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

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 136 posts

Re: undefined

#51

Post by shellehs »

cooldeal wrote: post #39
shellehs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not see any beauty on WP,to me, WP is harder to us /understand than webOS/iOS/BlackBerry/Android.

Beauty is a personal preference and lots of people like it and I guess you do not. But I am not with you on the "harder to use/understand" part. It's extremely simple, intuitive and easy to pick up, I've seen non-techies pick the UI up very quickly.

maybe easy to dial and send messages, but when I try to power on the Lumia 800 the first time, when I try to charge the phone or connect it to computer, when I try to close the networks becuz my battery is low, when I try to pick up contacts, when I try to type using the default keyboard, when I see the scars on the screen...

Also they need good apps, apps in WP style. WP is good at showing infomations, but not good to me.

Re: undefined

#52

Post by shellehs »

sliverstorm wrote: post #41
shellehs wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think WP was great , until I used it for a while. MS + Nokia, beautiful?

What's wrong with Nokia? As best I've been able to tell, they've always made some of the best hardware in the business (at least, in their higher end models. Not talking about the $20 specials)

yes, but nothing with beautiful...

Re: undefined

#53

Post by raganwald »

sliverstorm wrote: post #43
podperson wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft won for one simple reason -- the licensing deal for DOS. (Not that it wasn't smart and ruthless and good at executing.) IBM made DOS the dominant desktop OS, and the licensing deal allowed Microsoft to enable clone makers to displace IBM (without displacing DOS). Microsoft's legendary persistence -- fast following rival products and iterating them until they didn't suck and eventually drove competitors out…

I wouldn't call the Xbox barely-successful. I'd even say it fits in perfectly with your described model of following rival products and iterating. (Xbox -> Xbox360)

Microsoft's other successes netted it billions of dollars. XBox’s chief success from a business perspective seems to be defensive, as long as XBox maintains a significant market share, nobody will create a post-PC or post-TV world based on gaming consoles.

Of course, somebody seems to be creating a post-PC world based on phones and tablets, but that doesn’t negate the fact that this could have happened earlier if someone like SOny had sewn up 99% of the gaming console market and then integrated it with the web and content.

Re: undefined

#54

Post by vinayan3 »

nextparadigms wrote: post #34

webOS was more beautiful and intuitive than iOS, too. It still didn't end up too well for it.

I felt that webOS was immature. There was places that weren't smooth. Also, some of the web rendering was just messed up. I have seen characters broken in two.

Re: undefined

#55

Post by johnhartigun »

radley wrote: post #26
Zigurd wrote: post #22

The irony of this is that, with Android 4.x and the Fragment APIs for scaling UI from tablets to handsets, Android is the only UI system that has sophisticated ways for apps to intelligently arrange their UI elements to fit all sizes of devices, and developers are, as yet, ignoring those APIs.

"Intelligently" yes, but not intuitively. There's a difference. That being said all of Google's products cater to, and now operate consistently for, a certain mindset. Reluctantly I'll admit that it's possible for a platform to successfully operate using parameters other than intuition-based UX/UI. It just feeeels weird ;-)

Whether it's intuitive depends on the developer :)

Re: undefined

#56

Post by joshu »

starwed wrote: post #18
ComputerGuru wrote: post #9

I don't know why the other comment's been killed, but this is blogspam. Original story here, from the ones that actually interviewed Wozniak: http://anewdomain.net/2012/04/26/apple-founder-inventor-stev...

I wouldn't say it's blogspam, but linking the original source is still preferred. (Although here it seems to have gone down!) (Blogspam originally implied a blog post that copy-pastes the entire original article, possibly adding one or two sentences of "commentary". This article clearly has more meat than that -- it's at least a good faith effort to provide some context.)

Blogspam also includes linking with just a short quote.

Re: undefined

#57

Post by SquareWheel »

why-el wrote: post #46
aidenn0 wrote: post #20

Android is a really low bar. I've used several smartphones and the Android ones are easily the worst. It really does feel cobbled together and unintuitive. I call it the platform that makes. Symbian look good. On the other hand it's what I use since Apple has been so hostile to me and friends, and webOS is clearly a dead-end.

Android is not a smartphone. Edit: Downvote? so android is a smartphone? The parent was complaining about different smartphones, not different OSes. I think thats a subtle difference.

I think you're being pedantic when his meaning was clear.

Re: undefined

#58

Post by swayfm »

vinayan3 wrote: post #54
nextparadigms wrote: post #34

webOS was more beautiful and intuitive than iOS, too. It still didn't end up too well for it.

I felt that webOS was immature. There was places that weren't smooth. Also, some of the web rendering was just messed up. I have seen characters broken in two.

Rendering glitch aside, it was the best designed OS for it's time. Interactive notifications, gestures, multitasking and app switching. all copied by ios and android after webos fell apart.

Re: undefined

#59

Post by swayfm »

SquareWheel wrote: post #57
why-el wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android is not a smartphone. Edit: Downvote? so android is a smartphone? The parent was complaining about different smartphones, not different OSes. I think thats a subtle difference.

I think you're being pedantic when his meaning was clear.

Excellent use of "Pedantic" in this case.

Re: undefined

#60

Post by [deleted] »

Zigurd wrote: post #48
baddox wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android Fragments really aren't useful when A) you can't use them yet because so many users are on older unsupported versions (insert generic "fragmentation" pun here) and B) you still can't smoothly scroll a ListView containing more than a dozen Views or a few text shadows.

The Android SDK includes a library called the Support Package (previously called the Android Compatibility Package). This library provides support for Fragment and related classes, and Loader and related classes back to Android 1.6. Even if you are targeting API levels lower than in 3.x, using the Support Package is a substantial benefit in organizing your UI code and improved concurrency support. As ever, you can se…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN