en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1867050 Comments by Joe_Winfield_IL http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/28/att-sets-itself-up-for-failure-says-lumia-900-launch-will-be-a-notch-above-iphone#IDComment326521125 To be fair, "At all levels, this is a notch above anything we’ve ever done,” isn't exactly an easy metric to work with. I read it several times, and still can't guess what he meant. What are the levels? What is a relevant comparison? There's no way to fail with such ambitious - I mean ambiguous - goals. It's kind of like saying "this door hinge, on all levels, is a notch above anything I own." Is it the best door hinge, and why? Is it the best item on my door? In my room? My house? The best thing I use every day? Does it look nice, add function, swing silently? No, it's simply "a notch above anything." Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:04:46 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/28/att-sets-itself-up-for-failure-says-lumia-900-launch-will-be-a-notch-above-iphone#IDComment326521125 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319932317 I didn't forget, I just have enough faith in the human race to understand blatant, thick sarcasm without the need for a tag. Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:53:40 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319932317 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319918144 Did anyone actually read the whole comment??? All these lazy downvoters didn't get to the goods stuff after the scarcasm. Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:27:50 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319918144 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319903674 Yeah, but Android will surely take over the tablet market any second now. I mean, it's the new Windows. Industry standard. Apple will lose eventually. They literally have to lose, just like they did in the 80's and 90's. Because they have to, that's why. Obviously. Back in the real world...iPad = iPod on steroids. The only one worth knowing about. Band-Aid. Google search. Kleenex. Game. Set. Match. Dividend. Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:02:28 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/19/apple-announces-three-million-new-ipad-sales-since-march-16-launch#IDComment319903674 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/07/its-obvious-now-the-next-iphone-is-called-the-new-iphone#IDComment311459020 I wrote basically the same comment 2 days ago on a 9to5 article and ended up getting downvoted. What a difference a keynote makes to change perception in the fan base. Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:05:55 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/07/its-obvious-now-the-next-iphone-is-called-the-new-iphone#IDComment311459020 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/06/apple-goes-directly-after-google-secures-full-disclosure-of-motorola-purchase-and-android-roadmap/#IDComment309713134 Here's how you make it fit: Android developers tried AS HARD AS THEY COULD to copy the original iPhone OS as quickly as possible. They wanted to match every feature, while remaining hardware agnostic. From the standpoint of a feature punch-list , they were largely successful. As far as user experience, Google wasn't even close. Fortunately for Android, Google nurtures the permanent beta mentality, not concerned about immediate profits or even product excellence. Fortunately for Android, phone OEMs had no other option to combat the iPhone (way to drop the ball MSFT). Fortunately for Android, Apple didn't have nearly enough production to offer the iPhone to all carriers - they still aren't even close nearly five years later. So here we are in 2012. Android has largely caught up with ICS. The not evil folks in Mountain View are throwing huge resources at Android, and are even differentiating from iOS through Google services. But that doesn't change the fact that fundamentally, Android is a reverse engineered product. The passage of time doesn't reverse this basic fact. There is nothing inherently wrong or illegal about reverse engineering, but Schmidt and Co. have complete disregard for intellectual property. It is one of the central tenets of Google; all information is public and should be searchable. The company is appalled that Twitter didn't renew the contract or that Facebook never wanted to share the proprietary user data that is the company's life blood. They can't understand why book publishers would bristle at the notion of OCR scanning and machine translating every written page, ever, so that Google can monetize the search. They choose to fight privacy suits in Europe regarding Streetview images, rather than simply settle out of court. They defend, to this day, the use of Java as Android's foundation, having modded the code only in an effort to avoid a license. All of this would be fair game, except that the company has a holier than thou slogan of "Don't be evil." There is a self righteousness in all actions, even as they seek to migrate profits from content creators to Google, whose basic function is only to find the stuff others create. At least Apple has the cojones to be transparent about their corporate objectives. They make and sell very profitable hardware and don't apologize for it. They don't get on a soapbox and talk about civil liberties and human rights while acting exactly the same as every other company on the planet whenever it suits them. Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:04:54 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/06/apple-goes-directly-after-google-secures-full-disclosure-of-motorola-purchase-and-android-roadmap/#IDComment309713134 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/05/report-apple-working-on-new-ipad-smart-case-gorilla-glass-2-backed-iphone-5#IDComment308907900 Maybe it won't be aluminum any more? If could be that the industrial design effort is going into a beautiful case instead of a scratch prone exterior. It would encourage loyal Apple customers to replace the case during the life cycle of the iPad and create more revenue for Apple, all while stealing share from 3rd party case manufacturers. For the record, I wouldn't like this idea one bit as a customer (different story as a stockholder). Just a "what if" scenario, nothing more. Mon, 5 Mar 2012 21:54:40 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/05/report-apple-working-on-new-ipad-smart-case-gorilla-glass-2-backed-iphone-5#IDComment308907900 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/05/report-apple-working-on-new-ipad-smart-case-gorilla-glass-2-backed-iphone-5#IDComment308903974 I've got to side with keyblade321 on this one. It would be pedantic if "iPhone 5" was a 50/50 possibility, but there's almost ZERO chance the thing will be called iPhone 5. Just call it the next iPhone. We will still all know what they are talking about, and the staff at 9to5 won't have 1000 articles with the (obviously) wrong product name. The iPhone 4 got its name because it was the fourth generation hardware, NOT because the number 4 somehow necessarily follows 3GS. The 3G and 3GS monikers referred to the network connection, not the hardware generation. Apple has not done itself favors with its changing naming convention, but at least each name has made sense. iPhone 5 wouldn't make sense, and thus won't be the name. Personally, I'd rather see Apple use model years than model names. Then there's no confusion. They only really make one iPhone, but people still struggle to remember the name, instead falling back to calling it "the new one." And before you say it doesn't matter, just look at the Galaxy brand that Samsung has built. At present, there are at least five tablets bearing the Galaxy name, with overlapping price points and varying subsidies depending on mode of purchase. I was in an AT&T store last week, and witnessed an unfortunate incident where a 65-ish year old woman came to purchase a Galaxy smartphone. The clerk was disappointed that she couldn't identify which Galaxy she wanted, but she'd only been told by her daughter than the Galaxy is the way to go. After 20 minutes, she left frustrated and confused, afraid to make the wrong purchase and unable to contact her daughter for clarification. On the floor was an old Galaxy S, a Galaxy S2, a Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, and a Galaxy Note 5.1. AT&T lost out on the chance to upgrade a flip phone customer to an expensive new contract because of terrible product branding. Mon, 5 Mar 2012 21:48:59 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/03/05/report-apple-working-on-new-ipad-smart-case-gorilla-glass-2-backed-iphone-5#IDComment308903974 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303790279 The iPod Touch is $200 BECAUSE the iPhone is $650. If Apple weren't getting fat on the phone, it would be forced to make much more on the pod. As it is, Apple views iPod Touch as the equivalent of a free sample from a dealer - he knows once you get a taste you'll come back for way more. Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:05:19 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303790279 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303787772 Really? A laptop requires the same miniaturization as a phone? So my new Thinkpad 420S (a compact laptop, but no MBA) at 102 cubic inches is exactly the same in your mind as my new 4S at less than 4 cubic inches? It is roughly 28 times the volume of my phone, and it does not contain GPS, cellular antenna, accelerometers, gyroscope, an 8 mp lens and sensor, or a heavy glass display. Give me a break. Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:01:29 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303787772 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303000378 Here in the US, there is little benefit to using an unlocked iPhone. The carriers don't want to be transparent about the subsidies, so they charge the same rates for all smartphone plans. The only difference is in the early termination fee, should a user cancel the contract. So if I buy an unlocked 4S for $650 and sign up with Verizon, I am instantly their most profitable customer. The only possible benefit is if I decide to change to AT&T early in the deal. This is the same reason that US buyers almost always upgrade religiously on a 2 year cycle. They are paying the same in service fees either way, so the only cost of a new device is the highly subsidized hardware cost. For a $650 device, we are talking $8.29/month ($199/24 months). Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:05:04 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/27/pressure-mounts-to-deliver-inexpensive-iphone-as-apple-stagnates-in-countries-without-carrier-subsidies/#IDComment303000378 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment300054384 I CAN imagine! I've been relegated to airy music like Enya for the sake of my poor aching back. Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:54:45 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment300054384 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment299890256 Every time I download a new game, my iPhone gains a pound. It's exhausting carrying around all the useless crap on my phone. I'm not sure why he focused on games specifically, because productivity apps also weigh a lot. My iPhone is up to 65lbs, and the iPad...198lbs. Useing APPLE's MAC and iphone extra useless business toys is killing me! Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:36:42 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment299890256 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment299887191 What does that even mean? I'd love to see you try to flush out that comment without offending anyone. Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:32:00 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/23/microsoft-office-for-the-ipad-is-all-about-the-enterprise#IDComment299887191 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/21/qualcom-just-announced-the-chip-that-would-be-a-one-stop-shop-for-apples-mobile-needs#IDComment298445911 Hey, I'm not buddy, he is! I prefer champ, sport, kiddo, pal, etc. - but no redundancy in nicknames is allowed. Obviously you're right, but my guess is that the T-Mobile contract isn't signed in blood, and that buddy would survive should he leave to sign up for an iPhone with ANY OF THE OTHER NATIONAL CARRIERS. This product will have been available for more than five years when the LTE version ships. We're talking 2.5 contract life cycles, minimum. It was a valid concern when AT&T owned the exclusive. Now that 3 of 4 nationals (plus some regionals) are carrying the device, I'm not too sympathetic to anyone "locked out" of iPhone. Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:24:19 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/21/qualcom-just-announced-the-chip-that-would-be-a-one-stop-shop-for-apples-mobile-needs#IDComment298445911 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/21/qualcom-just-announced-the-chip-that-would-be-a-one-stop-shop-for-apples-mobile-needs#IDComment298422109 We're talking about iPad here buddy. You're not "on" any carrier. There's no subsidies, no contracts in iPadland. Tue, 21 Feb 2012 21:45:46 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/21/qualcom-just-announced-the-chip-that-would-be-a-one-stop-shop-for-apples-mobile-needs#IDComment298422109 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/17/google-reportedly-forcing-advertising-cookies-upon-iphone-users-regardless-of-safari-privacy-settings#IDComment295023721 I'd love to see someone put together a list of this crap that the "don't be evil" d-bags consistently perpetrate. It would make a great link to throw into any debate about Apple vs. Google. It's bad enough to do this crap, but to do it while simultaneously acting pious is vomit inducing. They get on a high horse every day talking about openness, fairness, blah blah blah. One other story to definitely definitely include would be the Mocality "mistake" where their Kenyan subsidiary was blatantly stealing the contact database of a competitor to lure customers away from said competitor. They were literally caught red handed when Mocality set up a sting operation by creating fake vendor information directed to their own phones. Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:30:21 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/17/google-reportedly-forcing-advertising-cookies-upon-iphone-users-regardless-of-safari-privacy-settings#IDComment295023721 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/10/apple-sues-motorola-in-the-u-s-over-qualcomm-patent-license#IDComment289117791 To those saying "stop all the lawsuits," read the quote in the gray box. It's only one long run-on sentence, so you can get through it. Go ahead, I'll wait... ...See, Apple isn't suing Motorola; they are seeking to prevent Motorola from suing them on the same FRAND patent Motorola is using in Germany. Motorola licensed the tech to Qualcomm for a fee, who in turn has the right to sell the tech and pass the license on to its customers. However, Motorola has sought to specifically exclude Apple from Qualcomm's license. The only conceivable reason for this exclusion is that Moto feels they can use their IP against Apple. The most likely goal is either a much larger payday from Apple than everyone already covered under the Qualcomm blanket license (non-FRAND), or as a weapon to fight back against Apple's own claims (non-FRAND). Either way, Apple feels they have indemnity because they are buying from Qualcomm. Apple is not directly using the Motorola patent(s) in question, and just choosing to ignore the IP. It's a massive difference. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:43:59 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/10/apple-sues-motorola-in-the-u-s-over-qualcomm-patent-license#IDComment289117791 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/06/wsj-motorola-wants-2-25-of-iphone-sales-representing-over-1b-in-2011#IDComment285663015 Does anyone know if percentage based royalties are the norm elsewhere in this industry? I always hear per-device numbers like the Microsoft $5 number listed in this article. Apple should be happy to pay Motorola $5 (or whatever appropriate) per device just to regain the clear upper hand in the IP battle. However, these FRAND patents shouldn't be of any more value on an iPhone than on a crappy ZTE flip phone; Apple shouldn't cave to sharing a cut unless absolutely necessary. Mon, 6 Feb 2012 22:14:18 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/06/wsj-motorola-wants-2-25-of-iphone-sales-representing-over-1b-in-2011#IDComment285663015 http://9to5mac.com/2012/01/26/tim-cook-responds-to-claims-of-factory-worker-mistreatment-we-care-about-every-worker-in-our-supply-chain#IDComment276008391 So if Apple doubled what they pay Foxconn, the hours would shorten and the housing would improve? Give me a break. I've been to a couple of Chinese factory towns, and they are all the same. It doesn't matter what industry they are selling into either. In one case, I visited a plant that makes carpet fiber and press-on nails. The owner of the facility sincerely felt that he was improving the lives of his workforce even though they were sleeping in smaller than twin size bunk beds, 6 to a room. These rooms were maybe 12x12, so we aren't talking about a barracks so much as a sardine can. The owner dictates diet of all employees, and the only form of entertainment he provides is the equivalent of a dentist's waiting room - shared among maybe 100 workers. A lucky few owned bicycles, but none had a vehicle. The plant was too remote to go anywhere on foot. The owner was lamenting how impossibly expensive labor had gotten over the past few years, and he complained that the workers just don't appreciate all he does for them (free laundry for uniforms, food and housing included in pay, etc.). Meanwhile, the owner was opulently wealthy. He had a 3000 gallon shark tank in his personal office, which was probably larger in square footage than the entire dormitory area. My point is, supply and demand are at work in China. In many ways, modern China resembles early 20th century America. Every year, there are millions of people moving from the barter economy and fields to participate in the paid labor market. Despite this massive migration and urbanization, businesses are struggling to find enough staff at meager sweatshop wages. Businesses are being forced to improve pay and/or conditions because of market forces. We look in from a 21st century, developed world perspective and are abhorred by what we see. I have little doubt that advocacy groups and labor unions will eventually take hold, following a similar path to what the western world experienced a century ago. I also fully expect the government and big business to violently push back, just like in 20th century America. If Apple wants to go the extra mile and insist on minimum pay and benefits, along with training and education, it will only help to accelerate the positive trend that IS ALREADY OCCURRING. If Apple does not do enough, conditions will still continue to improve. Regardless of what Apple does, the Foxconn workers will still make much less and live in much harsher conditions than any westerner would tolerate. The changes will seem minor to us wealthy few, but will be dramatic to the workers in China. Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:05:02 +0000 http://9to5mac.com/2012/01/26/tim-cook-responds-to-claims-of-factory-worker-mistreatment-we-care-about-every-worker-in-our-supply-chain#IDComment276008391