I don't think that is complicated at all. I think it's more likely you want to complain about Apple and so you make a big deal about nothing to try and get people to think it is complicated.
"When the current disk image I'm using gets overly cluttered after a few weeks or months, I just get rid of it and load a fresh copy from my backup and start over."
"When the current disk image I'm using gets overly cluttered after a few weeks or months, I just get rid of it and load a fresh copy from my backup and start over."
- Get a Mac!
While your point is technically true I can't help but wonder where this line of reasoning ends? I know that most stores probably have to charge more because of those damn regulations that prevent them from shooting you when you enter the store, skinning your carcass and selling it for dog food, taking your credit cards and charging them to the max, and from pimping your wife. But then again maybe it's a good thing we have those regulations, since without those regulations we'd probably pay FAR more when stores collude with other stores to price-fix items, pulled bait and switch schemes, lie to their customers, etc.
I find it odd that you somehow equate regulations designed to prevent fraud against consumers as something that is artificially raising prices, even in the face of evidence that corporate management creates policies designed to encourage sales staff to sell high profit, unneeded extended warranties. Don't those unnecessary sales raise prices to the customer too?
Personally I'll take some decent regulation and a minor increase of cost if it helps avoid fraud and un-checked greed by corporations who have the ability to hide behind expensive lawyers. Look at what is going on in the financial sector right now. How much extra is everyone paying (or have they outright LOST) due to lack of enforced regulations and oversight, which allowed them to outright lie to their investors and ruin them, while earning million dollar bonuses for running their company and investors life savings into the ground? I think the cost of a lack of regulation, oversight, and enforcement is turning out to be MUCH higher.
- Really? How about we take a quote from your original post . . "it lacked many features that were commonplace even on cheap bog-standard phones (video, 3G, Java etc)." Gee, that sounds like a spec comparison to me!
I just love how you proved MY point. . . YOU just don't get it!
I've got evidence though if that is what you want. Customer satisfaction ratings for the iPhone surpass ALL OTHER PHONES by a HUGE margin ( http://seekingalpha.com/article/50765-apple-s-iphone-builds-huge-lead-in-customer-satisfaction )! Is it because the iPhone has the most advanced camera? . . . No. Is it because it has the most memory out of any other phone? . . . No. It's the EXPERIENCE, and you can't measure that except through customer satisfaction ratings.
Your attempt to use specs alone as a measuring stick shows you don't understand why the iPhone is so successful and appealing to people. In fact you purposely attempt to negate any argument other than spec sheet comparisons because you can't make the mental leap that the iPhone's appeal has more to do with the overall experience and enjoyment of using the phone. But thankfully I tried to help you by providing the evidence you asked for, but I have no doubt that you'll find some way to try and disqualify the customer satisfaction results as proof of my point.
"I would say that Apple in no way have built a hardware and software that are integrated together to work seamlessly and intuitively."
- I would say you're wrong. The iPhone UI works better than any other phone I've ever seen, used, or heard of.
"The fact that iPhones are notorious for crashes and lockups"
- Good point. . except it's not true. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your blind hatred. I know tons of people who have iPhones and NONE of them have ever complained of lockups or crashes and they ALL love them and they ALL said they'll buy another iPhone in the future when it comes time to replace their existing one. About the only thing notorious is your penchant for making things up in your attempt to trash the iPhone.
"the fact that you cannot or at least until recently could not download podcasts directly to your phone without first downloading it to a computer shows that it is clearly not intuitive."
- I would disagreee again. I have never, not once, ever had a desire to do what you just described. Nor have I heard of anyone else have the same complaint. Maybe your fringe expectations do not represent the desires of the bulk of the buying public. And just to clarify a little deeper, the fact that you can't download podcasts directly does not "show that it is clearly not intuitive". About the only thing it shows is that you have a desire to do something that most people do not, and that hardly makes the UI non-intuitive.
