I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.
Well, the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing (Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find), less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers (What's the difference between a "high-end prosumer" and a "low-end business" machine), and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers (this computer is for home, this computer is for business). I'm not as convinced they were good for Apple's customers, unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you didn't need to be a good thing.
But that's just an aside.
On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models. It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities. There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint. However, the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&T. So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store, you don't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster, because the HTC Dream is not a choice.
It's sort of like how you can't have an iPhone on T-Mobile. You can't have an HTC Lancaster, either. You might be able to go to AT&T and buy an HTC Lancaster (or get it off eBay or something) and have it work, kind of, on T-Mobile (like people have done with the iPhone). But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone?
As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone, it's called "competition" and it's actually a pretty cool thing. It can mean that you don't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want. I know, as a Mac person, that this is really a hard thing to get your head around. You'll just have to trust me...
ok it has low spec processor, but its a phone so who cares as it does not need to do much.
I'm not trying to snarky, but I keep hearing about how cellphones are going to be the next big platform and how everyone is going to throw out their personal computers and start buying Apps from Google and Apple and installing them on their phones.
So how are you going to have all these great Apps doing cool things on a phone with a 500Mhz CPU?
The little band of freelancers I work with have produce two games. One for ourselves. It was really very good, which bombed at the store. We've sold just a few hundred. We're small, we don't have a marketing budget.
Okay. There's your first problem.
Guess what? You may have the best products in the world. But if nobody knows about them, you're going to fail.
If you're an Apple fan, consider the Mac. It may be the best personal computer out there. But if Apple didn't advertise, nobody would know about it.
In fact, just to get a little snarky, if you're a small company everybody has to wear multiple hats. That includes marketing. I'm surprised you didn't mention the name of your App, after speaking highly of it. Consider the audience that's reading your post: Technically inclined. Likely to own an iPhone or an iPod touch. Why aren't you wearing your marketing hat and, at least, mentioning the name of the game?!
The next game we bade [sic] was honestly no very fun. It was okay, not complete crap, but not great. It's been in the top 50 for several weeks. What's the difference? That second game was done for a Major Developer who was able to spend 20x as much on marketing as development.
Gee, think there might be a link there between the success of a product and the amount of time and effort spent promoting it?
It was a weak game and is on the Top 50 list? Imagine how well a very good game like, say, yours would do if only you decide to invest some money into marketing it.
That actually brings up another good point, though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong--I am not a pilot and you obviously are.
The communication with ATC, from what little I know of flying, isn't really much of a "conversation." They tell you things and you acknowledge. You tell them things and they acknowledge. Short, curt, direct, and to the point. Not a whole lot of "Hey, ATC, what are your plans for the weekend?" type of stuff.
So these are brief messages which are informational inputs. When ATC says that you are cleared to land on such and such runway, the response is "Roger." Not a lot of dialog going on.
I think there's a difference between doing alot of tasks simultaneously which accomplish a singular goal and attempting to accomplish two goals simultaneously. Landing an airplane means keeping up to date with a number of different things going on inside and outside your airplane. In the case of cell phones and driving, however, it's usually about accomplishing two different things (eg, maneuvering through traffic while simultaneously talking to someone about what's for dinner).
I don't know a good solution to this problem except for some serious competition to AT&T where their only possible response is to beef up their infrastructure to match or beat the competitor.
Which is why "exclusivity agreements" for handsets are a bad idea.
Imagine if Apple had released the iPhone unlocked. Figure that half the people would have gone with AT&T and half the people would have gone with T-Mobile, here in the US. Suddenly, AT&T has half the number of iPhones sucking data down and their network is responsive. Problem solved.
All you'd have to give up is Visual Voicemail, which is the only thing that AT&T contributes to the iPhone (and, while I'm not an expert on these things, I'm sure that there's some way that Apple could provide an open standard so that any phone network could implement it and provide it to their customers).
One thing I'd note, however, is that everything you mention is in regards to one thing: Flying and landing the airplane.
You're right in that it takes lots of concentration in order to do this well. As you say, you need to communicate with ATC as well as listen to other radio calls. You're doing all these tasks simultaneously.
Now lets add in a conversation with your sweetheart about dinner plans on a different radio channel. And let's also include trying to find a music radio station that isn't playing an advertisement.
You certainly wouldn't be trying to do all these other things while trying to land an airplane, would you?
There's the difference. In the case of landing an airplane, all of these things going on improve your ability to accomplish your task so your brain is remaining focused on the task. In the case of a car, all these things going on are a distraction to what you are trying to accomplish--namely maneuvering a couple thousand pounds of vehicle.
That's true. Personally, if I must have ads, I'd rather they be targeted. The problem is that I'm not sure I want to give up enough of my privacy in order to receive ads that are appropriately targeted.
So there's the problem. I'd rather see ads for the next neat videogame than ads for Pampers. But, no, I'm not sure I want to advertisers that I'm childless in order to make certain that I don't see ads for Pampers.
I don't entirely agree that most users will "blow through them", but I understand that some will.
Obviously, it's a social engineering problem.
As the GP pointed out, if a tip calculator needs access to the Internet and your address book, you can legitimately say something here is amiss. If a program that sends free SMS messages needs your phone number, I'm not sure if that's legitimate or not. It seems like it would be. And even if they do need it to send SMS messages, what they do with it after that is unknown to you. They can sell it off to a telemarketing company if they so desire and there isn't a whole lot you can do about it.
Yes, any App I install on my computer can do the same thing.
But you see, the beauty of the App Store is that Apple protects me from all of this--at least according to the fanbois. Why, without the App Store, according to them, our phones would be awash with viruses and trojan horses that did all sorts of scurrilous things to us. That's why Apple has to have it's own App Store!
Looks like the fanbois are going to start running out excuses...
Slashdot Mirror
If they shut down/slowed access to such sites nationwide it would financially cripple them.
Well, we'd just have to bail them out, then. Like the airlines after 9/11...
Ah...a high-tech SNL skit:
Generalissimo Francisco Franco Status: Still dead.
Or here's another possibility.
They used to have limited political freedom. Now they can't leave the house without worrying about getting shot.
Well, yeah, but at least they are free to leave their houses. I'd say, "Mission Accomplished!"
(It's an attempt at humor)
"SHIT: 10,000,000 flies can't be wrong."
Second, prisoners aren't the people that would be sent to Mars for a real mission.
Why not? Hell, it worked in Australia...
That was sort of my reaction.
From what I read, I got the impression that Windows 7 isn't any faster than Vista, but it will get the same speed using less energy.
This is a good thing for laptop users, is it not?
The interesting question is will this matter?
I'm looking in my Crystal Ball at smartphone market share for 1Q 2011. I'm seeing a list of numbers and names and operating systems...
Now, if you do the math, you'll see that Android phones have 30% of the market. But the title of this article that I'm reading from the future?
"Apple #1 Cellphone Maker in the World!"
It ain't fair. But that's how it'll read...
I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.
Well, the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing (Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find), less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers (What's the difference between a "high-end prosumer" and a "low-end business" machine), and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers (this computer is for home, this computer is for business). I'm not as convinced they were good for Apple's customers, unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you didn't need to be a good thing.
But that's just an aside.
On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models. It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities. There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint. However, the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&T. So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store, you don't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster, because the HTC Dream is not a choice.
It's sort of like how you can't have an iPhone on T-Mobile. You can't have an HTC Lancaster, either. You might be able to go to AT&T and buy an HTC Lancaster (or get it off eBay or something) and have it work, kind of, on T-Mobile (like people have done with the iPhone). But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone?
As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone, it's called "competition" and it's actually a pretty cool thing. It can mean that you don't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want. I know, as a Mac person, that this is really a hard thing to get your head around. You'll just have to trust me...
I drive a convertible and/or a bicycle.
(and I do live in CA)
Next they will mandate that car windows cannot be rolled down. Solves the problem.
Glad I have a convertible...
But what if there are children involved?! Dear God, won't somebody think of the children?!?
Actually, in my old jeep (Willys 1949 CJ-3A), I could take off the top and door and put down the windshield!
But you really wanted goggles...
You mean dihydrogen monoxide--pretty dangerous stuff...
ok it has low spec processor, but its a phone so who cares as it does not need to do much.
I'm not trying to snarky, but I keep hearing about how cellphones are going to be the next big platform and how everyone is going to throw out their personal computers and start buying Apps from Google and Apple and installing them on their phones.
So how are you going to have all these great Apps doing cool things on a phone with a 500Mhz CPU?
Check out Open Street View.
The little band of freelancers I work with have produce two games. One for ourselves. It was really very good, which bombed at the store. We've sold just a few hundred. We're small, we don't have a marketing budget.
Okay. There's your first problem.
Guess what? You may have the best products in the world. But if nobody knows about them, you're going to fail.
