On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:40:06 -0700, George Kerby wrote
(in article <C2BA39D6.308DD%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>):

>
> Excuse the occasional top-post. I didn't want anyone to miss this:
> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/4954824.html


Tell me, George, does Neil still drink?

At 10 Jul 2007 21:00:08 -0500 Jason McNorton wrote:

> > Oh gee, I am at the bookstore, I can pay 20 bucks for 802.11 or I can
> > use Edge. Geeze, what choice would you make?
>
> Let me get this straight, you're saying that 80kbs service is ok and
> better than wifi? And even better than Verizon 1.5megabit EDVO Rev A?


No, he's saying iPhone owners will be stuck using EDGE often, because Wi-
Fi is often unavailable, so they won't see the snappy performance
displayed in the iPhone commercials.

iPhone owners don't get the luxury of subscribing to EVDO.


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

At 11 Jul 2007 07:44:05 -0600 none wrote:
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:

> it's a new function, you haven't been able to "flick" through your
> albums with a finger before.

That's not a function- it's an interface. I can select my albums with a
finger too- I just can't "flick them."

Perhaps a "finger football" game should've been included to show off the
touchscreen! ;-)

> > Except for flash/java. It's closer than most devices, but still not
the
> > "actual web."
>
> it has java... just not flash since it's obsolete and eats batteries.

Funny how your "itune" will change if Apple releases a rumored flash
update in October. Then we'll have to hear how wonderful flash is, and
how only Apple has implemented flash "properly."

> not "real mail", the email on my iphone is indistinguishable from my
> computer email.

So is mine, except I occasionally have to scroll if images are too large
for the screen.

> it looks and acts the same, and that's a first for a
> phone.

Again, um, no.

> > Isn't syncing one-way on iPhone? (I'm asking- I haven't used on yet.)

> > Do contact and calendar changes upload to your computer?
>
> yes, data goes both ways. kinda fun that hasn't been reported anywhere
> that i've seen.... if you open iPhoto, the iPhone shows up and you can
> pull in your camera images.
I've seen photo transfer reported. I'm asking about Contacts- can you
create a contact on the iPhone and have it show up on the computer after
you sync?

I haven't seen THAT reported, and without that, it challenges the iPhone
fitting anyone's definition of a "smartphone"

> except for a multi-touch display,

New

> ambient light sensor,

New

> accelerometer,

New

> high rez screen,

Old. 640x320 phones predate your iPhone's 320x480.

> real time google maps,

You're f---ing kidding right? Google Maps has been in Java form for over
a year, and in native WM and Palm versions for nearly six months. All
versions "integrated" with other phone functions (contacts) and able to
use external bluetooth GPS for location and navigation.

I'll wager YOUR last phone coul do Google Maps.

> ipod,

iPod is a brand, not a feature. MP3 phones have been around a long time,
and even iTunes-syncable phones ('iPod') aren't new. Dare I utter the
name of "the phone that must not be named..." ...ROKR? Rumor has it the
AT&T exclusivity was going to be three years, but Apple gave them another
two to make up for inflicting the ROKR on them! ;-)

> the real web, etc.

Real-er, perhaps. Without flash and plug-in support, not "real."



> sure, at some point the iphone will expand to other
> carriers,

Yes. In 2012, earliest. AT&T got five years from Apple in return for
playing second-bananna to a fruit-logo.

> for now att wins the prize.
Hope it does well for my AT&T stock.


> hopefully we'll see an iPod with WiFi, ichat/skype features and

That ship has sailed, I suspect. Mrs. AT&T didn't raise any foolish
children, and I suspect AT&T has some protection against Apple competing
against their own iPhone with a "phoneless" version.


> everything but the old fashioned cell phone portion.

The "old fashioned cell phone portion" adds maybe $30-40 in cost to a
well-designed device. It's why we've seen the stand-alone PDA market get
decimated by smartphones and PDA phones in the last 18-months. Leaving a
phone off of a data device saves little money and leaves the device
virtually unmarketable- cellular is simply another connectivity "radio"
like wi-fi or bluetooth these days.

Usually including a phone in a device also benefits the end-user with a
generous carrier-subsidy- my "$600" PPC phone was $250 with a one-year
contract extension with T-Mobile. Obviously iPhone buyers miss the
benefit of a subsidy. Another iPhone first!

Also, in the past, smart/PDA phones worked for ALL non-phone functions
without phone service activated as well, of course. Not iPhone- another
first!

Opon reflection, you're right! The iPhone does do a lot of new
things! ;-)



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

none <a@b.com> wrote in
news:a-9D8DD5.11381211072007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net:


>
> the iPhone changed the world as we knew it, it took about 7 days, but
> it did happen. Now every Cell Phone must work like the iPhone or
> "die".
>

You mean "die" like the sales of the iPhone have? Or maybe you mean "die"
like the large number of iPhone returns that are being processed?

