Wow, Digital Skunk seems to be quite the expert on what should have been in Apple products. Isn't the "locked into a better network" thing a little old? It's not like Apple waltzed down to the local Network-Mart and picked AT&T on a whim.
The iPhone is what it is, and maybe is not your ideal cell phone (an ideal which probably no single manufacturer offers currently, since you complain about every missing feature), but it is far from a poor choice of phone. It is better than just about every Motorola, with their menus from hell, etc.
I find it ironic that in a thread that has turned into decrying the sad state of shock journalism, you yourself are perpetuating that attitude by stating absolutes about how "bad" Apple's products are. That's what turns forums into the "muckraking, sleazy" places into which they often degenerate.
And you yourself are doing the same thing. In none of my statements did I ever mention that Apple's products were bad, or that I am an expert on anything other than what I think Apple should have done.
I am sorry that you got that impression, but since you're new here, just remember that just because someone is dissatisfied with the choices Apple makes, doesn't make them a complete hater of the products that Apple makes.
I think the iPhone has the best UI which I stated and you seems to over look to support your own negative twist on my comments.... but the missing features (the ones that I never mentioned but you stated that I complained about EVERY missing feature... to once again support your negative slant) make it a hard choice for users that may need to do that one thing or group of things.
The same goes for the Air, which has been stated over and over again.... but you're new here and haven't been around the forums as much, so I will let that slide.
So, given what I have said and what I write here, I am NOT perpetuating shock journalism or any journalism whatsoever and it's quite and insult to think that my opinion could be taken for journalism.... that kinda shows the lack of knowledge of the subject.... I am merely stating my opinion and as most users here do back it up with facts.
I still stand by my statement as the iPhone being a poor choice for a phone... I should add... as far as smart-phones go. Granted... Windows Mobile and Symbian have their downfalls, but they still manage to do more than the iPhone even with the added headaches of the OS.
As a member of the "real" press, I appreciate that at least some people are aware that there are usually big differences between working at a national newspaper and sitting around the house in your pajamas and blogging. (Or even doing stand-ups in front of fires for your local evening "news" broadcast, for that matter.) Unfortunately this lack of distinction among many readers/viewers, especially the younger ones, is causing some "real" news outlets to lower their standards to better compete.
Exactly and your welcome. I don't mind it when people say bad things about the media, or journalism and journalists... it's when they get confused and bunch all of them together to make a general distinction. These online blogs and magazines aren't journalism venues, albeit the uninformed and younger crowd use them as such. Any real journalist wouldn't use shock to promote a story that wasn't very shocking. If Woz bashed the iPhone so what, it's not big news, but they have to do something to make a geeky computer raised crowd read a otherwise boring story which those linked are.
As far as real news outlets lowering their standards..... AMEN... it's happening and it's sad. The photogs and head honchos at my paper were shocked to know that Youtube had better content than their site. Will they raise the bar...? Nope, to costly, and the penny pinchers don't care about anything other than making money.
