Slashdot Mirror
iPhone Gets Better Battery, Scratch Resistant Glass
Dekortage writes "Prior to its much-hyped launch on June 29, Apple has announced upgrades to its battery life (almost 40% more than originally announced) and scratch resistance (using "optical quality glass" rather than plastics). The announcement also includes a comparison chart pitting the iPhone against smartphones from Nokia, Samsung, Palm, and Blackberry."
Apart from not selecting like for like that's arguably the most horribly biased selection of measurements I've ever seen used in a comparison chart. I know the aim of the chart is to try and make the iPhone look good but when doing these type of charts most companies at least give their competitors some credit so as not to look too desperate. Probably the most obvious is the first - thickness comparison without weight, width and height comparison? It's a shame it doesn't list things like features either because that's where the iPhone really fails miserably, it simply has no killer app like the Nokia N95's built in GPS.
Posted anonymously to avoid the Apple fanboy army that plagues Slashdot and that can't accept that Apple aren't always capable of producing a decent product.
Not that most/any battery lives up to its ratings, but in terms of announced figures, this is pretty impressive. Other smartphones out there tend to have 4-5 hour talk time batteries. Maybe 8 hour talk times will stem complaints of non-replaceable batteries a bit. After all, if you're on your cellphone more than 8 hours a day, you might need to re-evaluate your life... even as a business user ;)
And 24 hours audio playback? Where do I sign up? Goodbye recharging my cell phone every night and my iPod every other.
-Daniel
Those are upgrades every user will appreciate. Battery life is obviously good, and remember all the furor over iPod Nano scratches?
Look.. This thing can have all the features in the world, but when it's revealed that it'll cost $800-$1000, who's going to actually buy one? The iPhone suffers from PS3-itis.
Why dont they simply use polycarbonate and use the same coatings used on glasses? There are some anti-scratch coatings for polycarbonate that give you nearly the same durability as glass does with far less weight and problems.
Although I have wondered this cince the Ipod came out. anti scratch coatings are pretty darn impressive.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
How is the actual voice quality since well it's a phone and all?
A little while back, Dvorak (the original, not the popular term for a retard) was claiming the iPhone would have 40 minutes talk-time [the link doesn't go to Dvorak's site].
So, where's the retraction, John - after all, any *responsible* journalist's priority is the truth, not just seeking attention for himself at the expense of others...
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
Steve Jobs was even kind enough to include safa...er.....a development platform.
Looking at these phones it becomes clear that battery life was a secret feature of the iPhone, probably known to Apple all along. It's clearly one of the intended design features of the phone. By eliminating the keyboards (and sliders), and stylus storage slots, Apple wound up with a phone that not only has almost twice as much space available for the display screen, but also has nearly twice as much room for battery. Sure, they probably put a lot of effort into power management features of OS X, and other optimizations in the hardware design, but the biggest win is undoubtedly the physical design.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
I used to think the NFL was the world's greatest hype machine, with the annual orgy of coverage about the Super Bowl, a game that's usually not as interesting as the commercials.
But Apple has probably gotten something like a billion dollars of free publicity for six months about the iPhone, which almost nobody has actually held in their hands yet. I'm convinced that the business last week with Safari was planned way in advance, as was this bit with the batteries and the screen, so that in the last few weeks before the iPhone came out Apple would be getting more gobs of free press.
Is there anybody who works the press as well as Steve Jobs?
Seven Hours of video playback? Color me skeptical.
And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
The battery probably didn't even change. The only difference is that the old numbers came from engineering, and the new numbers came from PR :P
(I kid, I kid. I think it's a pretty sweet little device, personally.)
Game... blouses.
Cell phones get dropped fairly regularly. I'm sure the same goes for ipods. Will the iphone be able to withstand a fall from 3 or 4 feet onto carpeting or concrete?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
..and the new Intel Macs were supposed to be four-to-seven times faster than a 1.7GHz PPC and have 4 hours battery life.
I think I might just wait for the first few 100k sales before I look at the next 'comparison chart' from Apple Corp..
- Price
- # of carriers on which the system is supported
- Available SDK for developers
Apple makes nice hardware, but they want to make a buck just like all the other companies with phones in that lineup. The chart was pretty, but what I'd really like to see is some independent site doing a reasonably fair comparison.coding is life
I've been putting off purchasing a Nokia N800 until iPhone appears in stores. I don't find the chart to be helpful because it doesn't list the N800 or other competitive phones.
Mow the lawn, teach me Spanish? Is it waterproof, shockproof? Can it float fly and sit in an oven? Will it let me run my personal build of BSD? No? Then it's shit and we should shun it and hate it.
How many N95's sell anyway? They cost $800 (list from Dynamism).
Why did Apple choose to use millimetres to represent the thickness comparisons, but then use inches to represent the screen size comparisons? Is this some kind of marketing ploy made to emphasise the minuteness of the millimetre, and the heft of the inch?
How about they pick a unit of measure and stick with it? If you want to describe thickness (I'm surprised they didn't say thinness) in mm, then use mm/cm for the screen size too.
Wireless. Less plastic than a Palm. Lame.
Will there be an ssh client or an rdp or ICA client for the thing?
What will the "keyboard" be like? The adverts are really piss poor on details..
Add some real communication applications so I can quit lugging around a laptop when on call and I'll be intereted!
If AJAX is truly only going to be the way to develop apps for the phone then give us 3G. Sorry, I'm not gonna do ajax surfing over a lousy GPRS connection...
"Where quality is like a dead stinking rat - you just can't miss it."
Why does it fucking matter?
Of course it's a marketing ploy. What do you think that chart is? Pure marketing.
Realistically, they probably picked millimeters for the thickness because you can be more accurate with fewer decimal digits than inches at the dimension they're examining. On the other hand, screen sizes are almost always measured in inches.
Presumably this device will be compatible with the iPhone, and may assist you in your desire to perform other tasks with your phone: iGasm.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
iPhone is great and all, but as long as they are paired up with ATT, I'm not touching them. Hell, given the price tag, I wouldn't touch them anyway. But ATT? No thanks
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
proper broadband (3G), skype, cheap plan (voice+data for $30/mo), no sim lock.
the rest (GPS etc) isnt going to be a killer app.
How exactly is removing features to extend other features brilliant? Don't forget they removed the battery cover, circuitry for 3G, GPS, etc etc.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
they are going to print money with this thing..
though, I am still thinking I will wait until a version 2 or so.. glad I never bought a first gen ipod
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
People are all excited about this thing, and I don't understand why. Is it the iPrefix somehow making people think this will be as big a deal as the iPod? The difference here is that the iPod came in at the beginning of a new market, while the iPhone is trying to crack an existing and highly-competitive one. And I'm just not seeing anything special.
Let's see.
It's expensive. It only works on one provider. And it's closed platform.
If it used a SIM card, and had an open API, I'd be a lot more impressed.
As it stands, I'll wait for the Openmoko.
Can`t the iPod be recharged with human warmness, as in the most cases it is located in persons pocket ? And the backside could be a solar based recharger. Heh, once I even cracked my head if it could be possible to recharge a laptop through WiFi :D
No. You posted AC because you posted a flamebait troll. Claiming to be afraid of the "fanboy" is an interesting ploy. I think you would have found that the mod points awarded to your AC post wouldn't have been much different if you had posted under your regular login, Mr. Ballmer.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Exactlly....why the iphone will be a flash in pan at best 1) no one likes ATT 2) too expensive especially given roll out of several devices like VIA intros NanoBook Ultra Mobile Device - $600 ultraportable laptop and cheaper like devices... 3) touch screens s*ck, they make your finger tips sore after extended use especially on glass 4) glass? so is it unbreakable glass? or does one drop take out the iphone? 5) as usual Apple overprices a combined component item charging the max for each component instead of discounting a grouping.... as for example selling 5400 rpm drives in their high priced pcs when everyone else uses 7200 rpm unless its a cheapo....
If you look back to the beginning, the whole REASON AJAX developed was so that you could update a small portion of a page without a whole refresh.
If you need lots of bandwidth for an AJAX application, you need to rethink what you are doing. AJAX is perfect in combination with a somewhat but not terribly fast connection like Edge, and it will also keep designers from building applications that essentially require WiFi or 3G to function, instead of the far more widespread coverage EDGE has.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just look on eBay
:)
In mid 2008
No 3G = No Iphone. This is a dealbreaker.
nuts to wifi and gps, I need speed. I use it as a dsl modem on the freeway baby.
The iPhone, from this chart, essentially comes with two batteries compared to other devices. That was one complaint...
But even if that were not enough for you, there is a viable solution to extended power I have seen used with Windows Mobile phones - a small external battery pack that can recharge the phone. It's around the same size as a normal phone battery, and gives quite a bit more power.
In fact, it's such a good idea - they are already being made today. That's for the iPod, but since the iPhone uses the same dock connector...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The current scratch resistant coatings are problematic. I want Optically Transparent, Scratch-Resistant, Diamond-Like Carbon Coatings on my iPhone.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
"Optical quality: would that be like "industrial strength," "high definition," and "premium?"
What would you call the high-index polycarbonate plastic in my eyeglasses? I certainly hope it's "optical quality" plastic...
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
It's a cute comparison, but my Palm does:
SSH
VNC (with and without SSH)
IMAPS and SMTPS with multiple account support
NES emulator
Doubles as a broadband modem
Google Maps
IRC
IM (AIM, YM, Jabber, GTalk, MSN, ICQ)
Full keyboard for typing up emails
As for hours, my phone is constantly connected to IM and email, often times notifying me of new emails before thunderbird does on my laptop. All that, with occasional phone usage, and I get about 12 hours out of it.
Looks like the iPhone has a beautiful interface for looking at pictures and playing music, but it won't give me the tools I need to leave the laptop at the office when I take the afternoon off.
Best of all, I'm not tied to Cingular. I jumped ship when AT&T started having lots of connection issues. I have numerous friends who still use Cingular, and I refer to them as "two-call" friends, since the connection usually takes two calls to get through. I don't have that problem calling Verizon, Sprint, or T-Mobile friends.
The fanboys would also pick up on it too, trying to think of excuses why their list wasn't a list of features that made their chosen product look good compared to the competition, but rather was a list features that mattered. I see nothing has changed in that regard.
If you're on a business trip for a couple of days without access to a charger then it sure would be nice to have that exteneded talk time. Though it can be considered irrelevant if it uses a standard mini-USB connection as you can always find a shop that'll sell the cable for less than $10.
It uses the same dock connector with other iPods, so it's almost as easy to find a charger... or if you are bringing a laptop, just remember the iPod sync cable.
However there are other external battery solutions like this one.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Furthermore, you're not proud of it. If you were proud of it, you would post under your account.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Exactlly....why the iphone will be a flash in pan at best 1) no one likes ATT 2) too expensive especially given roll out of several devices like VIA intros NanoBook Ultra Mobile Device - $600 ultraportable laptop and cheaper like devices... 3) touch screens s*ck, they make your finger tips sore after extended use especially on glass 4) glass? so is it unbreakable glass? or does one drop take out the iphone? 5) as usual Apple overprices a combined component item charging the max for each component instead of discounting a grouping.... as for example selling 5400 rpm drives in their high priced pcs when everyone else uses 7200 rpm unless its a cheapo....
You can't upgrade a product that doesn't yet exist. The original announcement was probably deliberately misleading so they could announce an "improvement" just before the product is made available.
Since AT&T has about 1/3 of the U.S. market, that would mean about 3% of AT&T subscribers would need to switch for the iPhone to capture 1% of the market. This doesn't account for people who will switch carriers.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
If that's not fanboism what is?
Prediction based on past performance?
Apple has shown they can do a good job with UI on a small device, and furthermore have a lot of demonstration videos that convincingly show the utility of this small device. Is it so unthinkable to say, I have liked products from this company before, I'll trust them with a new purchase now?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I read that review too and that was my first thought until I used my Q for a few weeks. I have Exchange pushing email, I do some web browsing (amazingly fast with EVDO by the way!) and use a couple of POP 3 mailboxes. I get over 4 hours talk time most days, and given my routine use I have no problem making it through the average workday. No, it's not 8, but I'll also believe that figure when I see real world numbers.
I notice their chart doesn't compare the bandwidth of the various phones. That and the need to use 2 hands is why I won't touch an iPhone in it's current incarnation.
Still, I would expect a chart put out by Nokia to target things that make their phones look good, or a chart from Samsung to be tailored in favor of Samsung. This is just marketing fluff at this point. The proof will be when people actually have the things in their hands and start using them.
I own a Nokia N95. For all that it does (wifi, integrated gps, bluetooth, 5 megapixel camera, 3G support), the batter life is decent. I go 2 days without recharge with good amount of bluetooth and camera use. The iPhone is truly a gimmick, and it certainly will not live up to the hype.
Oh, did I mention that you actually program the N95 with C++ Symbian API, Java, and Python? Trying doing that on the iPhone...
Apple released the ROUND MOUSE a few years ago that was a real case of design takes the lead over utility....
The cool thing would be to use sapphire or diamond on the screen surface. Not only would it be great for bragging rights, it isn't that expensive. Supermarket scanner glasses are often coated with sapphire or diamond; otherwise they have to be replaced every few months. Twelve hours a day of canned goods being dragged across the scanner glass is worse than anything that happens to a PDA-like device. Sapphire coated scanner glass even holds up at Home Depot.
The Nokia 8800 has a sapphire window.
The AT&T 3G network isn't widely deployed in the U.S. Since the iPhone supports WiFi, high speed access to networks will be available to people on the iPhone in WiFi hotspots. EDGE will work fine for SMS text chats and email. When the 3G HSDPAnetwork gets rolled out more widely, we will undoubtedly see 3G capable iPhones to use it. Meanwhile, EDGE is deployed in 13,000 cities, 3G in only a few dozen.
See the AT&T Wireless coverage chart (and see link below the chart for a list of 3G cities).
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
By far, the iphone is the best phone for web browsing. I hope iPhone 2 has even higher resolution (meanwhile the "one step behinders" (motorola, blackberry, sony ericsson, nokia etc) decide that the original iphone resolution must be optimal. It's clear that other phone vendors believe that web developers should make applications that work on QVGA resolution. iPhone's philosophy is different, they will make the device capable of having a decent experience browsing regular websites ..they bend to the consumer not the other way around.
.. other phone vendors will wrongly claim it's the itunes tie in that is making the phone successful.
It's a design philosophy that no other company has. Well outside of maybe Nintendo.
Now on the negative side of the iPhone the fact that the keyboard takes up a portion of the screen probably isn't the best for IM chatting or email, but the decent resolution makes up for it.
Now as the iPhone takes the market by storm
I didn't know about Apple's round mouse, but I used something like it on a DEC workstation in the 80's. The really bad thing is that if you tried to grab it without looking, you couldn't tell which way was up by touch.
But what is rdp? ICA?
The chart is very clearly focused on a small set of features related to key differentiators of the iPhone. It's designed to attract people, to make them want to learn more about the iPhone. People who are curious will explore the feature set of the relative devices beyond this little chart. A giant chart with every feature of all devices would not attract nor interest anyone.
Your use of the term "fanboy" is unnecessary, as no actual fanboy performing actual fanboy stunts is cited. Attempting to use the propaganda technique of creating a boogeyman, "the evil fanboy" who pollutes your, uh, your advertising world by making excuses for, uh, advertisements, undermines any rational argument you may attempt to make.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Congratulations, you've caught on to Apple's marketing secret. Now sit back and wait for the men in black turtlenecks to cart you off for re-education.
I think you have that exactly backwards. The iPhone is limited by it's thickness and weight. Any manufacturer can add a bigger battery if they're willing to sacrifice in those areas. With the iPhone, removing a keyboard that consumes no power and replacing it with a double-sized screen leads to more power consumption, not less. Apple has had to contend with a device that uses more power for its size than its competitors. It is also using an OS not specifically written for low power devices. That doesn't mean that the device will be a failure but it sure indicates the unlikeliness of your claim. It's far from clear that battery life is the secret feature; everything suggests the opposite.
/. fashion, the author claims in the title that the iPhone gets a better battery. Not true, of course, as the iPhone gets better battery *life* *ratings*. I'm curious what the new weight *rating* is especially with glass replacing plastic for the screen.
I'll also note that, in true
In the winter that's fine... you have coat pockets and such. Where do you put all of your do-dads in the summer? Wallet, mp3 player, phone, keys, change, etc. overload your average pair of pants, especially when you live in the city and have to consider the back pockets off-limits.
Tell me you don't wear a hip-pack!
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Parent's got it right. In terms of subscriber numbers:
In 2005, US market was about 200M phones, so 1% is 2M phones. AT&T (then Cingular) had 61M subscribers. Thus, 2/61 = 3.3% of AT&T subscribers.
Also, roughly 1/3 of all mobile phones in the US are replaced each year, so 20M AT&T subscribers would be expected to upgrade this year, even in the absence of the iPhone as enticement. So 10% of this more motivated group would also net the desired 1%.
As parent mentioned, this doesn't account for carrier hoppers.
The parent to your post makes two primary statements, which you cite:
- corrects a gross overstatement in the price of the iPhone, e.g. presents a verified fact which should have been known to the grandparent
- states a personal preference that price is not the only consideration
This is not fanboism. This is a rational argument, a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.Unfortunately there is no equivalent vaguely pejorative term which can be applied to people with your particular handicap, that being an obsessive refusal to consider facts in the assessment of a value proposition of goods in a marketplace, a pathological unwillingness to look beyond "sticker price" accompanied by lashing out with name calling when facts are presented for your consideration.
The term "fascist" is generally applied to people who use propaganda techniques like name calling to silence people with different viewpoints, rather than engaging in a rational discussion. That seems a little harsh.
In any case, your use of the term fanboism here represents an ad hominem attack. It serves only to undermine your credibility and does nothing to further your point. Since you didn't actually make one, perhaps that doesn't matter to you. It matters to the rest of us.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Hammer time.
It seems to me, that they are just a little different.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
I have one and have dropped it a number of times with no ill effect. I think that unless the screen strikes a pointy thing directly, the durability depends on the strength of the case. If the case is strong and stiff enough to resist deformation, the glass won't break. So far so good with my iPod.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4885/untitledma5. jpg
And it's still missing stuff like.. you know GPS :)
Get a travel wallet that has a belt loop and then you can keep your keys in one pocket and the phone in the other. The change can go in either one. Leave the mp3 player at home and focus on your environment.
Those coatings help prevent the minor surface scratches (often called fogging) that can occur when people clean their plastic lenses with their cotton t-shirts. They don't do anything to prevent actual gouges of the lens material. If you put your polycarb glasses in your pocket with your keys and coins, they will get scratched--coating or no.
For real scratch and gouge resistance, glass is better. It is much harder, and the property is intrinsic--nothing to wear off or deform.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
For those who are interested:
Apple iPhone
115 x 61 x 11.6mm
135 g
Nokia N95
99 x 53 x 21 mm
120 g
Samsung Blackjack
113 x 59 x 12 mm
106 g
Blackberry Curve 8300
107 x 60 x 15 mm
111 g
Palm Treo 750
111 x 58 x 22 mm
153 g
I see that you're also unable to click links and find things out for yourself. I'll take that as strike two. :P
Would it really be that hard to add HSDPA or even UMTS support? One of the commercials advertises 'real internet' but EDGE is only about 4 times faster than dialup. I'd rather have faster speeds than 'scratch resistant screens'. That's what cases are for.
What's hilarious is Jobs compares this thing to other "smartphones"... we have YET to see the phone fit into this category. Put a huge battery into my 5 year old Nokia and it'd get kickass talk time too. Further, it's great how the so-called upgrades made 11 days before launch will apparently be thoroughly untested, and further, address many of the problems iPod users have complained about with the recent nano and other portable apple electronics--which of course Apple has taken no responsibility for. At least it will be a sexy phone.
Reminds of an ancient TV cigarette commercial where their cigarettes were 2.55 inches long compared to industry standard 2.54 inches - "just a silly little millimeter longer": Benson & Hedges 101s.
cargo pants, carpenter pants, and any other pants with random pockets are fucking retarded.
So write me a ticket, Fashion Cop.
buy regular pants.
Then I wouldn't have extra pockets... Duh!
glass? 'cause that's a good idea.~
for those complaining of size and not fitting in pockets ,i saw 1 person whose pockets it did fit into :)
steve jobs during the recent event where he and bill gates were present together ;)
No phone has 4 gig of memory, the damn desktop you posted your tripe from probably doesn't even have that much. Memory means RAM dickwad.
The Apple iPhone is a very attractive phone, but it seems to lack Skype support. http://forum.skype.com/index.php?showtopic=74159 http://www.disruptivetelephony.com/2007/01/apples_ iphone_a.html
Lack of SDK means we just have to wait until people hack the iPhone so Skype support might be added through homebrew.
When the RAZR cell phone was first launched, I had a friend who bought one. I asked him how much he paid, and he said 600 dollars. Granted he is the type who wants the latest gizmo, but it proves there is a market for 600-dollar phones.
Now, here comes the iPhone with a great deal more functionality and hype to go with it. I think they will sell a few.
Apple has a marketing group. I am sure they crunched the numbers before any engineer put a pencil to paper...
Please do not feed the trolls.
Though I did like the content.
This chart adds Ericsson for an even more fair comparision!
m parison-chart-follow-up.html
http://superzealot.blogspot.com/2007/06/iphone-co
(yes, belogspam. sue me)
Here's a comparison chart:
Slashdot | Digg
---------- --------
Apple Fanboys: Yes Yes
Bad Moderation: Yes Yes
Obviously Slashdot is now Digg based on this chart!
His nick name isn't "blow" for nuthin.
I don't think the iPhone's "superiority" on the above bullet points is anywhere near as conclusive as you seem to think. I think it's pretty comparable, which is awkward, considering the obsolescence of the comparison model.
scary how good your words match the "updated" chart:
m parison-chart-follow-up.html
http://superzealot.blogspot.com/2007/06/iphone-co
I told you to stop posting on Slashdot!
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I am glad you have several reasons not to buy an iPhone, leaves an open slot for someone who does want one.
1) I admit that AT&T is a risk (customer service wise), but remember Apple when to Verizon first and Verizon chose not to play.
2) the problem with ultra mobile device is that it is not a phone, it's an ultra mobile device
3) apparently texting on tiny little buttons of existing phones doesn't make your finger tips sore at all, making you a very unique person.
4) clearly Apple is in a lose-lose scenario with you: They do plastic and you'd probably freak about how everything gets scratched up. They do glass and you freak out how easily it will break. Do you avoid glass/ceramic objects at all costs because you are prone to dropping it?
5) yes, Apple charges a premium for delivering cutting edge software/design. If you've ever owned a BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Mercedes, you'll know that you often pay a premium for a brand. There is much more that goes with a brand than just component pricing.
But you don't have to pay, go get a Nokia or Motorola whatever and move on. Very strange how folks just love to bitch about how they won't be buying an item. If you're not planning to ever buy the item in question, then you're not even a *potential* customer and really offer little value to the argument.
Great creative comeback, Einstein.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
Your phone is 5.8 in. in circumference.
The iPhone is 5.72 in. in circumference.
The iPhone will have more room around it than your current phone does in said pants.
good UI design. That's all this is folks, it's a phone with no buttons and what seems to be a very well thought-out and useful user interface.
You people (none of you, especially not the software developers) understand how important that is. Get a clue.
What was the iPod anyway? It was "just an mp3 player" when it was first announced, and everyone thought it would flop. You could get the "same thing" for half the price with even more features! Why would anyone buy it? Oh, right, it had an amazing user interface and was beautifully designed. Oh, that.
What were Apple stores anyway? They were just another niche computer store, when they were first announced they were predicted to flop just like every other company's foray into that market. You could get the same thing for cheaper online, or from a big name like Best Buy, why would you go to the branded store? Oh, right, they have incredible customer service and are beautifully designed, essentially a great store UI. Right. Forgot about that.
So what's the iPhone anyway? It's just a phone, you can get the same thing for half the price with even more features! Why would anyone buy it? Pssh.
That's exactly what's being echoed back and forth in the technical crowd about this thing, but look at the market -- Slashdot readers are not who they're targeting. They're aiming for real people, specifically iPod users, and if you have any idea how big that market is... well...
No one here gets it. You people are all caught up on features and specs and parts and price, but it's the whole picture that makes an amazing product. None of the cell phone companies get it either, no one's nailed a cell phone UI yet, every interface is confusing as heck and looks like a Super Nintendo's running the graphics.
Apple gets it. If that's not obvious by the success of the iPod, the apple stores, the Mac laptops, OSX, their entire image in the US market... they have everything from product design to quality to marketing to customer service down, and that is why they work. They get it.
You don't get it. Look at the big picture. You all will look back on your stupid one-track criticisms in two to three years and wish you had bought Apple stock, and threads like these will be linked to like "LOL Thread about the reaction to the iPhone announcement... look how dumb they were."
"!"
2 - Don't think they've thought of that maybe? Nah, they're just going to release it with a crappy touch-screen keyboard even though the rest of it is well designed. This touch screen isn't a PetSmart kiosk touch screen, I promise you.
"!"
Guys, I'm not a fanboy of any of these phones. I'd love to have an iphone or even a blackjack for that matter, but the chart Apple is showing was simply a marketing ploy. I made a new and improved chart with just three phones for simplicity, but it shows the Iphone, the Nokia N95 and the Samsung Blackjack. It adds the weight, the true maximum talk time (not apples version of N95 or blackjack talk time and other stuff like data speed etc. Let me know what you guys think. I'll add some other phones to the chart later today. http://brentevans.blogspot.com/2007/06/chart-apple -forgot-to-release-on-iphone.html
i am spending $500 for an iPhone because it will sync properly with my Mac.
I have already spent twice that on a veriety of phones and software packages that claim to sync with my Mac, but in every case - Treo, Blackberry, Symbian - it only sorta works, and usually requires me to backup my old address book and stickies file prior to use because i KNOW that whatever craptastic 3rd party software i'm going to be forced to use will suck ass and not work.
SE and Moto phones were close to okay - but SE only makes phones 2 and a half inches thick, and Moto phones could have a slower UI in them, but would have to have a waterwheeled abacus for a CPU for that to be possible.
The iPhone is fast, slim, and will not treat me, a Mac user, like a second-class citizen. For that reason alone - i couldn't give a shit how expensive it is. Many mac users i know feel the same...
of course, for all i know, software for windows for all those phones could blow ass too, but you don't hear any bitching because... well... we're talking about Windows users, right?
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
I'm looking forward to the Neo1973... my ability to bend the phone to my will is more important to me.
Eh, everyone's comparing on the wrong points...
1. Does it get everything right with the UI in harmony with its features in harmony with high quality, in harmony with beauty and great design, balanced with good customer service, marketability, fashion, desirability, user needs and usability, all understood and designed-in from the start?
Oh right, it's the balance of everything together, not individual features, that people want... ohhhh we are so closed minded in the technology world..... but Apple's not.
(There should be light bulbs going on in the parts of your brain that connect combinations of different discrete fields and views right now, if they're not then you didn't get a good enough liberal arts education (probably a one-track engineering student right?), and should enroll in the nearest university).
"!"
You keep using that phrase,straw man. I do not think it means what you think it means. You see, I didn't misrepresent my parent poster's opinion. You, however, misrepresented my argument by mischaracterizing it as a "straw man" argument when it was not. Thus it is you, not I, who have constructed the straw man argument. That, by the way, is an example of irony.
Furthermore, by assuming that I've made a straw man argument, and then asserting without any other evidence that I've done so, you have also provided a nice example of begging the question (aka "petitio principii").
Thank you for providing a two-fer example for logical fallacies with such brevity.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
You can fit more than seven hours of video into eight gigabytes of memory. In fact, you can condense an entire feature-length film into a pretty good-quality video at 700MB, enough to fit it into a CDROM - at DVD resolution.
If you're willing to sacrifice resolution and frame rate, you can probably get days of video into 8GB.
And if the joke was something else, it just wasn't funny. Sorry if I can't detect stupid humor.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Of course, at 4GB you'd be watching the same 30 minute clip 14 times back to back...
int* p;
char* c;
just kidding
-Screen size: All other devices have a keypad.
-Talk time: I don't know about the others but N95 has 3G and iPhone only 2G.
-Display surface: Only iPhone has a touch display.
-24h audio playback sounds quite impressive.
I wasn't trying to claim superiority, but I did intend to show that the iPhone does have its strengths. I don't think buying an iPhone necessarily makes one dumb--it's a nice little device (based on the specs--that's all we've been able to see). Some people think I'm dumb to buy a Mac when PCs are so much cheaper. I don't want to run Linux or Windows--I want MacOS X. It's not dumb--it's a preference.
I don't think anyone is happy with the unholy union between Apple and ATT/Cingular because the price point and service are the dumb part. Personally, I don't think sales will be as explosive as people seem to think it will be--unless all of the potential buyers are ready to pay through the nose for the service contract and the locked unsubsidized unit.
After the unlocked GSM versions leak out of Europe in Q4, we'll probably see the prices drop.
If it were cheaper and Apple released a freakin' SDK for it, I think the critics might like the iPhone better.
The deal breaker for people like me is the fact that I don't have to purchase or install Missing Sync to get basic synchronization to work. And by that, I mean clean sync between my address book and my iCal (the Apple calendar not the standard), iTunes, and iPhoto--all the things I use. Since it is also an iPod, my iTMS purchased music (hard to find classic jazz and orchestral music that is out of print) transfers nicely.
For now, I'm still happy with my aging Treo 600 and my iPod. When it's time to replace BOTH my phone and my iPod, the combined cost will equal or greater to the iPhone.
PS> Yes--memory is an ambiguous term. I should know better to be more precise because Slashdot weenies split hairs about such a general term for storage (a form of memory).
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
Well, I did read it just before I saw this post. I compared the two phones (iPhone and the 8125) side-by-side to compare them. I must have been looking at an outdated spec sheet on the ATT site.
I'm not a rabid fanboy, but I don't think the iPhone deserves all of the "hater taters" its getting from the slashdot snobs. The ATT/Apple deal does suck, but the device itself looks pretty cool and appears to use the technology in intuitive ways. I bet Rev2 will be worth buying.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
Why not list the iMate Jasjam device alongside those others? Frankly, is pisses all over the crackberry and that useless Nokia. (Both of which I tried out)
http://www.clubimate.com/t-DETAILS_JASJAM.aspx
I've been using this phone/PDA/computer/camera/MP3 player/video conference unit for about 3 months now, and at $1198 New Zealand (wholesale), it's a bargain, especially with a 2GB micro-SD card thrown in.
How many escape pods are there? "NONE,SIR!" You counted them? "TWICE, SIR!"
The truth is, it needs a really powerful battery. I can run my iPod nano battery down halfway in one day of off-and-on use, if I'm switching songs a lot (which turns on the backlight, draining the battery). My Motorola cell phone battery will last through two or three days of normal use. Imagine putting them both in one device, and without a really good battery, it will need to be charged at least once a day.
One of the things I look forward to is that the iPhone will have a battery display like the iPod (which appears to go down in about 10% increments) as opposed to my Motorola's battery display, which has only three bars. (If you go into the menu on the Motorola, and go to the battery information, it will display either 2/6, 4/6, or 6/6, depending on the status of the three bars. WTF? Why not use 1/3, 2/3, and 3/3 if your battery display is that imprecise? Awful design that gives the false impression of precision...)
Sent from my iPhone
Nothing wrong with the Apple stuff, my next laptop is 90%+ likely to be an Apple. But yeah, the hype in the geeksphere over this thing is way beyond anything I can see.
That's bullshit, I don't have a figure handy but at around half of the machines running Mac OS X are notebooks. It's absolutely built for low power devices, plus it's a far far more mature operating system, which means Apple's engineers will have spent a ton of development-hours improving battery life/power management.
There is a reason mac notebooks get 4 to 6 hours of battery life. And yes, my iBook does get the "up to 6 hours" apple was claiming when I bought it.
Apple released the ROUND MOUSE a few years ago that was a real case of design takes the lead over utility
The failing of the mouse wasn't that it was round, it was that it was also very small. This was good if you held the mouse in an uncommon way (with your fingers instead of your palm) or if you were a child with small hands. Holding the mouse like that is actually superior from an RSI standpoint, and the original iMac it shipped with was intended to be usable by children, and somehow those demands mistakenly overrode all others at the time.
It was a terrible design for everyone else, of course, but it wasn't made that way just for show.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
I didn't buy an iPod to put 3rd party software on it. I use it to make calls.
Apparently that was a Fruedian slip when I mean to say "I use it to play MP3s", but I'm still not going to buy the iPhone at $500 and if ATT is the provider.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
So - come on Apploids - let's hear from you!
_ patched_winsafari_springs_new_leak.html
http://securitywatch.eweek.com/apple/apples_newly
once again we are shown how foolish it is to be a 1st gen purchaser of Apple kit.
Rah rah! Notebooks aren't low power devices in this context nor was OS X specifically written for notebooks, but if you want to believe that your iBook has superior battery life because it runs OS X then who's to argue with you? Meanwhile, suggesting that OS X is optimized for cellphones in the same way as Symbian or Blackberry is absurd.
OS X is "a far far more mature operating system" than what? OS X for iPhone hasn't even reached 1.0
I don't see no charts on that page.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2147467,00.as p
..., said its battery claims are dependent upon specific configurations and "many other factors."'
Where it is reported 'Apple,
So it's rock solid true then because of the "claims"!!! So what are the "specific configurations"? And what are some of those "many other factors."?
For god sakes, its a fanny pack, not a hip pack... get with it.
crap.
Is it me or is the chart in TFA blurry. Would installing Safari help?
I agree with both- to an extent. Pocketful clothing becoming hip is dumb. Decorative pockets hurt my brain. Seeing a girl who's never used a tool in her life (except maybe a nail file) with a hammer loop on her pants just makes me laugh. Oddly enough, carpenter pants on a carpenter doesn't seem so silly. If you want the pants with the pockets so you can put stuff in them, that's a beautiful thing! When pockets stopped being "cute" on girls I gladly bought men's jeans for work for the extra pocket space. (Also men's clothing sizes make sense.) I've kept my phone in that side pocket since I got a phone. When I went to buy more work pants, I found out they even started calling it a cell phone pocket. Utility > Fashion, mostly.
But you don't have to pay, go get a Nokia or Motorola whatever and move on. Very strange how folks just love to bitch about how they won't be buying an item. If you're not planning to ever buy the item in question, then you're not even a *potential* customer and really offer little value to the argument.
The problem isn't that we aren't potential customers; We'd very much like to be, or rather I would very much like to be. However, given all the strings attached to this thing, I wind up sorely dissappointed that I won't be getting one. Hence the reason for the bitching.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
And you are a homophobe.
Use of glass should mean no trouble reading the iPhone display while wearing polarizing sunglasses. This is a common problem with plastic windows in consumer electronics devices, due to stress induced in the plastic while it polymerizes. Polarizing glasses reveal the stress lines, which obscure what's being displayed. Palm blows it often in Treos. Even Lexus has blown it with plastic windows on their OEM stereos.
It is also using an OS not specifically written for low power devices.
Do you REALLY think that just because an OS wasn't designed for low power devices it cannot run well on low power devices? Most OS kernel designs are agnostic to things like this and if a proper power management mechanism is in place, makes this claim meaningless.
Here is an example:
WindowsCE is technically using a variant of the NT fork, just like Vista.
Windows XP & Windows Vista Embedded both work on very tiny and very low power devices as well.
And Windows Vista Embedded is Vista with features removed, just like OS X is on the iPhone. Get it?
So the OS begining 'designed' for low power is not notable or 'remarkable' that Apple was able to get OS X to run well on a low power device. Remove GUI bloat, add better or device specific power management and bingo, a Phone OS.
Also for the claims, removing 'space' for items like a keyboard and increasing the 'weight' are relevant to increasing battery life that other manufacturers don't have to deal with because overall size and weight won't matter to Apple's Fanboi base.
It has nothing to do with "low-power/high-power", it's about getting as much life out of whatever power you have. The OS is the only difference I can think of, both mac notebooks and pc notebooks are using pretty much the same hardware, and I can't imagine a good PC notebook ships with a shit battery. Unless you can give me an example proving otherwise, I'm going to continue believing that it's OS X vs Windows/Linux that makes mac notebooks have longer battery life. I don't have a mac-intel notebook to test windows on, but my iBook only gets 2 hours if I'm lucky under ubuntu, while it gets at a minimum 4 hours under OS X.
The iPhone has a much faster CPU than the machines OS X was originally designed to run on (back in 1985). It's software like iPhoto that needs a fast machine, not the operating system. They won't have needed to do many optimizations at all to get OS X running beautifully on such "slow" hardware, which means they're working with code that has had over 20 years to mature.
Sooo... you're saying the 4-8 gigs of something in the iPhone isn't Random Access Memory? What is it?
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
"Do you REALLY think that just because an OS wasn't designed for low power devices it cannot run well on low power devices?"
Did I say that?
"Most OS kernel designs are agnostic to things like this and if a proper power management mechanism is in place, makes this claim meaningless."
Proof please. Have you ever seen any such code?
"WindowsCE is technically using a variant of the NT fork, just like Vista."
Proof please. I would love to see that.
"And Windows Vista Embedded is Vista with features removed, just like OS X is on the iPhone. Get it?"
I know nothing of Vista Embedded but that's your example, not mine. Yes, I know what OS X for iPhone is. It is an OS not specifically written for low power devices, like I said.
Yes, I do believe that an OS specifically written for low power devices can have power management advantages over one that isn't. That seems incredibly obvious except to fanboys.
I believe that size and weight DO matter to prospective buyers of the iPhone. I believe that fanboys will take it as gospel that whatever the size is will be exactly what it should be. The iPhone is nicely proportioned though. Hopefully the battery life will be adequate.
"The OS is the only difference I can think of, both mac notebooks and pc notebooks are using pretty much the same hardware..."
;-)
Not in the case of your iBook. Apple, and its users, are known to exaggerate their battery life just as they exaggerated the performance of PowerPC processors. Now that Apple uses Intel, battery life and processor performance are quite similar between Mac and PC.
"Unless you can give me an example proving otherwise, I'm going to continue believing that it's OS X vs Windows/Linux that makes mac notebooks have longer battery life."
I think you're going to do that regardless.
"I don't have a mac-intel notebook to test windows on, but my iBook only gets 2 hours if I'm lucky under ubuntu, while it gets at a minimum 4 hours under OS X."
Lord knows you wouldn't want to test on relevant hardware before making your sweeping claims. I suppose that proves OS X for iPhone offers power management as good as other smartphones?
"The iPhone has a much faster CPU than the machines OS X was originally designed to run on (back in 1985)."
It does? Where are the specs for that? Have you run benchmarks? What does speed have to do with battery life? OS X existed in 1985?
"They won't have needed to do many optimizations at all to get OS X running beautifully on such "slow" hardware, which means they're working with code that has had over 20 years to mature."
I have no earthly idea what you are talking about, but OS X is nowhere near 20 years old with much of it relatively brand new. The iPhone's UI is entirely new and has never shipped in a product. The touchscreen hardware and the cellular radios are both brand new hardware to Apple and OS X.
Just what does it mean to run "beautifully" and how does that relate to power management? When OS X was first released in 1999 it didn't even run beautifully on even the newest Mac hardware of the time. I think you need to come out of your dreamworld now.
The *New* [Insert name] Wireless, with the best reception and fewest dropped calls from an "indendent" survey!
War of moderator's camps at its best. Who is winning?
Finally, slimness is what consumers care about.
So you'd feel just fine with a 6.4mm thick phone 30cm high by 15cm wide and weighing 68kg?
I care about exactly one aspect of my phone's geometry - Does it fit in the little half-pockets on the mid-leg side of all my jeans.
For the record, the iPhone comes in at 12x61x114mm. That would probably not fit in said pockets (which have a flattened width of just under 6.4cm on the pants I have on today), or at best would fit too tightly for comfort. My current phone fits nicely, however, at 23x51x109mm, despite literally twice the given-yet-irrelevant thickness.
the comparison charts deal strictly with physical attributes, not things like GPS.
The "Wi-Fi", "Talk Time", "Internet Use", "Video Playback", and "Audio Playback" rows on that chart would tend to disagree.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
"Not in the case of your iBook. Apple, and its users, are known to exaggerate their battery life just as they exaggerated the performance of PowerPC processors. Now that Apple uses Intel, battery life and processor performance are quite similar between Mac and PC.
;-)"
I think you're going to do that regardless.
Lets not even go into bias, if you're not willing to take my word for the battery life I get on a machine I've been using daily for 3 years, that's up to you.
"Lord knows you wouldn't want to test on relevant hardware before making your sweeping claims. I suppose that proves OS X for iPhone offers power management as good as other smartphones?"
I never said it was a perfect claim, I was just giving you what evidence I have to suggest OS X has better power management than windows. You are correct to point out that I could be wrong, since I haven't had a chance to properly test the battery life of an intel-based mac notebook. I have a friend with a first-gen mac book pro, and it's battery life is shit. However apple's estimate of the current release of his machine is twice as long as it was when he purchased his, so his experiences aren't really valid anymore.
"It does? Where are the specs for that? Have you run benchmarks?"
There was a website at some point that listed the specs, I don't have it handy. No I haven't run benchmarks. However assuming the iPhone's has a current generation mobile cpu, it will probably similar speed to my sister's G3 iMac*, which also runs OS X perfectly.
"OS X existed in 1985?
I have no earthly idea what you are talking about, but OS X is nowhere near 20 years old with much of it relatively brand new. The iPhone's UI is entirely new and has never shipped in a product. The touchscreen hardware and the cellular radios are both brand new hardware to Apple and OS X."
According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT), work began on OS X some time between 1984 and 1987 (based on skim reading the article), which would put OS X somewhere between 20 and 22 years old. I write mac software in my spare time, and I can assure you that the API's developed in those years are the API's of choice for any software that doesn't need to be cross platform, and even that will likely change soon (the NeXT OS, was way ahead of it's time. It had features that still don't exist in the latest releases of windows/mac/linux). Certainly, it's not the same OS anymore as it was then, but the core of it is the same.
Certainly, some features like touch-screen are new, but others like check-spelling-as-you-type are ancient.
* no, I haven't run bench tests on that either. Which is why I said "probably".
they could always remove the screen since it takes up power and replace it with a few more batteries... and a solar panel- then it would last forever, with no display you can play a lot more video. and with four times the battery power it would be more powerful than any phone on the market, and self charging.
A user interface that does not suck.
Really, all these feature comparisons are meaningless. People aren't going to buy this phone because it has some innovative new feature. It doesn't. It does, however, seem to have an UI that does not drive you insane. Which immediately makes it better than pretty much any other smartphone in a lot of people's minds.
..sorry: No.
This "they don't say", not even an "unknown" is so obviously an attempt to look smug that _anyone_ not seeing that the very second they glance upon the chart must be either heavily biased, have a slewed perception of what is acceptable in advertisements or both. And that is a perfect match for what one calls a fanboy.
Side note: When people are forced to do nonsensical things under hypnosis and you ask them why they did it afterwards, their brain will automatically create a fitting story that also happens to be completely ridiculous. That goes a long way to explain fanboyism, to me..
"Do you REALLY think that just because an OS wasn't designed for low power devices it cannot run well on low power devices?"
Did I say that?"
Yes, jackass.
Most dating sites have the same problem
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Looking at your posts in this thread, I just have to assume you hate the iPhone/Apple. Making claims of Apple users' "making" up battery life claims? You asked for proof in other areas, so where is your proof. No, forget it, you obviously just want to trash a product/brand/company for whatever reason. Yes, I own a MacBook. No, I'm not getting an iPhone.
I'm only posting this AC because I don't want to get into a back and forth with you. You don't like some stuff, great, but man, in really seems you got your knickers in a bind over a non-released product.
It's not the only thing she works well.....
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT), work began on OS X some time between 1984 and 1987 (based on skim reading the article), which would put OS X somewhere between 20 and 22 years old. I write mac software in my spare time, and I can assure you that the API's developed in those years are the API's of choice for any software that doesn't need to be cross platform, and even that will likely change soon (the NeXT OS, was way ahead of it's time. It had features that still don't exist in the latest releases of windows/mac/linux). Certainly, it's not the same OS anymore as it was then, but the core of it is the same.
Apple Aquired NeXT in 96, they then gutted the OS and extracted what bits were salvagable, Lots of good ideas there with lots of bad implementation. At the very best you could claim OS.x was 10 years old, more realistically you are looking at 7 years. OS.X is probably the LEAST mature of modern OSes (that is not to say it is bad though).
"an OS not specifically written for low power devices" ?
If you mean CPU power, I must remind you that the Next OS shipped on 68030 (40Mhz) workstations with just 8 MB RAM.
Funnily enough, this iphone is a much more powerful workstation than the machines that OS was designed for.
You're also an idiot - although, clearly more so.
There's a better comparison chart here: http://www.standandcount.com/index.php/iphone-spec s-change-12/.
It compares the iPhone specs with the Motorola V3i, the Nokia 5700, and the video and nano iPods.
I think I'll get one based on this spec comparison mainly because I don't already have an video iPod and I need a new phone.
---- The geek shall inherit the Earth.
"I was just giving you what evidence I have to suggest OS X has better power management than windows."
By making claims of its performance on an iBook? Since when did Windows ever run on an iBook? Since when was an iBook comparable hardware to PCs?
"However apple's estimate of the current release of his machine is twice as long as it was when he purchased his, so his experiences aren't really valid anymore."
Because Apple changed its estimates? Where do you think this doubling of battery life came from? Don't think too hard!
"There was a website at some point that listed the specs, I don't have it handy."
Apple has NEVER reveealed the source, type, or speed of the processor. You can't possibly know this and you are just quoting as fact some meaningless speculation from a fanboy like yourself.
"However assuming the iPhone's has a current generation mobile cpu, it will probably similar speed to my sister's G3 iMac*, which also runs OS X perfectly. * no, I haven't run bench tests on that either. Which is why I said "probably"."
Why do you make knowingly absurd speculation then footnote them where you admit they are such? PDA processors and desktop ones cannot be compared on clockspeed. As a PowerPC owner, I'd figure you'd "know" that by now considering Jobs marketed that message to you for years.
Considering that the iPhone relies on CoreImage and CoreImage uses GPU acceleration, how do you think this iPhone hardware that we know nothing about compares you your sister's G3 which you also don't know anything about? Have you used modern PDA/smartphone processors?
"According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT), work began on OS X some time between 1984 and 1987 (based on skim reading the article)..."
It's good that you skimmed a wikipedia article! When was the first time you could buy OS X? BSD dates back earlier than 84 and Unix far before that. Considering Unix's age, why aren't you claiming that OS X is 45 years old? You are a moron.
"Certainly, some features like touch-screen are new, but others like check-spelling-as-you-type are ancient."
Hell, that proves it then. The question is, if OS X is over 20 years old, why did it take Apple until 1999 to release it and why did it suck so bad until the Panther release more than 4 years later?
To summarize your points, (a) OS X is over two decades old yet it is still the most advanced OS and offers the most advanced power management on the market, (b) iBooks are comparable in performance to modern PCs, (c) iBooks offer superior battery life without sacrificing performance, size, weight or function, and (d) iPhones have computing capability just as good as Macs. I think it can safely be said that you're a raging fanboy.
Here's what I said, you anonymous retard:
"It is also using an OS not specifically written for low power devices. That doesn't mean that the device will be a failure but it sure indicates the unlikeliness of your claim. It's far from clear that battery life is the secret feature; everything suggests the opposite."
Just where in that do I say it "cannot run well"?
Perhaps you will learn reading comprehension when you get to high school.
So you are attacking me personally now? Is that the best you can do?
Every manufacturer makes up battery life claims. Apple doesn't just do that, they've refined bullet-point lying to a fine art. They've even changed their battery life estimates on the iPhone before first ship, and let's not forget their desktop "supercomputer" Altivec lies. It's just par for the course.
"Yes, I own a MacBook. No, I'm not getting an iPhone."
Then you aren't unlike me. I own 3 macs. Surprised?
"I'm only posting this AC because I don't want to get into a back and forth with you."
Well yeah. If I posted your drivel I'd be too cowardly to attach my name to it too.
"You don't like some stuff, great, but man, in really seems you got your knickers in a bind over a non-released product."
A little sensitive, fanboy?
"If you mean CPU power..."
No I didn't mean that and it's obvious from the context that I couldn't have possibly meant that. Thanks, though, for making a point that can't be disputed.
"Funnily enough, this iphone is a much more powerful workstation than the machines that OS was designed for."
Bullshit. You think CoreImage was designed for a 68030 class machine? Considering that we know nothing of the iPhone's hardware capability, your statement couldn't possibly be right regardless of what OS X was "designed for". You realize that capabilities of OS X that are being touted in the iPhone are brand new?
What is with you fanboys trying to talk up the iPhone's hardware capabilities when nothing has ever been documented?
It's all irrelevant. I was responding to a battery life comment and my point about OS X and what is designed for has only to do with battery life. I never commented on its performance or capability.
It is a fact that every other PDA/smartphone OS platform has specific design details tailored to very low power and small memory footprint. It is unlikely, though possible, that OS X has received such changes since porting large libraries and sharing large portions of OS code is incompatible with that. Anyone who think Windows Mobile is Windows with a few pieces trimmed off is sadly mistaken. WM, Symbian, and PalmOS are written exclusively for ultra-low power devices and OS X is not.
I assume you can find wikipedia.com or microsoft.com, so go do your own freaking homework.
It is not my responsibility that you are this stupid and unwilling to educate yourself.
BTW, yes I and a lot of other people on SlashDot have seen a lot of OS kernel code, from Linux to even NT core code, and especially MACH with a BSD interface, which is what OS X is. Do you also not realize that many of us have seen and worked with Darwin specifically?
Even just questioning the accuracy of the Windows Embedded or WindowsCE/Pocket PC example I gave you is an immediate red flag that you are more stupid than anyone would have expected even on SlashDot.
I apologize for responding to your post, I assumed you might care or have a clue of what you were talking about. It is obvious you don't.
1.) buy 2 shares of apple right now, at $124. 2.) Wait a month or two and sell the shares when they're at $250. 3.) Sell stock and buy iPhone. You know Apple stock is going to explode.
