1) the US market share. World wide market share is only 10.3%Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
Apple actualy bundle quite quite high quality head phones compartivly, although does offer the poorest sound quaity (as a device) out of all the major mp3 players.You say later that the quality of their music (they still use mp3) is because of their headphones which you could always buy different higher quality headphones. Most people dont want apple to send expensive headphones in the box because that would raise the price. And the iPhone has new headphones so you cant say they will be bad.
To rotate the picture your rotate the phone?? lol. Yea thats not really a feature, draw a picture on some paper, you may as find you still have that amaiseng feature, rotate the paper and the picture will rotate 2... WOW....The iPhone has a full web browser which is better. Everything is intuative (sp?). To zoom in you pinch your fingers together on the screen and move them apart. To zoom out you pinch in. To rotate the picture you rotate the phone.
Why would anyone want an upside down website view anyway?
1) Apples has been shown to crash just as commonly as a pc when running equivlent software.About the adverts. Most of them had points behind them. Apples crash less then pcs and dont get viruses as easily. They can also run XP so there wasnt much he lied about. Maybe bring up a ad and I can explain how it isnt lying.
2) Apple can get virus's, easier than pc's in fact, its just there far rairer as OSX doesnt have enough market share for spyware venders to worry about
3)No they cant. XP is so well made it will run on any hardware. OSX is so poorly made it can only run on Apples own hardware. Any hardware includes apple hardware. Stop adding spin. In reality its XP thats got the advantage not apples side.
Yes you can. you just use a matreal thats to hard to be scratched o.0You cant make something scratch proof. Maybe scratch resistant. The new iPod Nano has a better screen.
Actualy the iphone has very poor reviwes in reguads to its reistance to smudges or scratches, normal phones are usealy very solidty put to gether, the iphone isnt and is very likly to break or crack if droped.Also the iPhone is smudge resistant. They probably worked harder on making it scratch resistant because it will be touched more.
At $600 id think not.I agree that it would be great for business men and women but I know some teenegers who could be careful with it. I wouldnt snap and mess around with it if i got one.
Headphone independat survays have shown apple has poor sound quality, tests were only applied tothe major mp3 brands, im sure if you get some obscure crapy pound land branded mp3 player it will have worse sound.As I said earlier you can put MP3s on iPod. About how the sound quality is far inderior to any real MP3 player in existance? I am sure there are hundreds of MP3 players that have worse sound quality. Or do you only count real MP3 players as Sony, creative and Apple? And the headphones can be switched with higher quality headphones if you are really picky about your quality.
Actualy thats been apples marketing stratgery for some time, the whole ipod brand is built on its "coolness" its why its the must have accessory, and has proven to be massivly successful, hence its domincae in the US market.You shouldnt buy things just to make you popular because there are many good uses out of stuff besides people comming up to you and being like woa you have the new iPhone let me see.
Lots of people? the iphone marketings been pretty poor, "lots" of people have never heard of it. and out of the few who did, most aint likly to part with that much money, especaly when you could pick up a ps3 for the same price.How can you be so sure about this. How do you know that there will be spares. A lot of people have been waiting for this and I think there will be a big rush to get them. Depends on how many Apple make. If they have a lot already made or if they are going to release them while they are still making the bulk of them. Like what happened to 360 wii and PS3
Poor manufacturing on apples part usealy garentees at least a few hardware bugs. Why do you think apples software has such a rep for screen failures and haveing to replace so many of the ipods.How are you sure that they will have bugs? And they wont have to give them away for free. If they had bugs they could be fixed with a softwear update probably because the phone only has one button and one touch screen.
Then mug them?It is bad morally for that statment to be right. But in most places if someone drove to school in a super expensive car and walked out with the newest designer clothes they people would pay more attention to them.
They all come from the same sweatshops :rolleyes:Because they like to have the newest and most expensive things. That is how some humans are. More people notice them if they have the designer clothes. Welcome to the world.
Sales statistics for mp3's? its the sourse for the statistics used on wikipedia's ipod article.Ok first off is you can zoom in on the text so that isnt a problem. You can rear earlier in my post on how you zoom in. I have never seen a world wide iPod stat. Where did you get the 10.3%
Ipod only really seels in eurpoe and the US. that leaves china and pretty much the rest of the entire world useing differnt products, only about 30 or 40 % or the market share is taken up by the major mp3 distributers, the rest are just a large amount of smaller non main brand items.I agree that it might not be a big in like Japan because they are way ahead of us and are a totally different market.
