I should be able to flip landscape in any Apple app.
What I would like to see would be the option to (temporarily) turn tilting off. I have found that I often use the iPhone to surf the net while lying in my bed; however, this means that it'll often tilt to horizontal use when I'm lying with my head horizontal, even though I want to see the screen vertically.
I would really hate if the eBook reader in the iPhone would respond to tilting.
On the Treo, the phone part is an application that isn't really integrated into the rest of the Palm too well. I've owned a 650. It just can't compare to the iPhone. The only thing it does that I wish the iPhone did is this: If I want to ender an appointment, on the 650, I tap when I want the appointment to be and start typing. The iPhone doesn't do this quite as easily.
Then you're not in the target audience of the phone. It's not for everyone.
The iPhone looks nice but doesn't give me anything I didn't already have in terms of functionality. Now if you give me a nice-looking shiny product with features I don't have then you might have a winner!
I see two issues here:
You want a phone with more features than your current phone
You think people buy the iPhone because it's shiny
Obviously, you do not understand why people would want to buy an iPhone. That's okay: there are a lot of phone that give exactly what you want from a phone. The iPhone is not among them.
What the iPhone offers is not more features. It's also no "teh shiny." What the iPhone offers is the features most people use most of the time, in an UI that makes these features easy to use. Having owned such phones as the P800, the Treo 650 and the P990i, I can see why the iPhone is such a success: These phones offered a ton of features, but made the features I actually wanted to use hard to use and slow. Entering an appointment into the P990i took almost 20 taps with the stylus. Even stopping a phone call could lead to errors, because if the other person stopped the call before you did, tapping the "hang up" button would instead call somebody from the fast call list. In short, using these phones was an annoying experience, and I hardly ever used the "advanced" features, anyway.
The iPhone is the first smart phone I actually like. It does what I want in an elegant way. It doesn't fill the UI with useless features. Since my iPhone is unlocked, I can even install all kinds of games, e-Book readers and other stuff, and I can use my iPhone with local carriers.
The article is outdated and was wrong even when it came out. It was wrong because auto-checking mail was always optional. It's outdated because roaming can be disabled in current firmware versions.
The SIM card can be replaced, although it's a bit useless to do so unless you unlock the phone. There'sa "phone off" mode (it's called airplane mode). Your other points remain, of course.
So yeah: the iPhone isn't perfect by far. It's still the most pleasant, easy to use phone I've ever used. I'll gladly wait a few seconds longer for a web page to load if it means my phone actually does what I want it to do, when I want it to do it. Which can't be said of any of the other smart phones I've owned (P800, Treo 650, P990i).
Agreed. The iPhone is a great phone (and general information-finding device), but peering at it for long periods of time on that tiny screen? No good, not for book-reading.
I read Harry Potter on a P800. In comparison, the iPhone screen is pure luxury. Yes, it's absolutely possible to read books on the iPhone. It's even pleasurable: the iPhone's typography and sharpness beats every other portable device I've ever seen. A "real" e-Book reader will have advantages, but the iPhone absolutely can be an alternative.
There already are e-Book reader apps for hacked iPhones; they work perfectly well, too.
You probably goodled 10 minutes looking for somebody who claims Nintendo has a monopoly before simply linking to this, huh? Okay, I'll revise my statement: Only morons claim Nintendo has a monopoly on gaming. The same applies to Apple and computers.
Actually, you're wrong, as the other poster has commented, but even if your point held true: Nobody claims Nintendo has a monopoly just because you have to buy another Wii to play the Wii games you've already bought. Or that Ford has a monopoly just because the parts you bought for your model don't work with Toyota cars.
But... can anyone here honestly say that if you took the entire story about the 'dodgy' firewall and replaced Apple with Microsoft that there wouldn't be people literally screaming themselves blue in the face about how insecure MS is _by_design_?
Where in the world did you get the idea that people did not "literally scream themselves blue in the face" about this issue? Honestly, this idea that Apple gets a free pass because it's Apple is hilarious. Do you even read blogs which have Apple as a topic? Mac users are some of the worst whiners ever (and I mean that in a good way, so don't flame me). They whine about everything. Icons on the dock don't line up perfectly well with the Dock's perspective? There are literally thousands of blog entries whining about that. People download a trojan from a porn site and install it on their Macs, giving the installer their password? Literally thousands of "Apple is doomed!" news stories.
Apple doesn't get a free pass from anyone. Everything Apple does is minutely followed by Apple's customers and Apple haters alike. Apple can't set one foot in front of the other without people all over the Internet whining about it.
It's not a bad thing, either. There's so little malware on Macs because Mac users will whine about it all day if something is found, giving it little chance to spread. There are so many good, well designed applications on Macs because Mac users don't tolerate crap. They will whine and whine and whine if their favourite application has a button which is a pixel too high, or if the Firewall settings are named confusingly. In the end, bad software just doesn't survive on Macs.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure whether you're trolling, or whether you're serious, but either way it's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time.
UMD is not in deep trouble. It's dead.
gp meant: Please buy POP7; POP6 was not crap, so please forgive us the crappy POP5 (using your version numbers).
What I would like to see would be the option to (temporarily) turn tilting off. I have found that I often use the iPhone to surf the net while lying in my bed; however, this means that it'll often tilt to horizontal use when I'm lying with my head horizontal, even though I want to see the screen vertically.
I would really hate if the eBook reader in the iPhone would respond to tilting.
In my iPhone e-Book reader, I just tap the bottom part of the page, and it scrolls to the next page.
Because you'll want to take your MP3 player with you anyway, due to storage space and sheer size of the Kindle.
I'd mod you up if I could. Thanks :-)
On the Treo, the phone part is an application that isn't really integrated into the rest of the Palm too well. I've owned a 650. It just can't compare to the iPhone. The only thing it does that I wish the iPhone did is this: If I want to ender an appointment, on the 650, I tap when I want the appointment to be and start typing. The iPhone doesn't do this quite as easily.
Its look has been cloned. Believe it or not, the look isn't what makes the iPhone.
It's not the marketing department. It's the fact that the iPod (as well as the iPhone) combines
- the features people actually want
- in a small case
- with an UI that actually works
Pre-iPod, no MP3 player offered that. Pre-iPhone, few phones did.Then you're not in the target audience of the phone. It's not for everyone.
The iPhone looks nice but doesn't give me anything I didn't already have in terms of functionality. Now if you give me a nice-looking shiny product with features I don't have then you might have a winner!I see two issues here:
Obviously, you do not understand why people would want to buy an iPhone. That's okay: there are a lot of phone that give exactly what you want from a phone. The iPhone is not among them.
What the iPhone offers is not more features. It's also no "teh shiny." What the iPhone offers is the features most people use most of the time, in an UI that makes these features easy to use. Having owned such phones as the P800, the Treo 650 and the P990i, I can see why the iPhone is such a success: These phones offered a ton of features, but made the features I actually wanted to use hard to use and slow. Entering an appointment into the P990i took almost 20 taps with the stylus. Even stopping a phone call could lead to errors, because if the other person stopped the call before you did, tapping the "hang up" button would instead call somebody from the fast call list. In short, using these phones was an annoying experience, and I hardly ever used the "advanced" features, anyway.
The iPhone is the first smart phone I actually like. It does what I want in an elegant way. It doesn't fill the UI with useless features. Since my iPhone is unlocked, I can even install all kinds of games, e-Book readers and other stuff, and I can use my iPhone with local carriers.
Except for the fact that you actually can.
Why make up reasons for disliking the iPhone when there are real reasons you could use?
The article is outdated and was wrong even when it came out. It was wrong because auto-checking mail was always optional. It's outdated because roaming can be disabled in current firmware versions.
The SIM card can be replaced, although it's a bit useless to do so unless you unlock the phone. There'sa "phone off" mode (it's called airplane mode). Your other points remain, of course.
So yeah: the iPhone isn't perfect by far. It's still the most pleasant, easy to use phone I've ever used. I'll gladly wait a few seconds longer for a web page to load if it means my phone actually does what I want it to do, when I want it to do it. Which can't be said of any of the other smart phones I've owned (P800, Treo 650, P990i).
Wow. You're the reason I hate Microsoft, and you made my point: You're totally misinformed, can't spell, yet have to get into fanboy flamewars online.
No, wait, you're not the reason I hate Microsoft. You're just the reason I dislike you.
You're right, gp should not have been modded Troll. Should have been Flamebait. You and me, though, we're clearly Offtopic.
Mac OS X Leopard (includes Alex) + iTunes == iPhone that reads books to you.
I read Harry Potter on a P800. In comparison, the iPhone screen is pure luxury. Yes, it's absolutely possible to read books on the iPhone. It's even pleasurable: the iPhone's typography and sharpness beats every other portable device I've ever seen. A "real" e-Book reader will have advantages, but the iPhone absolutely can be an alternative.
There already are e-Book reader apps for hacked iPhones; they work perfectly well, too.
You're not making sense. Either what I said applies to you, or I did not insult you. Make up your mind.
Also, if you have an actual argument that relates to the topic, I suggest you make it.
You probably goodled 10 minutes looking for somebody who claims Nintendo has a monopoly before simply linking to this, huh? Okay, I'll revise my statement: Only morons claim Nintendo has a monopoly on gaming. The same applies to Apple and computers.
That comment would have made sense a year ago. Today, it's just the sad wish of a fanboy who doesn't yet realize that it won't be granted.
Actually, you're wrong, as the other poster has commented, but even if your point held true: Nobody claims Nintendo has a monopoly just because you have to buy another Wii to play the Wii games you've already bought. Or that Ford has a monopoly just because the parts you bought for your model don't work with Toyota cars.
What's more, Nintendo has increased Wii production to currently 1.8 million per month.
That's 21.6 million per year, or over 100 million in just 5 years. If they keep this up, they might even catch up with the PS2!
And Nike has a 100% monopoly on Air Max shoes. That doesn't mean they actually have any kind of monopoly.
Where in the world did you get the idea that people did not "literally scream themselves blue in the face" about this issue? Honestly, this idea that Apple gets a free pass because it's Apple is hilarious. Do you even read blogs which have Apple as a topic? Mac users are some of the worst whiners ever (and I mean that in a good way, so don't flame me). They whine about everything. Icons on the dock don't line up perfectly well with the Dock's perspective? There are literally thousands of blog entries whining about that. People download a trojan from a porn site and install it on their Macs, giving the installer their password? Literally thousands of "Apple is doomed!" news stories.
Apple doesn't get a free pass from anyone. Everything Apple does is minutely followed by Apple's customers and Apple haters alike. Apple can't set one foot in front of the other without people all over the Internet whining about it.
It's not a bad thing, either. There's so little malware on Macs because Mac users will whine about it all day if something is found, giving it little chance to spread. There are so many good, well designed applications on Macs because Mac users don't tolerate crap. They will whine and whine and whine if their favourite application has a button which is a pixel too high, or if the Firewall settings are named confusingly. In the end, bad software just doesn't survive on Macs.