Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×
Technology (Apple) Technology

Woz Dumps on MacBook Air, iPhone, AppleTV 360 360

AcidAUS writes "Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak heaped less than lavish praise on the company's iPhone, MacBook Air and Apple TV products when visiting Sydney this morning. Wozniak said he was puzzled by the lack of 3G support on the iPhone and that he didn't believe the MacBook Air would be a hit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Woz Dumps on MacBook Air, iPhone, AppleTV

Comments Filter:
  • by PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:25AM (#22623610) Journal
    Well, Steve is just stating what everyone else is thinking! Everyone who isn't completely in love with apple, that is. Although apple has great products, they're not for everyone, and because of that, they lack certain features.

    For example, the macbook air isn't very good as a main computer, and the lack of 3G iphones has to do with battery life - Apple has chosen to offer certain features which are mutually exclusive with other features - I'm glad someone ... respectable ... is saying it!

    I know a girl who has apple everything. She wouldn't buy a music player if it didn't come from apple - and she has 4 ipods, and 3 apple computers. She likes things to WORK, and she likes them to look beautiful. So, she ** IS ** apple's target market.

    Me, on the other hand, I prefer other options - I LIKE figuring out how my gadgets work, and I like repairing them at home ... so if they're a little bigger (because they're not manufatured with VERY tight tolerances, like the ipod nano), then I'm okay with that.

  • Sour Grapes (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Lord Haw Haw (1248410) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:26AM (#22623630)
    It's also just too bad he's not earning off these products. Heck, I'd go as far to say my old employer makes inferior products. They did fire me though, so maybe I'm just letting off steam.
  • 3G (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dangerz (540904) <stuff@@@tildastudios...net> on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:28AM (#22623654) Homepage
    While I definitely do miss the speed of 3G, all the other features of the iPhone made it worth it. I came from the Cingular 8525 and while it was an ok phone, all the apps on there seemed like they were made for a computer. Tiny buttons, slow response times and nothing worked well together.

    The thing I like about the iPhone is while it does have a lot of apps, all of them were made for a phone. MMS is stupid not having, but I knew that when I purchased it. Hopefully it's just a firmware update.

    Overall, it's a pretty good phone and I dont regret buying it.
  • No questions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheMeuge (645043) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:28AM (#22623660)

    I do however question the release of the iPhone without g3 support.
    I don't. The reason is so blindingly obvious, it takes a superb amount of fanboyism to ignore:

    Apple released a non-3G iPhone, to ensure that everyone who buys the first iPhone for $500, will buy the iPhone3G for $500, a year later.
  • not sour grapes... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by argent (18001) <peter@slashdot.2 ... m ['006' in gap]> on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:29AM (#22623670) Homepage Journal
    Woz is, according to the article you obviously didn't read, still employed by and invested in Apple.
  • So? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by swein515 (195260) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:30AM (#22623690) Journal
    So just because Woz said it, it's news? His opinions are nothing new, at all, and have zero insight as an Apple "insider".
  • Re:Hum (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dave420 (699308) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:33AM (#22623736)
    The iPhone didn't change the face of the cell phone market. It changed the face of the Idiot Bauble market by allowing them to buy a phone, but the most intense users of phones before the iPhone launch (corporate) still can't use the thing, so I fail to see how a non-3G phone corporate users can't use is changing the face of the cell phone market. Also, outside the US, the iPhone hasn't been as great a success. Most other countries already had phones that bested the iPhone on features (and price). The iPhone and the Air are just extrapolations of a game Apple didn't put into play. They're just using their clout to push things forward slightly, they're not launching new ways of thinking about existing products. They're playing the same game as everyone else, they just happen to have millions of grass-roots users screaming about their new products every time someone hears something new about them.
  • by russotto (537200) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:34AM (#22623758) Journal
    It's called the MacBook Pro. I'm sure he has a few. The Air isn't for him.

    And of course everyone wants 3G on the iPhone. Judging from the sales, it's not a fatal flaw.
  • Re:So? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Meat Computer (1249990) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:36AM (#22623778)
    Yeah, and who the fuck are you, some slob? At least he co-founded Apple Computer. That means something.
  • Re:3G (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dave420 (699308) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:37AM (#22623792)
    I had to go for the Nokia N95 8GB because I needed 3G for work, and I wanted the AGPS and 5MP camera. I can't tether the iPhone to my PC and use it for work, as it just doesn't have the speed.

    I do love the iPhone's interface, but I don't see the point of having a Ferrari's dashboard on a Fiat Punto. I'd rather have it the other way round ;)
  • Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by eldepeche (854916) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:44AM (#22623866)
    I would say it's more newsworthy than Linus or RMS saying something, because everyone always knows what Linus thinks, and RMS never shuts up. It's been a while since I read a quotation from Woz.
  • Make Air Cheaper (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nomen Publicus (1150725) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:51AM (#22623924)
    If the Air was half the price, they would sell shed loads. It's the kind of device that Apple might expect to sell two or three to a household. But at the current price, there may not be much demand.
  • by STrinity (723872) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:55AM (#22623958) Homepage
    He'd be modded troll and flamebait for daring to impugn Apple's quality.
  • by DrDitto (962751) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:57AM (#22623984)
    Woz thinks like an engineer. The majority of cellphone users don't know what 3G is and they don't care. What they do care about is a sexy, easy-to-use device that lets them easily play music, browse the web, make phone calls, and more. Other cellphones can also do this, but none is as sexy and easy-to-use as the iPhone.
  • by metamatic (202216) on Monday March 03, 2008 @11:59AM (#22624024) Homepage Journal

    Apple should have released an SDK for the iPod Touch that gives full access to the system on both the iPod Touch and iPhone when the iPhone is not on a cellular network.

    Wait, you actually bought that garbage about needing the SDK restrictions in order to ensure network security? In spite of the fact that Nokia, Sony Ericsson, RIM, and all the WinCE handset makers have open SDKs which don't require application signing?

  • Re:Hum (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:00PM (#22624030) Journal

    Most other countries already had phones that bested the iPhone on features (and price).
    I've played with an iPhone and it beats any other phone I've seen on interface hands down. Outside the US, however, it is far too restrictive. People here in the UK are used to cheap phones supporting 3G (my three-year-old one does, and it was free with the cheapest contract I could find). We are used to being able to install third-party software (I installed the Google Mobile Maps thing last night, for example, and have a third-party file manager which makes copying large collections of photos via bluetooth much easier than the built-in one). We are also, sadly, used to phones with horrible UIs. Being asked to trade a lot of features and a crap UI for fewer features, no way of adding the missing ones, a (much) higher price and a better UI is not the compelling.

    I looked on eBay last night, and the N95 goes for about half the price of the iPhone. In terms of features, it is far ahead of the iPhone. Would you pay twice as much for a better UI and fewer features?

  • Re:No questions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by timster (32400) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:00PM (#22624034)
    Because there is SO much free space inside the iPhone case for large extra chipsets. And AT&T's 3G network is well enough built out that the average user can expect 3G performance to be better than EDGE performance a significant majority of the time. And there are no independent tests confirming that 3G chipsets available in 2007 used much more battery power even when just making calls.

  • Re:No questions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eebra82 (907996) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:04PM (#22624082) Homepage

    Apple released a non-3G iPhone, to ensure that everyone who buys the first iPhone for $500, will buy the iPhone3G for $500, a year later.
    That doesn't sound like Apple at all, does it? For starters, EDGE sucks on a phone that is intended for YouTube, Safari and mail applications. It makes as little sense as putting FIAT tires on a Lamborghini. Secondly, Apple's top of the line products usually equip the latest hardware. Just look at their computers and software products.

    There is probably an entirely different reason Apple "chose" not to include 3G.
  • Re:No questions (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:05PM (#22624098)

    I don't. The reason is so blindingly obvious, it takes a superb amount of fanboyism to ignore:

    Apple released a non-3G iPhone, to ensure that everyone who buys the first iPhone for $500, will buy the iPhone3G for $500, a year later.

    I think the reasons were a little more complicated. While I fully agree that Apple likes to ensure that their fans purchase the same thing many, many times, I don't think that's what happened here. I honestly think they would have gone with a better network initially if they could, but that they couldn't get a provider with 3G support and willing to cave to all their demands initially. What you're suggesting is that Apple intentionally crippled a product that, if we recall from a year ago, was given a real chance of being the next Newton. I think making a phone was sufficiently important to Jobs that he wasn't going to dick around intentionally crippling it.

