Steve Sobol

On 2007-10-31, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> The N800 isn't a SELLphone! It uses my E815 SELLphone for a
> modem wherever real wifi isn't available, an area which shrinks,
> daily.

Didn't realize that.

> Brew and JAVA are not operating systems. They operate on TOP of
> operating systems like Symbian, Windoze Mobile, etc. to provide a
> runtime environment for various downloadable applications
> webpages send down. BREW stands for Binary Runtime Environment
> for Wireless. It's from Qualcom's QIS.
> http://www.codeproject.com/useritems...ction_brew.asp
>

Yeah, I know.

> JAVA is a similar runtime environment that overlays the operating
> system of a device, as is .NET Framework from our pals over at
> Micro$not.

Yeah, I know.

> The difference between BREW and JAVA is Brew is made to sit atop
> different hardware platforms, where JAVA sits atop a loaded
> operating system.

If you say so. I'm not familiar enough with BREW to agree or disagree.

--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com

SoCal Fire news @the L.A. Times: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/breakingnews/
Local wildfire coverage, KFMB-TV San Diego: http://cbs8.com/

Scott

Oxford <colalovesmacs@smart.com> wrote in
news:colalovesmacs-B46754.21103530102007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

<snip>

So you do agree- there is no reason to buy an iPhone based on it's size
because it is thicker than a cellphone and smartphone.

Larry

Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in
news:alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710311614321.5848@Tomobiki-
Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU:

> other than a Skype phone

and Google Talk
and VoIP from many carriers
and some I haven't discovered yet because Google talk video is too
much fun! N800's have a WEBCAM...(c;


Larry
--
You can tell there's extremely
intelligent life in the universe
because they have never called Earth.

Larry

Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote in news:R8CdnYcQt-
yhhbTanZ2dnUVZ_r_inZ2d@adelphia.com:

> So you do agree- there is no reason to buy an iPhone based on
it's size
> because it is thicker than a cellphone and smartphone.
>
>

http://www.wirelessinfo.com/content/...s-9-9mm-Thick-
Phone.htm

9.9 mm....slide phone....not stripped...

The battery must be as thin as a watch battery!

Larry
--
You can tell there's extremely
intelligent life in the universe
because they have never called Earth.

Mitch

In article <jasin-74DAA7.09030031102007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net>,
Gene Jones <jasin@janus.com> wrote:

> > >> Means nothing if it won't play Realmedia, Flash movies, DivX,
> > >> etc.
> those MS based 90's tech

Why would you call those technologies "MS based"?
They had nothing to do with MS. You could even argue Flash was made as
much using Mac OS as anything else, and the Xvid and DivX compressions
were developed to _spite_ MS.

Mitch

In article
<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710221735570.5880@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU>,
Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> If it were to buy yet another handheld gadget, it would be a Nokia N800 or
> possibly N810. Amazon sells the N800 for $260. It's Linux, hence open
> source, and unlike iPhone there's an SDK for it now. It also has much
> better screen resolution (800x480) than iPhone (320x480), so it's a much
> more practical platform for ported applications.
>
> My current handheld gadget is a Sony UX280P UMPC. It is somewhat larger
> and quite a bit thicker than an iPhone or N800, but it has a 1024x600
> screen resolution and runs Windows XP (or Vista).

Both good choices, but we're just getting larger and larger.
Gotta recognize the massive differences here: MUCH larger devices, and
very much higher prices.

Pocket-sized devices have a benefit.
iPhone is the smallest of such pocket-sized devices with the most
features and largest screen res.

Yes, some devices use an open platform. (That may not be anything
important to the user, and it is arguable that it is ready for consumer
use).
Yes, some devices are smaller, cheaper, or have different features.
That's fine -- if they fit better, buy one of those. No one is saying
you have to be imppressed with iPhone, and no one expects it to be a
perfect fit for all users. No one (but Oxford) is even trying to
pretend it's a fit for general users!
That means you don't have to be angry and decry the device with such
hate. Just let it go like you would any other cell phone that doesn't
fit your personal needs. You didn't run down every article and comment
about the earliest Motorolas, did you? Let the articles about iPhone
go, too.

Mitch

In article
<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710212002200.4932@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>, Mark
Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> >> Even a few more intelligent fanboys have figured out that for the price of
> >> an iPhone, they can get an unlocked phone (that performs better as a
> >> phone)
> > Significantly better? Or hardly better at all?
>
> Yes, signficantly better.
>
> iPhone's RF performance and audio quality is mediocre compared to other
> GSM phones or most CDMA phones.
Who measured this? Where did you read it?
I'm not prepared to take your angry assertion as evidence, of course.

> Its data performance is far below CDMA or 3G phones.
Not a phone function. Weren't you complaining that all the 'fanboys'
couldn't keep on-topic?

Mitch

In article
<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710212007300.4932@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>, Mark
Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> > But which is huge and heavy and expensive.
>
> Have you ever used a Nokia N800? Or are you confusing it with a UMPC?
Used? No. We were talking about features, and those are quantifiable.

> The N800 is available at Amazon for $258. That's $141 cheaper than an
> iPhone. And the N800 can run Skype.
Quite right -- but it can't operate as a cell phone, has something like
128 MB (perhaps more recently 256 MB). Its also not available from
Nokia any more, so if you want to claim EOL products are a bad buy,
that's a point against it.
It's a much better comparison to Touch, at the same prices, but you
were claiming that was expensive, too.

> UMPC prices are coming down, although they are still at least twice as
> costly as iPhones. But for that price you get a full Windows system
Are you trying to make that sound like an advantage? It would be an
advantage to avoid Windows, not include it. That's why people want the
Linux devices, you know.

> with four times the screen solution of iPhone.
Youy can't have that 'four times the resolution' without leaving behind
the entire category we are talking about.

Yes, everyone knows there are larger, heavier, more-expensive devices
that have larger screens. Isn't it pointless to keep mentioning that,
when we all know they aren't what we are talking about at all?

> And you can run Skype.
Only within WiFi networks, which means it's no competition for a cell
phone. Unless you are prepared to say Oxford is right.

Mitch

In article
<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710211940220.4932@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>, Mark
Crispin <MRC@Panda.COM> wrote:

> > Oxford represents NO segment of population. There are definitely people
> > who are fans of Apple products, but 'fanboys' is unnecessarily mean and
> > hurtful.
>
> I'm sorry that the truth hurts.
Who said that?
I am saying that your use of that word is when you are trying to be
hurtful. I did not say you were correct, that you had any fact right,
that you would recognize truth in any case.
I said you were trying to be hurtful. If that is the truth, then you
need to know I find you only ignorant and annoying, not hurtful.

> Apple might do better in the market without the wide-eyed fanatics
> screaming that all Apple products are perfect in all ways
Well, no wonder you are angry.
If it helps, no one is saying that. Well, okay, some of the expert
reviewers have been saying it, but most of us see that as short-sighted
dribble to sell magazines or site hits.

> and refusing to
> comprehend that competing products have features too.
Please -- show us ANY example of people that don't comprehend that.

The problem has repeatedlyt been to show you that iPhone is not, and is
not supposed to be, a juggernaut exactly like other devices. It's
supposed to be good at what it DOES try to do, not at everything any
device has ever tried to do.

Mitch

In article
<alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710211931270.4932@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>, Mark
Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> > And I think most of us are scratching our heads wondering why Mark is
> > decrying it as a poor business tool. It's like running into a theater
> > and yelling that it's a bad restaurant.
>
> Apple fanboys (such as Oxford) pollute our newsgroups saying otherwise.
> We are responding by posting the truth in the Apple fanboy newsgroup.
No sir, YOU are not posting any truths.
And if it makes you feel better, you _do_ come off exactly like Oxford
turned the other way. Still wrong in everything, still posting
everywhere you cn find, still adamant in his unsupported extreme claims
of everything, and insisting he knows it all.

> Or, to use your metaphor, the fanboys are running into our restaurant and
> saying that it's a bad theater.
One 'fanboy' does not make a plague.