4 ms·

Care to elaborate, which of the points are incorrect? How was using multitouch on that nice screen (half the resoliution of the iPhone and 35k colors only)? Was

Care to elaborate, which of the points are incorrect? How was using multitouch on that nice screen (half the resoliution of the iPhone and 35k colors only)? Was the WiFi integration seamless? How was browsing experience with mobile IE? Installing all those apps was an one click deal, right? Was distributing them a breeze too?

mquander 17y ago
Distributing a Windows Mobile application involves putting your CAB file on a webpage somewhere, as opposed to paying for a development license and submitting your software to Apple hoping to be eventually approved for inclusion in the App Store (if you want to be available to the non-jailbroken majority of users.) I don't think that particular comparison is very flattering to Apple.
- roc 17y ago
  And downloading a windows mobile app involved users putting aside every shred of hard-won suspicion about random binaries from essentially unknown development shops. Now how about distributing a for-pay app? How easy was that?
  - mquander 17y ago
    Well, the Windows Mobile model is exactly identical to the established model of trusting, advertising, and distributing any other computer software. I have yet to be convinced that a different model for handhelds is better. If I had to choose between making development free and easy and making sales and advertisement easy, I'll take the easy development. There are always a lot of people who will create interesting things for free, but many of those people might not feel like creating interesting things in Objective-C after paying for a development license and then not being able to distribute their things if Apple doesn't approve of the thing they wrote.
    - swift 17y ago
      It seems pretty obvious that your hypothetical objections have not been a problem in practice; no other mobile device has an app ecosystem on the scale of the iPhone and iPod Touch.
      - mquander 17y ago
        I disagree -- I don't know how to find reliable statistics for how many, but there are a huge number of free Windows Mobile apps to suit nearly every need. I have a Scheme interpreter with a little IDE on my HTC phone+, and a GBA emulator for it too. I think that the relatively large number of iPhone apps are a natural consequence of the big userbase and are in spite of their App Store model, not because of it. + http://www.mazama.net/scheme/pscheme.htm http://www.mazama.net/scheme/pscheme.htm if you're interested!
        blasdel 17y ago
        I think you've stumbled into a perfect way to win HN arguments -- appealing to Lisp
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "paying for a development license" This is the suckiest part. Paying money (every year!) to develop on a device you paid for is insane. I don't know if any other platform has annual development fees. Damned if I'll pay money every year to be "allowed" to write/deploy code on my own device.
asnyder 17y ago
I thought it was pretty clear in my first few sentences which points I was referring to. Furthermore, your assumption about the screen and wifi is incorrect. Mobile Opera was available and was pretty decent. Yes, apps were a one click install. You get the app, either through url, or file transfer and press one button. A quick Google search would've cleared that up for you.
- rimantas 17y ago
  Yes, you refer to many. I am too dumb to decipher that, can you name those many by numbers? What exactly is incorrect in my assumptions about the screen: is not 240x320 half the resolution of 480x320? Is not 16bit color space not as deep as 24bit? Did that HTC indeed have multitouch? How did that WiFi work seamlesly? Connected on demand to the known networks in the backround, without need for you to do anything? "Prety decent" can mean many things. But it does not mean that you could see the page looking exactly like it did on desktop. Not to mention JS and CSS support. Regarding apps: I am not talking about installing the app once it is on your phone. That's zero clicks on iPhone. I am talking about the whole experience.
  - asnyder 17y ago
    You make arguments such as But it does not mean that you could see the page looking exactly like it did on desktop. Not to mention JS and CSS support, which is false. Opera Mobile rendered websites properly. Furthermore, your tone is very combative. It's obvious that you're not actually reading what I write, but rather, just pushing your preconceived notions. It's not necessary for me to make a list for you. I was merely pointing out how many of the items that were supposedly introduced or unique to the iPhone wasn't, and in fact was worked on and implemented by many talented engineers years before the iPhone was released. As a long time HN user, dialogs such as these really turn me off to the current community.
    - jrwoodruff 17y ago
      As someone not familiar with the phone you mention, and never having used it, I would like to see a list, for comparison purposes. Although the tone is a bit combative and could be toned down some, I don't think they're being overly hostile, but rather are just asking for facts. I think most people are aware that the iPhone didn't spring out of some black ether. Obviously it built on technology that existed, but then that's the point. They put it together in a way that blew apart the model that existed before and have pretty much pushed the worldwide cellphone market into a new era.

