NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 15:16 In article <v9ut569kkb5soa46241rg2t2jrrehdjcs7(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:31:40 -0400, in > <znu-CC1361.14314008082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <0vnt569ooulbctshsd5rvjn1177ukrcapb(a)4ax.com>, > > Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > > >> Actually, it does. If all the Android phones were released > >> simultaneously, it's conceivable that they may all have some common > >> problem overlooked during the development. However, with the current > >> staggered release of various models by various vendors, each > >> succeeding model builds upon the lessons learned by the competitors. > >> This is the way to make incremental improvements, which are certainly > >> beneficial to the customer. > > > >Can you point to any actual examples of this? > > HTC model history. > Motorola model history. See, that's exactly the kind of vague nonsense I wasn't asking for. > >> >And the iPhone still has substantially better brand recognition than > >> >Android. > >> > >> Yep, but as I previously suggested, the real brand loyalty is to the > >> cellular vendor (AT&T or Verizon) as enforced by a 2 year contract. > >> If Verizon magically appears with a CDMA iPhone tomorrow, how many > >> current AT&T customers, with iPhone are going to pay $325 early > >> termination fee to jump ship? > > > >This appears unrelated to what I was talking about. > > Read what he wrote more carefully. I was making a point about brand recognition in the context of discussing how much coverage issues with phones get in the media. He seems to be making some other point about brand recognition. > >> I don't see it. There aren't enough Apple haters, clueless Apple > >> fans, and brand loyal fanatics to make much of a difference. > > > >Within the Internet tech community there absolutely are. Claiming > >otherwise is ludicrous. > > Really? What support do you have for that claim (if any)? You're both playing games. > >> Incidentally, when Apple finally gets the color matching correct, and > >> the white iPhone 4 is released, don't forget to count it as a > >> seperate product, like the various Android phones. > > > >Don't be absurd. There are _ substantive differences_ between Android > >models. > > Just as there are between iPhone models. Is each iPhone in a separate > class in your opinion? :) The iPhone 4 is certainly in a different class from, say, the iPhone 3G. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: nospam on 8 Aug 2010 15:18 In article <znu-7FD0D5.14580908082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >See also: > > >http://blog.flurry.com/bid/31825/iPad-Developer-Support-Continues-to- > > >Soar > > > > > >Android project starts are still growing, but iOS project starts are > > >growing even faster, thanks in part to iPad. (RIM just appears > > >totally screwed in making the transition from e-mail appliances to > > >real smartphones.) > > > > Flurry data is biased toward Apple. Got anything more objective? > > Your original link cited Flurry data, but as soon as I use it it's > "biased toward Apple". Hilarious. good catch. he's a hypocrite.
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 15:34 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:58:09 -0400, in <znu-7FD0D5.14580908082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <5jnt569bq08ae2pu55k07401lkeifop6s5(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 12:37:20 -0400, in >> <znu-E6AA49.12372008082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU >> <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >> >> >In article <sgkt569kivh80jiji4hm81iassi99cktn6(a)4ax.com>, >> > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >> >> Nothing wrong with that -- Android is getting the best of both >> >> worlds. >> > >> >See next response. >> > >> >> >You don't need a Mac to write Android apps, and they're written >> >> >in Java, which is a more widely used language than Obj-C. >> >> >> >> Benefits of the Android model. >> > >> >Not if it results in junky hobbyware crowding higher quality apps >> >out, it's not. >> >> I see no evidence of that, and don't think it likely. >> >> >> Available evidence suggests otherwise; e.g., >> >> <http://www.gomonews.com/android-go-boom-mobile-analytics-points-to >> >> -explosi on- of-development/> >> > >> >The data is from last October, which was still early days. It's easy >> >to have huge relative growth that early in the game, because the >> >baseline is so low. >> >> There's ample evidence of continued rapid growth (but since you're >> probably just going to reject them, I'm not going to waste time on >> more citations). >> >> >See also: >> >http://blog.flurry.com/bid/31825/iPad-Developer-Support-Continues-to- >> >Soar >> > >> >Android project starts are still growing, but iOS project starts are >> >growing even faster, thanks in part to iPad. (RIM just appears >> >totally screwed in making the transition from e-mail appliances to >> >real smartphones.) >> >> Flurry data is biased toward Apple. Got anything more objective? > >Your original link cited Flurry data, but as soon as I use it it's >"biased toward Apple". Hilarious. Think more carefully before you dash off a reply -- I used it precisely because it's (a) biased toward Apple and (b) still shows a huge boom in Android development. More representative data shows an even bigger Android boom. p.s. App development for iPad and other iDevices is irrelevant in this context. -- John "We have met the enemy and he is us" -Pogo
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 15:41 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:52:00 -0400, in <znu-81C683.14520008082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <dunt56pr5g0psrni122fd04qnro35d6p2s(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> I see no basis for that claim. Perhaps you're confusing Android, made >> by Google, with Android hardware, make by experienced hardware players. > >I'm talking about actual Android phones, which include both hardware and >software components. So you are confusing them. Tip: You can have great software on not-so-great hardware, vice versa, and other combinations as well. >> Apple has come up to speed remarkably well, but its mistakes are >> evidence of how new it is to the party as compared to much more >> experienced players like Nokia and Motorola. Google likewise, as >> evidenced by Nexus One. > >Um... if you compare the iPhone to specific models of Android phone or >even to, say, all the Android phones sold by Motorola, Apple is >trouncing those "more experienced players". Just the opposite -- Motorola has had no such embarrassing hardware issues, <http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=132820> and is (re)gaining market share much more rapidly than Apple. <http://www.npd.com/press/releases/press_100804.html> >> Since _all_ iPhone users tend to be impacted by any iPhone hardware >> issue, whereas a given Android hardware issue won't affect the >> majority of Android users, greater publicity is both understandable >> and meaningful. > >What you can't seem to grasp is that more models doesn't mean the same >number of discrete issues, with each issue impacting fewer users. All >else being equal, more models also means _more discrete issues_ with >each issue impacting fewer users. The odds of a specific user having >_some_ issue remain the same. Sorry, but that doesn't follow -- you're making an unwarranted assumption that files in the face of the available evidence. If you're going to promote Apple so aggressively, you should at least stick to its strengths, not its weaknesses. ;) -- John If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive, then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?
