does the fact that there are no devices in the market mean that you would rather buy something as much unlike a smartphone as possible? if there is no true smartphone, what do you logically buy? something that is closer to the definition (symbian/maemo/droid) or something that is further behind (iphone)?
The fact that my definition of a device class causes said class to contain no devices when everyone else is of the opinion that there are a lot of them would first cause me to re-evaluate whether my definition is correct. Then I'd get the device that best suits my needs without insisting that less interesting (to me) devices don't belong in the device class at all. After all, most people agree that computers running Windows are PCs, even though they don't quite meet my preferences with regards to personal computers.
were you using single program oses on your 600mhz pc with 256mb ram and dedicated graphics? concerning the criticality of msdos apps in some places, i would like to inform you that in many places 128kbps internet is a critical workflow element. does that mean its okay to go back to that?
You're conflating "general-purpose" and "things I like". (And by the way, yes, I did occasionally boot my K6-2 into MS-DOS.)
Legacy applications often aren't nice and it'd be nice to move on (even if that would mean lots of retraining) but that doesn't mean they magically don't exist. They're still around and a general-purpose computer can reasonably be expected to run them, directly or through an emulation layer.
that is what is supposed to change with the advent of smartphones. but look at you.
Well, it's unlikely to change. Certain things just aren't possible - for example it's unfeasible to build a mobile phone with a current desktop-class CPU, a high-end gaming GPU or a full-width 105-key standard keyboard. Mobile devices must be reasonably small (ruling out large and/or heavy components) and they must last for a reasonable time on a finite battery charge (ruling out components with high power consumption).
You're always looking at restrictions simply because certain combinations of features don't make sense (like a mobile phone with an integrated DVD burner). I'm not saying that smartphones can't fulfill many of the same duties a desktop computer does. But you're not going to see people use them in as many diverse roles as a real general-purpose computer because they're not supposed to be one.
usually, cellphone chargers provide that kind of power. and charging is a lot faster than discharging. also note that pandora has a beefier battery than any cellphone.
Note that the Pandora is designed to different requirements than a smartphone, one of which is being a feasible replacement for a notebook - including being able to use arbitrary bus-powered USB devices. Smartphones can't do that - I can't plug one smartphone into another to charge it (and I think even syncing your contacts is unlikely to work). It's a sensible limitation because, as you pointed out, the Pandora's battery is much larger - large enough to push a smartphone past what consumers are likely to tolerate.
Being fully general-purpose would make smartphones less appealing - for instance, they'd need annoyingly large batteries just to be able to supply bus-powered USB devices. Smartphones aren't supposed to do everything, they're supposed to do what people need in their pocket. Which usually boils down to calls, PIM and internet access.
then what is the difference between a smartfone (like droid/symbian/iphone/anything) and a dumbfone (like any of samsung/sony ericsson/lg/whatever)?
thanks! Thank you everyone for proving my point again and again: most iphone owners are unable to comprehend the purpose behind smartphones. This is mostly due to the fact that they don't need a smartphone. i ask all you iphonies, what are the things you do on your smartphone? ps: i did not say anywhere that i hate iphone because of apple. i dislike those damn idiots like you whose worldview has been fucked by their iphone.
Note that you contradicted your earlier post by admitting that Symbian-based mobile phones are not general-purpose computers and therefore not smartphones by your own definition, merely devices resembling smartphones more than iPhones do.
i know that. I was admitting my mistake and refining my statement to correct that mistake.
No amount of insisting that everyone else is incapable of grasping the concept of a smartphone is helping the fact that your own definition is either inconsistent or implies that there are no such devices on the market.
does the fact that there are no devices in the market mean that you would rather buy something as much unlike a smartphone as possible? if there is no true smartphone, what do you logically buy? something that is closer to the definition (symbian/maemo/droid) or something that is further behind (iphone)?
By the way, I'd like to point out that we used non-multitasking general-purpose computers for quite some time (and there are a number of places where MS DOS applications are still considered a critical workflow element). You can argue that it's common for modern general-purpose computers to have multitasking support but I'd say that's just an OS feature orthogonal to the genereral-purposeness of the device as on general-purpose computers the OS is usually replacable. DOS-era computers are often still able to run a slimmed-down (but still multitasking) Linux; the hardware doesn't depend on a specific operating system to work.
were you using single program oses on your 600mhz pc with 256mb ram and dedicated graphics? concerning the criticality of msdos apps in some places, i would like to inform you that in many places 128kbps internet is a critical workflow element. does that mean its okay to go back to that?
