MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Wow, that sure deflated my excitement at getting the new iPhone 3G. Now I'm following Thurrott's recommendation? Yuck!!

Wow. Thurrott has come out with some crazy insulting talk about Apple in the past. I guess it's all the more impressive when a former critic praises you than when a friend does.

Jun 10, 08 - 04:27 pm Comment from: Hm...

Remember, Grasshopper, even the blind frog will catch a fly at whiles.

Micro$oft payola to Paul Turd-rot is late again!

Jun 10, 08 - 04:28 pm Comment from: MacBill

One major feature still missing from the iPhone:

COPY AND PASTE.

Come on, Apple! WTF?!

Jun 10, 08 - 04:35 pm Comment from: Randian

They're just trying to piss you off as much as possible, MacBill. That's the only reason I can think of.

Thurrot is still an idiot.. even after all this admission. In the same article, he says that Steve Jobs mentioned 2G was better; while 3G was power-consuming etc. a year ago; and now he has acknowledged that's not the case.

What Thurrot does not understand is that 18 months makes a big difference in the semiconductor industry. The chips that are available now (low-power chips) were not there for 3G 18 months ago. And he always makes it out to be a huge RDF.. no matter whether there is some amount of truth to it or not.

Here's the paragraph from Thurrot.

"Also ironic is that Apple appears to have overcome one of the biggest fears about 3G, a fear that, incidentally, Steve Jobs raised last year when he explained why the original iPhone would utilize 2.5G instead: 3G wireless receivers, he said, sucked up battery life so fast that it just wasn't worth going that route. A year later, that's no longer the case, apparently: Apple claims the iPhone 3G will get "great battery life" with up to 5 hours of talk time and up to 5-6 hours of Web browsing on 3G. Huh."

There's a reason why they don't allow people to comment to the stories; while you can comment on the blog.

Ice skating in Hell. Great this time of year.

Jun 10, 08 - 04:43 pm Comment from: Jim - TIV

ok... where and when did the mother ship land and what did they to with Paul?

Sorry, not for me

Hear me out first before bringing out the flamethrowers and cries for censorship.

I have a "pay as you go phone" works on and exactly as my AT&T;(but not AT&T;) and with pernament double minutes on the life of the phone.

Cost only $20 for the phone a decent Motorolla.

$99 for 400 minutes 2x = 800 minutes.

I only have used 400 minutes going on my fourth month!

This equates to less THAN $20 a month for mobile phone service! Sure I don't talk a lot on the phone. Rather doing so in person where the interaction (and the BOOZE!!) makes a more interesting and rewarding experience!

I have a paid for Mac Book Pro, with a lot more ability than the iPhone and free wifi everywhere I go.

Well never mind about that, my POINT IS APPLE NEEDS TO INVADE THE SMART PHONE USER MARKET!!

The smart phone user, meaning the one who SAVES $40-$60 a month over the ripoff's provided by AT&T;PRICE GOUGERS!!

The $199 is attractive, but AT&T;is the danger with their high fee's for minutes one doesn't actually use!! Sure if you use them then perhaps so, but if you don't talk a lot then it's stupid to pay too much for something you'll never use!!

I gave AT&T;the boot and their $175 early termination fee, let me tell you how they screw you more. First you have to call them and can't cancel in the store, they carry you for another month regardless and you have to wait two months before getting the $175 early termination bill!!

God forbid if you don't pay on time, they threaten your credit. I haven't heard a beep about getting my deposit back, I suspect I'll have to scream about it to get my money back. This is a way for them to keep your deposit, hoping you forget about it.

AT&T;is just like the old Cingular, same dirty tactics. Now they demand a activation in their AT&T;Stores before buying a iPhone, no more buying a iPhone from Apple!!

Apple should have never made a pact with the devil.

That's all I have to say, hate it or dislike it.

There is copy and paste. Read the tech specs.

Has anyone been over to Thurrott's house recently to check for pods? And I don't mean iPods.

Ya... thanks Paul rub it in!

I'm in Vermont and AT&T;is not.

iPhone... available in 70 countries... but not all 50 states!

Jun 10, 08 - 05:13 pm Comment from: Ampar

Re: Copy and Paste on the iPhone

" . . . it’s not full copy and paste, but it is easier than switching up and back between pages. "

It's not the solution but it's helpful:
http://www.apple.com/webapps/utilities/quasiclipboard.html

Now he compliments Apple for hit traffic.

Hmmm, hit traffic rules.

Jun 10, 08 - 05:15 pm Comment from: studentrights

OMG! Hell has frozen over.

@VT Guy

Buy an iPhone and unlock it. I live in MT, no AT&T;here either, but my unlocked iPhone works like a charm at $50/m unlimited everything.

They haven't unlocked the 3G iPhone yet, but I bet they will... Otherwise, now is probably a good time to pick up an iPhone 1.0 real cheap!

Jun 10, 08 - 05:15 pm Comment from: Snow Leopard

@Mad Mac Maniac

I'd like to see you put that MBP in your pocket...

@MadMacManiac

Must suck to be living at home in mom's basement and not having a girlfriend

Dang, I wouldn't be so proud to boast about your low cell phone usage.

I'm getting mine! Tax write off!

@ Mad Mac Maniac:

Well, obviously an iPhone is not for you. Not for the reasons you stated, but because you simply don't see a need for the features of an iPhone.

If all you need is a cheap phone to make a few calls here or there, then an iPhone is overkill for you. Great that you find free Wi-Fi; many places I go don't have free Wi-Fi. I find many, many Wi-Fi connections which are locked down tight and not accessible to the general public, far more than are free.

I haven't had the problems with AT&T;you describe, and we missed a couple of monthly payments due to miscommunications with our bookkeeper when I switched to AT&T;. No credit threats, no problem. Yes, they called to remind that the bill was unpaid, but nothing harassing.

Honestly, I don't know why people rag against AT&T;. They're no better or worse than any other mobile phone provider, and I've used Sprint, Verizon Wireless, and others. They all have good points and bad points, good spots and dead spots, etc.

Apple didn't make a pact with the devil. Apple made a deal with a mobile phone service provider. It's no surprise that AT&T;wants iPhones activated in store, because so many iPhones have been put on other networks. AT&T;(or any other provider) wouldn't subsidize a mobile phone just to have you walk out and activate it on T-Mobile. Get real.

Jun 10, 08 - 05:29 pm Comment from: ChrissyOne

Up is down, black is white! Freedom is Slavery! Et tu, Thurrott?!?!

"Despite some fears about the monthly cost of owning an iPhone, the iPhone 3G appears to eliminate virtually every major complaint I've made about the original device."

Is the implication here that it was his complaining that caused Apple to solve these issues? Paul, you're my hero!!!

If Dvorak comes out praising it too I'll consider the possibility that I'm in a parallel universe.

Jun 10, 08 - 05:38 pm Comment from: Spark

@Mad Mac Maniac
"This equates to less THAN $20 a month for mobile phone service!"


Cell phone service is not equivalent to network connection via HSDPA. The iPhone is a "cloud computer" that also handles voice telephony. Yeah, $70/mo is a lot more than @$20/mo, but don't try to equate the level of service you get for these.

Jun 10, 08 - 05:44 pm Comment from: Famous Grouse

"that Blackberry or Windows Mobile device you're settling on now will seem like ancient Soviet-era technology by comparison" ....

ROTFLOL

I can forgive this windoze hack an awful lot for this one line....

So what was in those boxes shipped to Apple stores which were labelled “Do not open before Tuesday”?

Following to above comment. If the iPhone 2.0 is being released in most countries on July 11, what was in those boxes?

Jun 10, 08 - 06:02 pm Comment from: iamdj

COULD IT BE?!!! Thurrott has drank the kool-aid?

Sounds like the conversion of Saul to Paul. He's now seen the truth, fine!

Jun 10, 08 - 06:20 pm Comment from: gadfly

Hey troops - a little bit of sanity for a sec: is the iPod touch also getting updated for next month's availability. Ya know, optional black/white back, etc??

@IT guy

In this case - though uncomfortable as it may be - Thurrot is right. There have been no significant advancements for mobile chips since launch of the iPhone, and you can see this in the battery life expectations provided by Apple themselves:

Talk time:
Up to 5 hours on 3G
Up to 10 hours on 2G

Clearly no now lower energy chips here.

What happened I think is that Apple realised that to be succesfull outside the US, customers mostly prefer faster speed over longer batterylife. So Apple made a U-turn here, but a good one.

Where I work (in Europe) people are now talking suddenly about the iPhone, and they all mention the three same things: 3G, GPS and Lower price. That's what the market here wants, and Apple gives them that, and lots more. This iPhone I think will now even be faster a smashing succes then the iPod.

Apple did some brilliant market choices, it will be fantastic. :D

@Ton Palmans

Here's the link for first-generation iphone components.

Apple is currently using either a newer Samsung chip (SGOLD3 or SGOLD3H). The 2G talk time has improved from 8 hours to 10 hours!

It may not be much, but note that these chips did not exist in January 2007 (if iPhone is released then, then they must have evaluated the chips atleast 6 months ago), so by June 2006 these chips did not exist?!

Jun 10, 08 - 06:58 pm Comment from: Goople

its simple to me, Apple will go the traditional subsidy route with iPhone...and keep their options open with iPod touch

iPod touch will gain access to WiMAX, Apple will also evaluate the the option of leasing Clearwire's network to create a true end-to-end wireless alternative, potentially branded as a higher tier of MobileMe.

iPod gets a $Paid download to upgrade to iPhone 2 features.

And, yeah, what was in those australian boxes?

Most of you guys don't get it. He sees which way the wind is blowing, sees huge potential for the iPhone, and wants to be seen as one of the 'experts' on this 'new' platform.

Jun 10, 08 - 07:08 pm Comment from: Jubei

When I read that I thought it was April fools day or Hell froze over. I looked over to see if the Grim Reaper was ready to take me home. I thought Superman Bizzaro was the real Mccoy.

Ok, everyone is complaining about copy and paste. That Apple needs to implement it...

How do you suppose they do it?

Jun 10, 08 - 07:32 pm Comment from: Spark

@bioness
In a text area, spread fingers like you are enlarging a photo to select text. Go to new text area and double tap. That could work.

You want Cut Copy Paste Undo then get a MFn Macbook fools!

It is a phone - not a computer.

Stupefies me.

"Trust me, once you've used an iPhone, that Blackberry or Windows Mobile device you're settling on now will seem like ancient Soviet-era technology by comparison"
--
Good line

Jun 10, 08 - 07:44 pm Comment from: Spark

From article:
"The first major portion of the keynote focused on the iPhone 2.0 software platform and was largely just repetition from the March event, right down to the developer-oriented bits presented by the somewhat smarmy Jobs protégé Forstall."

I have to admit that I had the same impression of Forstall. He appears very talented and capable, but he presents himself like he KNOWS that he is the most talented and capable person in the room. He had a "wiseacre" smirk on his face most of the time. I hope he works on his public persona a bit because I think we are going to see more of him. Jobs is like a kid in a toy store and his enthusiasm is infectious. Forstall reminded me of Eddie Haskel. And what's with his little wrist flip everytime he changes a slide. You work with the Master, Scott, observe and learn.

@Ton Palmans: Altho a new 3G chip was released in the springtime just before iPhone 2007's sale date, it was too late to make it into the iPhone design, which was frozen long before then. Last July, I searched thru all of Nokia's 3G phones and none offered more than 3.5hrs. And that's what Jobs said last year, that he needed 3G to get to 5 hours. Still today, if you look, most phones are still using chips that only get 3 to 3.5 hrs on 3G.

@Spark: Altho Apple might choose to do what you said, the approach you offer doesn't seem to be exact enough to get the exact beginning and end, whether in the cutting or in the pasting.

Jun 10, 08 - 07:55 pm Comment from: Uncle Al

@ kwalos

Nice.

"Wow. Thurrott has come out with some crazy insulting talk about Apple in the past"

yes, now he just schizophrenically posts it on Wininfo.

Go check.

@IT guy & Mark

You are right, chip design and thus batteryfile have improved a notch up. And it could very well be that this notch was signifcant enough to provide Apple with the opportunity to reach their minimum standards for 3G. So I think you have a good point here.

Where I was more coming from was that there were quite firm opinions - MDN including - that 3G was hardly an improvement over iPhone 1.0, hardly worth the effort and much downplayed, and that batterylife was way too short compared to IPhone 1.0.

But it is clear now (as was then) that 3G is way faster then 2/2.5G, and that people - or at least the European market - cares more about speed then batterylife. 5 hours for 3G with iPhone 2.0 is still well below the 8 hours for 2G with iPhone 1.0 (now 10 with 2.0), but Apple listens to the market instead of 'some' websites. .

From the early reactions I get over here from mostly non-Apple users, is that they are rapidly becoming aware of iPhone 3G, and voiced interest is building up like I never seen before. And if you look at what some of the devolpers showed at WWDC, it is just encedible.

I think Apple will hit the motherload with this one, and that it will be even bigger then the iPod. I really do.

Ah, talk about tide turns. Hmmm even Zune Thang has been quiet.

I do like the blind frog that will catch a fly every now and then.

Jun 10, 08 - 09:31 pm Comment from: Spark

@Mark
Yeah, I suspect you're right. But the question was HOW it could be done. I gave a HOW, not a HOW WELL. I'm sure when it is done by Apple, it will be done a lot better.

Bill Gates vs. GM

For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on.

At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated,

"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all
be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:

If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with
the following characteristics (and I just love this part):

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash........
Twice a day.

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new
car.

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some r eason you would simply accept this.

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car
to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five
times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.

6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be
replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.

I love the next one!!!

7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to
drive all over again because none o f the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off