How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

Brenda Ann wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Brenda Ann wrote:
"Kurt" wrote in message
...
I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac.
You only want them to work in a few dozen exchanges, and use a codec that
only other phones of that brand use, so you can't talk to anyone else but
other customers of that company (sort of like Sprint's "Friends and
Family" plan). ?





There was a time that was true. Not so much since about OS X.2.

Truth is that I had a Mac on line at work since '89, and from home since
'84, and with the exception of those who bothered to read the headers in
e-mail, no one ever knew it. I've had my Macs and my PC's talking to each
other the entire time.

As long as the output files are the same format, there's no more
compatibility issue between Mac and Windows than between HP and Dell
printers. And with Solaris and Linux making a showing in the marketplace,
compatibility in general has become largely a non issue.

That's why the ****ing match between the Microsoft and the keepers of
standards is such a concern. Because if MS has their way, their
proprietary formats, will continue to play havoc with compatibility
between platforms that currently play well together using standards
compliant output.

On my Macs, I use only open source software with the exception of one or
two Apple branded programs for document and presentation creation. With
the exception of nicer, more eye catching documents, and presentations
with full animation and stereo sound, none of my colleagues can tell that
I've used a Mac.

On my PC's the only MS software is the OS. Everything else... browser,
IM client, office suite...everything, is open source.

The ONLY time I've ever had a compatibility issue is using MS software.
And that's been true for more than a decade, now.


My biggest problem with Mac (I like the machines, always have) is the
relative lack of software available for them. For instance, I have several
video editing applications, and several internet webcasting applications,
and they cannot be duplicated in Mac. (or at least they could not). I'll
concede that their machines, and to an extent their OS, are very reliable.





The applications...very likely are not duplicated under Mac, no.
Their functionality will be found in other apps, however. Especially in
video and audio editing. Most of them in open source, or at least
standards compliant apps. The challenge is finding them.

There are websites that are dedicated to nothing but video and audio
apps for Macintosh. The names escape me at the moments, but if you do a
websearch you can find thousands of audio, video and webcasting apps for
Mac. Some of which are produced by Apple.

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

On Jul 21, 8:35 pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Kurt" wrote in message

...





In article ,
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Kurt wrote:

Never said they do. People want to buy iPhones and iPods because of the
ease of use and right-on-the-nose product design.

'Right-on-the-nose product design'? What you like and want may be
totally useless to a lot of other people. When i saw that Iphone on TV,
I thought it looked like another useless piece of junk. 'Right on' is
doing what you need, and doing it as easily and cheap as possible. Not
cramming every damn gimmick and stupid idea you can come up with. There
are already complaints about battery life. Don't you even wonder how
much longer it would work without all the crap?

Yes, for you, buy a phone with large numbers and voice only.

I'm a lot older than you and the iPhone does it right for 90% of what
people really want.

Youth market fuels gimmicks. Ringtones reap untold millions.

Do people REALLY want something that is easily broken, lost or stolen that
would pretty much give away their entire life if it fell into the hands of
someone else? And hey, my iPaq does most of what the iPhone does. Besides,
sometimes I want to do more than one thing at a time. For that it takes more
than one device. Cute gimmick, yeah, and young people will buy any gimcrack
that comes out just to be "kewl". That doesn't make it worth what they're
paying for it.

As far as Apple being the be all and end all of gimmickry, I have a very
nice (and reliable) mp3/video player with a 60GB HDD in it that cost me far
less than a similar iPod, and I don't have to deal with proprietary files.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

BAD,

Let see to date I have never used the Camera
on my Motorola RAZR V3 Cellphone -and-
only down loaded on Ring Tone {Tune} :
"Hello Goodbye" -by- The Beattles

Two of the three iPhone owners that I know of
are ready to show everyone their iPhones . . .
but the third one already has a broken LCD
Display Screen. Oops ! They each average
$100 plus a Month in their AT&T Bill just for
the priviledge of saying : Hey Look At My iPhone !

As for me give me something like a "JitterBug"
Cellphone design with Senior Citizens in mind.
http://www.firststreetonline.com/pro...78&PID=1583978
-but- make it comatable with the AT&T Wireless
System.

Back to the Suject of Shortwave Radio :
Currently at 4:50 UTC on 5935 kHz is Pastor Melissa $cott
keeping the $pirit of Dr Gene $cott alive -by- Teaching and
Preaching the BIBLE Word for Word -If- You see Her on
TV She has taken to wearing the Gene $cott "Look" right
down to the Shoes :o) = http://www.drgenescott.org/
Has Her own website WWW . Pastor Melissa $cott . Com
PMS = http://www.pastormelissascott.com/
WWCR =
Say "PMS" is that a recurring Prophecy ?
Yes it is "That Time* of the Month Again . . .
.. . . . . . . When We Ask For Money !" :o)
* Hell It Is Always Time To Ask For Money !

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

On Jul 21, 9:42 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
RHF wrote:
On Jul 21, 5:14 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Brenda Ann wrote:
"Kurt" wrote in message
...
I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac.
You only want them to work in a few dozen exchanges, and use a codec that
only other phones of that brand use, so you can't talk to anyone else but
other customers of that company (sort of like Sprint's "Friends and Family"
plan). ?
There was a time that was true. Not so much since about OS X.2.

Truth is that I had a Mac on line at work since '89, and from home
since '84, and with the exception of those who bothered to read the
headers in e-mail, no one ever knew it. I've had my Macs and my PC's
talking to each other the entire time.

As long as the output files are the same format, there's no more
compatibility issue between Mac and Windows than between HP and Dell
printers. And with Solaris and Linux making a showing in the
marketplace, compatibility in general has become largely a non issue.

That's why the ****ing match between the Microsoft and the keepers of
standards is such a concern. Because if MS has their way, their
proprietary formats, will continue to play havoc with compatibility
between platforms that currently play well together using standards
compliant output.

On my Macs, I use only open source software with the exception of one
or two Apple branded programs for document and presentation creation.
With the exception of nicer, more eye catching documents, and
presentations with full animation and stereo sound, none of my
colleagues can tell that I've used a Mac.

On my PC's the only MS software is the OS. Everything else...
browser, IM client, office suite...everything, is open source.

The ONLY time I've ever had a compatibility issue is using MS
software. And that's been true for more than a decade, now.

DPM - I would suspect that you are right most of my
PC related problems have come from MicroSoft (MS)
Software related issues. ~ RHF

Didn't Wal*Mart offer some PC that had a Linux OS
with some of there store brand Computer Systems
for a while ? =http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...2125057,00.htm

Yeah, they did for awhile. And Lindows, IIRC. Even a basic machine to
which you could bring your own O/S.

They didn't sell well.

Truth is, that there are two things that play heavily against non-MS
systems, today. There is the FUD spread by MS itself. The shadow of
lawsuits against users of Linux, and other non-MS O/S's. The huge mass
of mis and disinformation about MS compatibility, and the refusal of
many network sysadmins to even consider non-MS product on their
networks. And the built in compatibility restraints that MS builds into
their code. Especially to drive upgrades to more recent product at end
user cost, despite the fact that the end user's product is, in fact,
perfectly serviceable. MS turns off functionality when they want to
force an upgrade. Something I've had first had dealings with. Something
I also forced MS to turn back on with some very loud and very public
complaints.

Then there is the fact that Linux other systems are not quite user
friendly. Not that Windows is any prize, but it's familiar. The Devil
you know, and all that. As Linux becomes more user friendly, market
share will increase. This is what's driving the shadow of lawsuits and
the tribute payments MS has extracted from Novell and other purveyors of
Linux.

They've made similar noise against Apple for years. And even as
recently as a year and a half ago, threatened to pull the Mac division
from their catalog.

So, alternative systems are not selling well. And as they make
inroads, you can watch Redmond play different and more aggressive games
to spread FUD about non MS product.

None of it's true.

But if you afraid to believe, you don't ever take the step.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

FUD = Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt a Sales or Marketing
Strategy of disseminating Negative (and vague) Information
on a Competitor's Product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear%2C...inty_and_doubt

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

In article ,
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:




For you I would have to buy the "Braying Jackass" ringtone. OTOH,

Troll plonk.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

Kurt wrote:

In article ,
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:



For you I would have to buy the "Braying Jackass" ringtone. OTOH,

Troll plonk.


Yes, you are a troll. Goodbye.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

At 22 Jul 2007 12:35:43 +0900 Brenda Ann wrote:

Do people REALLY want something that is easily broken, lost or stolen
that would pretty much give away their entire life if it fell into the
hands of someone else?

No, but many of us do want an all-in-one device, rather than schlep
separate phones, PDAa, cameras, etc.

I use a PPC phone, and my data's password protected. Not a perfect
failsafe against loss, but I'm not exactly James Bond keeping Her
Majesty's Secrets out of the hands of SPECTRE either...

And hey, my iPaq does most of what the iPhone does.


So you pick on iPhone buyers for wanting an all-in-one device while using
a competitive all-in-one? You might as well make fun of Coke drinkers
for downing wasted empty calories, then say "and I prefer Pepsi anyway!"


Besides,
sometimes I want to do more than one thing at a time. For that it takes
more
than one device.

Depends on how well designed the device is- theoretically I could shoot
pictures on my PPC phone while talking on the phone (with my bluetooth
headet) but I haven't actually needed to.

Cute gimmick, yeah, and young people will buy any gimcrack
that comes out just to be "kewl". That doesn't make it worth what
they're
paying for it.

I think the iPhone is overpriced personally, but I don't condemn the
concept because of it, just as I think Lexus' cars are overpriced as well
but don't condemn all automobiles because of it.


As far as Apple being the be all and end all of gimmickry, I have a
very
nice (and reliable) mp3/video player with a 60GB HDD in it that cost me
far
less than a similar iPod,

To be fair, you use a player that didn't exist before the iPod proved it
market-viable. The MP3 player market was floundering in a sea of akward
to use flash-memory players (like my Rio 500) that were battling each
other on cost vs. capacity. It took Apple to say "people will pay more
for a device with a large, easy to read screen and a huge capacity." And
they were right.

And not to pick on the Apple faithful, but can we cut this hooey about
"perfect design" and "ergonomics?" The iPods' menus are just as idiotic,
confusing and non-intuitive as ever other MP3 player out there- the
difference was an easy-to-read multiline display that could indicate
where in the menu system you were. My Rio 500's menuing system was no
easier or harder to understand than my Nano's, it was just harder to
navigate through it a one-line, grey, pocket-calculator-style, LCD panel.

and I don't have to deal with proprietary files.

Another iPod basher that apparently has never actually used one: iPod
owners do not "have to deal with proprietary files." I have several MP3
players lying around, including an iPod Nano. The iPod doesn't use
"proprietary files"- it plays MP3s I drag to it's drive letter just like
all of my other MP3 players. (Yes, Apple fans, I know I'm missing out on
the whole "iTunes experience"- sue me. I've used computers since before
the GUI, and MP3 players since before the iPod and I don't do "playlists"
and "media syncing"- I drag albums to my player and play them in their
entirety.) Having said that, iPods CAN use non-MP3 .aiff files, but
they're no more (or less) proprietary than the Microsoft .wma files many
players, including yours, probably, can play as well. Like .wma, they
offer better sound quality in a smaller file, but also like .wma, they
cause compatiblity issues since all players can't play them, forcing many
of us to stick with (inferior) MP3 files.





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.

Do away with GPS location reporting.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, US author,
diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)
--
DaveC

This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

At 21 Jul 2007 19:40:38 -0700 Kurt wrote:

Bottom line - People want products that work for them. Period.
Mac delivers, like them or not.


Yet Macs have been around for 20 years and still only have a 5% market
share- clearly they "deliver" something those 5% want, but not something
"everyone" wants.

In the iPhone's case, the potential market is fairly large, but not the
entire cellphone market, like our resident troll "none" believes, simply
because the entire cellphone market is not interested in smartphones,
regardless of how "smart" the phone is. Many people simply won't trade a
physical 12-key phone dialpad for access to Youtube or Google, period.

I'm not in that category obviously, nor are you, but the VAST majority of
people simply are. Those people, even if they were clamoring for an MP3
phone, would likely prefer a ROKR to an iPhone!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

On Jul 22, 9:12 am, DaveC wrote:
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.

- Do away with GPS location reporting.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, US author,
diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)
--
DaveC

This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group

DC,

No Problem - You Already Have An Alien Implant That
Allows Us To Track You 24/7 Throughout the Gallaxy.

we are here and we are watching you ~ RHF The Grey

How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
 

In article 346324481020070722181912elecconnec@AmericaOnLine. com,
Todd Allcock wrote:

At 21 Jul 2007 19:40:38 -0700 Kurt wrote:

Bottom line - People want products that work for them. Period.
Mac delivers, like them or not.


Yet Macs have been around for 20 years and still only have a 5% market
share- clearly they "deliver" something those 5% want, but not something
"everyone" wants.

Haven't me from running a good-sized design advertising design studio.
Never got what everyone else liked about PCs (and forget the "PCS are
cheaper" excuse - you pay more in time and virus prevention later).
Use Virtual PC about once a week to test on IE browser and access a
couple ActiveX powered control panels.

The masses generally were led to believe that Macs weren't compatible
with what they do and that software was extremely limited.
Comfort level, too. Some folks loved Windows 98.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"