I owned a 3G up until recently (I replaced it with a 3GS about a month ago), so I could just say "cool story bro" to your obvious lies, but whatever. Anything I say to the contrary you'll simply dismiss out of hand. You can't even be bothered to log in and stand behind your falsehoods. Unsurprising, really.
The 3G's most current OS is 4.2.1, which was current up until March 2011 - not bad for a phone released on July 11th 2008 and withdrawn from sale on June 19th 2009. It continued to be supported with the most current OS for 18 to 20 months after it was withdrawn from sale (depending on how you count the beginning and end months), so almost 2 full years.
The initial release of iOS4 was bad, but that was changed with a subsequent update to improve performance quite a bit. It was never as fast as iOS3, but the hardware really wasn't up to the requirements of iOS4, although the trimmed down version did keep it up to date with most of the new features. It certainly wasn't "bricked" like you seem to suggest, presumably with no actual first hand experience.
You read too much into my facetious comment. Enough to bring out the vulgar language and the cowardice of not logging in to an account that is pretty anonymous as it is.
Either way, the adults are talking. Come back when you're ready to take part.
I would be interested to see the evidence that paints me as a "known Google hater", other than this one flippant comment that you replied to. You and I both know that no such evidence exists, unless you are counting any non-pro-Google post (ie, anything that doesn't specifically praise Google) as being "Google hating".
Yes, a lot more crappiness for your money. Well worth it.
*ducks*
(I kid, I kid, I have seen some awesome Android handsets and some awful ones - it seems the experience can be all over the map depending on which one you get, whereas the Apple experience is pretty much a straight line since there is little variation in handsets).
Ah, the classic "I like slashdot being an echo chamber".
What happened to debating the pros and cons of different technology? Now anyone who disagrees with the slashdot groupthink-du-jour is the "evil enemy" to be derided and driven off.
My goodness, I considered whether I need a faux html tag to close my "tongue firmly in cheek" tag, but I assumed people on slashdot would be smart enough to see the blatantly obvious facetiousness.
I guess not.
Hell, I threw in a winking smiley, what more do you want?
Next week's screening of Blade Runner will be the one with the voice over.
That you're relying on "leaked dev builds that are 100% functional" as your evidence for Android being the "totally open" platform of sunshine and rainbows, at least until Google actually *does* officially release the source.
They did correct this though with later updates to iOS4 - it was really, really bad when it first came out, but they did a lot of work to improve it. It was still never as usable as iOS3 had been on that hardware though.
I replaced mine with a salvaged and repaired 3GS and was a little worried that the experience migrating it to iOS5 would be the same as going 3>4 on the 3G, but they learned their lesson I think and iOS5 is great on the 3GS, despite the considerable difference in hardware power between the 3GS and the 4/4S that it was really targeted at.
The iPhone 3G did get software updates, up to the latest version of 4, but it really is just not capable of running iOS5 (it was barely capable of running iOS4)
It's certainly usable. The main difference I notice is on UI elements (I don't have the HW acceleration working), and the fact that the temperature control is not as fine grained, and it runs much hotter than under 10.5 (which is what I have dual booting with it).
You can remove that "oh wait" since I do exactly what your first sentence says with my Mac machines.
Whitebox RAM, hard drives etc. In terms of laptop upgrades you're obviously limited, but how is that unique to Apple laptops? (excluding some custom 'luggable' laptops designed with removable GPUs and CPUs etc).
When the hard drive failed on my iMac I bought a whitebox bare drive and stuck it in. When my friend broke his DVD drive on his powerbook I installed a barebones slim slot load drive bought off Amazon...
Other than specific parts (eg, the logic board) the upgrade parts are all compatible.
Hell, the new iMacs use socketed Intel CPUs so you can upgrade to anything with the same socket (LGA 1155) - so if you want to upgrade your iMac to Ivy Bridge next year you're free to do so.
Goodness me you're angry and immature! A real ambassador for whatever it is you're promoting. I can see why Android folks would want you on their side.
