You just don't get it, do you? 99% of the people that have a phone don't want it to be off, otherwise, they'd not have the phone in the first place. 1% of the people have to turn their phone off for various job and security related purposes. These people have to go through a specific series of steps to turn their phones off, which is MORE than enough of an indication whether the phone is OFF or in standby mode. I don't need to know if my iPhone is off or in standby, because I know it isn't off, because I didn't go through the steps required to turn it off. I guess if I had a 5 second memory this would be an issue.
The person in this article is guilty of not understanding how cell phones in general work and there is nothing to the story that the iPhone's allegedly poor UI is the culprit here. This is just more iFud spin that seems to be so popular with the insecure masses that can't stand the fact that Apple makes a lot of great products.
Apple neither invented the touch screen, nor do they even use their own version. In typical Apple fashion, they took an existing yet under-utilized technology and pushed it into the mainstream. Giving Apple credit for the FAA table by inferring there is some sort of Apple patent involved is ridiculous, since Apple probably doesn't have the patent for the touch screen they use in their own products.
A real technological breakthrough would be to find a replacement for the FAA.
Reagan already tried that in the 80s. Worked for a little while, but somehow the fat, lazy, hand-out seekers got their jobs back.
Except you don't want to give government employees user selectable properties, because they'll mess it up. Hundreds of hours go into the standardization of critical tasks like the ones the FAA has to do. Training is built with ONE property, not multiple properties, in mind. Giving the users choices is good for home computers, but dangerous for government work.
Nice post! Imagine that; a bunch of experts who did a lot of research and user acceptance training know more about something than your average slashdot mob. Thank you for pointing out how irrelevant most people are on here. Seriously, just because people hang out on slashdot and ramble on about Linux and (shudder) politics, doesn't mean they have a shred of credibility when it comes to criticizing things of which they know nothing about. Thank you for the excellent post.
Depending on the popularity of the iPhone, this may or may not be counter-intuitive. Since the iPhone works the exact opposite of what is described in the article, a guy working for the FAA who uses an iPhone is in for a rough day.
Yeah, isn't it about time these engineers start thinking forward instead of investing all their R&D into should-be-already-obsolete models? Maybe it will take Steve Jobs to kill off hard drives once and for all.
Yeah, because the nuclear power industry in America has caused tens of thousands of radiological deaths.....what, no? Ok, THOUSANDS of dea....oh, really, no? Ok, TENS of deaths...what, not true? Oh, ok, my bad.
I know what you anti-nuke people are gonna say, but Vermont is NOT 1980s Ukraine.
Real heroes are the ones who don't shoot when given the opportunity. Real heroes are those that save lives rather than take even a single life. Peace is the way of security for all, and have no doubt that if you want security and peace your enemies must also have security and peace.
Since you obviously have NO IDEA of the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq let me tell you that you are describing the coalition men an women perfectly with this sentence. Every soldier I worked for was a huge target to the enemy, yet none of them reached for their gun first, nor did any of them go on a seek-and-destroy mission. The average US/UK soldier in Iraq are the REAL heroes, exactly for the reason you described. Do you think US troops are in Iraq to hunt down and kill people? No. Their rules of engagement are pretty clear. They are there to TRY to establish the idealistic peace that you so want. The reason it is the US Military doing this is because the soft European countries don't have the balls or a better solution, and there is no real world organization that has the clout to pull it off. No, those countries are much like yourself; they'd rather sit around philosophizing about peace, letting the evil grow stronger, until the evil destroys them (or, as recent world history goes, the US bails them out). See, America doesn't want to have to save another European country's ass in World War III, so we are taking steps to prevent it now, as opposed to later.
You call me evil? My soldiers and I were saving far more lives than we ever took in Iraq. In stark opposition to the distorted view you get from the news, the average soldier spends 10 hours a day helping families get food, water, clothes and electricity. Multiply my last sentence by 100,000 troops, and that's the real picture in Iraq. The other 20,000 are fighting troops that are there to protect our mission, to find bad people, and yes, KILL them if necessary. We were establishing security and trying to setup a basic infrastructure so those people can live the idealistic life you keep going on about. However, the ignorantly evil segment of that society keeps bringing the fight to us. Stop poking the US military with a stick, and we'd be out of there in 6 months, with a somewhat functional government and society in place.
Good for you that you study philosophy. I went to college too, so yeah, I had that class. But again, you live in a fantasy land, because the real world doesn't operate on philosophy. You can sit around all you want pondering life, but what really matters is that there is true evil in the world, and because of people like you, that evil goes unchecked and continues to thrive. In other words, there IS a right and a wrong, and my judgement is not distorted by my culture/tribe/village. I am an expert in Middle Eastern Affairs and know more about the Middle East than I do my own country in some respects. If anything, I'm biased towards Arabism, since it has been my career for the past 15 years. I just happen to be a realist and understand that ANY culture ANYWHERE in the world with as much of a broken social structure and miserable education system will breed evil. For you to dismiss radical fundamentalist terrorism as the equivalent to unchecked US occupation is ridiculous and you fail to see right from wrong. And since you keep doing it, allow me: "AS THEY SAY", you will fall on the wrong side of history.
