PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

No, I didn't get the iPhone, my wife most likely will. But I am in the market for a new phone. For the initial upgrade on my phone, I went with a Pantech Duo, wich has a sliding keyboard, no touch screen, and is a windows mobile phone. The phone is fine, but Windows Mobile is a complete piece of trash. I had no idea. I mean, the thing's been around for a very long time, no? And it crashes, feels very sluggish, just a bad piece of software. So I'm planning on returning it, and get something else that's not windows mobile.

I'm just amazed at the wave of new phones that are "iPhone inspired". Of course, the end result being "well, is it an iPhone? Certainly not, but blah blah". Here's what I don't get. If iPhone built the game, why play it? You can't beat the product that made the game!

I know for a fact that iPhone and other touch screen phones (they've been around) are not for everyone. Regardless of fancy interfaces, awesome advertisements, and the usual PR geniusm from Apple, the phone is good at a handful of things, and the rest.. maybe not so much. But that's fine. The phone suites a specific crowd very well, and so that's that. For example, it works very well for my wife because she needs to read/write japanese, and iPhone is pretty much the only phone that supports japanese by default.

The bigger problem is how the other manufacturers responded to this competition. What in the world is all this "I'm touch screen too" business? That has got to be the most sorry ass strategy ever. I would have thought, if iPhone catered to a particular crowd, then you fall back and grab everybody else. These people (not apple) must be out of their minds to think they can make a bad iPhone clone and fight for the exact same crowd. Not only do the manufacturers not have the OS dev history that Apple does, they don't have the design team, and the PR marketing team. I was extremely shocked RIM also joined the bandwagon. If people wanted a touchscreen phone, they'd get the iPhone dammit. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

This is another extremely sad showcase of how "thinking" has become a liability. I think if companies were willing to take the risk, and go the other direction, then we wouldn't be swimming in these wannabes. And in this situation, I think it might even be the smarter business choice. In that sense, I'm curious where motorola is heading, since they are clearly attacking the "tactile" part. So far, not so good.

At the end of the day though, the hype will most likely fade, and people will realise how inefficient a touch interface is. It'll be a battle between people accepting that fact, versus Apple marketing the idea to people. It is a new concept, so the curiousity will drive sales. But seriously, touch screen is only effective in a handful of situations (like buying train tickets, controling instruments)... not things that require precision and speed like text messaging, or browsing the web. But, people don't want to accept that, because it looks cool when you're using a touch screen device and typing at 2 words per minute.

I really miss the phones back in Japan. (http://mb.softbank.jp/mb/product/3G/815t_pb/) There were so little issues.. they all had awesome cameras, as in digital camera quality, OS that didn't crash or have bugs, and all you had to do was choose the design and not worry much about dodging duds.

not that I want a phone that is just a phone... no, I don't think I said that anywhere in my post.. and I think globally we've gotten past that point. But it would be nice if everything wasn't unified into an iPhone.

I don't think phone manufacturers understand the success of the iPhone at all. The way I see it, it succeeds in several fronts.

1. PR gimmick: touch is cool, got multi touch too!
2. Design: no clunkiness, no nonesense design as usual
3. OS: solid os developed by experienced OS builders. Quite different from "firmware" writer's approach
4. Internet: full web browser. I personally think WAP and wap optimized content is better, but "full web browser" is more marketable. It's so hard reading zoomed out webpages.. I clearly don't understand the value of a full web browser.
5. Apps: Still in infancy, but at least the distribution path exists

With the copy cat iPhones, most companies concentrate on copy 1 and 2, and atleast visually try to copy 3. Usually fail at 4, and has no capability for 5. But there is so much emphasis on 1 and 2, they fail to realize that iPhone is a much bigger system. And that's where they have to be if they really want to compete. They have to get their apps together, create a distribution system, and so on. It's no the phone that's innovative, it's the entire distribution system. Frankly, the phone could have been anything, as long as it is hot and marketable. Maybe it could have been a set of boobs.

Cellphone carriers in the US are clueless about this at this point I think. In Japan, it's the cell phone carriers that prepare the distribution protocol and app standard, and the phone manufacturers just use it. (so it's the other way around) Which has worked well for close to a decade now, but that's just them. What is cool about unified app standards is that the apps are not phone locked, or tied to a specific model (unless it is written specifically for it), but tied to a carrier network. Which is what I imagine the gphone will be like, but even more open.

It's just so strange to see all this stuff happening for the second time around.

I never expected myself to become an iPhone owner, but then I discovered this little program:

http://rjdj.me/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPrIPcyemdM

And decided I just had to get in there - This is the field I've been doing research in when writing my master thesis, i even build my prototypes in PD. There was no doubt, I had to get it and make a few scenes of my own.

Then I started to look for other cool music apps for the iPhone and discovered Brian Eno's Bloom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlnljiPCNAI

and I just knew that I had done the right thing buying the iPhone - I can't explain why I'm just fascinated by programs like these.

And then I discovered the price over them all - synthPond:
http://apps.stfj.net/synthPond/

Just brilliant!


Thomas - converted iPhone lover

Which is another advantage that iPhone has over many other closed hardware units. The dev language is Cocoa, which mac developers are familiar with, and the just have to use a limited framework.

But again, I do agree iPhone caters to a very particular crowd. Petal's example, to me at least, sound like they were apps that happened to make use of the touch screen.. more along the lines of touch screen computing, which is fine for iPod touch, and perhaps as an optional thing for iPhone. (unless it is your primary field of research, which is not "general")

These are all initial phase things that happen on most new platforms, where people come in and try out its boundaries.. but after all that dies away, and when it comes to what sort of apps really get used, that is when the real battle begins. At the moment, if an app is flashy and can stir up PR, then it will be successful.

In japan, I believe the most successful app was a train schedule and path finder that told you how to get from point A to B. (when the next train was, quickest transits, etc.. won't work for NY because there is no schedule) And then the other one was a gps enabled restaurant database (like zaggat). There were a whole bunch of fancy multimedia stuff, but these two were the main pillars, but maybe things have changed in past few years..

At now my only wish about cell phones is a Java multilanguage dictionary having offline database (it should very confortably fit into 1GB of memory...)

I don't feel the need to own a smartphone, yet.
The only touch screen device I've used is a TomTom GPS navigator, and of course I agree that thouchscreen keyboard isn't that comfortable. Tough I don't know how it can result getting used to it.



I find it more practical and appreciate to have mp3 capability on cellphone; this reduces the number of devices to be carried around and the number of batteries charger, so I recently bought a pretty cheap Walkman phone (the one with oled display on the outside).

I don't know anything about the difference between firmware based OSs and the smartphone OSs.
Apart from the major mumber of feature I guess smartphone OSs offer, what are the advantages from the user point of view?

The iphone is very difficult to type on.

Every App must be approved by Apple (the rumor is Steve Jobs does this himself) and none will be allowed which competes with Apple software. The iphone is over priced and is a fad. The 3G network uses a lot of battery power. AT&T's 3G service is so slow and unreliable. If you try to unlock your phone so you can use it on another network, Apple may brick your phone on the next update making it unusable.

Maybe

Awe..... where did your quote disappear to Warp?

In a sick & twisted way it was great quote though... the lobbyists were closing in if they read that.

well, I think apple is free to do whatever it wishes. It is a fact that they are way ahead of the game.. in their own direction. The problem is that other cellphone manufacturers are following suite, lining up at Apple's ticket booth, to purchase tickets to the cellphone game! How dumb is that. Doesn't anyone care to give alternative ideas?

Google phone is an alternative... but didn't they understand that perhaps they should PR the thing to make it a sensational release? The phone looks horrible too.

I just don't understand. I don't think iPhone is ground breaking at all. It's hard for iPhone to stand out in Japan or Korea because apps and all the goodies are built into the platform by the carriers. But why no manufacturer in the US tries to compete with iPhone with another ORIGINAL idea, just amazes me. I thought these companies were competitive.

Like Samsung.. they ship awesome phones to Japan, but for some reason, those never reach the US, even though they're 3G. I guess it's because their software won't work US carrier's platform? I really don't understand why the cellphone market is so strange. Again, I just want a good phone. I know they're out there, but for us in US, it's iPhone 'till you start having nightmares about it. (or buy one)

The G1 has a real keyboard. Too bad they forgot audio! I'm sure that will be included in future versions. Anyway I hate Apple. I could care less how pretty it looks. The Google phone will be free eventually. Then Apple will just add more colors and brag about it as if that is a cool new feature.

kensuguro wrote: But why no manufacturer in the US tries to compete with iPhone with another ORIGINAL idea, just amazes me. I thought these companies were competitive.

I think the overshadowing problem (and answer to your question) is that to these kind of businesses and unfortunately most other businesses as well, PROFIT is God, not innovation and the good idea. The people driving the business couldn't care less what they were selling, as long as it sells.

But that's the thing.. if profit is the deciding factor, why would you copy, instead of try to defeat apple.. unless you just accept the fact that you will never ever defeat it? Or perhaps nobody has the budget to compete with Apple. Sad.

Brain-> The world cares how pretty it looks. And if the phone does well globally, you'll get more of it. Apple is now the 3rd biggest cellphone manufacturer in the world, in a matter of just over a year after entering the market! To compete with that, google needs to get their design department (or actually, HTC) straight.

It's a fad.

ya, which has to change.. or the apps are going to suffer. Or at least head downhill in terms of quality like flash online games. (regurgitation of classic games with a bunch of advertisement on it)

I don't quite get why google isn't pushing the gphone too much.. I mean, there is hype, but not really a spectacle. As in, I know plenty of people who don't know of its existence. Maybe it's just targeted for the tech crowd? Not sure. Google, of all companies, should have been capable of pulling off one heck of a PR campaign.

It's not the style of Google to push things. That is what Apple does. Google doesn't need to do that. It will grow slowly but surely; besides, Google doesn't make phones, only the OS.

stardust wrote:...........................as long as ipod pays the bill.

Well, thats not correct.

Ipod sales only contributed 14.2% of Apple’s total revenue in Q4. And will continue to decline. Iphone and MAC sales accounted for 31% and 40.09% of total revenue in Q4.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08 ... _2008.html
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=13316

But many of your statements in that post are false - You can do better than that, Stardust

I also think two handed operation phones are inefficient. blackberry can be operated (as long as you don't need to type) with one hand, because the interaction area is limited (trackball). Flip phones too, since your interaction is limited to the lower half. (where your thum can reach) All big screen touch interface phones will need to be handled with two hands most of the time. I guess it can be addressed with software...
It's the thumb I'm tellin' ya... two hand operation phones never stay around for long..

Actually I was very surprised when I saw people using blackberries when I came to the US.. they were so big and people were typing with two hands! But, quickly came to realize that typing english on the number keys doesn't work so well, it was the mini qwerty keyboard that caused the phones to become ridiculously large. Japanese on number keys is surprisingly efficient. Japanese alphabets are naturally broken to a 10x5 grid, all you have to do is input the coordinates. 11 (a), 12 (i), 85(yo), like that. And the phone converts it to kanji characters. And people have learned it so well, it's like typing on the qwerty, only half the pople in Japan are slower on qwerty. Blackberry is huge when I hold it, feels like I'm holding a tiny book.. but not so bad on a normal sized (healthy, not obese) American I guess.

But anyway, english just has to be on qwerty or else it's impossible. Though, I'm not even sure many adults use text message in the US. I txt my friends a lot, and they rarely write back. Txt message infrastructure is also sort of weak, resulting in messages not going through, extreme (several days) delay, etc.. which makes them unpredictable. Or maybe I just don't have many friends. haha.