Now the real question to all of this is(not to the poster but to everybody)... Which of these do you really care about. My phone works works perfectly with my macbook, no 3rd party software needed. I don't use iTunes so nothing lost there. It has a 2 megapixel camera of great quality. I don't need a 3" screen, I just use it for calls, music and the occasional google maps(looking up phone numbers not directions), so 3" is far bigger than I need. I currently have 4 GB of memory and since it accepts flash cards I can expand it to whatever my little heart desires. Again I don't need WiFi on my phone. It's neat but unless I can skype from it there is little use for it in my little world. I personally have never needed an 8 hour talk time but I wouldn't be surprised if my current phone couldn't do that(and I can replace the battery at will). And because I don't need a 3" screen I don't need all those pixels. My current phone is good enough in that regard. Sooooo all in all... Do I want an iPhone. Hell yes I do, it's cool. Am I going to get one. No bloody way. Way too much for something I wouldn't use half the functions for.
The Proximity sensor and ambient light sensor btw, are not just something that they tossed in there to be cool. They are requirements as if you tried to do the things that it can without those sensors you'd get a shitload of mess. Just try putting the iPhone in your pants pocket without those sensors and customers would come back screaming.
"I assume you can find wikipedia.com or microsoft.com, so go do your own freaking homework.
It is not my responsibility that you are this stupid and unwilling to educate yourself."
This coming from someone who thinks WindowsCE is a variant of Windows. It's the responsibility of those making idiotic statements to back them up. I knew you couldn't.
"BTW, yes I and a lot of other people on SlashDot have seen a lot of OS kernel code, from Linux to even NT core code, and especially MACH with a BSD interface, which is what OS X is. Do you also not realize that many of us have seen and worked with Darwin specifically?"
I realize that there are people here who DO do that, but you aren't one of them.
"Even just questioning the accuracy of the Windows Embedded or WindowsCE/Pocket PC example I gave you is an immediate red flag that you are more stupid than anyone would have expected even on SlashDot."
That's because it's blatantly incorrect. WindowsCE/PocketPC (not that they've been called that for a long time) were independent products from Windows. They were not derivatives.
"I apologize for responding to your post, I assumed you might care or have a clue of what you were talking about. It is obvious you don't."
Surely you can bluff better than this. If you're going to call me stupid, perhaps you should check your facts first. Meanwhile, keep dreaming you're a Darwin programmer. Maybe someday after you reach puberty you might understand what that means.
You went from calling all my information incorrect to hitting on a single point that is harder to trace than others.
So which is it now, everything I said was incorrect, or only you couldn't find kernel design references that were used in WinCE that came from NT, so you are going to pretend that is the only point you have contention with because you found out the other information I supplied was correct?
To find the WinCe information you are looking for you have to go back to the timeline between NT 3.5 and NT 4.0. WinCE was designed specifically to fit into low MEMORY footprint devices, it was not designed for low power or any other claim you seem to be making.
MS originally planned on using a variation of the kernel design of the Win3.1 or Win95 architecture, but when they found they could use a modified form of the NT kernel technologies without doing the client/server kernel design of NT(i.e. pushing the API interfaces to related to an agnostic kernel and embed the APIs needed for the WinCE platform), it would meet their minimalist memory requirements and offer features needed for terminal type computing devices, like true pre-emptive and near real-time performance.
Actually because WinCE could drop the subsystem references and move the API more into the kernel interface directly than, it was more realtime than NT in the 90s because they moddifed the scheduler from the NT Model for WinCE.
Now I know you aren't going to find this information on a lot of sites, as most people don't give a crap about the origins of WinCE, and its evolution into Windows Mobile. I honestly don't even care much about it other than I know it will not be around as the main mobile product from MS, as Vista Embedded is positioned to move into phone and other PDA markets, which is why the UMPC platform was designed to ease the development transition for desktop application designers to consider smaller screens and handheld devices as the first step.
However if you look at the code for the WinCE kernel code, which is available for academic use, you will see that it draws on the NT kernel design 'SPECIFICALLY', but forgoes the upper end features of the NT kernel like subsystems, abstracted API interface, etc.
BTW The reason I called the product WinCE, is because that is the basis of Windows Mobile/PocketPC and it WAS WinCE specifically when the original kernel design was put together and drawn on from the NT kernel designs.
I'm not here to argue WinCE is the NT kernel, but its basis was the NT kernel and it ALSO was NOT SPECIFCIALLY designed for power usage any more than NT was, which was my main and original point. It was designed to fit in a small memory footprint and was used for small 'terminal' type computing originally, not Mobile or PDA technology.
As I mentioned at the begining, you seem to focus only the credibility of WinCE, but you no longer are arguing about Windows Embedded XP/Vista. Why is that?
Did you actually look it up and see that it is being used in 'portable' devies that 'power consumption' is important. Or did you find out that it is also being used in small memory footprint and real-time devices like routers and even freaking print servers?
I actually think that no matter what I say, you are going to try to dismiss whatever crack you think you can get water into. So with that in mind I realize you are proud of your ignorance and determined to keep it.
Good Day...
"So which is it now, everything I said was incorrect, or only you couldn't find kernel design references that were used in WinCE that came from NT, so you are going to pretend that is the only point you have contention with because you found out the other information I supplied was correct?"
It is none of that. You chose to argue with me, not the other way around. I'll point out that you offered nothing that actually contested my points. All you did was put words in my mouth.
"MS originally planned on using a variation of the kernel design of the Win3.1 or Win95 architecture, but when they found they could use a modified form of the NT kernel technologies without doing the client/server kernel design of NT(i.e. pushing the API interfaces to related to an agnostic kernel and embed the APIs needed for the WinCE platform), it would meet their minimalist memory requirements and offer features needed for terminal type computing devices, like true pre-emptive and near real-time performance."
So you now admit you were lying when you claimed "WindowsCE is technically using a variant of the NT fork, just like Vista."
In reality, they only share design similarities. All this in response to my claim that "It is also using an OS not specifically written for low power devices." An absolute truism I will add.
"I'm not here to argue WinCE is the NT kernel..."
It's a good thing now that you've admitted it isn't. Why didn't you do that in the first place?
"WinCE was designed specifically to fit into low MEMORY footprint devices, it was not designed for low power or any other claim you seem to be making."
"...its basis was the NT kernel and it ALSO was NOT SPECIFCIALLY designed for power usage any more than NT was, which was my main and original point. It was designed to fit in a small memory footprint and was used for small 'terminal' type computing originally, not Mobile or PDA technology."
Small memory footprint and low power go together and somewhat interrelate. It is, however, irrelevant since WinCE is your example, not mine. There are other OSes specifically designed for these types of devices and they emphasize both low power and low memory footprint since those are characteristics of such devices. It is a fact that MacOS was not designed with low power devices in mind. It is also true that it was not designed specifically for low memory footprint, although what that means changes with time. Talk WinCE all you want...all you are doing is redirecting an argument YOU started into something you hope you can win.
Incidently, my OS X point was not criticism of the iPhone, it was a direct counter-argument to the absurd, fanboyish suggestion that "battery life was a secret feature of the iPhone". I never said it was an iPhone weakness or that it couldn't work well. Those were your mistakes.
"As I mentioned at the begining, you seem to focus only the credibility of WinCE, but you no longer are arguing about Windows Embedded XP/Vista. Why is that?"
Really? Just who introduced WinCE and Embedded XP/Vista into the conversation? I could give a shit and never mentioned any og those things.
"I actually think that no matter what I say, you are going to try to dismiss whatever crack you think you can get water into. So with that in mind I realize you are proud of your ignorance and determined to keep it.
Good Day..."
Indeed! You are so kind and friendly.
Now, why don't you go back and read my post which, while factually correct and not disparaging of the iPhone/OS X in any way, motivated an unjustified response from you, then stick your WinCE arguments up your ass?