Page 9 of 22 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131419 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 431
Like Tree137Likes
  1. #161  
    The iPhone was did not try to compete with the Palm or Blackberry phones upon release.

    It was a true multi-media phone with an amazing interface.

    It wasn't the advertising that made it a success. Any company can hire the same ad agencies.
    mister2d likes this.
  2. Loiter's Avatar
    Posts
    682 Posts
    Global Posts
    893 Global Posts
    #162  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    I don't think Palm was laughing.

    Click to view quoted image
    I don't see how this has anything to do with what I said.
  3. #163  
    Quote Originally Posted by Loiter View Post
    The first iPhone was a joke compared to the competition.
    ?? And what exactly was the competition? I'm no apple fanguy but there was nothing like it at the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loiter View Post
    However, I strongly disagree with the NYT article in calling webOS a slow, buggy, laggy OS. At least not in 2.x.
    I'm not sure what you consider as acceptable performance but the article was speaking the truth. What the users got with the out-of-the-box touchpad was a slow, buggy, laggy OS. webOS 3.01 that is... (not 2.x as you mention)
  4. #164  
    And you are probably one of the people who repeat, "Apple users think that Apple invented everything!"

    Quote Originally Posted by kalel33 View Post
    I wish you would have put a "seriously" or "JK" after that question to know if you were sincerely asking, because Apple did not create the MP3 player.....far from it. I'm going to answer this as serious: Cowen, Creative, Samsung, Sandisk, iRiver, Sony, and Microsoft. Not to mention all the cheap players that were around. The Ipods were ranked in the lower category of audio quality and the Itunes songs were more compressed than other competitors. The battery didn't last more than 2 years, so you always had to buy a new one(I had two Ipad Nanos). The click dial was excellent but everything else you could find better. I bought the Nanos because I wanted an MP3 player for running that I could get an armband for. [/url]

    Either you don't know or are ignoring what was the state of most mp3 players back then.
  5. Loiter's Avatar
    Posts
    682 Posts
    Global Posts
    893 Global Posts
    #165  
    Quote Originally Posted by laoh View Post
    ?? And what exactly was the competition? I'm no apple fanguy but there was nothing like it at the time.



    I'm not sure what you consider as acceptable performance but the article was speaking the truth. What the users got with the out-of-the-box touchpad was a slow, buggy, laggy OS. webOS 3.01 that is... (not 2.x as you mention)
    1. There are some posts about it. Several Nokia phones (Symbian) and WM phones. The first iPhone lacked (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have the time to google them so I maybe doing some mistake) among others: 3G, MMS, Bluetooth file share (which now may seem redundant but back then was important and even low-end phones had it), video recording, voice dialling, copy-paste etc.

    2. I thought that the article was talking about webOS in general. I agree about 3.0.1. If you read the examples of bad decisions I wrote, getting out the TP with 3.0.1 was one of them.
  6. #166  
    Smartphones before the iPhone:




    And after the iPhone:

    mister2d and SnotBoogie like this.
  7. #167  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    It's pretty clear that the past three years of smartphone competition has been about the most aggressive ever seen in consumer technology. This certainly was not a time to flounder around with laggy software, buggy hardware, carrier problems, delayed product launches, questionable marketing, high product returns, lack of retailer interest, lack of capital, selling the company, tepid product reviews, boardroom distractions, and strategic waffling.

    These are all things that hindered webOS. In short, they didn't do anything right. If you do that then you lose and in a spectacular train-wreck fashion. The problem we are having in this thread is that Palm/HP did so many things wrong that it's hard to pin the blame on any one thing.
    Not quite correct. All of the things you mentioned were true and ALL of them reflected poor management. Period. Knowing when to play a hand and when to hold would have solved almost all of those problems.

