So it's OK for you to use your own experience to back up claims of reliability, but when you recive a disproportional number of counter claims to the contrary, you brush them aside with a "not interested?"
Steve Jobs has died. What effect, if any, will it have on Apple and the tech industry?
- Thread starter DBT85
- Start date
So it's OK for you to use your own experience to back up claims of reliability, but when you recive a disproportional number of counter claims to the contrary, you brush them aside with a "not interested?"
He means in the phone and tablet fields, not from Apple.
And this brings us to the outstanding customer service (overall)...
No they did create the frenzy - I was there with smartphones before the frenzy and amazed myself how they released a smartphone that was so easily adopted.
Hell it annoyed me as I was before the curve with smartphones as I was with mp3 players before the iPod. They werent new products or to my mind anything particularly special...
But to suggest in either instances that Apple didnt bring out a product that lead to worldwide adoption and an audience that became a viable market is to considered quite short-sighted...
ps3ud0
Who did start the whole craze then?
I'd be more than happy to admit that Apple did, and I'm not a fanboi in the slightest
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
I'm not quite sure what you mean?
I'm saying that Apple & Steve did push the industry forward, in multiple areas?
Well put, just because Apple make something does not make it better than every other product on the market.
Nintendo remind me of Apple, inventive and creative but you have Playstation/Xbox brand that is just as good as Nintendo and offers something different.
Im not sure I see the link, but Im not particularly impressed by that either. When my girlfriends iPhone was playing up again, she was told in an Apple store that the only option was to replace the whole phone at a cost of £130 because the battery had sustained water damage. Which it hasn't, past existing in an atmosphere which at times contains water vapour. No option to replace the battery (surprising, I thought these things were hallmarks of design? Yet you cant swap out the bttery pack in an instant like other phones?), no option to repair it. Just "buy a new one".
Apple like logitech have amazing CS, however look at both and you will still get bad reviews. You can never be brilliant 100% of the time. But they are fantastic which ever way you look at it. £130 is a substantial discount. Take water damaged good to another company and you would have to pay full price.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 638
- Location
- Suffolk
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of fanboys suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
Such is his impact.
Such is his impact.
Exactly.
No they did create the frenzy - I was there with smartphones before the frenzy and amazed myself how they released a smartphone that was so easily adopted.
Hell it annoyed me as I was before the curve with smartphones as I was with mp3 players before the iPod. They werent new products or to my mind anything particularly special...
But to suggest in either instances that Apple didnt bring out a product that lead to worldwide adoption and an audience that became a viable market is to considered quite short-sighted...
ps3ud0
I absolutely said nothing of this. I 100% that Apple had an integral part of all this. Just don't forget That Nokia, Sony, Google, Microsoft, Palm, RIM/Blackberry, HP, Samsung, IBM, HTC, etc. were all there, all setting the stones and all contributing to a massive rise in population of smartphones and a huge push in technology as everyone wanted a slice of the pie. To suggest that this wouldn't have happened without Apple is foolish. Apple helped the push in many ways, and was early in the game with an excellent product that solved many of the issues that the competitors had. This definitely made these other companies think twice, which is a very good thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
Well according to wikipedia, "Android, Inc. was founded in Palo Alto, California, United States in October, 2003" and then "Google purchased the initial developer of the software, Android Inc., in 2005".
Given the iPhone was released Jan 2007, you can't really say that the Android project started years before the iPhone because Apple would have been working on the project long before release.
Given that it's initial release was "23 September 2008" that is more than 18 months after Apple announced the 2G and 3 months after they released 3G!
Apple got there first and kicked everyone else up the backside to get them in gear as far as I'm aware.
Correct me if I am wrong tho.
Apple's innovation was unshackling Joe User from the Business Machine mentality.
It often seems like they thought "what does Joe User actually want from their computer?" which is why most of their products in the Apple resurgence became popular.
Sure, Windows is more intuitive, Android is smarter, the Samsung Galaxy S2 is arguably better, and mice with two buttons are more sensible. But nobody really sat back and thought that Aunt Marjorie doesn't know/care/worry about network setups, device management, etc... she just wants it to 'work'.
In my opinion, Apple did nothign to 'innovate' with hardware, but they made the user experience more personal, enjoyable and relevant for the vast majority of people who use their devices to consume media, rather than produce it.
Whilst I don't really like Apple's approach to marketing and support, I admire what they've done for the average user: my wife doesn't understand our laptop running either Windows Vista or 7, but the iPad is a doddle. Just the same as for my 3 year-old daughter (who learnt how to use the iPad in a day, when she was 2).
That's what I will remember Steve Jobs for... RIP.
It often seems like they thought "what does Joe User actually want from their computer?" which is why most of their products in the Apple resurgence became popular.
Sure, Windows is more intuitive, Android is smarter, the Samsung Galaxy S2 is arguably better, and mice with two buttons are more sensible. But nobody really sat back and thought that Aunt Marjorie doesn't know/care/worry about network setups, device management, etc... she just wants it to 'work'.
In my opinion, Apple did nothign to 'innovate' with hardware, but they made the user experience more personal, enjoyable and relevant for the vast majority of people who use their devices to consume media, rather than produce it.
Whilst I don't really like Apple's approach to marketing and support, I admire what they've done for the average user: my wife doesn't understand our laptop running either Windows Vista or 7, but the iPad is a doddle. Just the same as for my 3 year-old daughter (who learnt how to use the iPad in a day, when she was 2).
That's what I will remember Steve Jobs for... RIP.
what the hell am I reading
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,086
- Location
- Berkland
My gripe is more that they claim the phone had sustained water damage, despite never being near water. How fragile are these phones that they can sustain such damage (alledgedly) whilst being kept dry?
Also, the point was more about the design. Another company would indeed write off a water damaged phone. But it wasn't the phone that was at fault, but the battery. In another phone, that's £30 quid and 5 seconds to swap. With Apple it requires repalcement of the whole phone. Which doesnt strike me as a great design (from a sustainability point of view).
Also, this was fairly recently, and an iPhone 3, so Im not sure that £130 was a discounted figure.