Mobile phones are embedded devices with a limited set of capabilities.
that is what is supposed to change with the advent of smartphones. but look at you.
By the way, as for mobile devices not being able to give enough power: If your mobile device's battery is not capable of supplying 500 mA at 5 V you have a very interesting device indeed.
usually, cellphone chargers provide that kind of power. and charging is a lot faster than discharging. also note that pandora has a beefier battery than any cellphone.
and by the same award-winning logic, star wars is also not art. the story is art, the world is art, but not the film itself. this whole argument is completely silly. if i make something, put some of my creative input into it, then it is art. even a fine tuned porsche can be art. a fucking poop smear can be art, if intentionally created by a person. and we all know video games require much, much greater amount of input/effort than any other art form.
oh i dont know. modern painters have been selling their shit for milions of bux. the best movies make ~billion bux. best-selling authors make millions. and art has never been profitable?
i know. assholes like these are everywhere. here we have assholes thinking their culture is superior to europeans' 'immorality'. and as the above comment shows, you have some who think themselves to be superior for some imaginary reason.
only select programs which have been blessed by apple get to run in the background. I have said this again and again, people who buy an iphone generally dont need and dont understand the concept of a smartphone.
one thing that is very important to general purpose computing is the ability to run more than one program simultaneously. iphone cannot do that nor will it be able to in the foreseeable future. no the hack in iphone4 does not count. otherwise yes, you are correct. symbian phones cannot be run on some other os because the os and all basic programs reside on rom. so, inspite of both symbian and iphone not being general purpose, symbian is closer to the definition (if you think multitasking is a feature necessary to general purpose computers). ps:but some windows mobile and android phones can be made to dual boot. also n900.
I don't see why a general-purpose computer would use the OTG spec
i am not sure but maybe that is because a mobile device might be unable to give enough power required by usb devices?
if want the same games, then no. if you want games with similar gameplay, but different names then yes. any new sony ericsson will let you play thousands upon thousands of java games with the same level of graphics as that on iphone (though on a smaller screen).
no. and you could not do that even on the iphone too until version 3. because it requires a solid state compass. since we are comparing iphone at the time it was first released, iphone 3g, which is new hardware, does not come into the picture.
you should have bought the nokia e71. it came out around that time. there's not one thing you can't do on e71 that you can on iphone and there are many things you can do on e71 that you can't on iphone. and don't even get me started on the software development. symbian s60 sdk is totally completely free and open source. you don't need any subscription or other crap. to install any program on any phone, you just send the.sis(x) to the phone by any means (bt, ir, wifi, email, mms, whateverthefuck).
Probably someone who bought a smartphone before Android OS phones became common.
I bought smartphones before Android was around.
They ran Symbian.
Since the iPhone is hardly a smartphone I never thought of buying one.
exactly. people who haven't used a symbian (or even winmo) device do not understand what a smartphone is supposed to be. iphone is just a shiny toy. even by half decade old standards.
if you just want a cellphone, an mp3 player, and a Nintendo DS, there are much much cheaper dumbphones that will handle all that. and simultaneously, with real multitasking(not the fake shit in the iphone4). so why the fuck an iphone? let me say this:people who get iphone generally do not have any use for a real smartphone.
maybe you should use any of the real smartphones out there? like android, symbian and even winmo. then you'll see the power of having a device as powerful as a 2 yr old computer in the palm of your hand. seriously, can you do this on your new iphone? download a torrent(actually download it, not remote control your pc) while you send a video to your friend via bluetooth while browsing on opera mobile (not the mini shit). i can do this easily on my 2yr old e71. can you do it on any iphone without doing anything illegal?
you are right. even my old symbian phone looks more attractive and useful in front of iphone. and what is this shit about iphones being apple's devices? is it not my device if i pay for it??
Slashdot Mirror
does the fact that there are no devices in the market mean that you would rather buy something as much unlike a smartphone as possible? if there is no true smartphone, what do you logically buy? something that is closer to the definition (symbian/maemo/droid) or something that is further behind (iphone)?
The fact that my definition of a device class causes said class to contain no devices when everyone else is of the opinion that there are a lot of them would first cause me to re-evaluate whether my definition is correct. Then I'd get the device that best suits my needs without insisting that less interesting (to me) devices don't belong in the device class at all. After all, most people agree that computers running Windows are PCs, even though they don't quite meet my preferences with regards to personal computers.
were you using single program oses on your 600mhz pc with 256mb ram and dedicated graphics? concerning the criticality of msdos apps in some places, i would like to inform you that in many places 128kbps internet is a critical workflow element. does that mean its okay to go back to that?
You're conflating "general-purpose" and "things I like". (And by the way, yes, I did occasionally boot my K6-2 into MS-DOS.) Legacy applications often aren't nice and it'd be nice to move on (even if that would mean lots of retraining) but that doesn't mean they magically don't exist. They're still around and a general-purpose computer can reasonably be expected to run them, directly or through an emulation layer.
that is what is supposed to change with the advent of smartphones. but look at you.
Well, it's unlikely to change. Certain things just aren't possible - for example it's unfeasible to build a mobile phone with a current desktop-class CPU, a high-end gaming GPU or a full-width 105-key standard keyboard. Mobile devices must be reasonably small (ruling out large and/or heavy components) and they must last for a reasonable time on a finite battery charge (ruling out components with high power consumption). You're always looking at restrictions simply because certain combinations of features don't make sense (like a mobile phone with an integrated DVD burner). I'm not saying that smartphones can't fulfill many of the same duties a desktop computer does. But you're not going to see people use them in as many diverse roles as a real general-purpose computer because they're not supposed to be one.
usually, cellphone chargers provide that kind of power. and charging is a lot faster than discharging. also note that pandora has a beefier battery than any cellphone.
Note that the Pandora is designed to different requirements than a smartphone, one of which is being a feasible replacement for a notebook - including being able to use arbitrary bus-powered USB devices. Smartphones can't do that - I can't plug one smartphone into another to charge it (and I think even syncing your contacts is unlikely to work). It's a sensible limitation because, as you pointed out, the Pandora's battery is much larger - large enough to push a smartphone past what consumers are likely to tolerate. Being fully general-purpose would make smartphones less appealing - for instance, they'd need annoyingly large batteries just to be able to supply bus-powered USB devices. Smartphones aren't supposed to do everything, they're supposed to do what people need in their pocket. Which usually boils down to calls, PIM and internet access.
then what is the difference between a smartfone (like droid/symbian/iphone/anything) and a dumbfone (like any of samsung/sony ericsson/lg/whatever)?
thanks! Thank you everyone for proving my point again and again:
most iphone owners are unable to comprehend the purpose behind smartphones. This is mostly due to the fact that they don't need a smartphone.
i ask all you iphonies, what are the things you do on your smartphone?
ps: i did not say anywhere that i hate iphone because of apple. i dislike those damn idiots like you whose worldview has been fucked by their iphone.
Note that you contradicted your earlier post by admitting that Symbian-based mobile phones are not general-purpose computers and therefore not smartphones by your own definition, merely devices resembling smartphones more than iPhones do.
i know that. I was admitting my mistake and refining my statement to correct that mistake.
No amount of insisting that everyone else is incapable of grasping the concept of a smartphone is helping the fact that your own definition is either inconsistent or implies that there are no such devices on the market.
does the fact that there are no devices in the market mean that you would rather buy something as much unlike a smartphone as possible? if there is no true smartphone, what do you logically buy? something that is closer to the definition (symbian/maemo/droid) or something that is further behind (iphone)?
By the way, I'd like to point out that we used non-multitasking general-purpose computers for quite some time (and there are a number of places where MS DOS applications are still considered a critical workflow element). You can argue that it's common for modern general-purpose computers to have multitasking support but I'd say that's just an OS feature orthogonal to the genereral-purposeness of the device as on general-purpose computers the OS is usually replacable. DOS-era computers are often still able to run a slimmed-down (but still multitasking) Linux; the hardware doesn't depend on a specific operating system to work.
were you using single program oses on your 600mhz pc with 256mb ram and dedicated graphics? concerning the criticality of msdos apps in some places, i would like to inform you that in many places 128kbps internet is a critical workflow element. does that mean its okay to go back to that?
