Posted March 30, 2008 Well, it won gadget of the year last year from Time Magazine. The phone's grand imo. And does the internet properly, mail well, and replaced my 80GB iPod thanks to the joys of smart playlists. Anywhooo . .what does the iPhone do in terms of smart playlists that your 80GB iPod couldn't? Or are you just saying that you've realised you actually don't need 80GB of music and movies, because smart playlists have shown you that you only really listen to 10% of it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 Well, it won gadget of the year last year from Time Magazine. The phone's grand imo. And does the internet properly, mail well, and replaced my 80GB iPod thanks to the joys of smart playlists. Anywhooo . . Touch screens exists for over twenty years now. Dual ARM processors too. Notes, email, SMS, internet, ... there's certainly no innovation in Apple products. However, I'm not going to deny that Apple executes these features much better than it's competitors - but that's besides the point. It's certainly not the revolution, but it's still cool and still a must-have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 So basically you're saying that you buy marketing. What was you're point again? One person doesn't make any difference whatsoever. It's what the whole market does which makes the difference. Apple has made them think the iPhone is a great product, which Nokia has not been able to do with it's range of phones recently. The "best" gadget doesn't neccesarily have to be the technically best product, it's what people perceive to be the "best". Look at the iPod for a great example of this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 I was assuming Jasper was questioning Tape Deck's post. The iPhone is very much a "must have" gadget, but there isn't really much point having one over the competitors Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 I was assuming Jasper was questioning Tape Deck's post. The iPhone is very much a "must have" gadget, but there isn't really much point having one over the competitors Other than the user experience, which is why the iPhone is doing really well for itself and the hype is lasting. It's just fun to use. And not in the 10 mins then i get bored kinda way. what does the iPhone do in terms of smart playlists that your 80GB iPod couldn't? Or are you just saying that you've realised you actually don't need 80GB of music and movies, because smart playlists have shown you that you only really listen to 10% of it? I listen to most of my music, but smart playlists with live updating mean i have about 6GB of music with me at all times, and it changes about every time i sync thanks to the rules i've put in. Hence why i don't need my 80GB iPod despite the size of music library. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 Marketing sells products. The masses aren't too bothered about the reality. Just look at the Blu Ray vs HD-DVD malarky. Blu Ray mostly took it on aggressive marketing. People want to be told what they "must have". Its sad really but its the reality we live in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 Marketing sells products. The masses aren't too bothered about the reality. Just look at the Blu Ray vs HD-DVD malarky. Blu Ray mostly took it on aggressive marketing. People want to be told what they "must have". Its sad really but its the reality we live in. Also PS3 being a good cheap BD player in addition to a games console didn't hurt, eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 Also PS3 being a good cheap BD player in addition to a games console didn't hurt, eh? Thats aggressive marketing right there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 I was assuming Jasper was questioning Tape Deck's post. The iPhone is very much a "must have" gadget, but there isn't really much point having one over the competitors Exactly. An award for McPhee if you please... Apple DO use touch control as an advancement over traditionalist approaches to control - fair enough. But what really grates on me is that Apple know they are going for the "cool" approach and the "hip" end of the consumer market (or easily swayed customers). Therefore the prices are through the roof. And all for a little "touch". I have a mate with an iPhone and he was singing it's praises and I got out my N73 with (practically) the same features yet it was never going to be as good as his "touch screen and lovely screen-at-that" iPhone. Afterall, he had spent triple what I had paid for a reasonably unstable firmware, no camera functionality and a non-interchangeable storage medium (which can actually be, y'know: important). It's all about looking the best. Which always says to me - You've been duped somewhere along the line. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 30, 2008 all, he had spent triple what I had paid for a reasonably unstable firmware, no camera functionality and a non-interchangeable storage medium (which can actually be, y'know: important). It doesn't have a camera? I just assumed all phones had cameras. That is a bit stupid. Your right the non-interchangeable storage is a shambles but not a surprise coming from apple. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 It has a camera, 2MP IIRC. It can't take videos. My phone has a 2MP camera as well, on the other hand it was free on a £15 contract. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Exactly. An award for McPhee if you please... Apple DO use touch control as an advancement over traditionalist approaches to control - fair enough. But what really grates on me is that Apple know they are going for the "cool" approach and the "hip" end of the consumer market (or easily swayed customers). Therefore the prices are through the roof. And all for a little "touch". I have a mate with an iPhone and he was singing it's praises and I got out my N73 with (practically) the same features yet it was never going to be as good as his "touch screen and lovely screen-at-that" iPhone. Afterall, he had spent triple what I had paid for a reasonably unstable firmware, no camera functionality and a non-interchangeable storage medium (which can actually be, y'know: important). It's all about looking the best. Which always says to me - You've been duped somewhere along the line. One thing that should be said for the iPhone is the internet functionality. I was talking to one of my parents friends today who's a very successful businessman about the iPhone. He said his Blackberry (or Bramble as he calls it, Brambles are what Scots call blackberries) is absolutely great and does everything he needs it to and the only thing which would sway him over to getting an iPhone is how well the internet works on it. He had some Nokia phone before the Bramble and said on both of them the Internet is horrible to use (I would agree with him on the Nokia front, owning a 6288 myself). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 One thing that should be said for the iPhone is the internet functionality. I was talking to one of my parents friends today who's a very successful businessman about the iPhone. He said his Blackberry (or Bramble as he calls it, Brambles are what Scots call blackberries) is absolutely great and does everything he needs it to and the only thing which would sway him over to getting an iPhone is how well the internet works on it. He had some Nokia phone before the Bramble and said on both of them the Internet is horrible to use (I would agree with him on the Nokia front, owning a 6288 myself). That was my main reason for getting an iPhone. I wanted the proper internet on my phone, not some deformed version of it. Also the mail was piss easy to set up aka i didn't have to set it up. I couldn't be bothered to try and figure out how to get it working with my N95 and N73, plus i was scared of the extra money it'd cost me for data and stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 I couldn't be bothered to try and figure out how to get it working with my N95 and N73, Lazy. plus i was scared of the extra money it'd cost me for data and stuff. Scared to work out money issues = lazy. iPhone is for the lazy. :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Yes, internet on the iPhone is pretty good. Wes, you're talking rubbish. Everyone that uses Apple products is, in that sense, lazy. But let's look at that idea for a second. Apple users aren't lazy. Apple users are productive. Because they don't have to bother with setting up their systems, making too many insignificant choices. Apple users aren't lazy, Windows users are just overactive. Why? Because without properly tweaking and setting up your system, Windows just won't cut it. Macs are made to work out of the box. Pop the electricity in the connection, and you're set to play a nice game of ches, do some work and surf the internet. No connecting an extra screen, wondering why your printer isn't working, noticing your network doesn't really connect and asking yourselves why ypu can't find yuour Bluetooth phone. Windows users are used to jump through a lot more hoops than mac users, and that doesn't make mac users lazy. It makes mac users smarter. People are always critisizing Apple users for being stupid, without choice and lazy, and that's because Windows users have the exact opposite (not only Windows, just everything but macs in general). They have to make to many insignificant choices (what processor do I need to run Microsoft work in the office? How much RAM to get Messenger working? Vista or XP?) while Apple leaves you those few choices that interest the usual (I say usual because I mean usual) end user. I'm not turning this into a mac vs windows thing again (okay, probably I am, but not with that intention) but accusing iPhone users of lazy is simply stupid. If you have to read the manual before use, it means the product is not made with the necessary detail to make it easy to use. Iphone is made to be as easy to use as a pen, and offering a lot of functionality at the same time. Windows Mobile is hard to use, and you can't even use it properly without a pen. End of comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 EeePC - definitely worth the money (the Linux one at least) Wii - Prossibly, later this year once we get a few more decent games and less mini game crap DS - Yeah sure why not, although the only thing I'm playing right now is Ace Attorney 3 and 4 (yes... both at the same time) iPod Touch - No, not worth it. I have one and I think I'd have been better getting an iPod Classic or maybe a Creative Zen. iPhone - Perhaps. I can say that while I myself wouldn't buy an iPhone, the web browser is great and the screen and input method works really well along with that unlimited data they give you. But £269 + minimum £35 a month is pretty expensive. N95 - It's an amazingly kick ass phone if you update to the latest firmware (any firmware version 12 or below sucks, update to version 20 or above and it's like a whole new phone, seriously). I wouldn't say it's good enough for the £399 price tag on Nokia's website, but I got mine for £200, and it's definitely worth that price. A future Nokia S60 Touch Screen Phone - Definitely! :-D I think the ultimate gadget will come out some time in the next 3 or 4 years. It'll be like Nokia's S60 in that developers will be allowed to develop anything for it and not be restricted like Apple restricts their developers on the iPhone. It'll have a nice touch interface like the iPhone and data prices will have dropped dramatically, so that even PAYG cutomers can browse the likes of Youtube without generating huge bills. Who knows, maybe we won't see it in the next 3 years, but we'll get there eventually. At least I hope we will. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Honestly, you're just aying that we have to wait for Nokia to make an iPhone before the iPhone can be the ultimate gadget. Apple isn't really restricting developers - they are, however, keeping them from harming battery life of their system. There aren't much restrictions - there's even Voice over IP allowed. Daemons are not allowed because those background processes drain battery life and lower the speed. I don't know any other restrictions Apple has laid on developers except not using daemons. I wonder why you people don't believe the iPhone to be the mighty gadget it is, and all want Nokia to run with the fantasy... Anyway I am wondering... I think the most exceptional, freaky and certainly most inspector-gadget like gadget is the Sony Rolly. Once you've seen it move, you see advertisements of it in your nightmares. Freaky thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Because Nokia is reliable, or some people prefer Nokia and not Apple. It happens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 To be honest, I'd much prefer any iPhone clone with Google Android than an iPhone. The only problem of the other platforms is that they run Windows Mobile (which sucks ass) or Symbian. In general they give far more value for your money than Apple does with its iPhone. Until Google Android is out however, I'd probably prefer a faster phone for less money, which allows other applications to be run on it, and has network functionality, and just put up with Windows Mobile until Google Android, or maybe Ubuntu Mobile are out. Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of the iMacs and the iBooks, and Mac OS X is a wonderful OS, but the iPod and iPhone are so overrated it's getting ridiculous. The only reason that people can give while buying is either they consider Apple a religion, or that they just don't know any better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Because Nokia is reliable, or some people prefer Nokia and not Apple. It happens. Apple is just as reliable, and nobody has ever denied that. Macs are stable and reliable computers, and iPhone's are reliable Phones. I barely hear anything about iPhone crashes. And preferation doesn't really matter into wich is the best, is there? But a matterof taste discussion was on the mac forums once before, and it turned out to be a total dissaster so let's not go there anymore. (To give an example of how big a dissaster it was: I was deemed to be right by the moderator (wich, according to him, 'rarely happens')). But, well, value for money and all that - completely right. The only thing you pay for with Apple is that it's sure to just work. Is that wiorth the extra money? Could be, could be not. I'm willing to spend it, just for the ease of use by touching and tapping your way around the device. Now if Windows Mobile could take the Apple route, eliminate all the crapware avaible to get the same software as the iPhone, then it might be ompetitive. But it's turning into and iPod discussion, so I'm letting this one go. For Now... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 Personally I don't like Nokia or Apple. With the iPhone you are definitely paying for the brand. As with all of the iPods. If you want to pay the extra for that image then fair enough. Personally I'd rather get something as good/better for less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 According to the Gadget show Wii fit is the must have gadget this year... ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 31, 2008 To be honest, I'd much prefer any iPhone clone with Google Android than an iPhone. The only problem of the other platforms is that they run Windows Mobile (which sucks ass) or Symbian. In general they give far more value for your money than Apple does with its iPhone. Until Google Android is out however, I'd probably prefer a faster phone for less money, which allows other applications to be run on it, and has network functionality, and just put up with Windows Mobile until Google Android, or maybe Ubuntu Mobile are out. Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of the iMacs and the iBooks, and Mac OS X is a wonderful OS, but the iPod and iPhone are so overrated it's getting ridiculous. The only reason that people can give while buying is either they consider Apple a religion, or that they just don't know any better. Lol. Sorry, I didn't realise that's why I bought an iPhone. I muuuuust be an idiot. I have no problem with people that don't like Apple products, I really don't care as it makes no difference to me. What really pisses me off is when I get called an idiot for buying something I like. I like the way the whole 'Apple elitist' has turned around. Now whenever anyone buys an Apple product now there are cries of 'fanboy' or 'idiot'. :indeed: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 1, 2008 Wes, you're joking and I'm taking you way too seriously. I know you are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 1, 2008 The worst thing about it is that I forgot I said that completely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