"Appeal for Authority" is the opposite of Ad Hominem attack. I was merely pointing out that you are on the opposite extreme. The difference is, my comment is satirical, yet yours is trying to be serious. The fact that you are oversimplifying the entire topic of "conflict" by saying all killing is the same, tells me you do not have a strong grasp of logic. You are an idealist. As a realist, I understand, and fully accept the fact that the US is on the correct side of this conflict. In other words, there are perfect legitimate reasons for killing people, such as religious zealots who want to destroy all of western society. To think otherwise is living in a fantasy world much like yours.
Ah yes, your appeal to authority by using big words is the true cowardice. Yes, because we are the ones who randomly kill Israeli/American/Iraqi/fill-in-the-country citizens on a daily basis without provocation. You win.
Maybe there are a few other souls out there that don't think the American military is the right answer to all of the world's problems?
Yes because NATO and the United Nations have such a stellar track record at intervening and ending conflict? Riiiight. So do you have any alternatives for a World Police that actually have teeth? Well, since you don't (because nobody on the entire planet does), the U.S. Military (and GI Joe) will have to do for now.
It's not the US Military's fault that countries like France don't want to mess up their pedicures (or spend tax money that their governments cherish so much), so take your unilateralism argument elsewhere.
I'd like to hear YOUR solution, because I've been trying to find one for 20 years now, and the world has been trying to find one ever since the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
The complaint is that no matter what service you pick, you have to sign a contract. Consumers have no choice (in America, not true in the UK), because EVERY company uses the exact same contract model. People don't read the contracts because they are all basically the same...x minutes...x data...blah blah blah...eight million dollars to cancel early...small print...blah...legalese....blah.
Wake me up when I can have cell phone service like I had when I lived in England, otherwise, this is a bunch of posturing by politicians wanting to look hip. There are a few industries in America (telecomunications, cable television, for example) with such messed up business models, yet strong monopolistic locks, it just angers me to no end. Once business gets this far out of control (or actually IN control, but so much so, they are out of control) it is time to regulate. I don't mind lock-in, as long as I have the choice to NOT be locked in elsewhere. The problem now is, even if you go "elsewhere", you are locked in with them.
I have a feeling this bill will do the same thing for my cell phone servcie that the Digital Millenium Act has done for my "choice" of telecommunications/cable companies: nothing.
My guess is they are talking about the PC version of iTunes, which is not nearly as elegantly integrated with the system as the Mac version (for obvious reasons). I can't stand iTunes on my pcs, because it doesn't run well. Part of that problem is not much stuff runs well on my PC when compared to the same things on my Macs.
While I appreciate the breakdown, you have to understand that this is where we disagree, and why the iPod is a much larger success: all those features you listed are just that....features. In your own words, a lot of them aren't even very good. The iPod is simple and not bogged down by a bunch of features that most people don't want. You posted a device with a lot of features then state a few pros (I'll give you the file format ones, but there STILL are workarounds for my FLAC, Ogg and Xvid files). Simply having a laundry list of features in no way makes it a much better machine. It makes it a machine with a lot of features; none of which work particularly well (which is the problem when you try do everything). Oh yeah, and I've taken that one for a spin too, and it simply has an unacceptable UI compared to the iPod (the gold standard). I see you are comparing it to the iPod Touch, to which I have no comment because I haven't used one. I have an iPhone, and think the iPod built in is excellent, but the interface has some shortcomings (like not being able to change the songs without looking at the device, if you aren't using Apple's headphones.)
Worst movie ever. I didn't RTFA, but I could swear just from the overview, there is no mention of missing nukes, since they were attached to the plane the entire time, no?
True, it was a complete surprise to drop prices that much so soon, but not true about holding out for a phone. I just moved back from overseas, and as a consultant, I obviously need a cell phone. So, no, I wouldn't have held out, because I needed a phone immediately. The way I look at it is I didn't get locked into a mediocre $150 phone through Verizon/Sprint/Whoever for 2 years. By buying an iPhone then, I was saving money by not having to cancel another plan down the road.
I can justify the $200 on three things: 1) I don't care, and would have paid $900 for one, 2) its still a better phone for my needs than all the alternatives I tried, and 3) the money wasted on an obsolete/non-functional phone and calling plan from another phone would have been far more than the $200 I'm out now.
Macs and Apple products ALWAYS either go down in price or get better features in the "next" version, but I'm not going to keep waiting around for the "next" version to come out, because in the meantime, while I'm waiting, I have nothing. Had I a functional cell phone with a few months to go on the plan, yeah I would have held out.
