Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

networkworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 71 posts

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#11

Post by StrangeATractor »

crop_rotation wrote: post #6
m348e912 wrote: post #4

Makes you wonder if there should be professional repercussions for being so wrong. Does credibility or accuracy with assessments and predictions even matter? Other notable examples are Jim Cramer, who seems to be more wrong than right on stock and company analysis but still gets paid handsomely by CNBC. Or Paul Krugman who said the Internet's Effect on the World Economy Would Be 'No Greater Than the Fax Machine's. Kr…

Cramer is not a stock trader but an entertainer, and he did fine on that job. Same goes for Krugman. Krugman nowadays is an opinion columnist and not an economist. If you read his articles regularly you will realise that accuracy is not the main goal. Sounding important is the main goal. And he too is doing fine on that job.

Pretty sure if you bet against them consistently you come out ahead.

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#12

Post by pengaru »

crop_rotation wrote: post #6
m348e912 wrote: post #4

Makes you wonder if there should be professional repercussions for being so wrong. Does credibility or accuracy with assessments and predictions even matter? Other notable examples are Jim Cramer, who seems to be more wrong than right on stock and company analysis but still gets paid handsomely by CNBC. Or Paul Krugman who said the Internet's Effect on the World Economy Would Be 'No Greater Than the Fax Machine's. Kr…

Cramer is not a stock trader but an entertainer, and he did fine on that job. Same goes for Krugman. Krugman nowadays is an opinion columnist and not an economist. If you read his articles regularly you will realise that accuracy is not the main goal. Sounding important is the main goal. And he too is doing fine on that job.

Calling Cramer just an entertainer is absurd, he's more manipulator of a gullible audience than entertainer. It's pretty clear his role is to promote investing, and more specifically making certain (often bad, for the audience) investments.

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#14

Post by ceejayoz »

StrangeATractor wrote: post #11
crop_rotation wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cramer is not a stock trader but an entertainer, and he did fine on that job. Same goes for Krugman. Krugman nowadays is an opinion columnist and not an economist. If you read his articles regularly you will realise that accuracy is not the main goal. Sounding important is the main goal. And he too is doing fine on that job.

Pretty sure if you bet against them consistently you come out ahead.

If you wanna try, SJIM and LJIM are the ticket symbols to buy.

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#16

Post by realusername »

mrtksn wrote: post #10

All these “iPhone is doomed” folks had good arguments, the original iPhone was a flawed device. On paper, the incumbent mega corporations should have been able to come up with an iPhone killer quickly, considering the resources available to them. What they missed was the inertia and the lack of agility in these big companies. They kept insisting on their current plans until it was too late. Only Google was capable of…

> All these “iPhone is doomed” folks had good arguments, the original iPhone was a flawed device

I also did remember the first iPhone being a flop in my country, the pricing was very high but the biggest nail in the coffin was the lack of MMS support (it might sounds strange now but this was basically required for any feature phone)

It really took off with the 3GS

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#17

Post by iainmerrick »

Obviously this has aged badly overall, but I think this is quite interesting and insightful:

I was having lunch today with a good friend of mine, Ross Carlson, and we were lamenting how Apple creates innovative products, but then only implements that innovation to a very limited extent. Yes, the iPhone has a finger-based gesture interface. And the image rotates on the screen, but only for a limited set of applications like the Safari browser and displaying pictures. Many applications on the iPhone aren't "rotation aware" apps. Even WM6 supports rotation of the interface no matter what the application.

That’s true, handling rotation correctly on iOS was always a bit of a pain, even though it’s a key feature of the platform! It’s really quite similar to the original Mac OS, where despite having a rich toolkit of functions for the famous UI, you had to jump through a ton of hoops to actually implement a properly Mac-like app.

And yet both the iPhone and the original Mac have lots of really well-written apps that work hard to adhere to the UI guidelines. It’s like Apple (at their best) sets an example to developers of what a high-quality UI should be like, rather than providing them with great tools, and developers are happy to put in the extra work to make their apps good.

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#19

Post by wolpoli »

> "...that existing Windows Mobile devices could be upgraded to full Windows Mobile 7 functionality."

And we now know that none of the Windows Phone 7 devices were themselves upgraded to Windows Phone 8.

Re: iPhone Doomed to Failure (2008)

#20

Post by mrtksn »

realusername wrote: post #16
mrtksn wrote: post #10

All these “iPhone is doomed” folks had good arguments, the original iPhone was a flawed device. On paper, the incumbent mega corporations should have been able to come up with an iPhone killer quickly, considering the resources available to them. What they missed was the inertia and the lack of agility in these big companies. They kept insisting on their current plans until it was too late. Only Google was capable of…

> All these “iPhone is doomed” folks had good arguments, the original iPhone was a flawed device I also did remember the first iPhone being a flop in my country, the pricing was very high but the biggest nail in the coffin was the lack of MMS support (it might sounds strange now but this was basically required for any feature phone) It really took off with the 3GS

IIRC, Apple slashed the price after a couple of months due to slow sales.

Their initial price was wrong. The customer were used to pay next to nothing for the device as the device was considered an accessory for the GSM provider. Apple also didn’t have that many Apple Stores, to show people how amazing the device is.

Post reply on HN