Discussion:
Why the iPhone will Slaughter the Linux based phones.
(too old to reply)
Doctor Smith
2009-02-18 03:44:24 UTC
Permalink
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ


It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.

Applications.

Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.

The iPhone now has over 15,000 applications.

So whatever happened to that Linux based OpenMoko?

You know, the phone that couldn't reliably make phone calls.

The iPhone "killer" ?

Where is it?

Bwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!

Linux comes up short once again.
Erik Funkenbusch
2009-02-18 06:05:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
I don't think it will slaughter anything.

How I see things is that Linux based phones will be just like existing
phones today. Each phone will be it's own "distro" and will have it's own
applications, it won't be a single class of phones called "Linux phones".

Just like today, you buy apps for your specific phone. You don't buy apps
for a class of phones. Phone companies and manufacturers don't want their
phones to be compatible or interoperable. They make their money by selling
the apps, and if you can load an app from anywhere then they lose money.

Apple is largely the same way, which is why they only allow iPhones from
one carrier in any given market. It just has the Apple marketing machine
behind it (and a good product too).

There may be very popular Linux based phones, but you won't see it as a
category that you can say "Linux based phones are popular", because chances
are, the Linux based phone will have it's own methods to lock people into
things.
Ezekiel
2009-02-18 12:52:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
I don't think it will slaughter anything.
How I see things is that Linux based phones will be just like existing
phones today. Each phone will be it's own "distro" and will have it's own
applications, it won't be a single class of phones called "Linux phones".
So what you're saying is that if there's say a dozen different phones that
run Linux that each of these dozen phones will need it's own special
version of <application> in order to run?
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Apple is largely the same way, which is why they only allow iPhones from
one carrier in any given market.
That's more of a business decision and the exclusive contract with AT&T
will. expire in 2010. By making AT&T the exclusive carrier for the iPhone
in return Apple gets a nice cut of the monthly service bill.
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
It just has the Apple marketing machine
behind it (and a good product too).
It's mindset and the abundance of applications. These 'Linux phones' are
supposed to be open and were supposed to attract all of these developers to
create apps for it. This is nice in theory but in the real world the
'less-open' iPhone has several times as many applications available for it
as all of these 'Linux phones' combined.
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
There may be very popular Linux based phones, but you won't see it as a
category that you can say "Linux based phones are popular", because chances
are, the Linux based phone will have it's own methods to lock people into
things.
For most people they don't know or care what OS runs on their phone. Any
more than they could tell you what OS their microwave oven runs.
Doctor Smith
2009-02-18 15:48:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
I don't think it will slaughter anything.
How I see things is that Linux based phones will be just like existing
phones today. Each phone will be it's own "distro" and will have it's own
applications, it won't be a single class of phones called "Linux phones".
But people interested in these kinds of gadgets are going to buy the one
that has the most support, or applications.

It's the same with Linux.

IOW "whys doesn't Linux have Quicken, decent games, my SAT tutorial,
Rosetta Stone" etc.
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Just like today, you buy apps for your specific phone. You don't buy apps
for a class of phones. Phone companies and manufacturers don't want their
phones to be compatible or interoperable. They make their money by selling
the apps, and if you can load an app from anywhere then they lose money.
But the class as a whole isn't going to have the support like the iPhone
does and hence will die.

Of course people just interested in making calls, like me, won't care one
way or the other.
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Apple is largely the same way, which is why they only allow iPhones from
one carrier in any given market. It just has the Apple marketing machine
behind it (and a good product too).
They want to control the market just like they do with their hardware.
This has the advantge of the consumer ultimately having the best possible
experience with the device.

IOW it will work.

Take their computers for example.
You buy a Mac, a Mac drive, ProTools and it works.
Try the same with a Frankenstein PC and you have no guarentee that it will
work.
That's the beauty of Apple.
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
There may be very popular Linux based phones, but you won't see it as a
category that you can say "Linux based phones are popular", because chances
are, the Linux based phone will have it's own methods to lock people into
things.
I'm not sure I'm understanding what you are getting at?

What I am saying is that these Linux based gadgets, like the OpenMoko or
Android are not going to have nearly the support ie:applications etc that
the iPhone has so they are going to be killed in the market place because
people will buy the iPhone instead.
IOW people buying these kinds of devices want applications.
They don't care what OS it is running.
Doug Mentohl
2009-02-18 17:37:24 UTC
Permalink
.. chances are, the Linux based phone will have it's own methods to lock people into things.
What methods would that be, give real world examples ?
JEDIDIAH
2009-02-18 14:57:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.

[deletia]

What will more likely "doom" a non-MacOS phone are things like
lack of marketing and on dedicated storefronts and no pre-built
"buzz" surrouding any associated brand names.

Apple has been a marketing company for over 20 years.
--
iTunes is not progressive. It's a throwback. |||
/ | \
Ezekiel
2009-02-18 15:08:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
For people who are only seeking a basic phone they won't even look at
devices in this market segment. But more and more people want more out of
their phone than just the ability to call someone.
Post by JEDIDIAH
[deletia]
What will more likely "doom" a non-MacOS phone are things like
lack of marketing and on dedicated storefronts and no pre-built
"buzz" surrouding any associated brand names.
Apple has been a marketing company for over 20 years.
And that marketing is backed up with some impressive products.
ZnU
2009-02-18 16:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
[deletia]
What will more likely "doom" a non-MacOS phone are things like
lack of marketing and on dedicated storefronts and no pre-built
"buzz" surrouding any associated brand names.
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will insist
only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at all.)
Post by JEDIDIAH
Apple has been a marketing company for over 20 years.
--
"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them
‹ that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer
apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too
small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008
chrisv
2009-02-18 17:07:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by ZnU
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will insist
only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at all.)
Fsck off, you lying shit.

No one here claims "no negative implications" to choice. We only
claim that the positives of choice *outweigh* the negatives.

You have already had this explained to you, Mac-troll fsckwit liar.
ZnU
2009-02-18 18:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by chrisv
Post by ZnU
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will insist
only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at all.)
Fsck off, you lying shit.
No one here claims "no negative implications" to choice. We only
claim that the positives of choice *outweigh* the negatives.
You guys deny the negative implications of "choice" in every specific
instance, as far as I can see, which amounts to the same thing. I've
never seen one of the usual COLA suspects admit something like "Yes,
fragmentation on the Linux desktop does mean giving up X, but it's worth
it because we get Y in return". It's always "X doesn't matter". Or
"Linux has X and you're stupid for not knowing that" (when Linux doesn't
actually have X). Or sometimes "You'd be stupid to even want X".

I mean, come on. I've got people in COLA right now telling me that
seamless live sharing of contact data between apps isn't nearly as good
as manually exporting and importing contact data from apps (possibly
translating it through intermediary apps along the way). This is a
feature that doesn't exist in a useful sense in Linux solely because of
the difficulty of getting Linux developers on the same page, so COLA
advocates refuse to admit the feature has any value.
--
"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them
-- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer
apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too
small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008
chrisv
2009-02-18 19:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by ZnU
Post by chrisv
Post by ZnU
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will insist
only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at all.)
Fsck off, you lying shit.
No one here claims "no negative implications" to choice. We only
claim that the positives of choice *outweigh* the negatives.
You guys deny the negative implications of "choice" in every specific
instance, as far as I can see, which amounts to the same thing.
You're a fsckwit, so what you claim what we've said "amounts to" means
nothing.

Some things are obvious and don't need stating or "admitting-to". We
all understand that there's "some advantages" to concentrating efforts
the way a company can.

I dare say most of us would even admit that there's "some advantages"
to the Micro$oft monopoly.

