You can text one handed on the iPhone.
Its keyboard actually works remarkably well.
As to the complaint about APPLE'S protectionist policies..
That's just inventing stuff to whine about.
here are the facts.
I hope they are facts, because the foregoing was merely opinion and all I have done is expressed my opinion. Your strenuous defense of Apple is noteworthy, but not everyone feels the same as you. That doesn't make them, or you, wrong.
1- Here in the States MOST people get their phones at vastly reduced prices in exchange for having the things locked to a specific carrier... so, number one, its pretty much SOP here.
Well, I don't live in the US so am not unduly concerned or interested in mobile telecoms SOP there. But, that said, the same business model is pretty much replicated in Europe too, although not all networks lock all phones.
PAYG phones are nearly always network locked and more expensive but then end users are free to unlock them as they wish. The iPhone is perhaps the only phone (that I know of) where a network/phone manufacturer has gone to such lenghts to try and prevent it being used on another's network. Some blackberry functionality is also network dependent but in a different, less insidious way.
2- the iPhone is a NEW telecom paradigm... it replaces traditional cell phones with add on features with a COMPUTER that has a telecom feature. It is switching the entire idea of telephony to being ancillary to its usefulness as a mobile net client and software platform. This will allow the user to Update their phone, rather than replace them to get new features.
Get over yourself.
I have had many (most, perhaps all in fact) of those FEATURES (do you know how irritating THAT is) on several phones for well over five years. I'd argue that to a significant degree Apple is in fact, playing catch up.
In all fairness, mobile comms in the US had always struck me as being some way behind the times, compared to Europe and Asia. I think that is causing you to paint an overly rosy picture of the iPhone's impact - your asinine remark about SMS being merely one giveway.
3- Apple's products are consistently satisfying and predictable in their functions BECAUSE they exercise control over both hardware and software. The argument that it would be better if it were more open is made by folks who don't understand that apple's products are good specifically because they exert more control over them.
You mean, they're as satisfying and predictable as the end user finds them to be, right?
I have no idea what the rest of the above paragraph means, oh wait - Apple's products are better because they restrict what people (who may pay considerable sums for them) can do with them only as Apple say they can ... sorry, that doesn't work for me and I have a feeling I'm not alone.
I said I understand Apple's motivation, and I do, but that doesn't mean I must agree with the lengths they go to to enforce it, and I don't. I believe that is my right.
4- Apple is not doing this alone... having an iPhone that can connect thru other providers would not get you anything... because other providers do not have the installed equipment nor software compatibility to enable many of the iPhones features.
Perhaps you didn't read my post fully. I believe I stated that all UK networks (other than couple of the virtuals) support all the iPhone features, which quite frankly, in telecoms terms are
nothing exceptional. But, perhaps you could list those you consider groundbreaking ...?
Losing half the product's functionality in return for being able to use a differnet provider? WHo the fuck cares about the provider? I don't give a damn about what CABLE company is sending me television signals....
Now you're just being obtuse, or willfully missing the point. But, for the sake of argument why should I be denied the right to use a given device on my chosen network, regardless of the fact that its functionality may (or may not) be restricted? It's called freedom of choice. It's like denying people access to all of the Internet because their dial up isn't fast enough to support parts of it.
The primary issue is that Apple lives and dies on the reputation of its products and the satisfying customer experience of how well they work.
They are unwilling to allow YOU to connect to a provider that will result in your having a poor opinion of the product. They want you to connect thru a provider that is on board with their quality demands and that will help ensure that your experience of the product is superior.
Your evangalising for Apple is getting old. Are you on their PR staff?
iPhone comms functionality isn't anything special, the main innovations are in the interface. The restrictions are primarily commercially driven - any network that can support a Blackberry can support an iPhone. I think you know this but are blinded by the err big Apple.
I get it that folks don't like to be told they can't have what they want... but seriously... Apple's intent is ALWAYS to ensure you are NOT frustrated with USING the product...
Apple's design philosophy is that the experience of using the product is what matters most.
That's rather naive. Apple's intent is also to ensure users are tied to suppliers and providers it approves of. I wonder why ...
I don't doubt Apple wish their customers to have a good opinion of their product (then, I'd argue that's SOP for most manufacturers of products) but surely you're not so naive as to believe it's motivation is entirely altruistic, are you?
The new touch screen blackberry is a recognition that this new idea for what a cell phone ought to be and how it ought to work is the better idea.
But neither of these was the first touch screen PDA type phone, not by a long way. I purchased my first years ago.
Thus far, cell phones have taken a 2 year development cycle to produce a product with a 6 month sales life, before some other company comes out with a phone with a better gizmo added on.
Your point being ...?
The iPhone paradigm will allow one piece of hardware to last much longer, and require far less modification to keep up with new features as they come online.
Enough with the paradigm please. It isn't one, it's simply an evolution in technology. It does little or nothing that other phones don't do, it simply does some of them better.
But I am equally sure that the iPhone will always be somewhat ahead of the curve given Apple's software/hardware experience and its significant lead.
Until it's overtaken, yes.
And all the complaints of MMS and the like... the nice thing about that is that its ALL addressable thru software. Its not something burned into a chipset, so you can know that when it becomes available,you won't have to buy a new phone.
I was referring to out of the box functionality, as I wrote. I don't recall saying that because it wasn't built in it wasn't possible. My telephone didn't do a number of things it now does through software. So what - oh yes I could choose what software I wanted, from a wide and low cost range! If I wanted, I could even write my own.
Pictures?....How my son send me pictures is uploads them to his Mac photoalbum and then simply emails me the link.
Works fine.
No, it works fine for him and for
you Phil - do you begin to see my point?
For example; I can take, edit and send a picture to another's phone, to my home network, to an online service, to a digital photo frame etc using out of the box functionality - without leaving the camera application.
On a purely practical level, your son must utilise at least two applications and you must undertake at least one - which may cost you both money (whereas receiving an MMS in Europe does not and in many cases neither does sending one). Some paradigm.
Sorry, I see no new facts from you, just more opinion. I'm not trying to knock the iPhone, really I'm not I like it a great deal. I'm simply trying to put it in some perspective. You appear to be in denial that it (and Apple) are anything but perfection.
