iPhone announced, iDon’t know what to say

71 Comments

cinulgar_iphone.jpg

Phew – what a day. Sorry I’ve yet to weigh in on this bombshell, but it looks as though Cingular’s pulled up the socks that seemed droopy when the Pearl was launched, and have a new fervor with the addition of the iPhone to their roster. MacHead Steve Jobs let us know about the new iFamily member at his keynote speech at MacExpo that’s going on this week.

Now, we pointed you to an article earlier from the National Post who forecasted that the iPhone will be no threat to the BlackBerry, but now – it’s anyone’s guess.

It’s a really neat looking device. “Apple Inc.” (formerly known as Apple Computer) has launched a device that will, according to reliable news sources “leapfrog” over any competition, the BlackBerry included.

The iPhone, which will start at $499 when it launches in June, is controlled by touch, plays music, surfs the Internet and runs the Macintosh computer operating system. Jobs said it will “reinvent” wireless communications…

We’ll talk more about this tomorrow. But for now – first reactions, folks?cinulgar_iphone.jpgcinulgar_iphone.jpgcinulgar_iphone.jpg

  • squished18

    The most impressive thing is running OS X on it. That opens up the platform to a significant number of developers.

    I think trying to hold this flat piece of wizardry against your ear is going to go against the experience. From what I read, Mr. Jobs did the phone call on speakerphone, not holding it against his head. I think that was for good reason. I think it’s so thin and flat that he would have looked a bit ridiculous actually using it as a phone.

    It’s an iPod with a phone. Which is smart. But I think its form factor does not lend itself to being a data-intensive device. Text entry looks like it will be a pain. I say if you’re into heavy email, SMS, or IM usage, forget the iPhone.

    Having a WiFi phone is a bit overrated. Most public sites are locked down or are being locked down. The economics of “free Wifi” just don’t seem to jive.

    The discussion of “what data does it use?” is obviously not conducive to Mr. Jobs’ presentation style. But here’s a question for you: if I normally surf the web on my iPhone at home on my own WiFi, then I step out and surf the web on the road, will I know I’m getting dinged for every kB I’m sending over the airwaves? I predict a backlash of users who suddenly see $300 data charges on their Cingular bills.

    Finally, here’s where the iPhone appears to really fall flat:

    The Nintendo DS is a great portable gaming device.
    The iPod is a great portable audio device.
    The BB is a great portable communications device.
    What is the iPhone?

    I think it is trying to be too many things to too many people and will end up doing nothing really well. Too expensive for gaming. Not enough storage for great video. Too clumsy for great portable communications.

  • squished18

    The most impressive thing is running OS X on it. That opens up the platform to a significant number of developers.

    I think trying to hold this flat piece of wizardry against your ear is going to go against the experience. From what I read, Mr. Jobs did the phone call on speakerphone, not holding it against his head. I think that was for good reason. I think it’s so thin and flat that he would have looked a bit ridiculous actually using it as a phone.

    It’s an iPod with a phone. Which is smart. But I think its form factor does not lend itself to being a data-intensive device. Text entry looks like it will be a pain. I say if you’re into heavy email, SMS, or IM usage, forget the iPhone.

    Having a WiFi phone is a bit overrated. Most public sites are locked down or are being locked down. The economics of “free Wifi” just don’t seem to jive.

    The discussion of “what data does it use?” is obviously not conducive to Mr. Jobs’ presentation style. But here’s a question for you: if I normally surf the web on my iPhone at home on my own WiFi, then I step out and surf the web on the road, will I know I’m getting dinged for every kB I’m sending over the airwaves? I predict a backlash of users who suddenly see $300 data charges on their Cingular bills.

    Finally, here’s where the iPhone appears to really fall flat:

    The Nintendo DS is a great portable gaming device.
    The iPod is a great portable audio device.
    The BB is a great portable communications device.
    What is the iPhone?

    I think it is trying to be too many things to too many people and will end up doing nothing really well. Too expensive for gaming. Not enough storage for great video. Too clumsy for great portable communications.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Thought

    Quite frankly, your comment displays the kind of random illogic that makes me hate discussing any sort of Apple product. You say:

    “the fact that you have to name an assortment of devices that cobble together some of the features of the iPhone only makes my point.”

    Really, ok how is that? Let’s say you buy a notebook computer, and put a PCMCIA cellular modem in it. Now, if a couple years later another company puts out a notebook that has the PCMCIA modem integrated in the notebook, does that suddenly turn their notebook into a revolutionary new product? No, of course it doesn’t. It is the same product, with the same capabilities, just with a component integrated that was previously a modular add-on. There is nothing revolutionary, or even surprising about components being moved from add-on cards, to integrated components.

