Apple Takes on Droid X With Latest Smartphone Antenna Video

[cmaier]

In the book I read for my college course it said a computer did 4 things: input, output, processing, storage. So that's what I go with when I think of computer.

Exactly. I learned that in second grade, and a ph.d. in e.e. and 10+ years designing microprocessors later, that definition still works. The example in second grade was a mouse trap. It has storage - it keeps track of state (sprung or unsprung). Input is the trigger. Processing - if the trigger is pressed, it provides output. Output - mouse chopper.

 

[KnightWRX]

So...is it FUD or not? You seem conflicted.

It's FUD and both quotes are mutually exclusive. Getting an update later and never getting it is very different. But you know that do you, you aren't just posting to elicit a response which is against forum rules right ?

Not to mention like I said, iPhone got the same kind of shaft in regards to iOS 4. All devices get abandonned over time, even Apple is guilty of abandonning older devices in newer updates.

I'm just trying to provide an explanation for why people don't tend to identify their microwave ovens or their iPhones as "one of their computers" (a similar argument would explain why people don't identify their iPhones as "one of their radios"). If anything, it's unabashed populism.

It's easy, that's because they are uneducated, not because of some lack of a proper definition for a computer.

Again, even the lay folk understand that computers are now in about every device they own. They know a computer isn't just that "beige box in the corner for Internet".

General purpose input and output ? Last I checked, my microwave has a keypad and a screen. According to your own definition, it is more of a computer than a FreeBSD box sitting in a closet with just a network wire going into it. Which makes no sense.

Stop arguing, you were wrong, it happens. Move on.

 

[LagunaSol]

It's FUD and both quotes are mutually exclusive.

No, they aren't mutually exclusive at all. You argue the great Android fragmentation debate is merely FUD, then you turn around and bemoan the fact that your favorite Android device is still stuck on 1.x.

Seems like it's not FUD at all.

Getting an update later and never getting it is very different.

Not as different as you imply, especially when the wait for such an update is "appalling" (your word, not mine).

But you know that do you, you aren't just posting to elicit a response which is against forum rules right ?

Actually, my question is a legitimate one - and your answer was less than convincing.

As for your last sentence, it appears the one trying to elicit a response is you. You may want to refrain from bogus references to forum rules violations in lieu of responding with a rational argument.

 

[Veri]

The example in second grade was a mouse trap. It has storage - it keeps track of state (sprung or unsprung). Input is the trigger. Processing - if the trigger is pressed, it provides output. Output - mouse chopper.

A fine reductio. And this is why trying to impose domain-specific definitions on the layperson is a hindrance to effective communication. "Why didn't you list your mousetrap when I asked what computers you have? It's clearly a computer!" Quite.

It's easy, that's because they are uneducated, not because of some lack of a proper definition for a computer.

Linguistic snobbery won't help you communicate. The public's working definition of "computer" - the one which allows them to point at the laptop or the desktop as a computer but not the microwave oven or the mousetrap - is much more useful in context than some archaic or domain-specific definition. Embrace the populist evolution of English and thank FSM that there's no Academie Anglaise.

General purpose input and output ? Last I checked, my microwave has a keypad and a screen. According to your own definition, it is more of a computer than a FreeBSD box sitting in a closet with just a network wire going into it. Which makes no sense.

The FreeBSD box is a computer in the layperson's sense built with the potential for general-purpose I/O through a variety of devices. The fact that you have no keyboard plugged in doesn't change this. The microwave oven has no (trivially effected) potential for general purpose I/O or computing.

Apple may want to change the public's perception of what a "computer" is so they can creep in a more restricted alternative. It's a good attempt, I'll give them that.

 

[ThePoach]

Kids lol...

WOW! Thanks for showing us this new cool looking Motorola phone, apple I might consider getting this one next. BTW.. I still havent seen apple's video test on it's own iphone.. or was that done during the unvailing of the iphone4 where it failed to log on to the internet quite a few times? I know that the overcrowding of Wi-Fi affected the signal but why was the iphone 3GS able to log on to the internet while the iphone4 failed every attempt? Just fix your own problems and stop worrying about others; )

 

[KnightWRX]

No, they aren't mutually exclusive at all. You argue the great Android fragmentation debate is merely FUD, then you turn around and bemoan the fact that your favorite Android device is still stuck on 1.x.

Seems like it's not FUD at all.



Not as different as you imply, especially when the wait for such an update is "appalling" (your word, not mine).

Again, the fragmentation you speak of and what the original spoke of is different. Getting a late update is not never getting it in the first place. And the poster insinuated this was an Android problem. It's not, iPhone suffers the same (original iPhone not getting iOS 4.0, iPhone 3G not getting all the features).

That part was FUD, and that is what I made clear.

That you think it is or isn't mutually exclusive doesn't matter, to me it is and thus my speech is coherant. I don't really care what you think, but I find your opinion to be biased in that sense and thus to have no credibility whatsoever.

Linguistic snobbery won't help you communicate. The public's working definition of "computer" - the one which allows them to point at the laptop or the desktop as a computer but not the microwave oven or the mousetrap - is much more useful in context than some archaic or domain-specific definition. Embrace the populist evolution of English and thank FSM that there's no Academie Anglaise.

You fail to address the fact that the lay people you describe only exist in your head. Again, my Grand mother knows that "computers are everywhere" nowadays.

Your seperation is bogus. Lay people know that the box in the corner isn't the only thing that's called a computer.

That you keep ignoring this point and the very definition of the word is the only problem in communication here.

And my Macbook can't process input from a car's sensor, failing to have an OBD-IIb interface and can't process output signals for the relays/electronics to control the different parts of the ignition and fuel control systems. So I guess it's not so generalized after all...

 

[Rodimus Prime]

A fine reductio. And this is why trying to impose domain-specific definitions on the layperson is a hindrance to effective communication. "Why didn't you list your mousetrap when I asked what computers you have? It's clearly a computer!" Quite.


Linguistic snobbery won't help you communicate. The public's working definition of "computer" - the one which allows them to point at the laptop or the desktop as a computer but not the microwave oven or the mousetrap - is much more useful in context than some archaic or domain-specific definition. Embrace the populist evolution of English and thank FSM that there's no Academie Anglaise.


The FreeBSD box is a computer in the layperson's sense built with the potential for general-purpose I/O through a variety of devices. The fact that you have no keyboard plugged in doesn't change this. The microwave oven has no (trivially effected) potential for general purpose I/O or computing.

Apple may want to change the public's perception of what a "computer" is so they can creep in a more restricted alternative. It's a good attempt, I'll give them that.

You really do not get it do you. Please go look up what a computer is.

A lay person knows that a car contains a computer. They understand that it is a computer. The average person knows that a cell phone is a mini computer.

If you want to continue to say computers are limited only to PC then you are clearly not intelligent enough to stay on these boards and can not own a cell phone. I would suggest that you take your phone and throw it in the trash because you are complete clueless. I suggest you never use the internet again as well because you risk death of your head exploding with basic information.

 

[Journojulz]

I'm just trying to provide an explanation for why people don't tend to identify their microwave ovens or their iPhones as "one of their computers" (a similar argument would explain why people don't identify their iPhones as "one of their radios").

Ah - i thought you were saying an iPhone wasn't a computer.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Ah - i thought you were saying an iPhone wasn't a computer.

It stared with him started that. Then he got pounded with facts.

The iPhone I would consider a computer. I can understand the lay person not condescending anything with an embed computer a computer but the iPhone is not an embed computer. It is more a full fledged computer.

 

[Veri]

A lay person knows that a car contains a computer. They understand that it is a computer. The average person knows that a cell phone is a mini computer.

OK. Find 10 representative people (i.e. if you're going to find someone in engineering, make sure it's only one). Ask them precisely the question: "Which computers do you own?" No prompting.

Get back to me on how many list their cars. And, for cmaier, their mousetraps.

It stared with him started that. Then he got pounded with facts.

No. I'll quote myself for your delectation:

In the CPU etc sense I agree, and it's reasonable in context to use "computer" to mean "something which computes", but when most people read "computer" they think "general-purpose electronic computer". An iPhone isn't one of them - it lacks the interface and the opportunity for control (unjailbroken).

 

[cmaier]

OK. Find 10 representative people (i.e. if you're going to find someone in engineering, make sure it's only one). Ask them precisely the question: "Which computers do you own?" No prompting.

Get back to me on how many list their cars (and, for cmaier, their mousetraps).


Lol Internet.

Again - since when are facts determined by plebiscite?

 

[Journojulz]

The public's working definition of "computer" - the one which allows them to point at the laptop or the desktop as a computer but not the microwave oven or the mousetrap - is much more useful in context than some archaic or domain-specific definition.

The public haven't been editing photos, videos, writing emails, spreadsheets on phones for very long - so as time goes on - more people will start listing their palmtop devices as another form factor of "computers" to sit along desktop and laptop.

Apple may want to change the public's perception of what a "computer" is so they can creep in a more restricted alternative. It's a good attempt, I'll give them that.

