The first few iPhones were definitely limited in their functionality compared to other smartphones of the time - features like voice memos and third-party apps took a while to reach the iPhone OS, and the first-generation iPhone didn’t support 3G networks. Where Apple succeeded was in their UX - the iPhone’s ease-of-use and slick presentation combined with its touch-driven interface on what was, for the time, a huge display.
You need to sharpen your reading comprehension skills, I don’t have any problem with Apple and their products are fine. The 1st and 2nd get iPhones were less functional than the devices they purported to supplant by a wide margin, and the 3GS was the first actually good device they made. That’s all right there in the text, you just have to look with your eyeballs and put the words through the critical thinking part of your brain instead of the emotional reaction part. Even in 2007 it was laughable that you couldn’t connect to WiFi with a purported smart device. Its feature base sucked ass till the 3GS, and now they’re fine; the only reason I don’t use an iPhone is because I prefer auditable FOSS, hence I use an Android device with an AOSP-based ROM and no Gplay Services. If it wasn’t for that, the iPhone would be a fine alternative.
You claimed the iPhone didn’t change the market, but it did.
I don’t think any competitors would have eaten Apple’s lunch if the iPhone launched 6 months later. They may have had more features out of the box, but it took years for anyone else to catch up to the iPhone’s UX and build quality. Features like copy+paste didn’t matter as much as having YouTube anywhere you go on a 3.5" screen and a mobile web browsing experience that wasn’t cancer.
All one needs to do is look at the rapid u-turn Android took in design after the iPhone launched to see how much of an impact it had. Before the iPhone, Android phones were going to look like Blackberries.
I’m going to disagree with basically everything you just said. It reads like someone who simply doesn’t like Apple. Brand standing if you will.
The first few iPhones were definitely limited in their functionality compared to other smartphones of the time - features like voice memos and third-party apps took a while to reach the iPhone OS, and the first-generation iPhone didn’t support 3G networks. Where Apple succeeded was in their UX - the iPhone’s ease-of-use and slick presentation combined with its touch-driven interface on what was, for the time, a huge display.
You need to sharpen your reading comprehension skills, I don’t have any problem with Apple and their products are fine. The 1st and 2nd get iPhones were less functional than the devices they purported to supplant by a wide margin, and the 3GS was the first actually good device they made. That’s all right there in the text, you just have to look with your eyeballs and put the words through the critical thinking part of your brain instead of the emotional reaction part. Even in 2007 it was laughable that you couldn’t connect to WiFi with a purported smart device. Its feature base sucked ass till the 3GS, and now they’re fine; the only reason I don’t use an iPhone is because I prefer auditable FOSS, hence I use an Android device with an AOSP-based ROM and no Gplay Services. If it wasn’t for that, the iPhone would be a fine alternative.
You claimed the iPhone didn’t change the market, but it did.
I don’t think any competitors would have eaten Apple’s lunch if the iPhone launched 6 months later. They may have had more features out of the box, but it took years for anyone else to catch up to the iPhone’s UX and build quality. Features like copy+paste didn’t matter as much as having YouTube anywhere you go on a 3.5" screen and a mobile web browsing experience that wasn’t cancer.
All one needs to do is look at the rapid u-turn Android took in design after the iPhone launched to see how much of an impact it had. Before the iPhone, Android phones were going to look like Blackberries.
I stopped reading at
No need for insulting others.