New iPhones to use 3G network

At 03 Dec 2007 22:28:08 -0700 Snit wrote:
> but when you just list features you show you are missing the
> point of the iPhone - it is about usability, *not* a list of
> features to brag about. In other words, it is about allowing
> people to do things - not just having a device that can do
> those things if you are willing to put up with them.
True. My problem with the iPhone isn't in the complete laundry list of
features it's missing, but those it has no reason NOT to do, because the
hardware is already on board and wouldn't impede usability. (Things like
voice dial, external GPS support, BT stereo headphones support, or even
wireless iTunes sync with a computer, seeing that both BT and Wi-Fi are on
board...)


> Does the iPhone live up to that hype? I do not know
> completely - but I will bet that the UI of the cell phone in
> 5 years will be closer to the UI the iPhone now has than to,
> say, the UI of your unnamed phone.


For largish-form factor smartphones perhaps, but "dumbphones" have the
ideal UI right now- a dialpad, that's got 4 decades of time-tested
reliability behind it! ;-)


> > I, frankly, enjoy Snit's posts, even if I don't typically agree with his
> > positions- he's "a good read."
>
> Thanks... and curious - where do you disagree. :)

The whole usability vs. features thing- while I'm not suggesting devices or
applications should be akward for awkwardness' sake, I don't fear a
learning curve, if the end result is a feature or features useful to me.

I bought a "convergence device" with the idea of schlepping less stuff
around with me, and the devices I can leave behind include a separate PDA
and my laptop. The iPhone is too reliant on synching to a physically
attached computer for the computer to be left behind for very long.

I like the iPhone- I think it's an excellent device for what it does, but
it seems intentionally crippled by some of it's design decisions- and in
actuality, the same is probably true of my WinMo phone "out of the box",
but a long-time active 3rd-party community has greatly increased it's
abilities and reduced it's shortcomings. Perhaaps the same will be true of
iPhone next year is Apple's SDK isn't too locked down.

Unfortunately for me, however, missing features available on my admittedly
more "difficult to use" WinMo phone made the iPhone unsuitable for my
purposes. Unlike many others here, I don't think it's a "bad" phone, or
wrong for everyone, but each day I read this group (either
alt.cellular.attws or CSMA) I can think of at least one or two things I've
done with my phone that I wouldn't have been able to do with an iPhone, and
would've needed a computer or other device (i.e. a dashboard GPS) to have
accomplished.


Including this...

--
Posted via my WinMo phone (via NNTP, and without the aid of Google Groups
or any other web-based interface...)

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> stated in post
fj4fql$v1h$1@aioe.org on 12/4/07 1:40 PM:

> At 03 Dec 2007 22:28:08 -0700 Snit wrote:
>> but when you just list features you show you are missing the
>> point of the iPhone - it is about usability, *not* a list of
>> features to brag about. In other words, it is about allowing
>> people to do things - not just having a device that can do
>> those things if you are willing to put up with them.
>>
> True. My problem with the iPhone isn't in the complete laundry list of
> features it's missing, but those it has no reason NOT to do, because the
> hardware is already on board and wouldn't impede usability. (Things like
> voice dial, external GPS support, BT stereo headphones support, or even
> wireless iTunes sync with a computer, seeing that both BT and Wi-Fi are on
> board...)

Does seem like some of those should be there... maybe in the iPhone 2?
Apple did make it seem like the software was talking a lot of resources to
built - maybe they did not have time to add some of these things?

Of course, from a user perspective the *why* of the missing features is
irrelevant - other than if you can expect a software update to give you
those features later perhaps.
>
>> Does the iPhone live up to that hype? I do not know
>> completely - but I will bet that the UI of the cell phone in
>> 5 years will be closer to the UI the iPhone now has than to,
>> say, the UI of your unnamed phone.
>
> For largish-form factor smartphones perhaps, but "dumbphones" have the
> ideal UI right now- a dialpad, that's got 4 decades of time-tested
> reliability behind it! ;-)

You mean we won't be going back to the actual dial? :)

>>> I, frankly, enjoy Snit's posts, even if I don't typically agree with his
>>> positions- he's "a good read."
>>
>> Thanks... and curious - where do you disagree. :)
>
> The whole usability vs. features thing- while I'm not suggesting devices or
> applications should be akward for awkwardness' sake, I don't fear a
> learning curve, if the end result is a feature or features useful to me.

I think people, in general, put too little value on the idea of ease of use
when they make purchases and look too much at feature lists - features they
often never use. Look at VCRs for an example - people often have no clue
how to use theirs. Many of the folks on Usenet are more technical than the
norm and might not fit that...

> I bought a "convergence device" with the idea of schlepping less stuff
> around with me, and the devices I can leave behind include a separate PDA
> and my laptop. The iPhone is too reliant on synching to a physically
> attached computer for the computer to be left behind for very long.
>
> I like the iPhone- I think it's an excellent device for what it does, but
> it seems intentionally crippled by some of it's design decisions- and in
> actuality, the same is probably true of my WinMo phone "out of the box",
> but a long-time active 3rd-party community has greatly increased it's
> abilities and reduced it's shortcomings. Perhaaps the same will be true of
> iPhone next year is Apple's SDK isn't too locked down.

And as Apple offers more with future versions of the iPhone. But, sure, the
iPhone is not ideal for everyone... no product is.

> Unfortunately for me, however, missing features available on my admittedly
> more "difficult to use" WinMo phone made the iPhone unsuitable for my
> purposes.

Ease of use matters a lot less when the features you depend on are not there
at all. :)

> Unlike many others here, I don't think it's a "bad" phone, or wrong for
> everyone, but each day I read this group (either alt.cellular.attws or CSMA) I
> can think of at least one or two things I've done with my phone that I
> wouldn't have been able to do with an iPhone, and would've needed a computer
> or other device (i.e. a dashboard GPS) to have accomplished.
>
>
> Including this...

LOL! Hey, can't you use Google Groups on an iPhone? :)


--
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
--Aldous Huxley

"Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in
news:aDg5j.2231$BI5.835@newsfe09.lga:

> Snit wrote:
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>
>>> No- product not for sale. Vaporware.
>>
>> As I noted: I showed you products in people's hands. Did you think
>> they were given those products and not sold them?
>>
> Well then show him where to actually GET one for heavens sake instead
> of going back and forth endlessly with your childish "Am. Am not".
> Here:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/CECT-P168-Unlock...screen_W0QQite
> mZ220179709929QQihZ012QQcategoryZ41355QQssPageName ZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZView
> Item.
>

Yep- a chinese knockoff. Wow- who would have guessed. And where is the
Motorola knockoff, the Samsung knockoff, the LG knockoff? After all, they
are all quaking in their shoes and running to copy it because of that fear.

In article
<35a125ed-1c5c-4914-8af8-68065f1d90a4@w40g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> > You accused me of being a "cowardly anonymous troll". You don't like
> > the anonymity?
>
> Actually it was "cowardly, anonymous hypocrite [and bad loser] troll".
>
> Placing extra emphasis on 'anonymous' is your doing, not me.

Placing ANY emphasis on 'anonymous' was your doing.

You want to go calling others cowards for not spelling out their names
and addresses, you'd better pony up your own information first.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>
> [ ... Absolutely nothing worth saving in the archives .... ]


Here boy, I'll save you the effort of your next dozen posts:


"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"

"Does Not!"

"Does Too!"



-hh

--

:-)

In article
<55c94f1b-e166-474c-832c-e33c53c56fba@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote more of his drivel.

You want to go calling others cowards for not spelling out their names
and addresses, you'd better pony up your own information first.

"CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
Xns99FCB47DC7200isheforreal@216.196.97.136 on 12/4/07 5:44 PM:

> "Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in
> news:aDg5j.2231$BI5.835@newsfe09.lga:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>>
>>>> No- product not for sale. Vaporware.
>>>
>>> As I noted: I showed you products in people's hands. Did you think
>>> they were given those products and not sold them?
>>>
>> Well then show him where to actually GET one for heavens sake instead
>> of going back and forth endlessly with your childish "Am. Am not".
>> Here:
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/CECT-P168-Unlock...screen_W0QQite
>> mZ220179709929QQihZ012QQcategoryZ41355QQssPageName ZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZView
>> Item.
>>
>
> Yep- a chinese knockoff. Wow- who would have guessed. And where is the
> Motorola knockoff, the Samsung knockoff, the LG knockoff? After all, they
> are all quaking in their shoes and running to copy it because of that fear.

Before you said:

I'll help you- they don't exist because nobody is running
scared from it. Nobody has the need to make a copycat.

And now, when multiple copycats have been shown to you *and* you have had
your *additional* request as to where to buy one fulfilled you are moving
the goal posts.

Why?

Keep in mind that there simply is no reasonable question that copycat's
exist and that they are not that hard to find - for example:
(<http://www.google.com/products?q=Meizu+m8> and
<http://www.nextag.com/meizu-m8>).

Being that Apple has a pretty active set of lawyers their likely will not be
such close copycats until litigation is settled. :)


--
BU__SH__

Snit wrote:
> "Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> stated in post
> aDg5j.2231$BI5.835@newsfe09.lga on 12/4/07 11:02 AM:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>>
>>>> No- product not for sale. Vaporware.
>>>
>>> As I noted: I showed you products in people's hands. Did you think
>>> they were given those products and not sold them?
>>>
>> Well then show him where to actually GET one for heavens sake
>> instead of going back and forth endlessly with your childish "Am. Am
>> not". Here:
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/CECT-P168-Unlock...W0QQitemZ22017
>> 9709929QQihZ012QQcategoryZ41355QQssPageNameZWDVWQQ rdZ1QQcmdZViewItem.
>>
>> CozmicDebris, all you had to do was go to eBay (the site of which is
>> noted on the youtube video, and search for "iphone clone". How can
>> you guys spend endless hours arguing over verifiable stuff and not
>> take the second to do a simple google or ebay search?
>
> Frankly it is not my responsibility to do endless research for
> CozmicDebris. I showed him solid evidence that the products in
> question were available - I did not have to show him where to get
> them... though I thank you for doing that work for him. I am sure
> there are other places as well... an exercise left to the curious
> reader. :)
>
No, it is not your responsibility to do his work for him. But then it is
also not your responsibility to keep repeating your same position ad nauseum
but rather to walk away after you've stated it once.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article
> <55c94f1b-e166-474c-832c-e33c53c56fba@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote more of his drivel.
>
> You want to go calling others cowards for not spelling out their names
> and addresses, you'd better pony up your own information first.

Knock it off, Elmo. You are aren't fooling anyone with these infantile
responses...



--
Mike

"Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> stated in post
v_s5j.26960$BI5.21963@newsfe09.lga on 12/5/07 1:06 AM:

> Snit wrote:
>> "Carl" <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> stated in post
>> aDg5j.2231$BI5.835@newsfe09.lga on 12/4/07 11:02 AM:
>>
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>>>>>
>>>>> No- product not for sale. Vaporware.
>>>>
>>>> As I noted: I showed you products in people's hands. Did you think
>>>> they were given those products and not sold them?
>>>>
>>> Well then show him where to actually GET one for heavens sake
>>> instead of going back and forth endlessly with your childish "Am. Am
>>> not". Here:
>>>
>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/CECT-P168-Unlock...n_W0QQitemZ220
>>> 17
>>> 9709929QQihZ012QQcategoryZ41355QQssPageNameZWDVWQQ rdZ1QQcmdZViewItem.
>>>
>>> CozmicDebris, all you had to do was go to eBay (the site of which is
>>> noted on the youtube video, and search for "iphone clone". How can
>>> you guys spend endless hours arguing over verifiable stuff and not
>>> take the second to do a simple google or ebay search?
>>
>> Frankly it is not my responsibility to do endless research for
>> CozmicDebris. I showed him solid evidence that the products in
>> question were available - I did not have to show him where to get
>> them... though I thank you for doing that work for him. I am sure
>> there are other places as well... an exercise left to the curious
>> reader. :)
>>
> No, it is not your responsibility to do his work for him. But then it is
> also not your responsibility to keep repeating your same position ad nauseum
> but rather to walk away after you've stated it once.

Correct but - and call it a weakness - I like to watch those who troll
squirm. :)


--
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please
everyone. -- Bill Cosby