A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious • Hacker News Board

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#421

Post by talmand » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 2:33 PM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #414

tomkin wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sigh. I'm sick and tired of people twisting reality to fit an Apple anti-hero narrative. They are just as guilty as any other hardware/software manufacturer which tries to stifle human progress in the name of ego. Let me provide my perspective, as flawed as it may be. In 2006, Nintendo released the Wii. To those who don't know, it, for better or worse (re)introduced motion within the context of video games. Immedia…

> Today, we know how that story played out. We have PS3 Move and Xbox Kinect Neither of which has really taken off for gaming. The Wii wasn't really a success either. Sure, they sold a lot of consoles, but the console is sold at - at best - break even (and only there after 3-4 years on the market). All the money is in the game licensing (Paid per copy from the developer to the console maker). Wii owners just don't bu…

If you do not consider the Wii a success then I wonder what it takes to reach that level for you. Everything I've read was that Nintendo made money on each Wii sold since day one. According to Wikipedia the Wii has outsold both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 by a significant margin. I would also say that most likely Nintendo has never made that much money from third-party games (I'm sure there are exceptions), for them the money is in their first-party games on their hardware. Regardless of your personal feelings towards the console itself, saying it isn't a success seems just wrong.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#422

Post by pazimzadeh » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 2:56 PM UTC

confluence wrote: post #387

sbuk wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that you are trying, constantly to have the final word in a construct of your making that is based entirely on a fallacy and doing so in an extremely smug manner. To follow your line of thought, with your hubris continuing to grow you will eventually become too cocky and get you next investment increadibly wrong and lose everything in the process.

I disagree with what you say unfortunately - so I guess we should just agree to disagree.

Let's come back to this thread in a few months, shall we?

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#423

Post by TylerE » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 2:56 PM UTC

tomkin wrote: post #418

TylerE wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today, we know how that story played out. We have PS3 Move and Xbox Kinect Neither of which has really taken off for gaming. The Wii wasn't really a success either. Sure, they sold a lot of consoles, but the console is sold at - at best - break even (and only there after 3-4 years on the market). All the money is in the game licensing (Paid per copy from the developer to the console maker). Wii owners just don't bu…

> Neither of which has really taken off for gaming. I don't know about that. Last I checked, Kinect was doing well. In fact Kinect Adventures is #1 [1] > The Wii wasn't really a success either. Nintendo, until most recently, was the only console manufacturer to actually profit . [1] http://www.vgchartz.com/platform/7/xbox-360/

Nintendo lost almost a billion dollars last year.

Kinect Adventures was a pack-in game, so that doesn't really count.

So far, there have been only 7 Kinect-required titles in 2012, and except for 1, all are either movie tie-ins or rhythm games.

The one exception is Steel Battalion, which managed a whopping 90,000 sales, and a 35/100 Metacritic score.

In fact, only 2 Kinect titles have even managed to break an 80 on Metacritic, both music games.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#424

Post by pbhjpbhj » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 3:02 PM UTC

dmpk2k wrote: post #321

confluence wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think I know that? I've owned their stock since 08. But the past isn't what matters - but chances for future growth. Success always comes before the fall - Apple can either stabilise or fall. They will fall. Linux won - Android is Linux. Consumer electronics are Linux. Servers are Linux. Everything runs on Linux. Microsoft is done. Google wins. I own Google now.

but chances for future growth I find it thoroughly creepy that we define success through growth in a finite world. If a company isn't growing, it's "done". I realize that isn't quite what you mean, but then you shouldn't write it. The mindset is actively destructive.

>I find it thoroughly creepy that we define success through growth in a finite world. //

The current capitalist system revolves around rich people making more money because they are rich - that only works if they invest in companies that can return a [quick] profit.

It is very sad.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#425

Post by mcclux » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 3:25 PM UTC

confluence wrote: post #387

sbuk wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that you are trying, constantly to have the final word in a construct of your making that is based entirely on a fallacy and doing so in an extremely smug manner. To follow your line of thought, with your hubris continuing to grow you will eventually become too cocky and get you next investment increadibly wrong and lose everything in the process.

I disagree with what you say unfortunately - so I guess we should just agree to disagree.

Judging by the bump in AAPL today, I think you sold too soon.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#426

Post by silentscope » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 4:35 PM UTC

gpcz wrote: post #97

silentscope wrote: post #60

I don't want to stir up bad blood, I'm just making a point so don't kill me =). Almost every one of those devices has at least 5 buttons (up, down, left, right center). That's not simple at all. One button is simple. The touch screen on the iphone takes those away so only one is needed. It's the reason the iphone got so dominant--it worked. It's the reason Jobs realized his foray into tableting in the 90s (with devel…

Jobs was running NeXT during the development of the Newton. Steve Jobs resigned from Apple in late 1985 and became interim CEO in September 1997. He discontinued the Newton project in March 1998 to refocus the company toward profitability again.

Well color me schooled. Still, I've always had the impression from interviews (just an impression mind you), that it was a dream of his to have a working tablet, but the tech wasn't there. He was thinking about it is the sense I got, but I could be off.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#427

Post by batista » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 4:45 PM UTC

andybak wrote: post #400

batista wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The camera was "meh" and didn't do video, the screen wasn't nearly as nice as the VGA screen on my e800, the OS didn't support 3rd party apps, where was 3G?, etc. etc. With that you reminded me of the now classic response of Slashdot's Commander Taco when the first iPod was introduced: "No Wireless. Less Space Than A Nomad. Lame".

You're forgetting the point we are debating here. No-one claims the iPod was innovative. It was simply an excellent product with a well-thought out blend of features that was marketed well. So you're having a 'was the iPhone a great product' debate whereas this discussion is 'was the iPhone a radical innovation in design'.

>No-one claims the iPod was innovative.

Well, I do.

Innovation is not only technical in the most narrow term ("first device with an SSD", "new display technology").

There's also innovation in product design (how you've desided to build your product), and also market innovation (how you selected your market and marketed your product to it).

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#428

Post by clarky07 » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 5:50 PM UTC

tomkin wrote: post #420

clarky07 wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you can remotely compare kinect to wii. Move sure, but kinect isn't even close.

In terms of technology, they are vastly different. In the sense of discovery, market trials and R&D - the Kinect technology is an evolution of the Wii. If Wii did not introduce motion controls, Kinect would not be available. Period. I can validate this claim by the many quotes Microsoft (J Allard, et al.) spewed to the press about what they thought about motion control in video games at the time. This could have easi…

I'm sorry but I think that's absurd. That's like suggesting Samsung had a problem with this trial because it made a phone. It's not that they made a phone, it's that they made a phone that stole the look, feel, and function of the iPhone.

The kinect is a motion gaming device, but that is where the similarities to wii end. That's like suggesting the PS3 infringed on the xbox because it's also a console.

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#429

Post by lilsunnybee » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 6:15 PM UTC

nirvana wrote: post #287

SimHacker wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh bullshit. We were doing finger operated gesture user interface on the Palm in 2000 (pie menus on virtual buttons for consumer electronic IR remote control interfaces). Lots of people were using touch screens with finger gestures. The Palm included a stylus, but if the interface was designed correctly you could certainly use it with your fingers, and pie menus (self revealing gestures) worked just fine, and there i…

Yes, and the telephone existed before cellphones, but that doesn't mean the cellphone wasn't innovative. Your argument doesn't address the point, and is a bullshit rationalization for a claim you can't support. I refuse to believe you are so stupid as to think that is a rebuttal.

At least (s)he wasn't resorting to ad hominem. How about you keep things on topic when debating?

Re: A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious

#430

Post by flatline3 » Mon, Aug 27, 2012, 6:26 PM UTC

tomkin wrote: post #419

flatline3 wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft and Sony didn't copy Nintendo outright. Stagnation. That's what you get when people duplicate ideas instead of leading with their own.

> Stagnation. That's what you get when people duplicate ideas instead of leading with their own. Right. So the guy who invented the cell phone shouldn't have "copied" the guy who invented the cordless phone. Oh, and the guy who invented the touch screen phone shouldn't be able to make it because the guy who invented the cell phone (which can't exist because of the guy who made the cordless phone says "No") doesn't wa…

Samsung didn't make just any phone, they copied the iPhone.

Microsoft at least managed to try something completely different with Windows Phone, and I think it's a hell of a lot more innovative than what Samsung did.