• Gizmodo
  • bestmodo
  • lifehacker
  • kotaku
  • Profile logout login

#phones#bushadministrationissayingiranisnowworkingonnuclearprogramyouhavetwostatenegotiationbutisraelplansnewhomesineastjerusalem

Gizmodo

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #dealzmodo,
  • #rumors,
  • #broken,
  • #iphoneapps,
  • #apple,
  • etc.

New York, 5:53 PM
Mon Nov 16
31 posts in the last 24 hours

FR | IT | DE | SP | JP | AU | BR

Gizmodo Team

Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com

Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter

Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter

Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter

Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter

Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email

Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner

Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email

Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email

Heroes and Friends

Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
9515 Subscribers
Gizmodo
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of Benguin Benguin
    05:23 PM

    In reply to iPhone Apps Have to Be Approved By Robots Now, Too
    Maybe I'm naive, but isn't that a good thing? It always seemed to me that if you wanted to use unauthorized APIs just make a jailbreak app. Othewise if you want to be in the App Store, stick to the rules (which are admittedly draconian at times, but this not being one of them). #appstore
     Reply
    Benguin was starred Benguin was unstarred
    Image of Nathan Obbards Nathan Obbards
    05:02 PM

    In reply to Magellan Sends Its Eldest Child Into the iPhone Turn-By-Turn App War, Tearfully
    I see a rich person unwittingly stumbled into Santa Ana and is using it to escape. Smart move man. I hope your doors are locked. #magellanroadmate
     Reply
    Nathan Obbards was starred Nathan Obbards was unstarred
    Image of TheSonOfKrypton TheSonOfKrypton
    04:47 PM

    In reply to Magellan Sends Its Eldest Child Into the iPhone Turn-By-Turn App War, Tearfully
    "Google's telegraphed their intention to NUKE THE HELL OUT OF EVERYONE..." LMAO. Most appropriately chosen set of words ever. #magellanroadmate
     Reply
    TheSonOfKrypton was starred TheSonOfKrypton was unstarred
    Image of Monty Monty
    03:58 PM

    In reply to iPhone Apps Have to Be Approved By Robots Now, Too
    This seems like a perfectly reasonable step given the workflow Apple has in place for app approval. (Is it "App" or "app"? Is there an official "app grammer" playbook yet?)

    Given the fact that the only way to get apps on an iPhone / Touch is to go through iTunes and the shear number of apps being developed, it makes sense Apple would make the process as streamlined as they can - even if a few submissions are hurt in the process.

    Still, I want to back-up a step. Apple set this system up primarily (from what we have been told) to protect the cellular network and their proprietary device. This allows the elves in Cupertino (even the new cyborg ones) to determine if the app is naughty or nice. Got it. However, couldn't Apple give a "back door" approach to putting an app on your device without going through iTunes or Apple that has more limited access to the device and the network? If done correctly, it could protect all of the parties involved, dramatically reduce jail breaking the device, and would slow down the ridiculous number of apps being submitted. I know, it is a ridiculous concept, and I could write the rebuttal myself - but it seems a more benevolent Apple would consider this an option in the future. #appstore
     Reply
    Monty was starred Monty was unstarred
    Image of MarcusMaximus MarcusMaximus
    04:01 PM

    @Monty: Ah, but then some devs could get away with not paying the 30% to Apple when their app sells. #appstore
     Reply
    Monty promoted this comment MarcusMaximus was starred MarcusMaximus was unstarred
    Image of Monty Monty
    04:04 PM

    @MarcusMaximus: Doh! Forgot about that.

    Seriously, though - does Apple make money on that percentage, or does it get wasted away on continuing to improve the submission process? At this point, I almost wonder if Apple would love to get rid of all of the fart apps and leave the store to the high-end products from companies that have significant experience developing software. Not to say the fart apps are not great -- I am just wondering if there is a compromise here that could improve the process for the end-user and the elves in Cupertino. #appstore
     Reply
    Monty was starred Monty was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    03:54 PM

    In reply to iPhone Apps Have to Be Approved By Robots Now, Too

    Seriously, John. Either you read Dinosaur Comics....or you need to. #appstore
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of John Herrman John Herrman
    04:46 PM

    @OCEntertainment: Not for years! I loved those, and see NO reason that I shouldn't still #appstore
     Reply
    John Herrman was starred John Herrman was unstarred
    Image of BeyondtheTech BeyondtheTech
    03:01 PM

    In reply to Windows Mobile App Marketplace Now Open to All 6.x Phones
    Yay, piracy for all versions of Windows Mobile! #windowsmarketplaceformobile
     Reply
    BeyondtheTech was starred BeyondtheTech was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    12:55 PM

    In reply to Sony Xperia X10 Landing Sometime In February
    "The X10 will make your Droid feel inadequate in February."

