Comparing smartphone tech-specs
The iPhone 4 came out today. I saw this article amongst the swarm on Twitter:
iPhone 4 vs. the smartphone elite: EVO 4G, N8, Pre Plus, and HD2
The guts of the article is a table that compares various technical details of the new iPhone with other leading smartphones. It reports on things like processor, storage, display type, SIM standards and weight.
It so happened that I was reading this on my phone, where I pass webpages through a ‘mobilizer’ – a service that trims images and layout, leaving only the text of the article to read. The table from Engadget was lost and all the text ran together to appear like this:
It occurs to me that normal people probably interpret the original article in the same way; an incomprehensible collection of buzzwords, acronyms and metrics. They don’t want this level of detail, as useful as it may be to those who do.
It’s not that I don’t want that level of detail – it’s that I don’t want that *kind* of detail. I’m happy to read through detail on the results of usability, experience, and how I’m able to do the things I want to do on different phones.. And if you like, tell me if the tech specs enable all that
caycos
8 Jun 10 at 8:49 pm
I agree. It’s also the same reason that Apple can get away with saying what amounts to “hey look, we invented video calling!” and get away with it.
NigelR
8 Jun 10 at 8:51 pm
It’s all about the size of the e-peen.
Josh
8 Jun 10 at 9:14 pm
@NigelR: I’ve seen other people say that too, but don’t think I’ve seen the Apple statements you refer to. Got link?
Sam
8 Jun 10 at 11:48 pm
Actually, looking at the Apple site they do push a lot of hyperbole about how video calling is “now a reality”. It’s egregious marketing spin; imply it wasn’t possible before but don’t actually claim they invented it.
Sam
10 Jun 10 at 8:55 am
@Sam – I think you’re missing a point here; people that visit the Engadget website know all about these tech specs, probably dream them in their sleep actually.
Engadget is not for the casual home or even business computer user. It was never ‘designed’ for them and it never will be.
So in the end, this is quite a nothing story… actually, its probably more of a story about the failing of that mobilizer site.
A more capable web-browsing phone would have just correctly displayed the table… and with flash
GTRoberts
10 Jun 10 at 5:32 pm
In reference to the video calling… Apple never made that statement but they inferred “they’ve made it possible”.
This is quite true in the States where none of the big players allow video calling between phones.
Outside of the States, video calling is par-for-course and it has been for years. I probably use video calling about 4-5 times per week, while the techicians that I support are in the field using it at least twice a day. Our company has been doing this in Australia for at least four years.
While Apple comes along and says we’ve made it work… over WiFi ONLY… and effectively replicating Skype. Gosh, thats really usable and functional.
GTRoberts
10 Jun 10 at 5:37 pm
@GTRoberts: Heh, I think you’re the one missing the point here
Of course Engadget is not appropriate for home users. I never suggested that was a problem. My point was simply to use the mobilzer’s output as an illustration. In the cutdown form it makes no sense to technical people and that’s how normal people feel when they are encounter hardcore nerdery.
Sam
10 Jun 10 at 5:37 pm