iPhone 5 Announced. See the review!!

ScottM

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
42,529
Location
Variable, but somewhere on earth
Display Name

Display name:
iBazinga!
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_l8af266do31qzpwi0o1_500.jpg
    tumblr_l8af266do31qzpwi0o1_500.jpg
    65.1 KB · Views: 207
I'm working on an iPhone two-button app.

1) Read my mind

2) Do what I want

The problems is every time I try button 1, I get a "not found" error.
 
Oddly enough, Apple does not go putting tons of features in their phones simply so they can check a box - It's their competitors that do that! :dunno:
 
Apple Fanboy Commandment 3. Thou shalt not mock Apple. Ye shall take any man that mocketh The Apple, and cast him out of the city and stone him to death.
 
Uhhm you do realize that this is a joke, right???? :D

Yeah, but it was funnier 3 years ago when the iPhone seemingly did everything compared to other phones of the day - Now, it'd be a better joke for Android 3.0 or something. :rolleyes2:

Now, if they showed that it came with a free case resembling a black turtleneck and jeans... THAT would be funny. :goofy:
 
Yeah, but it was funnier 3 years ago when the iPhone seemingly did everything compared to other phones of the day - Now, it'd be a better joke for Android 3.0 or something. :rolleyes2:

Now, if they showed that it came with a free case resembling a black turtleneck and jeans... THAT would be funny. :goofy:
I seem to recall that the first iteration of iPhone could barely do enterprise email. Something that blackberry had been doing for a few years as well as Windows Mobile. The iPhone could not even claim the first touch screen as there had been phones from years prior that had those (Motorola Ming), no bluetooth either. What feature was that they had? Oh yeah, hype. :D
 
I seem to recall that the first iteration of iPhone could barely do enterprise email. Something that blackberry had been doing for a few years as well as Windows Mobile. The iPhone could not even claim the first touch screen as there had been phones from years prior that had those (Motorola Ming), no bluetooth either. What feature was that they had? Oh yeah, hype. :D

The iPhone is a case where the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. I kinda laughed when everyone suddenly came out with "NEW!!!! TOUCHSCREEN PHONE!" after the iPhone came out. The iPhone wasn't better because it had a touchscreen, it was better because it had an excellent user interface.

Theoretically, my old Sony Ericsson W600i *could* do everything that my 1st-gen iPhone could do - but it was such a pain in the ass to use some of the features, even features I had specifically bought the W600i for, that I never used them. The beauty of the iPhone is its simplicity and ease of use. I also appreciate that rather than "check boxes," they don't add a feature until they can figure out how to do it right.

They also pay a lot of attention to detail - One of my favorite iPhone features is that if your headphones come unplugged for any reason, whatever you were listening to is paused. That's not something you'll see on any list of checkboxes, but it sure is nice that I don't have to rewind the podcast I was listening to when it happens. There are many other tiny details that really make me love the iPhone.
 
The iPhone is a case where the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
The sum of all of it parts was that it was a not great phone, without many standard phone features but did have a good user interface. It was a lot of hype. The radio in the iPhone still stinks even in the 3GS versions. The receiver sensitivity is well below other smart phones and the battery life, well those who live in glass houses ;) , but even Moto had better battery life!

I kinda laughed when everyone suddenly came out with "NEW!!!! TOUCHSCREEN PHONE!" after the iPhone came out. The iPhone wasn't better because it had a touchscreen, it was better because it had an excellent user interface.
I agree. The whole 'we need a touchscreen' thing was even more funny when seeing Moto handset execs ,not even realizing that Moto already had touch screen products out in the field, decrying that was what was needed to recapture market share.

They also pay a lot of attention to detail -
Like for antenna design?
 
They also pay a lot of attention to detail - One of my favorite iPhone features is that if your headphones come unplugged for any reason, whatever you were listening to is paused. That's not something you'll see on any list of checkboxes, but it sure is nice that I don't have to rewind the podcast I was listening to when it happens. There are many other tiny details that really make me love the iPhone.

My Droid does that too, I sometimes look at it as an anti-feature though if i am just listening to a song. Then I have to unlock the phone and hit play again.
 
The sum of all of it parts was that it was a not great phone, without many standard phone features

Like what, exactly? :dunno:

The radio in the iPhone still stinks even in the 3GS versions. The receiver sensitivity is well below other smart phones

I have a 3Gs and it's slightly better than the original iPhone which was noticeably better than the Sony Ericsson, which was noticeably better than the Nokia that preceded it (though that was also accompanied by a switch from VZW with the Nokia to ATT with the SE). I expect to see that as technology improves, but I don't see how the iPhone's radio is significantly better or worse than anyone else's, if they all work properly.

and the battery life, well those who live in glass houses ;) , but even Moto had better battery life!

