Antennagate Redux: Consumer Reports condemns Verizon iPhone 4 The Verizon CDMA incarnation of Apple's iPhone 4 suffers from the same dropped-call syndrome as the existing GSM incarnation, according to the venerable American product tester Consumer Reports. As a consequence, Consumer Reports is not putting the Verizon iPhone 4 on its list of recommended smartphones – something that's sure …
People like you who take every opportunity to post useless comments about stuff they personally don't like, in a vain attempt to bolster their own flagging ego. Intelligent and reasoned posts gain respect, this sort of throwaway crap is an embarrassment, whatever product or company it's directed at.
I own several Apple products, including a 3GS, and they (mostly) do what I want them to do, which is what it's all about.They deliver value. But I've not been tempted by an iPhone 4, as it's a nice screen that does the same stuff as before. Which is not enough.
I may go for an iPhone 5 or 6 if it delivers a significant improvement on what I have now. But I'm not so married to Apple's ecosystem to not to evaluate the alternatives.
Android is very good, and will get better, but I do question an ecosystem where the proponent charges $0, betting it can maximise subsequent advertising $$$, while the HW manufacturers are reduced to "me too" offerings.
Android strips away their ability to take the initiative and lead the market, as they're always following whatever Google comes up with on the software side of things, just like all their competitors.
Nokia has got it right by stepping out of this zero sum game. Whether their alliance with Microsoft can deliver an ecosystem that is more compelling than Apple's is another question ...
>Android strips away their ability to take the initiative and lead the market, as they're always following whatever Google comes up with
Some 80 companies are involved in developing Android, not just Google, and almost all the others are the hardware and handset manufacturers you speak of. That's why it has achieved the current position so quickly, Google developers are really good, but not that really good!
Many of the key OHA partners, notably Samsung but also Tosh, LG and a dozen others, also design and manufacture practically all of the iPhone's components. For them its a win either way and they're presumably more than happy to play along with the 'leading brand' game Apple so excels at.
Back OT, one of the few components actually designed by Apple on iPhone4 is the antenna - presumably as some bright spark saw it as part of the core Apple hardware design activity which is enclosures.
> the HW manufacturers are reduced to "me too" offerings.
No, they're not. They're *offered* the opportunity to be such, whilst simultaneously being *offered* the opportunity to do whatever they like with Android. They don't even need Google's permission to take the Android code and do something different.
> Android strips away their ability to take the initiative
Not at all. Anyone can take any initiative; the fact that so many manufacturers currently are not doing so is because they see value in commonality, not because it is forced upon them.
This situation might change. Or it might not.
Vic.
Hope you like paying 42% more for media subscriptions.
That is what Apple hopes to pin on its own customers.
Of course, it is trying to illegally cause the same high prices through more efficient channels such as Android or even the home web site. But, that would be illegal and Apple lawyers know it.
But, then Apple customers are not very intelligent. So they most likely will never figure that out.
"Hope you like paying 42% more for media subscriptions."
Er, Apple wants to charge a company 30% if Apple generates the subscription. Apple won't take anything for the subscription if it is applied outside of the Apple's ecosystem. Apple would like the price of the subscription within Apple's ecosystem to match any offers outside the ecosystem.
Would you care to explain why this is 42% more?
More rampant anti-Apple trolling from someone who can't be bothered to actually look into it and do the math.
Its closer to 43%.
Company X used to sell a subscription for £1. Now apple force them to make it easier to buy that subscription using apple. But apple want to take 30%. If company X still want to make £1, then they must now charge £1.43. Which is 43% more than before. Why dont _you_ do the maths before you start foaming? Fanboi.
<sigh> ... for a moment assume you earn 100 X's for something you sell. Now assume somebody wants to take a 30% cut of that ... so you are going to lose 30 X's and only take home 70 X's.
Now assume that you are not happy to lose those 30 X's.
How many X's would you have to add onto those 100 X's, such that when 30% is deducted, you are left with 100 X's?
Let's assume it is as simple as 30% more. That would mean that you now charge 130 X's. But ... what's this ... 30% of 130 is ... 39 X's ... so by raising my price by 30%, I am still losing and only getting 91 X's!
But, wait ... if I add on 42 X's and charge 142 X now, then 30% = 42 X's. Hurray ... I still make 100X's even after paying Apple 30% if I raise my overall price by 42%!
QED ...
The sad thing is that it doesn't need to be legal. I'm sure that Apple will be happy to remove that clause if they are forced to, but as they don't need a reason to refuse an app, they can still ban everyone who doesn't comply with that "rule" even if it's not in the T&C anymore. I'm sure there are a couple publishers around who will just choose to not take the chance...
You are a serious douche. No wonder people hate fanbois, its not the iproducts, its the f*cktard attitude of the fanbois themselves. You could rail on any company for one thing or another, but none are perfect, and the religion-like devotion of some of you people is really pitiful. There ya go shmuck =)
Microsoft make phones now do they, or was that a complete nonsequitur to start with?
I, too have never had any problem with Apple products, since I have never owned any.
Actually, that is a lie, I used to have to use Apple Macintoshes, back when they were still called that, and they were a steaming heap, with a clunky user interface, non-standard SCSI implementation, and stupid one-buttonned mouse, so technically I have had problems with Apple products. However, since this article is about phones, that could be considered an irrelevance...
