03-17-2010, 06:35 PM
<!--quoteo(post=83123:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83117:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For the most part, people going to Wrigley don't go there on a regular basis, so that point isn't even valid.
Secondly, if it took the US as a whole, 18 years from the inception of the smartphone to get 30% of the people to own one, it'll take probably that long again to get the rest of the population to do the same.
Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.
Fourth, it's just a dumb idea.
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For the most part, people going to Wrigley don't go there on a regular basis, so that point isn't even valid.
Secondly, if it took the US as a whole, 18 years from the inception of the smartphone to get 30% of the people to own one, it'll take probably that long again to get the rest of the population to do the same.
Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.
Fourth, it's just a dumb idea.