Really, all these feature comparisons are meaningless. People aren't going to buy this phone because it has some innovative new feature. It doesn't. It does, however, seem to have an UI that does not drive you insane. Which immediately makes it better than pretty much any other smartphone in a lot of people's minds.
I still regularly use my 2 MP Kodak digicam, which is about 6 or 7 years old. The pictures are great. Phone cams? Not so much. I think the CCDs in the phones are too small, so you have to have perfect, bright conditions to make non-crappy pictures.
I don't even know why you brought the Wiimote into this
Uh... WTF? You wrote "It's pretty much the same tech as the Wii controller."
Makes you come off as a fanboy.
Yeah. You know, about that... Something really funny. Whenever somebody brings up that argument, it's always because he can't come up with any real arguments. Which kind of points towards you as the "fanboy."
Web 2.0 is just a jargon way of saying "moderatly standards compliant HTML and CSS, JavaScript and XmlHttpRequest." It doesn't have a whole lot to do with marketing, and a lot of people care. Grow up.
Here in holland all phones, except for the really cheap ones, are internet capable (just GPRS or GPRS + UMTS).
They sure are, but do you actually know anyone who uses that stuff? Watching TV on your cell phone is fun for 10 seconds, until you realize that you'll never, ever use that, ever again. Browsing the web is somewhat more useful, but you're going to use this so rarely, given the crappyness of pretty much all phone browsers and the mere cost of the experience, that the slower transfer rates don't really matter.
Please provide references for your "carriers are locking out cell phones unless the manufacturers pay them" theory. Sounds like a moronic conspiracy theory to me.
I don't think 3G is such a big deal in Europe, either. What matters, though, is MMS. And the iPhone (so far) doesn't have MMS (as per the iPhone training manuals).
The Wii has a "Sixaxis"-style motion sensor in both the remote and the nunchuck. In addition to that, it has a camera in the Remote which can be used to point at the screen. The Sixaxis is the crippled, retarded cousin of the Wii Remote.
Even though The Godfather is a bad game on all platforms
That's the thing. The only version that is good is the Wii version. Have you even played the game? No, wait, you obviously haven't, otherwise you'd know that the "gestures" in Godfather map to real life perfectly well.
Also, "gimmicky controller"? Geez, you'd think by now all those Wii haters would have found a new meme.
The Wii does have strong sales, but the fact is that its no more powerful than an Xbox. It's last gen and nothing will change that. It doesn't have the legs to carry it more than a few years.
A lot of the points you make are good, but this one isn't. It's ignorant and moronic. First, the definition of "current gen" is that it came out during this generation. The Wii came out during this generation. That makes it current-gen.
Second, even if you go with the "metaphysical" definition of "current-gen," you'd come up with something like "significantly different from last gen." Now tell me, what games are the most different from last gen? Ninja Gaiden Sigma is basically a hi-res Xbox game. Most 360/PS3 games are hi-res versions of last-gen games. The Wii is the only console actually offering anything fresh. By that definition, you could almost argue that the Wii is the only current-gen console.
Lastly, the Leader always comes out with a new console last. Nintendo will do the same. The Wii might very well end up the console with the longest life-span of the current generation. If the PS3 doesn't deliver, Sony needs to cut its losses sooner or later and abandon it.
Taking out ports and remakes, we have Lair, Warhawk and Heavenly Sword, two of which are at least somewhat questionable. Warhawk had major issues during development, Lair seems to have issues with control. I have high hopes for all of these games, but even if they deliver, I doubt these are the kinds of games that sell consoles. The PS3 needs an exclusive GTA, it needs a new MGS, and it needs FF. Then it will be able to compete with the 360.
The Wii is another story altogether. For the Wii, the PS3 needs exclusive Singstar, Guitar Hero and Buzz titles. And it needs a lot more, a lot faster.
I own a PS3 as well as a Wii. They are both great consoles. But I doubt the PS3 will ever be able to compete with the Wii. With the 360? Probably. Wii? Nah.
This isn't the first time I've recommended The Godfater: Blackhand Edition, and it probably won't be the last time. Yes, EA sucks. Yes, Godfather has crappy graphics on the Wii. But seriously, playing it just feels incredibly right. You hit somebody with your fist. he goes to his knees. You grab him by the colar, hit him again, yank him up, drag him to the roof's edge and throw him off. All with ultrarealistic gestures. I have no idea how the story is, because I basically just run around and beat up cops and people. It's easily the most violent and most fun game I've ever played. I don't really like GTA, but this game simply rules.
So value isn't what people are willing to pay, it's what enough people are willing to pay? I don't see the difference. Diamons are a nice example, by the way, since they are objectively worthless. You can't do anything, they have very little resale value, and there are plenty of diamonds in nature. However, marketing and artificial supply constraints are used to increase demand and thus value.
A diamond's value has nothing to do with the diamond itself. It's a glorified rock. The PS3 is just the opposite: Objectively, there's a lot of stuff inside, so it should easily be worth 600 bucks. But most people aren't willing to pay that much for it, so its actual value is lower than the "objective" value.
That's funny, but just stupid. The PS3 is and always has been worth well more than its price in the store for a lot of reasons that nobody should have to justify anymore.
That's a stupid way to evaluate worth. It's like killing somebody and paying his relatives 13 bucks for the dead person's meat. You can't calculate subjective worth by just adding up all the components. If somebody doesn't feel that Motorstorm, Resistance and a Bluray driver are worth 600 bucks, then it's not worth it to him or her.
For the record, I own a PS3 because it's pure techporn. I hardly ever use it, but at least it's a conversation starter, and it has a cf card reader and a nice picture viewer I use to show photos we took during Wii parties.
Slashdot Mirror
I use the mobile versions of Opera. Opera Mobile or Opera Mini are not the real Opera. They can't be compared to Safari on the iPhone.
A user interface that does not suck.
Really, all these feature comparisons are meaningless. People aren't going to buy this phone because it has some innovative new feature. It doesn't. It does, however, seem to have an UI that does not drive you insane. Which immediately makes it better than pretty much any other smartphone in a lot of people's minds.
I still regularly use my 2 MP Kodak digicam, which is about 6 or 7 years old. The pictures are great. Phone cams? Not so much. I think the CCDs in the phones are too small, so you have to have perfect, bright conditions to make non-crappy pictures.
What for?
Do you see a lot of people doing that?
Here you go: Xbox 360 is limiting GTA IV, says Rockstar
Uh... WTF? You wrote "It's pretty much the same tech as the Wii controller."
Makes you come off as a fanboy.Yeah. You know, about that... Something really funny. Whenever somebody brings up that argument, it's always because he can't come up with any real arguments. Which kind of points towards you as the "fanboy."
That is great, I do that from time to time. It works perfectly fine with 2G phones.
Web 2.0 is just a jargon way of saying "moderatly standards compliant HTML and CSS, JavaScript and XmlHttpRequest." It doesn't have a whole lot to do with marketing, and a lot of people care. Grow up.
They sure are, but do you actually know anyone who uses that stuff? Watching TV on your cell phone is fun for 10 seconds, until you realize that you'll never, ever use that, ever again. Browsing the web is somewhat more useful, but you're going to use this so rarely, given the crappyness of pretty much all phone browsers and the mere cost of the experience, that the slower transfer rates don't really matter.
Maybe something like "get a new, free, but crappy car if you change the fuel brand, and throw the old one away?" :-)
You probably already know this, but Safari has some pretty cool JavaScript debugging options: Drosera, Web Inspector.
False. Entering your existing iT account or creating a new one is a step during setup, but you can skip it.
You don't. That's the point.
Please provide references for your "carriers are locking out cell phones unless the manufacturers pay them" theory. Sounds like a moronic conspiracy theory to me.
