iPod". this computer can receive wireless network
> signals, and its users can surf the web in a common piece of computer
> software called a "web browser". this computer also comes bundled w/
> other applications programmed by its manufacturer.
>
> oh, and this computer can make phone calls.
>
>
> sm
>
>
I assume sm =SeMantics

Everything is a computer these days.

On Jun 29, 2:49 am, The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]> wrote:
> I assume sm =SeMantics

nope, its my email abbreviation.

> Everything is a computer these days.

do they all run unix? full web browsers, w/ javascript parsers?


sm

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > oh wait -- so you *record* the conversation, then listen to it later, and then...? type it?
> Only if they are so ****ed they cant email it to you child.

so youre sitting in a deli eating w/ your buddy, and somebody drops
off an interesting flyer for a band, w/ a url. you have your web-
capable nokia safe & snug in your pocket. you & your buddy are curious
about the content of said url, and have an hour to kill. but, youre
saying that instead of using your web-capable nokia, you verbally
*record* the url, and check it later, or have your friend email it to
you later, all because you wish to avoid typing in the url in your
crummy web-capable phone, even tho you have time to kill. man, thats
progress!


> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Rreeoow! "Watch out boy's, this cat's got claws!"

> > sure. cuz uh, email has repleaced impromptu speaking. yeah.
>
> Its in addition to the conversation, ****wit child.

Rreeoow! "Watch out boy's, this cat's got claws!"

> >> Its clearly too hard for someone as stupid as you.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Rreeoow! "Watch out boy's, this cat's got claws!"

> > not really.
>
> Yes, really.

not really.

> > yep. if a device doesnt do it well, i dont use it.
>
> More fool you, farting around with separate
> devices when you can all the functionality in one.

but...ive established that i dont think they do it well. whats your
beef w/ that? why must i think your nokia is the A-bomb of UI? thats
great if you do, but plenty of folks dont... see "free market".


> > still own a digital camera, even tho i have
> > this crummy one built into my nokia. useless.
>
> You dont always need the high quality camera and its much more
> convenient to have another in your phone for when you need it.

my nokia's crummy images are in no way near the quality worthy of
publishing on my photo site. they are next to useless. thus...i own a
camera in addition. and i bet you do too.

> It doesnt appear as a drive just by plugging the ipod into the computer.

err, but it does. you can most certainly see an ipod as a drive in any
win/mac you plug it into. you probably mean that you cant manage music
w/ it that way, unless you load custom software to do so (which you
can choose to do. google it).

> >>> -- i think the number of cell + primary-mp3 (non-stupid,
> >>> by your rules) users are much smaller than you think;
> >> Nope.
> > oh, so youre saying *most* people depend on their cellphone-and-media-
> > player combo device as their *primary* mp3 player or whatnot?
>
> Nope.

ok, so the number of people who use their media-player cells as their
primary media player are both not "smaller than you think", and not
"most". so, just what is it youre trying to say?


> Having **** thrashing that straw man are you child ?

Rreeoow! "Watch out boy's, this cat's got claws!"

> >>> based on apples track record, its a safe bet.
> >> Nope, look at the Newton some time.
> > ok, so youre saying one flopped product means "apple sucks at UI".
>
> Nope, that it isnt necessarily a SAFE BET yet.

one poor product UI out of 23 years of massive sales is, a "safe bet".

> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Rreeoow! "Watch out boy's, this cat's got claws!"


> > in the previews i read, they didnt say they came up w/ a lousy new UI.
> They dont have any choice on that, it doesnt have any physical buttons.
>
> > quote me different.
>
> Even someone as stupid as you should have notice
> that they all say it doesnt have any physical buttons.

talk about stupid -- ive never disputed the buttons. ive clearly
disputed that apple has replaced the ipods successful UI w/ something
lousy.

> You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist mindless lemmings ?

yep. as i mentioned, i write software for many platforms, primarily
windows, and never mac. think we can element the "You're a lemming!"
red herring now.


> The mac was no smash hit, almost no one is stupid enough to use it.

actually sport, the mac is what launched the personal computer &
desktop publishing industries. before then, no company gave a damn.
granted you will probably in diapers or unborn, but it did happen.
look it up.

> > just pop into an apple store.
>
> Most of which went bust. Funny that. Hilarous actually.

i havent read that. care to provide some data? or just more
unsubstantial name-calling rubbish?


sm

On Jun 28, 7:33 pm, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was commenting on the previous bit that even someone as
> stupid as you should have noticed includes the word MARKET.

complete red herring. we were talking media player controls; the
market talk was seperate.

> You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

garbage in, garbage out.

> I never thank scum like you, child.

Rrreoww! "Watch out boys, this cat's got claws!"

> >> Wrong. Its good in your terms.
> > hell no, it isnt.
> Hell yes it is.
> I just use the word decent instead of your use of good, cretin.

but...im refuting that -- i dont think the nokia UI is good. really i
dont. in my terms, it aint good.

> >>> my current phone is a nokia,
> >> Then that claim of yours is a lie or you are a klutz.
> > oh? so if i dont like nokia, then im lying or a klutz?
> Nope, if you are often frustrated by a nokia.

i am. because i dont like its ui.

> > wow. then i guess if weve peaked w/ nokias,
> > nobody else should bother making phones, eh?
> Having fun thrashing that straw man, child ?

no straw man -- im merely replying to what youre evidently purporting.
if what you think youre saying is something different, then perhaps
you need to make it clearer.

> > you & your dreamy nokia play no bearing in that.
>
> You and your lemming like behaviour in spades.

but im no lemming. i didnt get my first mac until very recently,
because i liked it UI and w/ the intel chip i could continue to
develop for win on it. so the whole "You're a lemming!" red herring is
done.

> >> Sure, but thats nothing like your previous claim.
> > which was?
> If you hadnt carefully deleted it from the quoting, you'd be able to see, child.

ah, so you cant say. (meaning, your claim is bogus)

> > let me tell you: my claim was that its UI is vastly superior to any other cell's.
>
> Lying again.

how can i be lying about my own claim? this thread started when i
chimed in on the crummy UI of other cells, your glorious pocket buddy
nokia include.

> > thats my claim, right there.
> Thats actually a third claim and you have absolutely no idea if its true anyway.

from the videos, and the reviews, its been substantiated. being an
offshoot of OS X, it shares many of the qualities of OS X, which is an
OS w/ a UI i enjoy. so yes, i do have an idea of that being true.


sm

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

>>> and all w/o software (as you claim)!

>> Never ever said anything remotely resembling anything like that.

> actually, you did.

Nope.

> no "crapware" required -- remember?

That was just referring to the FACT that you dont need
to add some special purpose crapware, you can use the
file manager etc that you use for all other file transfers fine.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that a file manager etc is software.

>> It aint random and it will do anything itunes can do, and you
>> get everything in the one device instead of in separate devices.

> sorta like....an iphone.

Nope, nothing like.

> but not as handy.

Wrong again. Much handier, you treat the phone as a drive, the iphone cant do that.

> got it.

Nope, you never ever do.

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

On Jun 29, 1:51 pm, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > no "crapware" required -- remember?
>
> That was just referring to the FACT that you dont need
> to add some special purpose crapware, you can use the
> file manager etc that you use for all other file transfers fine.

surely someone as worldly & learned as yourself realizes you can do
the same w/ an ipod if you so choose -- there are several sync &
manager alternatives to itunes, if you wish to install them. check out
lifehacker.

> Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that a file manager etc is software.

Rrreoww! "Watch out boys, this cat's got claws!"

> >> It aint random and it will do anything itunes can do, and you
> >> get everything in the one device instead of in separate devices.
> > sorta like....an iphone.
>
> Nope, nothing like.

oh? lesse...

- cell phone...check.
- pda functions...check.
- wannabe-ipod & itunes media functionality...check.
- visual voicemail, amazingly simple UI, unix-based OS, optimized
google maps, sweet design...ah crap!

....you may be right, not like an iphone. spades for you, huh?