    Everyone else had to make decisions to maximize their products effectiveness. It wasn't the engineers or programmers who made those decisions. Apple and Android both had to make compromises to make their offering the best they could be:

    Removable battery or not
    Screen size
    Multitasking or not
    Flash or not
    SD card or not
    Open or closed OS
    Value or premium priced
    Form Factors
    Screen type
    Hard or soft keyboard
    Imaging

    You get the idea. In many of these areas the two current leaders made completely opposite decisions and were still successful. And please don't say it was solely the OS. I had an early Android phone and the first version of the OS was awful. So was much of the early hardware. Many consider to Motorola Droid to be the first decent phone to run the Android OS.

    Here is one more difference: Google didn't quit despite having it share of setbacks. (The original Nexus phone, anyone?) Also, they (Google) were willing to invest the money necessary to grow the brand. Exactly how much have they made on selling the OS despite having invest hundreds of millions in development over the years since about 2007? That is not a knock, but a reflection on their management taking the long view and not freaking out because of not having a long plan.

    HP could have done the same with their vaunted scale and a huge business presence, and their pretensions of being a major-league cloud services provider. But they didn't... again a failure of management.

    Am I missing something?

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  8. kalel33's Avatar
    Posts
    280 Posts
    Global Posts
    281 Global Posts
    #168  
    Quote Originally Posted by nusome4 View Post
    Let's look at the negatives that the MP3 players had back then that the original
    iPod solved when it was released...

    - Flash memory-based players of the era held only about a CD's worth of songs.

    - Hard drive players held far more, but were relatively big, heavy, and they
    sported difficult-to-navigate user interfaces that did not scale well when
    scrolling though thousands of songs.

    - Most portable media players (PMPs) used the pokey USB 1.1 standard to transfer
    music from a host computer to the player, which made the user wait up to five
    minutes to transfer a CD's worth of songs. When moving thousands of songs, the
    transfer time could shoot up to several hours.

    The original iPod solved all of the above problems with a small 1.8" hard drive
    that could hold thousands of songs. A click wheel interface that allowed you to
    navigate through 1000s of songs easily. A firewire interface that was fast
    enough to fill your iPod with 1000s of songs in a reasonable amount of time. In
    addition the iPod was simple to use, very portable and had a long battery life.
    Also, a simple way to get music on the iPod through iTunes and to create
    playlists and burn CDs.

    So, what MP3 player back then offered all of the above that the original iPod
    offered when it was released?
    It amazes me that people want to gloss over details when talking about
    something. People don't care about a bunch of features, what they care about is
    a product that is easy to use and just works.

    That's what the original iPod provided back then, that the other MP3 players of that era did not.
    OK, who had firewire other than the small percentage of people that had Macs....nobody. Let's look at the MP3 market and who was the innovators. Creative had a portable MP3 player a year before Ipod with 6GB of memory, compared with 5GB when Ipod finally came out. Ipod could not do FM radio for years, while that was a given with others. First touch screen MP3? Creative. Creative had equalizers on there players from the beginning. Ipod forced you to use their way of doing things, but that's always been Apples way. First MP3 player that also shown photos? Archos. First one with a dock? Rio. Ipod could only play a few formats where the Rio players could play a lot of formats, including Ogg Vorbis and FLAC. The player’s ability to play back files gaplessly made it an audiophile dream. First MP3 player to put a mobile OS on their player? Creative with Windows Mobile. First video playback in an Mp3 player? iRiver.

    Apple had their own innovation in the click wheel, podcasts, and computer software but that's it. Everything else was taken from others and Apple made it their own, which they did quite well but for a person that really cared about quality of music then they bought other manufacturer's MP3 players. I bought the Nanos because of the armband and the podcasts. Nobody had podcast software at the time for feeds.

    Apple were marketing geniuses. They put a lot of money into commercials and marketing but the reason why someone has to ask if anyone else made Mp3 players is because nobody researches and the smaller companies didn't have the money to market like Apple did. For a bunch of WebOS fans I'm surprise some just assume that Apple created everything and was the best.
    C-Note, k4ever, ka1 and 1 others like this.
  9. #169  
    When I got my Sprint Pre, I bought it because it was pretty much the only smartphone that Sprint offered at the time. I didn't think it was buggy or slow. I put the on-screen keyboard patch on it. I had a friend that had the iPhone 3g(s? unsure which one) and he used it and thought it was cool, he thought the onscreen keyboard patch was even more responsive than his iPhone. My girlfriend got the Samsung Moment a few months later and hated it, she has always contended that it was a billion time slower than my Pre, even to this day (she has fought with Sprint for Months trying to get it replaced even now).

    So, in summary. I do not really think that the average user out there really thought that the Pre was so slow and laggy and buggy. I think that for the most part people thought it was pretty cool, but, it was not as "hip" as the iPhone at the time. I also think that it was a billion times more responsive and faster than the Android phones that came shortly thereafter.

    Everyone who used it thought that the email/contacts/synergy (before it was called that) was pretty much the coolest thing ever...
  10. #170  
    Quote Originally Posted by kalel33 View Post
    I wish you would have put a "seriously" or "JK" after that question to know if you were sincerely asking, because Apple did not create the MP3 player.....far from it. I'm going to answer this as serious: Cowen, Creative, Samsung, Sandisk, iRiver, Sony, and Microsoft. Not to mention all the cheap players that were around. The Ipods were ranked in the lower category of audio quality and the Itunes songs were more compressed than other competitors. The battery didn't last more than 2 years, so you always had to buy a new one(I had two Ipad Nanos).

    When I did electronics, I talked many people out of buying an Ipod and buying a Creative Zen, which was a better MP3 player. I never seen one come back returned. What I did see was people that wanted Apple, told how much better another player was, they agreed, but went with Apple anyways.......because it's Apple.

    Quote Originally Posted by finngirl View Post
    And you are probably one of the people who repeat, "Apple users think that Apple invented everything!"

    Either you don't know or are ignoring what was the state of most mp3 players back then.
    I was very much involved in this business back then and the truth lies somewhat between both of you.

    There WERE more capable mp3 players back then but none as sexy as the iPod (so it wasn't just people being 'sheep'). Some of the competition had FM radio built in and could play multiple formats and could do quality voice recording with mic jacks. Things the iPod could not do. I know of some media types who carried them as a backup recording device and actually used them successfully.

    Like most else your choice depended on what was important to you. If you needed the ability to swap out a battery or record, your choice may have been different. A great company redefines and sets consumer expectations and part of their (Apple's) success was being able to do that in this space. That's not an insult, it's a compliment, because you have to have the product and support mix to be able to do that. But it's also a fact.

    (edit: Just saw Kalel33's response and other than the anti-apple tone, he is factually correct. I have no problem with using an innovation if it is a clear improvement for the market as a whole.)

    C
    Last edited by C-Note; 01/04/2012 at 01:47 PM.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
    k4ever likes this.
  11. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #171  
    Whatever happened to Creative? I used to have a creative zen.
  12. #172  
    PCs didn't have IEEE 1394?
  13. #173  
    My first MP3 player was back in 2000 or 2001, this portable CD player that could also play MP3s, called the RioVolt. Next one was the massive hard drive-based Creative Zen Xtra. Then a Toshiba Gigabeat, before I finally gave in and bought an iPod a few years ago. There's just really no comparison in ease of use, accessories, and integration with cars (my iPod resides 24/7 in the center console of my 2011 Charger, plugged into the USB, where it integrates like it was always meant to be there). I tried my best to not be assimilated, spending less money on devices with crappy interfaces, but ... the iPod is a damn fine device, very refined, and as a Mac user, I don't care about the iTunes connection.
    SnotBoogie likes this.
  14. #174  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    PCs didn't have IEEE 1394?
    Sure it was available for PCs, but Firewire was built in to Macs back then. Not to mention it was a year or so after the release of the iPod before it was officially Windows-compatible. Slow as USB was, I'm sure people preferred to be able to bring the MP3 home from the store and just plug it into their PCs.

