PDA

View Full Version : How Apple just made all other mobile platforms irrelevant


MacBytes
Mar 9, 2008, 07:52 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: How Apple just made all other mobile platforms irrelevant (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20080309205222)
Description:: The smartphone industry, the PDA industry, the mobile gaming industry - the all were just "served" by Apple...

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

gerardrj
Mar 10, 2008, 02:26 AM
But will iPhone 2.0 firmware finally allow iCal on the phone to directly sync with iCal published calendars? having to plug my phone in to the computer to update my schedule on the iPhone is a drag, and pointless given the WiFi/EDGE ubiquitous network access of the device.

Genghis Khan
Mar 10, 2008, 04:46 AM
i know what you mean about the wifi bit...i could've sworn that in jobs iPhone intro last year (like 14 months ago) that he said you could update the iPhone wirelessly

e.g. you on comp, you change something in address book...wifi detects that the change is not on the iPhone, and hence updates it

he may not have said that, but i sure was thinking that you couldn't do it any other way when i hear saw the presentation

sunfast
Mar 10, 2008, 04:49 AM
Good article, nicely sums up the events of last week.

I really have to get one of these. Current contract ends in June, 2.0 update in June - if only we can have 3G by then I'm buying.

reverie
Mar 10, 2008, 05:51 AM
What's with celebrating the 28 % smartphone market share? That was only the Christmas quarter and until Apple says otherwise I will assume that through the rest of the year the iPhone's market share will be lower. It will grow, but from a lower level.

elppa
Mar 10, 2008, 07:53 AM
What's with celebrating the 28 % smartphone market share? That was only the Christmas quarter and until Apple says otherwise I will assume that through the rest of the year the iPhone's market share will be lower. It will grow, but from a lower level.

Won't other manufacturers sell fewer phones outside the Christmas sales period as well, so surely the market share proportions won't be dramatically different.

lost eden
Mar 10, 2008, 08:12 AM
I haven't read the entire article, but there is no way in hell that the iPhone is going to magically become a worthwhile handheld gaming platform with the 2.0 update. It doesn't have the power, the screen orientation, the controls, the developers, etc.

blakespot
Mar 10, 2008, 08:57 AM
I haven't read the entire article, but...
Maybe you should.



blakespot

dukeblue91
Mar 10, 2008, 09:41 AM
I haven't read the entire article, but there is no way in hell that the iPhone is going to magically become a worthwhile handheld gaming platform with the 2.0 update. It doesn't have the power, the screen orientation, the controls, the developers, etc.

You really need to read it and you will understand.
Watch the video too.

neonart
Mar 10, 2008, 09:51 AM
...It doesn't have the power...


You may have wanted to check that article prior to typing this.

According to this article and specifications, the iPhone is nearly twice as fast as the PSP. :eek:

That may not magically make it better for gaming, but does not lack power compared to the current handheld choices.

Yvan256
Mar 10, 2008, 10:03 AM
I haven't read the entire article, but there is no way in hell that the iPhone is going to magically become a worthwhile handheld gaming platform with the 2.0 update. It doesn't have the power, the screen orientation, the controls, the developers, etc.

I don't entirely agree. It's going to be a worthwhile platform for games, but its limitations for controls (3D axis sensor + touchscreen) will limit it to a certain type of games, just like classic iPod games (clickwheel + 1 button). And no, I don't want to use the accelerometer in games... ("shake iPhone/iPod touch to reload your gun"...) ;)

Some games will be more fitted for the iPhone/iPod touch, just like some games work better on a Nintendo DS (Zelda: Phantom Hourglass) or a Wii (Metroid Prime 3), other games pratically require a keyboard and mouse (Starcraft 2), etc.

The strength of the iPhone/iPod touch as a gaming platform, however, is that anyone can become a developper for only 99$ and have their game(s) distributed easily, something you can't do for other systems (except possibly "Xbox Live Arcade"... not sure of the name, I don't have an Xbox 360, I'm an Apple+Nintendo user/fanboy). :p

elppa
Mar 10, 2008, 10:28 AM
I haven't read the entire article, but there is no way in hell that the iPhone is going to magically become a worthwhile handheld gaming platform with the 2.0 update. It doesn't have the power, the screen orientation, the controls, the developers, etc.

