Christopher Allen has some questions for Steve Jobs. Speaking this afternoon at eComm in Mountain View, the man behind iPhoneWebDev.com, billed as the largest iPhone developer support community, raised three issues that Apple's chief executive failed to address when unveiling the Official Jesus Phone SDK last week. And you know …
not that voip nonsense again?
edge is what, 200Kbps at optimum rate. Much less in real world use? While we're complaining, let's winge the iPhone won't sync with a commodore 64!
Maybe, just maybe its not permitted not because apple and the phone networks are evil dictators, but to protect folks who don't know a lot about these things from paying for an application that is only going to hurt their opinion of the iPhone.
On the day that the hsdpa iPhone is announced, and not until that that day, this point will be nothing more than a red herring simply to give people something to winge about.
I predict that the current jailbreaking app coding vunderkind will simply use the SDK to great better integrated apps that I can download via my Installer.app and avoid having to suck Steve's mighty fat one to get anything cool - You know, cool like I've got now.
You're not getting an invite to WWDC 2008 if you keep this up
Apple's approach makes sense if you're an end user, they've made a damn stable phone and anything that has the potential to damage this should not be allowed. Has anyone else ever made a phone that is stable on day 1 without having to wait for a firmware update? For other companies firmware updates restore functionality, with Apple you add functionality.
All your rubbish about IM shows your inherent lack of understanding of the Apple way of doing things. Think about it logically, are you really likely to take a call and maintain an IM session at the same time? It's not a computer remember, it's a phone! If AOL is serious about developing applications for the iPhone then it must listen to Apple's guidlines very carefully and be more creative about bringing it's applications to this particular platform. Why can't AOL be more creative and do to IM what Apple did to SMS. There are many ways to develop some kind of hybrid IM application that quits during a call but maintains online status on the IM.
Dumb ass Linux developers
If all you dumb ass linux developers had even a little clue about developing apps that understand the fundamentals of human user interface then the mobile phone market wouldn't be in the code mess it's in now and Apple might not have entered the market. But now that it's proved it knows what it's doing why don't you just friggin develop applications like Apple says, you might learn something along the way......
-- If all you dumb ass linux developers had even a little clue about developing apps that understand the fundamentals of human user interface then the mobile phone market wouldn't be in the code mess it's in now and Apple might not have entered the market.
If I'm not mistaken, you're an American. And in the North American market, Windows Mobile is the party to blame for horrid smartphone usability. Not Linux, not even mighty Symbian.
After all, it is almost entirely the WinCE market share being eaten by the iPhone, right?
"It's not a computer remember, it's a phone!" - lunacy
I refer you to your lunatic quote. Once a reader reaches that point, he or she can safely assume the remainder of your post will contain absolutely no insight.
A handheld device requires different ergonomics to conventional computing
No, I'm Brit, and dumb arse doesn't sound as good. At least Windows developers know they don't understand fundamental human interface issues but they know who to copy - linux developers are a different breed who don't know what constitutes a good interface because they've never used one.
Was being lazy in my explanation, meaning was that an iPhone isn't a device that you sit in front of like a PC or laptop, you don't need this multitaksing functionality on a hand-held device, you're only likely to be using it for one task at a time - instant messaging on a phone isn't like instant messaging sitting in front of a computer.
@Chad... EDGE is not the only connectivity...
Chad wrote: "edge is what, 200Kbps at optimum rate. Much less in real world use? While we're complaining, let's winge the iPhone won't sync with a commodore 64!"
You seem to have forgotten that the iPhone can do WiFi. Which is, what, 54000kbps optimum...
So would you _really_ like to try to justify the notion that there's no reason why anyone would want to have, say, an ability to place a VoIP call from their iPhone phonebook? Maybe because they're indoors and have poor cellular reception, or because they're calling overseas and don't want to pay AT&T's rates?
(You know, just like you can with Nokia Series 60 phones like the E61)...
"Think about it logically, are you really likely to take a call and maintain an IM session at the same time?"
Er, yes. Obviously you'd need a headset to make it practical, but have you never been stuck on a long conference call and got real work done by IM at the same time? Why is that any different on a phone from a "computer"? It's not like IM requires 1920x1200 screen res.
Your total lack of imagination shows why it's not a great idea to add stupid restrictions to APIs.
But I wonder whether there is a stupid technical (rather than stupid usability) reason behind this, like the IM application stealing CPU cycles from voice processing on the call.
