Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'iPhone' started by boonlar, Jun 21, 2009.
would make the iphone the clear cut winner in the smartphone market. Why doesn't apple add these?
It doesn't need them, it is already the clear winner.
1) iPhone is already the clear cut winner in the smartphone market
2) higher res screen would be more expensive, and would offer little discernible benefit to most users. Would also add complexity in the form of resolution-independent scaling of text, as user interface elements would have to scale proportionately to still be usable, existing third-party apps would have to be scaled, etc.
3) the iPhone already supports multitasking, just not for 3rd party apps (yet). Given that reviews of the Pre state that three or four open apps frequently slow things to a crawl, seems like it's not yet time.
I honestly wonder where you fanboys get that claim from.
The actual leader in the smartphone market is RIM. The iPhone isn't even close. It's something like 20% vs 60% margin.
1) Not really
2) Higher res screen cost is negligible to be honest and looks WAAAY better than 480x320 especially when browsing the net.
3) Shouldn't this be left up to the user? It's plainly obvious that running multiple apps will slow down your phone a bit but why does apple get to decide for me?
Check this out:
People actually use iPhones. They aren't just force fed them at work.
l2read thats the users who browse the web with their device not market share
Apple gets to decide because not everyone is a pro. I know tons of people who don't even want to upgrade to 3.0 cause they just don't care. People are going to have 100s of apps open and the phone will be inoperable and everyone will complain. Thats why. Jailbreak if you want to
Wow, have you ever taken a high school statistics class?
Read my post, not just the link. I am defining "clear winner" as "the best phone" ... not "highest market share." I would say that the clear winner as far as operating systems go is Mac OS X Leopard, yet Windows still has the biggest market share.
The best phone has excellent usability, thus people use it.
Most of the reason that RIM has such large market share is because people are force fed that crap at work. The phones are unusable garbage, which is apparently by their low web browsing statistic.
Yes. What is your point?
The problem here is that you people are defining "clear winner" as "OMG MOST PHONES SOLD TO PEOPLE" which is absurd.
1) Yes, really. The only one close is blackberry, and it's fading fast. We'll see if Pre can gain any significant market share, but right now it doesn't look to be in any danger of taking over the market.
2) It is actually not negligible. It costs about $25 more per screen (depends on what quality and various characteristics, and in what quantity the purchase is).
3) No. "Leaving it up to the user" is exactly the problem. Ever use a WM device? Do you think the average person (as opposed to power users, who make up a tiny percentage of even the smartphone market) wants to deal with managing what apps are running, debugging memory problems caused by different simultaneous combinations, remembering when to kill programs, etc.?
The reason Apple is taking over the smartphone market is exactly because they focus on making the common things extraordinarily polished, even though they ignore the needs of various small minorities. Over time they address these needs, but only when they can do so in an extremely polished and efficient way. As soon as technology allows, you'll see 3rd party multitasking. Probably they will allow a fixed number of multitasking slots, and will review multitasking apps with close eye to make sure they don't interfere with other programs.
Luckily for us, nobody cares for your definition.
The market speaks best empirically. Come back on that day.
Okay, so then Nokia is the clear cut winner. Right? Does that make them the best phones? No.
What were those statistics 2 years ago? 0% market share for Apple, I believe?
How about we look at growth rate? Apple, from 2008 to 2009, more than doubled their market share from 5.2% to 10.7%. RIM, too, had a large increase in share, from 10.9% to 19.5%.
Apple, in two years, on a very limited subset of carriers, has gained nearly the market share that the Blackberry, in all its incarnations, across EVERY CARRIER, achieved in six years on the market. Do the math.
Eh. Fine. I'll accept that definition. But iPhone is still the clear winner.
I've played w/a few different in-store Pre's as well as read a number of reviews (I'm debating between an iPhone and a Pre) and this is the first time I've heard that 3-4 apps slow things to a crawl. I've had a good half-dozen apps running on the demo units and didn't feel the phone slow to a crawl. I'm sure some apps are more CPU heavy than others and if you run a bunch of CPU heavy apps things will slow down, but the same is true of any computing device. If someone complains that their Mac slows down because they are watching a DVD, exporting a file from After Effects, compressing a movie into H.264 w/Compressor, editing in FCP and doing some image stabilization in Motion are you going to say that 'it's not yet time' to multitask on Apple computers?
Please learn to read.
I don't know where you get that from - the latest figures from Gartner show that the world leader in smartphone sales is actually Nokia with 41.2%, with RIM in second (19.9%) and Apple in third (10.8%).
And because of that, Nokias are better phones than iPhones! Right? I mean, they sold more! That's because they're better! They're the clear cut winners and beat the iPhone out entirely because of their great features and speed and usability!
That's why they sold more! Because they're better!
Please learn to comprehend. Apple's growth rate outstrips everyone else in the market. I think that speaks volumes.
I can't speak from my own experience, as I haven't used it. I'm just parroting the reviews (I believe it was ars and engadget).
Note, though, that there's a difference in expectation between macs and iphones. iPhones are much more like an appliance that just needs to work. If a call or a text comes in and your phone chooses that moment to crash or be unresponsive, that sucks. (My Treo used to do that all the time). Phones may be computing devices, but they need to behave not-so-much like computing devices. That's the difference in philosophy between iPhone and, say, WM.
And don't think most people will say "this is my fault, so I won't call tech support or I won't complain."
I wouldn't even try. This guy is like talking to a dog. No ability comprehend the simplest things, S4B, only barks at you.
Don't people usually buy the product they think is better?
Ah, but people's thoughts are often wrong
This is true. I know 5 people with blackberrys, all of them were literally forced to take them from their jobs.
Even my father in law, he HATES the damn thing. He's on his 3rd one. He always having 'accidents' with it.