Computer is as computer does.

 

[Veri]

Again - since when are facts determined by plebiscite?

As far as definitions of words, since linguistic descriptivism. You may be interested to know that the majority of English dictionaries - including the OED on my shelf - are compiled following the descriptive approach.

This is still news to some, I guess.

The public haven't been editing photos, videos, writing emails, spreadsheets on phones for very long - so as time goes on - more people will start listing their palmtop devices as another form factor of "computers" to sit along desktop and laptop.

There's nothing inherently wrong with considering that a palmtop is a plausible form factor for a computer - I've had a Psion Series 3a since around 1993 and I used a Toshiba Libretto quite a lot around the turn of the millennium. The latter was just a miniature IBM PC-compatible; the former is more limited but still sports an excellent mechanical keyboard, clamshell design, expansion ports and serial I/O. I would type class notes at a decent speed for an hour or two at a time on the Psion. It has word processor, spreadsheet, basic database, audio record/playback and on-device programming language (during a school exchange trip to Germany I recall writing a Pong clone, passing it around the airplane like the insufferable geek I was, and being strangely relieved that one of the cool kids was sugar-scared of flying - although we had been hit by lightning so it wasn't exactly the calmest of flights. But I digress). My first experience with the mobile Internet[tm] was on someone's Series 5 infra-redding to a mobile using GSM data around '98, though I could have made a direct serial connection with the 3a.

So, anyway, I guess my point here is that what Apple's doing is not new, and that there is a perception gap between "tiny computer" and "powerful 'phone" which centres around generality of I/O methods and freedom of operation.

 

[cmaier]

As far as definitions of words, since linguistic descriptivism. You may be interested to know that the majority of English dictionaries - including the OED on my shelf - are compiled following the descriptive approach.

This is still news to some, I guess.

And yet your beloved OED defines "computer" so as to include your microwave and your mousetrap.

 

[KnightWRX]

As far as definitions of words, since linguistic descriptivism. You may be interested to know that the majority of English dictionaries - including the OED on my shelf - are compiled following the descriptive approach.

This is still news to some, I guess.

Well, according your Oxford dictionary, you are wrong :

an electronic device which is capable of receiving information (data) in a particular form and of performing a sequence of operations in accordance with a predetermined but variable set of procedural instructions (program) to produce a result in the form of information or signals

Sounds like my Microwave's microcontroller, or my linksys router, or the Cisco Catalyst switch sitting in the back room here at work, or like my bike's FMS.

Unless you then want to argue that receiving information requires a mouse or keyboard and that sensors, networks or other type of wired or wireless information reception is not actually receiving data or that outputting results requires a screen of dimensions found in desktop class computer monitors only...

Heck, OED offers a 2nd definition :

a person who makes calculations, especially with a calculating machine

 

[LagunaSol]

I don't really care what you think, but I find your opinion to be biased in that sense and thus to have no credibility whatsoever.

While your commentary remains flawlessly objective (and thus completely credible), of course.

 

[Veri]

Well, according your Oxford dictionary, you are wrong :

I've asserted that (English) linguists today, including dictionary compilers, tend to support the principle of linguistic descriptivism. You've responded by asserting that I'm wrong because the dictionary says so. Do you see the mistake there?

If you compare different dictionaries of the same dialect of the English language, you'll notice that they rarely have identical definitions of any given word. Hell, this copy doesn't even have cmaier's quite correct definition in the context of information theory. Why is this? Because it's an almost impossible task to track the active definition of every word in every context. This is why you, dear reader, have the opportunity to go out and test for yourself. How about the hypothesis:

English speakers think that a car is a computer.

Go out and ask people which computers they have and find out how many respond with a list which includes their car. Because, on a larger scale, this is how English is actually defined.

Heck, OED offers a 2nd definition :

Try not to anthropomorphise your iPhone just yet ;-).

 

[KnightWRX]

Go out and ask people which computers they have and find out how many respond with a list which includes their car. Because, on a larger scale, this is how English is actually defined.

Turn the question around, ask people if they have a computer in their car. Most will respond yes "dem comput thingies ar everywhar son'!"

 

[Veri]

Turn the question around, ask people if they have a computer in their car.

That would be leading the respondent, rendering your survey completely invalid. Never create a survey like that unless you're a political campaigner.

Exercise: Call up 20 random people and ask, "Do you think Obama is, above all, a murderer?" You're going to get one or two saying "yes". Call up another 20 random people and ask them to define Obama in one word. You're not going to get as many "murderer"s.

Perhaps more importantly, "is" and "contains" are usually very different, no matter how bad OO implementations are at separating the two. Sometimes it's less obvious: my thermometer "contains" mercury and effectively "is" mercury. My CRT "contains" mercury (oh and a computer right guys?) but it would be daft to say my CRT "is" mercury. The iPhone approaches "is a computer" far closer than a car approaches "is a computer", of course.

 

[Max(IT)]

I guess a sense of irony is completely lost on you. Some people want their ip4s fixed and are shouted down by fanboys like you. If you want to talk about taking evangelism to dizzying new heights just take one look at the "cult of apple"



The only real shout down happening is of people wanting the ip4 fixed by those in the cult of apple who would kill their first born rather than question or say anything bad about apple.

Except there is nothing to fix, nothing broken, and the vast majority of REAL iPhone users are just enjoying their iPhone 4 ...

 

[Veri]

Except there is nothing to fix, nothing broken, and the vast majority of REAL iPhone users are just enjoying their iPhone 4 ...

Perhaps Apple should issue a recall of the 'phone condoms it's been giving out. Don't want to give kids the message that a condom is just a placebo.

 

[Max(IT)]

No, they aren't mutually exclusive at all. You argue the great Android fragmentation debate is merely FUD, then you turn around and bemoan the fact that your favorite Android device is still stuck on 1.x.

Do you want a clear example of that ****** fragmentation? My wife bought me a new phone to replace a dead Nokia 5800 (the phone I used with my corporate sim), and she choose an Android based phone, an Acer E110. Note that I'm speaking about a brand new model, released on april 2010. Well, it sports Android 1.5 ! And I don't think it will be upgraded to a next version ...

I'm absolutely satisfied with this phone, using an iPhone for the "heavy duties", but it's a totally other world ...

 

[firewood]

I'm using a REAL computer. Its an i7 2.66GHZ Macbook Pro. The iPhone 4 is not a REAL computer. Its a cell phone.

Sure, you can use definitions so narrow that your kids will laugh at you ("You called THAT a computer? Only 8 CPU cores? Ha ha Ha!").

The wider historical definition of computer would include machines from Univacs, IBM 360/370 mainframes, to Cray-1's, ASCII White, etc. I can take an old mainframe era Fortran number crunching program, cross compile it, and (with a dev certificate) run it on my iPhone 4... faster than it ran on a Cray-1.

I can type Javascript directly into my iPhone (there's an app for that) and it will run those Javascript programs faster than a couple of my old PowerMacs. I probably have more apps on my iPhone than I had on those PowerMac as well.

I remember an old definition for a personal computer: You have to be able to buy it with a credit card. It has to be small and light enough for you to be able to carry it out and put it in the trunk of your car. And it has to run Basic. (The round-about way to run Basic on an iPhone is to load a web page that includes a Basic interpreter written in Javascript. But it is possible.)

I can see very few reasons not to call an iPhone a computer just because it can't run Photoshop or iMovie.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Sure, you can use definitions so narrow that your kids will laugh at you ("You called THAT a computer? Only 8 CPU cores? Ha ha Ha!").

The wider historical definition of computer would include machines from Univacs, IBM 360/370 mainframes, to Cray-1's, ASCII White, etc. I can take an old mainframe era Fortran number crunching program, cross compile it, and (with a dev certificate) run it on my iPhone 4... faster than it ran on a Cray-1.

I can type Javascript directly into my iPhone (there's an app for that) and it will run those Javascript programs faster than a couple of my old PowerMacs. I probably have more apps on my iPhone than I had on those PowerMac as well.

I remember an old definition for a personal computer: You have to be able to buy it with a credit card. It has to be small and light enough for you to be able to carry it out and put it in the trunk of your car. And it has to run Basic. (The round-about way to run Basic on an iPhone is to load a web page that includes a Basic interpreter written in Javascript. But it is possible.)

I can see very few reasons not to call an iPhone a computer just because it can't run Photoshop or iMovie.

I should have been less sarcastic about it. I get the semantics about it all. Human beings are computers for all intensive purposes. My point in it all is don't compare the two as like products, they are far from it.

 

[Veri]

The wider historical definition of computer would include machines from Univacs, IBM 360/370 mainframes, to Cray-1's, ASCII White, etc. I can take an old mainframe era Fortran number crunching program, cross compile it, and (with a dev certificate) run it on my iPhone 4... faster than it ran on a Cray-1.

Depends on the application, of course. I'm fairly sure you're not going to reach Cray 1's peak 250 MFLOPS. But this is going to get me back to wasting time at cray-cyber.org (is it up now?).