And you have that right but all I will say is my phone is jailbroken and if you dont want to work and develop for Apple you don't have to there are thousands of developers that develop for the Iphone without developing for Apple.
My point is the fight that first pitted Apple vs Google was over the Google voice app Apple said no but Google said yes and I use it everyday it was developed for the Iphone and it his hosted by a second party to down load on the phone.
As a stated before if your going to call the Iphone junk than you have to call the Krzr bigger junk because it does nothing I could not use it on a day to day basis with out having to carry 2 more devices.
Don't use developing for Apple as a reason for your point, Like I said other devs make apps for the iphone and dont have to deal with Apples app store. Rock, Icy are other app stores that can be used and developed for and they have no restrictions.
blk02si I can't talk on the region that you are in but I can tell you for a fact along the I95 corridor from Pa to Fl I have only had 2 dropped calls ever, I live in Md and I drive a big rig so I am all over the 2 dropped calls I did have was with the 2G Iphone and those calls were dropped when I was driving in rural Alabama.
I recently had my iPhone stolen, and I can say for certain that I will NOT be buying another iPhone.
First off, if you're not getting the phone with a contract (as is required if you're like me and your phone gets stolen but you already have a contract), the prices are unbelievably high. $700 for a high-end 3GS model? Seriously? For that price, I can get a new laptop with vastly superior performance. Granted, this isn't quite as mobile of a device, but that price is WAY beyond the cost of parts in an iPhone. Compare the cost to a pico-itx board (which has greatly superior processing speed and performance), plus a small LCD screen and you'll see how absurd it is. Oh, and did I mention that the iPhone is the only phone AT&T won't allow you to get anti-theft insurance on?
The iPhone is one of the most closed-platform devices I have ever seen. Sure, my old iPhone was jailbroken and hacked beyond belief, but I shouldn't have to void my warranty and modify the phone's software to get the device to operate like any other normal smartphone. Just the fact that they block 3rd-party apps in the first place is beyond irritating.
Not to mention the required ties to Apples unbelievably bad and horribly bloated iTunes software. Not only would it periodically decide to delete whatever apps it suddenly decided it wanted to (they call this a "backup"), but Apple is so concerned about piracy that they force you to register your iPhone on each computer you want to attach it to? All they're doing is making life harder for the honest users; people who pirate software will continue to do so no matter what restrictions are in place.
Lastly, AT&T is HORRIBLY overpriced. I'm paying about $110 for 900 minutes, unlimited data, and unlimited text. I can get unlimited everything for $50 on a local carrier (with free nationwide roaming)... for TWO lines, it still costs less than AT&T.
The iPhone has a LOT of potential, but Apple crippled the device by maintaining their dictator-like control over its software and by locking it down to one single carrier with crappy overpriced service.
That being said, I'm quite looking forward to switching back to a Windows Mobile phone (or maybe even a regular old flip-phone). If this wasn't a family-friendly forum, I'd say what I really think about Apple and their policies.
biggkatt01: i think that the consensus here isn't so much that the iphone is a horrible device, it is that apple has made it poor by keeping their knuckles wrapped around the capabilities of the device, and strictly control what software is and isn't allowed.
i also have a iphone, but i wouldn't have even considered it if i was locked into at&t and apple software, and because of this, i still maintain that if a device must be heavily modified to work, then it isn't all that great, or if it is going to be called great, the stipulation of jailbreaking it must be mentioned...or you must recognize that the phone itself is not great without the jailbreak...
for instance, the android phones that are hitting the market, as far as i know, all are almost completely open to devolpers(even the phone OS!), and the biggest hack would be to unlock the phone to work on a different providers networks (unless they already do this, i really don't know)...
and, as per the apple/google lawsuit, even apple feels that googles newest android phone really is a iphone killer.
and i know that once my iphone dies, i will be looking elsewhere for a less restricting phone...
soundman98 you are 100% correct in my earlier post I stated I am in no way defending Apple or AT&T everyone here is correct about the fact that Apple and AT&T are to expensive and to restrictive. the only thing I was getting at is the fact that some were just calling the device itself total junk which is just silly in my opinion if it were not for this device you would not being seeing the morphing of smartphones every maker is now following Apples way of making a smartphone.
ff89 if you hate the price of the Iphone here you could not live in Europe the best selling phone before the Iphone came on the seen over there was the Nokia's the n95 series and they run upward of $900 to $1200 so you probably wouldn't have a decent phone over there because there smartphones are higher than our prices.
I also agree that the new Android phones are catching up and competing with the Iphone but there still at least a year or 2 behind the Iphone I also have a Mytouch 3G on Tmobile but I still can't do half the stuff with it as I can do with my Iphone. in a earlier post above I was mocked because I gave an example that I could use my Iphone to control my car alarm some people may think that is a joke but I think it is a big deal if anyone has gotten a real good car alarm and had to get one of those 2way transponders replaced there about $120 to replace with my Iphone no need to replace. I will also be able to get push notifications if my car is tampered with anywhere in the country, so yes that's a big deal to me.
It's no question Apple & Steve Jobs are just stupid for not opening up the Os and AT&T is stupid for charging so d*** much for the plans but for some to say the phone is junk is also stupid. Yes the android Os is open but developers are still not developing full open apps for the Os. I can use Skype a full version on my Iphone but I can only use a scaled down version of Skype on my Android phone and Skype has said they have no plans to release a full version for Android as they did for the Iphone. I also use a app called Isip on the Iphone for my voip calls to save me mins on my AT&T plan Isip is also available on my Android phone but it is also scaled down not a full version, on my Iphone I can have unlimited voip accounts (I use 5 different voip providers) but on the Android version I can only use 1 provider when I called the developer they also said they have no intention of releasing a full for version on the Android Os, So Android can catch up to the Iphone but they have to convince developers to make the same apps for there Os if I can't get the same apps full apps on a different device and I depend on my Iphone for so much why would I and others chose to move to a different device if they can't offer the same. I want Android to catch up but hey have to get help from the developers and it seems that some are reluctant because there isn't the support there yet.
because of apples restrictions, i call the iphone junk :)
i don't think that the iphone would have half the popularity if any other company had started it--IMO, apple is really thriving off the success of the ipod..
i think that the whole reason that android is so far behind is because people aren't embracing it like the iphone--and because apples restrictive policies aren't as advertised as they should be.
i think that if a few tv news programs started bringing up apples anti-openness, and unfriendly attitude toward developers, and dictatorship-like bussiness model, they might loose popularity real fast...
just to be clear, imo, the iphone is a amazing phone, and was a ground breaking device when it was introduced, because of everything it could do, and still can, but, it is apples limititations that make it a poor choice over many other solutions these days, and apple fails to pursue that in any way except by suing the makers of the other devices...
they have become a schoolyard bully that needs to be brought down...
justchat: i missed the link at first..
so according to that, androids marketplace isn't the most conductive to making money, so that is also why devs don't want to contribute..
One mans trash is always another mans treasure.
Good thing about the iphone is when you realize it's junk and want to rid yourself of its fruitiness there is a mindless drone of zombies waiting to throw $500 cash for it!
Now a power mac g5 desktop sitting on my desk would not be junk, because then at least i'd be able to write some apps for the phone. As I recall you need a mac to write apps for it. Nothing wrong with the computing side of apple at all, just think the phone version of the company is not that great.
It is easy now to point out the faults of the iPhone. However, think back to the introduction of the 'Jesus' phone. The product reinvented the phone category and became a runaway best seller.
Why? A couple of possible explanations come to mind.
1. People are stupid and will buy anything that Apple ships. I don't think there are that many stupid people out there. And I think it does a disservice to them to imply that they are 'too stupid to know this product stinks'. If that's the case, then other companies ought to be able to mine this territory easily. The fact is, they don't because people aren't stupid
2. Cell phones sucked. I think back to my experience with phones up until then and the fact of the matter is, we had crappy phones with crappy service contracts from greedy network providers. These phones were dismal and a chore to use. Adding music, photos, contacts and so forth was a flat out chore. But iPhones were better in some way. They had to be or people wouldn't buy them. Remember, this was a premium priced product with a premium cost data plan. Why would people pay more for this phone?
We know that the iPhone didn't really break any important technological ground with the exception of one very important category - it was easy to use. You pretty much didn't need an instruction book. And they integrated the web and your location into the phone in a way that hadn't been done very well before. Obviously, phone manufacturers were underestimating the power of a well designed human-machine interface.
And they were expandable by the average user. Now, anyone has the ability to add a kabillion apps that aren't just garbage but actually use the hardware on the phone in ways that weren't/haven't been available to the masses before.
In fact, rather than feel closed in by hardware and software agreements that most people have never heard of and don't care about, the average user feels he/she has more freedom than ever to add functionality to their device. And it's DEAD SIMPLE. For the price of a candy bar, you can add a barcode scanner to your phone.
A new category of product
The real question is how was it possible that entrenched manufacturers and cell service providers didn't see this? How were other computer companies, notably Microsoft, unable to get this right after multiple iterations? How could the professionals in this industry like Verizon, Nokia, Motorola, AT&T, T-Mobile, all of whom had a direct connection to their customers and were in the business of selling cells phones and service to them, be bested by a company with no experience in the mobile phone business?
Well, it's really not possible in a product category that depends on evolution. New aircraft manufacturers don't come out of nowhere because the existing ones know how to build and refine existing designs. New appliance manufacturers don't become market leaders because the incumbents have way more knowledge and skill than the new entrant.
Nope, you can't become a market leader in an evolutionary category when you're late to the game -unless you buy an existing company. You can only jump to the front by introducing a a product that is revolutionary -disruptive, if you are a late entrant. Like them or hate them, Apple created a new product in a category that everyone thought had no room for one.
We've seen this movie before, of course and Apple is very familiar with it. It was when they created the music player market by introducing the iPod into a market that already had lots of lower priced players with more features.
Now, other, more advanced phones that are more open and more feature laden are entering the category created by Apple. That's great because it will require Apple to reinvent its phones again - soon. They only have a few tens of millions of phones out there and they can easily stumble and be replaced. Just ask IBM whatever happened to its PC division.
It's ridiculous to say that Apple's success is built on fluke after fluke financed by stupid consumers. It's even funnier when you go back to the early 1990's when Apple was irrelevant, couldn't ship products that worked, and it was all over but the bankruptcy filing. So, go ahead and have the argument about whether iPhones are trash or not but don't make the mistake of assuming that the average user wants or even cares about how open it is or how hard it is for a developer to write an app for it.
The good news is that if you hate Apple and their products, there are plenty of imitators and innovators who are drawn to the iPhone success. They have to differentiate themselves from Apple and less restrictive agreements and more network possibilities will follow. Good for everyone.