> Wrong again. Much handier, you treat the phone as a drive, the iphone cant do that.

we'll see about that. didnt take long for folks to get the AppleTV to
do what they wanted it to, either (support DivX, external USB storage
support, etc..). and dollars to donuts that future versions of AppleTV
*will* do what the user base wants it to. version 1, dude. it does
more than most phones already, does some things none of them can, and
the future is only gonna get brighter.

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

w/ you head stuck in the sand so long, doesnt it ever get sand in your
eyes? doesnt that...hurt? (feel free to add a "it's better than
sticking your head up your ass" retort, i know youve got it in ya,
little fella)


sm

On Jun 29, 5:52 am, "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> And it cant cut andpasteeither, pretty ****ed with email.
>

According to Wayne Westerman's PhD thesis "Hand Tracking, Finger
Identification and Chordic Manipulation on a Multi-Touch Surface" (on
which the iPhone's multitouch tech is based), copy & paste was planned
to work as follows (page 13, section 1.2.2.5):

"Even after all this, some room remains in the chord space for common
menu commands. Setting the thumb and forefinger down apart and then
pinching them together intuitively invokes cut. Copy becomes a simple,
simultaneous tap of the thumb and a fingertip. Setting thumb and
forefinger down together and flicking them apart invokes paste. A
clockwise rotation as if turning a screw saves the current file, and a
counter-clockwise rotation pops up the open file dialog. Additional
menu commands could be invoked on future systems with handwriting
gestures."

I've head that some "deletes" on the iPhone are accomplished by
sliding your finger across the length of the item (as if you were
going to cross something out) which brings up a "delete" icon. Has
anyone tried the copy and paste finger chords on the iPhone? I think
it peculiar that Apple would spend all that money buying up the
Fingerworks multitouch, chordic patents but didn't think to keep in
something as useful as copy & paste?

Cheers,
Chuan

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

>> And it cant cut and paste either, pretty ****ed with email.

> According to Wayne Westerman's PhD thesis "Hand Tracking, Finger
> Identification and Chordic Manipulation on a Multi-Touch Surface"
> (on which the iPhone's multitouch tech is based), copy & paste
> was planned to work as follows (page 13, section 1.2.2.5):

Presumably there is some reason they chose to leave that out.

> "Even after all this, some room remains in the
> chord space for common menu commands.

Wota ****ing wanker.

> Setting the thumb and forefinger down apart and
> then pinching them together intuitively invokes cut.

They appear to have used that for sizing.

> Copy becomes a simple, simultaneous tap of the thumb
> and a fingertip. Setting thumb and forefinger down
> together and flicking them apart invokes paste.

They appear to have used that for sizing.

> A clockwise rotation as if turning a screw saves the current file,

Why doesnt it just **** the current file ?

> and a counter-clockwise rotation pops up the open file dialog.

Why doesnt that pop the user's cork ?

> Additional menu commands could be invoked
> on future systems with handwriting gestures."

Yeah, give it the finger and it bites you on the arse.

Give it the it the little finger and it rips the user's head off.

> I've head that some "deletes" on the iPhone are accomplished
> by sliding your finger across the length of the item (as if you were
> going to cross something out) which brings up a "delete" icon. Has
> anyone tried the copy and paste finger chords on the iPhone?

Yep, plenty have.

> I think it peculiar that Apple would spend all that money buying
> up the Fingerworks multitouch, chordic patents but didn't think
> to keep in something as useful as copy & paste?

Presumably because they use those gestures for
sizing instead and there isnt any obvious alternative.

Guess you could use a scissor motion for cutting, but that would be a tad hard to sense.

You could use a spit for paste, but again, thats got some downsides.

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

> Has
> anyone tried the copy and paste finger chords on the iPhone?

Of course. We're not all stupid.

> I think
> it peculiar that Apple would spend all that money buying up the
> Fingerworks multitouch, chordic patents but didn't think to keep in
> something as useful as copy & paste?

Version 1.0, my boy. Keep it simple for everyone. People will get used
to the product and things will be added...slowly and thoughtfully.