    You say:

    “The HTC Windows Mobile devices with touchscreen and virtual keyboard are laughable compared to the implementation of those features within the iPhone.”

    Why, because you don’t like Windows Mobile? The same features are their, the same capabilities are there. It is just a different OS. Once again going back to the standard computer analogy. If I buy a notebook with Windows, and I instead install Linux on it, does that mean I have just created a revolutionary new device, because I changed the OS? No, of course it doesn’t, I just changed the OS. No matter how many cool little special Linux programs I write to make it look neat, and function the way I want, it is still the same old notebook, just customized to my preference, not a revolutionary new device that changes the face of portable computing.

    You say:

    “sure the OQO and Sony UX micro PC offer that, but at over 3 times the price…over $2000 and still at a larger size.”

    Once again using the notebook analogy. I can buy notebooks from Dell in all sizes and shapes and price ranges, does that make a $500 notebook a radically different piece of equipment than a $2000 notebook, just because of the price point Dell chose? No, of course not! They are standard notebooks, sold at different price points based on what components they use, and how Dell chose to market them. There is nothing revolutionary or innovative about a company pricing their product low to move units.

    You say:

    “Bottom line: this device breaks ground in many, many ways. Sure, it’s not going to put all other vendors out of business, but it will make its mark.”

    And I say the bottom line is that as is all too common among the mac faithful, you are working backwards. You are starting with the assumption that since Apple put it out, it MUST break new ground, and then looking for any new difference you can find, and declaring it revolutionary. I know from long hard experience of having hundreds of conversations like this, that even if I were to find a device EXACTLY like the iPhone in every regard, you would just retreat back to something along the lines of “but Apple was the first company to do it RIGHT.”

    We get it, you love Apple. However, that doesn’t change the fact that this is a 2007 Clié! The Clié went off the market in 2004. Of course by the middle of 2007, and device of that type would be expected to be thinner, have integrated cellular, and have more memory. That is not revolutionary, it is just the simplest of common sense. Components are smaller, cellular is cheaper and smaller, and memory is a fraction of what it was back then. None of this is even surprising, much less revolutionary or special.

    Everything beyond that is just kibitzing about who’s UI design you think is prettier, or who’s marketing is more effective. Guess what, contrary to popular conception, making a call button neat and candy-colored doesn’t make it an industry-changing call button.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Thought

    Quite frankly, your comment displays the kind of random illogic that makes me hate discussing any sort of Apple product. You say:

    “the fact that you have to name an assortment of devices that cobble together some of the features of the iPhone only makes my point.”

    Really, ok how is that? Let’s say you buy a notebook computer, and put a PCMCIA cellular modem in it. Now, if a couple years later another company puts out a notebook that has the PCMCIA modem integrated in the notebook, does that suddenly turn their notebook into a revolutionary new product? No, of course it doesn’t. It is the same product, with the same capabilities, just with a component integrated that was previously a modular add-on. There is nothing revolutionary, or even surprising about components being moved from add-on cards, to integrated components.

    You say:

    “The HTC Windows Mobile devices with touchscreen and virtual keyboard are laughable compared to the implementation of those features within the iPhone.”

    Why, because you don’t like Windows Mobile? The same features are their, the same capabilities are there. It is just a different OS. Once again going back to the standard computer analogy. If I buy a notebook with Windows, and I instead install Linux on it, does that mean I have just created a revolutionary new device, because I changed the OS? No, of course it doesn’t, I just changed the OS. No matter how many cool little special Linux programs I write to make it look neat, and function the way I want, it is still the same old notebook, just customized to my preference, not a revolutionary new device that changes the face of portable computing.

    You say:

    “sure the OQO and Sony UX micro PC offer that, but at over 3 times the price…over $2000 and still at a larger size.”

    Once again using the notebook analogy. I can buy notebooks from Dell in all sizes and shapes and price ranges, does that make a $500 notebook a radically different piece of equipment than a $2000 notebook, just because of the price point Dell chose? No, of course not! They are standard notebooks, sold at different price points based on what components they use, and how Dell chose to market them. There is nothing revolutionary or innovative about a company pricing their product low to move units.

    You say:

    “Bottom line: this device breaks ground in many, many ways. Sure, it’s not going to put all other vendors out of business, but it will make its mark.”

