Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Iphone Cellphones Handhelds Upgrades Apple

Apple Announces iPhone 4 1184

In a keynote presentation today at WWDC, Steve Jobs officially unveiled the iPhone 4. It's powered by an A4 chip, has a glass front and back, and has stainless steel around the edges, which turns out to be part of the antenna system. The new iPhone uses what Jobs called a "Retina display," running at 960x640, or 326 ppi. The battery is also bigger, with a corresponding increase in battery life. The iPhone 4 supports 802.11n, has two mics for noise cancellation, and a three-axis gyroscope, which allows rotation and precision that accelerometers can't match. The iPhone 4's camera is using a 5-megapixel backside illuminated sensor, which Jobs said does better at low-light photography. It also records 720p video at 30 frames per second, with tap-to-focus. In addition to this, they've created an iMovie app, which allows users to easily edit videos on their phone. Several live blogs of the event, with pictures, are available. The device ships in the US on June 24. Apple's product page has been updated with specs and a video. Read on for more details.
Update: 06/07 18:34 GMT by S : Steve's "One More Thing" this time around: FaceTime, live video chat from one iPhone 4 to another. It is Wi-Fi only at the moment, but they're working with carriers to expand that in the future.
Jobs says the iPhone 4 OS is being renamed "iOS4," since it isn't just focused on phones anymore. The release candidate will be made available to developers today. He demonstrated multitasking, a unified email inbox, and folders for apps. In the App Store, you can expect to see an iPhone version of Netflix soon, as well as Guitar Hero and FarmVille. Jobs also announced that iBooks, the ebook application for the iPad, would be getting a few upgrades. Users will soon be able to make notes, and a bookmark button is on the way. It will put bookmarked pages into the book's table of contents. iBooks is also gaining support for viewing PDF files. On top of that, it won't be just for the iPad anymore; it's coming to the iPhone and iPod Touch as well, and it will sync between devices.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Announces iPhone 4

Comments Filter:
  • by Jason Quinn (1281884) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:30PM (#32486876)
    Never before have I wanted a product so much but will not buy do to Apple's draconian policies.
  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Albanach (527650) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:31PM (#32486906) Homepage

    I find this one the most interesting feature.

    iAds []

    What would be interesting is Adblock Plus for the iPhone.

  • by Pecisk (688001) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:34PM (#32486944)

    ...when you can announce that your document viewer will support PDFs and everyone is in the awe :)

  • Re:IOS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Radish03 (248960) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:35PM (#32486958)

    Kind of like how Cisco owned the trademark for iPhone as well?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:36PM (#32486970)

    Don't. You know that euphoria you have when you're watching porn and then after you're done jacking off you feel guilty about it. This is the same thing only instead of a woman's skin, you're jacking off to steel, glass an silica. If you go over the top and buy it, you'll wont' just feel guilty, you'll feel like an idiot.

  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ircmaxell (1117387) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:38PM (#32487008) Homepage
    Wow, those are conservative odds as well. I would have put it somewhere around G [] to 1...
  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Pojut (1027544) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:39PM (#32487026) Homepage

    I'm glad to see the iPhone getting a serious upgrade in the hardware department, but the walled garden is still enough to keep me from ever owning one. Android is teh place to be, at least for me.

  • by AnonymousClown (1788472) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:41PM (#32487048)
    I disagree.

    Apple would have done this anyway to drive sales. Every time Apple comes out with a new or upgraded product, they sell like hotcakes - people who have the "old" version pony up even more money to buy the new version. I think the folks who jumped from the iPhone to Android are a very small minority and the rest of the Android crowd are folks who wouldn't have bought Apple anyway.

    Jobs is a marketing God!

  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Graff (532189) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:41PM (#32487058)

    It's an optional thing for a developer to include in his app. I can imagine that there will be free apps that use iAdd and pay versions that don't have ads. Just use the version without ads and you are good. If there's no version without ads then don't use the app!

    That's basically how it works now except Apple is providing developers with an easy and good-looking way to include ads in their app without having to cut deals on the side. Pretty much win-win for Apple, app developers and iOS users.

  • by catbutt (469582) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:42PM (#32487072)
    I agree that competition is good, but it isn't only Android. Lots of other competition, and if Android hadn't shown up, someone else would have filled that gap. Apple expected competition when they got into this business.
  • by proxima (165692) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:48PM (#32487146)

    The maximum storage capacity of the iphone maxes out at 32G, while the ipod touch goes up to 64G. I suppose that's comparable to the HTC's incredible maximum capacity of 40G (via 8 GB internal and 32 GB microsd card), but it's unfortunate that there isn't a larger option. The iphone really seems capable of replacing many mp3 players for reasonably sized collections, but with apps and music it's not hard to hit 32G.

    And, of course, it would really kill Apple's profit margins to actually offer an SD slot...Oh well.

  • by HeckRuler (1369601) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:48PM (#32487152)

    a three-axis gyroscope, which allows rotation and precision that accelerometers can't match

    Uh... So the thing obviously doesn't have an actual gyroscope, so I'm assuming he means rotational accelerometers... which is better then regular accelerometers how? They measure different things. Am I or the summary getting some lingo wrong?

  • by 91degrees (207121) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:50PM (#32487182) Journal
    Sure it would. Just slower. Apple still wants people to upgrade every so often, so they're effectively competing with their older products.
  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Albanach (527650) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:50PM (#32487192) Homepage

    It's an optional thing for a developer to include in his app

    Indeed adverts are. Adblock Plus is a browser plugin so that adds are an optional thing a user can choose to accept. I'm unclear as to what way graphics heavy adverts will be 'win-win for ... iOS users' given that as of today it is no longer possible to start an unlimited data contract.

    Will a user be winning when an ad for an ap that would have cost $1.99 for the ad-free version sends them over their monthly cap and results in a $10 bill from AT&T?

    All ads have done is resulted in a proliferation of free apps with limited functionality and lots of adverts. It's cluttered the marketplace and made it difficult to distinguish between applications and value. It's not immediately obvious how much paid or versions of similar apps cost, making price comparisons more difficult for the user. Where's the 'win' in that?

    Apple have distinct carrier contracts. What would have been innovative would have been to negotiate with carriers, make bandwidth to Apple's Ad servers not count as part of a user's allowance and have the advertiser pick up the cost of serving their Ad.

    Would you watch network television if you were billed for each ad you see?

  • by TheKidWho (705796) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:52PM (#32487208)

    The quality of the 720p video was actually extremely impressive.

  • by osu-neko (2604) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:54PM (#32487258)

    Apple - copy everyone else, claim it's revolutionary.

    It's revolutionary when someone else fails to start a revolution with their idea and it just languishes until you take it up and start a revolution in the industry with it.

  • by Altus (1034) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:55PM (#32487276) Homepage

    Wifi only because AT&T will never allow it. They say they are working with carriers which means outside the US it should be available in no time but inside, you can forget about it.

    It is iPhone only, but it sounds like Apple is opening up the protocol for others to use. It would be nice if there was a standard for video calls on phones.

  • Re:Really? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by frnic (98517) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:57PM (#32487314)

    I see, and which multi-billion dollar company do you run? With your wisdom and foresight I expect we all would be happy to bow down in homage to you...

  • by TodLiebeck (633704) on Monday June 07, 2010 @01:59PM (#32487348) Homepage

    This is a very impressive evolution. Thinner, better display, more processing power, better battery life, better camera, new sensors, and more capabilities across the board, both hardware and software.

    I'd love to develop for it.

    I just wish there was some way I could know that if I spent thousands of hours creating software for it, that such software would continually be available for purchase via the App Store. I'd be okay with explaining in detail to Apple how the software was going to work before developing it. But it would be necessary to obtain an authoritative answer to inform as to whether the software would be accepted (if implemented to a proposed specification) and for what minimum duration the software would be allowed on the store.

    There is a fundamental risk in developing new software: "Will customers buy this?" This risk can be calculated to a certain extent. My concern with developing for iOS is that an additional incalculable risk exists, and it is simply too much to bear.

  • by cowscows (103644) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:02PM (#32487406) Journal

    You do realize that there's a difference between having a webcam sitting on top of your monitor and sending live video from your phone, right? Not to mention that Apple's version of it will probably be about as simple as making a phone call.

    Like they said in the keynote, this isn't some new idea, this is a "vision of the future" that predates Apple, but finally starting to become a reality. It's about damn time, too.

  • Seek help (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:04PM (#32487428)

    Don't. You know that euphoria you have when you're watching porn and then after you're done jacking off you feel guilty about it. This is the same thing only instead of a woman's skin, you're jacking off to steel, glass an silica. If you go over the top and buy it, you'll wont' just feel guilty, you'll feel like an idiot.

    You have problems if jacking off makes you feel guilty. You might want to talk to a psychiatrist.

  • by idontgno (624372) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:06PM (#32487456) Journal

    In other words, it doesn't count until Apple does it.

    That does sound familiar. []

  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tylersoze (789256) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:06PM (#32487458)

    Speaking for myself as an iPhone developer, I will not be adding this to any of my apps. Since I freaking hate them as a consumer I'm not going to then turn right back around and add them when I'm trying to make money.

  • by ircmaxell (1117387) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:07PM (#32487480) Homepage

    but the shots of pictures taken with the 3G model vs the new 4G model show that there's been a huge jump in quality.

    It's all in the shot. My old G1 took pretty decent photos IF there was PLENTY of ambient light (basically in direct sunlight). Pictures taken on a cloudy day looked like crap (very hazy). I don't care what the best possible image the phone can take is. I care about day to day use. How well does it do in non-ideal conditions (Something that Jobs is very unlikely to show during a keynote). That's why I am reserving judgment until reviews start coming in...

  • by webdog314 (960286) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:09PM (#32487490)

    Actually, people should be in awe - and if you're Amazon you should be shitting your pants. One of the big debates lately in the publishing industry has been in regards to a unified format. Allowing PDF's in the iBooks part of iTunes basically makes that a moot point. Brilliant on Apple's part, and a death knell for traditional publishing.

  • by rinoid (451982) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:15PM (#32487618)

    Guess what Best Buy, Macy's, Banana Republic, LL Bean, Dicks Sporting Goods, or maybe you know WalMart better?, or insert your retailer of choice here are? They are all curated experiences!

    You, as a regular schmuck (I'm presuming) are not really affected by the so-called "draconian policies" ... and furthermore, it's a bit of stretch to call a curated app store a draconian experience. I've not once felt excessively, harshly, nor severely treated while using my iPhone.

    It's a wicked tired canard.

  • by phayes (202222) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:23PM (#32487776) Homepage

    Yup, that's my major disappointment. With 64Gb I can put all of the music in my collection that i rate as good or better & still have room left over. with 32gb it's music or other stuff.

    My phone is currently a Sony Ericsson p910 that's starting to get flakey & I was hoping to get a device to replace it, add a decent camera & an ipod.

    Oh well...

  • by cowscows (103644) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:29PM (#32487894) Journal

    The reality is,(with a few exceptions I'm sure)that for any reasonably complex application, a native app can almost certainly be superior than a web app. If the SDK and API's are even halfway decent, you're going to have way more options programming directly to the OS than you will going through a web browser. Not to mention that native apps can gain easy access to UI elements that are consistent within that OS. These benefits hold true on a desktop computer as well as a phone/tablet/whatever.

    Now that doesn't mean that farmville is going to take full advantage of all of that, but at least they have that opportunity. Honestly, if I was in Farmville's position, I'd have released a native iPhone App and also would be working on an HTML5 version. If you've got the resources, you should put your best foot forward on any platform that you think will make you money.

  • by MobyDisk (75490) * on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:31PM (#32487946) Homepage

    Or, if there was a common API like Flash that could compile for this platform. Then if Apple rejected your app, you know your effort is not wasted because it would run on another device.

  • Re:iAds (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Xanavi (1197431) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:49PM (#32488198) Homepage
    "We'll see how it pans out but I bet that the advertisement bandwidth will not count towards your total bandwidth." LOL.
  • by AcidPenguin9873 (911493) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:58PM (#32488304)

    This is exactly what Apple wants to have happen: every developer now publishes a native iOS version of their app. The lack of Flash support on iOS is merely the tip of the iceberg. If Apple's strategy comes to fruition, iOS becomes the dominant app platform so developers are basically forced to support it - just as Windows was for the past 20 years. And Apple both gets to control what is available for iOS (read: keep out competition), and gets a cut of everything that sells. Read this (this is not my blog, it's mostly about finance and banking and that whole mess, but there are a handful of posts on other topics): []

    It's a pretty scary future indeed, but sadly with iOS's dominance I can't see how to stop the freight train. With PCs, maybe there was enough market pressure for an "open" system where we can run whatever we want. But with smartphones, it's enough of an "appliance" that I don't think anyone will care. And we'll be stuck with Apple's draconian policies for the next 20 years.

  • by LynnwoodRooster (966895) on Monday June 07, 2010 @02:59PM (#32488322) Journal

    I'm surprised that more cell phones haven't implemented it. Maybe they have. Does anyone know if others are experimenting with it too?

    Noise cancellation with dual microphones is about 60 years old, as a technology. My 18 month old HTC Touch Pro 2 has dual mics (for noise canceling), and my 3 year old Plantronics Bluetooth earpiece has dual mics for noise canceling. The difference is that the iPhone is finally catching up to what most other phones and communication devices have offered for the last few years, so rather than admit they were way behind the times they hype the crap out of it to make it seem like its iRevolutionary and thus Apple is seen as an innovator.

    Reality is, Apple with dual mics is where Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, HTC, and most others were back in 2006. Apple's just really good at getting people to accept whatever they say at face value, even if it's just fluff and marketing glitz.

  • by Wovel (964431) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:05PM (#32488396) Homepage

    Doing nothing new, except now making video calls on mobile devices will be common and before it was not...They are also creating an open standard based on their software. (presumably a real open standard and not an Adobe like open standard that changes week to week).

  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pojut (1027544) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:28PM (#32488700) Homepage

    Yeah, I mean, who wants the world's largest selection of quality apps, all vetted to be reasonably sure of being malware-free and of at least a minimum level of quality and stability!

    Yeah, because fart apps are considered quality. Quantity != quality. Plenty of quality apps have been denied, while plenty of crap is available in the app store.

    Even though, at present, the "walled garden" provides a superior all-around app experience for most people

    New Kids on the Block had a number 1 hit. "Superior" is very subjective.

    there are some for whom ideology trumps reality. And I'm the one that gets called "fanboy"?

    You are defending the fact that your device is artificially limited. That, to me, is the very definition of a fanboy.

    Nothing I can do or say will change the fact that Apple retains control over what you can and can't do with your device. The only thing I can do is vote with my wallet, so that's what I do. Forgive me for being a consumer who pays attention.

  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:30PM (#32488730)

    Does anyone know what the "Retina display" means?

    The resolution exceeds that of the retina.

    Is it just a marketing term (a la "Powerglide transmission") or does it actually describe some innovation in the display?

    Yes, it's a marketing term.

    And can we please pitch in and buy Steve Jobs a sandwich? Even Kate Moss says he's too skinny.

    Dude just recovered from cancer. Not just cancer, but a type of cancer that is to cancer what most cancers are to not having cancer at all, which fucked up his liver and he had to get that replaced after getting past the cancer. I usually don't comment on personal attacks, but this one is exceptional in its lack of class, and not even at least being funny enough to make up for it.

  • by sootman (158191) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:32PM (#32488758) Homepage Journal

    Anyone except the most rabid Apple hater will admit that Apple single-handedly defined the modern smartphone featureset, the main characteristics of which are a ~3.5" touch display at 320x480 and a very good web browser. Look at what was introduced AFTER the iPhone: the Palm Pre, HTC Dream, and BlackBerry Storm. Hmm, notice any similarities in the specs of those devices?

  • by VinylPusher (856712) <{vinylpusher} {at} {}> on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:42PM (#32488882) Homepage
    I'm with you all the way on this, but you have to admit that this new iPhone is not only going to be enormously popular, but is also a really good device. It's just a different 'good' than your Nexus One.

    Personally, I want whatever follows the Nexus One or the Nokia N900. My next phone... I want to be able to write tools for it, without messing about with licensing. That iPhone though... *sigh* I'd quite like to have it as a second phone.
  • by sjbe (173966) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:44PM (#32488904)

    How are we not affected by the dictatorship of Steve Jobs?

    Because you don't have to buy an iPhone. Seriously. I like the iPhone well enough but it's hardly the only usable smartphone out there. Presently I use a Nokia smartphone and it works well enough for my purposes that I'm in no hurry to trade it in. Don't like Apple's policies? Don't buy from Apple. I'm sure the makers of Android, Blackberry and other smart phones will be happy to take your money.

    We're not allowed to use GPL'd software;

    If that bothers you buy one of the other phones that permits the use of GPL software. They certainly exist.

    we're not allowed to use applications that replicate included functionality; we're not allowed to modify the UI to our liking; we're not allowed to watch porn;...

    Again, there are other products that permit all of this. You realize you don't have to like the iPhone right? It's completely ok if you buy something else. Furthermore if you don't care about Apple's blessing you can even do all this on a jailbroken iPhone.

    This is different from shopping at Wal-Mart, Target, etc. because those companies might not sell what you're interested in, but they aren't going to stop you from buying the products you want from another source.

    You can buy competing phones that are functionally equivalent to an iPhone. No they aren't identical but that's ok - Mac's and PCs aren't identical but you can do most of the same things on each. Economists even have a term for that []. Apple isn't stopping you from buying products you want from another source either. My Nokia phone does essentially everything the iPhone 3G does, albeit with a fair bit less panache. Your analogy is quite simply wrong because you are defining the product too narrowly. If your definition of the product is "something that works on an iPhone" then yes, you will be frustrated. But if your definition is "useful smartphone software", there are vast options available to you. Don't paint yourself into a corner and you won't have a problem.

    Please, stop glossing over the fact that this "walled garden" blows; it's insulting to my intelligence.

    So buy somewhere else and stop whining. Plenty of very intelligent people have looked at the facts and come to a different conclusion. They obviously are not bothered by the same things that bother you. Speaking for myself, if the built in apps suit my needs I don't care if I can't replace them. I want a device that is well enough designed that I don't need to alter the interface. I don't remotely care if porn is available on the iPhone because I'll never use it for that purpose. Despite my being a big fan of the GPL, I don't even care if the iPhone has any GPL software because if I want GPL software I can get it elsewhere. The iPhone is there if I want it and I can buy some very good competing products if they suit my needs better. You are free to do the same.

    I suppose if I embraced the lack of freedom, I'd be happy. Not unlike the Patriot Act, I might add.

    That's a profoundly stupid argument. Comparing the federal government taking away civil liberties to a manufacturer of a technology product not producing exactly the product you rather arrogantly feel entitled to? That is amazingly lacking in perspective.

  • by whisper_jeff (680366) on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:45PM (#32488910)
    Given that they've paid out one BILLION dollars to developers thus far (and, no, that isn't a Mike Myers comedy sketch), I'd say that deciding to not develop for the iPhone is a decidedly stupid decision. Say whatever you want but thousands and thousands and thousands of apps have been developed for the platform, without issue, and developers have been paid a rather sizable amount of money for their work. But, hey, feel free to avoid the platform because there's a slim chance that you might do something you're not supposed to and thus have your app be rejected. There are 100 developers behind you in line, so to speak, that are more than willing to fill the void your absence will create.
  • Re:Seek help (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @03:57PM (#32489112)
    more than half of the world would tell you the opposite. The answer depends on your definition of truth :)
  • by BitZtream (692029) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:17PM (#32489322)

    Same risk faced by every iOS dev, every XBox dev, every Wii Dev, every PS3 dev ... pretty much every dev of every relatively or completely closed system on the planet.

    Somehow it still seems to bring new people in and make lots of money for the people that do it.

  • by kimvette (919543) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:22PM (#32489380) Homepage Journal

    Which event is the more important? The debut of the iPhone 4, or the return of Futurama as a television series?

    For me it's no question. I am planning my schedule around Futurama but will be waiting on a jailbreak being released before I upgrade my iPhone.

  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:23PM (#32489406)

    That, or learn to read. I made it clear I don't give two shits if you make fun of Steve Jobs. There's plenty about him to ridicule. But to ridicule a cancer surviver for being skinny after losing his fucking liver? I don't care who the target of such a comment is, it's out of line.

  • by acomj (20611) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:26PM (#32489432) Homepage

    Hopefully andriod and other competition keeps them honest. Game consoles are even worse as I can't even figure out how to get a development kit or get my applications on one.

    People want "just works" over "I can code on it". Most consumers aren't coders.

    On the plus side for us developers Apple just paid out 1 billion dollars to app developers. thats a billion dollar phone market that wasn't there before.

    Steve Jobs single handedly changed the mobile app market for the better as well: []

  • by yyxx (1812612) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:30PM (#32489480)

    Like they said in the keynote, this isn't some new idea, this is a "vision of the future" that predates Apple

    Gosh, you mean like this people have already been able to use on their Nokia phones for quite a while? The latest software to support it is Skype/Fring (but it's been available for others before): []

    Not to mention that Apple's version of it will probably be about as simple as making a phone call.

    Yeah, and it will probably only let you talk to other iPhone users. But, hey, that way you can maintain your illusion that this is something new or unique to Apple. Wouldn't want to have your preconceptions challenged, would you now.

  • Re:iAds (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:33PM (#32489514)

    Which is just exactly what Steve Said in the keynote. That resolution also happens to be exactly 2x the current resolution in both x and y making scaling a breeze.

    Think before you type.

  • Re:iAds (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cowscows (103644) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:43PM (#32489624) Journal

    There are a whole bunch of websites that I've been browsing almost every single day for years, and have never personally given them even a dime of my money. If it wasn't for advertisers paying some bills, then I wouldn't get to do that.

    Accept the reality. Content isn't free to produce. Someone has to pay for it. You can mumble whatever you want about subscriptions or micropayments or whatever, but the reality is that all of that stuff implemented on a large scale would be just annoying as your average web ad, and you'd rather not pay anyways.

    That's not to say that some ads are more tasteful while others are purposefully aggravating and quite annoying. But to pretend that everything would be puppies and roses if web ads went away is to ignore how the world works.

  • Re:iAds (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Pojut (1027544) on Monday June 07, 2010 @04:53PM (#32489742) Homepage

    Correct. That's why I wrote, "yeah, I mean, who wants the world's largest selection of quality apps". The App Store has the largest selection of quality apps, not just the largest selections of apps alone (which it also has).

    You are limited to the app store. Android (and, even though as an OS it isn't as robust, Windows Mobile 6.5) are limited to anything written for them available anywhere on the Internet, with no hacking or modding required.

    Yeah, like 5 or something. That doesn't change the fact that the App Store has more quality apps than any other mobile store out there.

    Again, you are still limited to the store. For Android, for example, you have the choice of going through the official store or any other place online that provides applications.

    Whereas the Android Marketplace has no crap apps?

    It does, but once again, Android users aren't limited to the Marketplace.

    You pay so close attention that you think fart apps are indicative of the overall App Store, that thinks that the iPhone is a locked down wasteland, while Android is a thriving metropolis?

    No, I was merely using fart apps as an example. Overall, yes, the Appstore does have plenty to offer. However, I don't like being restricted to a single location as a means for finding applications for my phone, regardless of what that single location offers. Why wouldn't Apple enable you to download things from places other than the Appstore? People that actually need the walled garden can stick to the Store, and "power users" would be free to go elsewhere. So why doesn't Apple do that?

    No, you're simply informed that the App Store is locked down, and that Android is less locked down, any any other fact be damned.

    You're right. Unless I hack an iPhone, I am limited to the Appstore, again, regardless of what that may include. With Android, I have the option of the Appstore and other sources, without having to hack my phone.

    Bullshit. Apple doesn't control what I can do, they merely control what apps I can get from the App Store, nothing more. I can buy a key and compile and run any app I want. I don't even have to buy a key, someone else can and distribute an app to hundreds of people for free. I can jailbreak. I can use HTML5 apps, which are extremely capable (Google's Voice webapp is fantastic).

    See bold section. Having to hack your phone to leap over the walled garden isn't necessarily something to use in an attempt to sway my opinion, when I can already download anything I want from wherever I want for my unmodified device.

    No, I'm defending the fact that the device has far more quality options than any other device out there. You are defending a device that is actually limited by actually not having as many quality apps for nothing more than ideology.

    Once again, Android devices aren't limited to the Appstore.

    That's the definition of a fanboy.

    I don't have an iPhone primarily because I don't want to be stuck with a single location for applications. I'm sorry that seems stupid to you, but that is my requirement, and as of now the iPhone doesn't meet that requirement.

    Not buying a product because it doesn't do what I want makes me a fanboy?

  • Re:iAds (Score:2, Insightful)

    by njvack (646524) <> on Monday June 07, 2010 @05:00PM (#32489824)

    the screen is higher than 300ppi, which is a resolution greater than the human eye can resolve.

    Wouldn't it depend on how close the screen is to your eye?

  • by commodoresloat (172735) * on Monday June 07, 2010 @05:29PM (#32490086)

    I'd love to write a best-selling novel, but until Bedford St. Martin's gives me 100% assurance that they will publish and advertise my novel before I start writing it, I'm not going to write a word of it.

    There is a fundamental risk in writing new books: "Will customers read this?" This risk can be calculated to a certain extent. My concern with writing a novel for Bedford St. Martin's is that an additional incalculable risk exists, and it is simply too much to bear.

  • Re:iAds (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @05:50PM (#32490280)

    Reality distortion field alert!

    Your post is 100% iFail(tm)

  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by justin12345 (846440) on Monday June 07, 2010 @06:20PM (#32490502)
    Sure, glass is the most important thing when it comes to sharpness, but image resolution can really save your ass sometimes. There are times you're just not going to be close enough or fast enough to get the shot, or your going to find something in the background that really adds to the shoot (I'm talking event here). In those cases being able to crop in and maintain sharpness can save your ass.

    Pros are pragmatic, and very often improvise, but I've never known a photographer that didn't want the best equipment that they could get their hands on. My fiancee is a professional photographer and I have a BFA in photography, in fact most people I know are either artists or professional photographers. My fiancee will shoot with her old Nikon D70 (hell she'll shoot with my F3 sometimes) if she has to, but she'd rather use her D300.

    As far as VR goes, sure you need a lot more resolution then you'll ever need on a cell phone. My point is that the companies making the screens for the cell phones are the same companies that will be making the screens for VR. Its not just technological cross pollination, its money for R and D.
  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BasilBrush (643681) on Monday June 07, 2010 @06:23PM (#32490518)

    The reason to choose 960x640 resolution is purely technical: to overcome their bad 3-year old decision to stick to a single resolution for application development. Quadrupling pixels is the only working solution for all the legacy apps out there.

    It wasn't a bad decision. Having a fixed resolution means that apps can be designed to a pixel perfect degree. And given that 3 years later, they have been able to up the resolution in a way that means all those apps remain pixel perfect means that fixing the resolution in the first place wasn't a technological dead end.

    For a desktop windowing OS, variable resolution combined with resolution independence is a good thing. Apps run in windows that can be of any size, and the generous screen space allows plenty of flexibility for apps to rearrange themselves to suit. For a screen as small as a smartphone that just doesn't work. Designers have to design very carefully to fit the app UI on the screen in a good way.

  • by sznupi (719324) on Monday June 07, 2010 @06:41PM (#32490646) Homepage

    You do realize that UMTS videocalling is available for better part of the last decade, right? With hundreds millions of devices already out there by this point.

    Oh, and it's as simple as making a phone call...because it is just a phonecall (you call somebody, and if videocall can be established, the option of switching to it during the call will be there)

  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soliptic (665417) on Monday June 07, 2010 @06:53PM (#32490740) Journal

    Setting aside your disregard for the Star Wars reference (turn in your geek card as you leave)

    Let's get this straight: referencing the solution to:

    Consider an n-dimensional hypercube, and connect each pair of vertices to obtain a complete graph on 2n vertices. Then colour each of the edges of this graph using only the colours red and black. What is the smallest value of n for which every possible such colouring must necessarily contain a single-coloured complete sub-graph with 4 vertices which lie in a plane?

    is not geeky, but awareness of a mainstream hollywood kids action movie is?

    Someone must have changed the definition of geekiness while I wasn't looking.

  • by sznupi (719324) on Monday June 07, 2010 @06:57PM (#32490778) Homepage

    Millions of people already have mobile phones capable of easy videocalling - []

  • by virtualXTC (609488) on Monday June 07, 2010 @07:14PM (#32490898) Homepage
    Wow, that was a troll, but somehow you've been modded insightful, so I guesss I'll bite:
    Only the most naive users and apple fanboi's would believe that apples smart-phone deign was truly innovative and first of it's kind. HTC had them beat for years: the MDA II, MDAII, MDA vairo, MDA Amino, vairo II, wing, kiaser, magician, touch diamond; and Palm pretty much defined the screen size for smart devices.
  • Re:iAds (Score:5, Insightful)

    by node 3 (115640) on Monday June 07, 2010 @07:16PM (#32490914)

    You are limited to the app store. ...
    Again, you are still limited to the store. ...
    It does, but once again, Android users aren't limited to the Marketplace. ...
    However, I don't like being restricted to a single location as a means for finding applications for my phone, regardless of what that single location offers.

    Exactly. You don't care about the reality of what's offered, but instead by your ideological aversion to having only one app store.

    Bullshit. Apple doesn't control what I can do, they merely control what apps I can get from the App Store, nothing more. I can buy a key and compile and run any app I want. I don't even have to buy a key, someone else can and distribute an app to hundreds of people for free. I can jailbreak. I can use HTML5 apps, which are extremely capable (Google's Voice webapp is fantastic).

    See bold section. Having to hack your phone to leap over the walled garden isn't necessarily something to use in an attempt to sway my opinion, when I can already download anything I want from wherever I want for my unmodified device.

    No, you read the bold section. You don't have to hack the iPhone to run apps from outside the app store. You don't even have to pay to do so.

    Once again, Android devices aren't limited to the Appstore. ...
    I don't have an iPhone primarily because I don't want to be stuck with a single location for applications. I'm sorry that seems stupid to you

    Not wanting to be stuck with a single app store is not stupid, but choosing an inferior product for the primary reason that it has the option for additional sources of apps tends towards the irrational. I.e., fanboyism.

    Now, if you truly think that Android will end up with more apps because of this, or at the very least, more high quality apps, then your decision to avoid the iPhone is rational, but the basis behind it is still based on ideology. There's no reason whatsoever to believe that third party Android app stores is going to result in more apps than the iPhone. What will result in more apps is more users and a higher-quality user experience. Android lags significantly behind iPhone in both categories.

    Or put differently, if there was a third-party app store for iOS, how many more quality apps would there be? There'd be a native Google Voice (like I already said, though, the existing web app is excellent), there'd be that Squeak interpreter app. There'd be a bunch of porn apps. And...? Flash?

    Oh, what a long list of things I can't have!

    You repeat the "there's only one app store" thing over and over, but you completely fail to demonstrate how that's a problem. It's just ideology. It's fanboyism.

  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Bassman59 (519820) <andy&latke,net> on Monday June 07, 2010 @07:26PM (#32490998) Homepage

    Tiny 14 megapixels on latest batch of cameras are there to showcase the lens weaknesses and noise reduction algorithms.

    No professional photographer needs more megapixels than his lens can resolve. And pros are often more pragmatic than regular consumers: some still shoot with first generation Canon 1D (4MP) - it works, and is enough for newspapers. A lot of pros shoot product photos for their customers' web sites - they don't need resolution at all, only good lighting.

    You need resolution to allow for cropping.

  • by IndustrialComplex (975015) on Monday June 07, 2010 @07:50PM (#32491136)

    I'm not sure why you want to hate on the Sony reader.

    I don't hate on their reader. I hate on Sony.

    Rootkits in CDs, built to spec DVD players that force me to watch 5 previews and 2 copyright warnings and disable just skipping to the damned DVD menu (Or perish the thought, just playing the damned movie), Removing other OS from the PS3 and since the upgrades are required for new games, effectively banning me from new games if I want to keep linux on my PS3.

    Their products are generally sound, and their eReaders are very nice, but the company is not one I care to send my money to based on their anti-consumer practices. (That ignores their whole music-branch which for their participation in the absurd copyright infringement lawsuits means I will not even go to the concert of a band that is signed with them)

  • by sjbe (173966) on Monday June 07, 2010 @08:26PM (#32491324)

    How arrogant of me to feel entitled to use something I paid for any perfectly legal way that I please.

    You clearly want to criticize Apple for not supporting what you want to do. Go ahead and hack on your iPhone. Nothing is stopping you. You CAN use GPL software an iPhone - just not with Apple's blessing. If it is so important to you, why the hell do you care what Apple thinks? Make your actions support your words.

    If you read the OP, then you'd know that he was defending Apple's draconian policies, which set the tone for my response.

    And your response was complete nonsense. I thought I'd made that clear enough. There are advantages and disadvantages to Apple's approach. Since you so clearly don't like what Apple is doing, buy a competing product from a different company. In fact doing so will probably force Apple to have a better and possibly more open product. Competition is good.

    You'd also know that he directly compared shopping at the App Store with shopping at any other of these "curated experiences" like Wal-mart or Target, hence the direct reference to his own metaphor.

    And he was right. Walmart doesn't sell the porn you seem so eager to get but you certainly can get it elsewhere. Likewise Apple doesn't sell it but that doesn't prevent you from getting it elsewhere. Walmart even sells products under its own labels just like Apple and you can't get them elsewhere. However that doesn't mean you can't get perfectly adequate substitutes elsewhere. In other words stop whining that Apple isn't making exactly what you want and find someone who is.

    Now, that I've read his posting back to you, feel free to STFU and RTFOP for yourself, lazybones.

    Interesting how your lack of a coherent and logical argument means I'm lazy. Curious.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @09:09PM (#32491658)

    PDF doesnt reflow. Turn your iPad on the side, bam, have to scroll around.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 07, 2010 @09:10PM (#32491668)

    I say BS. No phone camera lens can come anywhere close to my 50mm f1.4 Nikon lens. Sure, the smaller lens might have less chromatic aberration and a larger depth of field compared to a wide-open lens, but CA isn't really a problem (my camera automatically removes it) and if I want the depth of field I just stop it down. I can easily shoot photos which are impossible for a camera phone, especially in low-light situations. I can use a narrow depth of field for the situations where I want the subject to be in focus and everything else out of focus. You won't see pros shooting much with cell phones, even if they were 50MP.

    It's easier to make a tiny lens sharp since it inherently has a large depth of field, but it also has a lot less light gathering ability as well and a tiny sensor has a smaller dynamic range.

    There's many parameters that make a good lens including sharpness, contrast,flare/ghosting resistance, brokah and depth of field. There's a reason that those cinematography prime lenses cost so much, otherwise they'd be shooting with cell phone type cameras.

    See []

  • Amused in Japan (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lindseyp (988332) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @12:19AM (#32492614)

    Here in Japan the majority of phones on sale have had the ability to 'video call' over 3G using a front camera for several years. My wife's crappy old sharp which is ready to be thrown in the bin included.

    My current iPhone was a step back in that regard, and it'll be pretty amusing once Softbank starts selling the iPhone alongside phones which can video-call over 3G and has to tell customers that the iPhone is 'wifi only' for some goddamned reason.

  • by adolf (21054) <> on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @12:33AM (#32492676) Journal

    One is they wanted to keep everything as similar as possible between the iTouch, iPhone, and iPad. Since the iPad would be the only one that had the space for a SD slot they chose to go without one on all the devices.

    The iPad is already very different, in that it is rather large and has a USB port. Supporting SD simply isn't very far-fetched from my perspective. Next.

    A second reason would be that they wanted easily-definable configurations and allowing people to put in their own SD card would cause the device to have odd amounts of storage.

    It's not as if modern filesystems haven't solved these problems for decades. Next.

    A third might be design issues. Supporting stuff like SD cards might mess with internal timing, bus design of the device, or software support and Apple just didn't feel it was worth pursuing.

    Oh noes. Adding hardware to a device is hard, and takes engineers and stuff, which sounds expensive. (The rest of the device, apparently, is ejaculated fully-assembled by unicorns, since there's not any engineering involved with them, or something.) (And nevermind the fact that it's a dead-simple basement hack to plug an SD card in to a lightly-modified WRT54G without creating any issues. But then, I guess Linksys doesn't use unicorns for their R&D and production.) Next.

    Lastly, allowing people to buy a lower-end device and then add in more storage later would generate less money than having people go for the higher memory ones from the start.

    This. Or, better: Someone buys cheap version, decides they like it, uses lots of space, runs out, and then must buy an entirely new phone in order to get more space.

    Never attribute to technical limitations that which can be adequately explained by greed.

  • Re:iAds (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SenseiLeNoir (699164) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @06:29AM (#32494218)

    I know.... its kinda ironic isnt it? Though you can also add Symbian to that mix, that is also pretty open on what you can install. I believe it was the same for Palm as well.

    In fact, all three OSs were doing custom apps without havign an "app store". the norm was to download from various sources, and install.

  • by yabos (719499) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @06:52AM (#32494298)
    You'd better stop buying almost every single product in every single store then since nearly all of it is made in China or some other country with similarly low wages. I don't know how anyone can be shocked about Chinese workers getting paid a low wage, it's very common knowledge & the reason everything is made there in the first place.

    Are you swearing off all Chinese made products? If not you are a hypocrite. Foxconn also makes non-Apple devices & products. Are you going to swear off buying these too?

    "Foxconn produces the Mac mini, the iPod, the iPad, and the iPhone for Apple Inc.; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer manufacturers Dell and Hewlett-Packard; motherboards for UK computer manufacturer Zoostorm; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo; the Xbox 360 for Microsoft, cell phones for Motorola, the Amazon Kindle, and Cisco equipment." []
  • by Vectormatic (1759674) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @07:21AM (#32494476)

    my 3 year old nokia already has a front facing camera, and is capable of video-calls. I never did it, because i dont care about it, but the technology has been around for ages...

    Not to mention that wifi-only is increbidly lame, what do we have all these high speed wireless technologies for anyway?

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.