Mobile phones are embedded devices with a limited set of capabilities.
that is what is supposed to change with the advent of smartphones. but look at you.
By the way, as for mobile devices not being able to give enough power: If your mobile device's battery is not capable of supplying 500 mA at 5 V you have a very interesting device indeed.
usually, cellphone chargers provide that kind of power. and charging is a lot faster than discharging. also note that pandora has a beefier battery than any cellphone.
+9000 insightful
and by the same award-winning logic, star wars is also not art. the story is art, the world is art, but not the film itself.
this whole argument is completely silly. if i make something, put some of my creative input into it, then it is art. even a fine tuned porsche can be art. a fucking poop smear can be art, if intentionally created by a person.
and we all know video games require much, much greater amount of input/effort than any other art form.
oh i dont know. modern painters have been selling their shit for milions of bux. the best movies make ~billion bux. best-selling authors make millions.
and art has never been profitable?
i know. assholes like these are everywhere. here we have assholes thinking their culture is superior to europeans' 'immorality'. and as the above comment shows, you have some who think themselves to be superior for some imaginary reason.
only select programs which have been blessed by apple get to run in the background. I have said this again and again, people who buy an iphone generally dont need and dont understand the concept of a smartphone.
otherwise yes, you are correct. symbian phones cannot be run on some other os because the os and all basic programs reside on rom.
so, inspite of both symbian and iphone not being general purpose, symbian is closer to the definition (if you think multitasking is a feature necessary to general purpose computers).
ps:but some windows mobile and android phones can be made to dual boot. also n900.
I don't see why a general-purpose computer would use the OTG spec
i am not sure but maybe that is because a mobile device might be unable to give enough power required by usb devices?
no, a smartphone is a phone sized general purpose computer.
i dont understand what you are trying to say.
let me say it: google.
um, actually there was a lot of adverts for e71 where i live (india). your sheeple media was just busy over-hyping everything apple.
what if you are trying to call 911 and at&t network is gone? is at&t a danger to lives or property?
if want the same games, then no. if you want games with similar gameplay, but different names then yes. any new sony ericsson will let you play thousands upon thousands of java games with the same level of graphics as that on iphone (though on a smaller screen).
no. and you could not do that even on the iphone too until version 3. because it requires a solid state compass. since we are comparing iphone at the time it was first released, iphone 3g, which is new hardware, does not come into the picture.
you should have bought the nokia e71. it came out around that time. there's not one thing you can't do on e71 that you can on iphone and there are many things you can do on e71 that you can't on iphone. .sis(x) to the phone by any means (bt, ir, wifi, email, mms, whateverthefuck).
and don't even get me started on the software development. symbian s60 sdk is totally completely free and open source. you don't need any subscription or other crap. to install any program on any phone, you just send the
I bought smartphones before Android was around.
They ran Symbian.
Since the iPhone is hardly a smartphone I never thought of buying one.
exactly.
people who haven't used a symbian (or even winmo) device do not understand what a smartphone is supposed to be. iphone is just a shiny toy. even by half decade old standards.
microsoft looks like a neighborhood bully in front of apple's yakuza.
if you just want a cellphone, an mp3 player, and a Nintendo DS, there are much much cheaper dumbphones that will handle all that. and simultaneously, with real multitasking(not the fake shit in the iphone4).
so why the fuck an iphone?
let me say this:people who get iphone generally do not have any use for a real smartphone.
maybe you should use any of the real smartphones out there? like android, symbian and even winmo. then you'll see the power of having a device as powerful as a 2 yr old computer in the palm of your hand.
seriously, can you do this on your new iphone? download a torrent(actually download it, not remote control your pc) while you send a video to your friend via bluetooth while browsing on opera mobile (not the mini shit).
i can do this easily on my 2yr old e71. can you do it on any iphone without doing anything illegal?
why do you keep talking about hardware failiures? have you seen any one bricking iphone by jailbreaking it?
the existence of jailbreaking implies an iron fist. otherwise you would be able to do anything on your phone without hacking it.
so you are saying that developing games requires the same amount of effort/money as making a fart app?
you are right. even my old symbian phone looks more attractive and useful in front of iphone.
and what is this shit about iphones being apple's devices? is it not my device if i pay for it??