Nobody has mentioned it, but maybe the early adopters were just people they knew would be enthusiastic about the technology, and most likely to show off the phone to other people. Then, two months later, all the people who have seen their friends iPhone can suddenly afford one. Genius, in my book!
Like I said, if you are worried about $200, then you probably aren't in the iPhone demographic anyways. No pain tolerance here. Sure, I could have used the $200 for something else, but I can think of worse problems in the world right now. It would have been nice for Apple to offer something for us like maybe a $50 off certificate for a new iPod or something, or maybe a free month of service, but I wouldn't expect Apple to go back and honor TWO months of sales discounts, especially since those profits have already been accounted for in their business model. Think of it this way. I bought the phone, WANTING the phone when it cost $200 more. The fact it is $200 less now doesn't make it any lworse of a device. If anything, it makes it even better. I tell people my iPhone gets a 4/5 rating from me. The cost was a little high (not anymore) and the whole AT&T thing kinda stole a star. Now if the fix Safari so that it doesn't crash at least once a day, I'd have to give it 4.5/5 (the typing still is hard, even though they've made it as good as possible without physical keys).
Yeah, all 5 people I know with badly scratched screens are teenagers. A $1 piece of film fixes that problem as does taking care of your. Since most teenagers don't buy their own $200 electronic devices, they aren't likely to take care of them either.
Slashdot Mirror
The person in this article is guilty of not understanding how cell phones in general work and there is nothing to the story that the iPhone's allegedly poor UI is the culprit here. This is just more iFud spin that seems to be so popular with the insecure masses that can't stand the fact that Apple makes a lot of great products.
Apple neither invented the touch screen, nor do they even use their own version. In typical Apple fashion, they took an existing yet under-utilized technology and pushed it into the mainstream. Giving Apple credit for the FAA table by inferring there is some sort of Apple patent involved is ridiculous, since Apple probably doesn't have the patent for the touch screen they use in their own products.
A real technological breakthrough would be to find a replacement for the FAA. Reagan already tried that in the 80s. Worked for a little while, but somehow the fat, lazy, hand-out seekers got their jobs back.
Except you don't want to give government employees user selectable properties, because they'll mess it up. Hundreds of hours go into the standardization of critical tasks like the ones the FAA has to do. Training is built with ONE property, not multiple properties, in mind. Giving the users choices is good for home computers, but dangerous for government work.
Nice post! Imagine that; a bunch of experts who did a lot of research and user acceptance training know more about something than your average slashdot mob. Thank you for pointing out how irrelevant most people are on here. Seriously, just because people hang out on slashdot and ramble on about Linux and (shudder) politics, doesn't mean they have a shred of credibility when it comes to criticizing things of which they know nothing about. Thank you for the excellent post.
Depending on the popularity of the iPhone, this may or may not be counter-intuitive. Since the iPhone works the exact opposite of what is described in the article, a guy working for the FAA who uses an iPhone is in for a rough day.
My guess is General "Patton" doesn't care.
Yeah, isn't it about time these engineers start thinking forward instead of investing all their R&D into should-be-already-obsolete models? Maybe it will take Steve Jobs to kill off hard drives once and for all.
I know what you anti-nuke people are gonna say, but Vermont is NOT 1980s Ukraine.
You call me evil? My soldiers and I were saving far more lives than we ever took in Iraq. In stark opposition to the distorted view you get from the news, the average soldier spends 10 hours a day helping families get food, water, clothes and electricity. Multiply my last sentence by 100,000 troops, and that's the real picture in Iraq. The other 20,000 are fighting troops that are there to protect our mission, to find bad people, and yes, KILL them if necessary. We were establishing security and trying to setup a basic infrastructure so those people can live the idealistic life you keep going on about. However, the ignorantly evil segment of that society keeps bringing the fight to us. Stop poking the US military with a stick, and we'd be out of there in 6 months, with a somewhat functional government and society in place.
Good for you that you study philosophy. I went to college too, so yeah, I had that class. But again, you live in a fantasy land, because the real world doesn't operate on philosophy. You can sit around all you want pondering life, but what really matters is that there is true evil in the world, and because of people like you, that evil goes unchecked and continues to thrive. In other words, there IS a right and a wrong, and my judgement is not distorted by my culture/tribe/village. I am an expert in Middle Eastern Affairs and know more about the Middle East than I do my own country in some respects. If anything, I'm biased towards Arabism, since it has been my career for the past 15 years. I just happen to be a realist and understand that ANY culture ANYWHERE in the world with as much of a broken social structure and miserable education system will breed evil. For you to dismiss radical fundamentalist terrorism as the equivalent to unchecked US occupation is ridiculous and you fail to see right from wrong. And since you keep doing it, allow me: "AS THEY SAY", you will fall on the wrong side of history.