    And I say the bottom line is that as is all too common among the mac faithful, you are working backwards. You are starting with the assumption that since Apple put it out, it MUST break new ground, and then looking for any new difference you can find, and declaring it revolutionary. I know from long hard experience of having hundreds of conversations like this, that even if I were to find a device EXACTLY like the iPhone in every regard, you would just retreat back to something along the lines of “but Apple was the first company to do it RIGHT.”

    We get it, you love Apple. However, that doesn’t change the fact that this is a 2007 Clié! The Clié went off the market in 2004. Of course by the middle of 2007, and device of that type would be expected to be thinner, have integrated cellular, and have more memory. That is not revolutionary, it is just the simplest of common sense. Components are smaller, cellular is cheaper and smaller, and memory is a fraction of what it was back then. None of this is even surprising, much less revolutionary or special.

    Everything beyond that is just kibitzing about who’s UI design you think is prettier, or who’s marketing is more effective. Guess what, contrary to popular conception, making a call button neat and candy-colored doesn’t make it an industry-changing call button.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    squished18

    You say:

    “The most impressive thing is running OS X on it. That opens up the platform to a significant number of developers.”

    It isn’t running OS X any more than a Windows Mobile device is running Windows!

    IT is running an optimized embedded OS, *based* on the OS X kernel, just like Windows Mobile is running an an optimized embedded OS based on the Windows kernel.

    How does that “to a significant number of developers?” The biggest competition for any phone (Nokia) uses Java, one of the most popular programming languages on Earth. Windows Mobile device can use Visual Basic, .Net, and Flash, which are all popular languages. How does the iPhone using some brand new proprietary embedded BSD variant open it up to a significant number of developers compared to the competition?

  • L. M. Lloyd

    squished18

    You say:

    “The most impressive thing is running OS X on it. That opens up the platform to a significant number of developers.”

    It isn’t running OS X any more than a Windows Mobile device is running Windows!

    IT is running an optimized embedded OS, *based* on the OS X kernel, just like Windows Mobile is running an an optimized embedded OS based on the Windows kernel.

    How does that “to a significant number of developers?” The biggest competition for any phone (Nokia) uses Java, one of the most popular programming languages on Earth. Windows Mobile device can use Visual Basic, .Net, and Flash, which are all popular languages. How does the iPhone using some brand new proprietary embedded BSD variant open it up to a significant number of developers compared to the competition?

  • L. M. Lloyd

    squished18

    You say:

    “The most impressive thing is running OS X on it. That opens up the platform to a significant number of developers.”

    It isn’t running OS X any more than a Windows Mobile device is running Windows!

    IT is running an optimized embedded OS, *based* on the OS X kernel, just like Windows Mobile is running an an optimized embedded OS based on the Windows kernel.

    How does that “to a significant number of developers?” The biggest competition for any phone (Nokia) uses Java, one of the most popular programming languages on Earth. Windows Mobile device can use Visual Basic, .Net, and Flash, which are all popular languages. How does the iPhone using some brand new proprietary embedded BSD variant open it up to a significant number of developers compared to the competition?

  • L. M. Lloyd

    You know Simon, your “they made the iPod so they can do no wrong” attitude is misguided and poorly conceived. Every company, including Apple, has had their fair share of flops and missteps. Just look at the Newton, Apple’s last attempt to enter the portable computing market.

    Apple had a hit with the iPod, to think that because the iPod was a hit means any product Apple puts an i in front of will be a hit is foolish.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    You know Simon, your “they made the iPod so they can do no wrong” attitude is misguided and poorly conceived. Every company, including Apple, has had their fair share of flops and missteps. Just look at the Newton, Apple’s last attempt to enter the portable computing market.

    Apple had a hit with the iPod, to think that because the iPod was a hit means any product Apple puts an i in front of will be a hit is foolish.

  • squished18

    Lloyd,

    From what I understood from the presentation, it was running a full-fledged version of OS X. But that could just been because of Mr. Jobs’ slick presentation style pulling one over a lot of us.

    If what you say is true, then yes, it’s not much of a development. If it truly is the whole OS X code running on it, then I hold to my original statement.

  • squished18

    Lloyd,

    From what I understood from the presentation, it was running a full-fledged version of OS X. But that could just been because of Mr. Jobs’ slick presentation style pulling one over a lot of us.

    If what you say is true, then yes, it’s not much of a development. If it truly is the whole OS X code running on it, then I hold to my original statement.