AIM doesn't disconnect you...
...unless the IM app sends their server a disconnect message or their server cannot contact your app within a certain timeout, thus you can be using the IM app and when a phone call is received, the app should store the current status, then restore it when you launch the IM app again.
Your messages will still be there, the only thing is you won't receive any notification that someone is trying to talk to you - and why would you if you're using the phone? But then, if you look at how you use the iPhone.
If I were chatting away and received a phone call, the first thing I'd do after ending the call is to re-launch the IM app and carry on where I left off. The app would retrieve any messages you missed.
If you didn't re-launch the IM app after the call, that's just you being rude to your chat buddies.
@ Asam Bashir
Ho, ho, ho, what a laugh !
I think you "missed the point" by quite a large margin. Just because you want to keep an IM client running, doesn't mean that you are going to be interacting with it. The idea is that you can fire up the IM client and leave it running, and any time you are connected to a usable network, you will appear to be available to the network - and hence all your pals.
And of course, for 99% of the time that's all there is to it. Of course, someone could want to contact you at any time, so the client would be sat there in the background ready - and when someone 'calls', it can pop up and ask you if you want to chat.
If you can't leave an app running in the background, then you will have to remember to re-launch the IM app EVERY time you finish doing something else. If you don't then you will be unavailable.
And as for the first comment, while VoIP might not be usable on the current GSM network connection, it will be usable from many wireless hotspots (I wonder how many filter that out ?), and of course sooner or later the iPhone will get 3G and then it would be too late to put a VoIP client genie back in the bottle. AT&T, O2, et al, will NOT want to allow VoIP applications to eat into their call revenue - you only have to look at their T&Cs for data services to see that. It's nothing to do with usability (but 200kbps is more than enough bandwidth BTW), it's all to do with politics and market protection.
Good to see the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is alive and well in the comments section.
You know what's most annoying about Apple products? You're not allowed to criticise them at all without the FanBois jumping down your throat. Please get over it. No company's products are perfect or cannot be improved. Even Apple's. And often it's the customers and 3rd party developers that spot the potential improvements or build them themselves.
Oh. Wait. This is Apple. Mine's the silver spandex straitjacket in the Apple Store across the road.
"Think about it logically, are you really likely to take a call and maintain an IM session at the same time?"
Yes. I've done this many a time. I'll be chatting to the office on Skype IM, a phone call will come in, I'll take the call, and then GO BACK to my IM conversation without missing anything.
This is why Windows Mobile is still superior, in my opinion. Bang on about the interface as much as you like, it still works. And you're not restricted in the kind of apps you can have, where you can get them or when you're allowed to bloody run them. If I want to open a web browser, IM session and a Word document (not that I like to use Word - OOo haven't made it to mobile yet), and then take a phone call, I ruddy well can. No worries, no bother, no fuss.
Windows Mobile might not have the most inspired interface, but people bang on and on and on about it, when in fact the only real thing they've got against it is that it's a plain old boring start menu, and it's not shiny, flash, or animated. Know what? I just don't care. I really don't. The start menu works on XP Pro for me, it works under KDE on Debian/Kubuntu for me, and it works on my mobile too.
Given the choice between shiny and useful, I'll take useful every time.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to tune my sax/guitar using the app I installed on my Athena.
It really hurts me to say this, but I think mr Asam Bashir is right. Dont get me wrong, I despise everything about micrsoft, but the UI on my XDA orbit was a breath of fresh air compared to the shite on my P900. And the apple UI is a huge leap ahead of that. I think when it comes to useability, apple are a mile ahead of the rest and they should do everything they can to stop the rest of the mobe app morons from ruining their product and reputation.
Oh, and just for the record:
I am not American.
I dont own a Jesus phone. (And wont until they get GPS/3G).
I cant stand microsoft.
Im no apple fanboy.
Im not a member of the CoS.
I just want my electronics kit to work and let me get on with my life.
So I'd miss an IM message if I were in a call ?
Thats terrible granted I probably wouldn't want it to pop up while I'm in a call but I'd like it to be there when I'm done.
Part of the problem is that things like Flash are "not up to apple standards" maybe if we were told what apple standards are then maybe people would stand a chance.
Also an Installer.app would be against the T&C's which is why Java pulled out since they wouldn't be able to get around this.
sticking with my N95
Well, this weekend I will be devin' on my PC, creating some nice N95 apps... easily... in java... with a full API and no big brother (surprised El Reg hasnlt brought up the 1984 apple ad again.... abused becomes the abuser, etc...) telling me what I can and cannot develop and sell/give away my creations.
>are you really likely to take a call and maintain an IM session at the same time?
Well, I don't think I can remember ever having a phone that couldn't receive an SMS whilst I was on a call - although that capability is built right into the standard. Why should IM be any different to the user? Granted it's not quite as trivial at the baseband, but the user experience should be seamless.
>Why can't AOL be more creative and do to IM what Apple did to SMS
I must have missed something, what exactly did Apple do to SMS? ISTR that a recent update actually brought it in line with what every other handset does (multiple recipients). Perhaps that's what you mean by "with Apple you add functionality.", functionality that should've been there on day 1!
>There are many ways to develop some kind of hybrid IM application that quits during a call but maintains online status on the IM.
Apps that communicate with each other - out.
Two apps at once - out.
Apps that run in the background - out.
Now, I'm not the technical god that Jobs obviously is (:-/), I can't see how you could do as you suggest.
>Has anyone else ever made a phone that is stable on day 1 without having to wait for a firmware update?
Plenty. One of my first handsets was a Phillips Genie DB, it was rock solid, flashy UI, and could even send SMSs to more than one person at a time! and I never had to update it's firmware.
"Has anyone else ever made a phone that is stable on day 1 without having to wait for a firmware update"
Yes, actually. Almost everyone barring possibly those that use Windows Mobile.
The vast majority of phones, smart or not, run stably with few or no problems.
Chad seems to have a serious lack of knowledge of VOIP in general - the edge network is easily fast enough to support VOIP, even if signal is pretty poor.
Asam seems to be entirely delusional too, "all you dumb ass linux developers" is clearly a sensible critisim to be making. After all, I'm sure you could write Xorg yourself if you wanted to, you just have better things to do, right? And Linux developers are clearly relevent to an iPhone SDK...
The level of Apple fanboyism groweth mightily...
FWIW, I agree with Chris. Once some nice friendly coder has managed to circumvent the iTunes store requirement, we will be able to get much less restriced apps onto the iPhone. Although sadly I doubt many companies would choose this route, even if it existed, so this may not get us very far in real terms.
EDGE and VOIP
Everyone talks about EDGE at 200k/sec being fast enough for VOIP, they forget that it's an asymmetric protocol which is lucky to hit 64k/sec when sending data. There's also a degree of contention between users in the same cell. The result is that it's unlikely that you'll get a useable VOIP connection over it, and multiple users will cause the quality to go down hill fast.
Stop me if I'm wrong, but didn't Apple have an AIM developer at the SDK launch saying how great the iPhone was to program? On top of that Steve Jobs said that VOIP was OK, providing you ran it over WiFi. What's all the shouting about?
Is it REALLY that black and white?
Whatever any company decides to do also determines what it can and cannot do. In this case, Apple simply chose a different approach than the existing approaches by Linux/MS/Symbian.
It is obvious that for any decision there are tradeoffs, but most of the commentators seem to start from the position that Apple should have been able to create a foolproof-satisfy-everyone-perfect solution.
so come on guys, it's not that black and white! You pick your poison, and if that means sticking with the "joy" that is Windows mobile... then good on you.
You can ALREADY IM with existing webapps on the iPhone and you do not miss any IM's if you get a call or do anything else.
So much BS going around it makes me laugh.
I don't know if I am allowed to post links here but wakey wakey people - IM is available via Safari. I am on iChat, Yahoo, MSN and that Gmail thingy all at once all the time and never miss a msg.
I really despair - now IT is within the grasp of Joe Public the general level of BS you have to put up with in threads like these is almost unbearable.
And for the morons who keep crowing on about 3G - you really need to THINK some more. Put an iPhone on EDGE next to your 3G cruddy N95 and call up a site. Don't cry when you see the results in the FULL Safari web browser vs your crummy effort. Dullards.
"I'm too dumb to use my device. Please Apple, restrict what I can do!"
Grrr. I don't have any problems of stability with the great number of wonderful Apps I currently have installed on my ipod touch. It's an amazing portable computer (and yes, sometimes I use it to listen to music, but not THAT often).
i wonder how many you that are so addicted to your IM chats that you cannot bare to drop offline for the 5 minutes it takes to make a phone call, are the same ones that routinely bash facebook users for a similar addicition
the line about about "getting real work done via IM"
is it REALLY work, or just chatting with your pals, eh? because, surely if it's important and serious work, and email would be better, as it's then written and you can retrieve it easily later. or if it's really THAT important or urgent, you could, you know, call the person on your phone to explain the problem / resolve the issue / etc
Question for Ty
Out of interest, which N95 Browser are you comparing Safari to?
Opera, Opera Mini, Nokia's Webkit browser or A.N.Other browser?
It's nothing to do with thinking. It's just testing and experience. Perhaps it's you who should be thinking more.
My iphone does not download quicker than my brothers N95, because we've done this test. Over 10-12 pages I do, however, probably have a marginally faster browsing experience. Probably down to the superior browser and UI probably allowing me to read and find stuff faster on the page once they are loaded.
oh IM via web is not IM in the sense it's being referred to here. The reference here is the native application based IM. The giveaway is reference to the SDK in the title.
It's people like you who get iphone users like me unfairly tarred with the same Fanboi brush. Stop it.
AC'ing 'cos I'm at work.
VOIP over edge
@Chad - I've used VOIP over GPRS, using the GSM and G729 codecs. Just because skypes codec is so bloated that it doesn't work, doesn't mean that VOIP can't work.
The GSM codec was created to carry voice over, er, GSM networks, and GPRS runs on, er, GSM. So yes, edge is _easily_ quick enough to run VOIP.
"is it REALLY work, or just chatting with your pals, eh? because, surely if it's important and serious work, and email would be better, as it's then written and you can retrieve it easily later. or if it's really THAT important or urgent, you could, you know, call the person on your phone to explain the problem / resolve the issue / etc"
Just because your particular work flow doesn't find a use for IM doesn't mean that other people's doesn't. I've worked with people where their particular job and work flow benefits greatly by being able to IM other people in situations where email or a phone call would be less efficient.
My doesn't really work for my particular job so I don't use IM, however I'm not so narrow-minded that I can't see a number of ways it can be useful to other people.
Paris - because she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer either.
except... All the quotes I've seen say iPhone voip over edge is what's banned, not voip period. On wifi yes, it makes sense, but the quotes I've seen suggest its allowed.
No Apps in the Background?
This is very strange, and I'm sure there must be exceptions. The browser is one as Mr Fanboi has pointed out. But what about multimedia? I have to close my (third party) music player if a call comes in? I'm halfway through writing an email and have to quickly save it half-finished if I get a call? I'm working on a spreadsheet in QuickOffice and have to save what I'm doing to take the call? Or I'm using SportsTracker on a jog but have to turn it off and lose my data? What if I'm halfway through a SyncML session? Or using SatNav in a City I don't know? Lengthy podcast downloads have to stop? Even simple apps you might use on holiday, like a currency converter or phrasebook? All close down and have to be manually started up again? What about games? I've just reached my highest level ever on SystemRush but it suddenly closes down as a call comes in? No, I'm the iBling's biggest critic, but I think there must be some misunderstanding here, Apple aren't that stupid.
No VoIP either? Oh dear, you'll be telling me next it doesn't have a SIP stack.
Seems like a lot of folks - Jobs included - simply don't understand how software works, and the fact that there *really* might be two things happening at once. And in these OO days, one app should handle one feature.
So say we want to make a call. We launch the call app. We want to look up a phone book entry, so we need to put the call app on hold for a bit while we launch the phone book app - that's fine. Then select an entry, the phone book app reverts control back to the call app, we ring the number, and everything's going fine.
Now whilst we're on the phone, someone else rings us. Most phones these days support call waiting - you'd certainly expect a high-end phone to do it. Now we're in a call with someone else, but we have a number from the call waiting alert, and we'd like to look that up with the phone book app. But we can't, because we're in a call and we can't stop the call app.
Or suppose an SMS arrives while we're on the phone. Can we read the SMS and continue our phone call? Nope. Do we even get notification that the SMS has arrived? No, because it's the SMS app that'll pop up the notification, and the SMS app is blocked by the call.
There is a word for this design, and the word is "shite". Steve Jobs might want to investigate this thing called an "operating system" instead. It was invented a little while back, but it seems like the iPhone people have yet to discover it.
@Malcolm Weir: VOIP?
You will be able to do VOIP over WiFi. That's not being restricted by the T&C. Apple just don't want you VOIPing over EDGE/GPRS.
So, your scenario of the traveller in the foreign hotel wanting cheap calls, you can have that.
Jesus Phone ???
Hi, this is a inappropiate naming of the IPhone, it shows a total disrespect for Jesus Christ. You offending half of the people of the USA.
Nice try, but I think I saw you down the pub earlier.
Cool - how do we offend the other half?
My phone is a phone. It doesn't have a camera and the screen isn't in colour. I charge it once a week. I think it might have a game on it somewhere but I use it to text and make calls. That's it... Call me a luddite but really, that's all I want it to do.
I think we have to be careful here. Last week I was accosted by some chap from some happy clappy part of the company that thinks that Outlook is a good mail client and he demanded to know if I would like to trade my mobile for a blackberry. As far as I am concerned email is the "last bastion of asynchronous communication". If I get sent an email at 17:02 on a Friday I'm quite happy with the current arrangement where I can at least pretend I haven't seen it until Monday morning thank you very much. Seriously, what the fuck do you think you're doing to yourselves?
You know how there's a "Gateway" argument for drugs? That one about cannabis leading on heroin etc? I reckon that overly clever phones and blackberry style devices are but a stepping stone to daily use of powerpoint (and the accompanying addiction to adjectives and aversion for verbs - sorry but "systematized integration process" is NOT a sentence) and using the speakerphone at your desk despite sitting in a cube and not having an office. Fuck me it might even lead to playing golf.
You have been warned
Everyone put down your crayons and look at what Alan Parsons is doing.
There's a reason it's known in some quarters as CrackBerry. I've lost several friends to that stuff. Ruins your life, man.
What I'd be curious to see...
...is a VOIP over wifi product and - since it doesn't support bluetooth - a dockable headset for the iPod Touch.
If I'm reading all of this right and the iPhone/Touch can connect to a network over wifi, and VOIP over wifi apps will be permitted for the phone, then this could bypass AT&T altogether for anyone who has a Touch and is regularly near a wireless access point...
...or am I completely off here?
@Alan & Sarah
Well, you don't *have* to use a smartphone for push email. I use my N95 to watch live NASA TV in bed. Now how sad is that?
(Attn Reg: I feel a competition coming on. Nominations for the saddest use of a smartphone. Crackberry addiction is obviously top, but we could have second, third, fourth...)
As with most Apple products
OOOOOOHHH SHINY SHINY SHINY oooooh shiny oooh shiny oooh shiny. You want it to do what? it doesn't and we won't let you make it do what you want but look - it's all ooooh shiny shiny shiny - isn't it pretty
So the iPhone's great in backwards stepping?
"are you really likely to take a call and maintain an IM session at the same time?"
Maybe. I've done it on my Bla^H^H^HCrackberry. Though the main reason to be able to do this is to *get* incoming IM's, and attend 'em after hanging up. I don't want to be offline, though I would like it to switch to "ON THE PHONE" status. ;)
"Why can't AOL be more creative and do to IM what Apple did to SMS"
What did Apple do to SMS? I can't remember anything from the iPhone revolutionizing the SMS biz. My Nokia 1100 from circa 2003 had multiple-recipient message capability. The iPhone doesn't. The "newest" SMS tech I would see are emoticons (my W300 does it, my BB doesn't) and showing SMS as conversations (BB does it). And these "innovations" predate the iPhone for at lesat 3 years.
"Has anyone else ever made a phone that is stable on day 1 without having to wait for a firmware update?"
Nokia, most Symbian handsets, BlackBerry, SonyEriccson (ok, the W300 at least), alcatel ...
I happily am able to IM, send email, browse stuff and such, with the benefit of having a fast task switching option. True for my Blackberry, but also true for my 1996 PalmPilot. Face it, the iPhone is trying to compete in the smartphone market, which itself is derivative from the PDA. You can't nerf functions that 12 year old PDA's do have, can't you???
As Alan Parsons mentioned though, Blackberrys are dangerous in some hands. (Check out the UserFriendly strip for March 3, 2008 ;) Though it does give some advantage, as having IM / email capabilities while on the move, so I can communicate with my cash-deprived friends who don't want to spend on SMS messaging but have Internet access ;)
To be fair, the chap touting the evil devices was at least giving away lots of free stuff. (mugs, t-shirts and the like.) I caught my boss applying some 'BlackBerry' branded lip-salve, asked him if it tasted of blackberries. Faster than I could realise what I'd walked into, he whipped his BlackBerry handset from his hip and gave it a good long lick before replying "Not really, no." - so at least they don't completely kill your sense of humour.
