Letters to the Editor
sunspot
Published Letters: 351 Editor's Choice: 43
-
Speaking of laughter . . .
[Read the article: Is the press too nice to Apple?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can only laugh at that statement. Unless you think "ordinary people" could afford a $2000 Apple II in 1982 and completely discount the far more affordable (and color) Commodore 64s, Vic 20, Timex Sinclairs, TRS-80s, etc., your statment is simply laughable.
While it's true that cheaper alternatives were available by 1982, the letter you were replying to had praised Apple for being the first to deliver a PC that ordinary folks could use. And they did that in 1977 with the Apple //, sporting high build quality and color graphics over a year before any alternatives were available, let alone cheaper ones.
The Apple // also didn't cost $2,000, at least not in 1982, the year you cited. They ran around $1,200 by that point, and while I thought they were overpriced compared to Atari's and Commodore's offerings at the time, they did feature a killer library of education and productivity software that competing platforms lacked. For some people, that library alone was worth paying a hefty price premium.
-
All About Oscar
[Read the article: Beyond the Multiplex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hollywood's rolling out their Oscar fodder in June so that, come awards season, the films will be long gone from the theaters and their DVDs will have already been released into the marketplace for several months, with the majority of their sales behind them. That frees the studios to carpetbomb voters with free screener DVDs (a la Crash, which went to every actor, director, writer, maid and gardener in Los Angeles) without having to worry about all those freebies depressing DVD sales or spawning pirated copies (especially for films still in the theaters).
Now they can all play the Let's Buy An Oscar game pioneered by Miramax with Shakespeare In Love.
-
Please don't confuse the Right with facts
[Read the article: Rachel Carson's birthday bashing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It just makes them angry.
-
Expectations?
[Read the article: The iPhone: A quick first look]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The point is that the iPhone has failed to live up to expectations
Maybe your expectations, but it seems to me the launch has so far gone pretty well - far better than Microsoft's Zune launch went a few months back. The reports I'm seeing regarding the iPhone show that battery life is better than most expected (a pre-launch concern), that the lack of a physical keyboard quickly becomes a non-issue (another pre-launch concern), that the EDGE network isn't as slow as people thought it would be (though it's still bloody slow compared to wi-fi), etc., etc.
In fact most of the fear, uncertainty and doubt regarding the iPhone spread by Apple's legions of fanatical detractors has proven unfounded. Most of what's left is nitpicking, like harping that the screen smudges (well, duh, that happens with all smartphones - wipe it on your shirt, moron), or that AT&T is especially evil (spoken by someone who obviously hasn't dealt with Verizon's "customer service" department).
The complaints regarding third party software also strike me as a bit obtuse. Apple clearly isn't positioning the iPhone as a traditional smartphone, so if you're one of the few people that's interested in such a device the iPhone is no more appropriate than a microwave oven for satisfying your requirements.
Why would Apple want to make a traditional smartphone, though? Traditional smartphones have hardly taken the world by storm, still representing a small fraction of all phones sold in the world. Even Palm and Microsoft - two of the earliest players in that space - have only managed to lock up about 10% of the global smartphone marketplace between them. There clearly isn't a vast fortune to be made in the smartphone space - look at Palm's declining fortunes.
Apple seems to be emulating the more successful market model pioneered by Nintendo in the '80s for their videogame platform - anyone can develop software for the iPhone, but to release it you have to go thru Apple. This will ensure that Apple can control the quality of the software released for their platform and the consumer experience. Given the overwhelming success of this model with consumers in the videogame space (just look at the billions of dollars worth of games sold by Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony every year), I see no reason to assume it won't be equally successful (and highly profitable) in the mobile phone segment.
About the only legitimate complaint I'm seeing made about the iPhone which would apply to most consumers is that it's expensive. Which is true, although it's also true that there's nothing else out there quite like it.