A5 Mystery Solved (Why Siri Won't Run On iPhone 4) 239
Hugh Pickens writes "Anna Leach reports that Siri support has been a contentious issue for owners of earlier iPhones, but a recent filing from Audience shows that Siri won't run on the iPhone 4 because the phone's chip can't handle it. Linley Gwennap of the Linley Group cracked one of the secrets of the new iPhone's A5 chip after working out that it packs some serious audio cleaning power not available on the iPhone 4's A4 chip. Audience has developed technology that removes most or all of the background noise when someone places a cell-phone call from a restaurant, airport, or other noisy location. The iPhone 4S integrates Audience's 'EarSmart' technology directly into the A5 processor, improving its technology to handle 'far-field speech,' which means holding the device at arm's length rather than directly in front of the mouth. Apple has also licensed the Audience technology for a 'new generation of processor IP,' which may mean that the forthcoming A6 processor will appear in the iPad 3 and iPhone 5. 'Why Apple has not simply purchased Audience is unclear. An acquisition would prevent Audience's other major customer, Samsung, from using the technology to compete with Apple,' says Gwennap. 'The company may be hedging its bets, as it could switch to Qualcomm's Fluence noise-reduction technology in the future.'"
Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Or at least not the whole story. It has been shown already that a jailbroken iPhone 4 can run Siri just fine.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Prior to Siri being released it was an APP in the App store, folks I knew used the silly thing and no it wasn't called Siri. Apple had purchased the technology\application and about a week before Siri was released on the 4s the app stopped working as the back end servers were shutdown. I never loaded the app but wish I had because while Siri is interesting it certainly wasn't so interesting as to be a compelling upgrade from an iPhone 4. Siri, like the app before it, is a work in progress for sure! If I can recall the app name or get hold of the friend that was using it I'll post the app name - obviously it's no longer available in the app store and hasn't been for some time now.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep.
It's pretty funny to say "it's hardware" when there's nothing preventing apple from running it in software except choice (the restriction of the customer's, that is).
This is what you get when you run apple. Literally - you let them dictate the software that you can run, this is the result. Don't like it? Don't use apple.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, reading TFS, it says they "licensed a new generation of processor IP" -- but if you ask me, that sounds suspiciously like "licensed some DSP code that runs on any sufficiently-powerful DSP, but only paid for a license for their new chip (and pay royalties on the DSP code for every A5, whether it runs Siri or not)" -- cheaper than paying licensing for all manufactured iPhone 4 units (whether or not they use Siri) and provides an incentive to buy the latest. There's absolutely no reason something like that would be implemented in dedicated silicon, it just doesn't make sense. And yeah, it's possible the A4's DSP isn't powerful enough, but I have a hard time seeing how speech cleanup could be more demanding than x264 de/encoding...
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, reading TFS, it says they "licensed a new generation of processor IP" -- but if you ask me, that sounds suspiciously like "licensed some DSP code that runs on any sufficiently-powerful DSP, but only paid for a license for their new chip
That would make the statement "Siri can only run on the A5" true, then. It's just that the "why" is not the most obvious why. The why is a legal/contractual why.
I don't know why anybody cares, Siri isn't very useful at the present time anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between running and running as well as on the 4S. The demo of noise reduction is impressive.
http://www.audience.com/demos/transmit-noise-en.php [audience.com]
It's easy to see why with that noise reduction, Siri would be much more accurate than without it, in real scenarios.
Apple obviously wants Siri to be judged on it's best performance. They have a reputation for quality to maintain.
Re: (Score:2)
agreed. it WILL work on other chipsets, but w/o the background noise scrubbing, it will/could be a lot less accurate... so Apple doesn't enable it because of perceived quality issues .. i did a totally unscientific experiment with Siri. Tuned the radio to the news, cranked the volume up, put the phone right in front of the speaker and asked it to set the timer. it "listened" for longer than it would have w/o the radio on, but only "heard" my question and set the timer.
next i did the same thing but didn't as
Re: (Score:2)
That argument doesn't really hold water though. For iphone 4 they could just only enable Siri when the proximity sensor was active.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know why anybody cares, Siri isn't very useful at the present time anyway.
It's right that you qualified this, but all the same I find it incredibly useful right now for a limited number of scenarios. For example to set an alarm I just hold down the home button and say "wake me at six" - that's it, alarm set.
Another example, I'm walking down the street after work and want to send a text to the wife that maybe I'll be late. Well I just hold the phone to my ear, say "send a text" and take it from there. Could never do this obviously using the touch interface.
One more, locating a particular song: "play me Always crashing in the Same Car". That would normally take me ages to do.
All those thing may seem trivial to you, but not having all the options buried deep down to me, seems obviously the way to go. The nerd in me thinks of it as all commands being the same short distance away from me, the discrete metric space.
Re: (Score:2)
Why guess when details of Audience's earSmart technology is easily available in the web. It's a custom DSP (which of course will contain software). It's not software that "any sufficiently-powerful DSP".
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think you understood the content of the article. 4 and 4S can indeed run Siri, but Siri does it better in the very environments where it's important. Without the noise reduction hardware, Siri doesn't work nearly well enough on an iPhone 4. Lets face it. If you're at home and you need something you have your computer and a full keyboard in front of you. You would probably use them. Siri is typically used out and about where the background noise is the worst. The two have been compared, and in a quiet environment, they are comparable. put them in a noisy room and the iPhone 4 can't compete with the 4S.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The big problem with Siri isn't background noise. Siri just isn't all that smart. If you want to do simple things - send a simple text, it sort of works - just like voice commands have sort of worked since, oh, around 2000. If you want to do complex things it sometimes works, but very often screws up. When it screws up, you end up keyboarding the problem. Might as well go for the keyboard in the first place.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:4, Informative)
I'm guessing you've never used it given your response. Texting works very well, assuming you don't have some odd accent it's not programmed to handle. General queries also work well. I find the word recognition to be good enough for day to day. Comparing any voice recognition app to something from 2000 is a stretch in the extreme, and a flat out lie at best. If this was easy, it would be on every platform out there. Take a look at the recent Android attempts to duplicate it.
As to functionality, I find it works relative well for day to day tasks, general texting, and simple management. Then again, I'm not expecting Star Trek in a phone, but rather a phone that does a few things well.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To support the parent post, please note this:
http://www.vlingo.com/apps/iphone [vlingo.com]
It's free. It does voice recognition. It does web searches, map searches, texts, emails, and facebook/twitter updates.
And it somehow manages to run okay on the iphone 4...
AND EVEN THE 3GS.
The only thing it lacks is the fancy-schmancy siri AI back-end. Which is no no way dependant on the cpu front end you hold in your hand.
Another explanation (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The Galaxy S is a top-selling phone that's only months old and yet not getting Android 4.0, while the 2 1/2 year old iPhone 3GS can run the latest version of iOS.
Just to be 100% clear here, the characterization of the Galaxy S as 'only months old' is a bit disingenuous, it's well over a year old, in fact it's over 1 1/2 years old. And the iPhone 3GS can run the latest version of iOS but does lack some features like AirPlay mirroring.
That clarified, the Galaxy S doesn't get ICS because the at the time the requirements for ICS obviously couldn't be factored into the hardware design because they weren't known, that's a major advantage of Apple's vertical integration.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, it WAS called Siri before Apple bought it. I still have a copy of the app on my iPhone, although it's useless now since it won't communicate with the server.
So, does itunes give you your money back for the purchase? If not, sounds like a good class action lawsuit.
For whatever reason, it seems as though Apple didn't think the technology was good enough without the add-ons that come with the 4S.
My ass. Apple just wants you to buy a new phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're incorrect about the app having a different name. Apple bought Siri in 2010. [businessinsider.com] The app, called Siri, continued to be available in Apple's app store even after the company was purchased. It was removed from the store when the iPhone 4S was released. [tuaw.com]
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Strange that other manufacturers seem to be able to integrate the same tech entirely in software. The A4 isn't that much slower than Samsung CPUs and has the same NEON instructions. Talk time is comparable so if there is a special DSP in the iPhone it doesn't seem to offer any advantage. Sound quality is no different.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
It is easy to have a poke at Apple as trying to force people to upgrade but there are other reasons for them to be cautious. If Siri did have dubious performance then it would be dismissed as a half-arsed gimmick, likely damaging it's reputation for a long time. As there are a lot more older iPhones out there being used than there are 4S models the majority of people experiencing Siri would be doing so with inferior sound quality and judging it accordingly.
As it is it looks pretty cool but I will probably keep using my 3GS for at least one more generation if it keeps on ticking.
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to being dismissed as a half-arsed gimmick on the 4S?
Re: (Score:2)
It is also noticeably worse at understanding you when using an external headset rather than the internal microphone.
Even though voice calls on that headset are clear in quite noisy environments, I have had some decent conversations while riding my bike that had a lot less "can you hear me now" than using the built in speakerphone while driving.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
[Citation Required]
Took all of a 5 seconds to find the article on C|net's own site to find this which shows Siri on a 3GS and 4:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-57320077-233/developer-ports-siri-to-iphone-3gs/ [cnet.com]
But I'm sure you've heard of Google too. Derp.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, noise remval is still software algorithms, so should be possible without hardware support. Then again, the same can be said for 3d gaming, and it sucks pretty bad without hardware acceleration.
Re: (Score:3)
Realtime software always requires hardware support. In fact all software requires hardware support, even if the hardware is a human being with a pencil, a piece of paper, and a wetware co-processor.
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Voice commands aren't realtime. Initiation has to be realtime ("Listen for 'Siri'"), but cleaning up the whole command can be take a couple of seconds. Realtime software is stuff like synthesizing notes from an electronic keyboard - you don't want the note to play a second after you hit the key. Or cruise control on an airplane - lag is bad when you are trying to land.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, you mean: [Authors Slashdot ID Required]
Otherwise, though, kudos to you. I don't know why anyone even bothers to reply to ACs who are clearly trolling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Interesting but wrong (Score:4, Funny)
Well, it is perfectly understandable. People who write [citation required] are the second lowest form of Slashdot Scum, with the first being those that post the same ridiculous drivel as an AC. The best response is to send them to the correct citation [justfuckinggoogleit.com], of course ;-)
Let those who would mod intelligent responses to inane posts as flamebait choke on that! Cheers!
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed] is always a valid response to an unsourced claim,
No, it is not. It's an attack done with no thought by the prat who demands such. An actual request for information would be done with politeness and tact. [citation needed] is just an attack by some AC too lazy to refute something. "The sky is blue" "[citation needed]" No, it's not needed.
The only correct replies to [citation needed] are: 1. A citation. Of an actual source. No, Google links do not count. And no whiny passive-aggressive bullshit like you added in your initial response to the AC.
In most cases, putting the sentence preceding [citation needed] into LMGTF comes up with a valid citation supporting the OP. "google links do not count" Why not? They are valid citations. But the "no google" rule
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> You say it like standing in line for anything is a good thing.
I can't remember the last time I stood in line for anything not food or theater related. I've learned, however, not to go to my favorite coffee drive-thru on the way to work whenever Apple releases a new product. The coffee shop is right next to where the proselyte congregate waiting to receive their new icon, and it's impossible to drive a car through. (Except maybe really really fast, but then I'd have some 'splanin' to do.) (Oh c'mon,
Oh, great... (Score:4, Insightful)
improving its technology to handle 'far-field speech,' which means holding the device at arm's length rather than directly in front of the mouth
I thought cell phone users were annoying enough when they constantly raised their voice as if the other end were deaf; now people are going to be yelling at their phones from across the room.
Re: (Score:2)
The more things change, the more they remain the same.
Re:Oh, great... (Score:5, Funny)
Wait until they set up the iPhone to hang on the wall, with an earpiece you hold up to your head when making a call.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, that'd work, except get rid of that spinner thing and mount the phone there.
Going to be? (Score:2)
Don't you remember the Nextel craze?
People's phones would chirp and scream at them and they would press a button, it would chirp at them again and they would scream right back.
Some people would have extended conversations this way. In the middle of a room of annoyed people.
Maddening.
Re: (Score:2)
My biggest pet peeve with cell phone users are those who *always* use the speakerphone. It's bad enough I have to listen to your side of the conversation. I don't need to hear the other side of it.
And even worse are those who have it on speakerphone *and* hold it within 6 inches of their face. Being on the other end of such calls sounds like someone crinkling aluminum foil ... it's barely decipherable as words.
It's a phone. Use it like a phone. Stick it to the side of your head. You know, where the ea
Re: (Score:2)
No, now that our government approved tracking/monitoring device can hear side conversations as well its utility in enhanced.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they yell across the room? Are they going to hold the home button down until it chirps, walk away to the opposite end of the room, and shout "CALL MOM"?
That must be why it works just as well on A4 (Score:3, Interesting)
I have tried Siri on a jailbroken iPhone 4 and it works just as well, I did not notice any difference.
I doubt this is a major reason for not enabling this on the iPhone 4, especially when taking into account how little difference "just" the improved camera and a dual core processor is to most users.
I would think the improved hardware sensor played a major role, but again, Siri worked just as well for me on an iPhone 4.
Also, I'm surprised that they advertise as "removing most or all of the background noise", while Siri did a fairly good job of knowing who was talking to her, it gets confused too often, which means that it won't work very well if other people in the room are talking.
Mystery? (Score:5, Insightful)
I always assumed the answer was something to the effect of:
boolean siriEnabled() {
return (system.cpu.version >= 5.0);
}
Is anything else really needed? They don't want to support it on older models so you have to buy the new one. Conversely, if you really want the feature, buy the latest phone. Personally I find Siri an overhyped piece of junk. I have a 4S and I disabled it because it kept getting activated randomly and rarely understood my commands. Plus for the basic stuff like weather, I can just open the app. The anecdotal crap like "Will I need an umbrella today?" is just a dumb gimmick to me. But anyway, the fact is that the 4S is really an incremental improvement over the 4, and Siri is the one feature Apple can point to on the 4S as a differentiator, so they enforce that differentiation.
Re: (Score:2)
@"randomly activated": reminds me of a client I had that called me in because gibberish kept appearing on his screen when using MS Word. I looked at this and that, and then realized he'd left the voice recognition on and it was inserting the interpreted speech. I called him over to the desk and said, "Watch this," turned to his mic and said, "Microsoft sucks." It inserted "Microsoft socks". Close enough.
Re: (Score:2)
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S = 5th iPhone
Good article, bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Possibly true: Siri uses a unique feature of the iPhone 4S.
False: Siri won't run on the iPhone 4
Siri runs just fine on jailbroken a iPhone 4, and it ran just fine on an iPhone 4 Before apple removed it [google.com]. Kudos to the authors for enhancing Siri to use new features of the A5 chip. Good job to the researcher who figured this out. But shame on anyone who uses this as FUD to make Apple look like they didn't cripple their own product to force people to upgrade.
Re:Good article, bad summary (Score:5, Interesting)
Or maybe they wanted Siri to work really well, - even if there's background noise.
Apple's now defunct Newton was laughed at over the original version's poor handwriting recognition. Even though it improved immensely over time, lots of folks never got over that initial bad impression.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a major difference between "this works well enough we could charge a couple bucks for the app" and "this works well enough we're going to hype up the next version of our flagship hardware with it."
Too true! To charge a couple bucks means the app must work well consistently.
To hype the next version of a flagship product, it just needs to work most of the time.
To be a flagship product, it only needs to be minimally functional.
Re: (Score:2)
"Wrong" is subjective here.
Apple is certainly allowed to create artificial barriers and encourage people to upgrade devices. Yes, even if those barriers are motivated entirely by profit.
Meanwhile, potential and existing customers could and should evaluate Apple's business tendencies and attitude towards existing customers. That's part of what a rational consumer does before making any future purchases.
Both sides can and do exhibit varied expectations measured against reality. You called it "entitlement".
Re: (Score:3)
"Yes it runs on the 4, but not as well, so it makes sense that Apple would disable it entirely"
Given the nature of the feature, the same could be said for simply using it as a phone, and by your logic it would make sense for Apple to disable the use of all iPhones older than the 4S as telephones...
It would be a pretty aggressive business model, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the antenna troubles, by that argument they should have removed the ability to place phone calls in the first update to the iPhone 4!
Yes, voice recognition with background noise is a problem... but claiming that the new processor is *the* reason for its exclusivity is quite ridiculous.
Re: (Score:3)
by your logic it would make sense for Apple to disable the use of all iPhones older than the 4S as telephones...
It would be a pretty aggressive business model, though.
Somewhere in Cuptertino, a marketing executive just creamed his pants.
Re: (Score:3)
I understand with that philosophy, and I would agree if it had not already been available on the iPhone 4 for over a year then pulled it from the market after Apple bought the company.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is not in the habit of releasing half-finished features. They either don't have a feature, or they do it right.
I don't understand that philosophy, at least as it relates to Apple. They have a history of pushing out iOS upgrades that tend to degrade performance on older machines, requiring a point release to improve it enough to be viable.
Apple is just as bad as everyone else in terms of dumping half baked concepts out there. In fact, I think Apple does less testing than some other vendors. I never upgrade any Apple device until the .3 rev shows up. I never buy the first generation of Apple hardware.
And I like A
Mine works fine (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also have a 4S with a proxy server installed? Where are all these people getting access to a Siri proxy? Are you trying to tell me I can install Spire and it will "just work?"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tire, engine and heater noise are easier to filter out. Try it with the radio on, or while someone else is speaking at the same time.
Re:Mine works fine (Score:4, Interesting)
Have to agree with this. My cochlear implant, circa 1997, has a "filter" mode that works great to attenuate road noise, air-conditioner hum, vacuum cleaners, and lots of other repetitious sounds. It's not so good in a crowded room with lots of people talking.
Needs work (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In my rather normal Mazda hatchback, my phone can be in its cradle in the dashboard, about three feet away, and the transcription is generally faultless; definitely different results when I try to use it with the radio on :)
Does "Ear Smart" enhance other functions? (Score:2)
Is this audio cleanup technology on for "normal" use I.e. making phone calls? Can it be switched on or off in Apps so that, for example, a program like Skype could use it? Maybe Apple should provide an API for it (I assume they haven't already).
Is it (the algorithms) very processor intensive? Would that preclude a software only version of it running as a background process on a jail broken phone? Will the (rumored) upcoming quad core chips be able to run it without dedicated silicon?
By the way, I recent
Many here missed the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Except that there's a difference between "not releasing" for older iPhone models and "removing from" older iPhone models. Yes, I know Siri-as-on-4S is not the same as what was available from the App Store before.
Think of it, if you will, as follows:
Apple buys Rovio Mobile. Then they take Angry Birds, and make a better version - one that uses the reality distortion field sensor in the iPhone 5, perhaps. Then they disable Angry Birds on the 4S and every model prior, citing quality issues on earlier models
Apple/Audience buyout. . . (Score:4, Insightful)
"'Why Apple has not simply purchased Audience is unclear."
Perhaps it's because Audience doesn't want to be bought? Even without Siri, it sounds like that tech would be useful in EVERY SINGLE PHONE - would make conversations a bit easier in noisy locations.
Audience probably figures that by broadly licensing the tech to every phone company in the world, they'll make MORE MONEY that Apple would be willing to offer them. At least, they might be betting on it.
Applications outside of phones. . . (Score:3)
A moment's more reflection, and not only does the tech sound useful for every phone - sounds useful for any device with a microphone - video cameras, sound boards, computers, public address systems, teleconferencing systems, voice control systems in cars, voice control systems for customer support call-center use, etc.
It sounds like one of those rare instances of a technology which has almost universal applications.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. And Apple owning the implementation of the technology would be a substantial roadblock those who want the ubiquity of public closed-circuit TV with the power of Echelon. Every microphone being monitored, decoded, and analyzed by AI, producing a constant flow of actionable intelligence.
No, you're right, I'm probably just being paranoid.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple hates the dreaded F-word (Score:5, Funny)
Hold on, so there's a cell phone of a particular OS which appears to have different capabilities and thus can't run the same software as its immediate predecessor. And both of them are on the market at the same time, you say?
Wait, wait... there's... somewhere in my mind... I'm remembering something... there's a word there I remember from long ago... it... it starts with an 'F'... F... F... Fra... Frag... FragmentatiALL GLORY AND HONOR TO THE ALMIGHTY SAINT JOBS AS IT WAS WRITTEN AT JANUARY 1, 1904 AND SHALL BE UNTIL HIS GLORIOUS SECOND COMING! ALL GLORY TO HIS AVATAR, DOGCOW! ALL GLORY! SOSUMI! SOSUMI!
Woah, sorry, guys. Don't know what just hit me. Anyway, as I was about to say, the... um... word... it... oh, forget it. I've got to get in line for the iPad 3! I heard that before his ascension into... before his death, Jobs himself sweated over the first batch of plastic cases! Oh boy!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...then Samsung purchases Audience (Score:4)
iPhone 4 has an Audience chip too (Score:5, Informative)
There's been an Audience chip included in the iPhone 4 since June 2010. When iFixit tore down the iPhone 4S and noticed the chip wasn't there, it was assumed that the chip was either integrated into the A5 design or that Apple opted to do noise-cancellation without the need of an Audience chip.
It's true that the A4 chip doesn't have an Audience subprocessor in it but it doesn't mean that the iPhone 4 doesn't have the chip included somewhere else on its motherboard. The conclusion that the iPhone 4 can't do Siri is absolute garbage. The conclusion that the iPhone 4 can't do Siri technically because of this kind audio subprocessor is not being included in the iPhone 4's design needs to have their head examined and start doing some research. This entire thing is hogwash.
Facinating...so why won't SIRI work on my IPAD 2? (Score:2, Insightful)
Still does not explain why siri will not work on my ipad 2.
Why Not Buy Up AUdience (Score:2)
Maybe Samsung has contracts with Audience that prevent dropping Samsung while Samsung phones depend on Audience. Or maybe Samsung has some other methods of protecting itself from being screwed that way. They seem obviously necessary to mitigate the risk of depending on a small company like Audience. One might as well won
iPhone 4S speakerphone quality... (Score:3)
The fact that the A5 processor incorporates some fancy noise cancellation technology goes beyond enhancing Siri voice recognition, and explains the startling difference in speakerphone and handset call quality I have noticed after upgrading from the iPhone 4. The 4S is easily one of the best sounding smartphones I have used in recent memory.
Not that iPhone 4 call quality is terrible, it's just that the 4S is that much better.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No, Siri won't run on the iPhone 4 because... (Score:4, Informative)
1) Flash the latest CyanogenMod
2) Update it when the update comes out
Not too hard (at least on the newer phones, some older ones need exploits)
Re: (Score:2)
Or if you have a reference phone:
1) Wait for the updates to come to your phone automatically
2) Start flashing Cyanogenmod the day the phone comes out of support, with a single command needed for the bootloader unlock.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1) iOS, you know the one with draconian app approval process only 1 form factor, and planned obsolescence.
2) Android, not that great of a UI, but lots of apps, a multitude of form factors, but semi-official community updates give you a long life. Consider the G1 (HTC Dream) the first Android phone, it can run (unofficially) the latest release (Ice Cream Sandwich) although it is a bit slow. But the phone is usa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Who stated that goal? Some capitalist's PR flack?
The stated goal of capitalism is to gain more valuable property. Any other goal is either a means to that end, or an end for which capitalism is merely the means, or just not capitalism - or some combination.
In fact the goal of most capitalists is to ignore quality while driving profits up for purchasing more property. Stated or otherwise. Capitalists don't want competition; they want monopoly. It's only when other capitalists must compete with them that ther