" I have talked to several people who were definitely confused about why web sites didn't work with their phone. Particularly when they would get a button that says download Flash. When they would click on it, they would get a message saying that the phone couldn't do it. This is definitely not intuitive."
- I haven't seen one site that doesn't work with the iPhone. Flash would definitely be nice in the future, but even your own explanation proves you wrong. They click on the download Flash link and they get a message saying the phone couldn't do it. That seems about as straightforward as it can possibly get. What else do you want, a dozen roses along with that explanation?
"The iPhone is not a success because it is a great product. It is a success because Apple has great marketing, a fanatical generally well to do fanboy base, it is an upgrade to an existing popular product, it looks good, and it is a reasonably good product in it's own right, even if it has some major and obvious flaws."
- The iPhone is a success because it is a great product. It doesn't have the highest or most advanced spec in any one area, but as a product it is integrated well and offers a superior experience. It definitely has some flaws, but nevertheless it is a great product. Your attempt to marginalize its success by attributing it to voodoo marketing, or the tired old argument of fanboys shows that you're grasping at straws. RIM, Palm and MS stock all took a bit of a dive on the day the iPhone was announced because everyone could plainly see by the DEMONSTRATION (note that is not marketing, but a walkthrough of the phones features) that Apple had managed to leap ahead of everyone else. And to add one more point to this, if the iPhone is so bad why is every manufacturer trying to copy it now? . . . I'll give you a hint, it's because they knew the iPhone was what the people would want, so they'd better get a similar offering.
Your made up reasons (false claiming crashes and lockups, web sites don't work with the iPhone, etc.) sounds ridiculously desperate. While the iPhone is not perfect, it is head and shoulders above any other phone in terms of UI design and usability. If you want to blindly hate them and swallow the "hater" koolaid then have at it, but you'll have to come up with something better than the rants you've served up here.
The fact that all naysayers of the iPhone try to compare spec sheets as a way to build their case against it shows that they just don't get it. It's the total package. Hardware, software, integrated together to work seemlessly and intuitively. No one else is doing that. You don't have to have bleeding edge hardware to build a great device, you have to make it usable by the masses, and Apple has done that very well.
I don't root for Android one way or the other, but I fail to see how it can surpass the iPhone in mass market appeal because they will never have the synergy between the hardware and software. Open source is all fine and dandy, but it doesn't necessarily mean better.
Blow me you idiot. I don't mind free speech, but it was a ridiculously unnecessarily racist comment that had absolutely nothing to do with the parent post. It wasn't a hissy fit over something I disagree with, it was plain stupidity. Much like your simple minded analysis.
See, now I think, "I wonder why didn't include email on their phone? Email can be used for text or pictures. Why would they instead choose to include a feature limited app like MMS instead of a full featured app like email?"
"And if you really think that MMS was left out for design simplicity rather than either marketing or budget reasons . . . "
I'm not sure how you're attibuting this to me since I never addressed it? As for why MMS was left out, I can't speak to that, but it does seem a bit silly to include an app just to send pictures when email already accomplishes that task. I wonder why the iPhone should be forced to dumb itself down to support other crippled phones' lack of email support when it already has the much better email interface that accomplishes far more?
But again, you choose to place the blame on Apple for not including MMS when you could just as easily place the blame on other handset manufacturers who didn't include email.
"Email doesn't replace MMS because MMS is a more widely distributed standard (WRT mobile phones), available to many who don't have access to email on their phones. "
- Email can replace the functionality of MMS just fine. MMS is a more widely distributed standard? Than email? And your next sentence is telling. . . . "available to many who dont' have access to email on their phones" . . ..so it could just as easily be the fault of other handset makers who chose to try and (by your own convenient logic) force the market to abandon email.
Tell me, why are those handset makers trying to force others to abandon email? Why didn't they put the accepted standard of email on their phones?
You see, it's all in how you spin it? Could Apple add MMS? . . . Yes. Could they also add my Q Application? . . . . Yes. Are that many people really clamoring for this? . . . . I dont' think so.
You're "prepared to stand corrected on the fact that this isnt being pushed at present by the insidious apple update. "
- Wow, how big of you to be prepared to stand corrected. At what point will you actually stand corrected? Actually, I am looking forward to being prepared to stand corrected that your inaccurate accusation against Apple is not an insidious Hater posting by someone who can't get his facts right.
I don't know which is worse. Your initial inaccuracy, or your lame attempt at a retraction while still tossing an unwarranted insult. At any rate, I am prepared to hear your sniveling dishonest reply.
The reason people (okay, iPhone/Apple fans) are interested in this story is because Wired allowed a false hit piece against the iPhone to run on it's site. People who are buying Apple products are increasingly noticing what seems to be a concerted effort to falsely portray Apple products as incompatible, insecure (in comparison to a certain monopoly), proprietary, and difficult to use. I never noticed it until I bought my first Mac in 2004, and then when I fell in love with it I started to notice all the innacuracies that "journalists" were perpetuating. I wondered how they could make some of these patently false claims if they had actually used the product and done any research, and then I started to realize that this smacks of either complete incompetence on the part of "journalists" or a disinformation compaign by a competitor. I now believe both forces are at play, but I am happily seeing that the false "news" from sites such as Wired has not foiled Apple's rise, and more people are having the chance to experience Apple products so they can judge for themselves.
So while your eloquent soliloquy on human nature does have a strong grain of truth in it, I don't believe it is the main reason why people have a strong opinion on this story, or other Apple stories. Apple is not perfect, nor are its products, but they lead the customer satisfaction surveys for a reason, and Apple product owners who are satisfied tend to get annoyed when they see repeated false attacks on Apple products.
So you've taken the position that the iPhone is the one at fault because it doesn't have MMS rather than other phones aren't at fault because they don't do email? I've never used MMS nor do I see why it is attractive to people. If I want to send text I send SMS or an email. If I want to send a pic then I send an email.
MMS seems a bit ridiculous to me. A narrow subset of functionality that another application (email) supports. Why not create a new app that only sends out the letter Q? That way when I want to send a Q to my friends I can use that, because not all of them have email, but they should have this severely limited Q App on their phone.
How is this even remotely funny and why is it still on the site? I don't mind disagreement with anyone, but this post simply throws up a racist joke for no reason. Somebody delete this crap.
"this is how science is supposed to work. Scientist A says something, scientist B says "hang on my experiment gives different results", scientist A checks and says "sorry, yes, we goofed" and it gets fixed"
- The problem with this convenient excuse for innacuracy is that in the interim Scientist A has already published his conclusions which say that the end of the world is coming and his supporters have already begun calling anyone who doubts him a "denier". Sound familiar to you?
"This is exactly the opposite of religion"
- Who said anything about religion? Why are you bringing religion into the discussion? It seems like you might have your own anti-religion agenda on this and it's coloring your thoughts a bit.
When are you "climate change sheep" going to stop using the fact that some ice is melting or the climate has "changed" (it's ALWAYS changed in case you didn't know) as an excuse to peddle crisis hysteria that says the end of the world is coming. I don't think most people who look at this as a fraud disbelieve that the ice caps are changing, they just don't believe the hysterical rantings of scientists who can't predict the weather or a hurricane season with any certainty. There is nothing wrong with some skepticism considering the less than stellar record of scientific declarations in this area.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that is complicated at all. I think it's more likely you want to complain about Apple and so you make a big deal about nothing to try and get people to think it is complicated.
Just what are you implying is wrong with Cedar Rapids, IA? This smells like Jihad to me!!
Mod me al you want. I don't have those problems on my Mac. He asked for a solution and I gave him one. Sorry if you didn't like it.
"When the current disk image I'm using gets overly cluttered after a few weeks or months, I just get rid of it and load a fresh copy from my backup and start over."
- Get a Mac!
Or, get a Mac and stop worrying about Windows problems. Call me crazy, but why keep sticking your finger into the fire if you get burned each time?