You are also missing the point by such a wide margin, which isn't surprising given your homophobic frothing and ranting, but I should probably try to spell it out in simple language that you will understand.
This whole subthread is about the presence of the voice search on Android, hence the argument. No one is disputing that it's in there. However, it has the same level as promotion as the voice search that existed in iOS 3 and iOS4 on the 3GS and 4 before the release of the 4S - ie, not all that much. There was a little bit of marketing about it, but nothing major.
Now, with the release of the 4S, Siri is one of the headline features of the phone in the marketing - that is why people are "suddenly" talking about it, and what we mean when we say Apple has placed it front and centre.
If you'd stop thrashing about like a kid who had missed his Ritalin then you might be able to appreciate that subtle difference.
So... where was this front and centre feature promotion?
In the years since Android has been out, "doing things better" than iOS, why has this not been mentioned? Instead it's all about how it's better because you can sideload apps.
When I say "front and centre" I mean exactly that - Apple has made it the main selling point for the 4S, and as a result has everyone talking about it (witness, this article which doesn't really have anything to *do* with voice recognition, making a weak comparison with Siri in the summary to generate buzz).
Android might be able to cure cancer, but unless people actually know about it, you can't really call it front and centre.
Yes, they would - yet the OP is specifically using language that Apple would be looking to "sneakily" get a patent on it (with absolutely no evidence) rather than, say obtaining patents already granted on it by the original makers when they bought the software.
"Ok, we bought it, now lets patent it!" is the claim, with no corroborating evidence at all. In fact, the OP is claiming this is a "what's worse..." argument - as in, here's a fact that makes Apple's use of Siri bad for everyone, when he just shot his mouth off with wild speculation.
Then he goes into a non-sequitur.
Essentially he was just your classic anti-Apple troll, but that's hardly unusual around here.
Look, I will be the first to admit that there are a lot of vocal fans in the Apple community (just as there are in the Android community, although most of them seem to be more interested in judging what other people use), but not everything in Apple's success can be hand-waved away with "oh, it's just stupid sheeple falling for the RDF" - to do so is more a reflection on other people not learning what Apple *does* do right occasionally when creating and marketing a product. To simply dismiss its success out of hand as gullible people falling for glossy marketing is profoundly short sighted.
Marketing only gets you so far. It's certainly an essential element of the equation, but for continued, increasing success you actually need to back it up with a good product.
Not everything they do is "perfect" and there are certainly areas where some much-needed improvement exist (for just one example of several, on iOS there really needs to be a quick way to turn BT/Wifi on and off without going into the settings - I know this is trivial to do on Android and would be very useful), but overall they make products that work very well for the people who buy them.
The RDF is a crutch used by people who will predict doom and gloom and no sales for an announced Apple product because it's missing feature X, or it's a walled garden, or because you can buy cheaper products that do more, only for that New Apple Product to sell very well, seemingly in contradiction to all their knowledge on what should happen. It shows a clear short sightedness to say "pff, well since that does not fit my expectations of the market, it's just gullible fools falling for marketing" instead of "well that was unexpected, what are they doing right?"
That's not to say that Apple has it all worked out perfectly, but they are very good at judging the market on the whole.
Slashdot Mirror
I owned a 3G up until recently (I replaced it with a 3GS about a month ago), so I could just say "cool story bro" to your obvious lies, but whatever. Anything I say to the contrary you'll simply dismiss out of hand. You can't even be bothered to log in and stand behind your falsehoods. Unsurprising, really.
The 3G's most current OS is 4.2.1, which was current up until March 2011 - not bad for a phone released on July 11th 2008 and withdrawn from sale on June 19th 2009. It continued to be supported with the most current OS for 18 to 20 months after it was withdrawn from sale (depending on how you count the beginning and end months), so almost 2 full years.
The initial release of iOS4 was bad, but that was changed with a subsequent update to improve performance quite a bit. It was never as fast as iOS3, but the hardware really wasn't up to the requirements of iOS4, although the trimmed down version did keep it up to date with most of the new features. It certainly wasn't "bricked" like you seem to suggest, presumably with no actual first hand experience.
You read too much into my facetious comment. Enough to bring out the vulgar language and the cowardice of not logging in to an account that is pretty anonymous as it is.
Either way, the adults are talking. Come back when you're ready to take part.
I would be interested to see the evidence that paints me as a "known Google hater", other than this one flippant comment that you replied to. You and I both know that no such evidence exists, unless you are counting any non-pro-Google post (ie, anything that doesn't specifically praise Google) as being "Google hating".
You fanboys are amusing, though.
Yes, a lot more crappiness for your money. Well worth it.
*ducks*
(I kid, I kid, I have seen some awesome Android handsets and some awful ones - it seems the experience can be all over the map depending on which one you get, whereas the Apple experience is pretty much a straight line since there is little variation in handsets).
Or it could be that the quarter in question was the one *before* the release of the iPhone 4S.
Check the numbers again after the quarter that includes 4S sales...
Ah, the classic "I like slashdot being an echo chamber".
What happened to debating the pros and cons of different technology? Now anyone who disagrees with the slashdot groupthink-du-jour is the "evil enemy" to be derided and driven off.
Such a shame.
My goodness, I considered whether I need a faux html tag to close my "tongue firmly in cheek" tag, but I assumed people on slashdot would be smart enough to see the blatantly obvious facetiousness.
I guess not.
Hell, I threw in a winking smiley, what more do you want?
Next week's screening of Blade Runner will be the one with the voice over.
Strange how that all gets muddied up when Android is being touted as "open".
I suppose it should come with a disclaimer or something.
That you're relying on "leaked dev builds that are 100% functional" as your evidence for Android being the "totally open" platform of sunshine and rainbows, at least until Google actually *does* officially release the source.
And with Google you're at their mercy for source release.
How's that ICS source build going... oh wait ;)
Yes, yes, they've said it will come out when ICS-running phones are shipped, I know.
I'll just stick with XP with no service packs and IE6, then?
No need to upgrade!
They did correct this though with later updates to iOS4 - it was really, really bad when it first came out, but they did a lot of work to improve it. It was still never as usable as iOS3 had been on that hardware though.
I replaced mine with a salvaged and repaired 3GS and was a little worried that the experience migrating it to iOS5 would be the same as going 3>4 on the 3G, but they learned their lesson I think and iOS5 is great on the 3GS, despite the considerable difference in hardware power between the 3GS and the 4/4S that it was really targeted at.
To be pedantic, iOS5 supports the iPod Touch (multiple generations - I think 4 and 5), the iPhone (3GS/4/4S) and iPad (1 and 2).
The iPhone 3G did get software updates, up to the latest version of 4, but it really is just not capable of running iOS5 (it was barely capable of running iOS4)
IUPAC's spelling preference is Caesium (and it's not always a Brit/US thing - they have standardised on "sulfur" for example).
It's certainly usable. The main difference I notice is on UI elements (I don't have the HW acceleration working), and the fact that the temperature control is not as fine grained, and it runs much hotter than under 10.5 (which is what I have dual booting with it).
How is that Apple's fault?
You can remove that "oh wait" since I do exactly what your first sentence says with my Mac machines.
Whitebox RAM, hard drives etc. In terms of laptop upgrades you're obviously limited, but how is that unique to Apple laptops? (excluding some custom 'luggable' laptops designed with removable GPUs and CPUs etc).
When the hard drive failed on my iMac I bought a whitebox bare drive and stuck it in. When my friend broke his DVD drive on his powerbook I installed a barebones slim slot load drive bought off Amazon...
Other than specific parts (eg, the logic board) the upgrade parts are all compatible.
Hell, the new iMacs use socketed Intel CPUs so you can upgrade to anything with the same socket (LGA 1155) - so if you want to upgrade your iMac to Ivy Bridge next year you're free to do so.
Yes, I have Ubuntu running on a similar era PB G4.
It didn't like KDE, but Gnome works ok, if a little less flashy.
Heh. In other words the "I have lost this argument but lack the requisite intelligence to get out of it without looking like an idiot".
Better luck next time, maybe you'll remember to log in.
Goodness me you're angry and immature! A real ambassador for whatever it is you're promoting. I can see why Android folks would want you on their side.
You are also missing the point by such a wide margin, which isn't surprising given your homophobic frothing and ranting, but I should probably try to spell it out in simple language that you will understand.
This whole subthread is about the presence of the voice search on Android, hence the argument. No one is disputing that it's in there. However, it has the same level as promotion as the voice search that existed in iOS 3 and iOS4 on the 3GS and 4 before the release of the 4S - ie, not all that much. There was a little bit of marketing about it, but nothing major.
Now, with the release of the 4S, Siri is one of the headline features of the phone in the marketing - that is why people are "suddenly" talking about it, and what we mean when we say Apple has placed it front and centre.
If you'd stop thrashing about like a kid who had missed his Ritalin then you might be able to appreciate that subtle difference.
And the advertising? Front and centre means more than just having the feature on the home screen.
I can see why you posted AC - you have no clue.
So... where was this front and centre feature promotion?
In the years since Android has been out, "doing things better" than iOS, why has this not been mentioned? Instead it's all about how it's better because you can sideload apps.
When I say "front and centre" I mean exactly that - Apple has made it the main selling point for the 4S, and as a result has everyone talking about it (witness, this article which doesn't really have anything to *do* with voice recognition, making a weak comparison with Siri in the summary to generate buzz).
Android might be able to cure cancer, but unless people actually know about it, you can't really call it front and centre.
No, it really isn't. If you can't do anything but whimper anonymously from behind a screen then why waste my time digging up cites?
Yes, they would - yet the OP is specifically using language that Apple would be looking to "sneakily" get a patent on it (with absolutely no evidence) rather than, say obtaining patents already granted on it by the original makers when they bought the software.
"Ok, we bought it, now lets patent it!" is the claim, with no corroborating evidence at all. In fact, the OP is claiming this is a "what's worse..." argument - as in, here's a fact that makes Apple's use of Siri bad for everyone, when he just shot his mouth off with wild speculation.
Then he goes into a non-sequitur.
Essentially he was just your classic anti-Apple troll, but that's hardly unusual around here.
Ah, the old "RDF" argument again.
Look, I will be the first to admit that there are a lot of vocal fans in the Apple community (just as there are in the Android community, although most of them seem to be more interested in judging what other people use), but not everything in Apple's success can be hand-waved away with "oh, it's just stupid sheeple falling for the RDF" - to do so is more a reflection on other people not learning what Apple *does* do right occasionally when creating and marketing a product. To simply dismiss its success out of hand as gullible people falling for glossy marketing is profoundly short sighted.
Marketing only gets you so far. It's certainly an essential element of the equation, but for continued, increasing success you actually need to back it up with a good product.
Not everything they do is "perfect" and there are certainly areas where some much-needed improvement exist (for just one example of several, on iOS there really needs to be a quick way to turn BT/Wifi on and off without going into the settings - I know this is trivial to do on Android and would be very useful), but overall they make products that work very well for the people who buy them.
The RDF is a crutch used by people who will predict doom and gloom and no sales for an announced Apple product because it's missing feature X, or it's a walled garden, or because you can buy cheaper products that do more, only for that New Apple Product to sell very well, seemingly in contradiction to all their knowledge on what should happen. It shows a clear short sightedness to say "pff, well since that does not fit my expectations of the market, it's just gullible fools falling for marketing" instead of "well that was unexpected, what are they doing right?"
That's not to say that Apple has it all worked out perfectly, but they are very good at judging the market on the whole.