Dumb ass El Reg articles call for dumb ass comments....
If you want a friggin open system go develop for Android or JavaFX and make your perfect crackberry app - An iPhone is a unique platform that requires unique creative apps. If you can't let go of your old ways then stick to them, there are plenty of real Mac developers out there getting on with the business of making really great iPhone apps.
There are thousands of ways of making an IM that can work under conditions Apple has stated, AOL with it's network could easily make some changes so for example if you're busy with a call your IMs get relayed via the SMS network or stored on the server accessible by a GUI archive on client-side app.
I've had all kinds of devices from PDAs to mobile phones and non has satisfied, they've been a compromise. I don't want to do things on an iPhone that I can do better on my laptop. I want to do things on my iPhone that I've not done on any other device...
"i wonder how many you that are so addicted to your IM chats that you cannot bare to drop offline for the 5 minutes it takes to make a phone call, are the same ones that routinely bash facebook users for a similar addicition
the line about about "getting real work done via IM"
is it REALLY work, or just chatting with your pals, eh? because, surely if it's important and serious work, and email would be better"
This is absurd. Even before getting to the the philosophical point of "can u get real work done in IM" (which u can, I do, and many times it's a helluva lot faster than email, cause they _do_ have different purposes), the bottom line is, what kind of an advance in mobile devices is that where u can not run an application in the background? Am I the only one that see this as ridiculous?
Apple thinking about security as well
The limit on active/standby applications might have some security reasons, it would be quite easy to make a background app that jacks the audio from phone calls and sends them to some remote server - Apple is thinking about all these issues in addition to making a very stable platform, security is a high priority for iPhone, just as it has always been on a Mac....
Y'know, Doug, it's wankers like you speaking for "half of the US" that has made the US the laughing stock of the world. Next time you're offended, how about speaking for yourself instead of pretending you're the duly elected spokesperson for over 150 million people.
I'm an American, and I love the phrase "Jesus phone". Get bent.
Shit. You're serious, aren't you?
Going backwards in technology?..
The iPhone has the capability to act in part as an entire mobile computer. However, multitasking has been restricted by the manufacturer (Apple), rendering the computer portion useless, as many people wish to perform tasks, then if interrupted, tend to the interruption and go back to their task.
It's true it's a phone, however, once the manufacturer begins implementing other things, it becomes not just a phone at that point, but whatever the manufacturer has made it. in this case, a mobile palmtop computer. the only component that sets it as a phone is the cell chipset. it has all the signs of a computer, memory, local storage, on-screen user interface. processor.
I'm no apple 'fanboi' but don't get me wrong, The iPhone is good as a concept, it just wasn't implemented to it's full potential and properly.
A better grade of Crackberry
@ Daniel B.
for the discerning BB user, i recommend the BB 8800 series, which does indeed do emoticons, fast task switching, Google Sync and Gmail alerts, as well as BB-native email, and much more (also takes SD cards). my wife has one (works fine, even after a dunk in the toilet), as well as the iPod Touch. she's happy with both, for totally different purposes.
the BB 8800 is an excellent device, and (@ Alan Parsons) no one says you have to acknowledge an email, phone call or SMS/MMS/IM as soon as it arrives (i certainly do not). any communication medium can destroy your life (WoW, Facebook, Twitter, IM, IRC, Usenet, email, the old-style wired telephone, etc., etc.) when you let the technology run the show. IT is a tool, so you don't have to be one; therefore, don't be a tool, and follow basic mobile communications protocol (Rule #1: the person you are dealing with in the flesh, is almost always more important than anyone trying you on your phone, with VERY few exceptions).
the Jesus Phone (if you are offended by this usage, you are apparently part of the 50% of the US population that i despise) is not exempt from this protocol, and any tosser that takes a call in the middle of a physical-presence conversation, is even more of a pretentious twit if he does it on his Jesus Phone (do i get to burn in hell now? please?).
it's actually pretty obvious.
@ doug lynn
as the self appointed representative of 50% of the I'm can you please stop not having a sense of humour, it offends me.
Now HE'S is what others call a 'Fanboi' -- a 'RDF Fanboi'! I just wish those 'others' quit painting me and other Apple owners with his overloaded brush of tar! I don't defend Apple unless there is something so bleeding obvious that even the M$ 'fanbois' chime in.