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: JF Mezei on 8 Aug 2010 16:44 ZnU wrote: > I suspect Apple was aware of the tradeoff being made and decided to make > it anyway on the basis that it didn't impact real-world performance that > much. Which it doesn't seem to. I am convinced that there are folks within Apple who knew the antenna had problems. I don't know who, and high high up. What puzzles me is that Jobs would have extoled the virtues of the new antenna in his keynote speech if he knew the antenna had flaws. Perhaps he could have said "the antenna is so magical, it only works if you don't hold the phone :-)" Perhaps, at the time of the keynote, Jobs was confident that a fix would be found prior to first shipments. Perhaps Jobs is still confident that a fix will be made. You will note that the offer for those free bumbers ends September 30th. Perhaps lacker coated handsets will start shipping soon.
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 16:45 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:29:53 -0400, in <znu-9416FA.16295308082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <752u561i050d884dp5530b13l7eakj7a44(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> It would be easy to provide such evidence, but since you'll just reject >> it, pointless. > >I'm saying certain Android phones, like the Droid X, are in the same >class as the iPhone 4, while other Android phones, like the Ally, are >not. You're saying iPhone 3G is not in the same class as the iPhone 4, which to me is a silly classification I'm not going to waste time on. >You appear to be disagreeing with me. One logical consequence of this >would seem to be that you believe the Ally and the Droid X are in the >same class. Along with the industry. ;) >So why is anyone buying the latter for 4x the price (8x if >you want two)? Why would anyone buying water pay dollars per small bottle when essentially free tap water is as good or better (as it is here in San Francisco)? >> Verizon's big seller is the Droid. >> <http://www.npd.com/press/releases/press_100804.html>: >> 1. Motorola Droid >> 2. HTC Droid Incredible >> 3. HTC EVO 4G >> 4. HTC Hero >> 5. HTC Droid Eris >> Try again. > >I suspect this data mostly predates the widespread availability of these >cheaper Android models, which is very recent -- and which seems to >coincide with significant sales growth. I'm not going to waste time on idle speculation like that. Let me know if and when you actually have something persuasive. >> I disagree. Do you not have even one good real example? > >Well, for instance, the Droid X ships with junkware pre-installed and >with Motorola UI customizations that make the default Android UI worse. In your opinion. Many others must actually prefer it, or it wouldn't be such a hot device. >So maybe I'll go with the Droid Incredible. Except that it has shorter >battery life and doesn't support tethering. Tip: There is no one perfect device -- all have pros and cons, iPhone included, like the lack of multitasking up until recently. >When arguing, Android advocates sort of act as if they're advocating >some Android phone that magically combines all the best features of all >the Android handsets on the market. Unfortunately, you can't actually >buy one of those. That's a straw man argument. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: JF Mezei on 8 Aug 2010 16:48 ZnU wrote: > > You're pushing the notion that a consequence of staggered releases, > Android phones can borrow from each other sooner. I suspect that HTC is a bit like GM did. They make one core car design, and then send this to its various divisions (Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile) and each division then chooses the paint scheme and a few options inside and they are marketed as totally different cars even though at the core they are the same. Remember that HTC caters to invividual networks, so they generate one version of a core product and make it an exclusive to Verizon, and then generate another variation of the same and make it an exclusive to Spring. But the core development is probably the same for both. From the outside, it may look like HTC is producing a ton of different models at a rapid pace, but this could be mostly smoke and mirrors generated by marketing and in the end, a lot fo the different models are really the same.
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 16:54 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:19:29 -0400, in <znu-689068.16192908082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <3n2u56du8653880ejo4l47ibgls04nivrn(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> You don't know the model history of those two major brands? >> (How then can you comment intelligently on the issue?) >> OK, here you go: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_devices> > >Vague nonsense. Real facts actually. Did you bother to check it out? Do you really know nothing about those devices? How then can you comment intelligently? >You're pushing the notion that a consequence of staggered releases, >Android phones can borrow from each other sooner. But this only makes >sense if it's possible to see a new feature in a competitor's product >and have it in your product three months later or something. Which, with >products this complex, it probably isn't. If you learn something about how such devices are actually developed (outside of Apple at least), you'll discover that such incremental improvements in each subsequent model are SOP. As but one of a great many factors, a particular component (e.g., chipset) might not be ready for phone 101 but in time for phone 102 a month later. When you have only one release a year, like Apple, you wind up with an average of six month lag, which is a tough hand to play over the long term, part of why Apple went through three different CPU architectures in the PC business. >> Your class distinction, which amounts to iPhone 4 being in a class by >> itself, is meaningless (and self-serving, no offense intended). > >Huh? I would say there are a couple of Android phones in the same class, >like the Droid X. (Hardware-wise, anyway. I think iOS is far more >polished than Android.) > >What I'm objecting to is that people sort of pretend _all_ Android >handsets are in the same class as the Droid X or iPhone 4. You've defined the iPhone 3G as not being in the same class as the iPhone 4, which is too meaningless (and self-serving, no offense intended) for me to waste time on. -- John "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive, difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
From: JF Mezei on 8 Aug 2010 16:57
nospam wrote: > rim is losing market share. This was inevitable. RIM managed to create a new class of phones for statistics point of view. They were alone in that class, because all other phones with similar features were just considered "phones", not "smartphones". When Apple came in, they got put into that class, and so did HTC, and apparently a few Windows Mobile phones. So in that class where Rim used to stand alone, Rim's market share can only go down and others get counted in that same class. There are Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG etc which have similar features, but are counted as "phones" instead of "smartphones". There is a lot of "hype" surrounding smartphones, and my guess is that to get included in that class, the manufacturer has to generate a lot of hype about their product to get noticed by the media. I suspect that Nokia's phone that have browsers, email clients etc and not included in the "smartphone" class probably still outnumber HTC, RIM and Apple by a large margin. (at least on a worldwide basis). And expect Nokia to re-enter the USA market once Verizon has moved to LTE. Nokia was sued by the owned of the proprietary CDMA (Qualcomm), and pulled out of the CDMA market. Once CDMA is dead, Nokia might come back with a vengenace. |