Steve Jobs resigns as Apple's CEO

[Teatoe993]

I've had many different phones on different networks that dropped calls more frequently than my iPhones. Where's the venom for Kyocera, Nokia, etc.?

[MJLiverock]

in part because of Apple addressing the failings of their network

 

I don't understand this. Wouldn't this be AT&T's network? Of course, Apple could be indirectly addressing failings by pushing AT&T. As a parallel, there've been recent stories about how hard Apple pushes Intel.

 

It seems to me that you have to look at the provider before looking at the device. Where I live, Verizon is good, AT&T is fair, and you can't make or receive calls on Sprint and T-Mobile. Note that nobody got a "very good" or "excellent." http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Within a network, some devices do better than others, but not by leaps and bounds.

A lot of it is AT&T's fault, but thats why I made the original point about the Google icon issue. If Jobs is so concerned about the color of the icon Google provided you would hope he would be pushing AT&T to improve the single most important thing about his device. Unless of course he is more concerned with style over function, or rather that he can keep his fanbase satisfied with style over function.

I think if anyone has used an AT&T iPhone and some of the Android 2.2/2.3 phones on Verizon's LTE network or Sprints 4G WiMax network they wouldn't even consider an iPhone. Yet there's so many people with iPhones who wont even consider the much better options out there when its time to upgrade and I really don't understand why.

My hats off to Jobs for building such a loyal fanbase that they are willing to only purchase an inferior product. The only thing about his tenure that has bothered me is how Apple (and to be fair other companies like Microsoft) has recently tried to slow the innovation of the competition with lawsuits while at the same time copying a bunch of Android's features

I dropped AT&T and switched to Verizon a number of years ago because AT&T's network was so spotty. I had all sorts of dropped calls and no reception in and around Madison. This was prior to the existence of the iPhone and on some old Motorola phone. AT&T's network has been the biggest problem but for several reasons. First, despite the marketing, the coverage just isn't as good as Verizon in many areas, especially around here where Verizon customers have the ability to jump onto US Cellular's network in rural areas where USC has good (or much better than everyone else) coverage.

Apple offered the iPhone to Verizon first but Verizon turned down the deal because they didn't want to share as much revenue from the subscribers with Apple as Apple wanted. AT&T was willing to give a chunk of the subs monthly bill to Apple in exchange for the exclusivity. This is the reason why the phone were initially only available on T's network in the U.S. The problem T ran into was the sheer functionality of the phone and ease of internet browsing/data usage exploded and stressed their network. There were studies showing how iPhone users consumed much more data bandwith and created more network traffic than other phone users.

Verizon's LTE network just started rolling out, only a couple ares in Wisconsin are getting this year, and if I remember correctly it will be the iPhone 5 that launches this fall that will be the first iPhone to support that network. Of course Sprint is also going to get the iPhone 5 for its 4G network.

I can remember being at many Badger football games last year and even Miller Park where my friends with AT&T service had no calling ability or couldn't get score updates regardless of the type of phone they had, while my old 2.5G Motorola Verizon phone had no problem. Once the iPhone became available on Verizon I picked one up and have had no problems with dropped calls or poor reception, it works just as well as my old Motorola, even in all the problem areas like my parents rural house. I'd say my data/internet ability has actually improved when out there with the new phone. Of course Verizon or U.S. Cellular could have improved the towers as well.

As far as innovation goes, that was Jobs hallmark. He never let the company rest on the laurels of a popular product and worked his team to rapidly improve things, launching newer versions quickly, never allowing the competition to take the lead. This is how iPods totally dominated the MP3 player market, the iPad dominates the pads, and the iPhone is so successful. Coupled with the ease of interconnectivity between the devices and the content delivery system of iTunes he has engineered a nearly closed loop of technology that is easy to use, functions well, upgrades easily. If anyone has ever had a parent or spouse who is trying to figure out how to get pictures off the camera, or try to get their CD's to MP3, or watch a movie on the laptop, etc. the ease of connectivity for Apple products vs. PC/Microsoft is amazing. I only just made the switch a year ago after getting so sick and tired of slow loading updates, pain the butt configurations, viruses, crashes, and questions about how to make different things work in Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, etc. Now with the iCloud serving as a central repository for all your data(i.e. photos, movies, tv shows, music, calendar, etc.) it will make customers very sticky and reluctant to switch or mix and match different hardware /software providers especially if Apple makes getting new content, accessing old content, saving new content very easy. The ability to use Facetime with other iPhone users and Mac users along with the soon to launch messenger service (send text to other iPhones without Text Message charges, like Blackberry Messenger) will also encourage friends and family to get a similar phone.

As for Android, Google isn't really the innovator there either. A company called Harmon Kardon (yes the stereo and electronics maker) had a platform called QNX behind the development of many of the apps for the Android operating system. Research in Motion (RIMM, maker of Blackberry) bought QNX from Harmon a few years ago and will just now begin to use the QNX system on their phones later this year which will mean all the Android apps will run on the new Blackberries. Google doesn't even really make any money on the Android system because of its open nature, in fact Microsoft makes more money from Android than Google on the Samsung and if forget which phone makers versions. Microsoft gets about $15/phone on the Samsung Droids. When the new Blackberries with the Android apps hit the market it will be interesting to see the impact on the other device makers like Motorola and Samsung. Blackberry Messenger and the superior security of the Blackberry system coupled with the Android apps will make them a formidable competitor to any of the existing Android phones, especially for enterprise customers.

[thebruce44]

MJLiverock wrote:

As far as innovation goes, that was Jobs hallmark. He never let the company rest on the laurels of a popular product and worked his team to rapidly improve things, launching newer versions quickly, never allowing the competition to take the lead. This is how iPods totally dominated the MP3 player market, the iPad dominates the pads, and the iPhone is so successful.

I think this is the perception that Apple pushes on the consumers but it isn't necessarily true. Look at the major upgrades Jobs bullet pointed for iOS5.

1- Notifications Bar. This was available on Android from day one in 2008.

2- Twitter Integration. Android developers can integrate any app, which is an awesome feature.

3 - Tabed browsing. Many Android browser apps have been doing this for a long time.

4 - OTA Updating. Basically every mobile OS besides Apple has been doing this.

5 - iMessage. I'm guessing this is basically a ripoff of BBM or any of the similar Android Apps.

6 - The new Camera features. Already available in certain Android Apps.

7 - Cloud synch. Apple's version still doesn't catch up to a Google Account Synch on an Android phone.

8 - Photosharing. Easy to do with Facebook, Twitter, ect on Android.

All of these features have been "invented" first by Android and/or other Mobile OSs. I put invented in quotes because Apple is the only company who seems to claim to have invented anything when they sue someone.

As for Android, Google isn't really the innovator there either. A company called Harmon Kardon (yes the stereo and electronics maker) had a platform called QNX behind the development of many of the apps for the Android operating system. Research in Motion (RIMM, maker of Blackberry) bought QNX from Harmon a few years ago and will just now begin to use the QNX system on their phones later this year which will mean all the Android apps will run on the new Blackberries. Google doesn't even really make any money on the Android system because of its open nature.

Android was based on a Linux kernel and its Apps are written in Java and run on Dalvik. Google purchased Android Inc back in 2005 and released the software as opensource. So you could make the argument that they weren't innovative because they had so much input from so many sources, but I think the real innovation was how open the development was. Android may have been based on something related to QNX, but I was unable to find anything about that. Could you provide a link so I can see the relation?

Anyway, QNX Blackberry devises require an "Android Player" which I assume is basically an emulator. So again, I am not seeing the link.

I also think its false to say that Google doesn't make money on the Android system. They may not make money on the individual hardware sales (currently) but they make a ton of money with advertising through all of the free services they provide. As someone who now uses Gmail, Google Calender, Google Maps, and of course Google, the sponsored links they provide are so accurate I'm often happy to click on the links since it is what I was looking for in the first place.

[MJLiverock]

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with Android, but most of those innovations mentioned are apps. I guess when I was talking about innovation I was talking about the actual devices which AAPL makes rather than farms out which is the Droid model. I really don't worry so much about who gets an app a week or two first. The integration of allowing my wife to plug her camera into our Mac and have the pictures load into our networked hard drive without fiddling around is imense and it never worked that simply on the Microsoft platform we used to run, or the airplay feature from the tablet to the TV for streamed content, all working seamlessly and easy without me having to sit down and figure out how she changed a setting in frustration of her not getting it to work.

