What is really scary is that the Apple fans think non-fans actually care.

iPhone has another year or so before people will go, "Who made that one phone that had less features than the free ones at Walmart and yet convinced a bunch of people to buy one for the price of a used car?"

Truly compare it to a 2004 Motorola 615 or even a Samsung R500 that are old and free, they at least had voice dialing and 3G. iPhone has a better screen, but gives up 10 crucial features in the process, yes even the new 3G iPhones don't compare.

And holy cow, we won't even talk about the Asian market phones that make the iPhone look like a clunky slow device from the 90s.

Anyone that wants to run 'applications' on their phone are ALREADY using Windows Mobile, JAVA or considering Android.

Your cable guy won't be out in the field with an iPhone, he will still be using a Windows Mobile that allows him to talk, access remote servers and run all the software their company or any geek wants to write for it without Microsoft's approval.

As for the 'myths' about the Windows Monopoly of the 90s, people need to go re-read the court findings and also notice it was the OEMs signing 'exclusive' contracts that 'locked' the customers into a copy of Windows.

Microsoft only offered the discount OEM price, just like IBM and other OS vendors. The OEMs is where people should have taken their pitch forks, not Microsoft.

All OEMs could pay the extra 2-5 bucks a copy and NOT have to sell Windows with every machine. The OEMs screwed people, and got away with it.

People also forgot software companies did this all the time in the 80s and 90s, as it was considered a common software contract at the time. (Like getting OS/2 1.x on a Tandy)

This is also why you couldn't buy some computers without getting a copy of WordPerfect Office in the 90s.

Funny, that Novell/Wordperfect Office never got any DOJ investigation nor are considered the 'Office Suite' monopoly, I wonder why. Oh, ya, the software sucked.

As fashionable as the iPod and iPhone are, Microsoft makes more money off of crap than Apple does these products, even counting iTunes. Some bands even realize this and are selling more copies of their songs via GHII/RockBand on XBox live than on iTunes.

Apple is a 'fun' me too company, but they are starting to believe their own marketing, and that is fatal in the technology industry. Even their whole BSD/Mach marketing seems to be taking hold, especially when they put it on the freaking iPhone.

Has Apple (and other people) honestly forgotten what kernel technologies of their OS was designed for?

Do people not realize the author that desgined and wrote it works at Microsoft? (Yes Apple bois/gurls, the inventor of your OS works for Micrsoft, because even he never thought some idiots would try to make it work on crap it wasn't designed to work on, or do things it isn't designed to do. - You know, multi-messaging at the kernel level and other multi-tasking things MODERN OS need to do in a non monolithic nature.)

Anyway...
iPhones are so 2007, and like last month's hair, who wants to be seen with it?

The originator of BSD/Mach works at Microsoft?

Hmmm. As if BSD and Mach are linked in such a fashion.

You might want to review the history of the Carnegie Mellon re-write of the UNIX kernel that became Mach.

And then follow the licensing of UNIX by UC from Bell Labs.

But gee whiz, boy wonder, you fail to mention MS is the LARGEST Mac developer and has been for 20 plus years. And your point?

Unfortunately, there is no common developer of Mach and BSD.

And WordPerfect had a monopoly? Does anyone know the meaning of that term aside from what they chose to invent?

WordPerfeect proliferated primarily because it as readily available on client server platforms such as the VAX running VMS.

But folks, we did get a bit of sage market wisdom. In a few years the market will evolve and the iPhone may not be the latest greatest phone in existence.

Stay up late thinking that one up?

The iPhone is a proprietary platform that Apple has chosen to keep closed. I personally think that is stupid, but it is consistent with ole' anal Steve's view of the world. So our opinions matter little, except to the degree that we buy one or not.

And whether you do or not; that decision you have to blame on yourself.

But in any event, the iPhone is not a monopoly.

Yeah, and I just bought the new AC/DC CD and it didn't include any Victor Wooten or Josh Grobin or Craig Chaquico or Dixie Dregs! ...not even any Peter Gabriel!

And my Wii won't play World of Warcraft!

And my waffle maker won't make bagels!

And my Norelco razor won't mow my lawn!

And I can't use Ford replacement parts on my Chevy!

Monopoly!

We're being screwed!

The Wii is not capable of playing WOW, the waffle maker can not make bagels, etc., BUT the Iphone could run an alternate browser. But hey how would they push a highly unpopular browser then? Heck I think even most of the Macs users use FF instead of Safari.

Oh, and the point on top of your head is showing yet again.

If only there was a point to your posts. They would still be as nonsensical as always, but there might at least be a point.

Typical...Back an idiot into a corner where he knows he is wrong and out come the insults instead of actually disputing the argument presented.

This is just getting ridiculous now. M$ preinstall IE, but they don't stop you from installing Firefox, Opera, or even God forbid - Safari. Imagine the stink Apple would kick up if M$ wouldn't them release Safari for the PC. This really smacks of unfair practice to me, because if Safari was really that damn good, then quite frankly what would you have to worry about?

finally somebody is making some logical statements in here...

Yup, you guys sure are swooft!

As if the PC is a proprietary MS platform. Oops! You mean that SMALL issue matters?

And to use an accurate equivalent of your anything but example - is MS obliged to distribute Opera with Windows and IE? No?! Monopoly! Monopoly! LOL!

Despite that, MS' historical icensing DID render you oblidged to pay for Windows, regardless of whether you wanted it or not for the x86 platform!

But I love how you justify MS' actions and complain about a company who DOES indeed own its own proprietary hardware platform and only extends their control to their own design! The nerve of them!

So nitwits, go waste your time b!tching to BMW for not offering a Dodge hemi option as well as for not allowing Ford to make BMWs. I can just hear it now - BMW is a monopoly!

Or to MS for not bundling Opera with Windows and IE. Monopoly! Monopoly! ROFLMAO!

LOL! But thanks guys, as you are great, if not intelligent, comic relief!

As if the PC is a proprietary MS platform.

I believe he was implying that Windows is a proprietary OS.

Of course, once any proprietary product reaches a dominating market share (Monopoly, anyone?) we jump in and start telling them how to run their business and what they can and cannot do with their proprietary products. (Aren't we nice?)

...of course, Apple is no-where *near* a dominating market position, so his comparison is absurd.

@ foxfyre & PC_Tool: If I could get you two guys banned from this forum - I would. You are both (particularly foxfyre), the most offensive wastes of space here at BetaNews. I very much look forward to the day that you both leave.

no you have that all wrong...that is internetworld but maybe hes gone finally?

Agree with you there.

I certainly hope so. I used to enjoy reading Tools comments but lately I really have not and I hope along with foxfyre he will leave.

*laughing*

WTH??

That comment wasn't even *remotely* insulting to *anyone*.

If you don't like it? There are a *billion* other forums out there that I am not on.

Best of luck.

I know, I know...

I need more cowbell.

You are not as offensive as foxyfyre for sure, but I do read most people's comments (particularly long time members), and I'm just not very impressed by your comments anymore. But I agree it's probably not a very nice feeling to have been associated as being likened to foxyfyre.

Oh, my feelings were hurt. LOL!

Sorry, but if more would attempt to actually discuss the pros and cons of a situtation/announcement/market development in a non-partisan manner, there could be many interesting (OK, I an hoping a bit here!) discussions.

But instead what dominates the forum are rabidly emotional partisan rants most often lacking any basis except in the imagination of the author.

And to that degree, it becomes fun - if not overly easy - to point out that the emperor indeed has no clothes. ...Simply because tying "LOL!" becomes monotonous.

But now I expect a rant against nudity any moment....wait for it...

LOL!

Should my heart be bleeding cherry Kool-Aid?

Its pretty amazing reading some of the comments below that people actually applaud the fact that Apple won't let them have any choices when it comes to software on their phones.

Genius, it doesn't matter if you or I like it or don't like it!

Apple is free to manage or mismanage their own proprietary product!

And if it is so bad, then no one will buy it. As is obviously the case. Right??????? As if the market is clamoring for Opera. LOL!

And if you or I don't like it, we are free to buy one of the many enlightened perfect alternatives.

I can see that confused look on your face now.

What is truly amazing is that so many who claim to not like the iPhone and who claim not to want to buy anything Apple - ever - whine so loudly about that which they don't like or want and have so many myriad alternatives to buy.

Duh!

"And if you or I don't like it, we are free to buy one of the many enlightened perfect alternatives."

The problem here is the same problem with MS Windows. There may be other better systems out there, but this is shiny and new so everyone will flock to use it, along with all the developers. Which means that you'll have to use it as well to get any application support.

So we all have to buy iPhones...

Next....

....................

...and Tool...I think we have discovered the REAL reason so many use Windows!!! its "shiny and new"... ...and I suspect they twirled it in front of their eyes too! LOL! ;-)

Yes, we HAVE to if we want some shiny app that is produced only for the iPhone and nothing else.

As far as the windows analogy goes, it was shiny and new in 1995 with a good marketing campaign. Sure alternatives existed but at that time how many people actually heard of Linux in the consumer market? By the time other operating systems got into the game MS Windows already had the majority of the app support and that was that.

Of course that's pure software, not hardware. If I could install Linux on an iPhone and still use it for its main purpose I might actually get one.

"Yes, we HAVE to if we want some shiny app that is produced only for the iPhone and nothing else."

LOL!

But gee whiz, Mr Wizard, I thought the problem was that the iPhone doesn't run an app you desperately need?

Make up your mind!

So, if you can't debate it not running an app you claim you need ( when you mean "WANT", as it already possesses a resident browser) you counter with the argument that you HAVE to buy it if it runs an app that you WANT.

Gee, just like the word "monopoly", you substitute the wrong word again.

Then grow up and weigh your choices and assume responsibility for your choice!

I think Jobs is an idiot for closing their platform to apps, but hey, its their platform. And you weigh your decision based on an up front knowledge that it is not an open platform.

Gee, isn't being an adult and evaluating and assuming responsibility for your choices difficult?????

You don't HAVE to buy anything!

Go buy an Android phone...or any of the myriad competing multi-touch phones - and stop whining.

I can't wait until you are old enough to consider buying a gaming platform, or, heaven forbid, a car! Gee, the Wii doesn't run X, and the XBox360 doesn't run Y, and the PS3 doesn't run Z....and the BMW doesn't offer a hemi option...or turqoise paint... ROFLMAO! And the Beatles album doesn't have Stones or Grateful Dead songs...

Yup, you're being screwed. And the ignorant are always the first to get suckered.

Haha... I DO have an android phone :)

Good, then go put Steely Dan to good use.

I don't get it. Safari runs natively on the iPhone, Opera Mini would not. Safari would naturally be faster and Opera would likely be either a failure or just fan service for Opera.

I don't get why Apple would really care.

If you knew a little bit about Opera mini before you talk about the program, you would know that it would add quite a lot of features that Safari does not have.

Yes, as you should know, Opera is literally taking over the world.

...Right after Linux dominates the desktop.

LOL!

If you want opera, buy a phone that allows you to run it!

Pretty complicated, isn't it!?

Dude... this is getting embarrasing for you. if you did some research before posting here which you obviously dont, you would realize that Opera is the 4th largest browser for smartphones in the world - way way ahead of Safari.

Then dimwit, buy one of the MYRIAD number of phones that offer it!

Or aren't you smart enough to manage that?

Talk about embarassing...such a poor dumb victim...

And if your 'facts' are correct, that is indeed fascinating. Especially as other geniuses here claim Apple has a monopoly with the iPhone, and ALL iPhone come with Safari! Such a monopoly would make Safari more prevalent than the 4th place Opera. So which is it? And we won't embarass you by asking what grade you earned in math - let alone logic!

But then, if you actually go to Belgium and try to order Belgium waffles, they do not find it funny...so that sort of sums up your nonsense in total...

Forbidden to compete.
The true dream and face of "free market actors".

Welcome into the new world.

Who cares about Opera? Now FireFox I might be interested in.

Heh. That's fair enough. Are the Firefox developers planning on producing it for the iPhone? It'll be intersting if they do make it.

second the notion.

Yeah, probably not.

With Opera getting snubbed I bet they're thinking "why bother".

However I do see a fan making a rouge third party app.

Oh no!

What will they do now?!?!?!
They didn't miss it before, and now that they still won't have it, the only ones who cry are those without an iPhone. LOL!

And I love the asinine monopoly comments below. Go back to your 8th grade DECA club meeting and pay attention this time.

Monopoly! LOL!

Next the same idiots will be complaining that Parker Brothers be broken up over their game called Monopoly!

So explain to my how they have not got a monopoly as to what programs are put on their phone?

They have a monopoly on their phone/internet device that is perfectly capable of taking other applications (and in fact they want people to develop for it), but they deny Opera (and others) out of what I can only presume to be greed.
What gives you the right to deny certain groups of developers but not others? Having Opera on the phone would not damage the phone, and it would add more features as Opera contains more features than just a browser on its own.

What the heck else would you call it other than a monopoly?

"In economics, a monopoly (from Greek monos , alone or single + polein , to sell) exists when a specific individual or enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it."

It's a monopoly. End of.

The reason I'm pissed off is the fact that Apple haven't been chased by the DoJ or the EC, but they're both perfectly happy to go after Microsoft (which itself wasn't entirely wrong).

