Sigh. You're not, and the sooner you figure out why, the sooner you'll understand who Apple is marketing to.
You bought a more expensive phone because it came with more features, you said it yourself. There's going to be a clear difference between the iPhone v1.0 marketing, and iPhone v2.0 marketing. Features and price will likely change in a year, and will likely drastically change in two - three years as Apple goes after a larger market segment.
Also, I'm not convinced that Apple systems, iPods or.Mac is comparable to the iPhone at this stage. Different products, different stages of the product lifestyle, and they are also targetting the "masses" at this point with all of them. Would you care to elaborate on why this is fair comparison?
This coming from the guy who doesn't plan on buying a mobile phone anytime in the near future.
Is this relevant? The point was that Apple's marketing is clearly more successful, what you said has no impact on that.
Ok, how's this - I've never owned a cell phone, and I don't plan on buying one anytime in the near future. The iPhone included. Neither of us are in the market that Apple is looking to sell to. People have been criticizing the iPod for not having wireless or a built-in FM tuner ever since it came out. It's been pretty much closed the entire time as well.
Slashdotters seem to think that "Well I wouldn't buy it because it doesn't have feature X" is a valid reason for the product failing. A lot of product design is deciding what to leave out, in fact this is more important than deciding what to put in. Yeah, your swiss army phone has more features, and is expandable so third party apps have been written.
What chunk of the market is not going to buy a phone because it doesn't have MMORPGs, gnutella or VoiP? It's a pretty small segment, at least for now. Does your Nokia have a sexy interface and slick commercials? I hadn't heard of it before you posted, seems like Apple already has a jump on Nokia's customers. Looks like Apple is doing a better job at getting to their customers than Nokia is.
The killer app is the phone, you don't need an SDK to call people.
It was pretty clear months ago that Safari would be one of the primary development paths on the iPhone. They said from the get-go that it had a fully featured web browser on it, why are people suddenly giving this knee-jerk reaction when nothing's changed. They can release a real SDK in a year, or two years, or even more if they'd like - nobody should have been expecting more. This is classic Apple.
That said Apple has said numerous times that the Killer App _is_ the phone. _If_ it does well, it'll be because of Apple's UI + vertical integration from the PC to the phone. Yes, they're targeting the smart phone market, but Apple will rely on their own tools for the time being - there's no need to let developers mess it up.
If they provided a number of patent infringements, they've already listed them internally. It's clear at this point that their intention was never to actually act on these patents.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh. You're not, and the sooner you figure out why, the sooner you'll understand who Apple is marketing to.
You bought a more expensive phone because it came with more features, you said it yourself. There's going to be a clear difference between the iPhone v1.0 marketing, and iPhone v2.0 marketing. Features and price will likely change in a year, and will likely drastically change in two - three years as Apple goes after a larger market segment.
Also, I'm not convinced that Apple systems, iPods or .Mac is comparable to the iPhone at this stage. Different products, different stages of the product lifestyle, and they are also targetting the "masses" at this point with all of them. Would you care to elaborate on why this is fair comparison?
This coming from the guy who doesn't plan on buying a mobile phone anytime in the near future.Is this relevant? The point was that Apple's marketing is clearly more successful, what you said has no impact on that.
Ok, how's this - I've never owned a cell phone, and I don't plan on buying one anytime in the near future. The iPhone included. Neither of us are in the market that Apple is looking to sell to. People have been criticizing the iPod for not having wireless or a built-in FM tuner ever since it came out. It's been pretty much closed the entire time as well.
Slashdotters seem to think that "Well I wouldn't buy it because it doesn't have feature X" is a valid reason for the product failing. A lot of product design is deciding what to leave out, in fact this is more important than deciding what to put in. Yeah, your swiss army phone has more features, and is expandable so third party apps have been written.
What chunk of the market is not going to buy a phone because it doesn't have MMORPGs, gnutella or VoiP? It's a pretty small segment, at least for now. Does your Nokia have a sexy interface and slick commercials? I hadn't heard of it before you posted, seems like Apple already has a jump on Nokia's customers. Looks like Apple is doing a better job at getting to their customers than Nokia is.
The killer app is the phone, you don't need an SDK to call people. It was pretty clear months ago that Safari would be one of the primary development paths on the iPhone. They said from the get-go that it had a fully featured web browser on it, why are people suddenly giving this knee-jerk reaction when nothing's changed. They can release a real SDK in a year, or two years, or even more if they'd like - nobody should have been expecting more. This is classic Apple. That said Apple has said numerous times that the Killer App _is_ the phone. _If_ it does well, it'll be because of Apple's UI + vertical integration from the PC to the phone. Yes, they're targeting the smart phone market, but Apple will rely on their own tools for the time being - there's no need to let developers mess it up.
If they provided a number of patent infringements, they've already listed them internally. It's clear at this point that their intention was never to actually act on these patents.