back to article Apple ambushed in Barcelona

The mobile industry - most of it - has finally got its act together to challenge Apple's dominance of mobile applications. The "Wholesale Applications Community" can certainly claim wide support - three handset makers, LG, Samsung and Sony Ericsson, along with dozens of carriers and operators including China Telecom, AT&T, …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    So what?

    So what were the WhAC members doing when the Apple and its iDevices snuck up on mature markets and mature market leaders and left them comatosely dozing?

    Maybe they were racing ahead with cutting edge alternative ways of doing things or perhaps they were (and had been for quite some time) comatosely dozing or otherwise taken aback by counting the pennies repeatedly or finding even more convoluted contract arrangements?

    Maybe even putting their best brains on how to saturate the network framework with oversubscription (gross oversubscription) to return an even faster penny or three?

    Or maybe a combination of all plus some?

  2. Barry Tabrah
    FAIL

    Easier for developers?

    Designing an application that can run on any required platform can be a logistical nightmare. This won't help developers, this will hinder them.

    1. Lance 3

      Huh

      What did Apple invent? Multitouch? Nope. The screen? Nope. Apps store? Nope, they existed too. Internet on a mobile. Nope; that was 10 years before their first phone. They released a 2.75G handset when the leaders were shipping 3G handsets for over a year. They didn't even fully support the GPRS spec that was released a decade before their phone. Then Apple released a 3G handset at 3.6Mbps when the leaders were shipping 7.2Mbps. They released a 7.2Mbps when the leaders were shipping 10Mbps units.

      Who has been innovating? It isn't Apple. Look at the lawsuits. They use the IP of others and don't pay for it. They admitted that they used Nokia IP. They didn't like that Nokia was going to charge them what everyone else pays. So Nokia upped the price as punishment.

      Apple didn't invent a closed source OS where they say what you like.

      1. CS3000

        Huh?

        You are probably right about Apple not inventing any of the things you mention.

        But then again.... they must have done something right to get from zero to where they are now in the smartphone market in just three years... or is that just because of their marketing?

        Sure all those things have been around on smartphones way before Apple launched theirs... but which one of them integrated all of those inventions into a single smooth user experience that anyone could just pick up and use or even have fun with. Yes fun. Its a commodity very much overlooked by business centric geeks that think a smartphone must be capable of running MS office to be a valid platform.

        No doubt about it... Others phone OS's such as Android will catch up and one day Apple could possibly be forced out of the game all together, but one thing is really clear... Apple redefined what the general public should expect from a phone and without that we would still have phone UI's and OS's designed by geeks in finland.

      2. Robert Hill

        Apple may not...

        Apple may not have invented it, but Apple DID have the first working, widely popular micro-payments system, and frankly on that score they still lead by a considerable margin. The rest is just _stuff_ ...it's the usage of a good micropayments system (underlying iTunes) that made the iPhone app store click. (pun intended).

        Now, micropayment systems have been "invented" ever since Ted Nelson wrote about his design for one in "Computer Lib" - back in the '60s. But, funny enough, no one really had the gumption to really DO anything about it until Apple delivered iTunes and made it ubiquitous. That's not invention, but it IS innovation...

    2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  3. MurrayOak
    Thumb Up

    Only one App store can compete with Apple

    Interestingly, this is the largely the approach advocated by Colly Myers, former CEO of Symbian and long time advocate of JAVA ME Apps.

    In an interesting article written last year, entitled “Only one App Store can compete with Apple” on the 63336.blog he says

    “What developers require is a single App Store providing Java ME apps that will reach all the customers of all network operators using a mobile phone that can run Java ME. Developers would have a single marketplace from which to promote their applications, and a single commercial relationship. Customers would need only to go to one location to find and download applications. All of which would reduce friction in developing a substantial Java ME app market that could potentially dwarf the Apple App Store.”

    The question is whether the WAC can embrace Nokia and Telefonica. As he says in another article on the subject “Mobile apps can be the next gold rush, but only if the industry leaders, working together, deal with the few remaining problems of the Java ME platform. If they do so then they will create a mobile marketplace that is as significant as the internet itself”

    1. Sean Timarco Baggaley
      FAIL

      Colly Myers is a good chap...

      ...but he's talking bollocks here. Java ME isn't the problem: it's the panoply of hardware variations and user interfaces which cause the difficulties.

      Porting C or C++ code isn't difficult—both languages are no less portable than Java. Java's only claim to fame is its VM, but this isn't anywhere near as useful as some way of porting a GUI from, say, a multi-touch Nokia to a more traditional candy-bar device with a smaller (non-touch) display that runs at a different aspect ratio.

      THAT is the problem with a single, unified "app store" for all mobiles. Until these idiot corporations realise that the *user experience* matters far more than whichever marketing buzzwords they've been able to shoehorn into their clunky tat, they're just going to keep on hearing a strange, almost continuous whooshing sound. It's the sound of the f*cking point whizzing right by them over and over again.

      What galls most people about Apple's iPhone isn't the iPhone. It's the fact that—some *three years* after the first one was released—NOT ONE of the traditional mobile phone manufacturers has managed to come even close to understanding why it's been so successful, let alone coming up with a worthy rival.

      The sheer blithering incompetence exhibited by some of these companies is staggering.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      Java ME?

      Have you run Java on a mobile? It's a good way to make your mobile seem old and creaky and low-performing. I've still seen too few well performing apps on a proper computer that are written in Java. Java, ME or otherwise, is not the right way to go, unless they've found a way to make JavaFX scream on a handset...or a way to stick a xeon in a handset. I said this when I was at Sun and I'll say it now...but anonymously – I don't want to hurt feelings amongst the few comrades still there.

  4. bygjohn
    Stop

    Zzzzzzz...

    You know, it really is too late for this. When will the operators understand that we want them to be "pipes", no more, no less?

    I want to buy a connection from them, maybe a handset if they'll subsidise it without crippling it. I don't want to buy music/video/ringtones/apps/anything else from them. What I want them to do is put their efforts into providing a good network with enough capacity (both voice and data) and stop wasting their time trying to muscle in on other markets they are patently useless at competing in. 'Scuse grammar.

    1. Rob
      FAIL

      Asking a bit much

      You want a subsidy and a decent network yet you want to take away one of their revenue streams, you can't have your cake and eat it.

      1. Omer Ozen
        WTF?

        Cakes

        What is the point of having a cake if you cannot eat it?

      2. cognominal

        pipes/services is like electricity/appliances

        One want norms so that services providers can have a stack on to which to build.

        html5 being the higher level of the stack to get rid of proprietary lockup like Flash.

        I would like a app store but I don't want it owned by handset builder, neither by network.

        I am not sure what third party can provide that service.

        Decoupling service and pipe makes the prices more clear.

        Currently the pricing scheme are so complex with imposed services that we don't know

        the cost of providing reliable and everywhere mere bandwidth. If bandwidth provider makes

        most money on services light on their network like SMS or ringtones and multiplies by 50 the bandwitth price when you reach a limit, they have little incitation at being good provider of "mere pipes". So there will be no competition and the price of pipe will stay high and the quality low.

    2. drphilngood

      100% agree

      ...could not have said it any better.

  5. Ian 62

    You can give Apple a hard time...

    But, they do change the game.

    As much as people complain about App Store approve process, and locked platforms, multi tasking, jesus phone etc etc...

    I really really doubt without Apple taking the chance and giving it a go, that the 'old school' mobile companies and operators would have bothered their @rses to try anything like this.

  6. Andy Watt
    FAIL

    Har har! Open Mobile Alliance, anyone?

    fat fat Fat FAt FAT chance. And the irony is it's not too little, too late - it's more of the same. However, this time they're being backed into a corner instead of hunting for the "killer app" like they were 3 or 4 years ago.

    Operators squash good handsets as well - with endless customisation requests, cack-handed acceptance testing regimes (which are ENORMOUS) and (as the article points out) this awful awkward creaky idea of how to get people to buy content through their "platform".

    I do seem to remember plenty of soomsayers saying that the operators couldn't allow themselves to be "just the pipeline" or they'd go out of business. I'm not sure I buy into that at all. Maybe the operators need to actually go back to just doing networks, the handset manufacturers produce handsets and programming platforms for them (or Java ME, indeed, although I still think the YMMV component of Java on different handsets makes this unlikely - unless a common approach to dealing with JSR support on a given platform exists), and programmers work on those platforms. The most compelling implementation will win out, and this rarely comes from a group effort. Compromises and in-fighting lead to dismal specifications with watered-down capabilities and lowest common demoninator requirements.

    Put simply, if they all work together they'll come up with yet another common platform which everybody ignores.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Paradigm Shift ?

    Remember the HAL in Windows NT ? Build an O/S, it would work on any hardware. So I could buy Intel or PowerPC and the O/S would not care. Great - execpt it didn't work well and was abandoned.

    So, it's even easier for a phone - build an app and it's Phone O/S independent. Really. Simple. Rubbish.

    J2ME / JME might have helped, Symbian has a large market share and in future phones, assuming some serious coordination and agreement this universal store concept might just be able to function. But for now, for all the phones out currently there, the chances of this working are <1 %

    What this does do, however, is allow the spotty teenagers in Carphone Warehoue and other phone retail stores proclaiming you don' t need an iPhone (or even Android) because your new phone will have an app store of its own. So as a marketing device it might just work.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Already doomed

    By the time these companies get all of their noses in line, it will be too late. By that time, web apps will take over. Apple knows this, and in fact uses this. All of their competitors are now looking very busy trying to build app stores themselves, which are actually cunningly disguised sinkholes. You see, for Apple it made sense to build an app store, and by now it has more than paid for itself. So at this point in time it costs Apple nothing to build out their App store.

    But other companies will need to start from scratch. That means a lot of money, and a lot of time. If and when they will be ready with their answer to Apple's two-year-old concept, Apple will move on to the next thing.

    That thing will be hybrid web-apps. Locally cached on-line applications that share their information regardless of the underlying hardware. Apple knows this, Google is moving towards it. Only these companies have no idea. It would seem that they, like so many others, refuse to learn from (even recent) history. Just look at the iPod (yes, you, SE). For many years it was unassailable, with companies as wide-ranging as Sony and Microsoft trying to compete with it. And what was its ultimate undoing? The iPhone/iTouch. By Apple. Just at the point in time when the Zune actually became a credible competitor to the old-skool iPod.

    1. Antidisestablishmentarianist

      What he said

      Also, is it just me, or does the Win 7 Mobile interface (and latest Zune) look quite...well...fresh? I'm a typography fan and like what they've done.

      The Apple iPhone OS is frankly looking a little dated....

      1. Anonymous Coward
        WTF?

        RE: What he said

        "Zune" lol - you've bought one recently?

  9. Bassey

    WAC

    I thought WAC stood for Wide Awake Club?

    1. LinkOfHyrule
      Coffee/keyboard

      This article and its comments were boring...

      ...Till you chimed in with that and made me LOL so to speak! eww Wide awake club, thanks bringing back such nasty memories, I spent loads on therapy to help me forget that, thanks a lot!

  10. Smelly Socks
    FAIL

    A one-way trip down mediocrity lane

    If I were Steve Jobs, I'd want all my competitors to get involved in a project like this.

    -ss

  11. RichyS
    FAIL

    It'll fail, as usual.

    Like all other inter-operator schemes, this one will fail. All those vested interests to deal with, and 'lowest common denominator' solutions will see to that. Whatever comes to market (in about 4 years time) will be a crippled, clunky, badly integrated excuse of a store.

    I can't see Jobs losing any sleep over this one...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      RE: It'll fail, as usual.

      I'll bet it's just a matter of time before someone manages to sneak some kind of bandwitdth-hogging spam software in there too - which would be the kiss of death ;)

  12. Jerry H. Appel
    Happy

    Satire on a level with Pope

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/happy_32.png The idea of this group getting together and agreeing on anything put such a smile on my face that it is still there. This is truly hilarious. This will be as successful as the major music labels lame attempts to open digital sales beyond iTunes or in competition to it.

    Sean Timarco Baggalay says it well, "What galls most people about Apple's iPhone isn't the iPhone. It's the fact that—some *three years* after the first one was released—NOT ONE of the traditional mobile phone manufacturers has managed to come even close to understanding why it's been so successful, let alone coming up with a worthy rival.

    The sheer blithering incompetence exhibited by some of these companies is staggering."

    Ditto

  13. Joe Ragosta

    Committee

    Aside from the obvious problem of how you create software that works well on all the diverse UIs out there, there's the bigger issue: software designed by a committee? I don't think so.