 

Apple buried all MP3 competition with the rapidly updated iPod which left competition in the dust and started them down the path on the phones. Same with the iPad which is another potential market dominator. HP has already decided to dump their tablets, the Blackberry ones have been a disappointment, may improve with the next version, the Samsung ones I'm not sure on their progress. AMZN will be the next one to step up on the tablet route.

 

Most of the really techie people I know prefer Droid because of the customization they can do with the system. I probably more tech savvie than 90% of the people out there but I have no desire to use the level of customization that Droid stuff offers, nor do I care how easy or hard it is to develop an app, I just want them to be available and to work, which is where AAPL was able to garner so much attention and following, sort of the keep it simple stupid philosophy.

 

I too use Gmail, it works better than hotmail on my iPhone. I have never been a big Google search user, when it first launched it annoyed me by always coming up with Ebay auctions when I searched on something. The algos improved and fixed that but I have never really noticed it worked any better than yahoo or Bing for finding what I needed, usually not doing deep research searches.

 

I'll look for a good QNX article, I only knew about the QNX link thru stock research on RIMM a couple years ago when they bought QNX and cited the future ability to port all apps written for the Android system.

[thebruce44]

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with Android, but most of those innovations mentioned are apps.

 

I'll look for a good QNX article, I only knew about the QNX link thru stock research on RIMM a couple years ago when they bought QNX and cited the future ability to port all apps written for the Android system.

Right, but on Android the apps are integrated into the OS and run simultaneously in the background. Many of those innovations being apps are really one of the key innovations of Android itself. And depending on the build nearly all of those features are included on the phone out of the box. HTC's sense for example has an amazing UI that is very easy to pick up and I am guessing most iPhone users have never given it a shot.

Thanks for looking, I would appreciate an article. It will be interesting to see how the Android Apps work on Blackberry's system. I wonder if they will run as well in the background and if Widgets, ect will still work.

[MJLiverock]

PM sent

[Invader3K]

I think the Playbook is the only tablet that can give the iPad a serious run for it's money. It still lacks a few key features, but RIM is releasing version 2.0 of the software soon. QNX is a very powerful and secure platform. It is also the only current tablet approved for use by the US government. I'm posting on one right now, so I admit I am somewhat biased.

[DHonks]

just to note, I said previously that Apple had upgraded its network. Given that Apple has no network, I assume it was pretty obvious that I meant AT&T's network. Some didn't seem to understand that, hence why I'm noting my mistake here.

 

And Apple was not the first to add many features (as thebruce44), however, Jobs is the first to say that Apple might not be the first to do things, but when it does things it gets them right.

[Katuluu]

And Apple was not the first to add many features (as thebruce44), however, Jobs is the first to say that Apple might not be the first to do things, but when it does things it gets them right.

Also not true. Apple has as many failures as any other company, they just have a ridiculously good PR department.

[1992casey]

Also not true. Apple has as many failures as any other company, they just have a ridiculously good PR department.

 

I'm not sure that it qualifies as a failure (yet), but Final Cut Pro X hasn't been very well received.

 

[thebruce44]

And Apple was not the first to add many features (as thebruce44), however, Jobs is the first to say that Apple might not be the first to do things, but when it does things it gets them right.

Except of course when Apple is suing someone. Then things like a candy bar style phone becomes their innovation when they just ripped off the HTC Wizard.

[1992casey]

Apple's App Store review policy obviously wasn't part of its culture back in the 1990s, when a game called Garcia's Guitars was packaged on its Pippin multimedia device.

It’s hard to imagine Apple approving a game on one of its app platforms that allows the player to pose as Jerry Garcia as he runs around a parking lot to snatch up hits of LSD, needles, and bongs, all while avoiding the police. But back in the mid-1990s, that’s exactly what Apple did—for the Pippin.…

 

For a game that was temporarily "banned in several college towns," it's impressive that Apple not only didn't care about the content of Garcia's Guitars, the company actually highlighted it by packaging it with the Pippin.