The only time I've had any problem with either of my iPhones' battery life was right when I got the 1st-gen iPhone and it was new and cool and I used it practically every waking hour for the first few days. New-toy syndrome, ya know. Other than that, it's always been fine, and it's a LOT better than a lot of other smartphones - Nokia N-series or HTC Evo for example. I don't think battery life has been a particular strength of the iPhone until the iPhone 4, but it certainly hasn't been a weakness either.

I agree. The whole 'we need a touchscreen' thing was even more funny when seeing Moto handset execs ,not even realizing that Moto already had touch screen products out in the field, decrying that was what was needed to recapture market share.

And for Moto, the user interface has always been a particular weakness IME, so I'm not too surprised that the execs were so clueless.

Like for antenna design?

Yeah, oops. I think part of the problem there was that A) they have an AT&T tower on the Apple campus so they probably didn't have too much trouble with the iPhone 4 in their non-lab on-campus testing, and B) all of their off-campus iPhone 4's were in a case that disguised them as iPhone 3Gs' and thus... Well, ya know... CASE... Oops. Frankly, the iPhone 4's antenna design is a good idea, and works quite well, WHEN you don't give it the death grip.

Maybe everyone at Apple is right-handed. ;) Word is that there'll be iPhone 4's out this month that have some sort of fix for the antenna issue that doesn't require a case. We'll see what happens.
 
Like what, exactly? :dunno:
Like exactly what I said in the sentences you cut out from post above.


I have a 3Gs and it's slightly better than the original iPhone which was noticeably better than the Sony Ericsson, which was noticeably better than the Nokia that preceded it (though that was also accompanied by a switch from VZW with the Nokia to ATT with the SE). I expect to see that as technology improves, but I don't see how the iPhone's radio is significantly better or worse than anyone else's, if they all work properly.
I am sure you did not do much in the way of serious bench testing and comparison drive testing. I am also sure that you do not have access to system statistics that show a difference in performance of the iPhone compared to other phones. But that does not mean that nobody else has that data. It also appears that you were comparing different operators. I you have a brand A phone on operator A you cannot make valid performance observations of brand B phone performance on operator B's systems. By simple observation. You need to see a lot more about the link robustness and you would only get that if you had access to both system 'switch' stats.

The radio characteristics of the iPhone were well known to be less than most other phones. Surprisingly it is the iPhone 4 that has pretty decent statistics and it is the one that is unfairly being singled out by the public.


The only time I've had any problem with either of my iPhones' battery life was right when I got the 1st-gen iPhone and it was new and cool and I used it practically every waking hour for the first few days. New-toy syndrome, ya know. Other than that, it's always been fine, and it's a LOT better than a lot of other smartphones - Nokia N-series or HTC Evo for example. I don't think battery life has been a particular strength of the iPhone until the iPhone 4, but it certainly hasn't been a weakness either.
Well the lack of battery life certainly gave aftermarket accessory sales a boost. Lots of little jacket battery packs. The iPhone 4 battery is pretty darn good. Lasts a lot longer than my Droid, which I have to charge daily.


And for Moto, the user interface has always been a particular weakness IME, so I'm not too surprised that the execs were so clueless.
Which Moto interface exactly? There have been at least five different ones.


Yeah, oops. I think part of the problem there was that A) they have an AT&T tower on the Apple campus so they probably didn't have too much trouble with the iPhone 4 in their non-lab on-campus testing, and B) all of their off-campus iPhone 4's were in a case that disguised them as iPhone 3Gs' and thus... Well, ya know... CASE... Oops. Frankly, the iPhone 4's antenna design is a good idea, and works quite well, WHEN you don't give it the death grip.
BTW I have been doing side by side comparisons on the iPhone 4 and a Droid that is on AT&T. The IP4 has a plastic cover that I sometimes take off. I have yet to see significant differences in sensitivity. I would love to get my hands on a data logger for a week or two. But with Moto being split into two companies and me leaving Moto in the next couple of months that just is not going to happen.

But then I can get my iPhone!! Seriously.

Maybe everyone at Apple is right-handed. ;) Word is that there'll be iPhone 4's out this month that have some sort of fix for the antenna issue that doesn't require a case. We'll see what happens.
I am interested in what that would be? Seriously I thought the whole thing was over blown.
 
Last edited:
I seem to recall that the first iteration of iPhone could barely do enterprise email. Something that blackberry had been doing for a few years as well as Windows Mobile. The iPhone could not even claim the first touch screen as there had been phones from years prior that had those (Motorola Ming), no bluetooth either. What feature was that they had? Oh yeah, hype. :D

For the record, the original iPhone had (and still has) Bluetooth.
 
Like exactly what I said in the sentences you cut out from post above.

Um, no really. What "standard phone features" were missing from the original iPhone? Nothing that I cut out is something I'd consider a "standard phone feature." The phone portion of both of my iPhones has had more features than the phone portion of any other phone I've had. The big plus on the phone part of the iPhone was the Visual Voicemail.

I am sure you did not do much in the way of serious bench testing and comparison drive testing. I am also sure that you do not have access to system statistics that show a difference in performance of the iPhone compared to other phones. But that does not mean that nobody else has that data.

No, I didn't have any of that - And I don't care. What I'm saying is, the phone was perfectly usable, and that's what really matters. Usability. I don't care what it does on the bench, or what the network thinks of it. I care whether I can make and hold calls.

It also appears that you were comparing different operators. I you have a brand A phone on operator A you cannot make valid performance observations of brand B phone performance on operator B's systems.

I had a Sony Ericsson phone on AT&T before the iPhone... It was the prior switch where I switched networks. Over time, I've had phones from Qualcomm, Nokia, Moto, Sony Ericsson, and Apple on Sprint, PrimeCo/VZW, Nextel, and Cingular/AT&T. I've had both VZW and AT&T as a nationwide over-the-road driver as well as pilot, so I've poked and prodded at those networks extensively. As much crap as people give AT&T, I really think their network problems come from the iPhone and the way people use the iPhone. I think that when other carriers get the iPhone, AT&T's network will get some relief and other networks will start seeing some of the same issues. AT&T and VZW are the only truly nationwide carriers, though VZW is a bit weak in Montana, especially the western half (it'll show signal, but good luck trying to make a call, especially if you're moving).

Which Moto interface exactly? There have been at least five different ones.

I forget the exact model number of the only Moto phone I actually owned, but it was one of the ones that Nextel had back when they were the only ones with PTT. It was Cub yellow and built to be the indestructo-phone. Hard plastic with lots of rubber, felt really nice in the hand, made you think "Wow, this is a nice phone" right up until the first time you wanted to change the ringer volume, when you had to pull out the manual to find that you had to hold * and # and then press 7, then 9 to get to the volume adjustment menu. Serious WTF there.

I am interested in what that would be? Seriously I thought the whole thing was over blown.

Yeah, "antennagate" was at least as much a PR problem as it was a technical problem. Nobody knows what the fix is going to be yet, exactly - I was envisioning some sort of invisible clear-coat around the sides (antennae) but who knows. :dunno:
 
Um, no really. What "standard phone features" were missing from the original iPhone? Nothing that I cut out is something I'd consider a "standard phone feature."
See post 15.

No, I didn't have any of that - And I don't care. What I'm saying is, the phone was perfectly usable, and that's what really matters. Usability. I don't care what it does on the bench, or what the network thinks of it. I care whether I can make and hold calls.
Exactly. Being able to make and receive calls is important. And when you do real testing on the iPhone, one finds out that the iPhone dropped more calls and had more access failures than other phones. IOW it has a crappy radio. Which I also think causes some, but not all, of the early complaints about the AT&T network.

I had a Sony Ericsson phone on AT&T before the iPhone... It was the prior switch where I switched networks. Over time, I've had phones from Qualcomm, Nokia, Moto, Sony Ericsson, and Apple on Sprint, PrimeCo/VZW, Nextel, and Cingular/AT&T. I've had both VZW and AT&T as a nationwide over-the-road driver as well as pilot, so I've poked and prodded at those networks extensively. As much crap as people give AT&T, I really think their network problems come from the iPhone
Yes that is what I have been saying. Glad to see you finally agree, that the iPhone was actually not a good phone when it came to radio performance.

I forget the exact model number of the only Moto phone I actually owned, but it was one of the ones that Nextel had back when they were the only ones with PTT. It was Cub yellow and built to be the indestructo-phone. Hard plastic with lots of rubber, felt really nice in the hand, made you think "Wow, this is a nice phone" right up until the first time you wanted to change the ringer volume, when you had to pull out the manual to find that you had to hold * and # and then press 7, then 9 to get to the volume adjustment menu. Serious WTF there.
The Nextel or as we called the system iDen, had some interesting development history. It was not even designed by the cellular groups. It came out of the public safety truck radio people. The user interfaces reflected that as well.

