淘客熙熙

主题:iphone是超女 -- 小小曾

共:💬52 🌺37 新:
分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 4
下页 末页
  • 家园 iphone是超女

    一、iphone真的火了?

    每个人眼中的世界都是他看到的样子,因此,有理由怀疑像我这样在抓虾网站订阅了四五个技术类新闻blog的人有geek嫌疑,也因此,有理由怀疑我对iphone横空出世的赞叹不过是媒体接触习惯造成的幻觉,但是,美国主流媒体的持续关注、苹果公司在iphone发布到上市的半年市值大涨30%超越ibm,就连cctv都在新闻中播出了苹果公司wdc(wordewide developer confence)上的iphone介绍画面,新浪在iphone上市几个小时内开出专题……种种迹象证明,iphone的轰动似乎不全是我的误解。

    这种轰动当然是不寻常的,全世界每年有多少新的电子产品发布,但是能够引起竞争对手股价下跌的恐怕不多,让fans彻夜排队不拒风雨的也不多,可是,物极必反,围绕iphone到底是泡沫还是革命的争论,在产品正式上市后迅速升级。

    我是看好iphone的,看到很多关于iphone的评价,有几点感受不吐不快。

    二、我为什么对Iphone有强烈信心?

    从硬件配置上讲,iphone的优势并非独步天下,马上就有人论证iphone的技术和功能并不新鲜,举出某某手机、某某pda甚至某某电脑来,这样理解iphone的,多半是有一定技术基础的玩家,如果按照这种观点,iphone的轰动就变得莫名其妙了,上千万人的关注,几十亿美金股价的波动,都变得非常可疑,这些人的疯狂就变成了真正的发疯,为一种技术上并不新鲜的产品瞎激动。

    我对这种硬件决定论的观点强烈反对,在我看来,把iphone理解为功能的累积或者硬件的叠加,是一种不见森林的思维盲区。

    在半年持续关注iphone的过程中,我对iphone的最大信心,来自两个细节:

    1、在iphone上看照片,需要放大显示时,只需要直接用两个手指把画面“撑开”即可,这个功能的实现源自“多重触摸操控技术”;

    2、看网页、照片的时候,横持iphone,屏幕显示会自动转变成横版,充分利用屏幕宽度,这个功能被叫做自动感应;

    对有些人来说,这些并非什么了不起的技术,可我相信,对所有觉得电子产品操作复杂的人来说(比如我父亲),这些设计都将有很大吸引力,大到什么程度?大到让对所谓智能手机感到恐惧的老爷子愿意购买的程度。

    对一种商品来说,某种技术的意义大小,当然要以对用户的吸引力为最高标准,不是吗?

    三、iphone满足的两大需求

    从营销角度看产品,重要的不是功能,而是满足了什么样的需求,iphone的三大功能:网页浏览和邮件、视频音频播放、电话和短信,都有替代产品,甚至将三大功能整合在一起的产品,也未必没有,可是,对大多数人来说,他们甚至连内存和硬盘的功能都分不清楚,要求他们用增加闪存卡、选配扩展卡的方式来打造一部强大的手机,现实吗?有这样要求的人来判断iphone的市场前景,偏颇之处可以想见。

    那么,iphone满足了什么需求?

    我认为,iphone满足了两个方面的需求。

    1、用户层面的需求

    首先,Iphone以易于理解的简单操作、人性设计的功能,满足了处理通信、网络浏览和娱乐的需求。

    通信、网络浏览、娱乐这些需求,已经成为世界各地城市居民的生活方式的重要部分,但之前都在被以其他方式满足,比如pda+手机、电脑+手机,甚至包括类似的集成在小型移动设备上的方法。对不同设备搭配使用的方案来说,Iphone的不同之处在于整合,对集成的设备来说,虽然我肯定没有使用过这种设备中的全部,但我仍然相信,不会有什么产品的综合实力(包括操作简便性、外观等等)能够超越iphone,以外形取胜似乎胜之不武,而且审美这么主观的条件难以服人,可是,ipod从第一代至今,造型风格基本延续,产品线简单之极,却一直在时尚潮流的风头浪尖,我只能说,这是因为苹果事实上定义了审美标准。如果真的有产品跟iphone一样优秀,那我们只好对它表示同情——没办法,iphone的不同就在于它出自apple。

    不知道我是否说清楚了——重点不是打电话发邮件看照片,而是以多简单的方式实现这些功能,满足这些需求。在iphone之前,从未有人以这么自然的操作方法、这么人性化的操作来打理这些对现代人来说越来越日常的事务。(如果你在其他手机上有过更好体验,请保留意见,我无意说服所有人)

    2、市场方面的需求

    其次,iphone满足了手机升级的需求。

    我们对手机的需求难道不是打电话发短信而已吗?为什么会天外飞仙的跑出来一个手机升级的需求?

    因为现在的手机太蠢了。

    Jobs说我们都恨自己的手机,不知道多少人会把这句话理解为忽悠?我却对此深有同感,我们的手机太蠢了,特别是与另外一种我们日常接触的信息设备——电脑——相比,更是如此,那种原始的层级菜单模式,几乎总是把我们需要的按钮隐藏在最神秘的地方,用过一年了,你都未必能够熟悉所有操作。我们对此逆来顺受甚至习以为常,可有人认为这是巨大的市场机会,比如jobs。

    那么,为什么我认为iphone才是手机的真正升级。

    从大哥大到今天的手机,伴随着摄像头、mp3、3G等概念的加入,在手机厂商的推广中,我们接受了一个概念,似乎手机一直在更新换代。事实上,我认为,这种升级属于小数点后的版本提高,如果将从模拟手机进化到GSM比作录像带升级到vcd的话,真正实现从vcd到DVD、1.0到2.0换代的,不是有3G就可以,而是iphone——原因是,只有iphone实现了用户体验的革命性升级——当所谓的新款手机功能过剩的时候,当大部分智能手机对大多数人太过复杂的时候,iphone重新发明了电话,这种革命性,既有功能方面的强大保证,更重要的是,这些功能第一次被以如此人性的方式实现,史无前例的,iphone可以让绝大多数智力健全的成年人迅速习惯操作,已完成在传统手机上令人生畏的复杂操作。Btw,你会设置用自己的手机收取邮件吗?

    bill gates说过一个有趣的现象,让用户对自己的电脑作评价,当测试在自己的电脑上进行时,电脑的得分要显著要显著高于在纸上的结果——我们不太好意思当面向别人抱怨自己的电脑,在这里,电脑变成了某种具有人格的存在。

    很多人与自己的电脑有交流的感觉,可有多少人对自己的手机有类似感觉?可是iphone会给你这种交流感、伙伴感——对一个甚至一分钟使用体验都没有的人来说,做出这样的感性描述非常冒险,不过,愚蠢或者敏锐,让事实来印证吧:)

    希望通过证明其他手机(比如tero、win ce智能手机)功能不输iphone而对iphone保持怀疑的朋友,请多想想ipod对mp3播放器市场做了什么,谢谢。

    四、什么是iphone的最大优势?

    是优秀的工业设计?是苹果的品牌号召力?是jobs的个人魅力?都是,但我认为,iphone的最大优势,是用户体验的巨大升级。

    用户体验是个复杂的问题,而且是一个越来越受到关注的问题,但是,我相信,这个问题被关注的程度还远远不够,算算看我们自己手机里有多少闲置的功能就知道,在糟糕的用户体验下,再多的功能都是浪费,手机消费者并非需要经过培训上岗的专业操作员。

    用户体验的升级与硬件、软件都有关系。手机市场上,各品牌的硬件水平差异通常不会拉的太大, nokia市场份额世界第一的时代,其硬件配置水平一直并不拔尖,但菜单设计的合理度领先有口皆碑。但是,这种比较优势在硬件的重大突破下,会很容易丧失,因为这往往意味着模式的升级,比如多重触摸,就可以把大部分层级菜单甩在后面。苹果的高明之处就在于,只有他们,将多重触摸的意义从感应两个触点,变成了拿手撑开放大照片的便利。

    如果一定要按照标准结构来分析iphone的优势,我会说这优势在于软件,是人类史上第一次把真正的电脑操作系统(而不是电脑风格的手机系统如win ce)装进手机,而且,是人性化和易用性方面享有盛誉的mac系统。

    只有在这个很多人没有切身体会但其实意义重大的系统软件下,所有的硬件功能才有了全新的意义——苹果公司尚未公布包括cpu在内的详细硬件配置,从一个侧面证明了他们并未将硬件视为iphone的灵魂,否则,ipod又有什么?微硬盘+音频控制芯片而已,如果按照硬件决定论的观点,ipod的流行怎么解释?难道只是时尚潮流制造的巧合吗?真的这么理解的朋友,请思考一下ipod之前,是否有mp3播放器能够提供ipod这样舒适的操作感受?虽然其关键不过是一个触控滚轮而已,可是苹果收购了这项技术的发明公司,其他公司在做什么?

    在mac系统下,操作硬件不再是技术狂人们怪异逻辑的体现,而是人的本能反应,各家的操作方法五花八门,说明书也越来越厚,可人同此心心同此理,想放大照片就用手指撑开,恐怕是人类现在身体形态下最自然的方法了吧?这意味着什么?显然不是省下些印刷说明书的木头而已。可资参考的,是曾经的全球手机第一品牌nokia,和那句广为人知的“科技以人为本”的广告语。

    即使我对iphone操控的人性化程度毫无保留的大加赞扬,可是一定会有人指出它的缺陷,。对此,我想提到一件事情——时至今日,ipod甚至不能提供20美金的mp3都可以实现的机上删除功能(ipod删除歌曲必须在电脑上操作)。具有如此显著“功能缺陷”的播放器大行其道,证明了什么?

    我觉得,这种怪事背后,有部分原因是苹果公司对用户需求的理解比我们自己更加准确。

    在从事营销咨询的这些年中,我本人亲历的消费者不知道自己要什么的事情层出不穷,相比我们自己想当然的判断,苹果公司的用户研究更有说服力——苹果的一系列产品的成功证明了这一点。

    对苹果来说,易用性、操作的自然便利程度,不是所谓的卖点,而是产品的灵魂。你可以说自动感应佳能相机早就在用,可是图形界面(GUI)、鼠标也来自施乐公司,但第一台具有图形界面的个人电脑却是1983年苹果推出的LISA。苹果并非所有操作体验升级的原创者,却一贯保持了这个领域内的领先,我想不出有什么道理因为iphone并非第一款使用自动感应技术的电子产品就要受到鄙视——难道我们要因为非施乐品牌的pc使用鼠标而歧视它们吗?

    五、iphone对苹果公司的影响

    Iphone对苹果公司的影响,首先当然是一款具有吸引力的产品带来的利润。

    因为功能的重大升级(虽然并非所有功能都是首创),更因为这种功能升级是以如此用户友好的方式实现,iphone具备了在手机这种几乎成为大众必须消费品市场上重新定义市场代际的可能,这是一个世界范围内的巨大机会,包括intel、nokia在内的众多it、通信业巨头虎视眈眈,但是马上,我相信iphone将跑在前面。

    但是,iphone自身销售利润之外,Jobs承认,iphone是与mac电脑、ipod+itunes等量齐观的苹果战略产品,但是,我相信他故意隐瞒了的一个可能是:由于手机的用户面范围极广,加之更换手机比更换电脑要容易的多,iphone手机有可能让更多的人体验到苹果mac操作系统的魅力,这对当年因为拒绝开放标准而几乎错过个人电脑时代的苹果来说,具有特殊的意义——事实上,使用过mac系统的用户可能都会发现,刨除pc操作习惯转换的因素不谈,苹果的操作系统技术水平几乎一直领先微软的windows,但是,技术优势不等于市场优势,再但是,与当年vhs对beta录像带一劳永逸的摧毁不同,mac有了一次新的机会翻盘——在mac电脑顺利实现与intel架构转换、显卡等硬件体系逐渐统一的背景下,坚持了这么多年的mac,有机会利用自己的技术优势打一个翻身仗——当更多的人在手机上体验到mac操作系统的优越之处后,电脑选择上投入mac阵营要比从前更容易。

    在这里,我想做一个可能疯狂的预言,如果有一天apple愿意放下身段进入低端市场,在iphone等产品的推波助澜下,mac系统完全有可能与windows在市场份额上分庭抗礼,当然,这个时间要多久,乐观如我,也只敢希望十年之内能够发生。

    六、关于开放性

    关于苹果开放性的负面评价在开源时代让苹果承受了某种道德层面的指责,我建议这些朋友使用一下mac电脑再来判断,开放标准是一个改善功能的方法,但绝非唯一方法,任何方法都有利有弊,谁能告诉我,在你平常的工作生活中,苹果在什么功能方面的软件有空白?请不要举Windows下臭名昭著的磁盘整理工具作为例子——对,mac系统似乎没有这个软件,因为,它不需要。

    我有信心说,对绝大多数人来说,苹果体系下并没有功能盲区,而且,往往,在相同功能的软件上,苹果又有着更出色的表现。

    然后,我们再来比比病毒数量?

    在病毒数量的比较中,mac绝对甘拜下风,事实上,起码在现阶段中国,遭遇mac病毒的机会真的很小——不开放未必真的是因为苹果心黑手辣要宰你,还带来了安全性方面的好处,实际上,比较操作系统就会发现,苹果的系统比windows便宜很多。

    七、关于3G和网络接入速度。

    Iphone没有3G,这一点引起了无数责难,可是,同样使用edge技术(中移动06年开始在广东开始推广此技术,以升级2000年上市的GPRS技术,与联通的cdma 1X抗衡),黑莓却饱受赞誉,而且,wifi的数据传输速度,要比3G更快,有如此完备的方案,谁又规定先进的手机必须支持3G?你确认不是被手机厂商和运营商所忽悠?

    关键词(Tags): #自动感应#Iphone#多重触摸操控技术元宝推荐:铁手,
    • 家园 花! 上个周日到APPLE商店去玩儿了iPhone

      我本来对我的Treo750m相当满意,现在还真有些看不上它了.什么时候一定弄个iPhone好好满足一下.

    • 家园 贴个微软内部人的评价吧 not official (续)

      Fifth:

      iPhone negatives. There are the typical things that many people have noted, severely limited phone capabilities, an atrociously bad keyboard, a horrible email client, bad contact lookup. The thing is supposed to be a phone. What are the two primary things you do with a phone? Dial it, and look up a contact to dial from. Both of those actions are harder on the iPhone than just about any other phone on the market.

      But what surprises me is the UI. Apple is supposed to be perfect at this. I found the UI to be inconsistent at best. For instance, in many places sweeping your finger up and down on the screen scrolls it vertically. In some places, sweeping it right and left scrolls it horizontally. But in others that doesn’t work. Take the calendar. If I’m on the day view, I can sweep up and down. But if I want to go to tomorrow, I can’t sweep right and left. Worse, to go to tomorrow I need to touch a very small triangle about 1/3 of the way down the screen. One of the things you do to make a UI navigatable by finger is to make all of the hit targets large. But the next day target is too small. How could Apple of all people get that wrong? Or, say you want to go to a day three weeks from now. Hit the “month” view and tap the day. But that doesn’t take you to the day. It just highlights it. Now you’ve got to tap the “day” view again to see that day. That’s the kind of mistake I expect a first time UI designer to make.

      Sometimes you navigate by sweeping your finger anywhere on the screen. Others you need to touch a button. But the buttons you sometimes need to press end up being all over the device depending on the app. This is bad on two levels. First, you have to search the whole screen for them, and second, being used to one app doesn’t make you proficient in another. How could they possibly get something like that wrong? People have gushed that Apple made a device that’s “menuless.” No they didn’t. They just broke the menus into a bunch of buttons and spread them all over the device so that you don’t know ahead of time where they’ll be.

      I really disliked needing to stretch my thumb all over the place to do basic navigation. On typical phones you can do all navigation by parking your finger near the DPAD and moving it small amounts.

      I browsed to a website with a lot of text. I effortlessly zoomed the window so that the column width fit perfectly. Awesome. But, now when I want to scroll it, I need to put my thumb over the text I’m reading and move it. Every other phone on the planet has had some sort of offscreen scrolling mechanism (usually a DPAD or a scroll wheel) that lets you scroll without putting fingers in front of the text you’re currently looking at.

      There’s no real sense of “back.” I started entering a new calendar entry, but needed to get some information from something else. So I navigated to that other thing, got the information I needed, and tried to go back to the new calendar entry. The only way I could find to do it was to launch the calendar app again, at which point my half entered entry was gone.

      The much ballyhooed acceleration sensor doesn’t work very well. I turned the device sideways and nothing happened. Trouble was, I wasn’t holding the device vertically when I did it. I had it tilted at a fairly natural 45 degree angle. You have to move it up to vertical before rotating it if you want the acceleration sensor to work. You might say, “So what? That’s not hard to do.” But this is a $2500 phone that sold 500,000 sight unseen because it’s supposed to be perfect. Couldn’t they have done a better job with the acceleration sensor? I’ve used a lot of devices that switched between landscape and portrait and, while none of them were so cool as to switch by “magic” all of the worked every single time I tried to switch. I’d rather functional than magically half-baked.

      “So, what? They’ll get better.” Yes they will. See my second thought. They’ll be around for a long time. But if it had been Microsoft, not Apple, who released the iPhone, we’d be laughing stocks. Which brings me to my final thought.

      Sixth:

      Holy double standard, Batman. When we decided to enter the embedded space, we wrote, from scratch, a new operating system designed for embedded devices. We called it “Windows” (CE), but it was still it’s own thing, separate from the desktop product. Yet everyone said, “Stupid Microsoft, you can’t just take your desktop OS and shove it onto an embedded device. Embedded has special needs.” Now Apple literally takes their desktop OS and shoves it onto an embedded device, and everyone praises them for it. That’s … frustrating.

      I see them making a ton of mistakes that we also made over the years. People lambasted us for those mistakes, but they’re giving Apple a free pass for them. For instance, how many times have people here said, “It’s a phone, stupid. It should be a phone first”? At best, the iPhone is a phone third. I’d say it’s a phone fourth. But I predict this is suddenly not going to matter anymore. That’s also frustrating.

      Imagine if Microsoft came forward and said, “Here’s a phone, but you can’t even begin to use it until you’ve hooked it up to your PC.” We’d have been laughed out of GSM World Congress. But that’s exactly what Apple is doing.

      To use your phone you have to hook it up to iTunes? Where are the “network externalities” people? Do people think Apple doesn’t have a monopoly in media players? They’re not even being covert about this. At least, with us, you were able to use other browsers. There’s no way to use an iPhone without iTunes. Why is this okay?

      And, finally, to the person who back in January proclaimed, “Finally, a phone that works,” I find it very frustrating that people are saying “Oh look, the phone part doesn’t work very well, it must be AT&T’s fault,” but, even though we have less control over the device than Apple does, whenever a call is dropped or the network doesn’t work they say, “It’s Microsoft’s fault.”

      • 家园 这年头还有人在乎微软是怎样想的么?

        微软只有学的份喽。 微软其实对萍果的水平那是佩服得无体投地。即是明着不学,暗着可是一直没停着学。在idea上,如果拿萍果比作Nike,那么微软就是港台代工。

    • 家园 贴个微软内部人的评价吧 not official

      First:

      Newsflash, the iPhone is going to be a success. That was largely guaranteed when the 31,000th article was written about it (no exaggeration). There are very few single phone models that sell more than a million units (we’ve only had something like 3 to 5 of ours do that), and the iPhone probably has already done so (or they will soon). There’s no way to look at this as anything but a success for them.

      There are a lot of components to selling a product, and making people interested in buying it is one of them. You have to appreciate how amazingly good Steve Jobs is at this. Let me say that again, 31 thousand articles written about the device before it was even released. None of them paid for by Apple. Be as cynical as you want. Talk about “reality distortion fields” till you’re blue in the face. This is an impressive achievement and I bow to his skill.

      Second:

      Newsflash, Apple will be a player in the phone market for a long time. Believe it or not, I view this as a good thing. Microsoft does better competing with others than with ourselves. There are a lot of examples of this in our history, but the canonical one is IE. When we were competing with Netscape, we rocked. When Netscape died, we seemed to grind to a halt (yes, I know it wasn’t that simple). Then, when Firefox appeared, we started making cool browsers again. Look at the phone market. We’ve beaten PalmOS. We’ve beaten RIM. Nokia completely dwarfs us, but we’re growing much faster than they are and are taking share. We’ll beat them. It may take 5 years. It might take 8. But we’ll beat them. And, at that point, we’d be in the situation IE was in after they beat Netscape. But, now we’ll have Apple to provide competition for us. They’re fundamentally better at the game we play than Palm, RIM, or Nokia is. And that’s a good thing.

      Third:

      Viva la revolución. I read an article about Steve Wozniak showing up in line at the Apple store and cheering about the iPhone “revolution.” At first I was pretty disgruntled about this. What revolution? The device does nothing that hasn’t been done before. Are they really claiming that snappy graphics make for a revolution? But I’ve come to realize that there is something incredibly revolutionary about the iPhone. But it has nothing to do with the device itself. The revolution is that Apple is manhandling the mobile operators. AT&T, the company, is an afterthought with the iPhone. They don’t enable the phone. They don’t gatekeep updates. They clearly don’t have any say in what goes onto it. Is this a chink in the MO armor? Will this someday translate into us getting more freedom with them as well? Will we someday be allowed to distribute security fixes directly to customers? Will we ever be able to say, “You don’t make Apple submit to this requirement, why should we?”

      Apple’s greatest weakness is working with partners. It’s our greatest strength. I don’t want to play Apple and start walking over my partners the way they do. But if my partners start saying, “Gee, I sure like working with Microsoft more than those Apple people,” that’s a good thing. And if Apple forces some of my partners start saying, “You know, some of these requirements aren’t as important as we thought,” then Apple’s is a revolution I can get behind.

      Let me give you two examples. 1) WAP. We once spent an entire release cycle adding WAP support to our browser. We could have spent that time making our browser better, but the MOs insisted that we make it compatible with junky, less capable browsers instead. I don’t know if AT&T told Apple to add WAP to Safari, but if they did, Apple told them to pound sand. 2) The GSM Global Certification Forum spec. GCF is a compliance document that all GSM phones need to pass. Its 5134 pages long. I’ve just spent the last few weeks scrambling to fix a failure in test GCF 31.8.1.2.3. This is a test about changing the Call Barring password. You type in your old password, your new password, and your new password again to confirm it. In Windows Mobile, we do a string compare of the new password and the compare, and if they don’t match, we put up a message box that tells the user to retype them. That behavior causes us to fail GCF certification because 31.8.1.2.3 requires that we send both passwords to the network so that it can do the string compare. Insane, right? Well one of the top five cell phone manufacturers, a company that has shipped hundreds of times more phones than Apple, is being told that they can’t ship phones in Europe if they don’t pass all GCF tests, including this one. Apple probably fails half of the GCF tests. But I’ll bet they’ll still ship.

      Fourth:

      iPhone positives. I’m not sure if this device will ever be measured on its merits. But if it is, here are some of things I like about it. The UI is snappy. There are a lot of reasons why they’re snappy and we’re not, but I’d say the biggest is that they made being snappy a priority where we didn’t. I’m sure that, in the past, passing GCF tests was more important than being snappy. We’ll see if it still is in the future. The screen is really pretty. It’s bright and inviting, and has nice icons. The web browser is very nice, especially with the effortless and instantaneous zooming. Zooming on our browser follows the desktop model, which really amounts to, “The screen is big enough, but you may want to change the text size if your eyes aren’t good enough.” Clearly that’s not appropriate on a small screen device. Apple does a much better job here. The screen has more pixels than most of our devices do. We do support a larger resolution than Apple’s, but the screens are expensive and few devices use them. A device in the hand is better than a theoretical one in the bush. Kudos to them for putting a big screen on the device. The device is nice and small, roughly the size of my Dash, but they’re pulling some impressive battery life numbers from it (reported, I haven’t personally confirmed the battery life). Nicely done.

    • 家园 一句话,不能更换电池这种弱智设计足以让我远离iphone
      • 家园 不能换电池是很合理的,除非是把尺寸变大

        有个朋友弄了一个,我看了,真的是很薄,用起来感觉也真的是爽,EDGE网络也的确是慢。

        如果能让用户换电池的话,整个的装置就不太可能做的那么小了。要可以打开,要有弹簧固定电池,还要有专门槽来放电池,这些都增加了额外的空间和复杂性。除非 IPHONE 也做的象小型砖头似的,

        • 家园 问题是这个东西不是随身听,而是手机

          既然是手机,不能更换电池就是麻烦,而且麻烦大了,难道还要给iphone再配个备用手机么?

          要可以打开,要有弹簧固定电池,还要有专门槽来放电池

          这个问题其实很好解决,只要把电池的那几个焊点改成插口就可以了,根本不会浪费什么空间。如果不想改动原来的设计,估计以后iphone会推出外接电池盒,当然以ipod的作风来看,一个简单的电池盒恐怕也不会便宜

          • 家园 其实手机早已不换电池了

            只不过iphone明明白白的把这个事实告诉你了。

            现在手机厂商的包装里基本上只有一个线充了,其实就是告诉你一个电池一个充电器就够了。至少我周围的人都是随用随充,没有谁买一个备份电池和一个座充,而且现在很多手机厂家已经不产座充了。只不过这次iphone更直接的告诉大家了。

          • 家园 手机就一定要能换电池?

            我的手机就只有一块电池,周围的朋友好像都只有一块,都是直接充电的。

            • 家园 手机没电的时候正好在等重要的电话怎么办?

              尤其是我这种人,工作要求手机必须24小时开机,如果在外面的时候手机没电又没有备用电池,那么对我来说就不是错过什么电话的问题了,而是饭碗的问题

              或者用iphone的人都没有这种烦恼?

              • 家园 这回我也不站你那边了。你的思维和用手机的方法确实落后了。
                • 家园 看来是我太笨?我想不出什么更好的解决办法

                  像我这种情况,只有随身携带备用电池是最好的方法,否则只好再带一个备用手机。

                  或者国外随处都有可以给手机充电的装置?所以才不用备用电池?可国内很少有这种东西啊

                  不明白你说思维和用手机的方法落后是啥意思!

                  • 家园 你凶什么呀,没花。

                    说你思维落后,是因为你还是五年前或十年前的观念,还是老想着要个备用电池。

                    95年初,我第一次开手机。是日本三菱的手机,那标准电池的待机时间只有8小时,不够一天待机使用,所以我另外花大钱再加个标准电池和加强型电池。而前两年我开的手机只有95年的那个一半大小,而电池却能用差不多一星期。我用过六,七个手机了,从来就没用过专门给电池充电的充电器。包装盒都是配一块电池和一条普通充电线,汽车充电线。很多人都是晚上睡觉时充电,白天就有足够电量谈电话了。如果是某些人需要在工作上长时间通电话,那他肯定是带着两部以上的手机,一部是私人的,与亲戚朋友通电的。另一部商用,工作用的。

                    手机的电池虽然是可以拿出来更换。但绝大数人是不会更换的。如果电池坏了,就换手机。我也是。一般的手机用两年,电池的寿命就到尽头了,充不了电的。手机也有些坏。这时候就去申请一个新的免费低级手机或付几十,几百元,买个高级手机。

                    • 家园 切,就是不乐意了,咋地吧!

                      说到底就是钱啊!

                      汽车充电器?首先得有汽车吧,这个要求高了一点儿,再说买个汽车充电器花的钱够买两块电池了

                      我现在的手机一块电池待机时间差不多两到三天,但是备用电池还是要随身带。

                      电池坏了就换手机?我没钱总换手机

                      这时候就去申请一个新的免费低级手机或付几十,几百元,买个高级手机。

                      这话只有在国外才能说,国内想这么办恐怕要花不少钱预存花费,比单买手机贵多了,何况这种话费还是没得退的,必须在固定的时间用完

                      继续表示愤怒!!

分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 4
下页 末页


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河