Cue the flames!
"When the current disk image I'm using gets overly cluttered after a few weeks or months, I just get rid of it and load a fresh copy from my backup and start over." - Get a Mac!
While your point is technically true I can't help but wonder where this line of reasoning ends? I know that most stores probably have to charge more because of those damn regulations that prevent them from shooting you when you enter the store, skinning your carcass and selling it for dog food, taking your credit cards and charging them to the max, and from pimping your wife. But then again maybe it's a good thing we have those regulations, since without those regulations we'd probably pay FAR more when stores collude with other stores to price-fix items, pulled bait and switch schemes, lie to their customers, etc.
I find it odd that you somehow equate regulations designed to prevent fraud against consumers as something that is artificially raising prices, even in the face of evidence that corporate management creates policies designed to encourage sales staff to sell high profit, unneeded extended warranties. Don't those unnecessary sales raise prices to the customer too?
Personally I'll take some decent regulation and a minor increase of cost if it helps avoid fraud and un-checked greed by corporations who have the ability to hide behind expensive lawyers. Look at what is going on in the financial sector right now. How much extra is everyone paying (or have they outright LOST) due to lack of enforced regulations and oversight, which allowed them to outright lie to their investors and ruin them, while earning million dollar bonuses for running their company and investors life savings into the ground? I think the cost of a lack of regulation, oversight, and enforcement is turning out to be MUCH higher.
"Nowhere am I comparing "spec sheets""
- Really? How about we take a quote from your original post . . "it lacked many features that were commonplace even on cheap bog-standard phones (video, 3G, Java etc)." Gee, that sounds like a spec comparison to me!
I just love how you proved MY point. . . YOU just don't get it!
I've got evidence though if that is what you want. Customer satisfaction ratings for the iPhone surpass ALL OTHER PHONES by a HUGE margin ( http://seekingalpha.com/article/50765-apple-s-iphone-builds-huge-lead-in-customer-satisfaction )! Is it because the iPhone has the most advanced camera? . . . No. Is it because it has the most memory out of any other phone? . . . No. It's the EXPERIENCE, and you can't measure that except through customer satisfaction ratings.
Your attempt to use specs alone as a measuring stick shows you don't understand why the iPhone is so successful and appealing to people. In fact you purposely attempt to negate any argument other than spec sheet comparisons because you can't make the mental leap that the iPhone's appeal has more to do with the overall experience and enjoyment of using the phone. But thankfully I tried to help you by providing the evidence you asked for, but I have no doubt that you'll find some way to try and disqualify the customer satisfaction results as proof of my point.
"I would say that Apple in no way have built a hardware and software that are integrated together to work seamlessly and intuitively."
- I would say you're wrong. The iPhone UI works better than any other phone I've ever seen, used, or heard of.
"The fact that iPhones are notorious for crashes and lockups"
- Good point. . except it's not true. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your blind hatred. I know tons of people who have iPhones and NONE of them have ever complained of lockups or crashes and they ALL love them and they ALL said they'll buy another iPhone in the future when it comes time to replace their existing one. About the only thing notorious is your penchant for making things up in your attempt to trash the iPhone.
"the fact that you cannot or at least until recently could not download podcasts directly to your phone without first downloading it to a computer shows that it is clearly not intuitive."
- I would disagreee again. I have never, not once, ever had a desire to do what you just described. Nor have I heard of anyone else have the same complaint. Maybe your fringe expectations do not represent the desires of the bulk of the buying public. And just to clarify a little deeper, the fact that you can't download podcasts directly does not "show that it is clearly not intuitive". About the only thing it shows is that you have a desire to do something that most people do not, and that hardly makes the UI non-intuitive.
" I have talked to several people who were definitely confused about why web sites didn't work with their phone. Particularly when they would get a button that says download Flash. When they would click on it, they would get a message saying that the phone couldn't do it. This is definitely not intuitive."