Get it, fsckwit? We are smart. You are stupid. We see the world in
shades of gray, pros and cons. You see things like "no", "none",
"every", or "all", which are almost *always* wrong.
Post by ZnU
(snip idiotic, dishonest interpretations of what the advocates have claimed)
Fsck off, troll. We don't need assholes coming in here and saying
"you are so stupid that you don't understand ......" and then *lying*
about what we supposedly do not understand.
ZnU
2009-02-18 19:48:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by chrisv
Post by ZnU
Post by chrisv
Post by ZnU
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will
insist only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at
all.)
Fsck off, you lying shit.
No one here claims "no negative implications" to choice. We only
claim that the positives of choice *outweigh* the negatives.
You guys deny the negative implications of "choice" in every
specific instance, as far as I can see, which amounts to the same
thing.
You're a fsckwit, so what you claim what we've said "amounts to"
means nothing.
Some things are obvious and don't need stating or "admitting-to". We
all understand that there's "some advantages" to concentrating
efforts the way a company can.
Yesterday in the "multiple distributions are a good thing" thread in
COLA, JEDIDIAH seemed to want a specific example of how Linux desktop
fragmentation hurts UI. I gave him one.

In <znu-***@news.individual.net> I pointed out that
when one adds an item to the sidebar in the open/save dialog in a GNOME
app, that item shows up in the sidebar in open/save dialogs in other
GNOME apps, but not in the sidebar in open/save dialogs in KDE apps.
(And vice versa.)

You would think, from what you say above, I'd get responses something
like "Fair point. That's dumb behavior, and the GNOME and KDE guys
should work together to fix it".

But no.

So far, I've gotten a response that paraphrases as "That doesn't matter
and you're a troll and an idiot for mentioning it" (with an added
implication that I'm the same person as Snit), another response which
paraphrases as "Only an idiot would want things to work the way you say
they should" (despite the fact that the way I say this should work
obviously agrees with the intent of the GNOME and KDE developers), and
finally a response which claims this issue doesn't matter because "Most
people don't use apps that way". (Funny, I didn't think this prominent
feature of the GNOME and KDE file browsing UI was all that obscure.)

References: <***@kubuntu-intrepid64.org>,
<499bb72c$0$31880$***@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>,
<***@nomad.mishnet>

This was an almost flawless test case for whether COLA advocates are
willing to admit, in specific instances, to the costs associated with
Linux desktop fragmentation. At present, we've got three failures.
--
"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them
-- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer
apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too
small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008
Snit
2009-02-18 19:58:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by ZnU
Post by chrisv
You're a fsckwit, so what you claim what we've said "amounts to"
means nothing.
Some things are obvious and don't need stating or "admitting-to". We
all understand that there's "some advantages" to concentrating
efforts the way a company can.
Yesterday in the "multiple distributions are a good thing" thread in
COLA, JEDIDIAH seemed to want a specific example of how Linux desktop
fragmentation hurts UI. I gave him one.
when one adds an item to the sidebar in the open/save dialog in a GNOME
app, that item shows up in the sidebar in open/save dialogs in other
GNOME apps, but not in the sidebar in open/save dialogs in KDE apps.
(And vice versa.)
You would think, from what you say above, I'd get responses something
like "Fair point. That's dumb behavior, and the GNOME and KDE guys
should work together to fix it".
But no.
So far, I've gotten a response that paraphrases as "That doesn't matter
and you're a troll and an idiot for mentioning it" (with an added
implication that I'm the same person as Snit),
Well, anyone who makes sense is generally claimed to be me by *someone*.
Post by ZnU
another response which paraphrases as "Only an idiot would want things to work
the way you say they should" (despite the fact that the way I say this should
work obviously agrees with the intent of the GNOME and KDE developers), and
finally a response which claims this issue doesn't matter because "Most people
don't use apps that way". (Funny, I didn't think this prominent feature of the
GNOME and KDE file browsing UI was all that obscure.)
I saw that: the claim was, as it often is, that it was your fault because
you did not make a good choice of apps... so it is clear people understand
that using the apps that are not designed to work well together is a poor
choice... and since *no* distro does anything but mix and match, then no
disto does things well.
Post by ZnU
This was an almost flawless test case for whether COLA advocates are
willing to admit, in specific instances, to the costs associated with
Linux desktop fragmentation. At present, we've got three failures.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
2009-02-18 20:02:12 UTC
Permalink
(snipped, unread)
Fsck off, you stupid troll.
ZnU
2009-02-18 20:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by chrisv
(snipped, unread)
Fsck off, you stupid troll.
You must have read it, or you wouldn't be so pissed off.
--
"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them
-- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer
apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too
small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008
chrisv
2009-02-18 20:18:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by ZnU
Post by chrisv
(snipped, unread)
Fsck off, you stupid troll.
You must have read it,
Nope. A quick glimpse identified it as trolling gibberish. Plus, I
have already made my point, and there is no disputing it, so further
"debate" is unnecessary.
Post by ZnU
or you wouldn't be so pissed off.
I get pissed-off when lying idiots, like you, call me an idiot. You
did this here: <znu-***@news.individual.net>