    At this point, I'm a little confused why the iPod is even a factor in this discussion, we seem to have lost our way
  15. #175  
    Quote Originally Posted by jrstinkfish View Post
    Sure it was available for PCs, but Firewire was built in to Macs back then. Not to mention it was a year or so after the release of the iPod before it was officially Windows-compatible. Slow as USB was, I'm sure people preferred to be able to bring the MP3 home from the store and just plug it into their PCs.

    At this point, I'm a little confused why the iPod is even a factor in this discussion, we seem to have lost our way
    I believe the discussion veered into B b but Apple and a few people decided to share their perspective.
  16. #176  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    The iPhone was did not try to compete with the Palm or Blackberry phones upon release.

    It was a true multi-media phone with an amazing interface.

    It wasn't the advertising that made it a success. Any company can hire the same ad agencies.
    Yes it was competing with Palm's and Blackberry upon release, even if Apple did not want it to or did not say it was. Once it was labeled a smartphone, which Apple never contested, it competed with every device in that category. HP tried to say the TouchPad was not competing with the iPad, so did Amazon with the Fire. Look how far that got them.

    Advertising makes mediocre products instant hits. Look at the Motorola Razr (worst POS on the planet, my wife went through 5 of them before I told her I refused to pay for more) and Motorola Droid. Definitely not stellar devices. Everyone knows about the "There's an app for that" campaign. It started the app count stupidity we are stuck with today. Advertising matters.
  17. #177  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    PCs didn't have IEEE 1394?

    As a general rule, no. I'm not sure any PC other than laptops ever had firewire on the motherboard. Firewire was common for video editing and maybe some data-hungry workstations. Honestly, I think most of the Firewire ports installed on PCs came from that SB Live sound card that had a firewire port (which was surprisingly competitive with dedicated firewire cards). I had Firewire but I've had at least one iteration of every storage interface since 1995, up to and including the Sparq drive.

    USB2 was just good enough, arrived soon enough, and was backwards compatible with 99.9999% of PCs or Macs so most people abandoned firewire.

    Last I heard even Apple is ditching firewire for the new Thunderbolt port.
  18. #178  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    PCs didn't have IEEE 1394?
    Not at first. Apple wanted too much to license it. By the time it was included it was eclipsed by USB.
  19. #179  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post

    Advertising makes mediocre products instant hits. Look at the Motorola Razr (worst POS on the planet, my wife went through 5 of them before I told her I refused to pay for more) and Motorola Droid. Definitely not stellar devices. Everyone knows about the "There's an app for that" campaign. It started the app count stupidity we are stuck with today. Advertising matters.
    With all due respect, only people who don't truly understand advertising, sales and marketing would make this claim.

    Of course advertising matters for exposure, but the product has to deliver.

    No amount of advertising will sell fart flavored grapes!
    SnotBoogie likes this.
  20. #180  
    Quote Originally Posted by jrstinkfish View Post
    My first MP3 player was back in 2000 or 2001, this portable CD player that could also play MP3s, called the RioVolt. Next one was the massive hard drive-based Creative Zen Xtra. Then a Toshiba Gigabeat, before I finally gave in and bought an iPod a few years ago. There's just really no comparison in ease of use, accessories, and integration with cars (my iPod resides 24/7 in the center console of my 2011 Charger, plugged into the USB, where it integrates like it was always meant to be there). I tried my best to not be assimilated, spending less money on devices with crappy interfaces, but ... the iPod is a damn fine device, very refined, and as a Mac user, I don't care about the iTunes connection.
    It was brought up that the iPhone owes it's success to the iPod and iTunes, because it was not a better device or had more apps and features than the other smartphones on the market at the time. That sort of moved into a discussion about the iPod and iTunes, then towards USB vs Firewire. I think we have ran the course on this thread.

    The sad part is the negative stories about the TouchPad and/or webOS get a lot of discussion from the group as people post their biases (for or against), yet the positive ones don't get as much play:

    http://forums.webosnation.com/hp-tou...ack-webos.html
    cobrakon likes this.
Page 9 of 22 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131419 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions