Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mossberg burns the instinct

P

pomus

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 17, 2007
66
0
For those of who still have doubts in which is better between the iPhone 3G or the Instinct, check out this video


the link is here

... Now that's a nasty Mossberg Burn! ;)

P.S. For those who think that 130 is a better value for the instinct, don't be fooled. 8gb cards are approx 70 bucks, so that still brings it to par with the 8gb iPhone 3G.
 
Why isn't it linking to allthingsd? Just a bit suspicious of such a long non-descript link. Don't want to be rude, but you might want to make it clear who Brightcove are:
Brightcove Internet TV
"Brightcove is an Internet TV service that provides everything you need to add video to your website. Put Internet video to work for your site with ..." from Google.
 
t0mat0 said:
Why isn't it linking to allthingsd? Just a bit suspicious of such a long non-descript link. Don't want to be rude, but you might want to make it clear who Brightcove are:
Brightcove Internet TV
"Brightcove is an Internet TV service that provides everything you need to add video to your website. Put Internet video to work for your site with ..." from Google.
Click to expand...

when you click on the "get link" option on the video's player, the brightcove URL is what it gives you. Nothing fishy going on, they probably just help provide bandwidth or are otherwise some sort of sponsor, so they link that way.
 
t0mat0 said:
http://video.allthingsd.com/?bcpid=716692140&bclid=742940077&bctid=1601306878 is what it links through to, which you can at least see is from the allthingsd.com website. Nothing alarming, it's just it pays to be cautious :)

Lol - nice link. Will post more on another thread, but thanks for the link...
Click to expand...

get a mac, then you won't have to worry about random web links being a threat to your soul, since it won't do something stupid like let a virus run on your system ;)


oh no I didn't go there.....
 
No wifi. And yes. I use both. And after using a MacBook for a while, i'm having to stop trying to double finger scroll, and get back to Alt-D over Apple-L...
 
I really like this review...or the lack thereof...all this guy did was pretty much state the obvious = iPhone is better = but there was more information in this reviews about the iPhone than the reviewed phone...oh well - no Phone killer.
 
What´s with the kitchen backdrop? Did his wife throw a Tupperware party in the living room, or something? Umm, I´m, er, Walt, umm, Mossberg… I´m in my, er, ummm, kitchen, doing, um, a video review of, um, er…
 
Apple is paying mossberg to talk about the competition and to put garage band loops in his videos eheh
 
Masquerade said:
Apple is paying mossberg to talk about the competition and to put garage band loops in his videos eheh
Click to expand...

No. He's likely to have a nice review up on Thursday, when he does his Personal Tech column. Don't diss the man.His ethics policy is up on the site for all to see. No need for defamation/aspersions/libelous comments.

Verbatim, italics/bold added myself

Ethics Statement

Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.

I am not an objective news reporter, and am not responsible for business coverage of technology companies. I am a subjective opinion columnist, a reviewer of consumer technology products and a commentator on technology issues. I don't offer investment advice, or follow the financial progress or stock prices of technology companies. I focus on products and services, not revenues and earnings.

I don't accept any money, free products, or anything else of value, from the companies whose products I cover, or from their public relations or advertising agencies. I also don't accept trips, speaking fees, or product discounts from companies whose products I cover, or from their public relations or advertising agencies. I don't serve as a consultant to any companies, or serve on any corporate boards or advisory boards.

I do occasionally take a free t-shirt from these companies, but my wife hates it when I wear them, as she considers them ugly.

I don't own a single share of stock in any of the companies whose products I cover, or any shares in technology-oriented mutual funds. Because of this, I completely missed the giant run-up in tech stocks a few years back, and looked like an idiot. However, when the tech stocks crashed, I looked like a genius. Neither was true.

I also have a 401K plan and, like many 401K plans, the holdings of the funds it includes are managed without my guidance. My plan includes no technology-specific funds or indexes, although it might from time to time include technology stocks.

The products I review are typically lent to me by their manufacturers for a few weeks or months. I return any products I am lent for review, except for items of minor value that companies typically don't want back, such as computer mice or inexpensive software. In the case of these items, I either discard them or give them away to charity. For a few years, we gave away these cheaper products to other employees at the Journal, in return for donations of canned foods, which we then gave to food banks. But this was too much of a hassle, so we've stopped doing that.

