There's no such thing as unlimited residential internet in Australia.
Not for $59.99 anyway - and from what I found, it is $79.99 with TPG, as you have to bundle your home phone with them. Also note the ~Limited coverage availability at selected ADSL2+ with Home Phone enabled exchange areas. Which would relate to the fact that they have to be exchanges that TPG owns, which you'll find is predominantly exclusive to Sydney (http://www.tpg.com.au/maps/).
Even with all of this, TPG is notorious for having poor service and high contention.
> The "disruption" was aesthetics, marketing and ease-of-use
The iPhone (and smartphones in general) have disrupted multiple markets:
* Photography and video
* Portable music players
* Email and messaging devices
* Phones
... and many others
The thought I ran into many times with many people during this "disruption" period basically went along the lines of:
"I could buy a new camera, a video camera, a new iPod, a netbook, GPS device, etc - or I could just get an iPhone."
This theory doesn't stroke the egos of iPhone owners enough to be popular on Apple blogs. It also leaves them open to Android taking it further because cheap compromise devices are easier to make than magical high-end disruptors.
But then you may end up worrying about scratching anything you own. Your phone, your leather lounge, your car, etc.
I guess there is a line-in-the-sand, probably around some dollar-value. I don't care if I scratch the aluminium case of my iPad, but I do mind if I scratch the paint of my relatively new car.
My parents-in-law are protective of their lounge. I don't mind. But I let my kids go crazy jumping on my own lounge, because I don't mind that either.
Complimentary ("Expressing a compliment; praising or approving.") does makes sense, but I believe you mean complementary ("Combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize each other's qualities.")
I heard about Lockitron via an email from a friend before I saw the article on HN. Perhaps the huge interest is due to the concept going viral?
Most of the techy articles I read on HN I wouldn't bother forwarding to my non-techy friends or family; this however I would share for the "Wow! The geeky future!" factor.
Almost every "Directions for improvement" statement could be replaced with "Do it how the iPhone does it" and still basically be saying the same thing.
Some example "Directions for improvement" statements:
* Phone: Need to modify the call end button on the call screen so that it is a separate large button
* Calendar: The date displayed on the Calendar icon should match the current date on the phone
* Calendar: Need to modify by enlarging the area displaying daily schedule and the font size in order to address the low visibility
* PC Program: Need to [make some kind of change], like iTunes
Picturing myself as a Samsung engineer having finished reading that document, I could quite easily think "they just want us to copy the iPhone as closely as possible" even though the wording in the document itself doesn't explicitly say "copy the iPhone".
As a Samsung engineer I would think "they want us to stop making crap and learn from the iPhone". These are all cases where the iPhone basically does it the Right Way.
For every issue they explain why the iPhone does it well and the S1 not. To me it doesn't read like they want to copy the iPhone, but rather like they want to make it right (by copying the iPhone). Important distinction. This is consistent with their last direction for improvement: "Remove a feeling that iPhone's menu icons are copied by differentiating design".
The intuitiveness is why Apple makes great products. That takes time and money to do right. Everything looks obvious and simple in hindsight. This really makes me question my stance on software patents.
Thanks to the iPhone, Apple has become the largest publicly traded company in the world and stashed 100 billion dollars in the bank.
They did this without winning a big trial against Samsung, HTC or Google. I don't think Apple needs to win this or another patent trial to have the incentives to build top quality products. On the contrary, letting them secure a monopoly on all these good ideas might diminish the incentive for innovation. They already have ridiculous profit margins[1], which if anything indicates a lack of competition.
I would suggest we are not even talking about software patents but design and dress patents. I dont really think you can compare low level kernel algorithms to a visual design and dress patents. So to me thats an unfair comparison. In fact according to to other documents Ive seen, these are all dress patents being argued over.
Usability is technology. In every case in the document, it's, we got it wrong, the iphone got it right, let's fix it. Not, let's copy the look and feel of the iphone, it's purely a usability comparison not a style comparison.
A note of caution, this is a translated document. I have no experience with Korean but in Mandarin and Japanese a LOT of subtleties are lost when translated.
That said, you're probably right and it probably is a pretty accurate representation of how bluntly they wanted to grok the iPhone.
If my phone becomes unavailable (eg lost/ stolen/ dropped in a toilet) then I need a backup option to login. The backup options Google provides are:
* Use a backup code
* Use a backup phone number
* None of the above, I still need help!
1. The backup codes are suggested to be printed and stored in a wallet; however you can put them anywhere you like.
2. The backup phone number can be somebody else's number. Your best friend, your partner, whatever.
3. If you still can't get a backup code, the third option is to go through Google's support team and recovery process. Selecting this option results in an advisory message stating the process could take from 3 to 5 days.
I guess that's fair, but since it seems like that's how it got gamed, they should definitely be more strict and send only to your primary or backup number.
> I presume option #2 is the one cubicle67 is referring to.
I'm pretty sure the backup phone number is someone else's phone, not yours. I use my wife's phone number.
If you lose your phone (and thus access to the Google Authenticator app), you can send a code to the backup phone (for example, my wife's phone) allowing you to login.
I plug my iPhone into my car's USB port (via the standard USB-A to lightning cable) and it works really well.
I also could have connected to my car via Bluetooth, or via the AUX input.
The USB connection works best and also charges my phone.