Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 278910111213 LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 251
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    So why do they always come out head and shoulders above other Oses for customer satisfaction (note I don't own or use any apple products besides a classic)?

    We have some good interesting conversation here but the rather childish and naive outlook a lot of people bring to the table about Apple and it's products is disappointing; and saying that Apple's success is down to solely marketing and nice looking products is childish and naive.
    Satisfaction rate is always high with any apple products, its pretty shallow really, who doesn't like to show off their pretty products? Even if its not that easy to use, or doesn't do as much as they want it to. Not to mentioned the apple fans are not specially known for being critic to anything apple. They pretty much take whatever apple said as 100% truth. pretty sad.

    It is what it is, as a former macbook, mac mini owner, I'm sure i have more base to say what I said.

    Its marketing, its looks. Nothing more.

    Is MacOSX beautiful? yes, is it as useful as windows? obviously not.
    Is iPhone beautiful? yes, is it easier to use than android or pre? no.
    Is macbook beautiful? yes, is it really high quality? no, everything inside are average.
    Is iWorks pretty? absolutely, is it able to replace MS office? not a chance.
    Is iTunes nice looking? sure, is it good? not on windows, its a piece of bloated crap on windows.

    so why has apple been so successful? they make sure they pick highest quality hardwares for the shell of their products, and they lead users to believe what they give them is the best. That, is looks, is marketing.

    Its really simple.
  2. #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by cgk View Post
    so why do they always come out head and shoulders above other oses for customer satisfaction (note i don't own or use any apple products besides a classic)?

    We have some good interesting conversation here but the rather childish and naive outlook a lot of people bring to the table about apple and it's products is disappointing; and saying that apple's success is down to solely marketing and nice looking products is childish and naive.
    +50000000
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    It is what it is, as a former macbook, mac mini owner, I'm sure i have more base to say what I said.

    Its marketing, its looks. Nothing more.

    Is MacOSX beautiful? yes, is it as useful as windows? obviously not.
    Is iPhone beautiful? yes, is it easier to use than android or pre? no.
    Is macbook beautiful? yes, is it really high quality? no, everything inside are average.
    Is iWorks pretty? absolutely, is it able to replace MS office? not a chance.
    Is iTunes nice looking? sure, is it good? not on windows, its a piece of bloated crap on windows.

    so why has apple been so successful? they make sure they pick highest quality hardwares for the shell of their products, and they lead users to believe what they give them is the best. That, is looks, is marketing.

    Its really simple.
    I love how the entire Apple user base is composed of simpletons who are "lead to believe" things despite happening to be some of the most prominent artists, designers, tech luminaries, and all around smartest people we know.
  4. #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    I love how the entire Apple user base is composed of simpletons who are "lead to believe" things despite happening to be some of the most prominent artists, designers, tech luminaries, and all around smartest people we know.
    exactly, ppl in the looks industry, likes pretty looks, whats new?
  5. #225  
    Popcorn please...
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    ...
    We have some good interesting conversation here but the rather childish and naive outlook a lot of people bring to the table about Apple and it's products is disappointing; and saying that Apple's success is down to solely marketing and nice looking products is childish and naive.
    Probably worth noting that it's an equally c&n outlook that "my device was the first, because your device didn't do it the same, therefore it doesn't count".

    As a matter of fact, I'd have to cautiously agree that the very fact that (some) users of the device think Apple did it first speaks to exactly what is being talked about. They've been "marketed" into believing that...
  7. #227  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Probably worth noting that it's an equally c&n outlook that "my device was the first, because your device didn't do it the same, therefore it doesn't count".

    As a matter of fact, I'd have to cautiously agree that the very fact that (some) users of the device think Apple did it first speaks to exactly what is being talked about. They've been "marketed" into believing that...
    They do a wonderful job of marketing. Multitasking? Apple users didn't care about it until Jobs intro'd it as magical. Next thing you know Apple users are touting multitasking as if they were the first to do it.

    Apple tablet? Magical & revolutionary. Let some tell the story, Apple was the first to do it. Again, market the product correctly and you frame the story to masses. Apple frames the story and some among the great unwashed and Apple users except the story.
    Are you trying to hurt me?
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    I love how the entire Apple user base is composed of simpletons who are "lead to believe" things despite happening to be some of the most prominent artists, designers, tech luminaries, and all around smartest people we know.
    Hmmmm. Smartest people we know. Hmmmm. If you say so.
    Are you trying to hurt me?
  9. #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by playboy View Post
    Hmmmm. Smartest people we know. Hmmmm. If you say so.
    I'd agree with him, some of the smartest people I know carry an iPhone.

    Some of the smartest people I know carry an Android phone, some carry a feature phone, some even don't carry a phone at all. I even know some smart folks that carry WebOS devices.

    By the same token, some of the stupidest people I know carry an iPhone. Some carry a feature phone, some even don't carry a phone at all (I don't know any stupid people that carry a WebOS device, but I'm picky about the Pre owners I run with...)

    In short, the phone you carry has nothing to do with how bright you are. Marketing may convince you otherwise, but that's just ... well ... marketing.
  10. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #230  
    First...its rather ridiculous to assume that someone who dares to suggest a good thing about Apple and dares to speak other than positively about Palm must be an Apple enthusiast who are "users" of Apples devices.

    Second...the notion that Apple created the first mass marketed Touch, and by that I mean physically touching, device is not a false idea. Technically, the LG PRADA likely lays claim to it in the dumbphone category however it was hardly something you could consider as being mass marketed. The ability to use an OS successfully at times in ways that were not the intent is not the same thing as having a device with that purpose. Even as what could be most accurately called a PocketPC/WinMo fan boy, it would be laughable for me to honestly suggest that WinMo was a Touch focused phone in the sense I'm speaking about simply because it was possible to pluck around with your fingers at times to get it to work.

    The iPhone, unquestionably, ushered in the modern era of smart phones. That's not an argument. Look at every major competitor from that point forward.

    Microsoft? Hardware companies like HTC went out of their way to make WinMo skinned to be more finger friendly, and MS itself tried to improve touch input with 6.5.

    Palm? Their previous keyboard/stylus focused OS died, and from it emerged a touch focused operating system and structure.

    Symbian? Again, moved to creating a physical touch focused OS.

    Google? Came in riding that same wave of the new generation of user interface.

    Blackberry is the closet at trying to stay away from the new style completely, and even they have moved towards it fully for some phones or partially in others.

    Was it some revolution jump? There's an argument there, but I could see the notion behind saying "no". Going from a screen and OS that's focus and intent was to be used with a stylus but could have some things done well enough by jabbing it with your fingers to one which forgoes the notion of the stylus completely and seeks for extremely accurate and friendly finger input isn't a large stretch. But it was undoubtedly an evolution that has changed the face of what we look at in the phone industry today. Show me even 5 modern smart phones that still have an OS that isn't focused around physical touch input, or requires the inclusion of a Stylus because doing every bit of on screen input with a finger is neigh impossible?

    I don't think Apple routinely comes up with revolutionary ideas...but I do think they are great with evolutionary. The physical touch focused OS was one of those. The app store environment as its experienced with their devices is another. While there are NUMEROUS flaws and faults to iOS and the iPhone, and with Apple, throughout they're time the suggestion that anytime someone gives them some credit or praise that it must be because of "marketing" (because how possibly could someone see it differently than you) is as arrogant and smug as many claim the Apple fanatics to be. Indeed, this discussion has done nothing but remind me that the Palm loyalists of the late 90's and early 00's were very similar in attitude towards to the Apple loyalists now.

    Technology is always an endeavor where people are borrowing, consciously or unconsciously, various ideas or thoughts from others. It’s always adapting to what’s there now, or trying to improve upon it, or alter it in such a way that it seems a wholly new entity. Apple does it, Microsoft done it, Palm has done it in the past and in the present. The ridiculous tangent that has spawned due to people needing to rattle sabers over technicalities because someone dared to suggest that Palm came with their phone two years after Apple is just beyond common sense. Perhaps the person honestly thought not palm phone came before then. Perhaps instead he was simply meaning with regards to the current style of this cycle of smart phones. Perhaps he thinks the Pre is actually an iPhone that looks different. Who knows. But there’s nothing about that comment that needs to raise the defensive hackles where one must utterly put all guns on the man for some defense of your favorite platforms imaginary internet honor.

    And third…and I fully admit it flies in the face of my previous point but hey, I had to mention it…Palm didn’t create the first smartphone, Handspring did :P

    This would all possibly be a wonderful conversation…but probably not apt for this thread. Why not instead of accusing people of being iPhone users or apple fan boys or other such notions, we all…myself included…get back to the actual topic?
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    ...
    The iPhone, unquestionably, ushered in the modern era of smart phones. That's not an argument. Look at every major competitor from that point forward.
    ...
    Simply wrong.
  12. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #232  
    I'm excited by the notion of the Palm Pad. I think out of all the various mobile OS's, the one that has struck me as most tablet ready and friendly has been WebOS. That doesn't mean it doesn't need tweaks for a Tablet, but the general feel of it I believe works. I would absolutely love the ability to flick up two cards in landscape mode, allowing two applications to be running simultaneously on the screen. I think this could potentially be a "killer" feature for a Tablet, as multi-tasking in a linear fashion is the primary method we have available now. The ability to theoritically watch a youtube video while chatting with someone...or type up a document while viewing a wiki article....or sending an email of directions to someone while looking at the Google Maps...would be spectacular.

    With the theory that WebOS apps run continuously, hopefully it would not be that difficult to create within the OS.

    The leak makes me excited, specifically with regards to the two sizes. Currently I am at a crossroads, liking the screen real estate of the iPad but likely the lighter weight and easier carrying around of the Tab. It's been said the iPad is a stationary device while the Tab is more "mobile". IE you sit on a couch, a chair, at a desk, etc with an iPad where as the tab is more realistic for on the go usage. Giving two tablet sizes helps hit the mark for various people.

    For example, I may be apt to do a Pre and a 10" pad...with my Pre as my mobile device where as the Pad acting more as a laptop-esque role. However, give me a 7" tablet with bluetooth capabilities and I may be inclined to use it as my singular device if I'm part of a lifestyle where I'd routinely be carrying something that the tablet would travel in anyways.

    My hope is that scale up some additional gestures, and potential uses for the gesture area. The use of the "dead space" is one of the things I like greatly about Palm and hope they continue to push.

    The leaks that have been coming out are promising, and I think most of all are refreshing as it gives some air of certainty that what is coming on the 9th is unlikely to be a dud which is how I felt with the CES announcement of the Pre+ and later with the Pre 2.
  13. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Simply wrong.
    So can you pin point a more specific point in time when the hardware and OS design of major smartphone makers shifted from stylus focused screen input to physical touch focused screen input that dominates the market today?
  14. #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    ...
    And third…and I fully admit it flies in the face of my previous point but hey, I had to mention it…Palm didn’t create the first smartphone, Handspring did :P
    ...
    Interesting, but confusing ponit.
    The folks that founded Palm branched off and created Handspring, which was later bought by Palm. So, did "Palm" do it, or did the company that was Handspring, is now Palm, which is now part of HP, do it?

    But, even that brings up another point. Handspring's device wasn't the first.
  15. #235  
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    So can you pin point a more specific point in time when the hardware and OS design of major smartphone makers shifted from stylus focused screen input to physical touch focused screen input that dominates the market today?
    Nope.
    But, I don't buy the notion that using one's finger instead of a stylus is what defines a smartphone.
  16. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #236  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Interesting, but confusing ponit.
    The folks that founded Palm branched off and created Handspring, which was later bought by Palm. So, did "Palm" do it, or did the company that was Handspring, is now Palm, which is no part of HP, do it?
    Well, the difference between the current situation of Palm being a part of HP is that...PALM is a part of HP. Individuals at Palm didn't defect, while the "Palm" company still existed there.

    While some memebers of Palm split off to form Handspring, it was a wholey seperate and competing company existing in a space as a competitor...not as a combined entity...with Palm. At the point that Palm purchased Handspring and the Treo became theirs, those treo's from then forward were Palm's. I don't think you can rightfully lay claim as their own creation what the other company did.

    Semantics I know ,but the last part was more of a tongue in cheek type of thing. During the years where Palm, Handspring, and Sony were your major PalmOS vendors I was a Handspring fan. (As much as I was able to be a fan of PalmOS being a PPC ******)

    But, even that brings up another point. Handspring's device wasn't the first.
    ??? Que ???

    Not the first "smartphone"? Or not the first Palm smartphone? If the latter...you're not talking the VII are you?
  17. #237  
    can you guys take your argument to another thread? Or offline? Once again, you've veared off topic....
  18. #238  
    This repeat of the 'Apple invented everthing' argument is completely off topic. Nothing to do with the Engadget artcle. Boring!! There must be six other threads on the subject.
  19. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Nope.
    But, I don't buy the notion that using one's finger instead of a stylus is what defines a smartphone.
    I didn't say it defined the smartphone. I'm stating it defines the largest and most influencial shift in the current generation of smartphones. Input method is instrumental to design of both hardware and software. To me, the largest design difference between the early Treo's, WinMo Phone Edition phones, and even Blackberry's compared to today's smartphones is the specific input focus of all those OS's.

    Sure, things like RAM, resolutions, and processors change. But those change monthly almost. However, the early/mid 2000's phones compared to the late 00's / early 10's are marked by their input method. For half a decade it seemed, smartphone OS's were focused on either stylus, keyboard, or a mix as their MAIN intended interface options. This was consistant, despite all the changing internals. For the last 4+ years the move has been significantly, across the board, to move to a finger based input system and OS.

    To me, that's the major truly evolutionary step depicting the original generation of smart phones comparitive to this current generation. If you think there's another, I'd be happy to hear it. I could very well be wrong. But nothing sticks out to me quite like that when looking at the old O2's and Treo's and i720's compared to the HD7's, the Pre's, and the Captivates of the world.
  20. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #240  
    Yep yep, my fault. The last few posts actually became interesting discussion rather than arguing...which made me more apt to continue the off topic. My apologizes, I'll refrain from any other in this thread.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions