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: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 15:49 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:33:41 -0700, in <4c6057fa$0$22167$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >> it's handling android just fine, and by some reports, android users use >> *more* data than iphone users. > >There are far less Android users than iPhone users. Android sales are >increasing at a faster rate, but the iPhone has a huge installed base >already. So does Android (contrary to your claim): 8.7 million Android handsets here in the U.S. compared with 10.7 million iPhones according to Quantcast. >> what will be very interesting is how many at&t customers switch away >> from at&t once the iphone goes multi-carrier. > >Certainly AT&T's churn will go up, ... Not necessarily. Only time will tell. -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: nospam on 9 Aug 2010 16:19 In article <4c6057fa$0$22167$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: > >> Will Verizon's data network crumble under the crush of iPhone data like > >> AT&T's did? > > > > it's handling android just fine, and by some reports, android users use > > *more* data than iphone users. > > There are far less Android users than iPhone users. Android sales are > increasing at a faster rate, but the iPhone has a huge installed base > already. that's true, but the problems with at&t started early on, when there weren't a lot of iphone users. > > what will be very interesting is how many at&t customers switch away > > from at&t once the iphone goes multi-carrier. > > Certainly AT&T's churn will go up, but it will take a while for > contracts to expire. There's still the issue of international roaming as > well. While most Asian countries have both CDMA and GSM networks, Europe > is another story. a number of people have said they'll gladly pay the termination fee (which is only $175 until recently) to jump. the number one (and two) complaint about the iphone is at&t.
From: ZnU on 9 Aug 2010 22:10 In article <3b5u56pqkbrf6ihbo8c1regflof5roc5j2(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > 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)? So you're saying people _shouldn't_ buy the Droid X, they should buy the Ally, and it's irrational for them to buy the Droid X? One doesn't normally get to pull off such a clear reductio ad absurdum in .advocacy arguments. I don't normally get to pull off such a clean reductio ad absurdum in ..advocacy arguments. > >> 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. How about your own apparent claim that people _should_ buy lower-end Android phones. > >> 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. That doesn't follow at all. > >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. That's a non sequitur. My point was not that the iPhone was perfect. It was that "choice" doesn't necessarily mean there's any _one specific_ Android phone that's actually better that the iPhone. > >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. No, it's not. This is precisely what the "choice" advocate do. Constantly. -- "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: ZnU on 9 Aug 2010 22:12 In article <4c5f1ef4$0$30233$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot(a)vaxination.ca> wrote: > ZnU wrote: > > > It has processor half the speed, it has half the RAM, it has a screen > > with a quarter of the pixels. What sort of criteria did you think I was > > using to assign devices to classes? > > 3GS has *essentially* the same functionality as the 4. > > So it is in the same class/category, despite all the PR hype about the 4 > being in a new class. The 3GS, yes. I was talking about the 3G. Used a 3G lately? I used one a couple of weeks back, after having gotten used to the 3GS for a year. There's a _big_ difference there. > This is like going from Pentium 3 to Pentium 4 (or whatever it was > called). Marketing calls it a totally new class of CPU, but ion reality, > it is just an evolution of an architecture. -- "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: ZnU on 9 Aug 2010 22:13
In article <nqau56hk61u2r2vbc6fjpjd0rjo0eefk85(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 17:03:17 -0400, in > <znu-0050EC.17031708082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <nq5u56pi853987e002dk328q1rgorrtsa5(a)4ax.com>, > > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > >> 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. > > > >But models coming out, say, three months apart are not actually > >"subsequent models". Given realistic lead times, they would have been > >developed mostly in _parallel_. > > That's in fact what often happens, but doesn't preclude incremental > improvements. Learn about how the development is done. More vague nonsense. [snip] -- "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 |