  • Thought

    Lloyd: The Windows Mobile implementations of the touchscreen and virtual keyboard are indeed far less ambitious than the Apple iPhone implementation. The difference in usability is huge (again, everything I state is based on the delivery of the device working as Apple promised).

    Your analogy of the pricepoints with notebook PCs makes no sense. Are you saying that price makes no difference? It makes no sense to argue that comparisons of the iPhone with micro PCs are valid in spite of the price differences. The price does matter.

    Even putting aside price differentials, the iPhone is far smaller and lighter than those micro PCs…and priced less. Those are huge differentiators in the market.

    Where I do agree with you on is that certain models of the Sony Clie probably came closest in form factor to this iPhone. But nevertheless, Sony didn’t create this phone, Apple did. If Sony had created it, I would be giving them kudos as well.

    Name one smartphone that offers the web browsing experience of the iPhone, the vivid, beautiful screen, the great multimedia experience, and the seeming ease of use. I don’t think you can.

  • Thought

    Lloyd: The Windows Mobile implementations of the touchscreen and virtual keyboard are indeed far less ambitious than the Apple iPhone implementation. The difference in usability is huge (again, everything I state is based on the delivery of the device working as Apple promised).

    Your analogy of the pricepoints with notebook PCs makes no sense. Are you saying that price makes no difference? It makes no sense to argue that comparisons of the iPhone with micro PCs are valid in spite of the price differences. The price does matter.

    Even putting aside price differentials, the iPhone is far smaller and lighter than those micro PCs…and priced less. Those are huge differentiators in the market.

    Where I do agree with you on is that certain models of the Sony Clie probably came closest in form factor to this iPhone. But nevertheless, Sony didn’t create this phone, Apple did. If Sony had created it, I would be giving them kudos as well.

    Name one smartphone that offers the web browsing experience of the iPhone, the vivid, beautiful screen, the great multimedia experience, and the seeming ease of use. I don’t think you can.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Ok thought, you say that the difference in usability of the touchscreen is huge, based on what? The fact that Steve Jobs says it is? I don’t know about you, but I haven’t sat down and played with the iPhone touchscreen yet. I have messed around with multi-touch input surfaces for audio workstations however, and while they are cool, and allow you to do some neat things that just aren’t possible with a single-touch screen, they don’t do anything to address the problems that make a touchscreen a bad idea on a communication device, namely lack of tactile feedback, and an inherent inaccuracy. Something being neat, is not the same as something being more usable.

    Oh, and who cares how usable the on-screen keyboard of an HTC Wizard is? It has a REAL keyboard! It is hard to get much more usable than that.

    Oh, and speaking of usability, what happened to handwriting recognition? Wasn’t Apple working on all sorts of handwriting recognition software? On touchscreen devices like this, it really is far more usable to have handwriting or voice recognition. I had one PalmOS or another for almost a decade, and in all that time I don’t think I ever opened the on-screen keyboard more than a handful of times.

    And yes, I am saying that when you are discussing innovation, price is meaningless. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Using your argument, I could argue that the Pearl is a far more advanced device than the iPhone, because it is half the price. Hell, the RAZR must be the most advanced phone in the world, because it is free now! I guess the RAZR is also far more advanced than the iPhone because it is smaller too!

    This is such a typical Apple product argument. Don’t you ever get tired of just toeing the company line? Look, what you are doing is pretty basic and frankly shoddy rhetoric.

    You say: “But it can browse the web so well because it has a big gorgeous screen”

    I say: “This device has a bigger, better screen, and can browse the web even better”

    You say: “It doesn’t count, it is too big!”

    Look, both an OQO and the iPhone are too big to put in the pocket of your jeans, but small enough to put in a jacket pocket. Both devices also have screens that cover their entire face. If a big wide screen is good, then a bigger wider screen is better. You are just playing a game where anything up to the size and price of the iPhone is allowable, and that is the cutoff. That is a silly, and arbitrary distinction. I could do the same thing with the any smaller phone, and as such disqualify the iPhone.

    Price matters as to how the thing will sell, but last I checked, we weren’t talking about sales figures. We are talking about whether or not this is anything new, and whether it represents any capability not currently available. It isn’t, and it doesn’t. Besides, I suspect that if you could buy an OQO with a carrier subsidy, the price wouldn’t be a different as you think. The cheapest OQO only sells for $1,100 after all. How much do you think the iPhone would be without a contract? My guess is around $900. Not all that much a price difference.

    Of course then you say:

    “Name one smartphone that offers the web browsing experience of the iPhone, the vivid, beautiful screen, the great multimedia experience, and the seeming ease of use. I don’t think you can.”

    Great, so you ask me to name any device that can do this, I do, and now you want me to name any ‘smartphone’ that can do it…

    Here, what you mean to say is:

    Name me one product with the same measurements and price, from the same carrier, running an OS called OSX, in the same colors, with the same specs, that Steve Jobs himself endorses. You can’t, because this is the most amazing device ever made!

    Gee, you’re right. How could I not see it, that Apple logo on the back is the technological innovation that allows it to outclass a Cray supercomputer in a matchbox.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Ok thought, you say that the difference in usability of the touchscreen is huge, based on what? The fact that Steve Jobs says it is? I don’t know about you, but I haven’t sat down and played with the iPhone touchscreen yet. I have messed around with multi-touch input surfaces for audio workstations however, and while they are cool, and allow you to do some neat things that just aren’t possible with a single-touch screen, they don’t do anything to address the problems that make a touchscreen a bad idea on a communication device, namely lack of tactile feedback, and an inherent inaccuracy. Something being neat, is not the same as something being more usable.

    Oh, and who cares how usable the on-screen keyboard of an HTC Wizard is? It has a REAL keyboard! It is hard to get much more usable than that.

    Oh, and speaking of usability, what happened to handwriting recognition? Wasn’t Apple working on all sorts of handwriting recognition software? On touchscreen devices like this, it really is far more usable to have handwriting or voice recognition. I had one PalmOS or another for almost a decade, and in all that time I don’t think I ever opened the on-screen keyboard more than a handful of times.

    And yes, I am saying that when you are discussing innovation, price is meaningless. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Using your argument, I could argue that the Pearl is a far more advanced device than the iPhone, because it is half the price. Hell, the RAZR must be the most advanced phone in the world, because it is free now! I guess the RAZR is also far more advanced than the iPhone because it is smaller too!

    This is such a typical Apple product argument. Don’t you ever get tired of just toeing the company line? Look, what you are doing is pretty basic and frankly shoddy rhetoric.

    You say: “But it can browse the web so well because it has a big gorgeous screen”

    I say: “This device has a bigger, better screen, and can browse the web even better”

    You say: “It doesn’t count, it is too big!”

    Look, both an OQO and the iPhone are too big to put in the pocket of your jeans, but small enough to put in a jacket pocket. Both devices also have screens that cover their entire face. If a big wide screen is good, then a bigger wider screen is better. You are just playing a game where anything up to the size and price of the iPhone is allowable, and that is the cutoff. That is a silly, and arbitrary distinction. I could do the same thing with the any smaller phone, and as such disqualify the iPhone.

    Price matters as to how the thing will sell, but last I checked, we weren’t talking about sales figures. We are talking about whether or not this is anything new, and whether it represents any capability not currently available. It isn’t, and it doesn’t. Besides, I suspect that if you could buy an OQO with a carrier subsidy, the price wouldn’t be a different as you think. The cheapest OQO only sells for $1,100 after all. How much do you think the iPhone would be without a contract? My guess is around $900. Not all that much a price difference.

    Of course then you say:

    “Name one smartphone that offers the web browsing experience of the iPhone, the vivid, beautiful screen, the great multimedia experience, and the seeming ease of use. I don’t think you can.”

    Great, so you ask me to name any device that can do this, I do, and now you want me to name any ‘smartphone’ that can do it…

    Here, what you mean to say is:

    Name me one product with the same measurements and price, from the same carrier, running an OS called OSX, in the same colors, with the same specs, that Steve Jobs himself endorses. You can’t, because this is the most amazing device ever made!

    Gee, you’re right. How could I not see it, that Apple logo on the back is the technological innovation that allows it to outclass a Cray supercomputer in a matchbox.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Ok thought, you say that the difference in usability of the touchscreen is huge, based on what? The fact that Steve Jobs says it is? I don’t know about you, but I haven’t sat down and played with the iPhone touchscreen yet. I have messed around with multi-touch input surfaces for audio workstations however, and while they are cool, and allow you to do some neat things that just aren’t possible with a single-touch screen, they don’t do anything to address the problems that make a touchscreen a bad idea on a communication device, namely lack of tactile feedback, and an inherent inaccuracy. Something being neat, is not the same as something being more usable.

    Oh, and who cares how usable the on-screen keyboard of an HTC Wizard is? It has a REAL keyboard! It is hard to get much more usable than that.

    Oh, and speaking of usability, what happened to handwriting recognition? Wasn’t Apple working on all sorts of handwriting recognition software? On touchscreen devices like this, it really is far more usable to have handwriting or voice recognition. I had one PalmOS or another for almost a decade, and in all that time I don’t think I ever opened the on-screen keyboard more than a handful of times.

    And yes, I am saying that when you are discussing innovation, price is meaningless. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Using your argument, I could argue that the Pearl is a far more advanced device than the iPhone, because it is half the price. Hell, the RAZR must be the most advanced phone in the world, because it is free now! I guess the RAZR is also far more advanced than the iPhone because it is smaller too!

    This is such a typical Apple product argument. Don’t you ever get tired of just toeing the company line? Look, what you are doing is pretty basic and frankly shoddy rhetoric.

    You say: “But it can browse the web so well because it has a big gorgeous screen”

    I say: “This device has a bigger, better screen, and can browse the web even better”

    You say: “It doesn’t count, it is too big!”

    Look, both an OQO and the iPhone are too big to put in the pocket of your jeans, but small enough to put in a jacket pocket. Both devices also have screens that cover their entire face. If a big wide screen is good, then a bigger wider screen is better. You are just playing a game where anything up to the size and price of the iPhone is allowable, and that is the cutoff. That is a silly, and arbitrary distinction. I could do the same thing with the any smaller phone, and as such disqualify the iPhone.

    Price matters as to how the thing will sell, but last I checked, we weren’t talking about sales figures. We are talking about whether or not this is anything new, and whether it represents any capability not currently available. It isn’t, and it doesn’t. Besides, I suspect that if you could buy an OQO with a carrier subsidy, the price wouldn’t be a different as you think. The cheapest OQO only sells for $1,100 after all. How much do you think the iPhone would be without a contract? My guess is around $900. Not all that much a price difference.

    Of course then you say:

    “Name one smartphone that offers the web browsing experience of the iPhone, the vivid, beautiful screen, the great multimedia experience, and the seeming ease of use. I don’t think you can.”

    Great, so you ask me to name any device that can do this, I do, and now you want me to name any ‘smartphone’ that can do it…

    Here, what you mean to say is:

    Name me one product with the same measurements and price, from the same carrier, running an OS called OSX, in the same colors, with the same specs, that Steve Jobs himself endorses. You can’t, because this is the most amazing device ever made!

    Gee, you’re right. How could I not see it, that Apple logo on the back is the technological innovation that allows it to outclass a Cray supercomputer in a matchbox.

  • Simon

    Lloyd,

    Actually I have to apologise. After two days of excitement I feel a bit stupid. It does not excite me any more. You have your point.

    to note though, they had their failures too, but they were’nt all steve’s. actually i hardly remember some of his failures.

    sorry for being rude.

    Simon

  • Simon

    Lloyd,

    Actually I have to apologise. After two days of excitement I feel a bit stupid. It does not excite me any more. You have your point.

    to note though, they had their failures too, but they were’nt all steve’s. actually i hardly remember some of his failures.

    sorry for being rude.

    Simon

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Simon, please there is no reason to apologize to me. We all get excited about new tech when it comes out. That is why we come to sites like this. I really don’t take any of it personally. I get just as worked up and excited as anyone else, just in my own ‘wet blanket’ sort of way.

    I like hearing how people think about new devices, even when I don’t agree with them, and I expect a little friction when people see things from different perspectives.

    That said, I think it is uncommonly gracious and well mannered for you to even think about apologizing, and I appreciate the gesture, even if it was not needed.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Simon, please there is no reason to apologize to me. We all get excited about new tech when it comes out. That is why we come to sites like this. I really don’t take any of it personally. I get just as worked up and excited as anyone else, just in my own ‘wet blanket’ sort of way.

    I like hearing how people think about new devices, even when I don’t agree with them, and I expect a little friction when people see things from different perspectives.

    That said, I think it is uncommonly gracious and well mannered for you to even think about apologizing, and I appreciate the gesture, even if it was not needed.

  • L. M. Lloyd

    Simon, please there is no reason to apologize to me. We all get excited about new tech when it comes out. That is why we come to sites like this. I really don’t take any of it personally. I get just as worked up and excited as anyone else, just in my own ‘wet blanket’ sort of way.

    I like hearing how people think about new devices, even when I don’t agree with them, and I expect a little friction when people see things from different perspectives.

    That said, I think it is uncommonly gracious and well mannered for you to even think about apologizing, and I appreciate the gesture, even if it was not needed.