From: Jeff Liebermann on 8 Aug 2010 15:43
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:31:40 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <0vnt569ooulbctshsd5rvjn1177ukrcapb(a)4ax.com>, > Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:15:44 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >> >> >But this is precisely my point. Having more models doesn't actually mean >> >the phone an individual user buys is less likely to have an issue. >> >> Actually, it does. If all the Android phones were released >> simultaneously, it's conceivable that they may all have some common >> problem overlooked during the development. However, with the current >> staggered release of various models by various vendors, each >> succeeding model builds upon the lessons learned by the competitors. >> This is the way to make incremental improvements, which are certainly >> beneficial to the customer. > >Can you point to any actual examples of this? Not within the Android market. They're too new for this kind of evolutionary improvements. However, there are plenty of examples among other cell phone manufacturers. Motorola revolutionized the industry with the RAZR and its internal antenna at the bottom of the phone. Now, most commodity phones have internal antenna. HTC introduced the slide out keyboard which doesn't waste front panel space. Now, almost all PDA phones have sliding keyboards. Apple decided that mechanical keyboards and stylus's were un-necessary. Now, almost all the new phones use an on screen keyboard. Apple decided that battery life was critical in the iPhone 4. I'm starting to see larger phones (in product releases) primarily for the larger screen, but also for the larger battery. My point is that all the manufacturers borrow good ideas from each other, thus improving the product. >IOW, the whole thing was a huge Internet echo chamber phenomenon that >turns out to be pretty pointless. Apple was lucky that the problem was somewhat mitigated with a rubber bumper. Had it been something more difficult to solve, it could easily have been a disaster. However, a good question to ask was how could Apple have missed this effect? Could it be that someone unilaterally decided that it wasn't a problem and go ship it anyway? >Which is what I said it probably was to begin with. This was the largest >blowup to data, but it's not like we haven't been through this a >half-dozen times before. Past performance is not a good indication of future results. If ignored, such technical oversights, such as the antenna problem, tend to become more spectacular and messy. >> Sure, but the fanatics are also the early adopters and first to buy >> anything new. I keep waiting for a iPod Touch with a GPS, camera, and >> built in microphone. Yawn... > >Um... the iPod Touch is _way_ beyond the "early adopter" phase. I'm not a fanatic or early adopter. I bought the iPod Touch 2G used on eBay. The pile of iPhone 3G's I'm accumulating are all from upgrades. I don't pay full list or buy much retail. What I was suggesting is that there were hints of a new 4th generation iPod Touch model with a feature set similar to the iPhone. The leaks have been around for at least a year. If it happens, I just might become an early adopter. However, I won't stand in line all night too get one. <http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/05/new-images-of-4th-generation-ipod-touch-lcd-with-facetime-camera/> >> >And the iPhone still has substantially better brand recognition than >> >Android. >> >> Yep, but as I previously suggested, the real brand loyalty is to the >> cellular vendor (AT&T or Verizon) as enforced by a 2 year contract. >> If Verizon magically appears with a CDMA iPhone tomorrow, how many >> current AT&T customers, with iPhone are going to pay $325 early >> termination fee to jump ship? > >This appears unrelated to what I was talking about. Sorry. I'm mixing brand recognition with brand loyalty. On the brain recognition front, Verizon licensed the "Droid" trademark from Lucasfilm Ltd and is using it to label literally anything that runs the Android OS at a Droid. That's their way of building brand recognition for their product line. I don't know if Droid will ever catch up with Apple in brand recognition, but they're certainly going to try. > >> There's another factor at work here. Fear of screwing up. Everyone >> "knows" that the iPhone will do everything, because of the 4 year >> track record. If not, there's an app for it somewhere. The GUM >> (great unwashed masses) are not so sure if the various Android phones >> can do the same. FUD (fear uncertainty doubt) at work in the Android >> market. >> >> >Put these together with the tendency for sensationalist Internet >> >'journalism', you have a recipe for a firestorm -- in a way you just >> >don't with Android devices. >> >> I don't see it. There aren't enough Apple haters, clueless Apple >> fans, and brand loyal fanatics to make much of a difference. > >Within the Internet tech community there absolutely are. Claiming >otherwise is ludicrous. > >> Incidentally, when Apple finally gets the color matching correct, and >> the white iPhone 4 is released, don't forget to count it as a >> seperate product, like the various Android phones. > >Don't be absurd. There are _ substantive differences_ between Android >models. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |