Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The thing is, everything you just stated is 100%, pure opinion.

I never had an issue with my Mobile Browsers on my Windows Mobile Phones, in fact they were better in the sense that well...they supported far more. And the phones had 3G, where the iPhone did not.

My Windows Mobile phone was every bit as easy to use as an iPhone, and at the time could do far more.

And as far as " delightful " I could care less. Its a tool. Not a toy.

I am pretty sure the millions and millions and millions of iOS devices sold will disagree with you.

To be honest you sound like Steve Ballmer. Same attitude. Same use of words. And absolutely the same reason why Microsoft and RIM ran into the ground.

Just in case you are not following and want someone to spit it out for you; people don't care about how many features. People care about how they can use features. How many people used to browse the internet from their phones before the iPhone? ****, how many people actually owned a smartphone before the iPhone? A few geeks here and there who wouldn't mind using a phone running on steam power. You see, the reality is, you are in the minority. Most people don't care about how MUCH they have, they care about HOW they can do things. Only Apple got that right. Microsoft and RIM were laughing the whole time, using the exact same dumb arguments, until they were proven wrong. It turns out, this is really what people want. Something easy, simple, and fun.

Watch this video over and over again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
 
Last edited:
I am pretty sure the millions and millions and millions of iOS devices sold will disagree with you.

And I'm pretty sure I don't care what ANY of them think, at all. I pick the tool best suited for me. Not other people.

To be honest you sound like Steve Ballmer. Same attitude. Same use of words. And absolutely the same reason why Microsoft and RIM ran into the ground.

So, I sound like Steve Ballmer because I refuse to base my hardware buying choices off what a bunch of other people think? And I refuse to say the original iPhone was some kind of massive change. When it wasn't?

Yes, Microsoft is worth 230 billion dollars, and has about 68 billion dollars into the bank, and with the exception of last quarter because of a bad investment. They've been making massive profits, Windows, The Xbox, Office, Excel, and all that. Yes. Total failures. They should just shut their doors today.

Just in case you are not following and want someone to spit it out for you; people don't care about how many features.

See,I don't care about people. I don't care what they think. I care about what device works best for me. And at the time, the Windows Mobile/RIM/Palm phones were better.

People care about they can use features.

Well, with most UI's, it just involves clicking or tapping on something. This isn't complicated.

ow many people used to browse the internet from their phones before the iPhone?

Tons of people, lots of people I knew, even most of the Slider/feature phones had web browsing ability.

ow many people actually owned a smartphone before the iPhone?

Consumers? Not very many. Because they were VERY expensive. As I said, 500+ for a blackberry was not uncommon, some windows mobile phones easily ran up to 1000 dollars. The iPhone 3G was one of the first " cheap " smart phones, it also had the advantage of Apple marketing.

Oh yeah, I did not include the original iPhone, because it was not a smart phone.

A few geeks here and there who wouldn't mind using a phone running on steam power.

Or, a very large number of business users. You need to understand, at that point in time, smart phones and the data plans were FAR to expensive for the typical person to afford. I'm assuming you never worked in a large corporate environment back in the day? Palms, RIM's And Windows Mobile, all over the place.

You see, the reality is, you are in the minority.

Good, I'd rather buy a product based off how it performs, rather than what other people think of it. I prefer to not be a sheep.

Most people don't care about how MUCH they have, they care about HOW they can do things.

Most people don't use a smart phone to its full potential. So I really don't care what they think. My Windows Mobile Phone was better than the first iPhone in every category. Not so much with the 3GS and up, but before that. The iPhone for me was meh.

Only Apple and googlegot that right.

Fixed that, as of right now, the Installed Android userbase is larger than Apples, and its growing rapidly.

Microsoft and RIM were laughing the whole time, using the exact same dumb arguments, until they were proven wrong. It turns out, this is really what people want. Something easy, simple, and fun.

I'll still buy what I want, Yes, RIM is hurting. but they'll be back. Microsoft? Not hurting at all, last time I checked, they still whoop ass in the Desktop/Laptop OS market.


See, I don't buy devices based on how " easy it is to use "

I buy it off " does it do what I need it to? "

Sounds like the same arguments people who don't understand how to use built in features on digital cameras. Its not Nikons fault for making the wrong interface, its your fault for not learning anything about a product you just bought.

I don't need my hand held when I buy a product. I'm guessing you do?

My rule is to always buy the best tool for the job. I don't care if Apple, or Microsoft, or Dell or whoever makes it. I could care less about brands.

Back then was no different for me. What was better? My Windows Mobile? Or the first iPhone? At the time. It was the Windows Mobile.

Apple didn't step it up till the 3G/3GS. Thats when the iPhone started to be awesome.
 
Last edited:
One thing THAT phone had going for it around here was I could actually catch a signal off it in my yard, unlike with all my iPhones.

Thats what I don't understand, my work phone, iPhone4S, gets very bad signal where I live.

Where as my cheap samsung replienish Android phone, and my new Galaxy S3, get great signal.

Though that doesn't mean much, there are places where my Android's get terrible service, and the iPhone does great.
 
Thats what I don't understand, my work phone, iPhone4S, gets very bad signal where I live.

Where as my cheap samsung replienish Android phone, and my new Galaxy S3, get great signal.

Though that doesn't mean much, there are places where my Android's get terrible service, and the iPhone does great.

Its because the premium materials used probably. Plastic is where its at!
 
Its because the premium materials used probably. Plastic is where its at!

Yeah, I don't care weather a phone is made out of metal or plastic.

Good quality plastic lasts a long time.

The iMacG3, the computer that literally saved Apple, is made of plastic, so it must have been crap right? Without that little PLASTIC computer ;) Apple wouldn;'t exist today
 
Yeah, I don't care weather a phone is made out of metal or plastic.

Good quality plastic lasts a long time.

The iMacG3, the computer that literally saved Apple, is made of plastic, so it must have been crap right? Without that little PLASTIC computer ;) Apple wouldn;'t exist today

Also plastic absorbs shock a lot better. Not sure if its just coincidence but my Galaxy Note has been dropped over 30 times and my sisters iPhone 4s cracked around the 5th drop
 
My Windows Mobile phone had

MMS ( iPhone didn't have that )
GPS ( iPhone didn't have that )
Copy N Paste ( iPhone didn't have that )
3rd Party Apps ( the iPhone Didn't Have that )
3G ( iPhone didn't have that ).
Better battery life
Better screen.

How do people not understand that the original iPhone was pretty much crap?

I guess it depends how you define "crap". In this context, I'd say it's about popularity, and the fact is the first iPhone was very popular. Apple had sold its millionth original iPhone by 75 days after release, and eventually sold more than 6 million. The fact that it sold so well in spite of the shortcomings you correctly point out, is just more evidence of how successful the basic design and concepts were.
 
I guess it depends how you define "crap".

In terms of electronics, I define crap as something that can't do the job I need it to, in the iPhones case. It couldn't do what I needed it to. And it was expensive for what it was.

I'd say it's about popularity, and the fact is the first iPhone was very popular. Apple had sold its millionth original iPhone by 75 days after release, and eventually sold more than 6 million

It did go on to sell 7 million I think, after a massive price drop. Steven Balmer was right when he said the first model was to expensive. And that 7 million was under RIM's numbers of the time.

The fact that it sold so well in spite of the shortcomings you correctly point out, is just more evidence of how successful the basic design and concepts were.

The fact that it sold so well was the " iMarketing ". So many people loved the iPods, they went right for the Phone.

There were lots of criticisms as well. The girl I was dating at the time had one, the lack of MMS really pissed her off to no end.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=iphone

That one was just funny, it was written to be funny. But its TRUE in the sense that, the Nokia Feature phone its being compared to was better. ( and cheaper )


It honestly really wasn't until the 3G that Apple really stepped it up and made a great phone.

There really wasn't anything super new about the iPhone concept wise. There were lots of all touch screen phones before.
 
How many people used to browse the internet from their phones before the iPhone? ****, how many people actually owned a smartphone before the iPhone? A few geeks here and there who wouldn't mind using a phone running on steam power.

I presume by "steam power" you didn't mean the hardware. Other smartphones at the time the iPhone first went on sale were almost all 3G and many had GPS. They had Google Maps and TV slinging players. You could even get a WVGA "retina" resolution display in 2007.

As far as users go, I agree that most in the USA were business people, partly because of the cost of data at the time. As far back as 2000 there were business magazine articles about using smartphones in New York City to look up stores on the internet, check email, find Starbucks, and other such apps some people think came later.

Smartphones were in the public awareness, even if most didn't own one. By the early 2000s everyone had heard of a "Palm Pilot" and "Blackberry". Heck, there was even a 2004 movie ("Little Black Book" with Holly Hunter) which dealt with finding info about ex-girlfriends on a guy's Palm smartphone. It even showed people beaming apps between such phones.

By 2006 smartphone sales were ramping up across the world, especially where 3G was being implemented. 80 million people bought one that year. Nokia sold 38 million. RIM sold 6 million. Motorola, 5 million. It was a new hot market, growing by over 40% a year. Windows Mobile was growing fast worldwide. It's why Apple wanted to jump in, after all. The mass market was already prepared with the infrastructure, technology and awareness.

Heck, by 2006 there were articles like this one, "Will the Smartphone Kill the PC?". Sound familiar, from someone else a few years later? Bill Gates even suggested that the OLPC be replaced by a smartphone with keyboard and video options.

2006 was special for another reason: it was the year that everyone was showing off all-touch capacitive concept phones. I've always said that a prime reason Apple jumped the gun six months early and showed off the iPhone in mid January 2007, was to beat whatever would come out at the annual phone show in Barcelona a couple of weeks later. As it turned out, they didn't have to. Everyone else was stuck with legacy issues (as now Apple is with their hardcoded displays).

The upshot is, hundreds of millions of regular people were using smartphones at the time the iPhone came out.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.