Now stop being so egotistical.

"So explain to my how they have not got a monopoly as to what programs are put on their phone?"

Yup, dumb@ss, the iPhone has a monopoly over the CELL PHONE MARKET...despite English obviously not being your native language. ;-)

A monopoly is not defined as having a proprietary system within a larger market with plenty of competition!

Stop being so stupid...despite that trait being the basis of your charm.

U don't care about smartphones. Remember?

iPhone is not monopolizing, they are propriatizing their software. Like pretty much any OS does... A monopoly would mean that they keep other software companies from creating software for other phones, which is NOT the case. They also are not monopolizing the cell phone industry... you don't have to get an iphone to get a cell phone account....

Can someone get these people a dictionary??

"In economics, a monopoly (from Greek monos , alone or single + polein , to sell) exists when a specific individual or enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it."

"over a particular product or service"

The iPhone is a particular product.
I'm not arguing whether or not you can buy other phones; I'm clearly arguing that it is a monopolistic practise to pick and choose who can develop software and who can't on an arbitrary basis.

Oh no! I got one word wrong! Clearly I don't know English. I wasn't aware the @ symbol was part of the word dumba**.

Agree with above being stupid, however "Yup, dumb@ss, the iPhone has a monopoly over the CELL PHONE MARKET." that is also incorrect... Monopolizing the cell phone market would mean you need an iphone to use a cell service. This is not true.

I don't.

That is precisely why I think it is so hilarious that so many who hate the iPhone and who do not have one have their panties in such a wad worrying about the lack of Opera!

The show isn't the iPhone, it you geniuses. Take a bow. LOL!

Even I can tell he is being sarcastic.

It was meant sarcastically in response to the other and now your thinking that they do!

OBVIOUSLY - to some anyway who understand the meaning of words and can recognize rampant sarcasm- the iPhone is NO monopoly!

LOL!

The word you want is "proprietary".

@ is just as much a part of the word as are your two **. The dictionary told my. ;-)

"propriatizing" Not a word, but I get what you mean. Yes, it's proprietary, but that's not the end of the matter.

"They also are not monopolizing the cell phone industry"

Didn't say they were.

I agree with Paul Skinner. Maybe you would understand it better if the situation was a bit different. Lets say Microsoft did not allow any other browsers than IE on its Windows platform. Get the point?

Well, pour some syrup on you.

The iPhone is not a monopoly.

Tool was right, the level of ignorance regarding business is second only to the lack of awareness of the larger world of enterprise computing! And add to that the additional claim that this is not a technical site...

Doesn't leave us with much, does it?

No. Instead you misused the word monopoly where proprietary would have been appropriate.

Proprietary it certainly is. However, this does not give them a right to deny programs on an arbitrary basis with no set guidelines as to what is and isn't allowed. That is a monopolistic practise. If it were truly proprietary they would state somewhere what isn't allowed to be created. As far as I'm aware they have not stated this anywhere, but have told developers - after they've put it on the store and had it taken down - via email.

Also: If I click edit it gives it to me correctly spelt, however, if you do the same it gives it to you with an @ symbol. I have no idea why I'm still arguing this part.

See reply to lower comment of yours.

"The show isn't the iPhone, it you geniuses."

Hah! And you have a go at me for spelling.

However, this does not give them a right to deny programs on an arbitrary basis with no set guidelines as to what is and isn't allowed.

OMFG!!

You're not actually trying to tell Apple what they can and cannot support on *their* products, are you? Especially when ample, arguably equally functional (if not *more* functional) alternatives exist??!?

They sell a product. No-one is forced to buy it. Apple does not control the cell-phone market. Ample alternatives exist. They have *plenty* of competition.

You are way out in left field on this one.

I really think you are missing something here.... iPhone is not a monopoly, just as windows is not monopoly as an OS. (I think we all know there are plenty of other phones to choose from.)

Still, Microsoft got sentenced huge fines for abusing its dominance in the market share to promote its own products, such as the IE for instance, and thereby hinder free competition. After all, we are not living in a communist regime, so free competition is very important.

And this is the problem with the iPhone, by Apple banning applications that competes with the applications that Apple built in. By doing that Apple is abusing its dominance in the cellphone market to promote its own products by now allowing programs and services that Apple consider that any given user dont need, because Apple decided so.
In the end, its not hard to understand that only Apple over time will lose with this strategy.

Please just tell me that you understand that much? :)

Words mean things.

The iPhone is not a monopoly, regardless of how you want to attempt to arbitrarily redefine and limit context.

It is but one proprietary product in a larger, very hotly contested cell phone market.

I am sorry you fail to understand the meaning of the word monopoly.

Pour some syrup on you. You're done.

^This^ is the closest to what I am trying to say.

I've been trying to put what I'm thinking in to words, and this is the closest so far.

I'll come back to it later with my full response.

Geesh, you have been so lost on the meaning of the word monopoly, I have to allow you something, don't I?

Besides, I think I queried the spelling from the same dictionary where you looked up the meaning of monopoly. Its the spelling the dictionary provided for my. ;-)

Besides, you don't have a monopoly on English either! ;-)

Great, so now we have multiple geniuses who lack an understanding of the word monopoly! Not surprisingly, most hail from the EU, where they want to control everything they are unable to make for themselves...

Great, that's all we need! Someone attempting to employ LOGIC with these erudite folks...

;-)

So you don't like them exercising control over their proprietary product.

Who cares?

You don't like it, don't buy it! Buy one of the myriad alternative products that serve the SAME market.

In a monopoly, you would have none of the myriad alternatives to choose from!

Complicated, isn't it?

Psssssssst, foxfyre
since you obviously didnt read any of the above posts properly let me inform you that neither paul skinner or belgian waffle has said that iPhone has a monopoly on the cell phone market.

Read the first Skinner diatribe. Or better yet, have your mommy help you with the big words.

Or even more hilarious, re-read YOUR own asinine post below:

"I hope iPhone users realises {realises??} sooner rather than later that they are supporting a monopoly Microsoft was not even close to achieve back in the days."

Ooops! I guess you really are that ignorant!

The use of the word monopoly in this context is inapproriate in any sense of the word.

Not to mention that you are obiously clueless as to why MS was found guilty in their contractual requirment that every customer purchase Windows for use on every PC whether they wanted it or not...

And their attempts to redefine and morph the term and modify it to their use is inappropriate as well.

Or did you also miss the recurring reference to "monopolistic practices"?

Its really sad when you aren't even aware of your OWN ridiculous claims!

Yup, spank that thing...its apparent that you already have enough personal hangups to worry about...

Still, Microsoft got sentenced huge fines for abusing its dominance in the market share to promote its own products, such as the IE for instance, and thereby hinder free competition. After all, we are not living in a communist regime, so free competition is very important.

And this is the problem with the iPhone, by "Apple banning applications that competes with the applications that Apple built in. By doing that Apple is abusing its dominance in the cellphone market to promote its own products by now allowing programs and services that Apple consider that any given user dont need, because Apple decided so."

NONSENSE!

MS's licensing actively precluded other competitors from offereing any OS other than Windows on their boxes! Or of sourcing a box without Windows being purchased! Duh!

Apple is in no way attempting to prevent other cell phones from emplying an environment other than Apples nor forcing non-iPhone owners to purchase their environment!

Get you examples straight! Simply knowing a company's name and tossing around abstractions does not make your asinine example valid!

Apple is restrictng what runs on THEIR own product! They are not attempting to tell any other manufacturer what to use! And they are entitled to make whatever enlightened or asinine decisions they choose!

They abuse no one who did not actively make a decision to buy a proprietary product! And if the buyer was oblivious, that is not Apple's issue. Those folls have bigger problems as they are victim's in the same sense that you poor whiners are. They are victim's of their own stupidity and specious assumptions! And to think that ignorance is supposed to be bliss!

I personally think Apple's closed platform option to be a strategic marketing blunder. So my reaction is not to buy it. And I am free to buy whatever product suits my needs! But I am sure this option utterly and completely confuses you erudite folks.

So, are you as upset that Ford does not offer Chevy engines as a factory option? Or that BMW doesn't offer Dodge hemis in their vehicles? Oh no! They must be monopolies! Or to rephrase it in terms you an recognize, they must be employing "monopolistic practices"! LOL!

Gee, but I don't hear anyone complaining nor do I see the head up their posterior EU court challenging this? And if they aren't involved, it obviously can't be too substantial!

Or, should the PS3 folks be sueing because Sony is not allowing them to run XBox360 programs on their unit - or visa versa? DUH!

Now go complain that Parker Brothers are guilty of marketing a Monopoly.

You guys are clueless.

"Apple is restrictng what runs on THEIR own product! They are not attempting to tell any other manufacturer what to use! And they are entitled to make whatever enlightened or asinine decisions they choose!"

I think what is trying to be conveyed here is that Apple is allowing some 3rd party applications to run on their OS and not others. By that token... Excluding any hardware... can MS preclude "some" manufactures from running their software on Windows? After all it is their proprietary product. So they could keep 3rd party products from running if it duplicates a feature already included with windows?

"So, are you as upset that Ford does not offer Chevy engines as a factory option? Or that BMW doesn't offer Dodge hemis in their vehicles? Oh no! They must be monopolies! Or to rephrase it in terms you an recognize, they must be employing "monopolistic practices"! LOL!"

You keep trying to use this argument and it is seriously flawed. Of course car manufactures don't offer options of other companies products as options. Likewise, Apple does not offer other options with the puchase of the iPhone. However, no manufacture can stop you from using a 3rd party part on your vehicle after you have purchased it. They can't even deny you warranty repair unless they can prove that the 3rd party part absolutely caused an issue.

The problem here is that the Apple is allowing "some" 3rd party apps, but not "all" 3rd party apps. If they want a proprietary system, then by all means that is within their rights.

Wouldn't that be more like Ford Saying... Ok... you can put any fuel you want in your car, because we don't sell fuel. But you can't use a 3rd party exhaust system because we already provided you with one that works. Sure, the 3rd party system may offer better performance, but it is just duplicating the features that we provided for you. If you modify your vehicle to accept said 3rd party exhaust system, you void your warranty.

Opera sucks. Nobody wants that crap on a lovely iPhone anyway. Safari is all you need. Plus if Apple says it's not good for their iPhone then it's not good. End of discussion. Have a great day.

Actually, don't ban PC_Tool (though I was of course joking), ban this ****ing idiot.
I'm sick of his crap now.

Yeah I think its time for this idiot to be let go.

AGREED 100%.

iPhones are for losers.

You were *JOKING*?!??!

*edits reply to that post*

Sheesh...warn me next time ;)

Heh. Don't be silly, of course I wasn't joking. :P

Idiot? I'm the most intellectual man after Einstein. That's why I own a Mac to prove it. :)

Absolutely ban Tool!

After all, without Tool, fools who cannot distinguish between the meaning of proprietary and monopoly will appear intelligent to their equally dimwitted colleagues.

Its always easier to advocate the elimination of factors who consistently and successfully challenge the contetions of fools rather than for the fools to actually get a clue.

Yup, someone turn of that light, the roaches are trying to converse.

Of course even Einstein was left gathering dust once quantum electrodynamics surfaced....

Thats messed up. I hope iPhone users realises sooner rather than later that they are supporting a monopoly Microsoft was not even close to achieve back in the days. I mean, MS got sued over just having IE bundled with Windows. Not only is safari bundled with the iPhone, but Apple makes it IMPOSSIBLE to use any other browser. When are people going to realize that Apple is the new Microsoft?!!

You just said it yourself. It's not the new Microsoft, or even the old Microsoft. It's in a league of its own.

I just wonder sometimes when people are going to wake up....

Yup. Its so true and the Apple fans just can't see it. Tsk on them....

They can see it. They just choose to overlook it because they know it makes their beloved company look bad.

iPhone owners have screwed themselves by buying an iPhone. Now let them enjoy the feeling.

I've said it a million times. Apple is the new Microsoft.

Phone and software manufacturers are going to catch up to Apple's cohesiveness of software and hardware (and they're BS as well). Android is a step towards that and there are many more (limo, windows mobile, symbian, rim) coming up. They're gonna have to open up (probably a new phone and/or a software update that users may have to pay) otherwise they're market share is going to be the same as the pc/mac range and maybe Apple wants it that way. People talk about MS being a monopoly, Apple has a monopoly on their hardware. And Apple computers are PCs.

Imagine if Apple was that strict for releasing software to OS X?

"Apple has a monopoly on their hardware. And Apple computers are PCs."

Yup, Apple has a monopoly on Intel Roadmap compliant PCs.

LOL!

And Ford has a monopoly on Fords, and BMW on BMWs, and Kias on Kias, and Levis on Levis, and HP on HP, and...

In a forum literally full of nonsensical statements, this is near the top! Take a bow!

this comes as a shock... yeah right, if this were microsoft, they would be sued and already paying fines by now.

apple needs to wake up.

^This^

Seriously now, how is this not monopolistic?

??

Because Apple has no-where *near* 75% of the cell phone market?

Isn't it nice when one can simply make up the meaning of words and the 'facts'(sic) to support one's nonsensical case?

Isn't that a rule here? Hell, even the "journalists" here do it.