    We saw what he did instead - charge early adopters a tax for the privilege.

  • by darjen (879890) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:07PM (#22624130)

    Give me the iPhone with a hidden full QWERTY

    You should consider the Nokia e90 Communicator. Though the price tag is a bit high, personally I think it kicks the crap out of the iPhone in features. It also lacks 3G in the US, but only because it uses a different frequency band.
  • by nevali (942731) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:08PM (#22624136) Homepage
    [q]For example, the macbook air isn't very good as a main computer, and the lack of 3G iphones has to do with battery life - Apple has chosen to offer certain features which are mutually exclusive with other features - I'm glad someone ... respectable ... is saying it! [/q]

    I hate to burst your bubble, but everyone except the most rabid of fanboys (and I'll concede that the likes of Slashdot has a tendency for attracting them) has consistently said as much: if doesn't offer the features you require, don't buy it, no matter if it is the prettiest/nicest designed/lickable/whatever.

    Lots of people are content with EDGE (or just don't care), and Apple's been selling to those people--the reasons for not producing a 3G iPhone have been pretty clear from quite early on, but that doesn't mean the iPhone is suddenly everybody's only option and that they're somehow more limited by the iPhone's limitations than they were previously. I have plenty of Apple products, but I have plenty of products from other manufacturers too: I don't really understand the current trend for bashing a product because it doesn't meet an individual's specific requirements, when it's quite obvious that it does meet (or exceed) the requirements of more than enough people to keep Apple in business and the vast majority of its customers happy.

  • Re:No questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Applekid (993327) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:13PM (#22624206)
    TFA seems to indicate that his complaint is that he has 3G phones that last just as long as the non-3G iPhone... the fact that it takes extra energy isn't lost on him but rather it should have had 3G.

    To have it use 3G and maintain it's current battery life might have taken extra engineering to squeeze more energy efficiency out of it, or a slightly more energetic battery. Wozniak doesn't strike me as a "product-cycle schedule is more important that the hardware" kind of guy.
  • by failedlogic (627314) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:16PM (#22624236)
    This touches on a much larger problem for Apple ... they make throw-away gadgets and computers of increasingly lesser quality as they build up a user-base. They are in some ways becoming Dell by decreasing quality (for increased profit) as their sales volume increases.

    I think the quality of the iMac systems have gone down since the switch-over to Intel. I'm not tempted to buy one and would rather continue to use my G5 (not an option much longer) or buy a PC. I have to buy a whole lot of extra junk and throw it away after using it because Apple couldn't/wouldn't make a more affordable and expandable desktop. I'd like a better video card. I'd like a second hard-drive inside the system, ditto a better DVD burner. So when I replace the iMac with a PC, I don't need the HDD and burner enclosure. My LCD monitor (on the iMac), if I decide not to keep the iMac is utterly useless to me as I can't change it from computer to LCD monitor (there is a way, I'm not tempted or skilled enough to try).

    The iPod market is very much dependent on a throw-away society. My 5th Gen iPod's battery is supposed to last around 12 to 20 hours (can't remember the marketing lingo) but it has only ever lasted around 6 hours. I've replaced the battery myself with a higher life brand-name battery. Still same result. The shuffle, nano and the iPhone build on this idea of throw-away. I don't like the idea of having to send-in a cell-phone and not have access to it for a few days for Apple to change the battery. Hello?! for some people its their only phone. Calling 911, at the least, is going to be impossible!
  • by King_TJ (85913) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:25PM (#22624362) Journal
    I think your question really hits the nail on the head, actually. When people buy Apple products, they're almost *always* doing so specifically because they're willing to "pay more for a better UI". And yes, part of that inherently means "fewer features".

    Did the iPod become a huge success because it had the "most features for the dollar"? Hardly! It didn't even have a lousy built-in FM radio tuner! The beauty of it, though, was the overall form factor and UI functionality. While China and Korea were cranking out cheap little generic MP3 players with tiny buttons and single line LCD displays, Apple came along with a player that was easy and actually *enjoyable* for people to manipulate. I remember when I first bought a 2nd. generation iPod, I'd hand it to reluctant people who said "I don't know how to use one of these things!" - and within seconds, they'd get a big grin on their face when they realized how that scroll-wheel let them move through the menus. The whole thing just had a "satisfying" feel to operating it, and even to simply holding it in your hand comfortably.

    Mac OS X is much the same way. It's a visually satisfying OS, as well as one that most people find relatively "friendly" to use once they give it a chance. If your only (or main) concern is having the most possible options to tweak/modify, then OS X isn't for you. Many aspects of the UI are chosen for you by Apple's designers, and you'll have to buy 3rd. party tools (that often destabilize the system or fail when updates come along) just to force the changes. On the other hand, MOST of us just want an operating system that's stable, looks good out of the box, and does the things we need it to do. OS X seems to accomplish all of this quite well.

    I see the iPhone as yet another device in this vein. Some phones really cram in too MANY features, and it just makes the menus hard to navigate. Most cellphone users can't even tell you what some of the options do, or at least how to get to them on their phones. The iPhone does a pretty darn impressive job of making it easy to access the things you really might want to use on your phone, while leaving out a lot of the confusion. (EG. If I want to call forward my number to another number, I don't have to to remember that my carrier uses * and some 2 digit code to turn forwarding on, and another such code to turn it back off. I simply tap the "Call forward" option on the iPhone menu and key in the destination number for it. I then slide the switch to either "On" or "Off" and it's done.) And obviously, the web browsing experience blows away most of the competition. It's the first of many "Smartphones" I've had where I can surf "normal" web sites and actually read the content properly.
  • Re:Hum (Score:5, Insightful)

    by smackt4rd (950154) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:37PM (#22624502)
    I think they're just following the same old "ipod" strategy. (which has worked so far) They keep adding incremental upgrades to the device, and get to charge you $400 for each new one. Why not keep that up, if people keep falling for it?
  • by egomaniac (105476) on Monday March 03, 2008 @12:39PM (#22624532) Homepage
    I call BS. Apples don't "just work" any more than XP machines do.

    I concede that Apples are not perfect machines the way many fanboys claim they are, but I strongly disagree that they have as many problems as XP machines. "Just work" includes things like not having to resort to Google every time I want to find an infrequently accessed setting or command, which I find myself doing embarrassingly often on XP and Vista. They're both horribly laid out, and completely different from one another with respect to how to perform many common tasks.

    OS X, even after a decade of dedicated Windows use, makes far more sense to me, and obviously to many others. It's clearly a personal matter, and you might not share the same opinion, but you can't deny that many people feel OS X is easier to navigate.

    Wireless networking is hell if you want WPA encryption.

    Wait... what? I've got WPA encryption on my network. The user experience was: OS X told me that the network required a password and prompted me to enter it. I entered it. And presto, I was hooked up to the network. Where exactly is the "hell" part?

    What Apples do do is have more preloaded software. So, if you are considering the default software package, then sure. I have had to split my time equally between OSX and XP, and I spent far more time fiddling getting stuff to work in OSX.

    What exactly did you have to fiddle with on the OS X side of things to get it to work?
  • Re:Air Sold Out (Score:3, Insightful)

    by s_p_oneil (795792) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:00PM (#22624776) Homepage
    It's hard to believe that many people would buy a laptop without an optical drive. One of the primary uses for my laptop is letting the kids play games and watch DVD's in the back seat during long drives. (I see no point in spending hundreds on a separate device that's just for playing movies in the car.) When I use it, it's usually for work, but I've watched a few movies on it myself, and I wouldn't consider buying a laptop that didn't have that feature. The Asus EEE PC would be awesome for the kids if it had a DVD-ROM drive.

