WWDC 2010

[The Rick]

Since there are at least a few Apple guys here (AustinChief not included ), I thought I'd start a thread to discuss today's keynote speech.

Today is the start of Apple's annual developer conference and the keynote by Steve Jobs kicks off at noon CDT. Lots of rumored announcements such as a new iPhone, more details on iPhone OS 4.0, big Safari browser upgrade, possible cloud-based iTunes streaming, etc.

I'm hopeful for some great announcements...

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Doesn't matter... look at the context... some ignorant Apple fanboy tried to misrepresent the EVO by saying they didn't have software to support video chat.. yet the software was out MONTHS before the hardware.... typical of the Apple crowd to wait for an app to be spoon fed from daddy Jobs before they know a better one existed before it.

Actually, they aren't necessarily wrong in that assertion. Google has no software in their OS to support it. If we're going to say third party apps are in the running for things devices "support", the iPhone has a lot more features than people are claiming. As does Android.

I will give you battery life... if I turn EVERYTHING USEFUL OFF on my phone .. the battery life is AMAZING!!!! Jesus dude... don't be reeruned.. of course features cost battery life... call me stupid but I'd like to have the option instead of daddy tell me what's best...

That's not even close to what I'm saying. I'm saying 4G v 3G is not all about speed. You also have to factor in battery life and 4G drains the battery MUCH MUCH faster. So, it's not such a cut and dry decision.

And if you truly believe that Apple (other than display) has caught up to HTC in hardware than you are beyond help... you have drank the cool-aid and refuse to look at FACTS.

That's not what I said. You seem to think hardware is the main factor for people deciding what to purchase. For, you perhaps. For everyone else, I'm not so sure. Again, Windows machines can outstrip Macs hardware wise, but that's not why people buy them.

Interestingly, I'm reading an awful lot of comments on sites that say roughly the following:

"iPhone will be outdated a month from now" & "Android will leapfrog, given Apple's 1yr release cycle."

What baffles me is, unless you're made of money, you won't be upgrading your phone within a year, either. Let alone 1-2 months. And the EVO, which most reference, will be outdated next month too. So I'm not sure the argument is valid.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

AND PLEASE explain to me how facetime is anywhere in the ****ing same league as fring??? Facetime works with how many clients out of the box... I'll even give you the assumption it works with ALL iPhone users (regardless of the fact that it doesn't)... it still is a SPECK compared to how many clients can use fring.

Keep drinking that cool aid.

Did I mention anything about third party apps? Seriously...

What I said was I'm sure FT is ready to go wirelessly but that ATT can't handle it.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Hence the reason I think capped data plans are in the future for all carriers. It just makes sense for them. "Midair" networks just don't have the carrying capacity of hard-wired networks. It makes the most sense to charge you by how much you download (just like they do with the broadband "sticks" that you can plug into your laptop).

And it's fair. If User X uses 2G per month, and User Y uses 100G per month, why should User X help foot the bill to pay for User Y's consumption?

Conversely, it makes zero sense because User X COULD be using 100G a month, but isn't. Why should User Y be penalized for taking advantage of what is offered.

I'm an ardent opponent of bandwidth caps. Mobile devices are more of a grey area than cable landlines but still.

[Great Expectations]

With this phone could you download a movie from netflix via WiFi and then watch it later w/out using up your data plan?

[Shag]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Conversely, it makes zero sense because User X COULD be using 100G a month, but isn't. Why should User Y be penalized for taking advantage of what is offered.

I'm an ardent opponent of bandwidth caps. Mobile devices are more of a grey area than cable landlines but still.

My guess is that things like Netflix and AirVideo coming available to iPhone were big factors in AT&T's decision. Widespread, unmetered use of those apps would kill their network even more than it already is. Unfortunately, the customers are having to pay for AT&T's poor network.

I agree that the change sucks, but I'm guessing they're just the first carrier to do it, and others will follow close behind. Fortunately, I'm grandfathered in to the unlimited plan, assuming I stick with the iPhone platform (which I'm still undecided on)...

[The Rick]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Doesn't matter... look at the context... some ignorant Apple fanboy tried to misrepresent the EVO by saying they didn't have software to support video chat.. yet the software was out MONTHS before the hardware.... typical of the Apple crowd to wait for an app to be spoon fed from daddy Jobs before they know a better one existed before it.

Are you calling me an ignorant Apple fanboy?

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Silock

Which is fine for normal people, but I'm not a normal user.

I really really doubt you would hit that 2GB cap like you think you would. It's very difficult to use your phone enough to hit that. Remember that your transfers over WiFi don't count against that 2GB cap. Only what you transfer over 3G. So streaming over WiFi from your home computer wouldn't count against the cap.

I'm not sure what phone you're currently using, but look to see if it tells you how much data you transfer per month that actually counts as carrier data. Most phones do. I'm not saying I don't believe you, but averaging anywhere close to 2GB a month is incredibly rare. You would drain the battery twice a day if you really used that much data.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm pretty sure the answer is no, but has there been any change/advancement in the ability to use a 3Gs and connect to a Blackberry Server?

My wife HATES her BB, but it looks like because her company is on a BB server, she's tied to a BB.

I'm not very, if at all tech-savvy, so keep responses dummy-approved.

I guess that either the answer is no, or that the post was overlooked in all the bickering that followed it.

Anyone?

[Fish]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I guess that either the answer is no, or that the post was overlooked in all the bickering that followed it.

Anyone?

Generally an enterprise BB server is simply a "middleman" between the BB client and an Exchange server, that is only required by BB. Other phones don't need that "middleman", and can just connect directly to the Exchange server. Most companies that use a BB server had their Exchange server already in place, but had to purchase the BBES just so their employees with BB phones could access the existing Exchange server. If that's the case, she can get a new phone and connect directly to the Exchange server.

That's the case for my employer and most others I know. Have her ask the IT department to be sure though.

[NewChief]

The main thing that Austinchief, and all the other people who hate on Apple fail to see is that it's not about hardware specs vs. hardware specs. It's not about what's the superior product. It's about marketshare, marketing, and consumer awareness.

While I know that the free marketers out there would love to have faith in the American consumer... they're just not always that smart and predictable. There's more to their choice than going down and doing a point by point comparison of products. So you can argue about how inferior Apple is to Droid products all you want, but that doesn't mean that Apple phones are going to suddenly fall behind and become unpopular.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by KC Fish

Generally an enterprise BB server is simply a "middleman" between the BB client and an Exchange server, that is only required by BB. Other phones don't need that "middleman", and can just connect directly to the Exchange server. Most companies that use a BB server had their Exchange server already in place, but had to purchase the BBES just so their employees with BB phones could access the existing Exchange server. If that's the case, she can get a new phone and connect directly to the Exchange server.

That's the case for my employer and most others I know. Have her ask the IT department to be sure though.

This.

Have her ask her IT guys what phones will work and what phones won't.

[Huffmeister]

Originally Posted by NewPhin

The main thing that Austinchief, and all the other people who hate on Apple fail to see is that it's not about hardware specs vs. hardware specs. It's not about what's the superior product. It's about marketshare, marketing, and consumer awareness.

Which is exactly what could be said about Microsoft for the last 20 years.

[NewChief]

Originally Posted by Cankerskull

Which is exactly what could be said about Microsoft for the last 20 years.

Exactly. As much sense as it would make for the entire world to switch to Linux... it just hasn't happened.

[QuikSsurfer]

I'm loving Safari 5 on my windows 7 netbook.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Actually, they aren't necessarily wrong in that assertion. Google has no software in their OS to support it. If we're going to say third party apps are in the running for things devices "support", the iPhone has a lot more features than people are claiming. As does Android.

As I stated, yes they DO.. Qik is bundled and preconfigured.. it is their version of facetime... just because Google doesn't own them, doesn't mean it wasn't ready to go...

The great thing about the Android model is... they provide an open environment and allow development of even better products like fring... so you don't have to wait for Apple to spoon-feed you and tell you when you are ready for something.

The FACT is, the supposed journalist who made the comment was dead wrong.