New Marquette App

[mueron]

There is a reason most apps are released for iOS first, Apple makes it extremely easy for app developers.  Android is unbelievably fragmented and it makes it difficult to develop apps that work correctly across the large number of devices/manufacturers that use Android.  It's really not uncommon to release an iPhone app well before an Android app.

Also, people who knock Apple really make me laugh.  Apple has completely revolutionized all of our lives.   In case none of you remember (not that it was long ago), before the iPhone there really were no smart phones.  Sure there were blackberrys but not the same thing, those were phones that received email.  The iPhone changed the game.  End of story.  All Android phones are basically copies of iPhones.  You can squawk all you want about a feature here or there that Android might have that iPhone doesn't, but iPhone continues to set the agenda and Android continues to play catch up despite market share.  Don't believe me?  While Android market share is close to 60%, they are moving in the wrong direction.  You will see that share decrease over the next year.  iPhone sales have accounted for nearly 50% of smart phone sales in 2012 last I saw.  You also are ignoring the tablet market where Apple has a 60% market share.  By the way, that is another market that Apple created solely on their own and where everyone else is playing catchup.  I was laughing the other day reading iPad 1 reviews calling the iPad a dud, a big iPhone, making fun of the name, predicting miserable sales.  Well 70 million sales later I think it's safe to say the iPad is a success.

In the end, I don't care if you choose to have an Android phone, windows phone, blackberry, or whatever.  However, stop with the revisionist b.s. that Apple doesn't innovate, they brain wash people, they have inferior products, etc...   That's simple blind fanboy speak that comes off as bitter and uninformed.  A few Android phones are good, but there are 85% that are garbage.  I always know that my iPhone is going to work amazingly well, have cutting edge technology, and be simple, beautiful, and elagent.  I also know that I am going to have the most and best apps available because they make it easy and for app developers and they have the best chance of their app being profitable on the iPhone/iPad.

As an android "fanboy" I agree with all stated here except the bolded. I'd argue that it is now ios that is playing catch up with android. Outside of a much more robust app store what features does ios have that are more advanced than android? Don't say Siri. Also, the ios ui is far from elegant. Unified across the board? Yes. Elegant? No.

[Hards Alumni]

There is a reason most apps are released for iOS first, Apple makes it extremely easy for app developers.  Android is unbelievably fragmented and it makes it difficult to develop apps that work correctly across the large number of devices/manufacturers that use Android.  It's really not uncommon to release an iPhone app well before an Android app.

Also, people who knock Apple really make me laugh.  Apple has completely revolutionized all of our lives.   In case none of you remember (not that it was long ago), before the iPhone there really were no smart phones.  Sure there were blackberrys but not the same thing, those were phones that received email.  The iPhone changed the game.  End of story.  All Android phones are basically copies of iPhones.  You can squawk all you want about a feature here or there that Android might have that iPhone doesn't, but iPhone continues to set the agenda and Android continues to play catch up despite market share.  Don't believe me?  While Android market share is close to 60%, they are moving in the wrong direction.  You will see that share decrease over the next year.  iPhone sales have accounted for nearly 50% of smart phone sales in 2012 last I saw.  You also are ignoring the tablet market where Apple has a 60% market share.  By the way, that is another market that Apple created solely on their own and where everyone else is playing catchup.  I was laughing the other day reading iPad 1 reviews calling the iPad a dud, a big iPhone, making fun of the name, predicting miserable sales.  Well 70 million sales later I think it's safe to say the iPad is a success.

In the end, I don't care if you choose to have an Android phone, windows phone, blackberry, or whatever.  However, stop with the revisionist b.s. that Apple doesn't innovate, they brain wash people, they have inferior products, etc...   That's simple blind fanboy speak that comes off as bitter and uninformed.  A few Android phones are good, but there are 85% that are garbage.  I always know that my iPhone is going to work amazingly well, have cutting edge technology, and be simple, beautiful, and elagent.  I also know that I am going to have the most and best apps available because they make it easy and for app developers and they have the best chance of their app being profitable on the iPhone/iPad.

You smell like an Apple fan boi, bro.  Take off the turtle neck, scarf, and black rimmed glasses... Apple products are for people who want to be hip, overpay for inferior products, and hang out with pretentious "geniuses".

The one thing that Apple does best is fleece their customers.

I will give them credit for being idea people.

[Skatastrophy]

There is a reason most apps are released for iOS first, Apple makes it extremely easy for app developers.  Android is unbelievably fragmented and it makes it difficult to develop apps that work correctly across the large number of devices/manufacturers that use Android.  It's really not uncommon to release an iPhone app well before an Android app.

Also, people who knock Apple really make me laugh.  Apple has completely revolutionized all of our lives.   In case none of you remember (not that it was long ago), before the iPhone there really were no smart phones.  Sure there were blackberrys but not the same thing, those were phones that received email.  The iPhone changed the game.  End of story.  All Android phones are basically copies of iPhones.  You can squawk all you want about a feature here or there that Android might have that iPhone doesn't, but iPhone continues to set the agenda and Android continues to play catch up despite market share.  Don't believe me?  While Android market share is close to 60%, they are moving in the wrong direction.  You will see that share decrease over the next year.  iPhone sales have accounted for nearly 50% of smart phone sales in 2012 last I saw.  You also are ignoring the tablet market where Apple has a 60% market share.  By the way, that is another market that Apple created solely on their own and where everyone else is playing catchup.  I was laughing the other day reading iPad 1 reviews calling the iPad a dud, a big iPhone, making fun of the name, predicting miserable sales.  Well 70 million sales later I think it's safe to say the iPad is a success.

In the end, I don't care if you choose to have an Android phone, windows phone, blackberry, or whatever.  However, stop with the revisionist b.s. that Apple doesn't innovate, they brain wash people, they have inferior products, etc...   That's simple blind fanboy speak that comes off as bitter and uninformed.  A few Android phones are good, but there are 85% that are garbage.  I always know that my iPhone is going to work amazingly well, have cutting edge technology, and be simple, beautiful, and elagent.  I also know that I am going to have the most and best apps available because they make it easy and for app developers and they have the best chance of their app being profitable on the iPhone/iPad.

Haha, Apple is very far behind at this point.  Andoid has had 4G phones out for how long?

The "Android is fragmented" argument is moot for an app like the one MU just put out.  You aren't going to be concerned about OS fragmentation for an app that has website-ish functionality.

In case none of you remember (not that it was long ago), before the iPhone there really were no smart phones.  Sure there were blackberrys but not the same thing, those were phones that received email.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever read.  Palm and Blackberry phones were highly functional smartphones well before Apple came out with their iPhone.  Apple applied a great touchscreen interface (stolen from Microsoft) to the smartphone for the first time, but that's it.  Apple's *true* innovation is the combo of iTunes and the App store.  Nobody had done that on such a large scale before and ended up with such a big catalog, but even then it wasn't a brand new idea as you claim.

Everyone in this thread has been pretty level-headed about the iOS v Android thing up until your post.  You're very obviously an Apple fanboy.

That being said: welcome to the forums

[RideMyBuycks]

Ohhhh you know the 4G networks are trash (spotty, and rarely faster than 3G). Apple is just smartly waiting for a strong supporting network before launching a phone into it. As we have seen in the past, as a network's coverage goes, so goes the iPhone reputation.

[Skatastrophy]

Ohhhh you know the 4G networks are trash (spotty, and rarely faster than 3G).  Apple is just smartly waiting for a strong supporting network before launching a phone into it.

This should be in teal, unless your info is a couple of years old?  LTE has great coverage in the major metro areas and it absolutely screams.

That company line is about as bogus as "Apple computers are immune to viruses"

[Aughnanure]

You smell like an Apple fan boi, bro.  Take off the turtle neck, scarf, and black rimmed glasses... Apple products are for people who want to be hip, overpay for inferior products, and hang out with pretentious "geniuses".

The one thing that Apple does best is fleece their customers.

I will give them credit for being idea people.

This idea, that Apple produces inferior arguments, is a f****** joke. Seems like someone got sad/really bitter that their rents bought them a Dell instead of a macbook.

[Hards Alumni]

This idea, that Apple produces inferior arguments, is a f****** joke. Seems like someone got sad/really bitter that their rents bought them a Dell instead of a macbook.

Oh, I'm sorry, explain to me where Apple builds top of the line computers that are priced competitively.

Because they don't.  Weaker computers that cost more.  That is inferior.

FWIW my family owned only Apple products (starting with a IIgs in 1987) until I begged my parents for a replacement for our Mac.

[RideMyBuycks]

This should be in teal, unless your info is a couple of years old?  LTE has great coverage in the major metro areas and it absolutely screams.

That company line is about as bogus as "Apple computers are immune to viruses"

Just talking about my experiences in the Milwaukee market of the past few years. I wouldnt be surprised if the coverage was very different in larger markets.

And the Apple pricing structure isn't meant for the professional business market that buys 2000 units at once; it's for the upper-middle class home that is willing to pay a premium for, in my view, a superior machine for many tasks.

To each their own I suppose.

[Hards Alumni]

On top of all that, I love my sansa player much more than I loved any iPod that I've owned.

I can upgrade my PC easily.

I can buy music without having to use iTunes

I will admit that my mom's iPad is pretty slick, but I haven't really looked at any other tablets since I find them to be pointless considering my smart phone pretty does everything that an iPad can do.

[Hards Alumni]

Just talking about my experiences in the Milwaukee market of the past few years. I wouldnt be surprised if the coverage was very different in larger markets.

And the Apple pricing structure isn't meant for the professional business market that buys 2000 units at once; it's for the upper-middle class home that is willing to pay a premium for, in my view, a superior machine for many tasks.

To each their own I suppose.

Explain what is superior.  Specifically.  I'll wait.

[RideMyBuycks]

Explain what is superior.  Specifically.  I'll wait.

You know the great thing about America? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Want to know another great thing? You don't have to listen to it.

I'll keep spending money based on my preferences, and you can certainly do the same.

[Skatastrophy]

Just talking about my experiences in the Milwaukee market of the past few years. I wouldnt be surprised if the coverage was very different in larger markets.

And the Apple pricing structure isn't meant for the professional business market that buys 2000 units at once; it's for the upper-middle class home that is willing to pay a premium for, in my view, a superior machine for many tasks.

To each their own I suppose.

I totally disagree that it's a superior machine since the 4s is a last-generation phone.

That being said, there's no right answer for everyone.  If you have a phone that you like and that works well for how you use it, then why in the world would you get a "better" phone?  I'm happy that you found a phone that fits your lifestyle and that works very well for you, because that's really all that matters

[RideMyBuycks]

I totally disagree that it's a superior machine since the 4s is a last-generation phone.

That being said, there's no right answer for everyone.  If you have a phone that you like and that works well for how you use it, then why in the world would you get a "better" phone?  I'm happy that you found a phone that fits your lifestyle and that works very well for you, because that's really all that matters

Amen

PS: I'm grandfathered into unlimited data at like 15 doll hairs a month b/c I've had the iPhone since the first one...just one small factor of my allegiance I suppose.

PPS: http://devour.com/video/surface-vs-ipad-announcements/

hehe

[nathanziarek]

Ohhhh you know the 4G networks are trash (spotty, and rarely faster than 3G). Apple is just smartly waiting for a strong supporting network before launching a phone into it. As we have seen in the past, as a network's coverage goes, so goes the iPhone reputation.

4G networks are pretty widely available. The iPhone doesn't have 4G because they hold to a pretty strict once per year schedule, and last year the 4G radios were battery hogs. Apple prioritized battery life over network speed.  (It also doesn't hurt that using an "old" radio also helped hold costs down for their infamous profit margins).

This idea, that Apple produces inferior arguments, is a f****** joke.

I have to agree. I don't understand the love or disdain for Apple, but there is some serious revisionist history from Apple haters that completely ignore the fact that Apple was pretty much kaput before Jobs returned in '96. They've always had loyal fans, but that wasn't worth anything without Jobs' strict ethos of simple, high-quality products.

The iPod was far from revolutionary, but it took music players, stripped out the folder-based music management and made them attractive and simple to use.

Apple will never have the most features, but "features" do not make for a better or worse product. It's in the implementation and ecosystem...and Apple does pretty well in that regard.

Apple applied a great touchscreen interface (stolen from Microsoft) to the smartphone for the first time, but that's it.

Hardly. Microsoft had no multitouch devices on the market when the iPhone came out. The closest they came was "Surface" (now PixelSense) that was announced in May of 2007, and shipped in 2008. The first iPhone came out in June 2007.

Apple sometimes skates along the cutting edge (Thunderbolt) and sometimes lags behind (4G), but the idea that they never innovate or never copy is silly. Apple's strength is innovating the overall experience (as you said integrating on a grand scale the App Store and iTunes).

Oh, I'm sorry, explain to me where Apple builds top of the line computers that are priced competitively.

http://www4.pcmag.com/media/images/349117-macbook-air-vs-ultrabooks-big-chart.jpg

I'd say Apple is competitive, but always at the high end. Can you show where they are not?

[Hards Alumni]

You know the great thing about America? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Want to know another great thing? You don't have to listen to it.

I'll keep spending money based on my preferences, and you can certainly do the same.

Thats fine, but if you walk around calling the sky orange as if you believe it to be a fact, expect some people to disagree.

[nathanziarek]

I totally disagree that it's a superior machine since the 4s is a last-generation phone.

Interesting opinion, my good sir! Based on...?

Explain what is superior.  Specifically.  I'll wait.

Explain what is inferior. Specifically. I'll wait.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Apple has less potential than an equivalently priced PC product.

Lots of restrictions with hardware and software.

However, their design is very good/great, and the usability for the average consumer is very good/great.

For tech savy, high end consumers, it might not be the best product. That crowd wants something they can work with and upgrade. That's not an Apple product.

Apple vs Windows vs Android is like Chevy vs Ford vs Dodge for dorks instead of white trash.

[Hards Alumni]

4G networks are pretty widely available. The iPhone doesn't have 4G because they hold to a pretty strict once per year schedule, and last year the 4G radios were battery hogs. Apple prioritized battery life over network speed.  (It also doesn't hurt that using an "old" radio also helped hold costs down for their infamous profit margins).

I have to agree. I don't understand the love or disdain for Apple, but there is some serious revisionist history from Apple haters that completely ignore the fact that Apple was pretty much kaput before Jobs returned in '96. They've always had loyal fans, but that wasn't worth anything without Jobs' strict ethos of simple, high-quality products.

The iPod was far from revolutionary, but it took music players, stripped out the folder-based music management and made them attractive and simple to use.

Apple will never have the most features, but "features" do not make for a better or worse product. It's in the implementation and ecosystem...and Apple does pretty well in that regard.

Hardly. Microsoft had no multitouch devices on the market when the iPhone came out. The closest they came was "Surface" (now PixelSense) that was announced in May of 2007, and shipped in 2008. The first iPhone came out in June 2007.

Apple sometimes skates along the cutting edge (Thunderbolt) and sometimes lags behind (4G), but the idea that they never innovate or never copy is silly. Apple's strength is innovating the overall experience (as you said integrating on a grand scale the App Store and iTunes).


http://www4.pcmag.com/media/images/349117-macbook-air-vs-ultrabooks-big-chart.jpg

I'd say Apple is competitive, but always at the high end. Can you show where they are not?

So, now a run of the mill laptop is a top of the line computer?

[RideMyBuycks]

Thats fine, but if you walk around calling the sky orange as if you believe it to be a fact, expect some people to disagree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjHvJE1XU7E

[Aughnanure]

Oh, I'm sorry, explain to me where Apple builds top of the line computers that are priced competitively.

Because they don't.  Weaker computers that cost more.  That is inferior.

FWIW my family owned only Apple products (starting with a IIgs in 1987) until I begged my parents for a replacement for our Mac.

I can't even comprehend this. Weaker computers? Sure, in 1987.

Next time my PC gets to hot and freezes I'll think of you. Hate them all you want, but they crash less, run on battery infinitely longer (they use much superior metals and materials that allow them, to stay cooler and not waste energy running a fan from 1995), and perform much better with multiple programs open and running.

I don't even own a mac. I don't have the disposable income to justify spending $1000 bucks more. But your overhatred for them is getting ridiculous.

[Hards Alumni]

Apple has less potential than an equivalently priced PC product.

Lots of restrictions with hardware and software.

However, their design is very good/great, and the usability for the average consumer is very good/great.

For tech savy, high end consumers, it might not be the best product. That crowd wants something they can work with and upgrade. That's not an Apple product.

Apple vs Windows vs Android is like Chevy vs Ford vs Dodge for dorks instead of white trash.

exactly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjHvJE1XU7E

Well played, sir.

[nathanziarek]

So, now a run of the mill laptop is a top of the line computer?

Alright ... let's frame this debate in exactly the way you think it should be discussed. I think most people would agree that Ultrabooks are the hot new segment, but we can look at any product line you'd like.

Maybe you could compare the latest Dell laptop with a 2880 x 1800 screen resolution to the new MacBook Pro? Is that top-of-the-line?

[RideMyBuycks]

Haha just got an IT Services email from the MU campus saying that they are down due to a hardware failure. Looks like AL is looking down at this board.

[Hards Alumni]

I can't even comprehend this. Weaker computers? Sure, in 1987.

Next time my PC gets to hot and freezes I'll think of you. Hate them all you want, but they crash less, run on battery infinitely longer (they use much superior metals and materials that allow them, to stay cooler and not waste energy running a fan from 1995), and perform much better with multiple programs open and running.

I don't even own a mac. I don't have the disposable income to justify spending $1000 bucks more. But your overhatred for them is getting ridiculous.

I don't hate them.  I just don't understand the love people have for them.  I don't understand how they will pay more for something that just shouldn't cost as much as it does.  Then I realize that there are plenty of suckers born every minute.

[Benny B]

Oh, I'm sorry, explain to me where Apple builds top of the line computers that are priced competitively.

Because they don't.  Weaker computers that cost more.  That is inferior.

FWIW my family owned only Apple products (starting with a IIgs in 1987) until I begged my parents for a replacement for our Mac.

My first machine was a //c in 1984.  Switched over to PC's exclusively in the early 90's.  Hacked my way through college on PC's but bought a Mac in grad school (thank you, Stafford loan).  Built an HTPC on Windows a couple years ago.  Had an iPhone since it went to 3G.

PC's are superior to Macs on price, accessibility, and utility; Macs are superior on security, stability, and compatibility.

Having a Mac vs. PC argument over a stupid App makes MUScoop inferior to Dodd's site.