4 ms·

> It's shockingly obvious why the iPhone was a game changer if you're doing anything other than looking at capabilities and checking off lists of features. It

> It's shockingly obvious why the iPhone was a game changer if you're doing anything other than looking at capabilities and checking off lists of features. It lacked MMS; it wasnt even really a phone, much less a capable smartphone. You're grossly over simplifying if you call things like that a list of features. I used windows mobile phones for years before the iPhone. The iPhone was complete trash to me because I couldn't do the basic things I was able to do on a windows phone or even my flip phones before that. > When the iPod was released everyone said the same thing as you're saying about the iPhone I said precisely nothing about the iPod release. What I implied was that the iPod was viewed as innovative by the time the iPhone was released (hence my usage of the word inertia; inertia of iPod innovation counts for precisely nothing at the release of the iPod). > Slick hardware and good UX is way more important than people in tech give it credit for. The iPhone wasnt even in the same league as WebOs phones as far as UX; why didn't Palm make it very far? (Because UX counts for a lot less than you think) The modern Apple is a marketing titan and the fact that anyone thinks they're largely innovative is a testament to their marketing prowess.

matchbok 7y ago
Eh, no. Windows phone was not good. Horrible UX for the average person. Companies don't make phones for computer science graduates. The modern touch-based UI was entirely an Apple creation.
karlshea 7y ago
> You're grossly over simplifying if you call things like that a list of features. What I'm saying is lists of features don't matter. It didn't even have 3G on launch, but because it made so much more sense to use is why it was successful. > I couldn't do the basic things I was able to do on a windows phone or even my flip phones before that. You couldn't. The average person didn't know how to use those features on windows mobile. > inertia of iPod innovation counts for precisely nothing at the release of the iPod What was different about the iPod in 2008 vs 2001? The wheel was touch instead of clicky? The basic interface never really changed, it's just that it started to be more widely viewed as innovative. > The iPhone wasnt even in the same league as WebOs phones as far as UX; why didn't Palm make it very far? (Because UX counts for a lot less than you think) I'll give you webos had a far better interface, but it was evolutionary post-iPhone. And it WAS initially successful. But did you ever use one? It was slow as shit and the hardware was jank, which is why sales lagged. And then Apple poached some of the Palm guys to work on iOS. > The modern Apple is a marketing titan and the fact that anyone thinks they're largely innovative is a testament to their marketing prowess. Look at the phones pre-2008 (including Android). Look at the phones post-2008. It's delusional to think that was "marketing prowess," it was the average person looking at how the iPhone functioned and it made way more sense to them than the god-awful interfaces everyone had to deal with. Most phones didn't even have threaded SMS until iOS. No one else had a desktop-class web browser. Apple completely changed the expectations for mobile UX.

matchbok 7y ago

Eh, no. Windows phone was not good. Horrible UX for the average person. Companies don't make phones for computer science graduates. The modern touch-based UI was entirely an Apple creation.

karlshea 7y ago

> You're grossly over simplifying if you call things like that a list of features. What I'm saying is lists of features don't matter. It didn't even have 3G on launch, but because it made so much more sense to use is why it was successful. > I couldn't do the basic things I was able to do on a windows phone or even my flip phones before that. You couldn't. The average person didn't know how to use those features on windows mobile. > inertia of iPod innovation counts for precisely nothing at the release of the iPod What was different about the iPod in 2008 vs 2001? The wheel was touch instead of clicky? The basic interface never really changed, it's just that it started to be more widely viewed as innovative. > The iPhone wasnt even in the same league as WebOs phones as far as UX; why didn't Palm make it very far? (Because UX counts for a lot less than you think) I'll give you webos had a far better interface, but it was evolutionary post-iPhone. And it WAS initially successful. But did you ever use one? It was slow as shit and the hardware was jank, which is why sales lagged. And then Apple poached some of the Palm guys to work on iOS. > The modern Apple is a marketing titan and the fact that anyone thinks they're largely innovative is a testament to their marketing prowess. Look at the phones pre-2008 (including Android). Look at the phones post-2008. It's delusional to think that was "marketing prowess," it was the average person looking at how the iPhone functioned and it made way more sense to them than the god-awful interfaces everyone had to deal with. Most phones didn't even have threaded SMS until iOS. No one else had a desktop-class web browser. Apple completely changed the expectations for mobile UX.