If you're an Apple fan, consider the Mac. It may be the best personal computer out there. But if Apple didn't advertise, nobody would know about it.
In fact, just to get a little snarky, if you're a small company everybody has to wear multiple hats. That includes marketing. I'm surprised you didn't mention the name of your App, after speaking highly of it. Consider the audience that's reading your post: Technically inclined. Likely to own an iPhone or an iPod touch. Why aren't you wearing your marketing hat and, at least, mentioning the name of the game?!
The next game we bade [sic] was honestly no very fun. It was okay, not complete crap, but not great. It's been in the top 50 for several weeks. What's the difference? That second game was done for a Major Developer who was able to spend 20x as much on marketing as development.
Gee, think there might be a link there between the success of a product and the amount of time and effort spent promoting it?
It was a weak game and is on the Top 50 list? Imagine how well a very good game like, say, yours would do if only you decide to invest some money into marketing it.
North Korea Nukes Los Angeles, Millions Feared Dead
I'm not dead yet!
(Sorry. Couldn't resist).
That actually brings up another good point, though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong--I am not a pilot and you obviously are.
The communication with ATC, from what little I know of flying, isn't really much of a "conversation." They tell you things and you acknowledge. You tell them things and they acknowledge. Short, curt, direct, and to the point. Not a whole lot of "Hey, ATC, what are your plans for the weekend?" type of stuff.
So these are brief messages which are informational inputs. When ATC says that you are cleared to land on such and such runway, the response is "Roger." Not a lot of dialog going on.
I think there's a difference between doing alot of tasks simultaneously which accomplish a singular goal and attempting to accomplish two goals simultaneously. Landing an airplane means keeping up to date with a number of different things going on inside and outside your airplane. In the case of cell phones and driving, however, it's usually about accomplishing two different things (eg, maneuvering through traffic while simultaneously talking to someone about what's for dinner).
I don't know a good solution to this problem except for some serious competition to AT&T where their only possible response is to beef up their infrastructure to match or beat the competitor.
Which is why "exclusivity agreements" for handsets are a bad idea.
Imagine if Apple had released the iPhone unlocked. Figure that half the people would have gone with AT&T and half the people would have gone with T-Mobile, here in the US. Suddenly, AT&T has half the number of iPhones sucking data down and their network is responsive. Problem solved.
All you'd have to give up is Visual Voicemail, which is the only thing that AT&T contributes to the iPhone (and, while I'm not an expert on these things, I'm sure that there's some way that Apple could provide an open standard so that any phone network could implement it and provide it to their customers).
One thing I'd note, however, is that everything you mention is in regards to one thing: Flying and landing the airplane.
You're right in that it takes lots of concentration in order to do this well. As you say, you need to communicate with ATC as well as listen to other radio calls. You're doing all these tasks simultaneously.
Now lets add in a conversation with your sweetheart about dinner plans on a different radio channel. And let's also include trying to find a music radio station that isn't playing an advertisement.
You certainly wouldn't be trying to do all these other things while trying to land an airplane, would you?
There's the difference. In the case of landing an airplane, all of these things going on improve your ability to accomplish your task so your brain is remaining focused on the task. In the case of a car, all these things going on are a distraction to what you are trying to accomplish--namely maneuvering a couple thousand pounds of vehicle.
Gordon's Alive?!
That's true. Personally, if I must have ads, I'd rather they be targeted. The problem is that I'm not sure I want to give up enough of my privacy in order to receive ads that are appropriately targeted.
So there's the problem. I'd rather see ads for the next neat videogame than ads for Pampers. But, no, I'm not sure I want to advertisers that I'm childless in order to make certain that I don't see ads for Pampers.
I don't entirely agree that most users will "blow through them", but I understand that some will.
Obviously, it's a social engineering problem.
As the GP pointed out, if a tip calculator needs access to the Internet and your address book, you can legitimately say something here is amiss. If a program that sends free SMS messages needs your phone number, I'm not sure if that's legitimate or not. It seems like it would be. And even if they do need it to send SMS messages, what they do with it after that is unknown to you. They can sell it off to a telemarketing company if they so desire and there isn't a whole lot you can do about it.
Yes, any App I install on my computer can do the same thing.
But you see, the beauty of the App Store is that Apple protects me from all of this--at least according to the fanbois. Why, without the App Store, according to them, our phones would be awash with viruses and trojan horses that did all sorts of scurrilous things to us. That's why Apple has to have it's own App Store!
Looks like the fanbois are going to start running out excuses...