data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c26c5/c26c5ff9be24b254a3954b80475f53b86ca67a63" alt=""
Full disclosure: I own a little – too little – Apple stock. I also own a little – enough – Motorola stock. I've always admired Moto's advanced technology and, lately, its style. Unfortunately, its phones have often been marred by mediocre software. Also, all cell phones have been crippled by the telephone service providers because the carriers want to sell their own services. Apple, in contrast, had the clout to get Cingular/ATT to actually add support for functions. Oddly, the iPhone has been criticized (already) for not allowing even more, "third party" applications. This criticism is silly because the iPhone comes with standard applications that are years ahead of the competition and because nobody adds applications to their iPod or current cell phone, anyway.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ce336/ce3364d87e88cd39bce3537693739f8f03685667" alt=""
I was hoping for an ultraportable tablet computer from Apple. I figured, who needs another phone? Well, the new iPhone is essentially an updated Newton (lower figure), a small tablet/personal data assistant (PDA) that was way ahead of it time when Apple produced it over a decade years ago. The Newton didn't have cell phone, wireless internet, or bluetooth (short range) connections. There's a very good reason why these were missing on the Newton: they either rare (cell phones) or non-existent at the time. I had one and despite its limitations, the Newton was still a very useful device. Now the iPhone is the Newton, perfected. iWant.
3 comments:
"iWant" --HA-HA-HA-HILARIOUS!!!
I like your new use of photos and graphics! It adds to your already great essays!
Some people compare the iPhone with the Nokia tablet N800. There is no comparison. The N800 does not have a phone (it links with your regular phone through bluetooth) and it does not have an iPod. Sure, it's cool, but it's $400 and not even close to the iPhone.
Post a Comment