| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...e614fe3?hl=en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate, compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number of users. Who said anything about 44Kbit/sec? The bit-rate of my WMA CBR is 20Kbit/sec or less. 1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of at least 16-bit The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16 bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with compression. Okay. 2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of the audio must be the same. Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's no compression happening. Yes it is possible and it is compression. The uncompressed audio is a monaural linear PCM at 44.1-KHz-sample-rate with a 16-bit-resolution -- this audio has a bit-rate of 705.6 kbps. The compressed audio is a monaural CBR WMA at 44.1-KHz-sample-rate with a bit-rate of 20 kbps or less. Where/when is there any change in sample-rate????????? There is definitely a change in bit-rate. However, that is totally different from the sample-rate. Totally. BIT-rate and SAMPLE-rate are two completely different things. In linear PCM audio: BIT-rate = SAMPLE-rate X bit-resolution X number of channels Stereo has two channels. Mono has one channel. 44,100 Hz X 16-bit X 1 channel = 705,600 bps |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article . com,
Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...c79e614fe3?hl= en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
"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). ? |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:58:53 +0900, 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). ? Thx. -- skype:mranep cell:813-610-2978; work:813-386-4500; work2:813-915-1663 Motto: Why face the world myself when my wife's skirt, it is so dark and comfy under it? Proclamation: "A man can have sex with sheep, cows and camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in Nepal; Ok I did so beat me with a Yeti dick. |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article ,
Don Bowey wrote: On 7/20/07 8:27 PM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article . com, Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/4b14d9c79e614fe3?hl = en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. Apple can't and isn't forcing "the phone companies" to do anything. You're an idiot. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. You have a monthly payment plan for minutes of use of your Mac? Is this something they forced you to buy? You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On 7/21/07 9:28 AM, in article
, "Kurt" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: On 7/20/07 8:27 PM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article . com, Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/4b14d9c79e614fe3?hl = en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. Apple can't and isn't forcing "the phone companies" to do anything. You're an idiot. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. You have a monthly payment plan for minutes of use of your Mac? Is this something they forced you to buy? You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. The iPod's success is from Apple having a top-notch product line with good features, and cool looks. And people should not overlook, but often do, iTunes. It is iTunes that makes the iPod easy to use, giving it easy access to their CD and MP3 music regardless of where they buy it. People who don't want an iPod can still use the free iTunes to good advantage. Apple doesn't make anyone do anything. So, what was your point? Don |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article ,
Don Bowey wrote: You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Which is pretty much the definition of putting out a product that the public wants. But, yet, I seem to have feelings that you did not mean this as a positive. |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On Jul 21, 11:14 am, Don Bowey wrote:
On 7/21/07 11:00 AM, in article , "Kurt Ullman" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Which is pretty much the definition of putting out a product that the public wants. But, yet, I seem to have feelings that you did not mean this as a positive. You are reading in something I did not say. The iPhone is off to a great start, but it has no track record at this time. I anticipate that it will be very successful, but we can only guess at it now. From an investor point-of-view, I think the monthly kickback from AT&T that Apple negotiated, is good. From a personal POV I think it sucks, and will likely antagonize Apple supporters. IPhone Buyers and Users -and- Apple Supporters may not be one and the same. ~ RHF |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On Jul 21, 10:24 am, Don Bowey wrote:
On 7/21/07 9:28 AM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: On 7/20/07 8:27 PM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article . com, Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/4b14d9c79e6... = en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. Apple can't and isn't forcing "the phone companies" to do anything. You're an idiot. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. You have a monthly payment plan for minutes of use of your Mac? Is this something they forced you to buy? You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success {?} is due to people wanting {Gotto Have the Latest} a very cool instrument {Newest Bells and Whistles} with good features {of Questionable Utlity}. -RANT- While Senior Citzens like myself with Tired Old Eyes and Big Old Fingers just want a basic CellPhone that we can use without our Glasses like the "JitterBug" . http://www.firststreetonline.com/pro...78&PID=1583978 Why doesn't AT&T, Sprint, Nextel, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc offer a CellPhone designed for Senior Citizens and the Visually Limited-Impaired like the "JitterBug" ? Here is where the ADA Laws should apply and force the Cellphone providers to design and market these Cellphone to Seniors with needs. -end-rant- ~ RHF The iPod's success is from Apple having a top-notch product line with good features, and cool looks. And people should not overlook, but often do, iTunes. It is iTunes that makes the iPod easy to use, giving it easy access to their CD and MP3 music regardless of where they buy it. People who don't want an iPod can still use the free iTunes to good advantage. Apple doesn't make anyone do anything. So, what was your point? Don- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On 7/21/07 12:19 PM, in article
, "RHF" wrote: (snip) Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success {?} is due to people wanting {Gotto Have the Latest} a very cool instrument {Newest Bells and Whistles} with good features {of Questionable Utlity}. -RANT- While Senior Citzens like myself with Tired Old Eyes and Big Old Fingers just want a basic CellPhone that we can use without our Glasses like the "JitterBug" . http://www.firststreetonline.com/pro...678&PID=158397 8 That's as ugly as they get..... Why doesn't AT&T, Sprint, Nextel, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc offer a CellPhone designed for Senior Citizens and the Visually Limited-Impaired like the "JitterBug" ? Here is where the ADA Laws should apply and force the Cellphone providers to design and market these Cellphone to Seniors with needs. -end-rant- ~ RHF (snip) Lots of reasons..... Here's a couple: * We senior citizens aren't perceived as being a large enough market. * We aren't a cohesive group of a same mind. I'm one, but I'd have an iPhone in a minute just cause it is cool, if it weren't for the ridiculous rate structures. |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
On Jul 21, 12:19 pm, RHF wrote:
On Jul 21, 10:24 am, Don Bowey wrote: On 7/21/07 9:28 AM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: On 7/20/07 8:27 PM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article . com, Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/4b14d9c79e6... = en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c... how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. Apple can't and isn't forcing "the phone companies" to do anything. You're an idiot. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. You have a monthly payment plan for minutes of use of your Mac? Is this something they forced you to buy? You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success {?} is due to people wanting {Gotto Have the Latest} a very cool instrument {Newest Bells and Whistles} with good features {of Questionable Utlity}. -RANT- While Senior Citzens like myself with Tired Old Eyes and Big Old Fingers just want a basic CellPhone that we can use without our Glasses like the "JitterBug" .http://www.firststreetonline.com/pro...romotion=86678... Why doesn't AT&T, Sprint, Nextel, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc offer a CellPhone designed for Senior Citizens and the Visually Limited-Impaired like the "JitterBug" ? Here is where the ADA Laws should apply and force the Cellphone providers to design and market these Cellphone to Seniors with needs. -end-rant- ~ RHF The iPod's success is from Apple having a top-notch product line with good features, and cool looks. And people should not overlook, but often do, iTunes. It is iTunes that makes the iPod easy to use, giving it easy access to their CD and MP3 music regardless of where they buy it. People who don't want an iPod can still use the free iTunes to good advantage. Apple doesn't make anyone do anything. So, what was your point? Don- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - - S N I P - RADIUM, The please keep 'your' OT crap! OFF of Rec.Radio.Shortwave * The Theard Goes Where The Thread Goes * That Is The Nature Of NewsGroups - I had to start a new thread because some - jerks decided to post irrelevant nonsense. Relevance in in the Mind of the Poster. Right now since the 'topic' is CellPhones - I makes me wonder what kind of Cellphone and Service Provider others here may have . . . OK starting with me : I have a Motorla RAZR V3 via AT&T {Cingular} Wireless and I do not want any changes to the Cellphone Broadcasting System [.] Keep Posting Your Scientific and Cellphone BS to Rec.Radio.Shortwave and you will see replying to it with what ever comes into my mind and inviting others hear to do the same. However, leave Rec.Radio.Shortwave "Off" your Cross-Posting List and you won't have to deal with me. Now woldn't that be nice. Say Cuhulin do you have a CellPhone ? David I know you must have a Cellphone. Bet-Ya Telamon has a Cellphone. Wondering -if- DX Ace has a Cellphone ? Burr way over in the PI - you got a Cellphone over there ? Hey Back At You "Radium" Wondering . . . You Gotta Cellphone and who is your Service Provider ? IF YOU GOT A CELLPHONE LET RADIUM HEAR ABOUT IT ! I B 'rhf' Listening to my Shortwave Radio with my Cellphone near-by bye bye ~ RHF |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article ,
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. What's even worse is how MS thumbs their nose at making an HTML/CSS compliant browser. All the non-standard workarounds we need to do to get some HTML and much CSS to appear properly in PCIE is ridiculous. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article ,
"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 proprietary stuff will always be an issue (yes, not having DesignMyCloset couyld be an issue for some people). Final Cut Pro is pretty swell for most of the pro world. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article ,
Don Bowey wrote: On 7/21/07 9:28 AM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: On 7/20/07 8:27 PM, in article , "Kurt" wrote: In article . com, Radium wrote: On Jul 19, 12:06 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/4b14d9c79e614fe3?hl = en& : Radium hath wroth: On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c.. . how would u like to change the cell phone industry? I would do what Apple is doing right now. Use their power to force the phone companies to offer (finally) great phones with simple plans that their employees can't screw up or misinform customers about. Apple can't and isn't forcing "the phone companies" to do anything. You're an idiot. I want getting phone service like when I buy a Mac. You have a monthly payment plan for minutes of use of your Mac? Is this something they forced you to buy? You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. The iPod's success is from Apple having a top-notch product line with good features, and cool looks. And people should not overlook, but often do, iTunes. It is iTunes that makes the iPod easy to use, giving it easy access to their CD and MP3 music regardless of where they buy it. People who don't want an iPod can still use the free iTunes to good advantage. Apple doesn't make anyone do anything. So, what was your point? Don Never said they do. People want to buy iPhones and iPods because of the ease of use and right-on-the-nose product design. Then there is the coolness factor. Why is this so hard for other companies to do? -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
Don Bowey wrote:
* We senior citizens aren't perceived as being a large enough market. http://www.jitterbug.com/Phones.aspx -- 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.
In article ,
Don Bowey wrote: On 7/21/07 12:19 PM, in article , "RHF" wrote: (snip) Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success {?} is due to people wanting {Gotto Have the Latest} a very cool instrument {Newest Bells and Whistles} with good features {of Questionable Utlity}. -RANT- While Senior Citzens like myself with Tired Old Eyes and Big Old Fingers just want a basic CellPhone that we can use without our Glasses like the "JitterBug" . http://www.firststreetonline.com/pro...86678&PID=1583 97 8 That's as ugly as they get..... Why doesn't AT&T, Sprint, Nextel, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc offer a CellPhone designed for Senior Citizens and the Visually Limited-Impaired like the "JitterBug" ? Here is where the ADA Laws should apply and force the Cellphone providers to design and market these Cellphone to Seniors with needs. -end-rant- ~ RHF (snip) Lots of reasons..... Here's a couple: * We senior citizens aren't perceived as being a large enough market. * We aren't a cohesive group of a same mind. I'm one, but I'd have an iPhone in a minute just cause it is cool, if it weren't for the ridiculous rate structures. Far better for data than anyone else's offerings. Take a look. I need reading glasses for my Treo, but there are those who simply want a phone with large numbers and no features other than voice. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article
, Kurt Ullman wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Which is pretty much the definition of putting out a product that the public wants. But, yet, I seem to have feelings that you did not mean this as a positive. We had these same naysayers in these groups who were predicting the flop of iPhone a week before it came out. The more rabid ones disappeared. Now we have this more ambiguous approach. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
In article . com,
RHF wrote: On Jul 21, 11:14 am, Don Bowey wrote: On 7/21/07 11:00 AM, in article , "Kurt Ullman" wrote: In article , Don Bowey wrote: You miss my point. Why do you think the iPhone is so successful? Why the iPod? Until there are more facts, the iPhone's current success is due to people wanting a very cool instrument with good features. Which is pretty much the definition of putting out a product that the public wants. But, yet, I seem to have feelings that you did not mean this as a positive. You are reading in something I did not say. The iPhone is off to a great start, but it has no track record at this time. I anticipate that it will be very successful, but we can only guess at it now. From an investor point-of-view, I think the monthly kickback from AT&T that Apple negotiated, is good. From a personal POV I think it sucks, and will likely antagonize Apple supporters. IPhone Buyers and Users -and- Apple Supporters may not be one and the same. ~ RHF Bottom line - People want products that work for them. Period. Mac delivers, like them or not. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
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? -- 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.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
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. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
Kurt wrote in
: I'm a lot older than you and the iPhone does it right for 90% of what people really want. And what do you base this claim on? |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
"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. |
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
|
How I would like to change the *digital* cell phone industry.
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. |
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" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:06 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com