Sadly, somethings can easily break it.

The sad part is seeing "politics" happening. Whatever it is, this thread has got many of it since the beginning already.

Haha, no need until the extend of breaking things; it doesn't even involve monetary or anyone loosing money. Amazing right? Probably when one gets more mature and look back, will feel the stupidity of it.

Har? That day Photography event, you bukan sudah nampak mer... Somemore stand in front of me trying to snap my "funny" expression when looking through the viewfinder.

Where got tuagong? Compare to the other 2 sifu, mine one is smallest; have to hide.

Actually saw this about 2-3 days ago; about Mango.

Got browser comparison IE9 (with hardware acceleration) on Mango VS others on rendering HTML5
Safari - 2 frames per seconds
BB Torch - 4 frames per seconds
Atrix (Android) - 10 frames per seconds
Mango - whopping 24 frames per seconds!




Next, this communications features; about social network integration, which actually I mentioned before long time ago in early N900 thread. Maemo have long have this feature about social network integration into the contact book and conversations; Seems now Mango has done it better.




Not so interesting, multi-tasking or "task-switching".

Well, same like iOS, simplfied and lack of features; That's one key point for stability and less problems.

Basic rules in development (or any other fields), the more complciated/sophisticated, the more doors you open, the harder to maintain, control, etc. and the more work you need to do.


Not really, it's just an excuse for not providing Flash. Nothing wrong to provide, they can "turn off" the support by default and let user choose whether they want to have that feature and take the risk of the problems like lag, slower response, hang, etc.
I don't buy their excuses, don't have say don't have, don't want to provide say don't want to provide, don't give excuses, especially lame ones.

Plus, the videos I posted before for Windows Phone, iDunCare performs the worst for HTML5 rendering with only 2 frames per second, Android got 10 frames per second while Windows Phone with IE9 utilizing hardware acceleration renders at 24 frames per second.
Still waiting for Windows Phone to support Flash; the news about Adobe creating Flash for Windows Phone has been announce since early 2010. Now, I only read, both Adobe and MS are "still" working on it.

Yup, it's still being used by many nonetheless; If don't want to support or provide, then just say it, don't give "lame" excuses; That's what I trying to say.

They can always give OPTION for the user. "Turn on support for Flash", then put a disclaimer.
Not providing and giving "lame" excuses is another story.
BUT anyway, I'm just nobody and they don't need EVERY TYPE of user to use their device, every device has its target users; Just like cars, there is different segment, different types, that suit different people.


Let's put it this way, if Windows given ONLY "Guest" account to the user, then as an admin, you have lots of control over the user and you have less worry what the user is capable of doing; If you can control they can only run 1 application at 1 time, not allow them to run certain programs, no access to certain features, etc. You can pretty much be sure there will be less complain to the user (unless they are intermediate-advance users).
The problem is iOS? They never give ANY OPTION to the user. Everyone is treated as the same, regardless you're "professional" or someone who have never used a computer before.

As for other "smartphone", perhaps they should make their OS "DEFAULT" as simple as possible, then the intermediate-advance users can choose to enable the advance options; But then, the "normal" users might ask, "How come your device can do this and mine can't".

Of course, you have to understand above usage of "account" is an EXAMPLE. In just like software development, we try to make it simple to the users and prevent them from making problems, etc. Depending on the software you develop and user coverage, the simple part is, the software might be target to small scale (e.g. company, and there's not really the need to make the program/software "boombastic", BUT as a developer, we can always make it more flexible for the user through turning on certain options.)
For example: The search function, for most simple user, they just use the search. We don't give them the "Advanced Search" by default, the user can "choose" to use it, IF they know how to use it. Even if they starting out as SIMPLE user, then can eventually upgrade and learn. If we only LOCK them with simple search function, then next time they saw another software which offers "Advance Search", they'll be like point blank, and they said, I prefer the previous software, more easy to use? *HINT* this is also a "dirty" strategy to keep your user.

Just my cheap cheap 2 cents lah.

Why not? Hardwares are improving everyday; Actually, since late 2009, when N900 was introduced, it was already capable of running Full Flash website; One can browse Facebook just like Desktop version, that was on 2009, now it's already 2011. Yes, not everyone may be happy with the performance even with todays hardware; but that really depends on user, what do they want.

For me, I want a mobile computer that works as close to a real computer as possible. I've used computer since MS-DOS age, those processor and ram was like... and those who have been using dial-up internet connection, experience the speed, especially when downloading/uploading and playing online games back then... Nowadays? even it's actually not slow, people complains; My cousin complains how bad her internet connection was, when I check, yes it's slower than normal but it's not "that" bad. And, without proper understanding, people can't bear or accept why it's slow.
Example: a more technical/experience/knowledgeable user, when they experience problems, they will try to understand why and when they understand why, it makes a big difference and sometimes, they can choose to use it in a way it performs better or utilize it and bear with the drawback.

E.g. A phone has limited performance; you can keep it simple by turning everything off, no widgets, even turn off wallpaper, whatever and have better performance; while some maximize their usage. It'll be good if there's profile that can switch between the 2 or few. Usage is entire up to the user, the DIFFERENCE is... CHOICE.
One can buy a sports/racing car, and driving like a TURTLE to save fuel, or enjoy the drive everytime he/she drives knowing/understanding that it will consume a lot of fuel.
If someone who doesn't understand, buys a sports/racing car and revv it like mad everyday, then complains the car has high fuel consumption; Then it's the person's fault, don't blame the car.

Well, it's MS after-all; For many end users, open or not, isn't really important, most important is the features, flexibility, stability, etc. For now, I would say it's not bad and interesting especially with "Mango" update.

As for the "catch", yea, I know this; It's like softwares, there's a LITE version VS a Full/Profesional version, OR, Windows 7 Home Basic, Windows 7 Home Premium and so on... BUT, then.... everything has a catch right? It also applies to hardware. If you provide a powerful phone, then there will be user who might say, I don't need so much power, I need cheaper phone, right?
Now, the difference is... SOFTWARE can easily be upgraded, no problem (e.g. you can upgrade Windows Home Basic to higher version). Maybe the only limitation would be, it's limited by the hardware. So, it's always better to give MORE than to give LESS.
Hence, my point, OPTIONS/CHOICE.
I would prefer to make the phone suit as many people as possible, they can make the software "default" in SIMPLE mode; It's up to the user to turn on the advance features as needed.

My personal view on Apple is, they prefer NOT to give ANY choice to the users; They prefer to be in control. It may not be a bad thing, just that, for more advanced users, they may not like it or have to live with it, or go underground. But then, it's up to the manufacturer; perhaps their target market is only those specific group of users, so they don't need to bother about those "professional" that complaints; As long as their product satisfy the customer group that they're targeting.

Anyway, above is my personal opinion and m cheap 2 cents; There's no wrong or right, the company choose their own decision and have their own target customer/users.

This post has been edited by Andy214: May 29 2011, 08:19 PM