Mobile Competition Part 1: What OS is best for you
0. phoneArena posted on 23 Sep 2011, 12:31
Part 1 of 2 covering iOS, Android and the smaller competing platforms, the strengths and weaknesses of each, and why you might choose one over another. Part 2 will focus on the overall competition and its effect on the mobile space...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
95. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 18:16 0 1
every tech site and news organization views the iPhone as a smartphone so your opinion doesn't really matter. In fact making unsubstatiated claims makes you a fanboy.
What function can android do that iPhone can not?
102. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 18:59 0 0
And word wrap! But I'm sure adults like taco50 doesn't have time for childish things.
Can you guys picture taco looking at the screen right now wondering "what is word wrap"? LOL.
I'll save you the trouble taco. It's when us you zoom in on the screen or double tap on the screen and the words automatically adjust to fit the screen. You know, so you don't have to scroll from left to right. Just ask some one with a real smartphone to show you.
104. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 19:04 1 0
iPhone auto adjusts the text on your screen when you double tap so you're wrong about that one. In fact iPhone did it before android was even a real phone.
119. Heatfan316 posted on 23 Sep 2011, 20:57 0 0
No your wrong Taco the iPhone does not reformat the text to fit the page, the iphone does zoom in, but does not reformat the text, you don't have an android phone so you have no idea what whateverman is trying to explain to you.
121. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:01 0 0
Yes my iPhone does. If I double type it zooms in so I can read without scrolling back and forth.
103. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 19:01 0 0
@ taco50 - Somehow, I knew you would be the one to get their feelings hurt by my comment. You always cry that "ALL the tech blogs say this" and "ALL the tech news organizations agree that" and that I'm the one with no facts to back it up! Well, let's see who is the fact finder and who is the fanboy, shall we?
Here are just a few few articles from tech sites and tech news organizations that share my opinion...
And yes, these articles are old. But not as old as iOS. Seeing as though the iPhone still has all of the shortcomings mentioned in these articles, it still doesn't qualify as a smartphone. No matter what marketing spin VZW, ATT, or Apple puts on it. It's still just a really, really high end feature phone.
P.S. Seeing as though I currently own 4 iPods, 2 iMacs, an iPad, and only 2 Android devices, I'm probably a bigger fan of Apple then you are. The difference is, I don't see everything tech through Apple-colored glasses. Again, sorry if I hurt your feelings.
105. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 19:05 0 0
These are articles from 2007. Can you link a review from 2008 or later? No you can't because at that time Apple added exchange support.
106. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 19:16 0 2
Oh, yes exchange! What about the rest of it? Have they added a removable battery, an sd card slot, third party app support??? No? Okay, then it's still a really nice feature phone.
Whateverman, AKA Fact Finder 1,001
Taco50, AKA Fanboy 0
Game, Set, Match!
115. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 20:30 0 0
A removable battery is hardware and so is an sd card. Apple does have 3rd party app support. In fact they have the best app store on the planet.
Again what FUNCTION is missing? Apple has memory and a battery. I'm asking you to name just one function and you can't do it.
Let me clear it up. Can you complete tasks that I can't?
160. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 00:19 0 0
apples exchange support was an industry joke. I remember so many businesses dropping VZW and going to ATT to get the iphone because it finally added exchange support...
only to cancel those contracts and beg to come back, because the iphones exchange "support" was a joke. The Voyager had better email syncing and it didnt even do exchange.
the iphone was NOT a smartphone up until it got REAL exchange, cut n paste, fake multitasking, and some minor corperate security. It is a smartphone in the lightest sence of the word. Go to a real business that uses corperate email with security needs.. tell me how many iphones there are.... zero. but u will find plenty of blackberrys, androids, and windows phones.
193. taco50 (banned) posted on 24 Sep 2011, 13:30 0 1
This is why you're a fanboy. Business people are switching from blackberry to iPhone in droves. I use an iPhone for exchange email and it works much better than a blackberry.
Comments like "fake multitasking" and "smartphone in the lightest since of the word" make you a fanboy. You can barely hold back your contempt for the iPhone.
I can google in two seconds the fact that businesses are switching to iPhones. The voyager was a joke by the way. I can't believe you'd even compare it to an iPhone.
198. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 14:00 0 0
no, your inability to think of anything negative about a platform makes you a fanboy.
i realize you have all this "inside information".. oh wait.. you dont. Blackberry has a lock on business class corperate email, even today. Where do u think the bulk of their sales are? Noone is dropping blackberries and picking up iphones in droves that needs secure email. I've watched companies do that, and they have a 100% return rate back to blackberries. If they want a touch screen with security they get android more times than not.. specifically moto blur androids if they do any research because they have extra security on top of android's already good exchange security.
Do some business people get iphones? of course. noone is saying they dont. not all businesses need advanced security email... but if you need advanced security, iphone isnt even on the plate.
it is fake multitasking. just get past it.
i dont have contempt for a phone. its a piece of electronics. im sorry if you have emotions twards a piece of glass and metal. it doesnt love you back no matter how much you try.
when the voyager launched it had more OS features than the iphone. simple fact. go do a point to point with an iphone 2g on iOS1 vs a voyager. you will be sad. neither were smartphones back then. The iphone of course gained more features in the end, but that has nothing to do with that particular point in time.
111. RORYREVOLUTION posted on 23 Sep 2011, 19:51 1 4
We can make phone calls without having to worry about where our hand is covering the antenna and don't have to worry about dropped calls and horrible static during calls. True multitasking, full adobe flash, I can take out my damn battery and put a new one in. Oh sorry you have to call Apple and wait for them to mail you a NEW phone to do that. I can exchange or add a new micro SD card and I am not stuck with "16GB or 32GB" and that's all. Over the air updates that don't require stupid authorizations to selected computers and don't have to delete all my music and apps just to install more from my computer. I am not stuck with a tiny little screen that looks like it's a toy for kids.
I can go on and on Taco fan boy.
116. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 20:33 2 0
So by not having "true multitasking" what am I missing out on?
I can do flash. I have a battery that lasts way longer than yours and I can walk into an Apple store and come out with a new one if I have any issue. I can update my software, I can store all the music I want.
Yours giving me variations of the same thing. Sure android has a different method but what task can you complete that I can't?
118. MichaelHeller posted on 23 Sep 2011, 20:45 4 0
And things had been going so well...
You guys, this argument is absurd. I can understand the idea that the iPhone wasn't a smartphone at launch, but the second it had the App Store, that changed. There is no denying the iPhone is a smartphone, and a damn good one at that.
A removable battery or SD card expansion are features, they aren't necessities to the definition of a smartphone. That would be like trying to claim the Macbook Air isn't really a computer. It's just absurd.
Sure, Android offers some functionality that iPhone doesn't, but that's the point of competition, isn't it? If someone doesn't offer what you want, you go somewhere else. No need to have a long winded and silly argument about it.
120. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 20:58 0 0
I respect you opinion Michael, but until I can get an app from some place other then iTunes...I'm still not budging. When I got a new phone, it wouldn't update to the new version of the Android market. But I was able to find the APK online, download it, and install it with no problem. Every smartphone I have ever used in the past had the ability to download applications from many sources, but the fact that the iPhone doesn't is inexcusable.
124. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:05 0 0
Sorry you lose whatever man and not because Michael responded. Any reasonable person realizes the iPhone is a smartphone. To deny it is being illogical.
143. RORYREVOLUTION posted on 23 Sep 2011, 22:01 0 0
Any reasonable person also realizes that their iPhone isnt 4G hahaha
135. MichaelHeller posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:46 3 0
But again, that doesn't mean it isn't a smartphone. It just means it is a closed system that you don't like. WP7 is the same way.
153. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 23:01 0 1
See taco, that's how you disagree with someone who has an opposing opinion. I'm not mad at Michael or think it makes him a fanboy. I just disagree with him, and I don't think he'll lose any sleep over it.
But thank you Michael, I'll add WP7 to my list of non-smartphone smartphones. LOL.
155. MichaelHeller posted on 24 Sep 2011, 00:02 2 0
That makes no sense. By that logic, not all Android phones are smartphones, because AT&T locked down the option to sideload apps.
164. Whateverman posted on 24 Sep 2011, 00:38 0 0
I have stated that opinion before as well about ATT locking their devices down, that it technically makes it a feature phone. I'm consistent with my belief weather it's Apple or Android. And so far, no one has presented me with anything to convience me of anything different. I'm not having this debate just to be difficult, this is one of the things I was taught during training. Now if that has changed then fine, I would adjust my definition. But there still is no across-the-board definition of what a smartphone is.
So instead of trying to make sense of what I feel, educate me. I'm not buying the app store, exchange email, or internet browsers because most feature phones had those same capabilities when the iPhone was introduced. It can't be OS, because BREW is still somewhat of an OS. So please, educate me. What makes a smartphone a smartphone?
166. MichaelHeller posted on 24 Sep 2011, 01:10 1 0
I'll have to take time to consider a full definition of a smartphone, but I do know that the ability to sideload apps is not a breaking line of that definition, because in my definition the iPhone, WP7 and Motorola Atrix are all smartphones. I'll either get back to you or write up an article. Maybe next week, because I've still got part 2 of this piece to finish.
167. Whateverman posted on 24 Sep 2011, 01:28 0 0
That's a deal my friend. If you can convince me, I will stop saying it for ever! And for the record, it's not that I don't like the iPhone. I mean who wouldn't like it? It's a great phone, I just I like Android better, at least as far as phones go.
Even though we may disagree, but I still think you're writing like Snoop in 92', so I'm really looking forward to part two of this article!
187. MichaelHeller posted on 24 Sep 2011, 10:55 0 0
I think remixfa has a good start with:
-real exchange support
-real apps, not brew apps.
But, I would also add:
-a full featured web browser
-advanced text input features (not just T9)
-minimum 3G support + WiFi
-make and receive calls (it must be a phone after all)
-advanced video playback (not just 3GP)
I'm having trouble coming up with more, but the basic idea is this: most BlackBerries are smartphones and they make up what I consider the bottom rung of smartphones. But, fringe phones like the OG T-Mo Sidekick are under that rung and are not smartphones.
It feels like there is another requirement based on the ability to add extensive features with software updates, but I'm not sure how to express that.
190. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 12:58 0 0
we should probably throw in GPS too. even though thats pretty much standard on all phones now.. it didnt used to be.
I wouldnt throw in the 3g part myself, as if your trying to make a blanket statement about smartphone features, you will be excluding a lot of the OG's of the smartphone world that were edge and/or wifi only.
192. MichaelHeller posted on 24 Sep 2011, 13:19 0 0
I'll agree on GPS, but I think 3G sticks, because most of those 1st gen "smartphones" would be disqualified by other metrics we've set out as well. OG iPhone didn't have 3rd party apps or GPS. G1 didn't have exchange (although it did have 3G).
I don't know, the more I think about it, maybe 3G isn't a necessary feature, WiFi certainly is tho.
199. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 14:05 0 0
smartphones go back farther than android and iOS. Palm didnt have 3g until the bitter end.. many many windows phones did not have 3g.. heck most blackberries didnt even get 3g till a little while ago. Tmobile didnt get its first "3g" blackberry till this past year.. lol. You would be negating 70% of smartphones before 2008.
I dont concider Android when it first came out a smartphone because of the lack of exchange and exchange security. That got fixed quickly though comparitively. Android 2.0 I believe is when exchange dropped on the scene for everyone, though moto blur had exchange built into it, even on android 1.5 with the Cliq, so though it was mid/bottom tier, it was among the first android true smartphones.
202. Whateverman posted on 24 Sep 2011, 14:35 0 0
The problem is the restrictions and controls that manufactures and carriers place on individual devices. They somewhat blur the lines between feature/smartphone past and present. For example: every smartphone nowadays has 3G and WiFi. ATT offered WiFi with their Blackberries yet VZW left it off until the Storm 2. Yet they were still smartphones. But one thing all the old smartphones were able to do in the past was downloading apps from multiple sources. Not to be a dead horse here but here is something I pulled of of Wikipedia about the iPhone: "As a result of the iPhone's initial inability to install third-party native applications, some reviewers considered the originally-released device to be more akin to a featurephone than a smartphone. A process called jailbreaking emerged quickly to provide unofficial third-party native applications."
Now from that I hear that an iPhone isn't a smartphone until the user jailbreaks it. And the purpose of jailbreaking is to give users the ability to download apps from Cydia, correct?
But I also found things that countered my point. This one is from webopedia, and it states "A smartphone is considered to be the combination of the traditional PDA and cellular phone, with a bigger focus on the cellular phone part. These handheld devices integrates mobile phone capabilities with the more common features of a handheld computer or PDA. Smartphones allow users to store information, e-mail, install programs, along with using a mobile phone in one device. A smartphone's features is usually more oriented towards mobile phone options than the PDA-like features. There is no industry standard for what defines a smartphone, so any mobile device that has more than basic cellphone capabilities can actually be filed under the smartphone category of devices."
I don't think these two were the perfect example of what a smartphone is, but it just goes to show how without an industry standard, any company can call any phone with Internet, calendar, and a data plan, a smartphone. Michael, maybe you can create that standards by which all new smartphones will have to meet.
215. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 18:41 0 0
which highlights a great point
wikipedia is not a reliable source of information.
216. Whateverman posted on 24 Sep 2011, 19:10 0 0
True, it isn't. It's just parroting what they have also read as far as what those who reviewed the iPhone have said. But think about it, it you look at what the current iPhone has in common with old smartphones that established that market. What you're saying is an app store makes a phone a smartphone. So what would you call Blackberries, and Palms before they had their app stores? They didn't have apps stores when they were introduced, but they did have the ability to download programs from other sources. You weren't locked into whatever came with your device. Why wouldn't this be a requirement for all smartphones now, because Apple says so? You can believe that if you wish, there's nothing wrong with that, but that's not enough for me.
238. remixfa posted on 25 Sep 2011, 08:01 0 0
no, the point i was making was... app store or no app store doesnt make a difference. as long as it has the ability to run real apps and not just BREW apps, then its a smartphone feature. That doesnt automaitcally mean its a smartphone either.. its just part of what a smartphone should be able to do. Thats why I keep a checklist of smartphone features that have been on anything ive ever felt was a smartphone. if it doesnt meet the list, its not a smartphone.
no phone up until the iphone had a central app listing, and their were hundreds of smartphones before the iphone.
244. Whateverman posted on 25 Sep 2011, 14:25 0 0
BREW is every bit a legitimate OS, as is Android, iOS, or BB. But because Qualcomm designed it to be a basic cell phone OS, and a bit of a step up from our old Startac and Nokia 6110s (boy, I used to love snake). But Qualcomm has somewhat neglected, or at least they didn't evolve the BREW platform very much. If give the proper attention and maybe the same kind of vm that Android uses, BREW could have possibly evolved into a powerhouse OS. But one characteristic that BREW shares with iOS, is that although anyone can make an app in just about any coding language they wish, that app can only be ported by the carrier or the phone manufacture. I know that YOU know I'm speaking the true on that. So let's come together on this.
I can except that the iPhone or any phone being a smartphone seeing only when both of our conditions are meet.
1. The phone can not run the standard BREW format commonly used on current feature phones. And must have the ability to run full programs as opposed to simple games and plug-ins. And of course everything you said before as far as copy and paste and multi-tasking (even though iOS doesn't really have that either, but i digress.)
2. The phone must have the ability to download applications from at least one third party app store. For example, an iPhone, once jail broken, would qualify as a smartphone. (Remember, I never thought even a jail broken iPhone qualified before. So, I'm meeting you half way on this.)
So what do you think? Can we agree that these should be a starting point for smartphone qualifications?
247. remixfa posted on 25 Sep 2011, 17:08 0 0
brew at one time was the main starting OS code on everyone's phone. it could never be a smartphone OS, it wasnt designed to be that way.
#1 i can go for, but #2 i think your really sticking to the wrong point. Because under that guise, then windows mobile, palm, and blackberry didnt become a smartphone until AFTER the iphone did, as they just recently implemented centralized app stores. Windows mobile was the defacto high powered phone OS that is what a full smartphone "was". It may not have always been very stable, but it was the most powerful by far in features and functions. It never got a centralized app store, unless you want to count that crappy half assed try they added in with windows mobile 6.5.
Why exactly does it matter where the app comes from as long as it is a full featured app? Maybe I'm just missing the point in here somewhere. If its the same app from the centralized store, or from some internet site, what's the difference?
251. Whateverman posted on 25 Sep 2011, 19:56 0 0
My point isn't so much where they come from, it's the lack of freedom is what I'm getting at. All feature phones are completely locked down. You have no say so in what apps you can have. Smartphones never had that level of restriction. If a software developer writes the app, it was yours for the taking and your carrier had no says so in the matter. A smartphone, at least during my training, was described to me as a mini-computer and one of the neccesary function was the ability to download applications from anywhere. Much like how we have that ability on our desktops, laptops, and net books. You don't have to download all of your software from Dell, Gatewaand or even Apple for those who have iMacs. Why shouldn't a mini-computer have that same capability if it's possible?
