MacDailyNews Take: Make that “Mac-class,” Sascha.
Segan continues, “The App Store is, far and away, the best way to find and buy applications for a mobile device. By centralizing application discovery and putting it on every phone and in every copy of iTunes, Apple has made mobile apps easier to find and use than ever before.”
“Even if you’re not planning to add any apps (and why not?) there are still reasons to upgrade. The most important, for many business people, is Microsoft Exchange syncing. The iPhone syncs over the air, two ways, with Microsoft Exchange 2003 SP2 or later servers. We tried it with an Exchange 2007 server, and it gave us push email quickly and efficiently. You can turn on mail, calendar, and contact syncing separately,” Segan reports.
“In terms of the smart phone operating system marketplace, the iPhone is still a niche player. Microsoft’s Windows Mobile remains our Editors’ Choice because it’s available on a much wider range of devices, and has an even wider range of software and capabilities than iPhone 2.0 does. Nonetheless, the iPhone 2.0 upgrade is a must-get for any iPhone owner, who can download it for free, or even iPod Touch users, who must pay the reasonable fee of $10. The new apps in the App Store will make you look at both devices a whole new way,” Segan reports.
Full article here.
Niche. They love the word “niche.” It’s all they have left. Using it makes them feel better about choosing inferior crap in order to save a nickel upfront.
With more and more people switching away from Microsoft garbage (desktop, notebook, and mobile devices), PC Magazine faces the very real prospect of becoming the equivalent of Typewriter Magazine. Our guess is that they recognize their perilous situation all too well. It’s lucky for them that they love the word “niche” so much.
Microsoft’s Windows Mobile is feces compared to iPhone’s OS X 2.0. That’s simply a statement of fact. Steve Ballmer couldn’t get his 85-year-old uncle to line up with him in Redmond for one of those slabs of crap, much less generate hundreds of thousands of people lining up and camping out in countries around the globe!
Now, if being a so-called “niche player,” bars one from gaining PC Magazine’s vaunted “Editor’s Choice” award, then why does Firefox warrant PC Magazine’s “Editors’ Choice”, but Internet Explorer does not? Or, for that matter, why does Apple’s Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard get an “Editors’ Choice” designation from PC Magazine while Windows Vista goes lacking?
Logic can be such a bitch, huh, Sasch?
If PC Magazine is going to come up with lame-ass excuses for not awarding their “Editors’ Choice,” they ought to at least employ some consistency, lest they render their “award” completely meaningless.