Verizon's Challenge To the iPhone Confirmed 423
misnohmer writes "Verizon has just launched a new set of ads confirming the rumors of its upcoming iPhone competitor: 'Unlike previous Android phones, the Droid is rumored to be powered by the TI OMAP3430, the same core that the iPhone and Palm Pre use, and which significantly outperforms Qualcomm 528MHz ARM11-based Android phones that exist today. Droid will also be running v.2.0 of Android, with a significantly upgraded user interface. The Droid poses a different and more significant challenge to the iPhone than any other phone to date. The Palm Pre could have been that challenger, but it lacked the Verizon network, and users were unimpressed with the hardware. According to people who've handled the device, the Droid is the most sophisticated mobile device to hit the market to date from a hardware standpoint. When you combine that with the Verizon network, you've got something that is most definitely a challenger to the Jesus phone.'"
Finally...The iphone killer (and it's not from MS) (Score:1, Interesting)
The specs look outstanding, the network is far better than AT&T's cobbled mess, and since it's not from Cupertino, the price will likely be somewhat reasonable as well. And even better, Bill & Steve didn't have anything to do with it.
Wondered what all the "We've got a map for that" ads were leading into. Now we know. Let the games begin.
Either brilliant advertising, or they're worried.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Either brilliant advertising, or they're worrie (Score:3, Interesting)
Service and usability details (Score:1, Interesting)
How about details that matter to me as a user, rather than how cool the technology is?
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Lacked the Verizon network? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's because the user interface was designed around a desktop OS from 10 years ago.
In personal electronics beauty will beat functionality as non geeks don't want to carry ugly things. That is the iPhone's true success it looks good with a well dressed person. A crack berry makes someone look stuffy all business and no fun.
Besides verizon network is the opposite of AT&T's where one is good the other sucks, and vice versa, they both are limited to major cities and roads for full network access.
Re:The problem was never with their network (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Just Don't Get It (Score:3, Interesting)
verizon network, no thanks (Score:5, Interesting)
I had Verizon for near 10 years. However, this last summer I switched to AT&T because verizon's network was dropping my calls in my apartment half the time or more. And this is just 2 miles outside of downtown Portland, Or. Haven't had a dropped call on my iPhone on AT&T yet.
So just remember that strength of network is not "national", because most people don't move around all the time. Find the network that is best in your area first, then pick a phone.
Re:IPhone. Blah Blah Blah (Score:1, Interesting)
No, the iPhone was/is popular because it enables me to do useful things that I could not (and cannot) do as well with any other phone currently available. That simple.
Okay, name them. Actual examples, not "things that other phones actually can do, but I'm going to claim the Iphone is better anyway, without explaining why".
As for "apps" (sic), you do realise that just about any bog standard phone can run applications? There are about two billion Java phones out there, for example. $1.99? I can download them for free. Easy to find? Yes, I can download from anywhere I like, rather than being restricted to only Apple's site, and only allowed to run what they decide.
So, sorry, but the iPhone is not popular just because it's from Apple. It's popular because it works.
Sorry, it's not popular full stop. Well sure, it's selling okay - it's popular in the sense that it's "not a flop", but then I could say most phone brands are popular. But Apple are not a market leader in the phone industry. Or anywhere near. For popular phone brands, try Motorola RAZR, or for popular phone makes, try someone like Nokia. Unless by popularity, you don't mean sales, but hype, then sure - the Iphone is the most "popular". But I'm not sure how that has anything to do with how good it is - it's just a question of what gets hyped and receives free advertising.
And my phone works too. If your expectations are so low that even simply working is good enough, then that tells us all we need to know about the Iphone's features.
Missing the Big Picture (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Finally...The iphone killer (and it's not from (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Remember the iPod Killers? (Score:1, Interesting)
All these Smartphones including the iPhone and its so called killers are useless in an increasing number of places.
Its not down to the Network crippling the device or the Network coverage.
It's all because they have a frigging Camera.
HALF yes HALF of my customers ban visitors from bringing camera phones on site. One even took my iPod touch away as they thought is was an iPhone.
Note that one of these Customers is a Mobile Phone maker...
The real killer phone would be one WITHOUT a Camera. Sod the hardware, which O/S it runs or arguments about tethering. All I want is a decent smart phone without a Camera.
Re:Advert for the verizon network? (Score:3, Interesting)
Every other network in the USA is so bad that a device has to be on the best one to succeed
Maybe every other network isn't completely terrible, but Verizon does appear to currently be the best network. Look through the cities listed on this page:
http://www.cellreception.com/coverage/ [cellreception.com]
Even though that's not exactly scientific, there's a clear pattern from across the country of Verizon getting high user ratings. Verizon is nearly always higher than AT&T, for example. Sprint and T-Mobile occasionally fight for the top spot, and Nextel clearly has smaller targeted markets.
Apparently Sprint exclusively has the Pre "through 2009". Sprint shows up decently well on that reception site, but it's lacking in a lot of places.
I would also say that any single carrier is currently not capable of supporting everything that its users would really want to do on their phones.
renamed (Score:3, Interesting)
Apparently "Sholes" [engadget.com] wasn't considered to be a very good name for the phone.
More info. [androidandme.com]
Re:Advert for the verizon network? (Score:4, Interesting)
I was a Sprint customer since 2001, and seriously considered getting the Palm Pre. I played around with it for about 20 minutes in the Sprint store, and then talked to the salesman about it. What I wanted was to get my girlfriend on a family plan with me, and I wanted the Pre. She just wanted a free phone that could do some simple SMS messaging. She did not have any use for a data plan, smart phone, etc... But Sprint requires that on a family plan, if one phone has data, they all have to. That's another $25/mo for something that she did not need!
I told them that AT&T would let me get an iPhone with a data plan and another phone without data, and on the same family plan. The salesman said that with Sprint, that is the requirement. I told him that's fine with me, I'm going to AT&T. I switched to AT&T and got an iPhone, and haven't looked back. Sprint is the one screwing themselves and their partners (Palm) here.
Re:Lacked the Verizon network? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's the applications, stupid (Score:2, Interesting)
The iPhone form factor makes it clumsy as a smart phone, and the lack of physical keyboard makes it clumsy as a mobile internet device.
Also, iPhone apps are currently developed for a single form factor.
Android-based manufacturers will be able to deliver smart phones with more practical phone form factors, and also deliver mobile internet devices with physical keyboards and other physical inputs.
If Apple attempts this, either their app store will become segmented or app development and approval costs will increase. And once you need to make your app work on multiple form factors, you might just decide to move to the Android platform where for the same development cost you get access to a larger market.
What I find most telling about these stories (Score:3, Interesting)
What I find most telling about these stories, is that in just about 2 years since Apple has entered the smartphone market, they have become the product to beat, the benchmark against which all others are measured. How did it happen that sophisticated, tech savvy and powerful companies like Microsoft, Nokia, Sony and RIM have such a hard time coming up with an answer, and only Google seems to be going somewhere?
I don't have all the answers, but one thing that seems clear is that Apple totally focusses on the user experience. I once made the error in 2000 to buy a PocketPC instead of a Palm based on the hardware specs. I learned then that a 16Mhz machine can be a better choice then a 200 Mhz one, if the first has been properly designed.
I've been using Nokia phones in the past, as they seem to understand the same lesson, I'm a little puzzled why they and the other established forces in the market have such a hard time formulating an answer to the iPhone. But then the seem thing seems to be happening in the MP3 player market.
What does Apple do that makes them so dominant in these markets so quickly, that the other players seem to fail to do? Even I've been converted recently, having bought a Macbook a year ago, and an iPhone last week, after having had a good experience with my iPod for years. Somehow other products in the same price range just don't measure up. (I did quite an extensive comparison with my alternative OS being Linux).
How does Apple become the measuring stick and the product to beat so quicky, even Microsoft usually needs half a decade and Billions and often they don't really succeed if it's outside the direct Windows sphere of control. (WinCE/Mobile/Phone, Xbox?)
More money in George Lucas's pocket (Score:3, Interesting)
DROID is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd. and its related companies. Used under license.
Re:Hardware, schmardware, is it pleasant to use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nope, digital cameras suck. It's just that nobody has come along and done one right yet. I started out with full manual SLRs when I was ten years old so I quite like the arrangement of my DSLR, but even I hate what the point and shoots do. Particularly when a friend or relative comes along and says "I can't remember how to do X" and hands me a camera so I can hunt through the menus.