- I haven't seen one site that doesn't work with the iPhone. Flash would definitely be nice in the future, but even your own explanation proves you wrong. They click on the download Flash link and they get a message saying the phone couldn't do it. That seems about as straightforward as it can possibly get. What else do you want, a dozen roses along with that explanation?
"The iPhone is not a success because it is a great product. It is a success because Apple has great marketing, a fanatical generally well to do fanboy base, it is an upgrade to an existing popular product, it looks good, and it is a reasonably good product in it's own right, even if it has some major and obvious flaws."
- The iPhone is a success because it is a great product. It doesn't have the highest or most advanced spec in any one area, but as a product it is integrated well and offers a superior experience. It definitely has some flaws, but nevertheless it is a great product. Your attempt to marginalize its success by attributing it to voodoo marketing, or the tired old argument of fanboys shows that you're grasping at straws. RIM, Palm and MS stock all took a bit of a dive on the day the iPhone was announced because everyone could plainly see by the DEMONSTRATION (note that is not marketing, but a walkthrough of the phones features) that Apple had managed to leap ahead of everyone else. And to add one more point to this, if the iPhone is so bad why is every manufacturer trying to copy it now? . . . I'll give you a hint, it's because they knew the iPhone was what the people would want, so they'd better get a similar offering.
Your made up reasons (false claiming crashes and lockups, web sites don't work with the iPhone, etc.) sounds ridiculously desperate. While the iPhone is not perfect, it is head and shoulders above any other phone in terms of UI design and usability. If you want to blindly hate them and swallow the "hater" koolaid then have at it, but you'll have to come up with something better than the rants you've served up here.
The fact that all naysayers of the iPhone try to compare spec sheets as a way to build their case against it shows that they just don't get it. It's the total package. Hardware, software, integrated together to work seemlessly and intuitively. No one else is doing that. You don't have to have bleeding edge hardware to build a great device, you have to make it usable by the masses, and Apple has done that very well.
I don't root for Android one way or the other, but I fail to see how it can surpass the iPhone in mass market appeal because they will never have the synergy between the hardware and software. Open source is all fine and dandy, but it doesn't necessarily mean better.
Clam AV is available for Mac and Windows. I wouldn't waste time putting it on your Mac since it just wastes processor cycles.
Steve thanks you for contributing to the free advertising.
Moderate it all you want. I'm still right
"and a distinct lack of creationism "
and a distinctly high number of people who will burn in hell for all eternity as the dark prince feasts on their entrails. . . .
Actually it wasn't. My vitriol was germane to the discussion, the original comment wasn't.
Much like your attempt to bait me with the N word was germane to my post, so I could see it had some relevance (although it was a faulty analysis).
Blow me you idiot. I don't mind free speech, but it was a ridiculously unnecessarily racist comment that had absolutely nothing to do with the parent post. It wasn't a hissy fit over something I disagree with, it was plain stupidity. Much like your simple minded analysis.
See, now I think, "I wonder why didn't include email on their phone? Email can be used for text or pictures. Why would they instead choose to include a feature limited app like MMS instead of a full featured app like email?"
"And if you really think that MMS was left out for design simplicity rather than either marketing or budget reasons . . . "
I'm not sure how you're attibuting this to me since I never addressed it? As for why MMS was left out, I can't speak to that, but it does seem a bit silly to include an app just to send pictures when email already accomplishes that task. I wonder why the iPhone should be forced to dumb itself down to support other crippled phones' lack of email support when it already has the much better email interface that accomplishes far more?
But again, you choose to place the blame on Apple for not including MMS when you could just as easily place the blame on other handset manufacturers who didn't include email.
"Email doesn't replace MMS because MMS is a more widely distributed standard (WRT mobile phones), available to many who don't have access to email on their phones. "
- Email can replace the functionality of MMS just fine. MMS is a more widely distributed standard? Than email? And your next sentence is telling. . . . "available to many who dont' have access to email on their phones" . . . .so it could just as easily be the fault of other handset makers who chose to try and (by your own convenient logic) force the market to abandon email.
