quote:

For most of our “potential Fiber cities” — those where we’ve been in exploratory discussions — we’re going to pause our operations and offices while we refine our approaches.

Last Chance posted:

also these posts are both wrong. google copied apple first when they had to pivot immediately after the iphone introduction and turn their blackberry ripoff into an ios ripoff.

Jonny 290 posted:

nice samsung (thats korean for meltdown)

quote:

Sorry, Webpass is not available for your building. We currently require buildings to have at least 10 units and be built after 1995.

fishmech posted:

no child, google copied symbian

because ios had no functionality at all when the iphone came out

Shifty Pony posted:

just lol at anyone who expects google to ever, EVER follow a project through to completion.

Shifty Pony posted:

just lol at anyone who expects google to ever, EVER follow a project through to completion.

Jonny 290 posted:

iphone was

-a phone
-an internet device
-a music player

seems pretty functional to me

mod saas posted:

remembering this

http://www.attpublicpolicy.com/fcc/broadband-investmentnot-for-the-faint-of-heart/

fishmech posted:

A bad phone with bad call service (because 2g only)
Similarly with bad Internet (because 2g only)
About as a good as an iPod at playing music but tiny storage for the time


Original iPhone is super trash, it did not even begin to be useful til the 3g

akadajet posted:

yeah, but the ux was heads and shoulders over anything else

mod saas posted:

remembering this

http://www.attpublicpolicy.com/fcc/broadband-investmentnot-for-the-faint-of-heart/

Jonny 290 posted:

nice samsung (thats korean for meltdown)

Krakox posted:

holy poo poo AT&T published a callout post on google? This is insane. ATT is a heartless monolith monster etc, but they're apparently good at what they do. Google sticking their toes into things and fleeing on so many projects(this, Nest, modular phones, literally everything) is just shameful and it'll be hilarious to see if they end up following the exact same 'lets switch to wireless' stumble ATT has listed

Tatsujin posted:

Sorry, Webpass is not available for your building. We currently require buildings to have at least 10 units and be built after 1995.

Progressive JPEG posted:

lol I wonder what's so special about 1995, im gonna guess it has something to do with the st voyager premiere

e: or maybe the oj simpson trial

Progressive JPEG posted:

lol I wonder what's so special about 1995, im gonna guess it has something to do with the st voyager premiere

e: or maybe the oj simpson trial

Progressive JPEG posted:

lol I wonder what's so special about 1995, im gonna guess it has something to do with the st voyager premiere

e: or maybe the oj simpson trial

Progressive JPEG posted:

lol I wonder what's so special about 1995, im gonna guess it has something to do with the st voyager premiere

e: or maybe the oj simpson trial

LeftistMuslimObama posted:

i assume its the quality of wiring to the home. old houses have poo poo copper coming in and can't carry the full speeds promised.

hell, i have a condo built in '98 and the contractor clearly skimped on wiring quality because my internet rarely reaches the promised caps but every time they test the distribution point on my block is getting full speeds.

akadajet posted:

yeah, but the ux was heads and shoulders over anything else

fishmech posted:

no child, google copied symbian

because ios had no functionality at all when the iphone came out

Last Chance posted:

Last Chance posted:

Last Chance posted:

that first iphone was incredible. many years ahead of anyone else at the time. incredible breath of fresh air for phones. it should be in the history books really.

fishmech posted:

no, the user experience was extremely bad. that's why the drat thing barely sold except to die-hard apple fans and the kinds of people who buy a phone every 3 months because they identify as early adopters.

having everything be slow and broken, as they were on the original iphone, is not a good user experience unless you need to see an apple logo to cum

akadajet posted:

lol no. it didn't initially sell super well because it was like $600 bux and required an expensive contract. everyone who saw one wanted one.

akadajet posted:

lol no. it didn't initially sell super well because it was like $600 bux and required an expensive contract. everyone who saw one wanted one.

Sagebrush posted:

no, fishmech, you really don't appreciate how good the iphone's interface was, and how totally unlike anything else

yes it had a 320x480 screen and today it would be considered laggy. doesn't matter, because it introduced gestural navigation and instantly obsoleted everything else. remember when "smartphones" had little teeny trackballs? or scroll dials? or zoom buttons?


also it was only available on at&t

LastInLine posted:

its in commemoration of the launch of the 1995 dodge stratus the pinnacle of cap-forward design to give you a full sized interior in a mid sized sedan

test drive the new 1995 dodge stratus today at your local dodge dealer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_ThdlEAuDA

fishmech posted:

it was totally unlike everything else in that it had horrible connectivity due to refusal to support 3g, crippled functionality because stebe thought having native apps was eveil and insisted on using crappy html5 "apps" in the bad browser", and the interface was awgul

it didn't obsolete anything, as it was hilariously obsolete at launch, being a glorified featurephone with worse call quality/connectivity. there were already symbian devices with just touch interfaces for months

Sagebrush posted:

this is indefensibly bad. you're a loving moron

Jonny 290 posted:

nice samsung (thats korean for meltdown)

fishmech posted:

correct, the original iphone was indefensibly bad. it was terrible in literally every aspect, and only gained partial functionality like 2 months before the iphone 3g came out.

you accidentally referred to yourself in the second person for some reason while signing your post, consider fixing that.

fishmech posted:

and on top of being expensive it sucked hard and didn't work. only insane apple fanboys and gadget fetishists "wanted one"


it was totally unlike everything else in that it had horrible connectivity due to refusal to support 3g, crippled functionality because stebe thought having native apps was eveil and insisted on using crappy html5 "apps" in the bad browser", and the interface was awgul

it didn't obsolete anything, as it was hilariously obsolete at launch, being a glorified featurephone with worse call quality/connectivity. there were already symbian devices with just touch interfaces for months

but of course brain damaged freaks like you worshipped it because it had an apple logo, despite it taking til the iphone 3g came out the next year for anyone who wasn't insane to find it usable.