258. remixfa posted on 26 Sep 2011, 07:16 0 0
I get where your going with that, and for a while, that was completely true. All smartphones could download apps from any site they were found on. But they also lacked a central location to download apps easily from. you had to know where to go find them.
If you get angry birds on some website, or from the centralized store.. whats the difference? From personal experience, i could say you probably saved an hour of searching the internet by getting it from the central app store. I like being able to get apps from anywhere and I like an OS that gives me freedom. Thats why I choose android. However, if they took away the ability to get apps from elsewhere, I would be mad about it, but I would still consider it a smart phone, as it still can get apps. I think fighting over the location of where you get apps is splitting hairs.
259. Whateverman posted on 26 Sep 2011, 13:28 0 0
I concede, the location isn't as important as the freedom of choice. That's why i'm willing to say a jail broken iPhone is a smartphone.
This isn't splitting hairs because again it's not about the location. It about the restrictions placed on the device. The control Apple has over what YOU are allowed to put on YOUR device. It would be one thing if we were talking about your company's IT restricting usage, but its Apple. What other electronic computing devices have their full abilities block by the manufacture? The only thing I can think of is a basic cell phone. And this isn't something that I've set as a standard. This was exactly why some of the reviewers we follow as well as other industry experts had an issue with calling it a smartphone as well. This isn't all me.
261. remixfa posted on 26 Sep 2011, 19:50 0 0
Dont get me wrong, I completely agree with trying to avoid OS's that have huge restrictions from the manufacturer on them. I dont like being told what i cant do, only what i can do. Unfortunately the norm now is app store only restrictions. Exept blackberry and Android, everyone else has pretty much locked their phones down to the app store. So unless we start knocking out OG smart phones like windows and palm, we are just going to have to accept that.
or we could just agree to disagree.. lol.
262. MichaelHeller posted on 26 Sep 2011, 20:08 0 0
Aha, but there's the rub. It isn't YOURS. It's Apple's smartphone that Steve Jobs has been kind enough to let you use. It is still a smartphone however.
You have to remember, smartphones are NOT computers, and you can't place the same definitions on them. Apple wants to ensure a safer environment, so users don't have to worry about virus protection or malware. Regardless of the ease of hacking either device, there can be no argument that the Android Market and ecosystem has a ton of malware in it. What you see as restrictions on what you can do with the device is seen as features of enhanced security and ease of use by many others. And, because all of the hardware is the same with Apple, if there is an exploit that could be taken advantage of with a 3rd party app, it's in Apple's interest on behalf of consumers to not allow that possibility. Remember, most users aren't nearly as savvy with their devices as we are and could easily be suckered into something that could cause a lot of problems in a unified ecosystem like iOS. That's a feature tradeoff and decision for consumers to make whether or not they want to be in that system. It doesn't make the iPhone any less of a smartphone because of it. You don't like it, so you don't buy it. Simple as that.
That said, you posted links before of articles (which seemed to be citing the same source) which claimed the iPhone wasn't a smartphone at launch in 2007. And, I completely agree with that point. Have you shared links with more recent reflections on that topic? (Sorry, I haven't had a chance to go through the entire exchange with you and Taco.)
263. Whateverman posted on 27 Sep 2011, 04:59 0 0
How could you? You have a life! But sadly no recent articles. I realize I am a lone wolf on this issue, but the facts of that article has changed only so much. It clearly stated "3rd party software", and when I first read it 4 years ago, it only reinforced what I was told and its tough to change that line of thinking just because Apple says we should.
To use yet another analogy; if Ford bumped up the fuel consumption on the Mustang to 40 MPG, that would make it very fuel efficient, but that wouldn't make it a hybrid, right? Because it's still missing that key feature of having that second power source. Any car that doesn't have that second powerplant, doesn't get the distinction of being called a hybrid. So why is it that Apple is allowed to remove key features and still have that distinction of being a smartphone? And sure, they say its for security reasons, and I know what your saying about the unified eco-system is 100% true. But he did it for the money. Apple gets paid 10 different ways for everything people do on an iphone or ipad. From charging the app developers an application fee, to getting a share of the ad money from our clicks. Apple left flash and 3rd party apps off of iOS because there was no profit in it for them. Blackberry is widely excepted as the most secure mobile OS there is, yet they manage to allow 3rd party apps with very few issues. This is pure greed at its best and its working to the tune of $76 Billion!
