[zocster]

Yes.

In addition to the above, there're electric vehicles now, none in 1885 .. thanks.

[CBCListener]

In addition to the above, there're electric vehicles now, none in 1885 .. thanks.

No steam, though.

Posted via CB10, on a BlackBerry Passport

[Troy Tiscareno]

100% marketing. It was crammed down the public's throats and revisions/updates pumped out rapidly.

Marketing might be able to get people to buy a product once, but in order for them to keep buying, you actually have to deliver a product that people find valuable. Apple does exactly that - and you're fooling yourself if you believe otherwise. Apple users are the most loyal users there are (besides the ever-shrinking core of BB owners/CBers), because for them, the iPhone has a lot of value.

Blackberry started off BETTER than the original iPhone when they released the Z10 AND had a more developed app store. They failed to market it well and had absolutely NO momentum. They released a completely random assortment of devices with no successors.

The problem was that BB10, released in 2013, wasn't competing with the iPhone as released in 2007 - it was competing with the iPhone and its ecosystem (and Android and its ecosystem) as they existed in 2013. And when you make that comparison, no one should be surprised that BB10 flopped. If BB10 was released in that same form back in 2008, before Apple and Google had built out their ecosystems, then people would have been much more prepared to overlook BB10's shortcomings - just as they overlooked iOS's and Android's - but BB was 5-6 years too late, and they have only themselves to blame for that.

[Skidoo583]

Apples iPhone is very popular because that people that don't know much about technology buys the phones. They have fallen for the marketing and buy an expensive smartphone with budget spec's and yesterday's technology.
iPhone also have a simple operating system this easy to learn.

I wouldn't say that. My nephew is very tech savvy and used to be pro android he switched to iPhone recently and has been very happy

[app_Developer]

In addition to the above, there're electric vehicles now, none in 1885 .. thanks.

None is 1885, but there was one in 1898. The Eggers-Lohner P1, designed by Ferdinand Porsche.

[DJ BigToe]

This might be news to you, but a lot has changed in cars since 1885:

• Four wheels
• Multiple cylinders
• Fuel injection
• Air bags
• Seat belts
• Windscreens
• All-wheel drive
• Lights (head, tail and turn)
• etc.

At some point in the intervening 131 years someone had the bright idea to create an automobile with at least one entry in the above list for the first time; a hell of a lot more than just "making faster cars". Even if you think invention is synonymous with innovation (protip: it isn't), there is quite a bit in that Nissan GT-R that is not in the 1885 Benz wagon, having been created at some point in the 19th/20th/21st century.

And going back to your Intel 4004, the computer technologies of 2016 are not those of 1971, either being created anew (RISC, multi-threading: INVENTION) or being improvements of technologies from 1971 (extended bit-length, mobile, smaller process size: INNOVATION). The history of the thing is probably above you, but that does not diminish the inanity of assuming that everyone in the computer industry has been on a smoke break for the past 45 years.

As much as you don't like Apple, and as much as I don't like Apple, they've been putting serious work into CPU design and mobile storage, among other things. They may have not invented the ARM instruction set, or NVMe, or the touch screen, or other things, but both the pretty fine job they've done with improving them/bringing them to places formerly thought inaccessible, and the uncanny ability to force the other side to drop what they're doing and play catchup (BlackBerry Storm, Google Pixel, etc.) still shows Apple spurring innovation both inside and outside Cupertino. That your overly narrow definition of "innovation" would put a RIM 957 on the same pedestal as an iPhone 7 is naive at best and the usual vacuous partisan narrative-crafting that is endemic to the BlackBerry community at worst.

So innovations aren't new things, just improvements to other stuff. Creating something new, that hadn't existed yet would be invention.

[anon(3983727)]

Marketing might be able to get people to buy a product once, but in order for them to keep buying, you actually have to deliver a product that people find valuable. Apple does exactly that - and you're fooling yourself if you believe otherwise. Apple users are the most loyal users there are (besides the ever-shrinking core of BB owners/CBers), because for them, the iPhone has a lot of value.



The problem was that BB10, released in 2013, wasn't competing with the iPhone as released in 2007 - it was competing with the iPhone and its ecosystem (and Android and its ecosystem) as they existed in 2013. And when you make that comparison, no one should be surprised that BB10 flopped. If BB10 was released in that same form back in 2008, before Apple and Google had built out their ecosystems, then people would have been much more prepared to overlook BB10's shortcomings - just as they overlooked iOS's and Android's - but BB was 5-6 years too late, and they have only themselves to blame for that.

So we agree on the first point

2nd point was that. BB10 did not flop at launch. It did quite well in fact but overestimated sales left a mountain of unsold stock. The momentum dropped off fast though as they ran out of consumers. Advertisement could have stabilized sales until a next generation device was released. But nope.... Q10

[Troy Tiscareno]

2nd point was that. BB10 did not flop at launch. It did quite well in fact but overestimated sales left a mountain of unsold stock. The momentum dropped off fast though as they ran out of consumers.

But that's the problem: largely, the only people interested in BB10 were a percentage of the existing BB customer base. BB10 attracted almost no outside users compared to Apple or Google. And BB simply didn't have billions of dollars to spend on a sustained ad campaign of the likes of Apple or Samsung - and with their badly-damaged brand identity (which was BB's own fault), they'd have needed that much money to have any hope of changing their image. Then you still have the issue that the actual product couldn't deliver what most users wanted: apps, services, accessory support, and after-sale support. That's one of the reasons why the return rate on BB10 phones was so high - another issue that made BB10 unsustainable.

In order for BB10 to have stood a chance, it would have had to have something (or several somethings) that the average user felt they HAD to have - and wanted enough that they were willing to give up a robust ecosystem to get it. BB10 didn't have anything like that - their USPs only appealed to a small niche of people, and not a big-enough niche to be sustainable. Mainstream users demand a robust ecosystem, and if you can't deliver that, they won't buy your product - as Microsoft has proven by dumping over $20B into WinPhone with virtually nothing to show for it.

[Allan Milo]

I'm curious about peoples experiences with the Iphone hardware. The last time my wive was shopping for a phone we compared different makes and, at least on paper, the Iphone didn't seem to be out gunning anyone. Is there more to the hardware than the numbers tell us?

Posted via CB10

[emanuel0ss0]

Besides all of the marketing and processors, a major reason why Apple products work is because they work together. You can pick up all conversations on any device signed into your account. You can go from your phone to your iPad to your mac and not lose the conversation. It's crazy how efficient it makes things. You can answer calls on your ipad/mac while your phone charges.

Everything works together.

[thurask]

Besides all of the marketing and processors, a major reason why Apple products work is because they work together. You can pick up all conversations on any device signed into your account. You can go from your phone to your iPad to your mac and not lose the conversation. It's crazy how efficient it makes things. You can answer calls on your ipad/mac while your phone charges.

Everything works together.

This vertical integration is quite likely Google's endgame for the Pixel line.

[app_Developer]

I'm curious about peoples experiences with the Iphone hardware. The last time my wive was shopping for a phone we compared different makes and, at least on paper, the Iphone didn't seem to be out gunning anyone. Is there more to the hardware than the numbers tell us?

What numbers were you looking at? Their processors perform very well compared to other choices.

[Bbnivende]

I'm curious about peoples experiences with the Iphone hardware. The last time my wive was shopping for a phone we compared different makes and, at least on paper, the Iphone didn't seem to be out gunning anyone. Is there more to the hardware than the numbers tell us?

Posted via CB10

Reliability and after sales service and warranty.

Posted via CB10

[co4nd]

For me one of the biggest factors is the support and the Apple store. I don't deal with the carrier any more. When I need a new phone or help I go to the Apple store. My issues are handled immediately. I also like the ecosystem and the apps.

[Troy Tiscareno]

This vertical integration is quite likely Google's endgame for the Pixel line.

And it's something I've been doing (using Google's products) for at least 5-6 years already. I can take or make calls on any computer, send and receive texts, check VM or record new outgoing messages, etc. on any phone, tablet, or desktop/laptop I own or am using, through the magic of Google Voice. Hell, if I wanted to (and I don't), I could easily have a home phone running on the same number with a one-time purchase of the VoIP device.

[red5gary]

It's the name itself and the logo, it stands out plus there apps. If you want apps, the app store as them...all.

[cribble2k]

100% marketing. It was crammed down the public's throats and revisions/updates pumped out rapidly.
Blackberry started off BETTER than the original iPhone when they released the Z10 AND had a more developed app store. They failed to market it well and had absolutely NO momentum. They released a completely random assortment of devices with no successors.

I wont argue that BlackBerry World had more apps at launch.

However, it didn't have the important big name apps people actually wanted.

Nexus 6p 64gb
Android 7.0 (PureNexus ROM)
ElementalX Kernel

[cgk]

So innovations aren't new things, just improvements to other stuff. Creating something new, that hadn't existed yet would be invention.

Innovations can include invention as an element but not all innovations *need* invention. Also strictly speaking the *idea* would be the invention, putting into practice would be the innovation.

If you come up with a way to make a soda can lighter but still as strong and it goes into production, it's innovation even thought soda cans have existed for decades.

I'm curious about peoples experiences with the Iphone hardware. The last time my wive was shopping for a phone we compared different makes and, at least on paper, the Iphone didn't seem to be out gunning anyone. Is there more to the hardware than the numbers tell us?

Posted via CB10

Which seems odd given even sites like XDA-Developers which is a pro-android site write long articles about how the Apple processor smokes anything made by Qualcomm.

[Tre Lawrence]

Still see the "it's only marketing" comments.

Consumers aren't the silly putty some folks seem to think they are. Even if marketing alone gets them in the door, it doesn't keep them loyal. A good product does.

[z10Jobe]

Still see the "it's only marketing" comments.

Consumers aren't the silly putty some folks seem to think they are. Even if marketing alone gets them in the door, it doesn't keep them loyal. A good product does.

Then why does Apple spend so much money and effort into marketing if it isn't needed. Same with Samsung.

Posted via CB10

[cgk]

Then why does Apple spend so much money and effort into marketing if it isn't needed. Same with Samsung.

Posted via CB10

Because it's still trying to attract new customers? Apple's marketing budget as a percentage of overall revenue is actually pretty small...

Anyway isn't the broader point that in 2016, the idea that only slack-jawed idiots buy iphones is more one that reveals the paucity of the argument being made that says anything useful about apple.

[stlabrat]

Apple also groomed kids from when they were young in schools and with ipods. They are coming to harvest on all those time they spent with kdis back then so teh newer gen are all used to Apple Products.

you means BB forgot to groom the business school, law school and real state agent kids? My understanding is there were many restrictions that you can't even imaging...

[anon(3983727)]

But that's the problem: largely, the only people interested in BB10 were a percentage of the existing BB customer base. BB10 attracted almost no outside users compared to Apple or Google. And BB simply didn't have billions of dollars to spend on a sustained ad campaign of the likes of Apple or Samsung - and with their badly-damaged brand identity (which was BB's own fault), they'd have needed that much money to have any hope of changing their image. Then you still have the issue that the actual product couldn't deliver what most users wanted: apps, services, accessory support, and after-sale support. That's one of the reasons why the return rate on BB10 phones was so high - another issue that made BB10 unsustainable.

In order for BB10 to have stood a chance, it would have had to have something (or several somethings) that the average user felt they HAD to have - and wanted enough that they were willing to give up a robust ecosystem to get it. BB10 didn't have anything like that - their USPs only appealed to a small niche of people, and not a big-enough niche to be sustainable. Mainstream users demand a robust ecosystem, and if you can't deliver that, they won't buy your product - as Microsoft has proven by dumping over $20B into WinPhone with virtually nothing to show for it.

Thats exactly what marketing is for. You must create a demand for a product, not wait for people to discover it. Apple made everyone think iPhone was the MUST HAVE device and that life would be much improved with it. I stand by my opinion that the app ecosystem had little to do with its lack of popularity.
As for high return rate, nothing has been proven that the returns were any higher than any other device. Articles were posted claiming more devices were being returned than sold but Blackberry quickly responded and disputed the claim.

[DJ BigToe]

Innovations can include invention as an element but not all innovations *need* invention. Also strictly speaking the *idea* would be the invention, putting into practice would be the innovation.

If you come up with a way to make a soda can lighter but still as strong and it goes into production, it's innovation even thought soda cans have existed for decades.

Ideas aren't inventions. But they can lead to them.

As far as your definition of innovation, that sounds more like improvement to me.

[Allan Milo]

What numbers were you looking at? Their processors perform very well compared to other choices.

It was a more than a year ago, but I remember going to a website that let you compare different phones- processor speed, screen resolution, memory capacity etc. My wife was looking at a Samsung Galaxy 5 and a comparable Iphone. Because I was thinking of getting one, I throw the Passport in as well. I don't remember actual numbers, but I do recall not seeing anything that stood out on the Iphone.

Posted via CB10