JEDIDIAH
2009-02-18 20:10:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by ZnU
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
[deletia]
What will more likely "doom" a non-MacOS phone are things like
lack of marketing and on dedicated storefronts and no pre-built
"buzz" surrouding any associated brand names.
And a highly fragmented market. (Which of course you guys will insist
only offer "choice" and has no negative implications at all.)
The only thing that causes genuine fragmentation is proprietary
barriers. In this regard, it is Apple that is driving fragmentation.

This forum is proof enough that you don't have to engage in
artificial exclusion in order to enable interoperability. Even
the normal "DOS" PC market allows for more diversity than Apple
will countenance.
Post by ZnU
Post by JEDIDIAH
Apple has been a marketing company for over 20 years.
--
It's great to run an OS where you have to search Google |||
to find problems rather than experiencing them yourself. / | \
William Poaster
2009-02-18 18:45:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
I find it ironic that the troll says "Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE,
not geeks and freaks, are interested in." whilst advocating an all-singing
all-dancing, what-button-shall-I-press-next-to-see-what-it-does gizmo.

Personally, for a phone all *I* want is something to call someone on, &
*not* an "Internet in your pocket with widescreen balh, blah, blah"
gadget. I'm singularly unimpressed.
Post by JEDIDIAH
[deletia]
What will more likely "doom" a non-MacOS phone are things like lack of
marketing and on dedicated storefronts and no pre-built "buzz" surrouding
any associated brand names.
Apple has been a marketing company for over 20 years.
ZnU
2009-02-18 20:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Poaster
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
I find it ironic that the troll says "Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE,
not geeks and freaks, are interested in." whilst advocating an all-singing
all-dancing, what-button-shall-I-press-next-to-see-what-it-does gizmo.
Personally, for a phone all *I* want is something to call someone on, &
*not* an "Internet in your pocket with widescreen balh, blah, blah"
gadget. I'm singularly unimpressed.
Yeah, I guess we'll just see how plausible the notion that regular
people don't want smart phones looks in five or ten years.

Personally, I'm betting it's a "640K ought to be enough for anyone" sort
of statement.

[snip]
--
"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them
‹ that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer
apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too
small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008
JEDIDIAH
2009-02-18 20:11:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Poaster
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by Doctor Smith
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTE2NTQ
It's for the same reason that Windows and Apple Mac slaughter Linux
desktop.
Applications.
Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE, not geeks and freaks, are interested
in.
...silly me. I thought it was a phone.
I find it ironic that the troll says "Applications people, NORMAL PEOPLE,
not geeks and freaks, are interested in." whilst advocating an all-singing
all-dancing, what-button-shall-I-press-next-to-see-what-it-does gizmo.
Personally, for a phone all *I* want is something to call someone on, &
*not* an "Internet in your pocket with widescreen balh, blah, blah"
gadget. I'm singularly unimpressed.
Phone companies need to get back to basics: make a good phone.

Then get to the "all singing, all dancing, crap of the world".

[deletia]

This is a prime example of pushing flimflam first and real features
and robustness only as an afterthought.
--
It's great to run an OS where you have to search Google |||
to find problems rather than experiencing them yourself. / | \
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...