Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Sep 2010 21:41 UTC
Windows It's been only a mere six months since its first unveiling, but Microsoft has already announced that Windows Phone 7 has been released to manufacturing. This means device makers can start tuning the software to their hardware, leaving plenty of time to release devices before the holiday season.
Thread beginning with comment 439105
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

For people who just want to talk on the phone and maybe play a couple games once in a while there is no walled garden.

It's just a phone with a handy little store.

That's all it is.

Your metaphor is not universal.

I program just about every day and I could care less about being able to load outside code on my phone anymore than loading outside code on my Blu-ray player. My laptop is my portable code executor, my phone is for going BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. My last phone wasn't a smartphone and I could only buy a limited selection of Java games from the cell company. Perhaps you would have described it as a Nazi death camp?

Edited 2010-09-02 04:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

"my phone is for going BLAH"

I'm curious - if all you wanted in a cell phone is the ability to talk, why pay extra for a smartphone at all? Why not just get the free phone that comes with a 10-key, or a Jitterbug-like device with rock-solid voice and not much else?

I say this honestly, having used my beloved Samsung flip phone for 5 years just to talk (that dang thing just would... not... die!). It wasn't until I bought a Nokia N900 last Christmas that my laptop fell into relative disuse. When I can run virtually the exact same apps on a computer that's with me 24/7, including my library of custom Python apps that run my life, I only need the laptop for heavy typing or when I need a bigger (well, 10" :-) screen.

Just curious.

Reply Parent Score: 3

spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

I bought a N900 15 days ago. I love it. That tablet is da bomb. I installed libqt4-dev from the SDK repository and I compiled qmake and moc (if someone need, I can provide the binaries). I can develop and compile QT C++ programs ON DEVICE! I can't think about any other device of that size that can do that. It really is da bomb.

Now that being said, the N900 sucks as a phone. It's a computer, not a phone. I still have my old S40 phone and I still use it to receive and make phone calls. Weeks (literally) of battery life, tiny size, solidity, price, etc... The N900 does not compare with my €30 (unsubsidized) S40 phone. I use my N900 in the train and the subway to surf the web and develop software but I don't always carry it. I always have my S40 phone.

Edited 2010-09-02 13:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

I'm curious - if all you wanted in a cell phone is the ability to talk, why pay extra for a smartphone at all? Why not just get the free phone that comes with a 10-key, or a Jitterbug-like device with rock-solid voice and not much else?


That isn't all I want, talking is just the primary reason for having it. I also like having a mini browser and I'll play a game once in a while. The point is that it is primarily a phone to me and not something that is restrictive.

The only walls here are in the minds of people who seem to think that limited execution is a restriction for everyone. If a device meets your needs 100% then there is no restriction. The restriction only exists for those whose needs are not being met.

It's like calling a car that doesn't have 4 wheel drive a walled garden. For people that don't care about 4 wheel drive there is no walled garden. They are having their needs met with 2 wheel drive.

I like the iphone because:

1. It has a mini browser

2. The game selection is far better than Android

What would I gain by going with Android? For me it would be going from a garden of high quality garden of games to a half-assed ones. I'd also lose offline movies which I like for airplane travel. Yes I know Android can play movies offline but there isn't as similar service whereby I can just click on a movie rental and have it download and charge my account.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

For people who just want to talk on the phone and maybe play a couple games once in a while there is no walled garden.

It's just a phone with a handy little store.

That's all it is.

Your metaphor is not universal.

I program just about every day and I could care less about being able to load outside code on my phone anymore than loading outside code on my Blu-ray player. My laptop is my portable code executor, my phone is for going BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. My last phone wasn't a smartphone and I could only buy a limited selection of Java games from the cell company. Perhaps you would have described it as a Nazi death camp?

But then why would such people be stupid enough to spend 500+€ (don't know the $ price of current smartphones) in a phone that hardly lasts two days of battery life, coupled with a keypad that's harder to use, instead of just buying a $100 nokia/samsung/sony/whatever device that works better, lasts longer (in all senses of the expression), is more resistant to everyday life, and globally is just better for that use ?

The "it only costs 1€ if you subscribe for two years on a 50€/month plan" is not a valid argument in my opinion. I refuse to admit that adult members of my race are stupid enough to decide to buy a phone first and then discover how much they lose each month.

Reply Parent Score: 2

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

The iphone is only $200 in the US with a 2 year plan and at AT&T the cheapest Android is $130. Both plans require a minimum $15 per month data service.

So we are talking a $70 difference or $35 a year more for the iphone.

But who cares even if people in some other part of the world paid full price. Android alternatives have only been competitive recently and do not offer 1-1 functionality. Who even cares if some people spent $500 because they think it looks cool. They still probably derive a lot of entertainment from it.

If you want to complain about humans and silly spending then you should start with women's shoes. Paying $500 for shoes that are not at all designed around the shape of the foot is the real joke. It's funny but also good for the economy. Consider it a voluntary tax on savings.

Edited 2010-09-03 15:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2