What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
67 Comments
- tnoy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+44The other way they they revolutionized the phone market is by providing us with an closed, unsubsidized phone with only one provider and still require a lengthy contract.
Consumer wins?
At least it'll get the other manufactures to step up their game in terms of their interface. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -8/+23Over the past week I've used my phone as a GPS, streamed live TV from my home DVR, chatted simultaneously with people on different IM networks, had all my PIM information kept synchronized wirelessly with my Exchange server, swapped in a higher capacity battery for longer life, viewed pictures from my digital camera's SD card, used it as a universal remote control, used remote desktop to fix a server, played some third party games, and made free calls using Skype.
The interface for the iPhone will likely be the slickest thing to ever grace a phone, but I don't think it's going to revolutionize the handset market. - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20It'll revolutionize how mobile carriers do business, if by "revolutionize", you mean it'll make things like the way Danger Research (SideKick/HipTop) does business with T-Mobile.
If you have a HipTop, $5 of your monthly fee you pay to T-Mobile goes to Danger Research. It's been this way for years. - robdazomba, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14This is interesting. I'm a Windows user but there's a double-standard around here concerning Apple and I'm happy to point it out.
I notice that when MS puts out some new product (Zune, Origami, Tablet, etc.) people criticize the product as overpriced and underpowered or whatnot and a ton of MS apologists step forward to claim that we should go easy on MS because this is version 1.0 of the product and just wait until the next version comes along. And yet, I see none of those folks here defending the very same criticisms of the iPhone.
The most realistic view of the iPhone is that it will be a moderate to big success for Apple. I don't see it being a runaway hit, not with the first version and the prices we've seen so far. But that's not a deal killer. The first iPod was overpriced and underpowered and they made that sucker fly higher than anyone would have ever guessed (even after a ton of scoffing from the technorati know-it-alls.) Apple seems to have an uncanny ability to zero in on what average people (that is, not geeks) want and are willing to pay a premium for. By the time the second round of iPhones come out, I would be willing to bet that Apple's prices will have come down (as it did with the iPod in the form of the mini and the shuffle) and there will be an expansion of features (as was seen with iPod and iTunes.)
And for those of you kicking around the unlikely sounding idea that Apple might be looking into their own network, bear two things in mind. 1. There have been some curious minglings between Apple and Google and we all know about Google's inexplicable buying up of dark fibre... wonder if there's some kind of connection; 2. Apple has been quietly scouting out and setting up new offices in various locations as if they intend to expand their business in some dramatic new ways.
If I were a betting man, I would put my money on Apple for this one even if the rollout of the iPhone turns out to be a lackluster affair. Apple is much more aggressive company than they were 20 years ago and you can bet there are bigger plans for the iPhone behind some closed doors. - offwhite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@noahhoward
A phone is the ultimate universal remote. You call people and tell them to do things! :) - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"used it as a universal remote control"
What phone do you have? - drifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"The report says that Cingular agreed to leave its brand off the body of the phone; however, during the iPhone demo at Macworld Expo in January, the 'Cingular' brand appeared on the screen of the handset. In addition, Cingular also abandoned its usual insistence that phone makers carry its software for Web surfing, ringtones and other services, the report said."
First no more Cingular on my phones! I hate the branding considering most phones can be found for every carrier. not to mention they are annoying like on my KRZR it is not even centered on the back.
Also the software is very poorly done. So Cingular not enforcing their software or involvement in it is really good.
Truthfully I am not an Apple fanboy I only own Ipods no actualy Macs. But these 2 things that Cingular agreed to need to go for every single phone from now on. - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Because Apple wanted a monthly revenue stream, and Cingular agreed to do it.
- Arkonnan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Seeing that the iPod functionality is a huge part of the new iPhone, it's no wonder Apple wasn't too keen on caving in to Verizon's demands. You can bet that if Verizon had their way, they would have crippled any audio playback functionality and forced it to work exclusively with their paid services.
And don't even get me started on ring tones. - Quix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Want to subscribe to content from Audible.com? You're out of luck." - EtherGnat
What are you talking about? The iPod has supported Audible content for a long, long time. The iPhone will almost certainly support it as well. - mirmar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4 In the UK the if you ask someone about Jobs on the Internet, they would think Employment or even Hand Jobs
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Actually if Cingular would have wanted to they could have pushed back at any time. There was truly only one partner option for Apple, considering Steve Jobs is a big picture guy. The big picture does not just include dominance in a US market. I would be willing to bet there is no way Jobs truly wanted to go with Verizon even if the talks orginally started there. I base this on the fact that when Steve enters a market like he did with the iPod he wants gain dominance. He was not about to introduce a ground breaking product like iPhone into an exclusivity deal with a CDMA carrier like Verizon or Sprint.
The only chance for dominance in this industry relies on a hugely successful US introduction of this unit with the potential to go global and the best chance at that lies with a GSM based carrier. In the U.S. the biggest GSM players are T-mobile and Cingular but T-mobile is far too small in the US to launch a product like iPhone. iPhone needs prestige it needs needs huge service coverage and most of all it needs a lot of subscribers. Cingular being number one in the US made it a match in heaven for Apple even despite the supposed ribbing that Jobs gave Cingular Execs. He did not take anything that was precious to Cingular and they will win in the end with addition of far more subscribers with the 5 year exclusivity of the iPhone than they would have without it. This was Jobs being Jobs and another set of corporate Execs (like Pixar and Disney before) that said, hey he might be an ass but he gets it done and the proposal can only help our bottom line. Lets let him run with it.
But as I said for Apple it is about the ability to go global and getting in bed with a GSM carrier opens up huge market market potential for Europe and Asia which have adopted GSM as the almost defacto wireless technology of choice. My guess is that Europe will be the next target market in say two years which means the next big carrier fight will be on between the major European GSM carriers like T-mobile and Vodaphone. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6noahhoward: '"used it as a universal remote control" What phone do you have?"
I have a two year old Samsung SCH-i730 running Windows Mobile 5 on Verizon. It came with basic universal remote functionality, but I use NoviiRemote because it has a huge database of codes available and it's attractive and customizable. http://www.novii.tv/pocketpc/deluxe/
Almost any Palm or Windows Mobile phone with a IR port can be used as a universal remote, although the transmitter on some is not that strong. - vancanucksfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the only problem i have with the iphone is its size. sure it's thin but it's still too big. i'll be sitting this one out until the release of the iphone nano.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The difference is that with the iPhone everyone else will be able to do what you are doing, not just the technologically elite that know how to make a really tall house of cards stand up for a while.
That is what Apple has done well, making cool stuff that technical people like usable. And in so doing they capture some of the technical people as well who tire of the effort of making all this high technology work. - teknobryan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6but it IS an iPod.
- noreturn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The iPhone is not that advanced compared to existing phones, not in hardware, not in features. Probably the only innovative thing about it will be the multi touch interface. And if Apple has let Cingular/AT&T dictate such a long contract, they're not going to be able to wrangle a way into allowing VOIP and "free" ringtones. Software issues aside, the iPhone is also lacking in 3G, which will likely hamper its success outside the US. The iPhone is a neat little device, but saying it's advanced or revolutionary is false.
And to anyone that believed this statement:
"These service providers usually hold enormous sway over how phones are developed and marketed -- controlling every detail from processing power to the various features that come with the phone."
They're absolutely lying. They can usually customize the phones, but this never extends beyond software patches that at most the phone manufacturer will approve. I know from actually being involved in the process that the providers have almost no say over concepts or designs. - DrStephanHeimer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7@flag564
you routinely bash any new product that is from Apple just because its made by apple.
BTW microsoft did its own hatchet job on the Zune and Vista which by the way share a great many similarity to apple products that came out years ago. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5There is an AllTunes application for Windows Mobile and other smartphones: http://www.alltunes.com/en-download.shtml It's true that web based applications could duplicate some functionality, but they are limited. Music stores that offer DRM-free audio are few and far between, and without third party app support you can't code your own player/storefront app so that essentially locks out other music services.
Want to subscribe to content from Audible.com? You're out of luck. Want to play audio and video on the iPhone in unsupported formats? No third party codecs, so you're out of luck. Want to stream from an unsupported source? You're out of luck. There are a long line of services for Windows Mobile and Palm devices.
It's not just audio either. Do you think Apple is going to allow TomTom to sell their GPS software, or do you think they'll team with Cingular's service at $9.95/month? Do you think they'll allow MobiTV to sell their service? What about skinning/tweak programs? Ringtone managers? An improved web browser? File sharing? The list goes on and on.
The iPhone is exciting in a lot of ways, but I don't understand how people on Digg can defend the prohibition on third party apps. Choice is a good thing. I like having tens of thousands of applications available. I like that every day somebody programs an app that is something I would never have thought of that makes my phone better. I like not having to wait for somebody else to decide if the app fits their business model before I get to use it. The most exciting and disruptive apps have always come from third parties.
We would have laughed at a PDA that didn't allow for third party apps, and we sure as hell wouldn't put up with it on our computers. Why the hell should we put up with it on a smart phone? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2if the product is as good as jobs thinks and says it is, i would pay the premium, stay with cingular and get the phone with the 300 dollar markdown on subscribers to the service. where is though, and im betting within 12 months someone will a windows-mobile 6 enabled phone that can do more, cheaper, and more reliably with more incentives (like a bulk-rate for any media type data transfers, which current by cingular is crazy at $15 just for texting and 5MB internet. The markup on the apple service is likely to be a lot. They also have to provide service and being competitive on the service costs.
- CreativeMonster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3There might be things that you wanted built into the iPhone, but iPhone is their very first phone product, so I expect much of what we'll get from it is what Apple wants to deliver, not what we want. iPhone may not be attractive for you at first, but it's their flagship model. There are lots of windows of opportunities for Apple later to make the phone right for consumers by means of getting feedbacks. Down the road, iPhone will be more polished and get more attention from regular consumers just like they did with iPod. They started iPod with HDD models, and later introduced slick and small flash-based iPod which got much affordable for everyone. This is what I really care and expect Jobs to play hard.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4He's playing hardball with a minor league team
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Not sure why people are digging you down, but that's one of the most levelheaded assessments I've seen so far--and a very interesting observation about the Google thing. Hadn't considered that. Didn't one of Google's execs join Apple's board last year?
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7"This is interesting. I'm a Windows user but there's a double-standard around here concerning Apple and I'm happy to point it out.
I notice that when MS puts out some new product (Zune, Origami, Tablet, etc.) people criticize the product as overpriced and underpowered or whatnot and a ton of MS apologists step forward to claim that we should go easy on MS because this is version 1.0 of the product and just wait until the next version comes along. And yet, I see none of those folks here defending the very same criticisms of the iPhone."
OK, there's a double standard, but it goes both ways. How many of the people that criticize Microsoft's products do you see here criticizing the iPhone for the same reasons? In fact Microsoft receives harsher criticism overall than almost any other company, so I'm not really sure what your point is. - inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6And griped about by robot users.
- ulric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1FYI :
the FACT that Apple was in negotation with Verizon is information that comes from Verizon itself
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-verizon-iphone_x.htm - pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, but the CDMA version would have to be larger and have less battery life. Why would you want to release that one first? Same thing with the RAZR. Motorola released the GSM version first, then put out the CDMA version, which was still tiny, but not AS tiny. It really has to be a whole new product.
- SVPirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This isn't really a surprise is it? Jobs plays hardball with everyone - that's how he does business.
Oh and iPhone won't revolutionise phones - it'll just bring them up to the standards they should have been at all along! - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11"iTunes music as ringtones (not that I really care to hear your favorite song as a ringtone, but I don't like features being pulled for $$$ reasons),"
Software problem? Yes.
"not allowing external applications"
Software again.
"not syncing with Outlook"
Software, yet again.
"probably never having a VOIP client that works on WiFi"
And lastly, Software.