  14. jbelkin

    More Meetings Than the UN

    Concept fine - by the time you get these guys to agree on the right clor chairs for the vice presidents, Apple will be on iTunes 20.1 and iphone 6.0 ...

  15. James Katt

    It won't work

    The problem for everybody is that they all have different CPUs and different operating systems. Thus every cell phone type has conflicts with others. Apps have to specify exactly which cell phones - even within a single manufacturer's line - they are compatible with and not allow downloads to that cell phone. This becomes a huge complicated mess when it is done in one huge marketplace. It becomes a Tower of Babel. Users will be disappointed in that the market may show lots of software but so very little that runs on any particular phone.

    Even then, it will take 2-3 years to implement this idea. This will give Apple an EVEN BIGGER lead in smart phones.,

    1. dgp
      Big Brother

      oh my the air is stuff around here..

      "The problem for everybody is that they all have different CPUs and different operating systems."

      A good percentage of the phones you would want to run "Apps" on are ARM based and Symbian.

      "Thus every cell phone type has conflicts with others."

      That doesn't actually matter. If you have an "App store" and you browse it with device X and it shows apps that will run on device "X" there is no issue. Some apps might not even be suited to device Y as it has no GPS or something... How long will apple be able to keep it's unified apps platform working (it already isn't unified, but lets ignore that for now), unless they keep the same shitty hardware forever. You don't need to have every app on every device, you just need a place where person with device X can get apps that will work with device X without having to arse around. Before Apple released the iphone people were doing pretty well selling Symbian applications.... it's like Apple releasing a product erases any memory of prior art.

      "Apps have to specify exactly which cell phones - even within a single manufacturer's line - they are compatible with and not allow downloads to that cell phone."

      And that can all be taken care of.. the user doesn't have to know that there are 20,000 apps available but only 50% have been ported to their device. There only see the stuff they can use. And that's the point...

      "Even then, it will take 2-3 years to implement this idea. This will give Apple an EVEN BIGGER lead in smart phones.,"

      Apple has no lead in "smart phones"... 99.999..% of the apps on the app store are fluff. Thats the reason that they are shifting units. In reality only a few people actually want a "smart phone" that runs "applications", most iphone users want a phone that has worse functionality than a phone you could buy in asda for 30 quid but has novelty apps like the shotgun simulator.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        @dgp

        "A good percentage of the phones you would want to run "Apps" on are ARM based and Symbian." With modified UI's and proprietary additions. Your point?

        ""Thus every cell phone type has conflicts with others" That doesn't actually matter. If you have an "App store" and you browse it with device X and it shows apps that will run on device "X" there is no issue." Adding a needless level of "complexity" to the store. Have a look at Handango...

        "How long will apple be able to keep it's unified apps platform working (it already isn't unified, but lets ignore that for now)" How so? Are you alluding to the immanent launch of iPad, or the (extremely) limited range of apps that require the compass available on the 3GS? Either way, BOLLOCKS.

        "...you just need a place where person with device X can get apps that will work with device X without having to arse around." Which is EXACTLY what the App Store provides.

        "Before Apple released the iphone people were doing pretty well selling Symbian applications...." Go out on the street and ask any consumer if they knew this! That's not Apples fault. That's not even the (over-hyping) Media's fault. It's the fault of the mobile operators AND the device manufacturers AND the who ever has been in charge of the Symbian project (that'll be the halfwits at Nokia then).

        "it's like Apple releasing a product erases any memory of prior art." No, see above. Apple have recently (since the iPod's initial release) had a knack of doing things well, or at least getting consumer mindshare. I couldn't give a shit what methods Apple employ in achieving this, so long as they aren't illegal; in much the same way as i don't give a shit how Nike or BMW manage the same process.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        RE: oh my the air is stuff around here..

        "A good percentage of the phones you would want to run "Apps" on are ARM based and Symbian."

        Try telling that to Android users (to name just one bunch)

        " the user doesn't have to know that there are 20,000 apps available but only 50% have been ported to their device. There only see the stuff they can use. And that's the point..."

        So you're advocating that they download them all through the handset and never use their PC? That's not going to be very popular considering that many tariffs make people pay for bandwidth usage on their phone - but the same people can download FREE on their home broadband...

        "In reality only a few people actually want a "smart phone" that runs "applications","

        Really?

        "most iphone users want a phone that has worse functionality than a phone you could buy in asda for 30 quid but has novelty apps like the shotgun simulator."

        So the cruz of the matter is that you're an iPhone hater!

        I have an iPhone. I've had it for two weeks. Not only is it better than my previous phone, it was also cheaper (when the previous one was new ofc)

        I do have a couple of novelty apps but the ones I have used the most are things that tell me bus times, show maps, look up local cafes/amenities etc

        I believe you should rethink most of your post as it's starting to seem like an "I have Symbian but it's not as popular as I would like" post...

        1. dgp

          more hot air?

          "Try telling that to Android users (to name just one bunch)"

          Android, being linux based has at most levels are great deal of abstraction from the actual hardware... The biggest phone markets in the world shift Symbian phones... don't assume that your locality is the center of the world. IIRC recent stats suggest that 95% or so of mobile phones are ARM.

          "So you're advocating that they download them all through the handset and never use their PC?"

          Ugh? Ok,... so the PC software can't be clever enough to know what device the user has and only show apps available for that device. I'm failing to understand how you arrived at your conclusion.

          ""In reality only a few people actually want a "smart phone" that runs "applications","

          Really?"

          Explain the ratio of "tat apps" to "applications of serious merit" on the app store.

          "So the cruz of the matter is that you're an iPhone hater!"

          Dear oh dear... this is basically what it always comes down to with "you people".

          I have a number of apple products, I'm writing this on a macbook. I have an iPhone in my coat pocket. However unlike you I don't blindly defend things and accuse others of being "haters"

          "I have an iPhone. I've had it for two weeks. Not only is it better than my previous phone, it was also cheaper (when the previous one was new ofc)"

          I've had an iphone for about a year,.. before that I had an n95 and before that some cheap samsung phone that cost about 5000yen. Guess what? The Samsung phone had a better camera than the iphone and could even record video. It's input system was a ton better also.

          "I do have a couple of novelty apps but the ones I have used the most are things that tell me bus times, show maps, look up local cafes/amenities etc"

          I would say that your bus timetable applications etc are verging on the novelty side. There's no reason that sort of stuff can't be integrated into any old phone. We're talking about the "smart phone" market here. Where are the all the serious applications?

          "I believe you should rethink most of your post as it's starting to seem like an "I have Symbian but it's not as popular as I would like" post.."

          Symbian is very very popular.. again don't think that where ever you are is the center of the world.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    App stores ?

    While the Apple's app store sticks to well defined-ness and even integrates between devices (desktops, laptops, tablet) what on earth are the other alternative app stores going to do?

    Write for the phone OS?

    (Yes you can have this app for models x, y and z and for pre-2009 you'll need variant 3 of the app or variant 2 if the device is post 2009 but not 2010 in which case you'll need variant 1)?

    And then some: how will it integrate with mobile life?

    (Not at all, only partially but that partially varies between OS on your pooter)

    It looks like web apps will win but software drains?

  17. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Rollin' Rollin' Rollin'

    i hear a bandwagon, with people trying to get on board...

  18. Martin Hill
    Grenade

    Plays fer Sure all over again

    Yep, I reckon this will be as successful as the Plays For Sure alliance of all the major mp3 player manufacturers and the Music cartel which totally obliterated the iPod and the iTunes Music Store.

    Oh wait....

    -Mart

  19. Reverend Brown
    Troll

    Logo

    Upon inspection of the WAC website... is it me, or does the WIND logo resemble a butt?

    1. Rod MacLean
      Joke

      Logo

      Butt-wind!

  20. Matthew Barker
    FAIL

    App store vendors

    Let's do some math. 140,000 apps on Apple's app store (by their count, not mine), maybe 50 (at most) whining vendor stories (or actual and unreasonable miscarriages of the process) which have made the news. And we then have to endure an endless supply of stupid lines like this:

    "...which has a less than transparent process for approving apps. If developers don't fit Apple's

    unspoken laws, they can forget tapping into the lucrative iPhone (and iPad?) market, except for

    those customers foolhardy enough to jailbreak their handsets."

    Calculate the percentages. It's this kind of stuff that makes me think El Reg will soon contract the services of Glen Beck or some other Fox News talking head to do their analysis for them...unless this is another example of El Reg taking the piss. One can only hope.