    Yeah, sure. If you're a fan of fluffy Cloud 9 glass shards flying through heaven's serene yet sterile landscape. In which case....um, why'd you buy the Droid?

    I suppose the Snapdragon would be attractive. Assuming they don't underclock it. Those bastards. #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of valkilmerisawful valkilmerisawful
    01:04 PM

    @OCEntertainment: Also, I have a feeling X10 owners would happily trade 20% CPU clock freq. for multi-touch and non-Sony-ified compatibility problems that I'm sure it comes with. #xperiax10
     Reply
    valkilmerisawful was starred valkilmerisawful was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    01:13 PM

    @valkilmerisawful: For my part, I have yet to hear one compelling argument in favor of "multitouch" as a feature. Pinch-zooming I can live without. In fact, I prefer tapping an icon. Or, in the new version, double-tapping. Which sounds way more dangerous and less unintentionally sensual then "multitouch". Besides that, I haven't heard of any convincing implementations of multitouch to make it worth any speed decrease.

    I can think of one that I've seen that would be cool....but no one else has said it yet. ;-) #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of valkilmerisawful valkilmerisawful
    01:50 PM

    @OCEntertainment: I see your point there. I suppose multitouch is just a fancy-pants, and possibly overdone way to do the same thing. I also think this phone is exceedingly badass, or I will as soon as they post a real-time video of it not running like a steaming pile. I have a BB, so I have a zero-touch and was just temporarily twitterpated by the black magic that is multi-touch-ness. #xperiax10
     Reply
    valkilmerisawful was starred valkilmerisawful was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    01:55 PM

    @valkilmerisawful: If you're looking for this phone moving faster than my dead turtle Dave, this may be the video you wanna see: [www.engadget.com]
     Reply
    Edited by OCEntertainment at 11/16/09 1:58 PM OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of namforellik namforellik
    02:26 PM

    @OCEntertainment: I'm really curious what the one thing you've seen that would be cool is. Please do tell. #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment promoted this comment namforellik was starred namforellik was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    02:31 PM

    @namforellik: [ocarina.smule.com]

    ^That's the kind of thing you just can't do with a single-input system. It's mostly useless, except in certain rare circumstances. Nonetheless, it is incredibly cool. In short: it exemplifies everything multitouch is right now.

    Why no one else can point this out is beyond me. #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of namforellik namforellik
    04:30 PM

    @OCEntertainment: Isn't this the same app that had people blowing into their phones and bricking them from moisture damage? #xperiax10
     Reply
    namforellik was starred namforellik was unstarred
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    04:42 PM

    @namforellik: I never heard anything about moisture damage. You do blow into it, though, yeah.

    Frankly, though, if you can't control the saliva in your mouth, maybe a busted iPhone is just the wake-up call you need to close that lower jaw. #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of fryhole fryhole
    05:35 PM

    @OCEntertainment: The most compelling reason for multitouch for me (besides the rock lobster AWESOMENESS that is the ocarina app) is the ability for soft keyboards to register two points at once. I can't tell you how many times I've not let up one finger just enough so that I can't type the next letter on my G1.

    Other than that, and controls in games, there isn't much. #xperiax10
     Reply
    OCEntertainment promoted this comment fryhole was starred fryhole was unstarred
    Image of Jacubious Jacubious
    05:48 AM

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    It could be worse, you could be stuck with Canadian pricing. #wireless
     Reply
    Jacubious was starred Jacubious was unstarred
    Image of UnderLoK UnderLoK
    11/15/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    I'm on a family plan with 3 other people and long story short, it's $35'ish a month for unlimited everything.

    People really should leverage the family plans as much as possible. I lucked out awhile back and pay $10 for 2 more phones on my account. It's worked out well.
     Reply
    Edited by UnderLoK at 11/15/09 10:58 AM UnderLoK was starred UnderLoK was unstarred
    Image of Digo Digo
    11/15/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    The cost per minute/text might be cheaper but that's because here you are charged for both making and receiving them, in much of the rest of the world only the caller/texter is charged. So, you might be paying less per minute but you are spending a lot more minutes. #wireless
     Reply
    Digo was starred Digo was unstarred
    Image of uchendunwachukwu uchendunwachukwu
    11/15/09

    @Digo: The reason Americans pay both to make and receive calls (whereas the rest of the world only pay to make calls) is because, in America, wireless phone numbers are mixed in with landline numbers (eg. 212-462-5622 could just as easily be a landline or wireless number.)

    In the rest of the world, wireless numbers are allocated into their own special area code, usually 080 or some variation thereof. So the telco can say "all calls to 080 get charged more than calls to other area codes." And the caller winds up paying for wireless calls.

    In America, they can't do that. So instead of charging the caller, they charge the receiver. #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE promoted this comment uchendunwachukwu was starred uchendunwachukwu was unstarred
    Image of dragon:ONE dragon:ONE
    11/15/09

    @uchendunwachukwu: We have our own prefixes for wireless carriers, though.

    For examples...

    315-854-XXXX is Verizon Wireless. 315-528-XXXX is AT&T. And so on.

    So, why don't we just charge the caller? :P #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE was starred dragon:ONE was unstarred
    Image of AmphetamineCrown AmphetamineCrown
    11/15/09

    @dragon: ONE: Because what you said isn't true and hasn't been true for a long time. First, NXX exhaust led to below 1000 number block allocation. And, you can port your number, so what might originally have been a Verizon landline might now be a T-Mobile wireless number. #wireless
     Reply
    AmphetamineCrown was starred AmphetamineCrown was unstarred
    Image of JAlexoid JAlexoid
    11/15/09

    @AmphetamineCrown: But that still does not explain why you are charged for incoming messages. To my knowledge, sending a message to a landline phone is impossible, therefore the sender should be charged 100% of the service. #wireless
     Reply
    AmphetamineCrown promoted this comment JAlexoid was starred JAlexoid was unstarred
    Image of AmphetamineCrown AmphetamineCrown
    07:11 AM

    @JAlexoid: @rwalford79: I don't think there is any question that carriers could implement calling party pays as a technical matter. The problem is that consumers in the US has always lived with mobile called party pays and no one seems to be asking for that to be changed. Part of the reason might have been addressed by the article, in fact, which is that Americans seem to prefer predictability. If you go calling party pays, there is a much greater variation in your telco bill depending upon whom you call.

    With large minute bucket plans, larger and larger pools of non-charged minute (in-network, mobile-to-mobile), and niche carriers offering all-you-can-eat voice, it isn't going to be too long before voice isn't really a per minute service anyway. #wireless
     Reply
    AmphetamineCrown was starred AmphetamineCrown was unstarred
    Image of Radioheadonist Radioheadonist
    10:41 AM

    @dragon: ONE: Does this mean you are a "315-er"? #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE promoted this comment Radioheadonist was starred Radioheadonist was unstarred
    Image of dragon:ONE dragon:ONE
    02:53 PM

    @Radioheadonist: Yep, a 315-er. #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE was starred dragon:ONE was unstarred
    Image of Radioheadonist Radioheadonist
    03:07 PM

    @dragon: ONE: I was a 315-er for the majority of my life. I just became a 585-er about three years ago (not much of an "upgrade" if you ask me). It's nice to see some fairly local Giz readers! #wireless
     Reply
    Radioheadonist was starred Radioheadonist was unstarred
    Image of dragon:ONE dragon:ONE
    03:10 PM

    @Radioheadonist: Define 'local'. 315 covers too broad an area. Ogdensburg/Canton area? #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE was starred dragon:ONE was unstarred
    Image of Radioheadonist Radioheadonist
    03:16 PM

    @dragon: ONE: True, sorry. I was from the Syracuse region. Now, Rochester. #wireless
     Reply
    Radioheadonist was starred Radioheadonist was unstarred
    Image of The Lab The Lab
    11/14/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    This argument makes the assumption that telecoms can only have either a fixed price plans OR a variable plans. That is not the case, Sprint could offer multiple types of plans without much difficulty and let the consumer decide. The telecoms seem like they are colluding. #wireless
     Reply
    The Lab was starred The Lab was unstarred
    Image of Communist Pope Communist Pope
    11/14/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    Fortunately, Sprint grandfathered its "Fair and Flexible" plans (the one referenced in the write-up) if you had one before they discontinued them. Don't know if it's indefinite, but I still have mine after two handset upgrades since the discontinuation. Unfortunately, there's no way to get their "Power Vision," which includes Sprint Navigation, without signing up for one of the newer plans. Sprint Nav is $10/month extra (or $3/day) if you want to get it on their regular data plan.

    Slightly off-topic, but Sprint is now offering $150 upgrade discount annually, instead of biennially as they used to do. Or maybe they're only doing it for customers that have been around for awhile, but either way I appreciate the change. Even if I do have to commit to another two-year contract every time I upgrade. #wireless
     Reply
    Communist Pope was starred Communist Pope was unstarred
    Image of diesel828 diesel828
    11/14/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    America this, America that. I take it, Chris, that when you refer to America you're doing so in comparison with other countries, namely the ones in Europe and Asia. What I took away from that NYT article is completely different from what you did: yes, we pay a bit more in the U.S. but it's far less when compared to the rest of the world because we get more minutes and more text messages. And we have unlimited, all-you-can-eat data plans. Those points were explicitly mentioned in the Times. #wireless
     Reply
    diesel828 was starred diesel828 was unstarred
    Image of Mannyatic Mannyatic
    11/14/09

    @diesel828: Umm... I dunno if I agree if you got more minutes, because you get charged on the minutes of outgoing and ALSO incoming calls, so you are wasting all those many minutes on calls you are not making but receiving. In Costa Rica we pay just for outgoing and 60min costs about $8. Yes I know we have one of the world's cheapeast telecom, but I don't think about paying for calls that are paid by the person that is calling me, sounds pretty ridiculous. We got now 3G and here runs just 1 telecom company. #wireless
     Reply
    The Lab promoted this comment Mannyatic was starred Mannyatic was unstarred
    Image of faulknerswhiskey faulknerswhiskey
    11/14/09

    @diesel828: Chris isn't ignoring the NYT article's points on the relative cheap plans in the U.S. I think Chris's point is that while you get a great deal in the U.S. on the price per minute and data, most people just don't use their minutes or data to the extent that they actually see any savings.

    I had plans with Cingular/AT&T for years. Nothing fancy, but it cost me about $60 per month after taxes. I never used my minutes or text messages. All I got out of it was a crappy dumb phone for $30.

    Now, I'm in Asia. I bought my Nokia E71 for $350. I pay for my minutes and texts as I use them. I don't use data plans since I have Wi-Fi at work and most places I travel. On average, I spend less than $10 per month for everything I use.

    Now if you take the total cost of the phone and monthly fees, I will have spent $590 on my phone and connection here in Asia over the course of 2 years. In the States, I spent $1510 over the course of 2 years.

    I actually cringe when I think that when I move back to the U.S., I will be forced back into monthly plans. I really just want to be able to buy my phone independent of the plan if I could get the option of a discounted montly rate. Yet, that option really doesn't exist since pay-as-you-go users are punished with inflated per minute costs. #wireless
     Reply
    Chris Jacob promoted this comment faulknerswhiskey was starred faulknerswhiskey was unstarred
    Image of dragon:ONE dragon:ONE
    11/14/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    Ugh. And prepaid still bends you over. For example... Page Plus, a Verizon MVNO.

    1200 minutes, 1200 text messages, $29/mo. Sounds reasonable. But they only give you all of 50 megabytes of data. OR pay $39/mo for unlimited voice/text... and 20 MB. WTF, prepaid companies?

    I'd die for just straight-up prepaid data - be able to plunk down, say, $25/mo for unlimited data barring voice. I can sure as hell do it on a 2-year with AT&T via a Premier discount ($26/mo before taxes), but I'm locked in with the rest of my family for an out-of-date smartphone I got in June. That is... until June of 2011. (Thanks for coming out with the TP2, AT&T, right after I bought my FUZE!) #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE was starred dragon:ONE was unstarred
    Image of Seth Roberson Seth Roberson
    11/15/09

    @dragon: ONE: Wow. Pageplus has some crappy phones but that 1200 minutes deal is amazing. I'm kind of torn. I want a Pixi but at the same time I don't like cell contracts and this is waaay cheaper. Hmm... I don't really NEED a smartphone.
     Reply
    dragon:ONE promoted this comment Edited by Seth Roberson at 11/15/09 10:07 AM Seth Roberson was starred Seth Roberson was unstarred
    Image of dragon:ONE dragon:ONE
    11/15/09

    @Seth Roberson: You can bring over any CDMA phone, provided you can program it. Even DROID works. #wireless
     Reply
    dragon:ONE was starred dragon:ONE was unstarred
    Image of crackel crackel
    11/14/09

    In reply to Why U.S. Wireless Pricing Sucks
    There's no incentive to charge less. Everyone "needs" a cell phone, and there's only 4 1/2 companies than can reasonably do so. Therein lies the problem. Blaming the consumer is a classic deflection tactic, but it was on the NYT so it must be true, right? #wireless
     Reply
    crackel was starred crackel was unstarred
    Image of parkur parkur
    11/14/09

    @crackel: RIGHT . People didn't like sprint's plan because it was with SPRINT not because of some idiotic need for a consistently high bill. It seems like there is no reason a 20 something dollar plan shouldn't be available on the major carriers. #wireless
     Reply
    crackel promoted this comment parkur was starred parkur was unstarred
    Image of crackel crackel
    11/15/09

    @parkur: yes there is. Companies seek to raise prices, and resist lowering them. Until there is significant downward pressure on pricing, it will continue to rise. And often, pressure is not enough, since companies often believe they have something that differentiates them from others that's worth the premium. For example, AT&T dropping prices by 10% would cause VZW to retain their structure and claim that 10% is worth having a 3G signal everywhere. #wireless
     Reply
    crackel was starred crackel was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Gizmodo account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.