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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?

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?

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.