141–150 of 212 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Touch And waaay before that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_LOOX
That Touch was announced on 5 June 2007... the iPhone was announced on 9 January 2007.
Sure it had an impact on design, but given a couple of years, they would have gotten there(hardware-wise).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who developed for Mobile Phones pre iPhone era, I can say they are people who never worked on software for Mobile before iPhone :). There were number of Phone that existed with several of those styles. How many people know Verizon Had a decent app store (Apps developed with Brew) in US before iPhone? This included similar testing that you see for AppStore TODAY.
Yea, if I remember correctly the closest to the iPhone's look was the LG Prada one year before the iPhone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I commercially developed both Windows Mobile and Palm apps. None had exactly the same design nor look & feel as the iPhone. Which phone are you referring to ?
I think maybe he is talking about the general IDEA, not necessarily the look and feel. You're right in asserting that there really was nothing like iPhone before iPhone, but the IDEA was there from way back with HP Jornadas and the older BREW phones. (I do concede that the UI of all of those devices was, in PRACTICE, much different than the iPhone UI. That much is undeniable when you look at old pictures of them. Bac…
To everyone saying "these are basic phone designs," try and remember reactions to the original iPhone release keynote. The design was originally reasonably polarizing/radical. Half the reason these design elements are now so widespread is because everyone immediately copied Apple.
>The design was originally reasonably polarizing/radical. Half the reason these design elements are now so widespread is because everyone immediately copied Apple. The LG Prada was shown off before the introduction of the iPhone. To imply that the iPhone was polarizing/radical and that the LG Prada was not is ridiculous IMO. https://www.engadget.com/2007/06/29/apple-iphone-vs-lg-prada...
If it was so radical and ground-breaking, how come LG are an also-ran Android OEM and not the most valuable company ever?
It's an asinine argument as it takes the most superficial elements, such as a full touchscreen, conveniently ignoring the actual things that made the iPhone so innovative, such as multitouch UX, proper web browser, full featured operating system, exclusive carrier partnerships and more.
Here's what the LG was actually like:
* No multitouch
* Flash-based UI
* T9 keyboard – even though it was a touchscreen it still used predictive text
* Basic browser, no pinch to zoom
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is such a blatant attempt to diminish the massive effort huge numbers of very talented people put in in order to make the iPhone a reality when it became one. And I’m not at all convinced that it was such an obvious idea given the development of multitouch. I think it only seems obvious after the fact.
Sorry, but the idea is so obvious that the burden of proof lies with those who suggest that an iPhone-like device isn't inevitable once capacitive multitouch tech appears. Or do people think Apple invented that, too? And make no mistake, it's ideas, and not implementations, that are behind these ludicrous half-billion dollar patent judgments. Patents were not supposed to work that way, but they do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a book which explains this phenomena : "Everything is Obvious ... Once you know the answer" http://everythingisobvious.com/the-book/
One of the Android engineers (back when Android was going to be a Blackberry knockoff) made a similar comment about his reaction to the iPhone unveiling. >“As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought ‘We’re going to have to start over.’” What we had suddenly looked just so . . . nineties,” DeSalvo said. “It’s just one of those things that are obvious when you see it."…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your claims. If the idea was so obvious, why was it so widely ridiculed in the industry for having no hardware keyboard? It was widely predicted to be a failure.
It was ridiculed only by people like Steve Ballmer who were either whistling past the graveyard or just plain dense. It wasn't ridiculed by myself, or by anyone I knew. To me, and to most other people I hung out with at the time, it was very obvious that physical keyboards on cell phones were not going to be A Thing for very much longer. Everything else that happened simply followed from that.
How exactly does this contribute to the discussion,
To counter your point, my friends were blackberry fanatics, they just laughed when they saw the iphone without a physical keyboard and said this will never work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The iPhone was always going to happen as soon as capacitive multitouch technology became feasible at the consumer level. It was never going to happen a minute earlier, and it was absolutely inevitable a minute later. It was just a question of who was going to build it. Apple kept their eye on that particular ball, while Microsoft, Nokia, Blackberry, Samsung, and others did not. As a result, Apple was (properly) rewar…
To support the obviousness of multitouch interfaces Camperbob mentions: See this prototype from Synaptics from 2006: https://www.slashgear.com/synaptics-onyx-concept-live-demo-c... The original iPhone used a Synaptics touchscreen IIRC, so it's pretty reasonable that Apple and every major phone manufacturer has been shown the Synaptics tech demo in 2006, probably earlier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this was simply about rounded corners or a grid of icons, they would have been laughed out of the court. Trade dress not about any single design choice but the combination of dozens of design choices which, when combined together, become an aesthetic trademark. And importantly, Apple spent millions of dollars on marketing to promote the fact that the iPhone looks a certain way and operates in a certain way. The is…
If this was simply about rounded corners or a grid of icons, they would have been laughed out of the court. Like they were in the UK? And forced to publish an apology?