    It would also be nice if 4+ GB USB drives were cheap enough to use them for movies instead of optical disks, but we're not quite there yet. I wonder if they would be significantly cheaper using ROM instead of flash RAM. They would be like those game cartridges for the old Atari and Commodore systems, but smaller. Anyway, it would be nice.
  • Re:No questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anubis350 (772791) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:09PM (#22624876)
    Apple's primary market is the united states... Also, wasn't there a problem with a couple major 3g chipsets being approved by the FCC that iPhone skirted by being an EDGE based device?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:10PM (#22624892)
    Actually, I wonder how many people RTFA before writing that he was right to "dump on Apple", because he didn't. As regards the MacBook Air he says:

    "I'm trying to figure out a way to make the Air a part of my life because i'm a one-laptop-only person,"

    Well, yeah, if you're that kind of person the product isn't for you -- and wasn't even aimed at you. You'd be better off with a MacBook Pro, wouldn't you? And, yet, Woz apparently likes it enough to "try to figure out a way" to use it even though he knows it wouldn't suit him. He also adds:

    "... there's a pureness about it and really I like it."

    I'd hardly call that "dumping" on a product. He doesn't want one (or maybe he does -- he seems kind-of torn); I wouldn't want one; but it's not a bad product. And he never said it was. I'd have thought it would be very attractive to enough people for Apple to make quite a bit of money on it. I'll be surprised if (a) it doesn't sell well and (b) the Windows OEMs don't have something similar (but not as well-designed) pretty soon.

    But. basically, there was no "dumping" going on here. I thought Slashdot readers were more careful and perceptive readers than some of these posts would suggest.
  • by SuperKendall (25149) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:17PM (#22624978)
    they're going to run the serious risk of having to play catch up with Google.

    They aren't even in the same class. Android (WHEN we even get a phone that supports it) will be great in bringing a better standardized platform to low-end phones. But the necessity to be adaptable for every possible kind of hardware hamstrings Android in comparison to a more focused phone that is free to pair hardware and software UI advancements, that will take place in higher end phones (not just the iPhone or phones from Apple either). There may be some kernel of Android embedded in more advanced phones but using applications built from Android on said platform will be like using web apps on an iPhone - a usable stopgap but hardly competitive with native apps that take full advantage of the native GUI and hardware.

  • Re:No questions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:49PM (#22625410)

    There is probably an entirely different reason Apple "chose" not to include 3G.
    Yeah, and that reason is pretty obvious once you think about it. This was Apple's first phone. They basically started from scratch, and didn't know ahead of time what sort of choices would be better than others. By all accounts, the iPhone was barely ready for show at MWSF '07, and just barely ready for roll-out in June.

    Apple felt it was better to get the parts they had working, working well, than it was to start adding whole new parts into the mix. While I would definitely like 3G, I'd rather have EDGE + the iPhone that's out now than 3G + delayed iPhone + lowered battery life + other aspects of the phone being less finished.

    I also don't buy the "other 3G phones don't have battery problems" argument. The chips themselves don't lie, and they *do* require more power. You can't beat physics. What you *can* do is make the necessary concessions. Such as using less power on the rest of the phone, or using aggressive power management, or using a larger battery, or using EDGE chips most of the time and switching over the 3G on demand, etc. But in all of those cases, it would *absolutely and without question* diminish some other feature of the iPhone, making it larger, or later, or less powerful, or more laggy, etc. If the biggest complaint about the iPhone is that it uses EDGE instead of 3G, then given all the other great features of the phone, it's more than a fair trade, *especially* since a 3G iPhone is inevitable.

    As for the battery being non-replaceable, the real question for me is, had the iPhone had a removable battery, would I have caved in and bought one by now? And the answer, for me, is a resounding 'no'. This means such an iPhone would have been larger or had a smaller capacity battery, and would have been structurally and aesthetically less solid. In other words, a whole lot of lose for absolutely no win.
  • Re:No questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tfoss (203340) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:53PM (#22625458)
    Your analogy is useless unless you compare a N70 +/- 3G. 3 days might've been a week w/o 3G.

  • Re:No questions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Monday March 03, 2008 @01:58PM (#22625518)

    On a windows smartphone with 3G, you've got much better data rates.
    The funny thing about that is that, when it comes to loading a page, the iPhone on EDGE generally shows you the finished page before a 3G phone does. Even though the data is retrieved faster, the actual presentation of the final page is slower. Even more, the iPhone actually shows you a fully desktop-like version of the page, just as it would look in Safari, sans-flash.

    So not only does an EDGE iPhone load pages faster than a 3G otherphone, the pages look better as well.

    And the tables tilt even further in the iPhone's favor with the interface itself.

    Really, the only thing you miss out on not having 3G is when tethering the phone to a computer to use its internet connection (something the iPhone doesn't even officially support anyway). This *is* important to some people, but undoubtedly not for the overwhelming majority of people.
  • Woz (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lpangelrob (714473) on Monday March 03, 2008 @02:09PM (#22625676)
    My wife and I listened to his book (oddly named iWoz) while traveling in Alaska. He's brilliant, and so is Jobs. They're brilliant in different ways, though. Steve Jobs has an innate ability to know in advance what the consumer will like (and he's right most of the time, and wrong sometimes. See 1st generation Apple TV, the G3 Cube, etc.). Woz had (and presumably, still has) an innate ability to make it work with what he's got.

    Which is why I understand Woz not seeing where the Air will fit in today's market. It's not quite a part of his skillset. He's still a genius.
  • by gpalyu (995482) on Monday March 03, 2008 @02:14PM (#22625730)
    "For me, Trebuchet. The OS X firewall solution is too simplistic" Are you saying Windows Firewall is the ultimate firewall for Windows then?
  • Re:Woz knees Mac (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gnasher719 (869701) on Monday March 03, 2008 @02:32PM (#22626014)

    So, Wozniak tells it like it is, that Jobs has made some bad choices, and the world explodes?
    Actually, Wozniak and Jobs just have a very different point of view. Wozniak is a man who can produce technology. Jobs cannot do anything himself, but he can force a company to create a product that customers want. These are very, very different qualities. It will happen very often that something that Apple comes out with is not optimal from Wozniak's point of view. Like the Edge vs. 3G thing: From Wozniak's point of view, Edge is hugely inferior to 3G. From Jobs' point of view, Edge is technologically 90 percent as good as 3G, and the better battery life makes it better. They are obviously both right, it just depends on your point of view.
  • by *weasel (174362) on Monday March 03, 2008 @02:33PM (#22626030)
    what's wrong with a clipboard:
    storage space is low
    edits are limited/lossy
    organizing/achiving/backing-up media is challenging and error prone beyond trivial use
    searching is slow
    long access time for reference data during work tasks
    network transmission is slow and lossy
    data re-entry to digital systems is time-consuming and error-prone.

    It's a mark of how poorly tablets have been done thus far, that a clipboard still compares favorably.
    It's not unlike the early days of personal computing, when people snickered about not having to reboot their typewriters.

    Yet, as with desktops before them, it's just a matter of time before tablets are done well-enough that their drawbacks are trivial next to their advantages. The form-factor is too perfect to be relegated to the dustbin of history. Eventually someone will create a tablet computer with hardware and software built from the ground-up for its task. And it will carve itself a very respectable slice of the computing market.
  • by Dan Nordquist (214523) on Monday March 03, 2008 @02:59PM (#22626374) Homepage
    I have no idea how Apple's current products are supposed to compete with their competitors' future products. Perhaps Apple will also release future products. In the future.
  • Re:No questions (Score:2, Insightful)

    by CapitanMutanda (1185685) on Monday March 03, 2008 @03:17PM (#22626582)
    You must be joking! How can a transmission method (Edge or 3G) make pages look better???
  • I have to agree with the removable battery though. It would be nice to always have one in the cradle ready for a swap out.

    This is a demand that I can't begin to understand. Don't you ever sleep? Can you not make it through a day on a single charge? Every cell phone I've ever had has had a removable battery, and not once have I ever felt the need to have an extra around.

  • Re:No questions (Score:2, Insightful)

    by RiotingPacifist (1228016) on Monday March 03, 2008 @05:22PM (#22628068)
    To be fair, theyre just taking your money. If the ipod color can play video then let it, the ipod Video will be much better at it, so sell the iPod video on the point that its much better at it, not that its the only one that can do it!
  • Re:No questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dfghjk (711126) on Monday March 03, 2008 @07:05PM (#22629286)
    I see you've bought into Steve's lies. Woz didn't, as he rightly observed that that the existence of a large number of 3G phones proves that it isn't so. I'm just a programmer, too, and I'm amused at how easily duped fanboys are.

May Euell Gibbons eat your only copy of the manual!