mquander 17y ago

Distributing a Windows Mobile application involves putting your CAB file on a webpage somewhere, as opposed to paying for a development license and submitting your software to Apple hoping to be eventually approved for inclusion in the App Store (if you want to be available to the non-jailbroken majority of users.) I don't think that particular comparison is very flattering to Apple.

roc 17y ago
And downloading a windows mobile app involved users putting aside every shred of hard-won suspicion about random binaries from essentially unknown development shops. Now how about distributing a for-pay app? How easy was that?
- mquander 17y ago
  Well, the Windows Mobile model is exactly identical to the established model of trusting, advertising, and distributing any other computer software. I have yet to be convinced that a different model for handhelds is better. If I had to choose between making development free and easy and making sales and advertisement easy, I'll take the easy development. There are always a lot of people who will create interesting things for free, but many of those people might not feel like creating interesting things in Objective-C after paying for a development license and then not being able to distribute their things if Apple doesn't approve of the thing they wrote.
  - swift 17y ago
    It seems pretty obvious that your hypothetical objections have not been a problem in practice; no other mobile device has an app ecosystem on the scale of the iPhone and iPod Touch.
    - mquander 17y ago
      I disagree -- I don't know how to find reliable statistics for how many, but there are a huge number of free Windows Mobile apps to suit nearly every need. I have a Scheme interpreter with a little IDE on my HTC phone+, and a GBA emulator for it too. I think that the relatively large number of iPhone apps are a natural consequence of the big userbase and are in spite of their App Store model, not because of it. + http://www.mazama.net/scheme/pscheme.htm http://www.mazama.net/scheme/pscheme.htm if you're interested!
      - blasdel 17y ago
        I think you've stumbled into a perfect way to win HN arguments -- appealing to Lisp
plinkplonk 17y ago
"paying for a development license" This is the suckiest part. Paying money (every year!) to develop on a device you paid for is insane. I don't know if any other platform has annual development fees. Damned if I'll pay money every year to be "allowed" to write/deploy code on my own device.

asnyder 17y ago

I thought it was pretty clear in my first few sentences which points I was referring to. Furthermore, your assumption about the screen and wifi is incorrect. Mobile Opera was available and was pretty decent. Yes, apps were a one click install. You get the app, either through url, or file transfer and press one button. A quick Google search would've cleared that up for you.

rimantas 17y ago
Yes, you refer to many. I am too dumb to decipher that, can you name those many by numbers? What exactly is incorrect in my assumptions about the screen: is not 240x320 half the resolution of 480x320? Is not 16bit color space not as deep as 24bit? Did that HTC indeed have multitouch? How did that WiFi work seamlesly? Connected on demand to the known networks in the backround, without need for you to do anything? "Prety decent" can mean many things. But it does not mean that you could see the page looking exactly like it did on desktop. Not to mention JS and CSS support. Regarding apps: I am not talking about installing the app once it is on your phone. That's zero clicks on iPhone. I am talking about the whole experience.
- asnyder 17y ago
  You make arguments such as But it does not mean that you could see the page looking exactly like it did on desktop. Not to mention JS and CSS support, which is false. Opera Mobile rendered websites properly. Furthermore, your tone is very combative. It's obvious that you're not actually reading what I write, but rather, just pushing your preconceived notions. It's not necessary for me to make a list for you. I was merely pointing out how many of the items that were supposedly introduced or unique to the iPhone wasn't, and in fact was worked on and implemented by many talented engineers years before the iPhone was released. As a long time HN user, dialogs such as these really turn me off to the current community.
  - jrwoodruff 17y ago
    As someone not familiar with the phone you mention, and never having used it, I would like to see a list, for comparison purposes. Although the tone is a bit combative and could be toned down some, I don't think they're being overly hostile, but rather are just asking for facts. I think most people are aware that the iPhone didn't spring out of some black ether. Obviously it built on technology that existed, but then that's the point. They put it together in a way that blew apart the model that existed before and have pretty much pushed the worldwide cellphone market into a new era.