There's an awful lot of naysayers around: BongoBadger and the like who are so quick to tell us how iPhone is nothing that special compared to what is available.

I think iPhone is being severely underestimated by some. My advice would be to read the specs in the article and then watch the keynote before dismissing the devices potential.

I'd pay particular attention to the developer from Sega who said that developing for iPhone was not like developing for a handheld, it was like developing for a console.

SiliconAddict
Mar 10, 2008, 11:04 AM
Thank you Apple. Thank you for coming down from the mount and showing us dirty masses the true way. Because Apple is the one true way to compute....I'm starting to hate this company more and more each day, even though that article wasn't made by Apple they perpetuate this crap, and its driving me nuts. I'm sorry Apple's crap doesn't smell any better then anyone else's, and the iPhone is still a neutered platform on a crappy carrier.

There's an awful lot of naysayers around: BongoBadger and the like who are so quick to tell us how iPhone is nothing that special compared to what is available.

I think iPhone is being severely underestimated by some. My advice would be to read the specs in the article and then watch the keynote before dismissing the devices potential.

I'd pay particular attention to the developer from Sega who said that developing for iPhone was not like developing for a handheld, it was like developing for a console.

You don't know much about the gaming industry do you? Apple will go nowhere against devices that are half to a quarter of the touch or iPhone's price. And I LOVE. completely love how the fanbois come out of the woodwork, not saying you are one but in general, and now claim that the Touch has all this potential and one of the core reasons is because it isn't specialized and has all these features. For 7 years we've heard the complete opposite of this for the iPod....that its a device specialized for Music, why would we want something like video, or a radio tuner, or wifi, blah blah, blah. Now that Apple comes out with this generic almost PDA like device its OMG! Its going to take over the world! Sony and Nintendo better look out!
We hear this time and time again with Apple products. Because until Apple makes it, its crap.

This is why I can't take Apple and its fanbase serious, and why they piss me off to such an extent. They make up this BS on the fly. If they would stick to a story I could at least buy that but they shift as Apple makes up new BS to explain why they do or don't go into an industry. Its getting tired, its getting old, and frankly Jobs can shove his RDF generator up his....exhaust port. I can't take his justifications anymore, nor the people who literally worship him.

You really need to read it and you will understand.
Watch the video too.

So sayth from the book of Jobs.....all hail the anointed one. Let us pray.

SiliconAddict
Mar 10, 2008, 11:17 AM
You may have wanted to check that article prior to typing this.

According to this article and specifications, the iPhone is nearly twice as fast as the PSP. :eek:

That may not magically make it better for gaming, but does not lack power compared to the current handheld choices.

And gets about half the battery life when using that power.

IJ Reilly
Mar 10, 2008, 11:31 AM
Thank you Apple. Thank you for coming down from the mount and showing us dirty masses the true way. Because Apple is the one true way to compute....I'm starting to hate this company more and more each day, even though that article wasn't made by Apple they perpetuate this crap, and its driving me nuts. I'm sorry Apple's crap doesn't smell any better then anyone else's, and the iPhone is still a neutered platform on a crappy carrier.

To be fair, we'd had our ration of unfounded negativity lately too, particularly about the SDK and what it would do, and how development would be restricted by Apple to the point of smothering. Now that this cloud has passed, we're hearing some equally unfounded optimism on the upside. They sort of cancel out, leaving us with reality, which is usually in middle somewhere anyway.

dejo
Mar 10, 2008, 11:33 AM
And gets about half the battery life when using that power.
Wasn't it Uncle Ben who said, "With great power comes great battery drain"? :D

elppa
Mar 10, 2008, 02:11 PM
I'd also say what you can get in the handheld advice when the iPod was first introduced (early '00s) and what you can get in one now (late '00s).

A lot of this is about timing, which Apple tend to get right more often than not.

blakespot
Mar 10, 2008, 03:27 PM
...even though that article wasn't made by Apple they perpetuate this crap, and its driving me nuts. I'm sorry Apple's crap doesn't smell any better then anyone else's, and the iPhone is still a neutered platform on a crappy carrier.
Lament the carrier if you like, but how is the iPhone a neutered platform? Indeed it is now one of the more open mobile platforms around. It runs one of the very fastest mobile chipsets available, has a free SDK available for it that leverages all of OS X's capabilities (the iPhone OS is OS X, after all) including Cocoa, OpenGL, Core Audio, OpenAL, Core Animation, etc. Developing for it is a breeze. On most "smartphones" you are forced to code a Java app that's running on a device with a much smaller screen and a far less immersive interface.

You don't know much about the gaming industry do you? Apple will go nowhere against devices that are half to a quarter of the touch or iPhone's price.
True, the PSP retails for just over half the price of the low-end iPod touch. But the iPhone is not merely a game machine - it is now the ultimate PDA, thanks to the SDK and the host of applications being developed for it. It's a far more versatile device, overall. And what do you have on the PSP or Nintendo DS that can compare to the forthcoming iTunes App Store where an application of any type (game, enterprise app, comm tool, etc.) can be downloaded from anywhere you happen to be standing -- and many of them will be free. It's better than the best of the PDA app download world and the best of XBOX Live / PSN-style game downloads rolled into one.

Because until Apple makes it, its crap.
Did anyone pay attention to USB until Apple started using it as the key peripheral bus on the first iMacs? Who drove the now-standard move of DVD writers in mid-class desktops? Did Apple invent the graphical user interface? No, they just packaged it up and got it out the door done well. Apple has done many things that just make sense in a timely fashion and it's paid off for them.

Did ARM create the chipset upon which the iPhone is based for Apple? No. Where are the other devices that use it in a similar fashion, using an interface with elegance that one could expect from no one but Apple? They spend ludicrous amounts of $$ on R&D to bring together existing technologies in such a way that they describe a compelling device - and they get it out the door. In many ways, it seems Apple is the only company that has what it takes to get these things done properly. I believe Vision is the distinguishing element here.

The iPhone is positioned in such a way right now that everything is going for it. It truly has the capability to become the ultimate, uber mobile device. Now we just have to sit back for a few months and wait for the floodgate of apps to drop in June. And the iPhone as it physically exists now is just the beginning of the platform it will evolve into. I see various phone units, slates, etc.

It's an exciting time, really.



blakespot

BongoBanger
Mar 10, 2008, 05:22 PM
There's an awful lot of naysayers around: BongoBadger and the like who are so quick to tell us how iPhone is nothing that special compared to what is available.

It's BongoBanger. Do try to get it right.

And it's not nay-saying, it's fact. I read that article and I have to say the writer is the king of unfounded speculation. I don't think I've seen that much wishful thinking outside Disneyworld.

The iPhone has 28% of the US smartphone market for one quarter, a market in which Symbian - who have about two-thirds of the global market - don't even compete. I'd also point out that one of the reasons in Europe the iPhone has had mediocre sales because Symbian does have a massive presence there.

Of course the other main reason is it's not competitively priced.

I think iPhone is being severely underestimated by some. My advice would be to read the specs in the article and then watch the keynote before dismissing the devices potential.

I did. It's got potential but it's not doing anything that doesn't exist already and has done for a few years. Steve Jobs may say they're years ahead but, sorry, they're not.

I'd pay particular attention to the developer from Sega who said that developing for iPhone was not like developing for a handheld, it was like developing for a console.

Yes, I remember Sega's consoles after the megadrive. :)

elppa
Mar 10, 2008, 05:27 PM
I think some posters just trying to offer perspective and objectivity on proceedings, but in doing so, triumph other non-Apple solutions which are actually inferior.

Blue Velvet
Mar 10, 2008, 05:56 PM
I've deleted some personal comments in this thread. Let's please discuss the topic like adults, thanks.

Santa Rosa
Mar 10, 2008, 07:51 PM
If you look at the iPod, its a household name. People dont know what an MP3 player is, they just know iPod. They think its two different things, not everyone obviously but a large segment of the consumer market.

The attraction to the iPod is massive. With the introduction of the Touch and now the SDK, yes its maybe more expensive in comparison to DS / PSP but people are going to see far greater value in it as its an iPod, thats all they see it as, an iPod.

The members of the forums are relatively tech astute. We know the touch iPhone has internet etc etc. The majority of the consumer market just dont understand. Even people in my university who are straight A students, brilliant at university have very little interest or knowledge about the platforms and what they can do.

They only see things from the asthetic point of view. As soon as it spreads that your iPod touch and iPhone have games on them and all the cool applications people will get interested even more once again.

I think the hype surrounding the SDK is slightly blown out of proportion in many respects but I do agree its very exciting, maybe not instantly game changing but after time it will be.

You have to ask yourself how many general consumers really pay close attention to all that is happening. If they go on Apple.com and see SDK the majority wont have a clue.

As with everything, time will tell. Its going to be interesting to see how it all pans out.

apsterling
Mar 10, 2008, 08:07 PM
I don't know so much about graphics on the iPhone/Touch, but the Processor itself is roughly the speed of the Gamecube's. Obviously graphics won't be nearly as great, because the cube can get 2Gb per game, but I hope to see games like the 15mb masterpiece, Ikaruga, on the iPhone and touch.

I agree with most of the points in the article, but Wireless syncing, at least of contacts and calendars, is a necessity in the coming months.

neonart
Mar 15, 2008, 02:37 PM
...Of course the other main reason is it's not competitively priced.

I did. It's got potential but it's not doing anything that doesn't exist already and has done for a few years. Steve Jobs may say they're years ahead but, sorry, they're not....

You often need to think how will pessimistic things you write with so much conviction sound like in 6 or 7 years.

May I direct you to thread 500:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500

a456
Mar 15, 2008, 03:36 PM
The iPhone is the resurrected Newton, and the Mac Mini is the resurrected Cube, so lets hope when the MacBook Air gets resurrected it's just as successful as these little babies.

BongoBanger
Mar 16, 2008, 05:01 PM
I think some posters just trying to offer perspective and objectivity on proceedings, but in doing so, triumph other non-Apple solutions which are actually inferior.

Until we actually see what the SDK produces and are able to compare the finished apps to the existing ones that Symbian uses then how can you possibly state that they're inferior?

Time will tell the fact remains that S60v3 has a massive head start, open distribution and a lot of free apps.

BongoBanger
Mar 16, 2008, 05:03 PM
You often need to think how will pessimistic things you write with so much conviction sound like in 6 or 7 years.

May I direct you to thread 500:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500

May I direct you to Apple's failure to enter the PDA market or inability to seriously crack the domestic global PC market?

One swallow does not make a summer.

neonart
Mar 17, 2008, 10:17 PM
May I direct you to Apple's failure to enter the PDA market or inability to seriously crack the domestic global PC market?

One swallow does not make a summer.



Apple has done great in the PDA market! It's the iPhone/Touch. Also since the amazing success of the iPod and iPhone, it appears they're doing better and better in market share, and selling Macs like crazy!

May I direct you to thread 445817:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=455817

These days, with global warming, rouge penguins, and lazy union swallows, it's better to just look for the hot weather.

BongoBanger
Mar 18, 2008, 08:55 AM
Apple has done great in the PDA market! It's the iPhone/Touch.

I'm referring to the Newton which didn't do too well. Nowdays there isn't really a PDA market at all - it's been replaced by the smartphone market which Apple are actually doing well in.

Also since the amazing success of the iPod and iPhone, it appears they're doing better and better in market share, and selling Macs like crazy!

Yup, agree there's been a definite halo effect. The link you give refers to retail market share in the US only and excludes on-line sales. I suspect Apple's real market share is about 7% or so in the US and still about 3% globally. This despite the halo effect caused by the iPhone and the disappointing reception of Vista.

We need to see sales volumes by product type so we can gauge the impact of a new product launch (the Air) and growth in the MB/MBP and iMac/Macpro segments. Until then figures like "14%" don't really mean anything.

These days, with global warming, rouge penguins, and lazy union swallows, it's better to just look for the hot weather.

Actually no, it's just better to understand what you're talking about.

IJ Reilly
Mar 18, 2008, 10:35 AM
I'm referring to the Newton which didn't do too well. Nowdays there isn't really a PDA market at all - it's been replaced by the smartphone market which Apple are actually doing well in.

Which begs your original remark. How could Apple have "failed" in market which barely exists any longer? Why go back to a product they haven't sold in ten years as evidence of anything, when so much has changed since then?

BongoBanger
Mar 18, 2008, 11:13 AM
Which begs your original remark. How could Apple have "failed" in market which barely exists any longer?

Because there was a market for them at the time. Thought that might have been obvious.

Why go back to a product they haven't sold in ten years as evidence of anything, when so much has changed since then?

I'm sorry, but are you being deliberately obtuse here?

IJ Reilly
Mar 18, 2008, 11:26 AM
Because there was a market for them at the time. Thought that might have been obvious.

No, it's not obvious when you don't say. It's also far from clear that a market existed for them at the time. The Newton was the first PDA. It was also not cancelled because it was a failure, but was dropped along with a number of other Scully-era projects when Steve Jobs returned to Apple.

I'm sorry, but are you being deliberately obtuse here?

That was my question. I'm still not sure what point you are trying to make here.

BongoBanger
Mar 18, 2008, 01:38 PM
No, it's not obvious when you don't say. It's also far from clear that a market existed for them at the time. The Newton was the first PDA. It was also not cancelled because it was a failure, but was dropped along with a number of other Scully-era projects when Steve Jobs returned to Apple.

Actually the first PDA is considered to be the Psion Organiser. The PDA market lasted from about 1984 to, say, 2005 by which time it had jumped the shark. The Newton failed mainly because it was too expensive and too big.

Not sure I can make this any clearer.

IJ Reilly
Mar 18, 2008, 01:47 PM
Actually the first PDA is considered to be the Psion Organiser. The PDA market lasted from about 1984 to, say, 2005 by which time it had jumped the shark. The Newton failed mainly because it was too expensive and too big.

Not sure I can make this any clearer.

The Newton didn't "fail," it was cancelled by Steve Jobs when he took over, along with numerous other projects started during the John Scully era, some of which were quite promising. By most reckonings, the Newton was profitable by that time.

Either way, I still don't get what you are driving at.

BongoBanger
Mar 18, 2008, 03:58 PM
I think you need to read a version other than Apple's. The Newton wasn't a commercial success.

The key point I'm making is a simple one: One Apple product has been extraordinarily successful - the iPod. Some Apple products have been pretty successful in the US market although less so elsewhere - the iPhone and the Macbook/Macbook Pro. Some have failed - the Newton and the Cube. To therefore assume that any Apple product will automatically dominate a market is unfounded and to assume that it makes some of its competitors who are actually well ahead of them in a particular market obsolete is just plain silly.

IJ Reilly
Mar 18, 2008, 05:13 PM
I think you need to read a version other than Apple's. The Newton wasn't a commercial success.

The key point I'm making is a simple one: One Apple product has been extraordinarily successful - the iPod. Some Apple products have been pretty successful in the US market although less so elsewhere - the iPhone and the Macbook/Macbook Pro. Some have failed - the Newton and the Cube. To therefore assume that any Apple product will automatically dominate a market is unfounded and to assume that it makes some of its competitors who are actually well ahead of them in a particular market obsolete is just plain silly.

I've never read an "Apple version," of which there wasn't one that I can recall. At the time of its cancellation, the Newton was selling well. Apple was widely seen as having finally gotten it right with the 2000 series and the eMate. By that time, a great deal of money had been invested in developing the Newton, so over the course of its existence it almost certainly was a net loss. However Jobs lacked the interest or the patience to stick with the product and decided to abandon the sunk cost, but not because Apple was losing money the product at that time. In fact almost everything which Jobs did not regard as a part of Apple's core business was jettisoned at that time.

If this is your main point, then I don't suppose I disagree with it. I simply don't see the Newton as being a good example of an Apple product which "failed." In the end it met its design goals and was on it way towards becoming a financially successful product. The Newton was a victim of other forces within Apple, and possibly from without.