"Appeal for Authority" is the opposite of Ad Hominem attack. I was merely pointing out that you are on the opposite extreme. The difference is, my comment is satirical, yet yours is trying to be serious. The fact that you are oversimplifying the entire topic of "conflict" by saying all killing is the same, tells me you do not have a strong grasp of logic. You are an idealist. As a realist, I understand, and fully accept the fact that the US is on the correct side of this conflict. In other words, there are perfect legitimate reasons for killing people, such as religious zealots who want to destroy all of western society. To think otherwise is living in a fantasy world much like yours.
Ah yes, your appeal to authority by using big words is the true cowardice. Yes, because we are the ones who randomly kill Israeli/American/Iraqi/fill-in-the-country citizens on a daily basis without provocation. You win.
Well, I doubt many of you were ever in the Army, but I was and GI means General Infantry. Everything else you people are spouting is ignorant.
It's not the US Military's fault that countries like France don't want to mess up their pedicures (or spend tax money that their governments cherish so much), so take your unilateralism argument elsewhere.
I'd like to hear YOUR solution, because I've been trying to find one for 20 years now, and the world has been trying to find one ever since the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
Besides, everyone knows the real American Hero is the International Man of Mystery: Austin Powers.
The complaint is that no matter what service you pick, you have to sign a contract. Consumers have no choice (in America, not true in the UK), because EVERY company uses the exact same contract model. People don't read the contracts because they are all basically the same...x minutes...x data...blah blah blah...eight million dollars to cancel early...small print...blah...legalese....blah.
I have a feeling this bill will do the same thing for my cell phone servcie that the Digital Millenium Act has done for my "choice" of telecommunications/cable companies: nothing.
But I agree, iTunes is NOT bloatware.
While I appreciate the breakdown, you have to understand that this is where we disagree, and why the iPod is a much larger success: all those features you listed are just that....features. In your own words, a lot of them aren't even very good. The iPod is simple and not bogged down by a bunch of features that most people don't want. You posted a device with a lot of features then state a few pros (I'll give you the file format ones, but there STILL are workarounds for my FLAC, Ogg and Xvid files). Simply having a laundry list of features in no way makes it a much better machine. It makes it a machine with a lot of features; none of which work particularly well (which is the problem when you try do everything). Oh yeah, and I've taken that one for a spin too, and it simply has an unacceptable UI compared to the iPod (the gold standard). I see you are comparing it to the iPod Touch, to which I have no comment because I haven't used one. I have an iPhone, and think the iPod built in is excellent, but the interface has some shortcomings (like not being able to change the songs without looking at the device, if you aren't using Apple's headphones.)
"Smoldering Curry". Oh wait, not those Indians?
Worst movie ever. I didn't RTFA, but I could swear just from the overview, there is no mention of missing nukes, since they were attached to the plane the entire time, no?
I can justify the $200 on three things: 1) I don't care, and would have paid $900 for one, 2) its still a better phone for my needs than all the alternatives I tried, and 3) the money wasted on an obsolete/non-functional phone and calling plan from another phone would have been far more than the $200 I'm out now.
Macs and Apple products ALWAYS either go down in price or get better features in the "next" version, but I'm not going to keep waiting around for the "next" version to come out, because in the meantime, while I'm waiting, I have nothing. Had I a functional cell phone with a few months to go on the plan, yeah I would have held out.
Nobody has mentioned it, but maybe the early adopters were just people they knew would be enthusiastic about the technology, and most likely to show off the phone to other people. Then, two months later, all the people who have seen their friends iPhone can suddenly afford one. Genius, in my book!
Like I said, if you are worried about $200, then you probably aren't in the iPhone demographic anyways. No pain tolerance here. Sure, I could have used the $200 for something else, but I can think of worse problems in the world right now. It would have been nice for Apple to offer something for us like maybe a $50 off certificate for a new iPod or something, or maybe a free month of service, but I wouldn't expect Apple to go back and honor TWO months of sales discounts, especially since those profits have already been accounted for in their business model. Think of it this way. I bought the phone, WANTING the phone when it cost $200 more. The fact it is $200 less now doesn't make it any lworse of a device. If anything, it makes it even better. I tell people my iPhone gets a 4/5 rating from me. The cost was a little high (not anymore) and the whole AT&T thing kinda stole a star. Now if the fix Safari so that it doesn't crash at least once a day, I'd have to give it 4.5/5 (the typing still is hard, even though they've made it as good as possible without physical keys).
Well I guess we can both agree then that it is a GOOD thing that Apple offers 160GB iPods for your needs and smaller iPods for mine ;-)
Yeah, all 5 people I know with badly scratched screens are teenagers. A $1 piece of film fixes that problem as does taking care of your. Since most teenagers don't buy their own $200 electronic devices, they aren't likely to take care of them either.