With the sole exception of the interface (which is a large reason for all
of the returns), every feature that I've seen is available on at least one
other phone currently on the market, and many phones come amazingly close
to the feature list at a fraction fo the cost.

The iPhone will be off the market by the end of 2008 in all forms.


> It's that simple.
>
> -
>

Yes you are. But you can go to your happly place, where the Steve Jobs
poster hangs above your bed- you cab gaze at it lovingly while putting on
your iPod pj's.

none wrote:
> Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote:
>
>>> you must live in a uncivilized location, something like that wouldn't
>>> happen here since all the kids are wealthy and highly educated.
>> Now you're just being an asshole.
>
> incorrect, i'm being truthful. try it sometime. or MOVE to a more
> civilized location.
>
> no kid "steals" in an affluent area, come on, get real....


You seem to really worship "affluent" people and think they are god
like. Just because they dress nice and drive fancy vehicles doesn't mean
they can't be riff-raff. I can tell you from experience that many are
worse than you could ever find "on the bad side of town".

I was just at my buddies last night. He lives in an area that is
littered with McMansions. His kid graduated high school and asked to go
on a trip with some of the "upscale" kids in the neighborhood that
involved renting a place for a week at the shore.

He said his son had called earlier and told him that two of the
"upscale" kids are in jail because they broke into vehicles and stole
various electronic equipment. Since this happened in another state the
parents weren't able to just make a couple phone calls and have it all
go away.

none wrote:
> Jason McNorton <jmcno@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>> This just proves you're a moron. 802.11 is very very very far from
>>> available everywhere.
>>>
>>> Oh gee, I am at the bookstore, I can pay 20 bucks for 802.11 or I can
>>> use Edge. Geeze, what choice would you make?
>> Let me get this straight, you're saying that 80kbs service is ok and
>> better than wifi? And even better than Verizon 1.5megabit EDVO Rev A?
>
> ignore Justin, he is still thinking the old CELL world has a chance to
> survive against 802.11. which all computer people KNOW isn't going to
> happen. Cell tech is DEAD, it's just now a transition period before
> everyone is on free 802.11xxx
>
> -
Really? I live in one of the top 50 markets and you would never know
that. If you want connectivity on the road around here you buy an
aircard for your laptop. You find Wi-Fi at the usual coffee house and
bookstore suspects or maybe if you are into wardriving.

The local nearest big city can't get anyone to even bid on their free
Wi-Fi project. Free Wi-Fi projects in other cities are floundering.

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 10 Jul 2007 21:00:08 -0500 Jason McNorton wrote:
>
>>> Oh gee, I am at the bookstore, I can pay 20 bucks for 802.11 or I can
>>> use Edge. Geeze, what choice would you make?
>> Let me get this straight, you're saying that 80kbs service is ok and
>> better than wifi? And even better than Verizon 1.5megabit EDVO Rev A?
>
>
> No, he's saying iPhone owners will be stuck using EDGE often, because Wi-
> Fi is often unavailable, so they won't see the snappy performance
> displayed in the iPhone commercials.
>
> iPhone owners don't get the luxury of subscribing to EVDO.
>
>
I know at least five people now who bought iphones and the biggest
complaint is having to use EDGE.

Justin wrote:

> Nope. That's not what I am saying at all. This "none" person seems to
> believe that wifi is available everywhere, and for free.
>
> It isn't, and it isn't.
>
> At borders, starbucks etc you have to have a monthly plan with T-Mobile
> to use their wifi.
>
> Most places in the world do NOT have wifi. Even fewer have FREE wifi.

Thats a totally accurate statement.

The local big city can't even get anyone to bid on their free Wi-Fi project.

At 11 Jul 2007 07:16:03 -0600 none wrote:

> you must live in a uncivilized location, something like that wouldn't
> happen here since all the kids are wealthy and highly educated.

In those areas the bullies just do it for kicks- not economic necessity.

BTW, since you're in such a wealthy area, would it kill you to buy a
shift-key? It's like reading e.e. cummings for crissakes.


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

At 11 Jul 2007 11:35:44 -0600 none wrote:

> ignore Justin, he is still thinking the old CELL world has a chance to
> survive against 802.11. which all computer people KNOW isn't going to
> happen.


Where does all of this "free 802.11x" come from? Ad-supported? Tax-
supported? Or just stolen from the "wealthy neighborhoods" you frequent?

Not all of us use our phones only in suburbia. That's fine for a teen
who's entire world consists of friends' houses, school, and the mall, but
for the rest of us, cellular networks will be the primary method of
wireless telephony for awhile.

> Cell tech is DEAD, it's just now a transition period before
> everyone is on free 802.11xxx


If so, why did your beloved Apple bother with making an iPhone? Why not
just a Wi-Fi-enabled "iChat"/VoIP device? (Like Belkin and Linksys make?)
Why plug a bunch of R&D into a dead technology?


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