Lastly, I know you guys are probably this guy is just too thick headed to get it! But believe me, I get every excellent point both you and remixfa have made. It's just I don't think Apple deserves this pass. This whole thing just reminds me of the Emperor with No Clothes. The Emperor struts his new attire so convincingly that the crowd wants to believe he really is wearing the most elegant of fabrics. And I'm like the little kid yelling, "Hey, the Emperor has no clothes."
266. MichaelHeller posted on 27 Sep 2011, 10:55 0 0
I just think you're misinterpreting "3rd party software". The OG iPhone didn't pass that test because it didn't have any 3rd party apps at all. The App Store wasn't introduced until iOS 2.0. I don't think it has anything to do with being able to install apps from outside sources.
267. Whateverman posted on 27 Sep 2011, 22:55 0 0
No, I know 3rd party software is basically any software not developed by the manufacture. With the exception of a few iWork app, everything on the app store is 3rd party. What it seem if done is put to much emphasis on where the apps should come from. My real issue is the lock down. The lock down and control of the device Steve allows his followers to use ishad no other precedence in smartphones, only feature phones. And it would have been okay had they taken the Android route allowing users to decide for themselves. But the lock down and control is my real issue.
269. remixfa posted on 28 Sep 2011, 17:12 0 0
and there in lies the difference. some people like freedom and all the good and bads with that, and some people like confinement and saftey, with all the goods and bads of that.
we all have that choice to make. Is one better than the other? Is one less of a good idea than the other? Each side will talk up their side and point out issues with the other. Its all preference. It is 2 sides to the same coin.. but yet, it IS the same coin. 2 ways to run a smartphone, but it is still a smartphone.
And no, only fools that think apple is always right or have no idea of what a smartphone is or how little the iphone2g did at launch... think the iphone was a smartphone at launch.
223. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 22:21 0 0
just to bring up a point
the "multiple sources" part is disingenuous. Before the iphone's app store there was no centralized location on any true smartphone platform to get apps. You had to search the internet for them. Neither windows, nor palm, nor blackberry had an app store before the iphone. The one thing apple did right was making apps very easy to find.
226. Whateverman posted on 24 Sep 2011, 23:32 0 0
Let's not forget about Handango, that's what most people used, but I get your point. Apple was the first to make an app store specifically for their phone. But if that's what makes a phone a smartphone, then nothing before the iPhone would have qualified. So if a centralized app store is what makes a smartphone, where is the line drawn? Downloading apps can't be it, because I downloaded apps long before using a smartphone.
175. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 06:03 0 0
sorry WEM, but i dont think the app store arguement is a good one.
the iphone IS a smartphone now. It became one after the last few updates. It WAS NOT a smart phone when the iphone 2g launched. It was a really nice feature phone. It was lacking way too many features to be a smartphone. Shady advertising by apple convinced everyone it was a smartphone before it was.
It is nice that we live in a world of updates as any phone can pretty much be turned into a smartphone if it has the horsepower to handle the updates.
122. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:04 0 0
And PS, the vibe in this comment section was harmonious until taco50 came in. There were iPhone fans here that saw the article for what it was and had nothing negative to say to anyone. But as usual, when taco50 sees other people's opinions or talking civilly amongst themselves, he finds a way to throw off the balance in the room. My comment was my comment was to biophone (who BTW took no offense) not taco.
126. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:10 0 0
You made an absurd comment I responded to. I haven't attacked anyone personally. Well maybe sniggly lol.
Here's the thing. Fandroids make disparaging and sometimes ridiculous comments about the iPhone.
Some examples :
Not a smartphone
iPhone users are sheep
Apple is evil
Apple users are disgusting or idiots
Darthball refers to it as idiot phone
Then if I rebut your statement I'm viewed as an instigator or a sheep?
I don't comment on every android article trying to prove iPhone is better. It's you androids that follow Apple articles and talk s**t.
136. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:46 1 2
If you read my posts, you will notice I never made any disparaging or ridiculous remarks. I'm only reiterating what many in the industry have always felt. I don't think an app store make a phone a smartphone. Nor does email or exchange, because as any VZW customer could tell you, our feature phones have all of those things, even an app store. But what VZW feature phones can not do... Is download apps from third party sites and app stores. Just like the iPhone.
141. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:59 0 0
No one in the industry shares your view. Only fanboys.
151. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 22:46 0 0
So who wrote those articles then?
179. remixfa posted on 24 Sep 2011, 06:25 0 0
1) the iphone was not a smartphone at launch. It IS one now, so why are you still crying about it
2) some iphone users are sheep. Miz and gallito come to mind specifically. You are still a loyal apple customer, but since you have been behaving, i havent been calling you a sheep. A sheep is not only blind to everything apple does that is not awesome (and u still fall under this), but they also act like a complete idiot and dont say anything of note (you have gotten much better at this).
3) i think as an over all company, apple has a bad track record. Is it evil? i dont think it has a soul. But apple has the deaths of many workers on his head and the blood of their slave like work conditions in every iphone. If you can live with that, fine. I want no part of it. Nor do I want any part of their 1984 big brother like attitude on their products. i buy a product from you doesnt mean u get to control me through it for the rest of my life.
4) i have some extremely intelligent friends that are diehard apple users. Then there are people on this board that are the exact opposite. Most people are talking about the loud mouths on the board.
5) did darthball hurt your feelings? Want a tissue? Thats his opinion. You have said many vile things about android, so until you hold yourself to the same standard, quit whining about others.
195. taco50 (banned) posted on 24 Sep 2011, 13:46 0 0
I found you an article where samsung was being sued for 60 worker deaths and the article mentioned that samsung employees had complained for years about poor working conditions. The clothes on your back are most likely made in sweatshops. You have selective outrage against Apple.
132. biophone posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:41 1 0
I agree with mike. I to understand some people views that the og iphone wasnt a smartphone but i do think there wrong but to say that doesnt make you a fanboy. To say once the iphone got a appstore wasnt a smartphone makes you a instant fanboy. Remixfa is a weird fanboy. When talking about android i enjoy his comments when talking about iphone foot in mouth. To whateverman i have a question for you. What makes something a smartphone. Remixfa says copy and paste. I say all a smartphone is is an advanced feature phone with a more advanced proccesor bigger display/battery has access to email/web and has a keyboard.
138. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:52 1 1
All VZW feature phones were able to go to Get It Now, are those smartphones too? And the Blackberry App World was introduced in 2008, so was it just a feature phone before that?
139. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 21:57 0 0
What makes the iPhone a smartphone is that it has all the features that any other smartphone has. Not liking that 3rd party apps are installed through iTunes doesn't change facts. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can twist facts.
I think what we're really getting to here is you dont want to PAY for apps.
147. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 22:18 0 0
Never said I didn't like the iPhone or iTunes, as I said, I have thousand of dollars worth of iDevices. So if NOT liking iTunes was an issue, I wouldn't own these devices. And I probably have paid for many more apps then you, so that last comment was really weak.
Having used not only iPhones, Blackberries, Palms, Windows, and several other devices give me a different perspective, one you obviously don't like. Again, you have to get over your own insecurities about your iPhone because it's obviously have an inferiority complex. If you think the iPhone is the best smartphone in the world, that's great for you. But I believe a smartphone should be a mini computer that offers at least the same features as any basic feature phone. Expandable memory and removable battery doesn't make a smartphone, but to me, downloading apps from anywhere does.
150. taco50 (banned) posted on 23 Sep 2011, 22:42 2 0
It's not about to you. There's a standard for a smartphone which the iPhone meets. Not liking a feature on it doesn't change what it is.
I have used all of those platforms. iPhone blows blackberry, windows mobile, palm out of the water. That's why 2 of 3 no longer exist.
I understand you work for VZW but you need to get off the fanboy horse. You have the iPhone now. It's ok.
152. Whateverman posted on 23 Sep 2011, 22:55 0 0
Yeah, it's just okay, it's not a smartphone. LOL. How does lacking something make it a feature? If it can't do it, that's not a benefit.
And since when is someone opinion not about them? I gave an opinion and back it up with artcles writen by people in the industry. You not liking what they had to say doesn't mean they're wrong. But your getting this upset about it sounds rather fanboyish.