As it happens I have never used the function to share files via BT.
I have always been an advocate of having the kernel of an OS lean and mean and then loading additional modules as required. MS Windows is a supreme example. I can remember back in 1987 when I used to boot Windows 1.0 from floppy disk and it booted faster than today's high power machines. Unfortunately mobile operating systems are all headed the same way.
Your already loading up bluetooth functionality with ios dont u get that? just apple stop you sharing files so your loading bluetooth just to have a earpiece! The you have to go and load an additional app to cover the function you should already have had throught the os. The fact you dont share over BT is irrelevant.
Bluetooth isnt just one driver/module and thats it - loading Bluetooth in itself doesnt provide compatibility for every kind of Bluetooth transaction that exists.
There are multiple profiles, covering hands free headset, audio headphone, modem, peer to peer gaming, file transfer and many many more.
These various standards and functions require stacks to control and interpret them. Apple havent "blocked" file transfer, the profile driver and stack have simply not been added.
Although you can download an App to allow bluetooth file transfer, it is only iOS compatible; it actually utilises the GameKit api.
But in general, since most people only use Bluetooth for handsfree, its a safe bet to allow the other functions to be installed on-demand, with logic being simple: efficient and good use of system ram.
I realise its academic as the point of this latter part of the discussion was that the iPhone couldnt do file transfer, but there were some finer points that needed to be cleared up.:)
These various standards and functions require stacks to control and interpret them. Apple havent "blocked" file transfer, the profile driver and stack have simply not been added.
Although you can download an App to allow bluetooth file transfer, it is only iOS compatible; it actually utilises the GameKit api.
But in general, since most people only use Bluetooth for handsfree, its a safe bet to allow the other functions to be installed on-demand, with logic being simple: efficient and good use of system ram.
I realise its academic as the point of this latter part of the discussion was that the iPhone couldnt do file transfer, but there were some finer points that needed to be cleared up.:)
But that's just it....it's completely stupid of them to knowingly omit a key feature. The company should be letting the consumers make decisions not vice versa. With regard to Bluetooth processes, I can go and buy a cheap phone with a fraction of the ram that uses the exact same class drivers including BTFTP and it will do it no problem. Your point about efficiency is a non-issue as the processes for file transfer are only called upon when initiated....it doesn't load all the bluetooth functionalities everytime you activate it, thus the inclusion of FTP via bluetooth would have minimal effect on the performance of the iPhone...
And unless you or Apple have conducted a survey on every existing and potential iPhone user, there is no grounds for saying that BTFTP is not a heavily used feature....by that logic Apple should also be omitting Voice Activated Dialling etc...
Bluetooth isnt just one driver/module and thats it - loading Bluetooth in itself doesnt provide compatibility for every kind of Bluetooth transaction that exists.
There are multiple profiles, covering hands free headset, audio headphone, modem, peer to peer gaming, file transfer and many many more.
These various standards and functions require stacks to control and interpret them. Apple havent "blocked" file transfer, the profile driver and stack have simply not been added.
Although you can download an App to allow bluetooth file transfer, it is only iOS compatible; it actually utilises the GameKit api.
But in general, since most people only use Bluetooth for handsfree, its a safe bet to allow the other functions to be installed on-demand, with logic being simple: efficient and good use of system ram.
I realise its academic as the point of this latter part of the discussion was that the iPhone couldnt do file transfer, but there were some finer points that needed to be cleared up.:)
OK I'm not going to be drawn on the semantics of BT, however your argument remains that "no one" uses BT file transfer. Now where you have got that from I have no idea and in addition it cannot be used as part of ios on iphone so you have no possible way to justify that claim as obviously you are not allowed to use it. The reality is however apple have removed it to prevent file sharing so obviously they were not of that opinion.
As a defence of this removal your argument is that apple have removed this feature to make the phone more efficient and less bloated. So one of the most powerful smartphones in the world needs a few k provided for bluetooth transfer made available to perform better? really? when as already mentioned it works fine on phones with a few k of ram costing £10. Not really a plus for ios that it is desperate for that amount of resources is it?
Now as no one uses BT file transferas you say it further begs the question why there are apps such as bump to provide that feature that has been removed. Your argument is then that it is more efficient for you to load an app 2-3 meg is size which will take up far more system resources when running is preferable to having this already built in which would have no impact on the system at all.
Finally as you say this was about this feature not being available on ios as opposed to android, the above argument is really the best you can do to justify missing features in ios? This is why you have no credibility when you argue such things.
Shall we make the argument to remove all "little used" features from ios it will run like a dream then.
:mad: let myself be drawn in again on such ludicrous points
OK I'm not going to be drawn on the semantics of BT, however your argument remains that "no one" uses BT file transfer. Now where you have got that from I have no idea and in addition it cannot be used as part of ios on iphone so you have no possible way to justify that claim as obviously you are not allowed to use it. The reality is however apple have removed it to prevent file sharing so obviously they were not of that opinion.
As a defence of this removal your argument is that apple have removed this feature to make the phone more efficient and less bloated. So one of the most powerful smartphones in the world needs a few k provided for bluetooth transfer made available to perform better? really? when as already mentioned it works fine on phones with a few k of ram costing £10. Not really a plus for ios that it is desperate for that amount of resources is it?
Now as no one uses BT file transferas you say it further begs the question why there are apps such as bump to provide that feature that has been removed. Your argument is then that it is more efficient for you to load an app 2-3 meg is size which will take up far more system resources when running is preferable to having this already built in which would have no impact on the system at all.
Finally as you say this was about this feature not being available on ios as opposed to android, the above argument is really the best you can do to justify missing features in ios? This is why you have no credibility when you argue such things.
Shall we make the argument to remove all "little used" features from ios it will run like a dream then.
:mad: let myself be drawn in again on such ludicrous points
I'm not asking you to be drawn, I'm pointing out that your previous assertion that since it was loaded the extra functions were disabled by Apple, were incorrect.
Again, incorrect, I didnt say "noone", I said "most people".
Its your post that is ludicrous. You told tdenson that he was wrong, when in fact what he was saying was perfectly logical.
I cant answer why Apple opted to not include it, they are certainly capable of including it.
I think the fact that as the number one iOS file transfer App, Bump only has 314k ratings indicates I am right, the majority dont use Bluetooth for file transfer.
Dont be drawn in, its not compulsory to reply to me.:D
I think the fact that as the number one iOS file transfer App, Bump only has 314k ratings indicates I am right, the majority dont use Bluetooth for file transfer.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not asking you to be drawn, I'm pointing out that your previous assertion that since it was loaded the extra functions were disabled by Apple, were incorrect.
Again, incorrect, I didnt say "noone", I said "most people".
Its your post that is ludicrous. You told tdenson that he was wrong, when in fact what he was saying was perfectly logical.
I cant answer why Apple opted to not include it, they are certainly capable of including it.
I think the fact that as the number one iOS file transfer App, Bump only has 314k ratings indicates I am right, the majority dont use Bluetooth for file transfer.
Dont be drawn in, its not compulsory to reply to me.:D
No you assume that every thing sits within memory whether it is being loaded or not BT on ios is loaded at boot up regardless of functions apple make available. The whole thing is so silly anyway to even allude to BT being left out for performance sake dear dear me.
Ive already told you why apple have not included the ability to transfer files, so now you know they dont want you having it so you dont get it full stop. 314k ratings on that basis it has been downloaded so many times just based on that alone it is untrue and given the percentage of people who leave feedback, which shows apple are not giving their customers what they really want, very very poor to have such an os without basic functions like this.
The whole premis of your argument is poor in the same way that you have tried in vain to rationalise the other advanced functions of android I pinpointed. Unfortunately you argument has served only to further highlight the failings of ios and in turn the iphone. Showing clearly that an old out of date os such as ios cannot compete with the premier mobile os in the world today.
No you assume that every thing sits within memory whether it is being loaded or not BT on ios is loaded at boot up regardless of functions apple make available. The whole thing is so silly anyway to even allude to BT being left out for performance sake dear dear me.
I dont think you understand Operating Systems, and thats ok, allow me to explain. Certain things do get loaded at startup regardless of whether they are used or not.
And as I have said before, Bluetooth is not just Bluetooth, but lots of profiles and functions which need drivers and apis.
I dont remember saying that Apple left out bluetooth for performance reasons? Perhaps you should read back properly then you will see how the whole OS BT discussion started.
I dont think you understand Operating Systems, and thats ok, allow me to explain. Certain things do get loaded at startup regardless of whether they are used or not.
And as I have said before, Bluetooth is not just Bluetooth, but lots of profiles and functions which need drivers and apis.
I dont remember saying that Apple left out bluetooth for performance reasons? Perhaps you should read back properly then you will see how the whole OS BT discussion started.
Yes I believe it made the old os that is ios less bloated and more efficient. Obviously you considered that not having essential and basic functions of an os important as otherwise ios would be too bloated.
Android does not need to worry about such things has a fully functioning BT which works perfectly and provides without compromise those features that all modern smart phones should have except for one
In addition to those advanced features I have previously mentioned earlier there is only one clear winner in terms of features and performance. Whilst ios can perform the basic functions required by your phone it will need a drastic overhaul if it is to remain fit for purpose against the constantly improving and evolving android.
If anyone is still actually remotely interested in the thread title, latest 'supplier chatter' points to rumours of a 4 inch screen. Of course it could be nonsense. Also Foxconn HR chief mentions an October release.
4 sounds more believable. Would be shocked if they didn't bump it up a little.
4" sounds entirely reasonable, because they could increase the screen size and not have to change the resolution. The last thing they'll want to do is add yet another screen resolution.
I think October is likely - they'll retain the "new model once a year thing" and releasing a new model only 8/9 months after the 4S makes no sense at all.
4" is about as big as you can get before the phone starts to become too big, in my opinion.
As for not wanting to change the screen resolution - I don't understand why Apple would have any issues with this. Surely iPhone app devs aren't developing their apps assuming that screen resolution will never change? PC developers have been dealing with this issue successfully for years.
4" is about as big as you can get before the phone starts to become too big, in my opinion.
As for not wanting to change the screen resolution - I don't understand why Apple would have any issues with this. Surely iPhone app devs aren't developing their apps assuming that screen resolution will never change? PC developers have been dealing with this issue successfully for years.
2 reasons:
1. They've just added a new resolution with the Retina iPad, making 4 in total, and iOS devs have been moaning about having to support yet another resolution.
2. Apple do treat lots of different screen resolutions as a point against Android, so if they add another one, that would put them in a similar place with screen resolution fragmentation.
At least, those are my perceived reasons why they wouldn't be likely to. It's just my opinion though, so it's entirely possible they'll prove me wrong.
1. They've just added a new resolution with the Retina iPad, making 4 in total, and iOS devs have been moaning about having to support yet another resolution.
2. Apple do treat lots of different screen resolutions as a point against Android, so if they add another one, that would put them in a similar place with screen resolution fragmentation.
At least, those are my perceived reasons why they wouldn't be likely to. It's just my opinion though, so it's entirely possible they'll prove me wrong.
Fair enough - I don't think it's that much of an issue, however. They're boxing themselves into a corner if they're going to attempt to never change the resolution.
I think the main reason they're unlikely to go above 4" at the moment is that any bigger and people with smaller hands start to struggle.
In addition to those advanced features I have previously mentioned earlier there is only one clear winner in terms of features and performance. Whilst ios can perform the basic functions required by your phone it will need a drastic overhaul if it is to remain fit for purpose against the constantly improving and evolving android.
Thats perception. The iPhone actually performs complex functions in a simple slick easy manner.
Complicating things doesnt make things better, if the same outcome can be achieved with less.
The great thing about iOS is that the operating system fades into the background, making it very App orientated:D
Comments
Your already loading up bluetooth functionality with ios dont u get that? just apple stop you sharing files so your loading bluetooth just to have a earpiece! The you have to go and load an additional app to cover the function you should already have had throught the os. The fact you dont share over BT is irrelevant.
Its not that difficult to understand is it?
Bluetooth isnt just one driver/module and thats it - loading Bluetooth in itself doesnt provide compatibility for every kind of Bluetooth transaction that exists.
There are multiple profiles, covering hands free headset, audio headphone, modem, peer to peer gaming, file transfer and many many more.
These various standards and functions require stacks to control and interpret them. Apple havent "blocked" file transfer, the profile driver and stack have simply not been added.
Although you can download an App to allow bluetooth file transfer, it is only iOS compatible; it actually utilises the GameKit api.
But in general, since most people only use Bluetooth for handsfree, its a safe bet to allow the other functions to be installed on-demand, with logic being simple: efficient and good use of system ram.
I realise its academic as the point of this latter part of the discussion was that the iPhone couldnt do file transfer, but there were some finer points that needed to be cleared up.:)
But that's just it....it's completely stupid of them to knowingly omit a key feature. The company should be letting the consumers make decisions not vice versa. With regard to Bluetooth processes, I can go and buy a cheap phone with a fraction of the ram that uses the exact same class drivers including BTFTP and it will do it no problem. Your point about efficiency is a non-issue as the processes for file transfer are only called upon when initiated....it doesn't load all the bluetooth functionalities everytime you activate it, thus the inclusion of FTP via bluetooth would have minimal effect on the performance of the iPhone...
And unless you or Apple have conducted a survey on every existing and potential iPhone user, there is no grounds for saying that BTFTP is not a heavily used feature....by that logic Apple should also be omitting Voice Activated Dialling etc...
OK I'm not going to be drawn on the semantics of BT, however your argument remains that "no one" uses BT file transfer. Now where you have got that from I have no idea and in addition it cannot be used as part of ios on iphone so you have no possible way to justify that claim as obviously you are not allowed to use it. The reality is however apple have removed it to prevent file sharing so obviously they were not of that opinion.
As a defence of this removal your argument is that apple have removed this feature to make the phone more efficient and less bloated. So one of the most powerful smartphones in the world needs a few k provided for bluetooth transfer made available to perform better? really? when as already mentioned it works fine on phones with a few k of ram costing £10. Not really a plus for ios that it is desperate for that amount of resources is it?
Now as no one uses BT file transferas you say it further begs the question why there are apps such as bump to provide that feature that has been removed. Your argument is then that it is more efficient for you to load an app 2-3 meg is size which will take up far more system resources when running is preferable to having this already built in which would have no impact on the system at all.
Finally as you say this was about this feature not being available on ios as opposed to android, the above argument is really the best you can do to justify missing features in ios? This is why you have no credibility when you argue such things.
Shall we make the argument to remove all "little used" features from ios it will run like a dream then.
:mad: let myself be drawn in again on such ludicrous points
I'm not asking you to be drawn, I'm pointing out that your previous assertion that since it was loaded the extra functions were disabled by Apple, were incorrect.
Again, incorrect, I didnt say "noone", I said "most people".
Its your post that is ludicrous. You told tdenson that he was wrong, when in fact what he was saying was perfectly logical.
I cant answer why Apple opted to not include it, they are certainly capable of including it.
I think the fact that as the number one iOS file transfer App, Bump only has 314k ratings indicates I am right, the majority dont use Bluetooth for file transfer.
Dont be drawn in, its not compulsory to reply to me.:D
I think the fact that as the number one iOS file transfer App, Bump only has 314k ratings indicates I am right, the majority dont use Bluetooth for file transfer.
[/QUOTE]
well, according to
http://itunes.apple.com/gb/genre/ios-social-networking/id6005?mt=8
it's listed 5th (presumably by popularity), only between by FB, Skype, Twitter and Whatsapp.
Ahead of pinterest, linkedin, foursquare, windows messenger. Not exactly a fringe app....
I dont know why its listed 5th. I'm simply quoting amount of feedback registered which is approx 314,000.
Facebook has nearly 2 million feedback.
I'd be over the moon if my app had 1/6 of the reach of Facebook
No you assume that every thing sits within memory whether it is being loaded or not BT on ios is loaded at boot up regardless of functions apple make available. The whole thing is so silly anyway to even allude to BT being left out for performance sake dear dear me.
Ive already told you why apple have not included the ability to transfer files, so now you know
The whole premis of your argument is poor in the same way that you have tried in vain to rationalise the other advanced functions of android I pinpointed. Unfortunately you argument has served only to further highlight the failings of ios and in turn the iphone. Showing clearly that an old out of date os such as ios cannot compete with the premier mobile os in the world today.
I dont think you understand Operating Systems, and thats ok, allow me to explain. Certain things do get loaded at startup regardless of whether they are used or not.
And as I have said before, Bluetooth is not just Bluetooth, but lots of profiles and functions which need drivers and apis.
I dont remember saying that Apple left out bluetooth for performance reasons? Perhaps you should read back properly then you will see how the whole OS BT discussion started.
Yes I believe it made the old os that is ios less bloated and more efficient. Obviously you considered that not having essential and basic functions of an os important as otherwise ios would be too bloated.
Android does not need to worry about such things has a fully functioning BT which works perfectly and provides without compromise those features that all modern smart phones should have except for one
In addition to those advanced features I have previously mentioned earlier there is only one clear winner in terms of features and performance. Whilst ios can perform the basic functions required by your phone it will need a drastic overhaul if it is to remain fit for purpose against the constantly improving and evolving android.
4" sounds entirely reasonable, because they could increase the screen size and not have to change the resolution. The last thing they'll want to do is add yet another screen resolution.
I think October is likely - they'll retain the "new model once a year thing" and releasing a new model only 8/9 months after the 4S makes no sense at all.
As for not wanting to change the screen resolution - I don't understand why Apple would have any issues with this. Surely iPhone app devs aren't developing their apps assuming that screen resolution will never change? PC developers have been dealing with this issue successfully for years.
2 reasons:
1. They've just added a new resolution with the Retina iPad, making 4 in total, and iOS devs have been moaning about having to support yet another resolution.
2. Apple do treat lots of different screen resolutions as a point against Android, so if they add another one, that would put them in a similar place with screen resolution fragmentation.
At least, those are my perceived reasons why they wouldn't be likely to. It's just my opinion though, so it's entirely possible they'll prove me wrong.
2.8" is brilliant for occasional users.
Get to 5"+ and it becomes your mobile computer.
I think the main reason they're unlikely to go above 4" at the moment is that any bigger and people with smaller hands start to struggle.
The youth market is massive for Apple.
Thats perception. The iPhone actually performs complex functions in a simple slick easy manner.
Complicating things doesnt make things better, if the same outcome can be achieved with less.
The great thing about iOS is that the operating system fades into the background, making it very App orientated:D
Another way to put that would be that the OS can't do anything.
No thats not even close to what I was saying.
I'm saying its easy, intuitive and fast and runs apps brilliantly.
How is that not doing anything?!