|
| On Jun 28, 5:28 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> There's plenty that do playlists too, in fact almost all of them do.
> Plenty that are just as easy to synch too.
so you can sync w/ your itunes managed music collection? it will auto
sync based on your prefs, load desired playlists, etc? and all w/o
software (as you claim)! amazing. er wait, they do use software? so
why would i want to abandon my ipod for a new random cell+media
system? wouldnt.
> There's XXXX all likely to piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90
> per month against the wall on an iphone just for that.
i like how you copy & paste the same crap. ok, here i go again...
$60/80 is on par w/ what many people are (wait for it) *already
paying*. i pay ~70 bucks for my package, and i dont even get data. and
im in a contract, and have always been in a contract. so, when mine
expires, why *wouldnt* i want to pay only 60/80 in a new contract?
further, $500 isnt that much to some people. i spent $400 in '99 for
my nokia 8800. it didnt do anything, and i loved the hell outta it. so
now i can pay a little more for a mobile computer, *and* it can sync
w/ my itunes? sign me up.
>
> Easy to claim...
yep. it sure is.
>
> Why piss $5/600+ and a 2 year $50/90 per month against the wall
actually, its 60/80, according to the NYT.
> no way to run 3rd party apps,
crazy thing about computers -- updates. its this thing called
"software"...they call it "soft" because it changes. usually does, in
fact.
> no removable battery,
that is lame.
> no sim,
not according to the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business...H
IC.html
> etc etc etc.
what etc etc?
>
>
> See the sales of all those phones with media players and non ipod media players.
youve lost the context. the orig quote was saying that apple's
superior UI is marketworthy -- the proof being that folks prefer ipods
to any other mp3 player. nothing to do w/ phones here, skippy.
>
> Nope.
um, but it is. everyone knows apple does UI best. even developers at
competing companies say so. look it up.
> Useless, sweet XXXX all of the market even bother with it.
popularity and superior product arent always relational. toyoto is far
more popular than lamborghini, but.. well, you get the idea.
>
> Doesnt mean that it ever takes off tho. Look at the Newton.
look at ipod.
> The Mac and Newton clearly arent.
the mac is, and continues to sell well -- remember apple has billions
in the bank, and has had billions in the bank.
the newton. well... youve picked one weak product out of two decades.
congrats.
>
> Plenty of phone can do that, YEARS before the iphone.
oh? what other phones sport a full web browser, standards based,
javascript/ajax apps, etc...? and what other phones support itunes?
cuz see, to me, those things are a requirement of doing what i want
well.
> Nope, plenty have enough of a clue to want that stuff in one device.
oh, i see -- so youve given up your digital camera in favor of your
phone? you dont want a regular cam, w/ good glass & optics, superior
censor quality, image stabilization, etc? interesting. me, ill keep my
regular camera handy, and use my phonecam for taking pictures
of....hmm. let me get back to you on that one.
>
> Wrong with the high end phones and pdas.
which are not the majority of "everyday" phones. thus the label "high
end".
> Pity it doesnt even have a GPS.
you mean user-accessible gps...all cell handset hardware has them as
per the e911 requirement. bet a future version lets you use it. cuz
you know, apple is clever like that.
sm
|
|