On the topic of phones, however, I'd suggest taking a look at the phones made by HTC, which are a more serious competitor to Apple in the hardware market than Microsoft, who , as I pointed out above, don't actually make phones AFAIK. I, for one, whould rather use a phone which isn't locked down to using proprietary software to transfer files (the crock of shite that is iTunes), but which allows you to mount your phone as an external drive and simply transfer any files you wish, and for which you can obtain software to play any media files you wish without paying tithe to St Jobs.
Oh, and edning with an ad-hominem attack is always stylish, and always strengthens your argument, idiot.*
*iRony.
so its happening again with a slightly uptodate model this is why il never buy apple or any of there products ever there rain of been top spot is sliping down hill because there a damn ripoff to i can get a much better phone cheaper that does the same things. why pay for something just cause its got a half bitton apple on it eh why bother your just paying for the name. think il get a htc or samsung thank you least they work lol
"so its happening again with a slightly uptodate model this is why il never buy apple or any of there products ever there rain of been top spot is sliping down hill because there a damn ripoff to i can get a much better phone cheaper that does the same things." Yeah and u could get some English lessons to. If u want a top end HTC or Samsung on contract it will cost u just as much as an Iphone. If u go for a lower end HTC or Samsung then it wont be as good as an Iphone. You pays your money and you takes your choice....
...the irony of your lamentably poor grasp of the English language:
HTC Desire HD - Free, £25 per month
HTC Desire Z - Free, £25 per month
HTC Desire - Free, £20 per month
Samsung Galaxy S - Free, £25 per month
...and that's from one site and before I even start on the free handsets for WP7.
In my previous post I referred to the Desire HD as being 60% cheaper the the iPhone4 16GB. I was of course typing too fast! What I meant to write is that the Desire HD is 60% OF the price of the cheapest iPhone4 and is therefore about 40% cheaper than the iPhone. That however does not change one iota the rest of my previous post.
I have always taken the cracks about the Jobsian reality warp as examples of barbed humour until I read your post and realised that The Man From Cupertino really can warp reality for a certain type of iPhanboi.
Let us take the OFF-contract price of the cheapest of the iPhone4s at Amazon: £599
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Apple-iPhone-Black-Mobile-Phone/dp/B003TQ3NCY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298703067&sr=8-1
Let us further take an example one of the high-end Android phones the Desire HD available OFF-contract from Amazon for: £375
http://www.amazon.co.uk/HTC-Desire-Free-Mobile-Phone/dp/B003ZDP5YK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298703126&sr=8-1
Are you seriously telling me that it is impossible to get a more reasonable deal for a Desire HD ON-contract than for the iPhone4 (16Gb, the cheapest of the two iPhones) ON-contract when the sim-free price difference between them is over 60%? Because if that is true then Apple has a deal with the carriers concerned that the competition authorities ought to be looking at on the grounds of predatory pricing or Apple is taking a hit on their *own* margins that would result in their own shareholders going absolutely berserk. I do not know what Steve has been feeding you boy but just say no, you know it makes sense.
Yep, Apple completely changed the market alright, now you can get a phone that does everything...... except, it seems, maintain a call when held a certain way!!!
It's funny but I always thought it might be a good idea if the PRIMARY function of a phone was to make and receive phonecalls.......
There were smartphones before that - I suffered from having a surplus company XDA for 6 months in 2006. There were tablets before that - I suffered from having to use network test and measurement software that came with a bundled Tosh tablet in 2005.
None of them was even remotely as usable as the iDevices. That is a fact.
By the way I am no fanboy - my iDevices are obtained via skipdiving and run Linux (a 2002 TiBook and a 2004 G4 Mac Mini). However credit where credit due - Apple made both the smartphone and the tablet a mainstream consumer friendly device. It succeeded where Microsoft and Nokia failed miserably for nearly 10 years prior to that.
I'm no iFanboi having owned several 5x-6x win phones before my 3G and 3GS.
Yes there were successful smartphones before the iPhone but no-one but the most rabid anti-fanboi's would deny that Apple have redefined the mp3 player, smartphone and tablet markets. Hate Apple (and part of me hopes they are punished badly by the Market for denying Antennagate) all you want but there is no denying how successful they have been in the last 10 years.
Name one other manufacturer that has managed that.
"[...] Apple have [has] redefined the mp3 player, smartphone and tablet markets"
Marketing something is not the same as redefining a technology. Additionally, products have changed as a post result, not as a precursor.
For example, prior to the iPod, most MP3 players were flash memory based, had better audio quality, removable chargeable batteries, swappable memory, AM/FM transmitters, AM/FM receivers and many other functions. Apple removed all of these features (reintroducing some of them later as "magical") and decimated the market, selling a garbage product in shiny colors. The key was marketing it as "cool" in order to con the people with no technical expertise into buying one. Now everyone duplicates "what works" which is a featureless stripped down music player.
How many phones currently have swappable batteries? Why not? I'd gladly take a phone with a 4 hour battery life that I can just swap a second battery into than deal with an iCrap that I can never change the battery in. Instead of duplicating, phone companies need to go back to the features that Apple cut and prove to the people why they are valuable.
"The iPhone may be an iTurd, but if that's true why would Google, Microsoft, HP/Palm, and RIM be trying so hard to play catch-up?"
It's not a Catch-up...it call competition.
There is a competition in everything now days (longer nails, longest hair, highest jump…..)
I guess the companies want to join the Guinness world of records for better looking Turd.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