There was the original menu Moto interface that served everyone pretty well until about 1995, then there was the one that was developed by an overseas lab in which I do not think one of the engineers had ever used a cellphone in their life. That was the one that people complain about the most. Then there was the revision to that one, the Symbian UI, Microsoft, and Android. I think a big issue is that no one at Moto ever really looked at use and usability nor did they use other company's phones. In the almost 21 years I have had a cellphone there was only 2 years where I did not have a Moto one.


Yeah, "antennagate" was at least as much a PR problem as it was a technical problem. Nobody knows what the fix is going to be yet, exactly - I was envisioning some sort of invisible clear-coat around the sides (antennae) but who knows. :dunno:
I thought about that clear coat as a solution too. My concern would be that the clear coat could rub off. I am thinking that maybe a small bumper at the antenna gap that would prevent a finger from 'shorting' across that gap?
 
Last edited:
LOL. Stuff like this is probably why there's no Verizon iPhone yet. :tongue:

http://gizmodo.com/5632186/samsung-...eview-when-greedy-carriers-ruin-decent-phones

Verizon, unfortunately, is also what ruins the phone. Or, rather, what it's forced Samsung to do to the phone, which you could sum up in a word: Bing. Bing is the default—and only—search engine on the Fascinate. A Google Android phone. In the search widget, in the browser, when you press the search button. Bing. No, you can't change it. There's no setting for it, and the Google Search widget that you can snag from the Market is blocked (or at least very carefully hidden). Being unwittingly forced into Verizon and Bing's conjugal relationship is infuriating on its own, but the implementation also feels like the sloppy hack that it is. The co-branded Bing/Verizon portal that an in-browser search takes you to is ripped from the circa-2005 dumbphone-approved "internet," while the Bing Maps app that it pushes you toward is vastly inferior to Google Maps (no multitouch, Latitude, etc.). To be clear, Bing itself is fine. This implementation of it is not.
 
LOL. Stuff like this is probably why there's no Verizon iPhone yet. :tongue:

http://gizmodo.com/5632186/samsung-...eview-when-greedy-carriers-ruin-decent-phones
Verizon, unfortunately, is also what ruins the phone. Or, rather, what it's forced Samsung to do to the phone, which you could sum up in a word: Bing. Bing is the default—and only—search engine on the Fascinate. A Google Android phone. In the search widget, in the browser, when you press the search button. Bing. No, you can't change it. There's no setting for it, and the Google Search widget that you can snag from the Market is blocked (or at least very carefully hidden). Being unwittingly forced into Verizon and Bing's conjugal relationship is infuriating on its own, but the implementation also feels like the sloppy hack that it is. The co-branded Bing/Verizon portal that an in-browser search takes you to is ripped from the circa-2005 dumbphone-approved "internet," while the Bing Maps app that it pushes you toward is vastly inferior to Google Maps (no multitouch, Latitude, etc.). To be clear, Bing itself is fine. This implementation of it is not.
Operators all want to control the user experience. They are the ones the are really f'ing up the whole cell phone market too. Lest you ever think that you are the customer of Nokia, Samsung. LG, Apple, Motorola, etc. because you are not. AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, Vodaphone, KDDI, DoCoMo, etc. THEY ARE THE CUSTOMERS and dictate designs.
 
Operators all want to control the user experience so they can extract the most $ out of them. They are the ones the are really f'ing up the whole cell phone market too. Lest you ever think that you are the customer of Nokia, Samsung. LG, Apple, Motorola, etc. because you are not. AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, Vodaphone, KDDI, DoCoMo, etc. THEY ARE THE CUSTOMERS and dictate designs.

Fixed that for ya. :wink2:
 
Operators all want to control the user experience. They are the ones the are really f'ing up the whole cell phone market too. Lest you ever think that you are the customer of Nokia, Samsung. LG, Apple, Motorola, etc. because you are not. AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, Vodaphone, KDDI, DoCoMo, etc. THEY ARE THE CUSTOMERS and dictate designs.

Why do you think the Apple/Verizon talks fizzled so quickly when they were originally working on the iPhone? There's been a lot of rumors about the "Verizon iPhone" but frankly, it's a CDMA iPhone and I would not be at all surprised to see it available everywhere BUT Verizon. And if Verizon continues to screw up the user experience, they're going to lose more and more customers. Heck, that's why they lost me in the first place.
 
Why do you think the Apple/Verizon talks fizzled so quickly when they were originally working on the iPhone? There's been a lot of rumors about the "Verizon iPhone" but frankly, it's a CDMA iPhone and I would not be at all surprised to see it available everywhere BUT Verizon. And if Verizon continues to screw up the user experience, they're going to lose more and more customers. Heck, that's why they lost me in the first place.
Me too. It was absolutely ridiculous how much crap Verizon did to try and stop you from enjoying the features that CAME with the phone.
 
Back
Top