Every problem you brought up was in the most unfinished portion of the phone: the software, like I said in my original post. Most of the things you mentioned are only rumors as well, things we don't know factually to be true. So, until we have hard evidence that the iPhone can't do any of the above, it's simply not true. [The only one that will *probably* be true is no external applications, at least right away; the iPod is slowly starting to open to external applications, there's no reason the iPhone won't slowly go too.. however, because it is a phone, it has to Just Work (tm)]. - Quix, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9"The interface for the iPhone will likely be the slickest thing to ever grace a phone, but I don't think it's going to revolutionize the handset market." - EtherGnat
This particular article isn't talking about software or interface. It's talking about how the hardware makers deal with the service providers. In the past, the hardware makers have had to kowtow to the service providers. And the providers' control (and often downright sabotage) of hardware functionality is legendary. Apple may be the first hardware maker to successfully say "Look, this is what our phone does and this is how it works. And no one is going to screw with that. Period. If you want to sell our phone, those are our conditions." We'll see how this approach works out.
Frankly, I was hoping Apple would offer its own service. The fact that every mall in America is littered with a dozen cell phone sales carts, each staffed with a dozen hard-sell reps that circle you like car salesmen, not to mention two or three cellular service stores in every strip mall, shows me that I'm paying for WAY too much overhead, yet still getting sub-par service. And the "features" offered with most cell plans are a joke. $3 to download a song? Please. This is definitely a market in need of being "revolutionized." Time will tell if Apple will be the one to do it. - fantasticjon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Cingular could have pushed back. If Apple couldn't come to an agreement with any major carrier, they could have just sold the phones on Apples website unlocked for $500 and still made a bundle, and put a hurtin on the wireless carriers customer loyalty. (ie. Major Wireless Carrier: if you renew your contract for 2 years we will give you this free phone. ...You: um, no thanks. I just bought a new phone from apple. I think I will actually lower my contract and not renew.)
- Eptiger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Buried as a duplicate story. This same information came out in an article a couple of weeks ago and was pretty high on Digg as well (http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/29/verizon-passed-up-apple-iphone-deal/). They're just rewording the same information.
- bcimhe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the real revolution will come with an open-source-powered phone. you might say i'm a dreamer. but i'm not the only one....
- Diganta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Yes, you'll be able to transfer MP3s to the iPhone, but I can download *wirelessly* directly from AllOfMP3 to my phone. I've got $100 that says you'll never be able to download MP3s from AllOfMP3 or any other music service (with the possible exception of iTunes) wirelessly to the Apple device. "
Hmmm..iPhone full browser capable Safari. You're telling me that Apple is going to block specific websites for iPhone users and prevent them from saving data like non-DRM MP3s to play on the iPhone. That's quite a bold statement to make and if I may say so a bad bet to make as well. So when the iPhone comes out this summer, if users are able to download MP3s from eMusic or ALLOfMP3 (if it is still up by June) using their EDGE 2.5G or WiFi connection using Safari browser what are you planning on doing with that $100? So you're betting that the iPhone will NEVER be able to download any non-DRM music off a website using a wireless connection with the exception of iTunes, if I am to understand your statement correctly (not to sound repetitive).
As for VoIP ala Skype. I agree that won't happen, the CEO of Cingular isn't going to shoot himself in the foot. Which is a pity for the consumers, but then again the US carrier cartel has been crippling features like DUN on phones like the Treos they sell with their contracts. Nothing new here in terms of business practices of US carriers. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The iPod has supported Audible content for a long, long time."
OK, audible.com was a bad example (and I dugg up your comment for letting me know). The point is Audible.com content only works because Apple allows it. But it's not specifically about Audible.com subscriptions, or TomTom, Skype, Sling, or anything else I mentioned. It's the principle of being able to do whatever you want with your device. How many free and open source applications do you think we'll see for the iPhone? How many killer utilities?
Most of my favorite mobile applications are unlikely ever to see the light of day on the iPhone because they use too much bandwidth, interfere with profit streams, or are too damn obscure. Prohibiting third party apps is a money grab by Apple, and it's the same thing we've been criticizing mobile network providers for forever. Regardless of what you think of the iPhone (I actually think it's pretty neat) you ought to be able to see that is a bad thing. - Diganta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@EtherGnat
You side stepped my direct question about your $100 bet and went off on another tack about 3rd party apps.
"It's true that web based applications could duplicate some functionality, but they are limited. Music stores that offer DRM-free audio are few and far between"
I thought you said one could "...NEVER be able to download MP3s from AllOfMP3 or any other music service (with the possible exception of iTunes) wirelessly to the Apple device...".
So are you retracting that statement along with that bold $100 bet?
"Want to subscribe to content from Audible.com? You're out of luck"
Have you ever used iTunes? They have audio track from Audible.com so what are you talking about.
"Do you think Apple is going to allow TomTom to sell their GPS software"
Who to say it won't happen? As I pointed out that's speculation right now.
"An improved web browser? "
Safari a pretty good browser. I've used Opera Mini and Blazer on my Treo and it's painful,
not to mention Blazer has rebooted my Treo once too often. I wouldn't mind a full Opera
browser on the iPhone, but could easily settle for Safari which works quite well. Now the
question is how will the Safari on the iPhone fare? I don't know until I take it for a test drive
on some heavy CSS, Javascript website.
"The iPhone is exciting in a lot of ways, but I don't understand how people on Digg can defend the prohibition on third party apps."
That's where you and I see eye to eye. When I first heard about no 3rd party apps I had two words 'Deal breaker'. I'm not defending the prohibition either. Initially reports that came out said no 3rd party apps, then as the euphoria and hype settled down in the coming weeks more details emerged about 3rd party apps that are certified will be allowed on the iPhone. There seems to be a lot of misinformation about it right now, part of that seems to be Apple not being clear about its plans regarding the phone or developer support, which has lead to a lot of punditry and rumors. I hope to see 3rd party apps like Garmin or Tom Tom for the iPhone as well as many other existing vendors from the iPod ecosystem. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Releasing a CDMA version of the iPhone wouldn't have prevented them from offering a GSM version as well. Many phones are available for both technologies.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4You got hosed. The Chocolate is available for free with a two year contract from Amazon.com right now. I don't think comparing a free phone with one that is $500-600 with a two year contract is fair. Comparing it with a high end iPod, which isn't heavily subsidized like a phone, isn't exactly fair either. I won't say the iPhone is overpriced, but it's hard to argue it's quite expensive.
Free Chocolate at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/LG-VX8500-Chocolate-Verizon-Wireless/dp/B000H7GVA4/sr=8-1/qid=1171837207/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-8726611-1648952?ie=UTF8&s=wireless - totuck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm surprised there isn't a link in the comments to a full version of the WSJ article that isn't locked behind a subscription.
- ArminPiTT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1as much as i hate verizon (i think its service is so damn overrated, yea you get signal everywhere, but voice quality is kaka) for once i think they did a good thing. don't be push overs, and i hate everything Apple with a passion.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"So what's to stop someone from using songs they bought from AllOfMP3 on their iPhone may I ask? Since you brought it up as a list of features you felt were not possible to do on the yet to be released iPhone?"
Yes, you'll be able to transfer MP3s to the iPhone, but I can download *wirelessly* directly from AllOfMP3 to my phone. I've got $100 that says you'll never be able to download MP3s from AllOfMP3 or any other music service (with the possible exception of iTunes) wirelessly to the Apple device.
"Since Slingbox has an OSX player already, I would speculate that it wouldn't be a big leap for them to have a player for the iPhone as well,but we'll see how 3rd party developers are/aren't given access to the iPhone development environment."
Steve Jobs has already confirmed there won't be any third party apps, saying in part, “These are devices that need to work, and you can’t do that if you load any software on them. That doesn’t mean there’s not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn’t mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment.”
Yes, Apple could decide to offer a Sling player for sale, but they won't. They would rather you buy TV from iTunes or pay Cingular a monthly fee. They're not likely to release IM clients because that would interfere with text message fees. The idea of a free VOIP client is laughable. Without an open platform you're out of luck if you want any applications that don't somehow benefit Apple, or even ones Apple just hasn't gotten around to yet. Apple isn't going to do anything to jeopardize their revenue stream any more than they're going to open up iPods and FairPlay to work with other music services. - mirmar, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Jobs wtf. Get a life people or even better a real Hand Jobs or Blow Jobs.
P.S. Bill Gates Rules. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6"And the "features" offered with most cell plans are a joke. $3 to download a song? Please."
No fair comparing Apple's smart phone with regular phones. Let's compare it to the audio options for my WM5 smart phone, which can:
* Play MP3s from my 4GB flash card
* Stream music from my PC wirelessly using Orb
* Stream live radio from the web
* Stream my cable companies digital music channels using Sling
* Use the WM5 version of AllTunes to download songs directly from AllOfMP3 to my phone for about $0.15/song.
If Apple uses their influence to improve customer experience that's a great thing. If they use it just to line their own pockets I'm not impressed. I'll believe it's the former when Apple starts releasing features like multiprotocol IM clients which cut into AT&T/Cingular's revenue stream. - Diganta, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@EtherGnat
"I'm not going to turn this into another debate on AllOfMP3. The point is you'll likely never see compatibility with other music services"
So what's to stop someone from using songs they bought from AllOfMP3 on their iPhone may I ask?
Since you brought it up as a list of features you felt were not possible to do on the yet to be released iPhone? Some of the features you've mention like 3rd party games is rumored to probably show up on iPhone, but we'll be able to tell more once the phone is actually released in June. Until then what you and I say what the capabilities or lack of in the iPhone is premature speculation as best. Since Slingbox has an OSX player already, I would speculate that it wouldn't be a big leap for them to have a player for the iPhone as well, but we'll see how 3rd party developers are/aren't given access to the iPhone development environment. - uberdesigner, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I doubt other carriers will be pushovers lie Cingular was.
- EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@xoineg
Apple likely will address many usability and design issues with their phone, and I give them full credit for doing so. It's one area the mobile industry really needs a kick in the ass. I'll be even more impressed if they can help break mobile providers stranglehold on any technologies that might threaten their revenue stream, although I think that is less likely. I really hope the iPhone succeeds.
Just because the iPhone sports a snazzy interface and a few innovative features doesn't earn it a free pass, however. There are some definite drawbacks to the iPhone as well, and it's competitors have some killer features as well. The iPhone has a tremendous amount of work to do before it proves itself the savior of the telecomm industry, as so many people seem to be predicting. - Quix, on 10/12/2007, -11/+10"closed, unsubsidized phone with only one provider and still require a lengthy contract"
We don't know what the final terms of iPhone service pricing will be, so we should reserve any judgment until we do, no? If the hardware isn't subsidized, I tend to think the calling plans will be. After all, if the consumer is getting $xxx in subsidization from Cingular on a RAZR, he should expect the same with an iPhone - and if Apple doesn't want its brand diluted from subsidized hardware pricing (a philosophy I agree with), Cingular should kick the money back to the consumer on the service end. - xoineg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@EtherGnat Doing all those things are great and for technology people, what you have been doing is why they get such high tech phones, but for regular people that are not into technology, the iPhone is all about the image, brand and style and that it brings new things into the market like visual voicemail and how easy it is to use. I have a treo and has so many functions and is able to do so much, but the phone is far from stylish and it can be hard for regular people to learn to use it. Apple brings its easy to use know-how to the iphone and its brand name.
- shad0w, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2So why is AT&T paying Apple again?
- Quix, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5EtherGnat, again, this story isn't about "features," but even if it were, most of the audio playback features you're trumpeting on your WinPhone aren't features that 90% of consumers care about.
And I don't know that the ability to download music from an illegal source (AllofMP3) should be considered a "feature." I highly doubt that ability is listed in the sales brochure for your phone, eh?
No fair comparing Apple's smart phone with pirating services... -
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is