But I find 10.3% to be too small.
Yea, they say that, hence all the stick from the watch dog agencys. There clames dont match up with realty, and they have a very poor track record. Plus no apple buys the devices from manufactures as its own, in the same way an O2 phone wasnt made by O2, its just the actual designers remain anoniums. Apple write the software though "/Apple isnt trying to get other companies to knock off their design. And they dont use sweat shops. They actually regulate their shops to make sure the workers have good working conditions. Stop making up stuff. Apple doesnt make them but they design them.
Nope im makeing infiernaces based on the evdiance avaible.And you have traveled to the future and seen that iPhones didnt sell well and are on the shelfs?
No one knows. I am just getting in to this thread because it will be funny to look back on if the iPhone becomes a huge hit like the iPod.Im not bias against it, its just im also not bais towards it, since ive mainted an understanding that adding an i infront of somthing doesnt make it good, dispite the fact half the contary seem as if theyed be perfectly happy to buy an Iturd if apple made one.
Yes, as we all browse are computers, then zoom in on the blob we want to read o.0 thats exsacty how they were designed to be used, well done.... :rolleyes:
Poorly designed mp3 player + poor attempt a pda + phone with unchangeable service so behind cant even connect to a 3g network + a few patent infingments = iphone.Heres an idea; find how the product works first, then come back to debate about it. Obviously, you haven't even seen how the phone works, let alone know how its features function or how they will probably improve the way things are done on today's cell phones.
Thats pretty much what your buying.
Mp3 player market share. i though when i said 10.3% of the MP3 market share it was pretty clear... i guess not.No that wasnt my argument at all, lol. In fact, it seems more like you started your own argument (about iPod marketshare apparently) and concluded it. o_O And are you talking about market share in consumer electronics a whole or in the mp3-player market, because the percentages vary widely.
Itunes is a desktop software used to work with the ipod software. Ipods dont run on itunes, dispite similartys in the look.I was saying that the iPod is more widely recognized along with the software it uses (iTunes),Apples ignorance campaign? well cant actualy disagree there, its done wonders, but its gona byte em in the *** soon enough. Plus i tend to buy better things, not one im familur with. you may be more familur with a mega drive, chances are your still going to opt for a ps2/3 etc since its supeior.so if someone were to buy a phone and were already familiar with the software the iPod uses, chances are they'll buy it for its ease of use not because its technologically superior. Plus the marketing strategy Apple uses also helps.
A long time listening to many people ranting about how **** it is tends to be a good insignt. Then the technical specs, limitions, software limitions, shear common sence, and a little time pokeing it. But yea, in the end its an opinion. Mine.don't personally use Apple's email client because I've never used client-based email. But please provide some insight as to why Apple's email client is a horrific mess. Obviously, you've used it long enough to experience all the flaws it has, otherwise, I'd say you were just quoting some anonymous entity based on their opinion. "/
Ive still yet to be convinced of anything apple can do better than its competion, in any area? or overall? even touch screens been done before, although people tend not to advertise devices in the price range at this sort of audance, you want spend alot, you can get a phone with a 10 mega pixle camra if you felt like it "/The improvements of the iPhone are isolated to certain areas. I'm not calling the competition inferior. Maybe the features they have, but not their products as a whole.
Actualy the ended up just paying creative a £100 million in order to licence the patent. But in this case they used the name, meaning there going to have to complety rebrand it, if they want to sell it. Iphone is already a product.Yes. Thats why the iPod was never sold because its UI belonged to someone else. :rolleyes:
Results 81 to 90 of 179
-
-
The question here isn't whether it's a good idea, because it obviously is. Think about it;
Apple already making billions every year through other products, so when they enter something as lucrative as the telecommunications market there are bound to be millions of people worldwide who will think ''well Apple made it, it must be good!'' and because it has the i in front of it, everyone will rush to get one. The amount of money that Apple stand to make here is actually quite scary, when you consider the fact it probably won't be as good as a lot of other phones.
-
I don't actually know what the iPhone is marketed as. The way they brag about how amazing it is in the advert, it seems to me they are saying it is the first phone to have the internet and an MP3 player. Other than that, it is just the touch screen which makes it different. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
You moan later on that you've never come across real stats for the iPod, so why do you do it too? It isn't 70%, I would say 30% because loads of people I know prefer and have iRiver, Creative, Sony and any other MP3 in terms of price compared to an iPod. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
It is rude to change words in what I say. I said that some of the blame could be to their poorly designed headphones, not that it IS the headphones. After buying such a rediculously expensive MP3 player, you don't want to buy better headphones. At that price, you should be able to get good headphones with them. Other MP3 companies do? People only tend to buy new headphones when their old ones have died or they want Bass Boost etc. When you upload a song onto an iPod, the quality is slowly taken away. I am not sure why, but I am imagine it might be for space. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
As stated, it wouldn't make a change. But because Apple like to glorify themselves by raising the price, they would probably do that. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
That's kinda strange, to roate a picture you rotate the phone? Can you grab the corner and do it that way? I wouldn't really say you need a full web browser? But what do you mean by it? Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
The ads I am questioning are ones you find on Myspace, so it might be hard to find them. In general it was something like this: Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
"There are 1,400 viruses a year on a Computer. 1,400 to choose a Mac."
"With a Mac, you can make your holiday videos. With a PC, you'll need another holiday."
People who make viruses never bother making them for Macs, waste of time in the long run because they don't belong to people who are leaking with information.
The video thing was aload of crap when I saw it. Most PCs actually are fast and can make videos easily. You can also make more effects and edit quicker with a PC. A Mac just takes ages and is frustrating when you find out it has hardly any special effects in the Official Program.
They sometimes call it scratch proof, so I go with that Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
The iPod Nano, the new one, still scratches like crazy. For the price, it's not worth buying one. For the amount you pay for a Nano, you would think they could fix this more. The iPhone is smudge resistant? Smudges are not as bad as scratchs? One you can wipe away, the other is perminant unless you buff it down?
I find the could amusing. At schools, you always get pointless, random wrestling matches or general boyish behaviour. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
Suppose so, but there is a high possiblity it will just be another iPod which would be just as famous as a Zen etc if it wasn't over advertised or given away for free by loads of companies. Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
Last edited by GommeInc; 13-01-2007 at 09:20 PM.
LEFT
FOM & FOW
If you need me, feel free to PM me here for contact details.
-
It's fairly impressive the way people are getting so feisty about a phone.
To me it's just another product. Don't get so angry about it.
-
It's a debate forum, it's what you have to do? You give a few points and the opposing side give a few points. If you are not here to debate, then don't look at the thread? Originally Posted by Cola
I've also been in a more interesting, feisty debate in one of my Philosophy classes. We all ended up agreeing that rabbits should cut the crap and be given the guns to protect themselves out in the wild.Last edited by GommeInc; 13-01-2007 at 09:26 PM.
LEFT
FOM & FOW
If you need me, feel free to PM me here for contact details.
-
What I meant was that the website itself is completely there on the phone, as it would be on a regular browser, as opposed to having content reduced to a single column. "/ But you already knew that, so I don't see why you're sidetracking the argument at hand, which was juxtaposing mobile browsers. Originally Posted by 01101101entor
Thats irrelavent to my statement. I suggested you find how the phone works, not list what you believe makes the iPhone.Poorly designed mp3 player + poor attempt a pda + phone with unchangeable service so behind cant even connect to a 3g network + a few patent infingments = iphone.
Thats pretty much what your buying.
You said, "your useing the stats for the US. World wide market share wize ipod only has a 10.3%", which could either imply the consumer electronics market or the mp3-player market. I'm gonna have to ask you for the source of your findings if you don't mind. All articles concerning the mp3-player market that I've read (which are like three, tbh) have shown the iPod with a substantionally larger market share that what you're suggesting. (And thats worldwide marketshare btw)Mp3 player market share. i though when i said 10.3% of the MP3 market share it was pretty clear... i guess not.
I know that. Maybe I should've made myself clearer, but in any case, this isn't a valid argument, nor was it supposed to have one. o_OItunes is a desktop software used to work with the ipod software. Ipods dont run on itunes, dispite similartys in the look.
How is advertising something that is easier to use an ignorance campaign? When something is easier to use, its sold for convenience of usage. If someone already knew how to use a product but wanted the convenience of using it in an easier way, this marketing would be targeted for those people. Working easier =/= being ignorant.Apples ignorance campaign? well cant actualy disagree there, its done wonders, but its gona byte em in the *** soon enough.
With that logic, you'd prefer Mac OS X over Windows XP. (And for the sake of argument, I'm just using them as examples, not comparing their capabilities.)Plus i tend to buy better things, not one im familur with. you may be more familur with a mega drive, chances are your still going to opt for a ps2/3 etc since its supeior.
I asked for your personal insight, not your method of acquiring a 'personal opinion' based on what others think of something. :rolleyes:A long time listening to many people ranting about how **** it is tends to be a good insignt. Then the technical specs, limitions, software limitions, shear common sence, and a little time pokeing it. But yea, in the end its an opinion. Mine.
multiple-touch touchscreens havent actually been available in mobile devices, so integrating that technology into cell phones would have an upperhand in competition, or a disaster if it isnt easy to use.Ive still yet to be convinced of anything apple can do better than its competion, in any area? or overall? even touch screens been done before, although people tend not to advertise devices in the price range at this sort of audance, you want spend alot, you can get a phone with a 10 mega pixle camra if you felt like it "/
Considering Cisco is now risking losing their rights to the name in the EU market, they might just rebrand the phones on the US market, assuming Apple can get the rights to use the name there. Anyway, hopefully it'll be over soon. Pretty boring to see the topic arise almost everywhere you go.Actualy the ended up just paying creative a £100 million in order to licence the patent. But in this case they used the name, meaning there going to have to complety rebrand it, if they want to sell it. Iphone is already a product.
-
That is the point. It is all intuative. You are looking at a website right side up in portate mode. You want to see it in landscape so you rotate the phone and the picture flips too. The iPhone automatically flips the site to where you are looking at it from. Originally Posted by 01101101entor
How can apples get viruses more easier them pc's? Any source or anything? Every time you download and want to install something you need the admin password. It is not like OSX was made badly so it cannot be run on any hardware. It is locked from running on non apple computers.1) Apples has been shown to crash just as commonly as a pc when running equivlent software.
2) Apple can get virus's, easier than pc's in fact, its just there far rairer as OSX doesnt have enough market share for spyware venders to worry about
3)No they cant. XP is so well made it will run on any hardware. OSX is so poorly made it can only run on Apples own hardware. Any hardware includes apple hardware. Stop adding spin. In reality its XP thats got the advantage not apples side.
Hard to scratch is not totally scratch proof. I am sure if you drop a "hard to be scratched" thing a few stories onto concrete it will have scratches.Yes you can. you just use a matreal thats to hard to be scratched o.0
Has anyone actually tested this. I dont think anyone was looking at the iPhone and droped it and it broke. This is just all assumptions.Actualy the iphone has very poor reviwes in reguads to its reistance to smudges or scratches, normal phones are usealy very solidty put to gether, the iphone isnt and is very likly to break or crack if droped.
The coolness factor doesnt just come. They had to earn it by the ease of use and high quality.Actualy thats been apples marketing stratgery for some time, the whole ipod brand is built on its "coolness" its why its the must have accessory, and has proven to be massivly successful, hence its domincae in the US market.
It wont be released untill june. There doesnt need to be hype already. But I am sure a lot of people know about it. It was all over the news and usually something about it on youtubes popular list.Lots of people? the iphone marketings been pretty poor, "lots" of people have never heard of it. and out of the few who did, most aint likly to part with that much money, especaly when you could pick up a ps3 for the same price.
Doesnt say anything about 10.3% on wiki just talks about the success andSales statistics for mp3's? its the sourse for the statistics used on wikipedia's ipod article.in the US. If 10.3% is actually right that still means that iPods are way ahead of any other produce on the world wide mp3 list.over 70% of the market for all types of players
As I said. if Apple is more then 10%, that means that they are by far the best selling mp3 player world wide.Ipod only really seels in eurpoe and the US. that leaves china and pretty much the rest of the entire world useing differnt products, only about 30 or 40 % or the market share is taken up by the major mp3 distributers, the rest are just a large amount of smaller non main brand items.
For a buisness man a nice iPhone will do him better then a Play Station. And chances are if you can buy an iPhone you wont have problems dishing out more money for a ps3.chances are your still going to opt for a ps2/3 etc since its supeior.
In any area. Well they have over 90% of the market share for hard drive based players in the US. Not to mention their stock has rocketed up.Ive still yet to be convinced of anything apple can do better than its competion, in any area? or overall? even touch screens been done before, although people tend not to advertise devices in the price range at this sort of audance, you want spend alot, you can get a phone with a 10 mega pixle camra if you felt like it "/
In an debates forum you cant say that statistics are wrong and say that it is more like 30% because you see a lot of other mp3 players. Originally Posted by GommeInc
Here is a quote from Wiki to help you understand.
Since October 2004, the iPod has dominated digital music player sales in the United States, with over 90% of the market for hard drive-based players and over 70% of the market for all types of players.
iPods are just at expensive as other high quality mp3 players like the Zune and others.After buying such a rediculously expensive MP3 player, you don't want to buy better headphones.
It isnt strange, it is intuative. A full web browser is better then a mobile one. And because the screen is big enough you can do that.That's kinda strange, to roate a picture you rotate the phone? Can you grab the corner and do it that way? I wouldn't really say you need a full web browser? But what do you mean by it?
-
Originally Posted by HUGECOOL
My point was rearangeing the content is a valid thing to do. Your argument is that is not how a website was intened to be viewed. I then pointed out websites were never intened to be viewed via beeing zoomed in to on a specific place in order to be able to read the content. The websites use shown also requre to be modifed even if by the phone anyway, since its scaleing option does not compily with the websites design, aka the resolution the device is rendering the website as is not the actual device resolition, there is alot of rescaleing going on. sites that have been designed to resize themselves to smaller browsers, then loose this functionality anyway, and are made for no good reason unreable by the rescaled rendering used.
So the website is still altered to the phone.
The diffence is, the Iphone does the changes in the browser, wasteing resorces. The opera system does this on its own servers, saveing resources and meaning less data has to be transfer an advantage on low bandwidth devices which are what most phones are. Especaly the Iphone which has far slower bandiwidth than most phones around hence why it cant even connect to a 3g network.
And i explained it to you.Thats irrelavent to my statement. I suggested you find how the phone works, not list what you believe makes the iPhone.
I quoth:You said, "your useing the stats for the US. World wide market share wize ipod only has a 10.3%", which could either imply the consumer electronics market or the mp3-player market. I'm gonna have to ask you for the source of your findings if you don't mind. All articles concerning the mp3-player market that I've read (which are like three, tbh) have shown the iPod with a substantionally larger market share that what you're suggesting. (And thats worldwide marketshare btw)
Originally Posted by Apple Insider
o.0 no its a perfectly valid arguemnt deductive reasoningI know that. Maybe I should've made myself clearer, but in any case, this isn't a valid argument, nor was it supposed to have one. o_O
Itunes = desktop software
Ipod = portable mp3 playing device.
Thefore Ipods do not run on Itunes .
No i mean the sort of crap like the "apple are immune to all virus's" (an outright lie and makeing consumers ignorant of common sence safty practises.)How is advertising something that is easier to use an ignorance campaign? When something is easier to use, its sold for convenience of usage. If someone already knew how to use a product but wanted the convenience of using it in an easier way, this marketing would be targeted for those people. Working easier =/= being ignorant.
Vista is superior to OSXWith that logic, you'd prefer Mac OS X over Windows XP. (And for the sake of argument, I'm just using them as examples, not comparing their capabilities.)
XP is Superior to OSX
vender freedom on hardware is supeior to vender locking as with mac's
How the hell can you deduce if i choose the supeior product that id want a mac?
Go look insight up in a dictonary...I asked for your personal insight, not your method of acquiring a 'personal opinion' based on what others think of something. :rolleyes:
Most devices this far havent really had any want nore need to incorpate a multiple-touch touchscreen. Since in normal circumstances its not really seen as very useful. For exsample it would be like windows haveing two mouse pointers (although this infact could have a possible use, and has a product for it, so is really only here as a persudo exsample, and does still apply to portable devices)multiple-touch touchscreens havent actually been available in mobile devices, so integrating that technology into cell phones would have an upperhand in competition, or a disaster if it isnt easy to use.
Since most pdas etc have taken there design from computer based interaction.
So apple is trying somthing pretty new here, for better or worse, in the way it intends people to navigate it "/
Actualy cisco has started attacking them from a number of fronts with a number of new law sutes, i personly think apples unlikly to win and will end up with the apple phone, in the same way they have appleTV insted of the Itv... although on that one, they really didnt have a chance "/Considering Cisco is now risking losing their rights to the name in the EU market, they might just rebrand the phones on the US market, assuming Apple can get the rights to use the name there. Anyway, hopefully it'll be over soon. Pretty boring to see the topic arise almost everywhere you go.
-
You never did answer my question. You complain about people making up stats, yet you do it yourself? Isn't it common sense that if there is more types of MP3 player compared to an iPod, there would be less percentage of iPods being used as a whole? Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
I am not in the US, and I am talking about World Wide. Globally, there are less iPods than other MP3 Players.Here is a quote from Wiki to help you understand.
Yes, iPod are cheap (sarcasm). Here is my proof that they're not: Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
Play.com
iPod Video 30GB = £179.99 Delivered
iPod Nano 8GB = £149.99 Delivered
Creative Zen Vision: M 30GB = £164.99 Delivered
SanDisk Sansa E280 8GB = £129.99 Delivered
Amazon.co.uk
iPod Video 30GB = £166.00
iPod Nano 8GB = £154.00
Creative Zen Vision: M = £164.18
Creative Zen MicroPhoto 8GB = £140.00
Philips 30GB = £99.99 (was £150).
Back to my original argument of the sound quality, for what you get with an iPod, you can get for cheaper and better with any other company. The headphones you get are useless with an iPod, the design of them are not built for sound.
That's not a very good feature really... What if you want to view an image from the side which has something written on which you cannot easily view normally? Originally Posted by BL!NKEY
Last edited by GommeInc; 14-01-2007 at 09:16 PM.
LEFT
FOM & FOW
If you need me, feel free to PM me here for contact details.
-
You explained the statistic wrong. The 10.3% means that out of every 10 computers globaly about one of them has an iPod. This is not counting people who own more then one iPod and only one computer. I can see that that statistic is right. But that doesnt mean that out of every mp3 player, only 10.3% are iPods. Originally Posted by apple insider
You are true if you take all the iPods in the world there are less of them them all the other mp3 players. But if you take every kind of mp3 player and see what one there is the most of. You will find that iPods are the most popular. And I got all my stats from Wiki. If there is a stat I gave which you question please show me and I will link you to the source. Originally Posted by GommeInc
They are relativly closly priced. Just about a £15.00 difference. If they were like twice the price then I could see where you would be comming from. The iPod is more popular so they can charge a little more and get away with it. Creative needs to be competative to keep up in the market.Yes, iPod are cheap (sarcasm). Here is my proof that they're not:
Play.com
iPod Video 30GB = £179.99 Delivered
iPod Nano 8GB = £149.99 Delivered
Creative Zen Vision: M 30GB = £164.99 Delivered
SanDisk Sansa E280 8GB = £129.99 Delivered
Amazon.co.uk
iPod Video 30GB = £166.00
iPod Nano 8GB = £154.00
Creative Zen Vision: M = £164.18
Creative Zen MicroPhoto 8GB = £140.00
Philips 30GB = £99.99 (was £150).
Cheaper and better with any other company? I am sure most headphone companies make headphones worse then iPods. Where do you get that iPod headphones are not built for sound? Most headphones were built with sound in mind. I used my iPod headphones for a while untill I lost them but there were certantly not useless.Back to my original argument of the sound quality, for what you get with an iPod, you can get for cheaper and better with any other company. The headphones you get are useless with an iPod, the design of them are not built for sound.
I dont know that many internet sites that have images you need to view from the side. And if you did you could just turn your head like you would to read it on a computer. But maybe there is a image rotate option in the iPhone. Originally Posted by GommeInc
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts