Guest spacemonkey Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/29327.html Interesting article on the register. I don't agree with all it's conclusions but it certainly makes a good read. For instance it makes mention of 7650/P800 having internal cameras vs SPV's external. Well, look at the body size of the various phones and they'll see why that is... Also, it says microsoft have lost... microsoft have barely entered the market yet, I'd say we can decide if they've lost in a few years, and besides microsoft will happily run it as a loss effort until it gets established. Anyway... thought you might be interested.
Guest Ed Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 Oh, it's that site. I wouldn't pay too much attention to it, they normally just says things that are wrong.
Guest ClintEastman Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 I wouldn’t say that, it's a good site (when not releasing stories from Orange's PR department).
Guest Firaas Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 It's the geek version of The Sun - you either love it or hate it, and most people love it :)
Guest Ed Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 it's a good site Yeah... I don't actually agree with that... I know some people do but, I don't.
Guest DamianJauregui Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 When the Register did this article it was kinda obvious they didn't research it too much. They go on about how so many Symbian based phones shipped, compared to MS Smartphones but don't say that Nokia has had the Symbian based phones on the market a lot longer in 2002. They also constantly go on about how no one else is licensing the Smartphone OS. Not true. The main licensees of the Symbian OS are SonyEricsson, Nokia and Motorola [they also happen to be the key shareholders in the company], where as Samsung, NEC, HP, etc. have opted for the MS OS [samsung also has the Symbian version planned for future as well]. Microsoft is entering in to a monopoly based market here. I think that they will be around for some time and we should look at judging their performance in a couple of years time, after 3G handsets start to appear, etc.
Guest sebset Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 from http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/29350.html Samsung takes 5% stake in Symbian :? By John Lettice Posted: 17/02/2003 at 11:31 GMT First blood to Symbian at this year's Spy v Spy at 3GSM in Cannes. Microsoft and Samsung revealed the Samsung SGH-i700, a GPRS-capable Pocket PC device, but experienced immediate and massive retaliation from Symbian, which today announces that Samsung has become a Symbian shareholder. Samsung is possibly the biggest tug of of love child in the history of the universe, and is subject to more or less alternate strategic announcements from Microsoft and Symbian indicating undying allegiance. Until the next counter-announcement. The Symbian stake, however, is surely more meaningful in the longer term. Samsung gets 5 per cent for £17 million, and a seat on the Symbian supervisory board to go along with it. This puts current shareholdings as follows: Sony-Ericsson 19 per cent, Panasonic 7.9 per cent, Motorola 19 per cent, Nokia 19 per cent, Psion 25.3 per cent, Samsung 5 per cent and Siemens 4.8 per cent. The new shareholder doesn't seem to impact the stakes the existing shareholders have much, but no doubt the £17 million will come in handy. @reg;
Guest Rob.P Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 Yeah... I don't actually agree with that... I know some people do but, I don't. I agree with you Ed, having a journalistic background I find the register to be a bit on the trashy/slack side of reporting.
Guest sebset Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 Have a look to this: http://wapsight.com/info/2003/02/17/130645.html Digital signature will be soon available for Symbian phones.
Guest Kallisti Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 The register is one of those politically motivated bits of "reporting". They bend the facts around to the party line (which is typically that MS is eeeeevil). You simply can't trust a word that comes out of their mouths...
Guest spacemonkey Posted February 17, 2003 Report Posted February 17, 2003 I find that a partline makes peoples views somewhat useful. If someone is completely honest and objective that is good. If they are always biased in a particular way then they are almost as good. Don't take what they say literally, filter it through their bias and it's useful. The people who are useless are the ones who are unobjective and eratic in their bias. You really can't trust a word they say.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now