Companies often visit my office, or invite me to theirs, to brief me on new products, Web sites, or software, before they are released -- usually a few weeks or days ahead of time. I don't review most of these products, and, when I do, I don't always review them favorably. I test every product I review, never basing a review on such a meeting or a press release. If I do decide to review a product, I sometimes negotiate with a company the timing of the review, but never its outcome.[ I sometimes strive to be the first to publish a review, but I never promise a good review in exchange for that timing. When I meet with a company, I ask sharp questions and make sharp comments, as any good journalist does. I frequently warn companies that these exchanges don't constitute advice from me, and may not predict the outcome of any review, or even whether I will write a review.

During my testing, I ask companies a lot of questions about things I encounter. If, in the course of testing a product, I ask a company about a problem I have encountered, and the problem is fixed before the product actually is made available to my readers, I usually don't mention it, because it is irrelevant. My job is to judge the product as it wlll be put into the hands of consumers, even if I am looking at it early.

If I want a product I review for my own use, I buy it, at normal prices, or the Journal does. For instance, my personal and work computers, my digital media players, digital camera, and cell phone, were all purchased this way, as are my Internet service, cell phone service, and cable TV service.

I never coordinate my reviews with our advertising sales staff, and don't solicit or sell ads for the newspaper or Web site, or sponsorships for the D conference. The Journal's separate ad sales staff does this. Advertisers and companies whose products I cover don't get to see my columns in advance, or to select or reject column topics. Similarly, sponsors of the D conference don't get to select or reject speakers on the agenda, or to select or preview the questions we ask speakers on stage. We don't charge companies for appearing on stage at D to demo new products, and we don't pay speakers at D.

On many occasions, I have written negative reviews of products from companies that advertise in this newspaper or Web site, or which sponsor the conference, and positive reviews of companies that aren't advertisers or sponsors. There has never been a single instance where any editor or official of the Journal or Dow Jones has complained about this, or tried to change a column to favor an advertiser or potential advertiser.

I make a number of speeches each year, some paid and some unpaid, but I never appear, even for free, at events hosted by companies whose products I cover.

Kara Swisher and I have established a small LLC company whose purpose is to manage payments to the independent contractors, including Kara herself, who work on the All Things Digital web site, and to buy equipment for the site. I receive no payments from this company. The site itself is owned by Dow Jones and Company, of which I am a full time employee.

Beyond these policies, I also abide by the Dow Jones Code of Conduct, which can be found here.
http://www.shareholder.com/dowjones/governance/CG_conduct.cfm
 
Was that a review of the Instinct, or a preview for the iPhone 3G? I seriously can't tell. He said the word "iPhone" more than "Instinct"... No joke.


EDIT:
Hmm... I read the written review. He mentions "iPhone" 30 times, "Instinct" 19 times. I'm glad this isn't my first place to go to for an objective review... :eek:
 
They're much cheaper

pomus said:
For those of who still have doubts in which is better between the iPhone 3G or the Instinct, check out this video


the link is here

... Now that's a nasty Mossberg Burn! ;)

P.S. For those who think that 130 is a better value for the instinct, don't be fooled. 8gb cards are approx 70 bucks, so that still brings it to par with the 8gb iPhone 3G.
Click to expand...

More like $35 each:

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-micro...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1215134974&sr=8-1

It would be a nice feature to be able to swap 8gb cards in as needed, especially because they are so inexpensive these days.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
t0mat0 said:
No. He's likely to have a nice review up on Thursday, when he does his Personal Tech column. Don't diss the man.His ethics policy is up on the site for all to see. No need for defamation/aspersions/libelous comments.

Verbatim, italics/bold added myself

Ethics Statement

...
Click to expand...
Wow that was an excellent Ethics Statement. I actually read the entire thing because it was a good read. He needs to start writing government docs so they won't be so blasted boring.

As far as the video goes ... don't really care about comparing phones to the iPhone. I mean, it doesn't even have multi touch. I know how crappy single touch devices can be. I use one extensively on a daily basis at work. It would be a lot easier to use if multi touch were used. ... Crap, now I've gone and cared about it!
 
QuarterSwede said:
Wow that was an excellent Ethics Statement. I actually read the entire thing because it was a good read. He needs to start writing government docs so they won't be so blasted boring.

As far as the video goes ... don't really care about comparing phones to the iPhone. I mean, it doesn't even have multi touch. I know how crappy single touch devices can be. I use one extensively on a daily basis at work. It would be a lot easier to use if multi touch were used. ... Crap, now I've gone and cared about it!
Click to expand...

I'd agree - hence why I posted it - I think people can initially confuse his simple style as being plain or shallow, but he has depth, and experience, as his written work including even his Ethics statement shows. Yes there are places to get the minutiae, all the details. He has a couple hundred words space in the WSJ to tell it how he sees it. He doesn't hold back, and he gave a decent review of the v1 iPhone when it first came out. Luckily for us he'll be doing the same - his regular article is on the Thursday, so i'm not sure if he'll use that normal timing, or deliver a review a bit earlier (he was 2 days before release last time).

Caring about multi-touch - it ain't a bad thing :D
 
Walt gets fame because he gets Apple products before anyone else.
Walt gets status because he gets meetings with Apple execs and Steve Jobs.

Fame and status get Walt $$$ in terms of getting him speaking engagements, and keeping him employed by WSJ.

There is an unstated quid pro quo. Apple uses Walt, Walt needs to keep Apple happy in order to keep his fame and status.

Walt gets tons from Apple and nothing in his "Ethics Statement" contradicts any of the above.
 
Syrus28 said:
Was that a review of the Instinct, or a preview for the iPhone 3G? I seriously can't tell. He said the word "iPhone" more than "Instinct"... No joke.


EDIT:
Hmm... I read the written review. He mentions "iPhone" 30 times, "Instinct" 19 times. I'm glad this isn't my first place to go to for an objective review... :eek:
Click to expand...

Erm, doesn't he says in his ethics thlig: "I am not an objective news reporter, and am not responsible for business coverage of technology companies. I am a subjective opinion columnist"
 
What's wrong with giving the upcoming 3G iPhone some information? He's informing customers that an upcoming phone will have features and OS superior to the product he's currently testing. His angle is that it is trying to be an iPhone clone, which is fair, and so he's doing a comparison with the upcoming iPhone.

It's kind of obvious from his title: "Samsung’s Instinct Doesn’t Ring True as an iPhone Clone" and 1st line, "The parade of iPhone lookalikes continues." It's just as justified as comparing to the N95 for example. It's also a sense of justice - they're using comparisons with an old model, which is hardly a fair fight...



Anyhow - I think we only have to wait a week to see proper head to heads. Pure hands on usage shown, and head to head stats will show a lot, and in part that was what Mossberg was doing in his article.
A short list of points Mossberg pointed out regarding the iPhone 3G:
v1 iPhone was a Sleek touch-screen 1st gen model
v1 iPhone had beauty, power, and breakthrough software. Which hasn't been really that well replicated by others
v1 iPhone is the old model now - and comparisons to the old model will cause problems. (e.g. Instinct has had 2 weeks of this interim period, and has 1 week left).
3G iPhone "corrects some of the first model’s main weaknesses, wiping out some advantages Sprint hoped the Instinct would have."
3G iPhone base model 8GB handset price lowered to $199
3G iPhone now using 3G and HSDPA (in some form).
3G iPhone now has GPS
3G iPhone now has OTA sync through Exchange/MobileMe
3G iPhone has App Store
3G iPhone has multi-touch
3G iPhone has better (larger, better resolution) screen
3G iPhone doesn't require a mail in rebate.
3G iPhone has much more memory
3G iPhone has wifi - Instinct doesn't - a big negative, as you can't use free wifi then, so all data is through the carrier network...
3G iPhone has a better onscreen keyboard, email system, and web browser

Negative points of 3G iPhone:
Apple has made no mention of any change to the very basic camera*
Apple has made no mention of any change to the situation that it can't capture video*
It has no physical keyboard (Blackberry fans main gripe really). (Note there is word that Jobs has at least looked at making a corporate model with a physical keyboard - he hasn't ruled it out it seems from the articles on the situation (though it didn't seem that way from the prior keynotes).
It's locked to a single carrier, which is putting up its prices.
(Heavier than Instinct)
No removable battery
Has lower battery life talk time (on paper)
Other features missing: " Sprint’s new baby has a few other features that even the latest iPhone omits, such as a built-in service for viewing TV shows and a voice-command system."
No handwriting support.

Whilst it might have been more useful for a comparison chart, that isn't much of an article, hence he basically puts that comparison chart into words in his article.
* Subject to change.

The Instinct plugs its price, speed, GPS capability etc, so Mossberg highlights the 3G iPhone's price, speed, GPS, OTA push sync, Exchange & App Store (which Instinct doesn't have). He notes that it has handwriting support, which the Newton had (but the iPhone v1 doesn't have). He mentions battery life, and removable batteries, noting Apple is weak in that area in a way.

The Instinct has a 2Mpixel cam, just like the old iPhone (we'll see what 3G iPhone has). Why be harsh on Mossberg? If you want asinine anti--Apple reviews, Cnet, John Dvorak from PC Magazine. He does make some points, e.g. "The problem here is that while Apple can play the fashion game as well as any company, there is no evidence that it can play it fast enough" but the majority is abject drivel:
"There is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive. Even in the business where it is a clear pioneer, the personal computer, it had to compete with Microsoft and can only sustain a 5% market share." (the market share being more than that as the latest figures show). "Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone" he says... He's basically a troll for the click through unfortunately.

The review is of the Instinct, and he squares up the Instinct not against the phone that Samsung wants to compare it against
(the old iPhone) but with the actual competition in 7 days time - the 3G iPhone. The press and promotion of the Instinct was compare with the iPhone, so it's bound to get a lot of critical comparisons with the 3G iPhone (and if they do the adverts they have done, and have a site called nowisgood.com which compares the Instinct with the old iPhone, of course they're going to attract comparison.
Mmmm, mail in rebate and Flash based site... Requiring activation at time of purchase...

Seeing as this isn't the iPhone's review, he doesn't have to have an exhaustive list of negatives or positives for the 3G iPhone (Cut & Paste, tethering, expandable memory, SD slot, lack of stylus support, etc etc).
 
I don't think it's a 'burn' - he points out areas where the Instinct has a slight edge over the iPhone 3G - however he correctly points out the top two big problems with the Instinct, the lack of software (No1) and the lack of Wifi (No2).

Software is a _major_ part of the iPhone - it's what turns it from a phone into a portable computer platform. It's no surprise that Apple are making the iPhone 2.0 software available for free to owners of the first iPhone - Apple want as many people as possible to be able to consume software from the AppStore.

Wifi is a must have for any truly multi-purpose data device like the iPhone, allowing you to get the best possible performance when using the device at home, and also allows you to make use of wireless hotspots when on the move. Here in the UK O2 are throwing in access to a hotspot network as part of all their contract packages.

So not a burn - but an explanation of why the Instinct is not an iPhone killer, backed up with good reasoning.

--
BG
 
Badgerguy said:
I don't think it's a 'burn' - he points out areas where the Instinct has a slight edge over the iPhone 3G - however he correctly points out the top two big problems with the Instinct, the lack of software (No1) and the lack of Wifi (No2).

Software is a _major_ part of the iPhone - it's what turns it from a phone into a portable computer platform. It's no surprise that Apple are making the iPhone 2.0 software available for free to owners of the first iPhone - Apple want as many people as possible to be able to consume software from the AppStore.

Wifi is a must have for any truly multi-purpose data device like the iPhone, allowing you to get the best possible performance when using the device at home, and also allows you to make use of wireless hotspots when on the move. Here in the UK O2 are throwing in access to a hotspot network as part of all their contract packages.

So not a burn - but an explanation of why the Instinct is not an iPhone killer, backed up with good reasoning.

--
BG
Click to expand...



I think the use of wii for the 3G iPhone and the v1 iPhone is being underplayed currently. I know in the UK it's about to become a much bigger thing - FON access, BT Openzone access, Cloud access - That's a huge number of places to get wi-fi, and they're in decent commuter hotspots - services stations on the motorway, train stations etc. Which other phone can boast that kind of wireless access coming as part of it's package? It's a huge selling point. And it's not only a selling point to consumers - it's a big thing for enterprise also, if the security is there.

As for software, it's worth bringing up a poster Apple did a while back ;)
(From roughlydrafted (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/09/10/office-wars-3-how-microsoft-got-its-office-monopoly/) , which has consistently good articles on Apple).

To whit, an example from OS X Leopard:
"In the final quarter of last year, Apple brought in $9.6 billion, almost entirely from Mac and iPod hardware. It “only” earned $170 million from sales of Leopard in the final quarter; subsequent retail box OS sales quickly dropped down to $40 million in the next quarter of early 2008. Of course, pulling in those extra millions in software upgrades is a great bonus. However, Apple is not a software vendor; it is only making some extra cash on the side for the OS it develops primarily to sell its new hardware."
iPhone's get the upgrade to 2.0 free, Touch models pay the nominal sum. The app store helps with sales too - it sounds like it's pretty easy to port games to the iPhone. hopefully it isn't going to have the console problem, of only having a few decent titles.
 

Attachments

  • -office-monopoly-files-software-sells-systems.jpg
    -office-monopoly-files-software-sells-systems.jpg
    54.1 KB · Views: 67
Mossberg hit the nail on the head. Its all about software, and the iPhone hands down has the best operating system, third party applications, and update process of any phone in the industry.

These companies have to learn that nowdays software is the biggest part of a product like a phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back