    So, in the vernacular, BFD. Who cares if Apple controls the content. My daughter, friends and co-workers who have iPhones have pretty much trouble-free experiences with them. Some people want that. Some people don't want to jailbreak their phones and they want a vendor who screens all of the apps. More power to them. I think they should be allowed to have it if that's what they want. You could also remind folks in the same breath that the Google uncapped app marketplace model doesn't work either, since we've already heard about malware there.

    For the record, I don't own an iPhone, but a Sony Ericsson phone.

    It's also pretty stupid to require vendors to do software that can be run on every handset. Normally, it's hard to find software that will run on Linux, Windows, Mac, etc., so why with the handsets.

    Let 'em run Java if they're so concerned about run-anywhere (and, no, I don't like java either.).

  21. CS3000

    App Store Restrictions

    "Apple has dominated mobile applications thanks to its App Store, which has a less than transparent process for approving apps. If developers don't fit Apple's unspoken laws, they can forget tapping into the lucrative iPhone (and iPad?) market, except for those customers foolhardy enough to jailbreak their handsets."

    Oh really? 140,000 apps approved does not sound like much of a restriction to me. What are these hot apps we are all missing out on anyway?

    How many apps fail to get approval then? Why do apps fail to get approval? These are the questions rarely addressed by those that like to trumpet crap like "less than transparent process for approving apps" or "developers don't fit Apple's unspoken laws"

    I am not saying there should no competition for the app store, but to succeed it will need a similar approval process or it will fail the minute the first trojan app surfaces and either wipes out a network, wipes out a users phone or gives away that users bank details...

    If the Apple App store only just turns a profit (the vast majority of apps downloaded are free and they need to go through approval, need hosting etc just like a paid app) how on earth do the phone companies think they will turn this venture into a "revenue stream"?

    Best comment so far is that this will give sales dorks at CrapPhone Whorehouse something new to hoodwink their customers with.

    1. Oninoshiko

      Grr...

      "Oh really? 140,000 apps approved does not sound like much of a restriction to me. What are these hot apps we are all missing out on anyway?"

      How would we know (they didn't get approved, remember)? IIRC wasn't google maps on the list?

      "How many apps fail to get approval then?"

      APPL won't tell us.

      "Why do apps fail to get approval? These are the questions rarely addressed by those that like to trumpet crap like "less than transparent process for approving apps" or "developers don't fit Apple's unspoken laws""

      APPL won't tell us, which is why it is "less then transperent," and qualifies as "unspoken laws." If APPL would just say, then all that "crap" being "trumpeted" would just go away, because it would cease to be the case. AFAICT it's pretty random.

      "I am not saying there should no competition for the app store, but to succeed it will need a similar approval process or it will fail the minute the first trojan app surfaces and either wipes out a network, wipes out a users phone or gives away that users bank details..."

      It could be made transparent, with a list of rules. A rejection email could be sent to every rejection indicating what rule you have violated and why. this would address the majoity of the complaints with APPL's approval process.

      "If the Apple App store only just turns a profit (the vast majority of apps downloaded are free and they need to go through approval, need hosting etc just like a paid app) how on earth do the phone companies think they will turn this venture into a "revenue stream"?"

      Phone companies dont HAVE to make money from it directly, unlike APPL. All it has to do is sell larger data plans and it's worth while. For handset manufacturers it just has to make them more competitive with APPL. In busness we call this a "loss leader."

      The real kicker is unlike APPL the costs (risk) are spread across the partners. so the amount of uptick in sales to offest the costs is much lower then would be required for one vendor going alone.

      "Best comment so far is that this will give sales dorks at Cr*pPhone Wh*rehouse something new to hoodwink their customers with."

      wow... juvenile.

      Those "sales dorks" have jobs. I'm sure most of them don't like their job any more then you do, but they are what we call "responable adults" who are trying to pay their bills rather then chavs living on the public dole. More people should take a lesson from them.

  22. stjohnswell
    FAIL

    Design by committee!!

    Perfect - let's get a really HUGE committee together to kick-off a whole range of consultative sub-committees, submit many drafts for dilution and rejection and prepare for a FAIL of monumental proportions in about 3 years time.

    Meanwhile the market will just move on.

  23. Grumpytom
    Grenade

    Blitzkrieg?

    Why are you talking phones? Phones are over, the new paradigm has been brought about by the users voting with their wallets. `Lance" (and his ilk) just doesn't get it does he, going on about 2.75G not 3 G IP this nockia the other 3 mega pixels, lack of invention,you name it - it's irrelevant.

    Old ground old ideas, techy crap. Sounds like pipe suckers discussing high lift twin cams and the virtues of the mechanical limited slip diff at the motor club in the late sixties, it's over. Come down from your model railway sets in the loft and take the cardigan off.

    HELLOOOOO the majority of users don't give a flying ducky on the intricacies of this vs that, he wants what Apple have delivered. Period.

    The fat, cozy, lazy makers and network suppliers wringing a fortune from the users have had their asses well and truly kicked, they are playing catch up - but they can't even stop the rot.

    Why? This is blitzkreig from Apple, maxing out integration by common command, common platforms, common goals, single source power. The entrenched have been overun by a much smaller more nimble, higher initiative force. Google are now trying to emulate that plan.

    1. CS3000

      Hit the nail...

      @Grumpytom

      I love it mate! Hit the nail cleanly on the head. Sure there were smartphones before the iPhone... but apart from business users and geeks NOBODY wanted them.

      Apple do not care one jot about "enterprise deployment"... a stagnating market if ever there was one. I cant recall Apple trying to promote anything they have ever built since the Apple II / III as a business machine.

      Look at the new Win Mobile 7 system... if ever there was evidence that geeks and enterprise markets are dead in the water its Microsoft's complete turn around from Win Mobile 6...

      Mind you IMHO the user interface on WM7 is a joke.. but thats just personal taste

  24. Twm Davies

    roads and lorries

    It's clearly unfeasable for a wide reaching app store to expect all applications to run on every phone.But there is a clear need for a simple way for users to be united with applications that work well with their phone.

    Creating standard APIs just hasn't worked. For instance, just writing in JavaMe is not good enough - a good app store will have empoyed someone to actually verify the apps for a whole a range of phones and only offer the the app to users of the phones that have been verified. Its unreasonable to ask developers to test on every different combination.

    Though we can have a dig at apple for many things, their exclusivity and proprierary nature makes for a much simpler developer and user experience.

    1. CS3000

      What?

      Surely you aren't suggesting we have some sort of approval process are you?

      LOL

      And believe me... when they all do the maths and find out what it will cost to run an app store that works seamlessly, and filters out all the trojans and unsavoury content just waiting to be unleashed on their networks and the damage it will do to customer relations they will all think again.

      Anyway... you could always buy apps for your phones before... its just that they were pretty crap or only worked with the model you had from them at that time.

  25. BeefStirFry
    FAIL

    WAC is wack...

    They tried so hard to keep it real with the youth of today, they called themselves WAC? That's so wack...

  26. Georges
    Happy

    it is true

    while it is true Apple did not invent anything, and yet they had the whole mobile industry up in arms. Every phone release from major manufacturer hope to beat the Iphone and be the Iphone killer. why?

    What Apple did reminds me of the Phoenicians. While they (the Phoenicians) did not invent the alphabet per se, but what they did changed the world and without it we might be still using a hammer and a chisel. There is no denying that Apple changed the definition of "Smart Phone".

  27. Goat Jam
    FAIL

    Crapware

    On the odd occasion that I flip on the idiot box, it doesn't take long before you start seeing ads for extremely dodgy looking Homer-Simpson-Meets-Loderunner games and Your-Horoscope-On Your-Phone! crap and I wonder how many idiots fall for that not realising that the fine print means they are signing up for a "daily sms service" @ $5+ per day.

    It has been going on for years. The network operators don't care because they get a piece of the action and the mobile makers have, until only recently, cared about whether _their_ customers (ie the telcos) are happy. They couldn't give a toss about the handset users.

    Now, apple comes along with their app store and whether you hate their control freakery or not, you can't argue that from a consumers perspective they are able to download apps from itunes without being concerned that they are signing up for some borderline piece malware or outright trojan.

    The networks have been raping their customers for years until apple came along and showed people that there is another way. People are flocking to that other way, whether a bunch of spotty geeks like to admit or not.

    Signed, a spotty geek.

    Fail, for the telcos and their muppet manufacturer partners

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019