NO!! Oxford is FULL of crap - as ALWAYS

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-874348.17000319112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> Old School Vodafone is so upset with the massive popularity of the
> iPhone in Germany they have gone to court to try and block their own
> downfall!
>
> Wow!
>
> We all knew this would happen sooner or later, but Germany's poorly
> managed Vodafone unit has gone to court to stop Cell Phone advancements
> in the the country of Germany. They can't stand the iPhone's pressure,
> so are seeking court relief before they go under.
>
> This will be good for everyone!
>

Here is the REAL facts...

Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
Gordon said.
Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
unlocked
version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
said.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...one_sales.html

I don't think I've ever seen someone (Oxford) more consistently full of
shit.

"Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

> Here is the REAL facts...
>
> Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
> Gordon said.
> Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
> unlocked
> version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
> said.
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...otests_tmobile
> _iphone_sales.html
>
> I don't think I've ever seen someone (Oxford) more consistently full of
> shit.

Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
customers to the iPhone, so they are trying to open up holes so they can
obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.

No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
that's a pure fact. Apple has too many patents on the future, so
everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.

These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.

Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.

Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.

-

In article
<linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact.

Nonsense.

Different people use cell phones for different purposes; quite a lot of
people use them simply as phones. For that purpose something
considerably smaller, lighter cheaper and simpler makes a lot more sense
than the iPhone.

Some people use them to connect to the internet. Whatever you may think
is going to happen, at present open WiFi networks are not available in
most places, at least in my experience. Under those circumstances, a 3G
phone provides a better connection, especially for tethering, than the
iPhone.

I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
not for most.

> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.

This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
something interesting.

--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now

Oxford wrote:

> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.

Fish or cut bait, Oxie-moron.

When did you naked short the wireless telcos and handset makers?

David Friedman <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:

> I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
> some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
> not for most.
>
> > Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> > everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
> you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
> think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
> their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
> something interesting.

great, but you are missing the point that the current iPhone is just the
slightest tip of the product iceberg.

Apple has 20-30 designs on their 3D imager right now and is fine tuning
them as we speak to match the larger Cell Market. You'll see 8 to 12 new
models of iPhones within 36 months.

That's just how Apple operates... always bettering themselves since
there is no outside competition.

So, don't focus on the great first iPhone and say it's the last.

Simply look at the Monochrome 5GB iPod sold at $399 in 2001, then look
at the iPod Nano 8GB sold today in Walmarts across the world.

http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/

Apple has only opened up 7 outlets for the iPhone, and it's been a
massive success. 90x times more popular than the original iPod!

The iPod now sells at upwards of 47,000 locations...

The iPhone will follow the same successful path.

-

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
>
> Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
> customers to the iPhone, so they are trying to open up holes so they can
> obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.
>
> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact. Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.
>
> Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.
>
> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.
>
> -
>

Nope, sorry. Not even a moderately good attempt at spin.

Wrong on ALL counts. Sorry fanatic fanboy.

Since Oxford's pathetic spin is ALL complete CRAP - no point
in my refuting it line by line.

Just more of the same, lame fiction.

"David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
news:ddfr-F204B6.12564720112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
> In article
> <linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
>
>> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
>> that's a pure fact.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> Different people use cell phones for different purposes; quite a lot of
> people use them simply as phones. For that purpose something
> considerably smaller, lighter cheaper and simpler makes a lot more sense
> than the iPhone.
>
> Some people use them to connect to the internet. Whatever you may think
> is going to happen, at present open WiFi networks are not available in
> most places, at least in my experience. Under those circumstances, a 3G
> phone provides a better connection, especially for tethering, than the
> iPhone.
>
> I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
> some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
> not for most.
>
>> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
>> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
> you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
> think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
> their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
> something interesting.
>
>

It's the "posturing" that is what garners the responses.
The arrogant, **I** know it all, everyone else doesn't piss poor attitude.

(That and the complete disregard for any facts whatsoever)

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-163999.16565620112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> "Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
> catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say SHIT! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>
> trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
>
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> -
>

OK...... I'll NOT be holding my breath in the mean time.

Here's the deal..... the market is FAR from "static" and functions
VERY well. Therefore, your suppositions aren't based on any facts.

Therefore, they are completely false.

Oxford wrote:
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.

Always???

Lets see....

1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.

2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.

3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.

4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.

5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.

6) Taligent - Dead after a few years

7) EWorld - Dead after two years.

8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.

9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
$7,499 price been a factor?

10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.

11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.

12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.

DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:ADL0j.492$Vq.290
@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:

> Oxford wrote:
>> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> Always???
>
> Lets see....
>
> 1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.
>
> 2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.
>
> 3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.
>
> 4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.
>
> 5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.
>
> 6) Taligent - Dead after a few years
>
> 7) EWorld - Dead after two years.
>
> 8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
> Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.
>
> 9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
> $7,499 price been a factor?
>
> 10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.
>
> 11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.
>
> 12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.
>
>
>
>
>

You forgot Apple TV.