Tell me, why are those handset makers trying to force others to abandon email? Why didn't they put the accepted standard of email on their phones?
You see, it's all in how you spin it? Could Apple add MMS? . . . Yes. Could they also add my Q Application? . . . . Yes. Are that many people really clamoring for this? . . . . I dont' think so.
You're "prepared to stand corrected on the fact that this isnt being pushed at present by the insidious apple update. "
- Wow, how big of you to be prepared to stand corrected. At what point will you actually stand corrected? Actually, I am looking forward to being prepared to stand corrected that your inaccurate accusation against Apple is not an insidious Hater posting by someone who can't get his facts right.
I don't know which is worse. Your initial inaccuracy, or your lame attempt at a retraction while still tossing an unwarranted insult. At any rate, I am prepared to hear your sniveling dishonest reply.
Stop it, you're making the milk come out of my nose with that comment!
That was beautiful . . . . and wrong.
The reason people (okay, iPhone/Apple fans) are interested in this story is because Wired allowed a false hit piece against the iPhone to run on it's site. People who are buying Apple products are increasingly noticing what seems to be a concerted effort to falsely portray Apple products as incompatible, insecure (in comparison to a certain monopoly), proprietary, and difficult to use. I never noticed it until I bought my first Mac in 2004, and then when I fell in love with it I started to notice all the innacuracies that "journalists" were perpetuating. I wondered how they could make some of these patently false claims if they had actually used the product and done any research, and then I started to realize that this smacks of either complete incompetence on the part of "journalists" or a disinformation compaign by a competitor. I now believe both forces are at play, but I am happily seeing that the false "news" from sites such as Wired has not foiled Apple's rise, and more people are having the chance to experience Apple products so they can judge for themselves.
So while your eloquent soliloquy on human nature does have a strong grain of truth in it, I don't believe it is the main reason why people have a strong opinion on this story, or other Apple stories. Apple is not perfect, nor are its products, but they lead the customer satisfaction surveys for a reason, and Apple product owners who are satisfied tend to get annoyed when they see repeated false attacks on Apple products.
So you've taken the position that the iPhone is the one at fault because it doesn't have MMS rather than other phones aren't at fault because they don't do email? I've never used MMS nor do I see why it is attractive to people. If I want to send text I send SMS or an email. If I want to send a pic then I send an email.
MMS seems a bit ridiculous to me. A narrow subset of functionality that another application (email) supports. Why not create a new app that only sends out the letter Q? That way when I want to send a Q to my friends I can use that, because not all of them have email, but they should have this severely limited Q App on their phone.
How is this even remotely funny and why is it still on the site? I don't mind disagreement with anyone, but this post simply throws up a racist joke for no reason. Somebody delete this crap.
"climate change deniers"
- Spoken like a true AGW fraud denier
"this is how science is supposed to work. Scientist A says something, scientist B says "hang on my experiment gives different results", scientist A checks and says "sorry, yes, we goofed" and it gets fixed"
- The problem with this convenient excuse for innacuracy is that in the interim Scientist A has already published his conclusions which say that the end of the world is coming and his supporters have already begun calling anyone who doubts him a "denier". Sound familiar to you?
"This is exactly the opposite of religion"
- Who said anything about religion? Why are you bringing religion into the discussion? It seems like you might have your own anti-religion agenda on this and it's coloring your thoughts a bit.
When are you "climate change sheep" going to stop using the fact that some ice is melting or the climate has "changed" (it's ALWAYS changed in case you didn't know) as an excuse to peddle crisis hysteria that says the end of the world is coming. I don't think most people who look at this as a fraud disbelieve that the ice caps are changing, they just don't believe the hysterical rantings of scientists who can't predict the weather or a hurricane season with any certainty. There is nothing wrong with some skepticism considering the less than stellar record of scientific declarations in this area.