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."
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!
You sound roughly about as biased as the comparison chart. To be fair the OP has a point.
d =1023
If it's about physical attributes why does it list non-physical attributes? and only one of the few physical attributes?
Slimness is all consumers care about? If that was the case everyone would be happy with the iPaq phones because they're so slim, of course in reality, the issue is they're too wide for most people to want in their pockets. Personally I also prefer phones to be light, so for me weight is one of the largest issues.
As for features well, yes it does have a few but not as many as the new Nokia and Sony offerings. Supports 3rd party development? this is a joke right? again, other offerings have full Java and some even C++ application support - that's an awful lot more than rich internet apps which nice, are still extremely limited - again, you aint EVER going to see anything like this on iPhones with their supposed 3rd party application support:
http://www.midlet-review.com/index?content=news&i
It's probably worth noting the iPhone's camera is pretty dire in comparison to the new Sony/Nokia offerings too - 2megapixel vs. 5 megapixel.
Um, because maybe the N800 isn't a phone? You can do VOIP, but it doesn't have cell phone capabilities (I know, I own an N800).
No matter where you go... there you are.
Inches for the screen because Americans know what inches are.
MM for the thickness, because the point of the chart isn't the actual thickness, but the relative thickness of the iphone compared to the other phones. It's much easier for most people to compare the MM measurements against each other than it would be to compare 3/4" to 5/16" to 3/8", or whatever the imperial measurements would end up being. I deal with fractional measurements all day at work, and I still have to take a few seconds to think about it when I compare them.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
I'm not saying that Apple has shelled out for a better cam function, I'm just saying that MP count is like snakeoil.
What I care about is reception range/quality and battery life
An oft unappreciated phone (and the one I use on a day to day basis) is the Motorola V195. It's offered by T-Mobile and Cellular One, but it's GSM, so you can get it unlocked and use it with anyone.
It has the highest RF output of any non-brick phone I've ever seen (1.7 watts on GSM850/900 and 1.0 on GSM1800/1900), the best reception, an insanely long battery life (rated for 10.5 hours of talk time -- I tend to get six or seven, depending on signal strength), class 1 (long range) bluetooth, plus it's a quad-band phone and will work in any country with a GSM network.
Yeah, it has no camera (who cares?) and is slim on features. But if all you want is a phone, I'm hard pressed to think of a better GSM one. And the full retail price is only $120.00 ($20 with contract) from T-Mobile. I'll cry a lot less when my $120 phone goes into the swimming pool/toilet/stolen then I will when something happens to my $600 iPhone. And that's with contract -- wonder what they'll charge you to get one at "full price" once you are already under contract?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Like plastics (including poly carbonate) there's optical quality and non-optical quality. It's not a hard concept.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
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...
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.'"