Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It's adequate for typing the occasional paragraph or filling in the occasional form, of course.

Typing?

With Dragon Dictate, I can speak and transcribe +130/minute.

Who needs to type, with a tool this capable, and an abundance of productive apps available.

Dude, you're using "closed" in the sense that the owner has decided to set them up in a closed room. This isn't the same as the manufacturer creating a "closed room" for the device.

Jailbreak the 'computer' then, and you have an open environment.

The iPhone is a computer, and there is nothing you can say that is going to change that.
 
Jailbreak the 'computer' then, and you have an open environment.

The iPhone is a computer, and there is nothing you can say that is going to change that.

Dmann,if you value you time you would've stopped by now. He's attempted 3 different tangents and found one so vague (the "laymans" definition) that its impossible to actually win, just stalemate or compromise.
 
Typing?

With Dragon Dictate, I can speak and transcribe +130/minute.

This is just using the iPhone as a microphone. Your prized speeches are sent to Dragon's servers, converted to text and sent back. NaturallySpeaking is an excellent piece of software, but the iPhone's not powerful enough to run it well.

Jailbreak the 'computer' then, and you have an open environment.
No, I have a semi-closed environment which I can hack at using external tools.

The iPhone is a computer, and there is nothing you can say that is going to change that.
It's not really up to me. The iPhone is a computer if the masses identify it as a computer - not just tech enthusiasts who like to think of it as one or particular domain experts who can fit their specialist definition to one. As MD says, it is "impossible to actually win".

If you don't like how vague and fickle English can sometimes appear when contrasted with the mathematical rigour in your textbook, that's understandable, but she is formed as she is formed. And she's done rather well.
 
Haha, lol ok Apple. But really, if I wasn't an apple customer I'd want to know if the Droid/HTC smartphones had the same complaints.
 
I prefer the opinion of computer scientists in defining the subject matter of their expertise.

Well good gawd man, please link to the consensus opinion of the definition of the term "computer" by computer scientists, and put an end to this debate once and for all!
 
This is just using the iPhone as a microphone. Your prized speeches are sent to Dragon's servers, converted to text and sent back. NaturallySpeaking is an excellent piece of software..
Computers interfacing with computers - what a concept.

...but the iPhone's not powerful enough to run it well.
Yet it's powerful enough to run and process 'on-the-fly' speech translation software: Jibbigo iPhone Translation Software

I've used the English-Spanish, which works very well.

No, I have a semi-closed environment which I can hack at using external tools.
Semi-open, is open, nonetheless. ;)

It's not really up to me. The iPhone is a computer if the masses identify it as a computer
Regardless, the iPhone performs the basic functions of a computer, has its own processor and RAM, a 'large enough' multi-touch display, and runs a multitude of productivity applications, on the device itself.

The masses would tend to agree.

If you don't like how vague and fickle English can sometimes appear when contrasted with the mathematical rigour in your textbook, that's understandable, but she is formed as she is formed. And she's done rather well.
Ditto. ;)
 
Computers interfacing with computers - what a concept.
Why not make the same argument about a microphone attached to a radio transmitter? Surely you weren't using the Dragon example of iPhone computing power because it has the ability to store and forward packets of data?

Yet it's powerful enough to run and process 'on-the-fly' speech translation software: Jibbigo iPhone Translation Software. I've used the English-Spanish, which works very well.
I haven't used it, but since you know Spanish, quite. From this and a dozen other reviews, looks like the same basic problems as any other decade-old translator. And I've not seen any evidence that it can recognise, let alone translate, fluent paragraphs in the style of Dragon. Ages ago I had a tutor whose research was phonetics with a special interest in machine translation, and he'd delight in distracting me with tales of the simplicity and inadequacy of the principles of machine translation beyond set phrases and sentences mastered in the first few weeks of human learning.

(The only thing I don't understand people whining about is the price. The App Store has created this horrible race to the bottom. This software isn't "magical", but users should stop whining that everything isn't $1.99!)

Semi-open, is open, nonetheless. ;)
Only in the sense that a half-empty glass has no liquid in it.

Regardless, the iPhone performs the basic functions of a computer, has its own processor and RAM
As does a mouse trap.

The masses would tend to agree.
Results in from your survey?
 
Surely you weren't using the Dragon example of iPhone computing power because it has the ability to store and forward packets of data?

...just like my MacBook Pro when using remote voicemail services. Are you saying the MacBook Pro isn't a computer because the network packets it's sending are audio?

Are you also saying Apple's Xserve isn't a computer because it doesn't come with a keyboard? (Can't remember, but didn't some models of the Mac Mini come without any keyboard also?)

For computing power, I prefer the Cray 1 comparison, unless you think the Cray 1 doesn't have enough number crunching power to be called a computer. A iPhone 4 can easily crunch in the same ballpark or faster.
 
Why not make the same argument about a microphone attached to a radio transmitter?
Since both a microphone and radio transmitter are incapable of displaying pages which can be easily edited, providing lists of suggested words directly on text, or performing the basic tasks of a word processor, this suggestion is senseless.

I haven't used it, but since you know Spanish, quite. From this and a dozen other reviews, looks like the same basic problems as any other decade-old translator. And I've not seen any evidence that it can recognise, let alone translate, fluent paragraphs in the style of Dragon. Ages ago I had a tutor whose research was phonetics with a special interest in machine translation, and he'd delight in distracting me with tales of the simplicity and inadequacy of the principles of machine translation beyond set phrases and sentences mastered in the first few weeks of human learning.

(The only thing I don't understand people whining about is the price. The App Store has created this horrible race to the bottom. This software isn't "magical", but users should stop whining that everything isn't $1.99!)
Nevertheless, it is usable, and operates solely on the iPhone. The next update will likely take advantage of the iPhone 4's new processor, improving performance significantly.

I agree about the competitive pricing issue.

Hopefully, the App Store will eventually devote a section solely for pro apps, such as Pro Remote ($99) Xa1 Audio Analysis ($179) Luminair ($99) ForeFlight Aviation Weather ($79) etc.

Only in the sense that a half-empty glass has no liquid in it.
Your point?

The glass is filled with water, and quenches thirst, all the same.

As does a mouse trap.
As does a MacBook Pro.

Results in from your survey?
I'll let you know as soon as they're in.

As I said before, I believe that the masses would tend to agree.

...just like my MacBook Pro when using remote voicemail services. Are you saying the MacBook Pro isn't a computer because the network packets it's sending are audio?

Are you also saying Apple's Xserve isn't a computer because it doesn't come with a keyboard? (Can't remember, but didn't some models of the Mac Mini come without any keyboard also?)

For computing power, I prefer the Cray 1 comparison, unless you think the Cray 1 doesn't have enough number crunching power to be called a computer. A iPhone 4 can easily crunch in the same ballpark or faster.
Excellent points, indeed.
 
Why not make the same argument about a microphone attached to a radio transmitter? Surely you weren't using the Dragon example of iPhone computing power because it has the ability to store and forward packets of data?

A microphone and Radio Transmitter is an analogue piece of technology. Unuseful example, no information is stored and they are incapable of processing data.
 
...just like my MacBook Pro when using remote voicemail services. Are you saying the MacBook Pro isn't a computer because the network packets it's sending are audio?
How did you manage to conclude that? I'm saying that the ability to send audio packets across a network doesn't imply a computer. Let "a=>b" be false in general. Then it does not follow that "a=>not(b)".

Are you also saying Apple's Xserve isn't a computer because it doesn't come with a keyboard?
How did you manage to conclude that? Unlike iPhone, Xserve is designed with general purpose local and network access in mind. You can connect any USB keyboard. There's an onboard GT 120 with Mini DisplayPort connector. Then there's Firewire, USB host, two gigabit Ethernet, and (gods bless them) even RS232.

Since both a microphone and radio transmitter are incapable of displaying pages which can be easily edited, providing lists of suggested words directly on text, or performing the basic tasks of a word processor, this suggestion is senseless.
Your statement was, "With Dragon Dictate, I can speak and transcribe +130/minute." You were alluding to the iPhone being powerful because it can be used for continuous dictation, even though it cannot except as a peripheral. You did not assert, "With Dragon Dictate I can see a list of suggested words and perform the basic tasks of a word processor."

To tackle your new, different argument: yes, pocket thesauruses have existed for ages, and it's no stretch of the imagination to contemplate a pocket homophone lookup (of course, the iPhone isn't even doing the lookup: it's just acting as a terminal for a list of words from the server). The '80s were replete with basic "word processors" which were basically advanced typewriters and differentiated from the burgeoning home computer market. The public identified neither as a computer.

The glass is filled with water, and quenches thirst, all the same.
If you want to look at it that way round: a sip does not quench thirst.

MorphingDragon said:
A microphone and Radio Transmitter is an analogue piece of technology.
So? What's wrong with an analogue computer?

Unuseful example, no information is stored and they are incapable of processing data.
Nonsense. The analogue dual superhet receiver sitting next to me does a lot of processing of incoming signals before some vaguely intelligible voice from across the world comes out of the excellent 25-year-old speaker. There's the basic mixing to switch to IFs, variable width filtering and various options for demodulation. A slow AGC will be using capacitance to effectively remember previous signal level so volume does not vary too quickly. Peripherals include an antenna tuning unit.

So, we have input, storage, process, output. Analogue computer yet?
 
Nonsense. The analogue dual superhet receiver sitting next to me does a lot of processing of incoming signals before some vaguely intelligible voice from across the world comes out of the excellent 25-year-old speaker. There's the basic mixing to switch to IFs, variable width filtering and various options for demodulation. A slow AGC will be using capacitance to effectively remember previous signal level so volume does not vary too quickly. Peripherals include an antenna tuning unit.

So, we have input, storage, process, output. Analogue computer yet?

You obviously never took any electronics if you don't know the difference between Analogue, Digital and don't know what a radio looks like. There is no processing of data.

Hint, its not a computer and it doesn't process data. A computer can not be Analogue it can only be digital. Digital does not mean it has a processor.
 
Actually, it does. If a => b is false then a is true and b is false.
Perhaps you ought to read through the topic, as you've taken what I've said out of context and responded omitting quantifiers implied by "in general". Let's first give another example:

I am a human, but it does not follow that I have two legs. Some humans have zero legs, some have one leg, and some have more than two legs. In other words, "Is human => has two legs" is false in general.

It does not follow that no humans have two legs. In other words, "Is human => does not have two legs" is false.

Now, let's express it in general terms with quantifiers, if that helps you. I'll write the existential quantifier as There-Exists and the universal quantifier as For-All. Let P(x) denote property P applying to x. Let x be a member of the universe of discourse {a,b,c}.

Now, assume that P(a) is true but Q(a) is false. Then we can assert:
There-Exists x (P(x) and not Q(x)).

Thus the following assertion is false:
For-All x (P(x) => Q(x))

We cannot conclude from this that the following assertion is false:
For-All x (P(x) => not Q(x))
because there is nothing so far precluding the possibility that P(b) is true and Q(b) is true.

OK?

MorphingDragon said:
You obviously never took any electronics if you don't know the difference between Analogue, Digital and don't know what a radio looks like. There is no processing of data.
In what way is, say, the present voltage output from an IF circuit not a datum? In what way is retaining this information over a short time for slow AGC correction not (ephemeral) storage of that datum?

A computer can not be Analogue it can only be digital.
Are you trolling? You started off arguing via a commonly held misconception of computing students and practictioners, but now you're coming out with comments which suggest much less knowledge about technology. From a technician's PoV, analogue computing is well defined and has a history all of its own. Meanwhile, a layperson couldn't care less whether the computer uses discrete voltage levels or a continuous variation.
 
In what way is, say, the present voltage output from an IF circuit not a datum? In what way is retaining this information over a short time for slow AGC correction not (ephemeral) storage of that datum?

The Voltage is not calculated, it is simultaneously present and relational to other factors of the circuit. Take a magnet to that bad boy and watch your needle be permanently ruined. Is it calculating data now? :rolleyes:

Are you trolling?

One could ask you the same question.

You started off arguing via a commonly held misconception of computing students and practictioners,

I started off arguing a text book and omni-dictionary definition of computers created by many people with fancy letters after their name and many more people with fancy letters after their name backed me up. I and many other people couldn't care about a laymans definition or your silly attempt to create one. Because that definition only exists in your head. The laypersons definition of a computer is up to the general public and in spirit of KnightWRX "That them computers are everywhere"

but now you're coming out with comments which suggest much less knowledge about technology.

All of your posts have been comments which show your lack of knowledge about science. Fine I was wrong saying that there was no such thing as analogue computers, (That is the first time I've seen one, and the fact you had to reference obscure websites) regardless your 25 year old radio is not a computer.

Ham_Radio_Circuit_Schematic.jpg
 
You obviously never took any electronics if you don't know the difference between Analogue, Digital and don't know what a radio looks like. There is no processing of data.

Hint, its not a computer and it doesn't process data. A computer can not be Analogue it can only be digital. Digital does not mean it has a processor.

Computers may be analog. Not every electronic computer is digital.

Not are analog computers obscure. They just aren't used in PCs. They have many other uses.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.