bit-tech.net

Cult of personality

Comments 1 to 25 of 44

Reply
specofdust 8th July 2007, 11:39 Quote
Good article, and I see what you're saying. I'm not so sure I agree that the Iphone is a better product than all the other phones out there. Its just different. I mean, the camera in it is sucky for a start, and there's no video recording whatsoever. My brothers old phone could do simple video recording years ago.

So in some respects the Iphone is almost embaressingly behind. On the other hand, it's not just a phone and it looks totaly different to anything (bar the prada copycat) that's been released up untill now. The iphone looks like the first serious contender for an all-in-one device that would work properly and the way its users would want it to. So in this I think apple may have done something special.

The coverage is annoying as hell though and I look forward to all the macboys climbing back into their glass boxes (I would say caves, but I know no apple fan would ever be seen in one of those) and shutting the hell up for another 6 months (that is, untill the next time steve jobs farts).
mikeuk2004 8th July 2007, 11:56 Quote
I have not heard much about it. All I know is that is another phone. I have my £40 LG that makes calls and not intersted in any extra rubish that boosts up the price.
Jamie 8th July 2007, 13:38 Quote
I think there was a huge amount of press for Vista, Bill appeared on TV, he BBC was going crazy for it. I've not really seen much about the iPhone in the genera press.

Apple fanboys are like the emo kids of the music world.
KMS-oul 8th July 2007, 13:48 Quote
Good read. I loved the bit about Jobs passing gas:). From what I have seen of the iphone, it does look snazzy however I would never get one. Even if I could afford one I still would not. I'm the type of guy that stuffs his phone in his pocket with keys and coins also the features will be wasted on me. I just want something that makes a call.
DXR_13KE 8th July 2007, 14:11 Quote
the iphone is a multimedia phone with a futuristic interface that does not have 3G so therefore it does not deserve my attention.
Veles 8th July 2007, 14:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie
Apple fanboys are like the emo kids of the music world.

Don't apple fanboys admit they're apple fanboys though?
Ramble 8th July 2007, 16:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeuk2004
I have not heard much about it. All I know is that is another phone. I have my £40 LG that makes calls and not intersted in any extra rubish that boosts up the price.

Same here. I think it's a VOIP phone made by Linksys. Not sure what all the fanfare is about, it's looking pretty old.
Hells_Bliss 8th July 2007, 17:12 Quote
while a good article and I agree with you that they have excelent PR; I disagree with the below statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Dego
On the flip side, in two years' time the best features on the iPhone will be integrated into other devices, many of which that will run off of Windows Mobile. Those improvements will be built on the mass efficiency of the Windows Mobile platform, allowing them to show up on hundreds of types of devices, though assuredly with a few quality issues (such is the problem with mass-scale, multi-unit design).

Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING on the iPhone is already on the market, in fact the technology is obsolete. And you better not drop that lil iphone of yours because you know that the glass screen is going to shatter.

the specs of the iPhone are here, i'll compare with sony ericsson phones since i'm most familiar with those.
Quote:
Capacity
4GB or 8GB flash drive1 W950i rel date 10/06
Display
3.5-inch (diagonal) widescreen multi-touch display
480-by-320-pixel resolution at 160 dpi ya got me on that one, it's got a reasonable screen
Support for display of multiple languages and characters simultaneously not sure about this one, usefulness though?
Operating system
OS X hahahaha
GSM Quad-band (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz) what, no UMTS2100?900,1800,1900 T600 rel date 2002, couldn't find 850 band *shrugs*
Wireless data
Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) P990 12/05
EDGE
Bluetooth 2.0+EDR considering bluetooth is an Ericsson standardized technology, uhh, 1994? for 2.0 edr etc. i'm too lazy to look
Camera
2.0 megapixels K750 q2 2005just so you know, there are now 5megapixel camera phones on the market
Audio
Frequency response: 20Hz to 20,000Hz
Audio formats supported: AAC, Protected AAC, MP3, MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 1, 2, and 3), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV disregarding apple junk, w800 July 2005
Video
Video formats supported: H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; H.264 video, up to 768 Kbps, 320 by 240 pixels, 30 frames per second, Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
i can play mpegs and avis on my w800, again July 2005. .mov sucks anyways

I'm sure Nokia, Samsung, Motorola etc. have comperable models, i just am not familiar with them


The only thing special about the iPhone is its media-hype.
themax 8th July 2007, 17:39 Quote
Isn't the Spint Mogul (U.S.) a pretty good comprable phone to the Iphone as well? It also uses sprint's Ev-Do network which gives it a much faster download speed than the iphone does using Edge along with expandable memory (I don't the max capacity it supports).
Bluephoenix 8th July 2007, 18:04 Quote
I just need a phone that makes calls, none of this other rubbish, and what I really want from apple is a 6g iPod that has the touchscreen and a 30-40gb HDD, none of this phone crap.
xPaladin 8th July 2007, 18:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss
I'm sure Nokia, Samsung, Motorola etc. have comperable models, i just am not familiar with them

I can't speak for the other fronts, but Samsung is already way ahead of the iPhone with their Korean models. They're not available here because the design of the phones is tailored to the Korean masses, and not necessarily the US masses. Believe it or not, both cultures have radically different tastes in phones, ranging from size and dimension to button protrusion. When a phone is imported from another country it is essentially given a facelift by the manufacturer and then the user interface is branded to hell and back by the carrier. It's actually a grueling and rather bureaucratic process.

Apple tends to be the exception here: the iPhone can slip in with it's trendy bourgeois design and Apple branding alone, simply because the American consumer will buy it. Not a surprising revelation, considering that the American culture is centered around this trendy, vanity-based consumerism.
Phil Rhodes 8th July 2007, 18:21 Quote
You know, I think what's actually going on here is that Apple have invented an entirely new language. The only two words in this language which have any worthwhile translation to English are "iPod" and "iPhone", both of which mean the following:

"Hello. I am a dribbling, easily-led prole. I am so stupid, it's actively infectious. I am so dense, it shows up on those gravitational anomaly charts used by cold-war aircraft for navigation; only through the expedient of having my brain surgically replaced with a mixture of sawdust and finely-ground walnut husks have I been able to innure myself to the otherwise unavoidable suspicion that I'm being viciously fleeced for entirely unremarkable electronic tat the like of which can be had from any one of a dozen alternative vendors, none of which wants evidence in triplicate that my internal soul is in escrow against my future social acceptability."

It should be noted that "iBook" has a similar meaning. These people present the hazard of imminent contagion and should on no account be approached.

Phil
Zurechial 8th July 2007, 18:44 Quote
Yet another great article, Brett.

You pretty much summed up everything that I dislike about Apple, and yet also everything that I respect them for. Weird that.


Off-topic, but.... Did anyone else think of a Fallout character perk upon seeing the title of the article? :o
completemadness 8th July 2007, 19:42 Quote
of course you could get something like the nokia n800 Internet tablet, a cheap blutooth phone (the Motorola L6 is like £20) and have significantly more functionality then the iphone, for a lot less
Quote:
Windows Vista barely showed up on the radar of the general press, despite us all waiting with baited breath
Dunno about you but everything i heard about vista (for the 2 years M$ was trying to hype it) just made me dislike it more and more

now that its out, it hasn't disappointed 1 bit, its just as crap as i thought, and with any luck it will be the downfall of M$ - of course most people seem to just plain ignore the problems with it, and shell out £200 for a newer more bloated worse piece of software, its a crazy world
scq 8th July 2007, 19:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by specofdust
Good article, and I see what you're saying. I'm not so sure I agree that the Iphone is a better product than all the other phones out there. Its just different. I mean, the camera in it is sucky for a start, and there's no video recording whatsoever. My brothers old phone could do simple video recording years ago.

So in some respects the Iphone is almost embaressingly behind. On the other hand, it's not just a phone and it looks totaly different to anything (bar the prada copycat) that's been released up untill now. The iphone looks like the first serious contender for an all-in-one device that would work properly and the way its users would want it to. So in this I think apple may have done something special.

The coverage is annoying as hell though and I look forward to all the macboys climbing back into their glass boxes (I would say caves, but I know no apple fan would ever be seen in one of those) and shutting the hell up for another 6 months (that is, untill the next time steve jobs farts).

Apple products have never been "better" by ways of functionality and features. They win by near-universally praised modernist design, and a smart interface to tie it all together.
Cthippo 8th July 2007, 20:33 Quote
Their popularity is more of a commentary on the society that buys them and the triumph of style over content. If functionality was what mattered most to people then Apple would be a second rate player instead most people seem to want somthing that makes them "cooler" even, or perhaps especially, if it costs a small fortune and they have no clue how to use most of the features. In short, Apple is this popular because most people are stupid and shallow.

(come on, what did you think i was going to say about it? :p )
Nexxo 8th July 2007, 21:10 Quote
Sorry, but I have to disagree... Apple products are accused of being style over substance, but the truth is that they are a triumph of functionality: of form follows function.

Apple products are largely transparent. You don't have to think too hard about how to use them, you just do. The function is, for practical purposes (sic), invisible. What is very visible however is the resulting form, and Apple does like to make its products look polished. So people mistakenly think they are all about style because they can't see the functionality. But then again, they are not supposed to. It is supposed to just be there: subliminal, intuitive, invisible.

We are used to the much less refined generic clone PCs which are a random compilation of verious manufactuers' parts, and phone PDAs which are really several devices not very well integrated by Windows-on-top-of-DOS-on-top-of-BIOS, or Windows Mobile which is really just a derivative Windows Lite rather than an OS specifically designed for small hand-held devices. We are used to our devices having a slightly Heath-Robinson edge to them, and as such we are used to coaxing and tweaking and expanding or modifying them to make them do what we want.

Apple products don't have that; they are the finished product. We could appreciate the seamless intuitive transparency of their functionality, but we're not used to that. We almost feel as if something is missing; as if the devices are limited in some way. But they are not. They are just designed to be what they are, and nothing else. It is like driving automatic when you are used to having to change gears. You just can't help but feeling, at first, that you lack control.

The reason why nobody gets hot and bothered about Windows Mobile devices is because although the technological features may be cutting edge, the concept is old-fashioned. You may argue that they have 3G, and higher res cameras and video and whatnot, but in the end they are still a separate PDA and mobile squeezed into one case, with an OS that thinks that both really should be a desktop PC. Apple products may not always be cutting edge in technology, but they are certainly better thought through as a concept. And that is what people want: a device that does what it is supposed to do well, without having to think too hard about how to use it.
Hells_Bliss 8th July 2007, 22:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexxo
We are used to the much less refined generic clone PCs which are a random compilation of verious manufactuers' parts, and phone PDAs which are really several devices not very well integrated by Windows-on-top-of-DOS-on-top-of-BIOS, or Windows Mobile which is really just a derivative Windows Lite rather than an OS specifically designed for small hand-held devices. We are used to our devices having a slightly Heath-Robinson edge to them, and as such we are used to coaxing and tweaking and expanding or modifying them to make them do what we want.

I'm used to symbian on my phones. I agree windows mobile phones are crap, but they do tie in relatively well with windows machines.
Aankhen 8th July 2007, 23:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss
.mov sucks anyways
That's simply not true. MOV is just a container format (a fairly decent one). If you were referring to H.264 &c., they are lightyears ahead of DivX, XviD and MPEG-2 in terms of quality.
Ramble 8th July 2007, 23:20 Quote
h.264 is part of the mpeg-4 spec just as divx and xvid is.
No argument on Mpeg-2, but it does require FAR lower processing power to decode the stream.
Da Dego 8th July 2007, 23:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss
Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING on the iPhone is already on the market, in fact the technology is obsolete. And you better not drop that lil iphone of yours because you know that the glass screen is going to shatter.

the specs of the iPhone are here, i'll compare with sony ericsson phones since i'm most familiar with those.

I'm sure Nokia, Samsung, Motorola etc. have comperable models, i just am not familiar with them

The only thing special about the iPhone is its media-hype.
Hey Hells_Bliss,

First of all, I wrote the piece, not Tim. ;) But second, I wanted to argue with a point above. Not everything on the iphone IS on other phones - they lack the one thing that makes it special, which is the interface.

Apple doesn't claim macs to be more powerful than any computer with windows on it. The specs are the specs. What makes a mac a mac is its interface. Are designer jeans some magical golden cloth? Of course not. And yet they DO do something differently to standard jeans.

Microsoft looked to OSX when it came time to build Vista. Many linux GUIs use it as an example, too. Why? Not because it was sold on a machine with the top specs.

The point of my article was just that - it's not about building the fastest phone with all the bells and whistles. As Nexxo said, the entire functionality of an apple product IS that its interface is so transparent, which is almost unquantifiable. You don't see that in a spec sheet, the same way you can't see "this will flow on you" in a designer clothes tag.

For anyone thinking Apple's steam is entirely form over function, you should definitely look again. It's the same function as you find on a windows PC, or most of the function you find on a cell phone (the lack of 3g does confuse me, too). It's just that the functionality is laid out differently so that you interact differently with it. Apple isn't a hardware maker - it is an industrial design powerhouse that turns out excellent interface software...and might as well make the thing it runs on pretty, too.

To sum up, my basic point is this - what makes a mac product great will never sit on the spec sheet - it's not the lacking 3g, included bluetooth, blah blah blah. It is an interface design that i can assure you will end up in part or whole everywhere in the industry. It's functional fashion, and that should be respected - it has an incredibly important role all its own.
completemadness 9th July 2007, 03:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Apple products are largely transparent. You don't have to think too hard about how to use them, you just do. The function is, for practical purposes (sic), invisible. What is very visible however is the resulting form, and Apple does like to make its products look polished. So people mistakenly think they are all about style because they can't see the functionality. But then again, they are not supposed to. It is supposed to just be there: subliminal, intuitive, invisible.
i guess that depends on the person alot, Personally, i find windows quite intuitive, im probably one of a few, and having used it for quite some time probably helps alot, but im just using windows as an example, i find most things reasonably easy to use, aslong as they are atleast 1/2 well designed

However, having used apple products (ok the ipod and mac (a bit) mainly) i dont really find them that intuitive, their simplicity is a barrier to the power user, sure i can see people who have trouble using a pc might find it easy, but to people who pick things up very quickly, they just slow you down

Now im not saying apple products arent pretty good, and they do look pretty cool, but the final nail in the coffin is the price, ok i can but a 90% finished windows product, or a 99% finished apple product, but the windows product is 2/3 to 1/2 the price of the apple product, i dont know about you but i will take the windows product every time

And if you really want the best of the best, why not go with somone who really knows what their doing, like blackberry
Quote:
h.264 is part of the mpeg-4 spec just as divx and xvid is.
No argument on Mpeg-2, but it does require FAR lower processing power to decode the stream.
Yeah but how much larger are files using the h.264 codec, Don't forget, xvid/divx are really popular because they produce pretty good picture quality, at low processing power, and produce small files

People aren't that interested by quality, as is proven by MP3's, and don't forget, an xvid/divx can actually be done properly, just like an mp3, and make pretty damn good videos
Hells_Bliss 9th July 2007, 03:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Dego
Hey Hells_Bliss,

First of all, I wrote the piece, not Tim. ;) But second, I wanted to argue with a point above. Not everything on the iphone IS on other phones - they lack the one thing that makes it special, which is the interface.

Apple doesn't claim macs to be more powerful than any computer with windows on it. The specs are the specs. What makes a mac a mac is its interface. Are designer jeans some magical golden cloth? Of course not. And yet they DO do something differently to standard jeans.

Microsoft looked to OSX when it came time to build Vista. Many linux GUIs use it as an example, too. Why? Not because it was sold on a machine with the top specs.

The point of my article was just that - it's not about building the fastest phone with all the bells and whistles. As Nexxo said, the entire functionality of an apple product IS that its interface is so transparent, which is almost unquantifiable. You don't see that in a spec sheet, the same way you can't see "this will flow on you" in a designer clothes tag.

For anyone thinking Apple's steam is entirely form over function, you should definitely look again. It's the same function as you find on a windows PC, or most of the function you find on a cell phone (the lack of 3g does confuse me, too). It's just that the functionality is laid out differently so that you interact differently with it. Apple isn't a hardware maker - it is an industrial design powerhouse that turns out excellent interface software...and might as well make the thing it runs on pretty, too.

To sum up, my basic point is this - what makes a mac product great will never sit on the spec sheet - it's not the lacking 3g, included bluetooth, blah blah blah. It is an interface design that i can assure you will end up in part or whole everywhere in the industry. It's functional fashion, and that should be respected - it has an incredibly important role all its own.

sorry, fixed :o

as to the functionality, i really couldn't really argue since I haven't played with one. Sure it's got a pretty interface, and you can apparently get from point a to b pretty quick...but you can do that on most phones. example, i have a SE W710i, if I want to get to my contacts, i press the down cursor. If i want my mp3s, I press the walkman button. If I want the camera, I open the lense. If I want to send a friend a picture of the hot girl at the bar, I take the photo, press more, send now, choose contact, send. if I want silent I press up and then down 4 times. Isn't that functionality? Once again, i can't say how the iphone does it, but probably through a bunch of menus since I don't see a lot of hotkeys.

Is it better than windows mobile? yep, i've definately played with those and I don't like them at all.

would an iPhone "flow" on me, maybe if my name was Nicole Richi or Paris Hilton wearing prada this gucci that and believed in the holy word of "Branding"...other than that, why spend more for a media-hyped smartphone which is behind the times?
Bladestorm 9th July 2007, 04:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss
sorry, fixed :o

as to the functionality, i really couldn't really argue since I haven't played with one. Sure it's got a pretty interface, and you can apparently get from point a to b pretty quick...but you can do that on most phones. example, i have a SE W710i, if I want to get to my contacts, i press the down cursor. If i want my mp3s, I press the walkman button. If I want the camera, I open the lense. If I want to send a friend a picture of the hot girl at the bar, I take the photo, press more, send now, choose contact, send. if I want silent I press up and then down 4 times. Isn't that functionality? Once again, i can't say how the iphone does it, but probably through a bunch of menus since I don't see a lot of hotkeys.

Is it better than windows mobile? yep, i've definately played with those and I don't like them at all.

would an iPhone "flow" on me, maybe if my name was Nicole Richi or Paris Hilton wearing prada this gucci that and believed in the holy word of "Branding"...other than that, why spend more for a media-hyped smartphone which is behind the times?

I understand the iphone interface is a touch-screen, so presumably to make a call you touch the call button then the icon for the person you want to call. Main advantage presumably is you can fit a lot of nice large hot-keys on the phone at a time and have them usefull and imediately obvious as to function on every screen .. if that makes sense ?
2JSC 9th July 2007, 08:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie
Apple fanboys are like the emo kids of the music world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veles
Don't apple fanboys admit they're apple fanboys though?

I'm sorry but that is hilarious!!! :)
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums