Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 103
  1. #21  
    Well, I'd be sad if you didn't hold mine in higher regard than Paul's. Didn't that guy rave about the Zune?
  2.    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rene Ritchie View Post
    @Surur:

    BTW - Feature check list != functionality. Having everything and being able to do almost nothing with it (or without HTC graft-on extraneous OS layers) is not functionality. While the iPhone is carefully adding features, sometimes piece by piece over time, they do so in an extremely functional manner, as is Apple's trademark.

    Remember, for Apple, the design is functionality.
    iPhones are lovely and amazing I just canít use one. AT&T does not work in my home or office. I actually use Word and Excel regularly on my phone. And, I need a physical keyboard and physical keys (I need to be able to operate my phone without taking it out of my pocket; especially as I walk to work in the rain or drive in my car on the weekends).

    But, youíre right. Microsoft is the least sexy least stable least user friendly operating system out there. And, for most users, the iPhone or the Blackberry is a revelation. However, for a long time PDA power user like me and many others on this site, not so much. While I would give almost anything for the stability of the Blackberry or the iPhone, I draw the line at carrying 2 or more devices because the Blackberry or iPhone falls short of my needs.

    Microsoft could learn a lot from RIM and Apple. The lesson being control the hardware; rule the world. But, antitrust woes seem to have left Microsoft leery of this approach.

    Well with SDK for the iPhone, a new Blackberry touch screen on the horizon, and Microsoft acquiring the device/software maker Danger, the smartphone shake up is just getting started. Oh, and we donít even know what Android and the FCCís requirement for opening device access on the 700 Mhz spectrum will mean. Looks like I will get the big screen sportiní, keyboard haviní superphone of my dreams someday. But, will it be a Windows phone?
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Features and functionality are synonymous.
    Depends totally on your definition of 'functionality'. Take your pick:

    functionality
    noun

    1. the quality of being suited to serve a purpose well; practicality.

    2. the range of operations that can be run on a computer or other electronic system.


    So WM and iPhone both have good functionality but bad functionality?
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    Depends totally on your definition of 'functionality'. Take your pick:

    functionality
    noun

    1. the quality of being suited to serve a purpose well; practicality.

    2. the range of operations that can be run on a computer or other electronic system.
    Number 2 obviously.

    Surur
  5. #25  
    Number 2 obviously.
    Too many (Austin Powers inspired) jokes...

    If the iPhone is fractal, than is WinMob chaotic, where as complexity increases the break down and ultimate failure of the system itself is achieved?

    Both definitions are , of course, correct. From a user perspective, something which is unusable or impenetrable is the same as that thing not being there at all.

    @cmaeir: if you heard Thurrott's diatribe about WinMob on the last Windows Weekly (horrible, terrible, should be abandoned, etc.) the blog was tame by comparison... Given his love for all things MS, this should make even seasoned pundits (re)consider unconditional support..
    Editor-in-chief, iMore
    Executive producer, Mobile Nations
    Co-host, Iterate, Debug, ZEN & TECH, Ad hoc, MacBreak Weekly
    Cook, grappler, photon wrangler.

    http://www.imore.com
    http://www.mobilenations.com
    http://twitter.com/reneritchie
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rene Ritchie View Post
    Both definitions are , of course, correct. From a user perspective, something which is unusable or impenetrable is the same as that thing not being there at all.
    By your definition, anything which requires a little effort and a learning curve does not work. Thank god surgeons, airplane pilots, learner drivers and your local plumber does not give up so easily.

    Surur
  7. #27  
    By your definition, anything which requires a LOT of effort and a learning curve is fully functional :-)

    My full tower workstation is the perfect smartphone if I clamp it to a car battery, add wheels and an evdo aircard.
  8. #28  
    cmaeir by logic-bar, round 1, 1:28

    Winner and still champion of reason...
    Editor-in-chief, iMore
    Executive producer, Mobile Nations
    Co-host, Iterate, Debug, ZEN & TECH, Ad hoc, MacBreak Weekly
    Cook, grappler, photon wrangler.

    http://www.imore.com
    http://www.mobilenations.com
    http://twitter.com/reneritchie
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by cmaier View Post
    By your definition, anything which requires a LOT of effort and a learning curve is fully functional :-)

    My full tower workstation is the perfect smartphone if I clamp it to a car battery, add wheels and an evdo aircard.
    And my stickshift car is perfectly functional, despite needing a car battery and wheels, and me having to do driving lessons and tests, and Rene not being able to drive it.

    The ability of a random user to use a device tells you very little about its real functionality, except for its functionality to random users.

    Surur
  10. #30  
    Yes, but I am not concerned with "random" users. I am concerned with TYPICAL users. (btw, I drive a stick, too).
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    By your definition, anything which requires a little effort and a learning curve does not work.
    Usability (a much less ambiguous term I think) isn't just about learning curve. Palm started by counting taps, and a damn fine idea it was too (not to say there hasn't been a misstep or two since). Microsoft seem to have started by copying their desktop UI (ironically to reduce the learning curve), which was (IMHO) bloody silly.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by cmaier View Post
    Yes, but I am not concerned with "random" users. I am concerned with TYPICAL users. (btw, I drive a stick, too).
    I assume the typical user will find the device with the level of functionality which work for them. Its a free market after all.

    Surur
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by cmaier View Post
    By your definition, anything which requires a LOT of effort and a learning curve is fully functional :-)
    By surur's definition anything with a lot of features is fully functional. It doesn't matter if they work or not. You want a surgeon that does thoracic, cardiac, ENT and brains but is crap at all of them? Me neither.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    And my stickshift car is perfectly functional, despite needing a car battery and wheels, and me having to do driving lessons and tests, and Rene not being able to drive it.
    Just for fun:

    http://vistasucks.wordpress.com/2007...-vs-microsoft/
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    Lets not start "just for fun" posts which turn ugly.

    Surur
  16. #36  
    Ok, but from the same site a quote from Steve Ballmer that I pretty much agree with:

    'Accessible design is good design'

    Usability isn't just about learning curve, but accessibility is very much a part of it.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    Ok, but from the same site a quote from Steve Ballmer that I pretty much agree with:

    'Accessible design is good design'

    Usability isn't just about learning curve, but accessibility is very much a part of it.
    And the truth is, like with everything in life, the more you put in to it, the more you get out of it.

    Surur
  18. #38  
    You know once we ignore the ambiguity of the the term 'functionality' there probably isn't a lot of disagreement here. There are are lots of features we'd all like and we'd like the experience of using them to be as high as possible. I bet there might even be some agreement that (currently) WM devices are more feature-rich but using the features on an iPhone is a better experience. Your choice at the moment depends on how you balance the two, but the challenges for both Microsoft and Apple are pretty obvious. No?
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    You know once we ignore the ambiguity of the the term 'functionality' there probably isn't a lot of disagreement here. There are are lots of features we'd all like and we'd like the experience of using them to be as high as possible. I bet there might even be some agreement that (currently) WM devices are more feature-rich but using the features on an iPhone is a better experience. Your choice at the moment depends on how you balance the two, but the challenges for both Microsoft and Apple are pretty obvious. No?
    Agreed.

    Surur
  20. #40  
    Good, that's got that sorted then . So this is my plan for how Microsoft do it. Seems to me one of the best liked Microsoft products is the Xbox, a product in which they do the hardware and the OS. How to achieve the same vertical integration and not kill the existing WM market? Simple - buy HTC.
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions