I'm betting the iPhone lasts more than twice as long as your current phone anyway.
Also, the thing charges off it's port, and the iPod industry has already churned out tons of external chargers. Some that you can power off AA's if you want. This is no "deal breaker"--it's simply a different way of doing it. Are you going to be constantly on the phone for 8 hours+ with NO downtime inbetween, so that plugging in an external charger would become a huge inconvenience? (And if it's a real emergency, you can always just deal with the dangling.
In fact, I figure a built-in case/dock/battery will be on its' way from Belkin shortly.;-) (Memory, too, once we figure out if the iPhone can be made to support external storage.)
Personally, I don't really see it. If I want to replace the battery on my meager LG phone (2.5 hours talk time, if I'm lucky) it still runs me $40. (At least at the brick and mortar stores. I can find better online, no doubt, but that's comparing apples to Apple.;-) ) The iPhone is listed at 8 hours, and people are reporting even better times.
Granted, we don't know what the lifespan and drain-over-time will look like right now, but the battery itself is simply much higher quality. They list video playback at 7 hours, and some reviews have listed getting over nine to start. On that screen! (And ran with more power-draining features turned on than Apple had when measuring it.)
It is quite simply a much higher quality battery. (Or Apple has the best power-saving engineers in existence, at which point I'll STILL reward them by paying more for a replacement battery than Joe Fatzenyatz.;-) )
For example: why does iTunes run the iPod service even when iTunes isn't running and even though I've never used an iPod?
I take it you've never used any other Windows program before? o_O You have to continually monitor your services and processes to turn off crapola. Does Adobe have no idea how to write a decent Windo... er... don't answer that.;-)
I'll admit the "open in browser, don't ask to save" default in QT is a queer decision. They frequently have default settings that feel odd to me, but I think it's mainly because I always want to manage my media myself. Most people have NO idea what they're doing with it, and forget where they've downloaded anything, so the default makes for less of a mess with them. (And it's not like you can't "save as" easily enough.)
Meanwhile, Windows programs aren't similar enough to have anything one would call "look and feel" in other than the upper-right-hand min/max/close options (which Apple programs do have), and the menu structuring (which they also have.)
As for the 64-bitness of iTunes, I assume it mainly comes from too much crunch-time, and not enough time to vet iTunes for 64-bit Windows on top of what they were adding to the mix to get the iPhone working properly. It'll be along in short order, no doubt, but they do have a penchant for trying not to release consistently bug-ridden software.
How many devices use their own custom software for syncing? Is Palm to be bitched at for using their own HotSync and Desktop software to be the central routing point for your data, or wanting "total control" over it? Or is it simply that Apple is using their most intrinsic and centralized piece of software already used for this purpose (the iPod) and adding another device to it as well? Considering the iPhone DOES function as an iPod... you'd be using iTunes for that purpose already. How in bloody hell is this "arrogance?" Is Kodak "arrogant" for continually wanting to install and use their own picture manager, while it's completely inferior to other options?...or is it that they want to officially support THEIR software, and if you choose to go in another direction, that's your discretion? Are you telling me there are NO other iPod syncing possibilities out there? (Heck, there are some mentioned in this very thread.)
The lack of 64-bit support is a bit aggrivating, to be sure, but they appear to be fairly time-crunched to meet their launch timetable, so it's something to take a grain of salt with and wait a month or so for it to show up. If activation is all one is concerned with anyway, it's not like anyone would have a real problem going back to an Apple/at&t store, or finding ANYONE with a 32-bit OS...
As for iTunes itself, I'm really not sure why people are so hard up on it. I've certainly had problems with it, like I've had with any piece of software, but it manages a shit-ton of media quite well, and despire having a "large memory footprint," I don't notice it slowing down anything else. It doesn't really bother me if ANY program takes up a lot of memory, so long as it knows to get out of the way of other programs when they need the resources not being actively used or given lower priority.
Do we know if it's repetitive or not? Frequently forums get deluged with posts asking the same thing, and some of the late-comers get culled so that attention can be paid to the more active thread. (With the information already in it.)
Before the "prove a negative" people jump out of the woodwork, I should say that I would consider a scientifically complete model of the universe that includes no "extra" variables to be a sufficient proof...It's a high standard, but a reasonable one for a scientific proof.
Reasonable in a scientific context, but that "God" which people talk about--taken back that many levels--completely belies any scientific context. There is absolutely, positively, NO possible scientific explanation--no matter how lengthy and robust--that could not have "...and God wanted it to be that way" put behind it. God didn't WANT the universe to seem like it needed a God, silly monkey!
The "no way to prove a negative" concept is in full force for matters such as this. There is no possible way to exclude the supernatural as a possibility somewhere in a completely natural explanation. (Which is all a scientific one ever would be. By definition.)
No "proof" exists on that side of the equation. It is strictly impossible, unless you assign some sort of naturalistic binders to God. (Which goes rather against the whole "omnipotent" grain.)
But seriously, what I really wonder about people, is their incessant kvetching about the non-servicable battery. Which is completely servicable. Just not easily user-replacable or hot-swappable.
iPods are limited in the same way, but has that hampered the iPod's adoption? Can you NOT get the battery on your iPod replaced?...or can you instead get them replaced for barely more than most cell-phone batteries cost anyway? (Granted, the iPhone's might be more expensive.)
Meanwhile, they don't seem to complain that the iPhone has a BETTER battery than most devices (if current ratings pan out, which they probably will since the official ratings for the iPod are pretty much spot on), or that it doesn't impact the form factor, making you carry around a thicker, heavier unit.
Lack of user-swapping is minorly inconvenient, but certainly doesn't stop the iPhone from getting extra battery life. Plenty of external batteries already exist for the iPod (so are already a commodity), and I'm pretty sure you'll get a nice, form-fitting one you can clip to the bottom of your phone--or is built into a case, so that every time you put it away or operate it from a case, you're getting the extra juice--and will give you an amazing amount of extra life. Quite possibly have extra memory built in, too, because why not? The only thing is "restricts" you on is if you must get extra power without compromising the form factor at that point. Considering most people bring it up for emergency situations or the occasional extra-long business trip, I don't see it being that much of a deal; I'd rather have the form factor not be impacted to begin with.
The only real issue it could possibly have is if the battery swells or goes into so complete a failure that it messes up the iPhone's internals, but that will no doubt a warranty situation, so in that case it simply depends on how Apple makes good on it.
If true, that's still a step up. Most cell providers seem to take the "do not do anything that could remove revenue from our network!" approach. (Admittedly, I might be affected more by close proximity to Verizon.;-) ) A hardware manufacturer's saying "look, if we can make hardware compelling enough to pull subscribers TO your network from another one or keep them from moving, then that is MUCH more valuable to you!" makes the situation better for ALL hardware manufacturers.
All data plans suck right now. You think I'm doing backflips over Verizon? No, it's the reason I DON'T have a Treo right now... (That, and the Treo's lack of WiFi-without-an-extra-and-annoying-dongle.) Data is that "new thing most people don't need, so therefore you pay a premium for it right now." It's slowly getting commoditized, though, and if the iPhone sells well, it will probably assist notably in speeding up the process.
at&t hasn't announced their new plan details yet, however, and the network reforming and the iPhone's launch are notable events, so let's see if anything else gets changed first.
Didn't they approach Verizon first and get turned down cold? Isn't Cingular/at&t one of the big few to approach anyway? Might it be that Apple is getting them to permit more from their device, and contribute more to changing features of the service, by remaining exclusive for a period of time? Things that would not happen otherwise? Say what you want about at&t's service (I used to do network mapping for them; in this regard, they are certainly playing catch-up), but they are not a company that can be shrugged off, and ANYTHING that shakes up cell providers, IMHO, is a good thing. Especially good for Motorola, Nokia, LG, and any of the others who want to build more interesting DEVICES, but continually have to kowtow to the whims of the networks. (Admittedly "less good" from having an extension of the iPod franchise now in direct competition...;-) But competition is still good.)
Also, how is harping on a 2-year contract even a valid point? Almost ALL people sign up for two-year contracts to get the discount on their cell phone.
I hate to point it out to you, but the only reason Magic can be as revitalized as it is is DUE to the "cheap whore"-dom qualities you seem to assign it. I take issue with other points of profiteering I see (mainly in card design, as they can most CERTAINLY tell what combos will arise when they release new sets, and surprise-surprise! 90% rares!), but not the rapidity at which they are designing in general.
It makes it an expensive hobby to keep up, but not a STAGNANT one, which is by and large worse. There's nothing preventing you from playing exactly the way you used to with exactly the same cards you have with your friends, but if you want a competitive tournament environment and a live culture in a game specifically marketed as being ever-changing, you have to maintain a good pace and lots of variety. The designers have actually done a hell of a lot better job in maintaining that than I thought they would.
It is tiring to keep up with, though. I played from the beginning and burned out around Urza's Saga/Legacy (damn you, Tolarian Academy! Oh, and Sligh decks. *grumble* ), but up until that point was willing to keep up the investing and trading to stay on top of things. The "whoring" wasn't nearly as important as the gameplay changes, and unlike in a local PnP game, if you're mainly invested in the local tournament crowd, you can't tweak it.
And come to think of it, I had a TON of fun with the restrictive environment when the Magic Online beta started up--primarily because of the metric ton of cards I could accumulate for free during it. When "the Magic died" on that front, it was not worth it cost-wise for me to hop on the new medium, so I let it fall to the wayside as well. That's not precisely "whoring," though, but simply a cost of re-entry I'm no longer willing to front. (Same reason I never advanced past Step 1 in Games Workshop tabletops. I still get a hankering to play Necromunda, tho.;-) ) Same reason I don't invest in many games.
I would IMMEDIATELY subscribe to a Magic Online service that was not trying to sell-through in the same way, though. If they had just a straight subscription fee, "free" ability to collect (similar to how you accumulated cards in the Beta, for instance), no physical set cash-ins, and a no-holds-barred approach to what games and sets and styles you could play... I'd be back to giving them as much profit as I used to.;-)
Regardless, I can both appreciate what they DO have to do and lament what they HAVE done at the same time, and without invective. Also, also--D&D was very the same kind of cheap whore back in the TSR days. Gamers want MORE. It's up to you to decide how much you need.
Funny. That was rather my experience well before MMORPG's came along. It's a matter of mentality and maturity and imagination, and by and large "people don' got it."
Certainly the WoW'ing of gamerdom isn't going to help, but it's least brought more attention to similar gaming IRL. Searching for diamonds--even ones in the rough--will pretty much be as difficult as always.
He said he uses his Windows PC for games. Granted, that's the mainstay of how many people have "fun" on their computers, but Apple doesn't market for games. They gear their image toward "having fun doing what you want to on your Mac" and hope you are not a gamer.;-)
Which is fine, as gamers wrote off the platform ages ago. Unless they got absorbed by WoW, at which point it no longer matters for them. They're hoping to grab the attention of others.
Not to forget, you can buy 2 laptops for the price of the iPhone AND the 2-year contract that comes with it..
...and then you still have to buy a cell phone, and probably the 2-year contract that comes with it to save money off the phone. And if you want a good portable music player, an iPod.
...then you'll wonder just why in hell you're spending so much money or need to own two laptops, and hey! Wouldn't it be great of someone made a pocket-sized computer that you could do most of your quick and dirty internet tasks with? Maybe if it played the media you want to have with you and could be used as a phone, you could make do without carrying so many devices around!
That would be pretty cool. Someone should work on that.
Heck, I can't even get my mother to remember how to just PLAY the music on her phone, after I did all the other grunt-work for her. (But who can blame her... it is two menus deep, after all! Heh...)
I'm pretty sure she could manage an iPhone, tho. I believe that's the point.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm betting the iPhone lasts more than twice as long as your current phone anyway.
;-) (Memory, too, once we figure out if the iPhone can be made to support external storage.)
Also, the thing charges off it's port, and the iPod industry has already churned out tons of external chargers. Some that you can power off AA's if you want. This is no "deal breaker"--it's simply a different way of doing it. Are you going to be constantly on the phone for 8 hours+ with NO downtime inbetween, so that plugging in an external charger would become a huge inconvenience? (And if it's a real emergency, you can always just deal with the dangling.
In fact, I figure a built-in case/dock/battery will be on its' way from Belkin shortly.
That said, it's overpriced for what it is.
;-) ) The iPhone is listed at 8 hours, and people are reporting even better times.
;-) )
Personally, I don't really see it. If I want to replace the battery on my meager LG phone (2.5 hours talk time, if I'm lucky) it still runs me $40. (At least at the brick and mortar stores. I can find better online, no doubt, but that's comparing apples to Apple.
Granted, we don't know what the lifespan and drain-over-time will look like right now, but the battery itself is simply much higher quality. They list video playback at 7 hours, and some reviews have listed getting over nine to start. On that screen! (And ran with more power-draining features turned on than Apple had when measuring it.)
It is quite simply a much higher quality battery. (Or Apple has the best power-saving engineers in existence, at which point I'll STILL reward them by paying more for a replacement battery than Joe Fatzenyatz.
...why would you kvetch at a $80 + S&H iPhone battery replacement? The battery itself is certainly way more than $20 better.
Star Control III and not II...? o_O
For example: why does iTunes run the iPod service even when iTunes isn't running and even though I've never used an iPod?
;-)
I take it you've never used any other Windows program before? o_O You have to continually monitor your services and processes to turn off crapola. Does Adobe have no idea how to write a decent Windo... er... don't answer that.
I'll admit the "open in browser, don't ask to save" default in QT is a queer decision. They frequently have default settings that feel odd to me, but I think it's mainly because I always want to manage my media myself. Most people have NO idea what they're doing with it, and forget where they've downloaded anything, so the default makes for less of a mess with them. (And it's not like you can't "save as" easily enough.)
Meanwhile, Windows programs aren't similar enough to have anything one would call "look and feel" in other than the upper-right-hand min/max/close options (which Apple programs do have), and the menu structuring (which they also have.)
As for the 64-bitness of iTunes, I assume it mainly comes from too much crunch-time, and not enough time to vet iTunes for 64-bit Windows on top of what they were adding to the mix to get the iPhone working properly. It'll be along in short order, no doubt, but they do have a penchant for trying not to release consistently bug-ridden software.
How many devices use their own custom software for syncing? Is Palm to be bitched at for using their own HotSync and Desktop software to be the central routing point for your data, or wanting "total control" over it? Or is it simply that Apple is using their most intrinsic and centralized piece of software already used for this purpose (the iPod) and adding another device to it as well? Considering the iPhone DOES function as an iPod... you'd be using iTunes for that purpose already. How in bloody hell is this "arrogance?" Is Kodak "arrogant" for continually wanting to install and use their own picture manager, while it's completely inferior to other options? ...or is it that they want to officially support THEIR software, and if you choose to go in another direction, that's your discretion? Are you telling me there are NO other iPod syncing possibilities out there? (Heck, there are some mentioned in this very thread.)
The lack of 64-bit support is a bit aggrivating, to be sure, but they appear to be fairly time-crunched to meet their launch timetable, so it's something to take a grain of salt with and wait a month or so for it to show up. If activation is all one is concerned with anyway, it's not like anyone would have a real problem going back to an Apple/at&t store, or finding ANYONE with a 32-bit OS...
As for iTunes itself, I'm really not sure why people are so hard up on it. I've certainly had problems with it, like I've had with any piece of software, but it manages a shit-ton of media quite well, and despire having a "large memory footprint," I don't notice it slowing down anything else. It doesn't really bother me if ANY program takes up a lot of memory, so long as it knows to get out of the way of other programs when they need the resources not being actively used or given lower priority.
Do we know if it's repetitive or not? Frequently forums get deluged with posts asking the same thing, and some of the late-comers get culled so that attention can be paid to the more active thread. (With the information already in it.)
Nicely done! ;-)
I wonder how many people will catch this... I wish I had mod points. *snf*
Before the "prove a negative" people jump out of the woodwork, I should say that I would consider a scientifically complete model of the universe that includes no "extra" variables to be a sufficient proof...It's a high standard, but a reasonable one for a scientific proof.
Reasonable in a scientific context, but that "God" which people talk about--taken back that many levels--completely belies any scientific context. There is absolutely, positively, NO possible scientific explanation--no matter how lengthy and robust--that could not have "...and God wanted it to be that way" put behind it. God didn't WANT the universe to seem like it needed a God, silly monkey!
The "no way to prove a negative" concept is in full force for matters such as this. There is no possible way to exclude the supernatural as a possibility somewhere in a completely natural explanation. (Which is all a scientific one ever would be. By definition.)
No "proof" exists on that side of the equation. It is strictly impossible, unless you assign some sort of naturalistic binders to God. (Which goes rather against the whole "omnipotent" grain.)
WHERE IS THE FLOPPY DRIVE?!!
But seriously, what I really wonder about people, is their incessant kvetching about the non-servicable battery. Which is completely servicable. Just not easily user-replacable or hot-swappable.
...or can you instead get them replaced for barely more than most cell-phone batteries cost anyway? (Granted, the iPhone's might be more expensive.)
iPods are limited in the same way, but has that hampered the iPod's adoption? Can you NOT get the battery on your iPod replaced?
Meanwhile, they don't seem to complain that the iPhone has a BETTER battery than most devices (if current ratings pan out, which they probably will since the official ratings for the iPod are pretty much spot on), or that it doesn't impact the form factor, making you carry around a thicker, heavier unit.
Lack of user-swapping is minorly inconvenient, but certainly doesn't stop the iPhone from getting extra battery life. Plenty of external batteries already exist for the iPod (so are already a commodity), and I'm pretty sure you'll get a nice, form-fitting one you can clip to the bottom of your phone--or is built into a case, so that every time you put it away or operate it from a case, you're getting the extra juice--and will give you an amazing amount of extra life. Quite possibly have extra memory built in, too, because why not? The only thing is "restricts" you on is if you must get extra power without compromising the form factor at that point. Considering most people bring it up for emergency situations or the occasional extra-long business trip, I don't see it being that much of a deal; I'd rather have the form factor not be impacted to begin with.
The only real issue it could possibly have is if the battery swells or goes into so complete a failure that it messes up the iPhone's internals, but that will no doubt a warranty situation, so in that case it simply depends on how Apple makes good on it.
If true, that's still a step up. Most cell providers seem to take the "do not do anything that could remove revenue from our network!" approach. (Admittedly, I might be affected more by close proximity to Verizon. ;-) ) A hardware manufacturer's saying "look, if we can make hardware compelling enough to pull subscribers TO your network from another one or keep them from moving, then that is MUCH more valuable to you!" makes the situation better for ALL hardware manufacturers.
"Haven't figured it out...?" He outright said it above.
All data plans suck right now. You think I'm doing backflips over Verizon? No, it's the reason I DON'T have a Treo right now... (That, and the Treo's lack of WiFi-without-an-extra-and-annoying-dongle.) Data is that "new thing most people don't need, so therefore you pay a premium for it right now." It's slowly getting commoditized, though, and if the iPhone sells well, it will probably assist notably in speeding up the process.
at&t hasn't announced their new plan details yet, however, and the network reforming and the iPhone's launch are notable events, so let's see if anything else gets changed first.
Didn't they approach Verizon first and get turned down cold? Isn't Cingular/at&t one of the big few to approach anyway? Might it be that Apple is getting them to permit more from their device, and contribute more to changing features of the service, by remaining exclusive for a period of time? Things that would not happen otherwise? Say what you want about at&t's service (I used to do network mapping for them; in this regard, they are certainly playing catch-up), but they are not a company that can be shrugged off, and ANYTHING that shakes up cell providers, IMHO, is a good thing. Especially good for Motorola, Nokia, LG, and any of the others who want to build more interesting DEVICES, but continually have to kowtow to the whims of the networks. (Admittedly "less good" from having an extension of the iPod franchise now in direct competition... ;-) But competition is still good.)
Also, how is harping on a 2-year contract even a valid point? Almost ALL people sign up for two-year contracts to get the discount on their cell phone.
Not precisely a big deal, IMHO. Every time I tried dipping my toes into the RPGA at cons or local sessions, I found it chock-a-block with idiots.
I hate to point it out to you, but the only reason Magic can be as revitalized as it is is DUE to the "cheap whore"-dom qualities you seem to assign it. I take issue with other points of profiteering I see (mainly in card design, as they can most CERTAINLY tell what combos will arise when they release new sets, and surprise-surprise! 90% rares!), but not the rapidity at which they are designing in general.
;-) ) Same reason I don't invest in many games.
;-)
It makes it an expensive hobby to keep up, but not a STAGNANT one, which is by and large worse. There's nothing preventing you from playing exactly the way you used to with exactly the same cards you have with your friends, but if you want a competitive tournament environment and a live culture in a game specifically marketed as being ever-changing, you have to maintain a good pace and lots of variety. The designers have actually done a hell of a lot better job in maintaining that than I thought they would.
It is tiring to keep up with, though. I played from the beginning and burned out around Urza's Saga/Legacy (damn you, Tolarian Academy! Oh, and Sligh decks. *grumble* ), but up until that point was willing to keep up the investing and trading to stay on top of things. The "whoring" wasn't nearly as important as the gameplay changes, and unlike in a local PnP game, if you're mainly invested in the local tournament crowd, you can't tweak it.
And come to think of it, I had a TON of fun with the restrictive environment when the Magic Online beta started up--primarily because of the metric ton of cards I could accumulate for free during it. When "the Magic died" on that front, it was not worth it cost-wise for me to hop on the new medium, so I let it fall to the wayside as well. That's not precisely "whoring," though, but simply a cost of re-entry I'm no longer willing to front. (Same reason I never advanced past Step 1 in Games Workshop tabletops. I still get a hankering to play Necromunda, tho.
I would IMMEDIATELY subscribe to a Magic Online service that was not trying to sell-through in the same way, though. If they had just a straight subscription fee, "free" ability to collect (similar to how you accumulated cards in the Beta, for instance), no physical set cash-ins, and a no-holds-barred approach to what games and sets and styles you could play... I'd be back to giving them as much profit as I used to.
Regardless, I can both appreciate what they DO have to do and lament what they HAVE done at the same time, and without invective. Also, also--D&D was very the same kind of cheap whore back in the TSR days. Gamers want MORE. It's up to you to decide how much you need.
Funny. That was rather my experience well before MMORPG's came along. It's a matter of mentality and maturity and imagination, and by and large "people don' got it."
Certainly the WoW'ing of gamerdom isn't going to help, but it's least brought more attention to similar gaming IRL. Searching for diamonds--even ones in the rough--will pretty much be as difficult as always.
He said he uses his Windows PC for games. Granted, that's the mainstay of how many people have "fun" on their computers, but Apple doesn't market for games. They gear their image toward "having fun doing what you want to on your Mac" and hope you are not a gamer. ;-)
Which is fine, as gamers wrote off the platform ages ago. Unless they got absorbed by WoW, at which point it no longer matters for them. They're hoping to grab the attention of others.
So by your rationale, that makes Microsoft the most irresponsible company ever?
So by your rationale, that make Microsoft the most irresponsible company ever?
Not to forget, you can buy 2 laptops for the price of the iPhone AND the 2-year contract that comes with it..
...and then you still have to buy a cell phone, and probably the 2-year contract that comes with it to save money off the phone. And if you want a good portable music player, an iPod.
...then you'll wonder just why in hell you're spending so much money or need to own two laptops, and hey! Wouldn't it be great of someone made a pocket-sized computer that you could do most of your quick and dirty internet tasks with? Maybe if it played the media you want to have with you and could be used as a phone, you could make do without carrying so many devices around!
That would be pretty cool. Someone should work on that.
Yes, I hear lots of people want their phones to be at least twice the size of a laptop hard drive...
o_O
Heck, I can't even get my mother to remember how to just PLAY the music on her phone, after I did all the other grunt-work for her. (But who can blame her... it is two menus deep, after all! Heh...)
I'm pretty sure she could manage an iPhone, tho. I believe that's the point.
How about we mod you down for saying nothing of use and being a general tool, as opposed to our being fanboys?