I don't think 3G is such a big deal in Europe, either. What matters, though, is MMS. And the iPhone (so far) doesn't have MMS (as per the iPhone training manuals).
Until it's more than a bunch of web sites, it's vaporware.
So, what are the other three axes?
The Wii has a "Sixaxis"-style motion sensor in both the remote and the nunchuck. In addition to that, it has a camera in the Remote which can be used to point at the screen. The Sixaxis is the crippled, retarded cousin of the Wii Remote.
That's the thing. The only version that is good is the Wii version. Have you even played the game? No, wait, you obviously haven't, otherwise you'd know that the "gestures" in Godfather map to real life perfectly well.
Also, "gimmicky controller"? Geez, you'd think by now all those Wii haters would have found a new meme.
No. I won't.
A lot of the points you make are good, but this one isn't. It's ignorant and moronic. First, the definition of "current gen" is that it came out during this generation. The Wii came out during this generation. That makes it current-gen.
Second, even if you go with the "metaphysical" definition of "current-gen," you'd come up with something like "significantly different from last gen." Now tell me, what games are the most different from last gen? Ninja Gaiden Sigma is basically a hi-res Xbox game. Most 360/PS3 games are hi-res versions of last-gen games. The Wii is the only console actually offering anything fresh. By that definition, you could almost argue that the Wii is the only current-gen console.
Lastly, the Leader always comes out with a new console last. Nintendo will do the same. The Wii might very well end up the console with the longest life-span of the current generation. If the PS3 doesn't deliver, Sony needs to cut its losses sooner or later and abandon it.
Taking out ports and remakes, we have Lair, Warhawk and Heavenly Sword, two of which are at least somewhat questionable. Warhawk had major issues during development, Lair seems to have issues with control. I have high hopes for all of these games, but even if they deliver, I doubt these are the kinds of games that sell consoles. The PS3 needs an exclusive GTA, it needs a new MGS, and it needs FF. Then it will be able to compete with the 360.
The Wii is another story altogether. For the Wii, the PS3 needs exclusive Singstar, Guitar Hero and Buzz titles. And it needs a lot more, a lot faster.
I own a PS3 as well as a Wii. They are both great consoles. But I doubt the PS3 will ever be able to compete with the Wii. With the 360? Probably. Wii? Nah.
This isn't the first time I've recommended The Godfater: Blackhand Edition, and it probably won't be the last time. Yes, EA sucks. Yes, Godfather has crappy graphics on the Wii. But seriously, playing it just feels incredibly right. You hit somebody with your fist. he goes to his knees. You grab him by the colar, hit him again, yank him up, drag him to the roof's edge and throw him off. All with ultrarealistic gestures. I have no idea how the story is, because I basically just run around and beat up cops and people. It's easily the most violent and most fun game I've ever played. I don't really like GTA, but this game simply rules.
So value isn't what people are willing to pay, it's what enough people are willing to pay? I don't see the difference. Diamons are a nice example, by the way, since they are objectively worthless. You can't do anything, they have very little resale value, and there are plenty of diamonds in nature. However, marketing and artificial supply constraints are used to increase demand and thus value.
A diamond's value has nothing to do with the diamond itself. It's a glorified rock. The PS3 is just the opposite: Objectively, there's a lot of stuff inside, so it should easily be worth 600 bucks. But most people aren't willing to pay that much for it, so its actual value is lower than the "objective" value.
That's a stupid way to evaluate worth. It's like killing somebody and paying his relatives 13 bucks for the dead person's meat. You can't calculate subjective worth by just adding up all the components. If somebody doesn't feel that Motorstorm, Resistance and a Bluray driver are worth 600 bucks, then it's not worth it to him or her.
For the record, I own a PS3 because it's pure techporn. I hardly ever use it, but at least it's a conversation starter, and it has a cf card reader and a nice picture viewer I use to show photos we took during Wii parties.
They would get laid, if all the chicks weren't playing Pokémon, too.