| Author |
Sony Ericsson have not been innovative |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-28 10:21:31, bart wrote:
how many CEO's know what ericsson had ready? how many CEO's know that the P800 mainly comes from ericsson?
SE's P910 is loved by bussinespeople and for that reason the see SE as an innovative company, those's CEO's don't know whats really going on.
|
|
But Bart NOBODY is saying the P800 doesn't come from Ericsson. WHO is saying the P800 doesn't come from Ericsson?
Who?
Name one person?
Go on? Just one.
One little person? 
The discussion is "Sony Ericsson have never been innovative". Not "The P800 doesn't come from Ericsson".
UNLESS you know MORE than all those CEO,s who head multinational corporations, who know more about business than most. Oh no, wait I'm sorry. Your now going to tell me they all live a dream world!!! | |
|
bart
Joined: Feb 03, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Flanders
PM, WWW
|
such a reply is normal, most of us here don't know each other.
i'm not saying i know more then those CEO's, i've just got a good vieuw on things, and it hasn't let me down yet.
With Ericsson and Nokia gone: we must keep their spirits alive and buy JOLLA or YOTA |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-27 18:51:35, Yazan24 wrote:
No Im not picking what is innovative and not, I didnt mean memory sticks in particular, I meant "expandable memory as a whole (removable) was done before, and not going into detail as their size etc. I dont think its innovative to reduce the stick size.
|
|
Why not? It isn't innovative to find a new technique or develop new methods that allow one to make something smaller and yet contain more memory? What exactly is that then? An improvemnent? As I demonstarted before, innovation, at heart, is nothing more than improvement.
If we take it to an extreme then expandable memory within mobile phones is not innovative at all if one considers the Sony Walkman for example. Here we see a portable electronic device with removeable storage.
Quote:
|
YES Putting the camera in the phone is innovative, but was it the first camera phone? No it wasnt.
But yes I agree with you the camera phone is an innovative product. But SE werent the first.
|
|
Does that make them less innovative? If SE's first integrated cameraphone had other features that other cameraphones didn't have then isn't that innovative?
Again I am left wondering what your point is. You seem to be saying that SE isn't technologically innovative, yet your standards for innovation don't appear focused or coherent enough to actually support that assertion.
What we are left with then is your appraisal of SE as being technologically lacking in terms of innovation. Because you consider nothing other than what is completely new e.g. inclusion of a cameraphone as being innovative you then disregard the real innovation, which is the improvement and increase in quality of such features.
All the manufacturers can include a camera in a handset, yet how many of them have the innovative skills to be able to include a really good camera? How many of them innovate to include a Zeiss lens? How many of them innovate to include a lens protector?
The initial technology i.e. the camera isn't necessarily the innovative component. A camera is just a camera, they have been used for well over a century. Bluetooth isn't innovative in itself either, it is just a use of electromagnetic radiation to transmit data, something, which has been in use for decades. The innovation comes in the surrounding applications and ideas that go along with these technologies. I don't think the inclusion of a camera in a mobile phone was particuarly innovative, but I do think the inclusion of a camera with various supporting features that doesn't place a huge drain on battery power is.
To ignore the underlying fundamentals of the technology employed is to ignore the real innovation that takes place. Focusing on the 'big hitters' is an exercise in futility because they provide very little in the way of actual innovative ability and they are so few and far between that they completely negate the case for any sort of innovation at all. |
Yazan24
Joined: May 29, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
Surely a smaller jump is considered less innovative than a leap in technology, so upgrading from 1.3->2 MP isnt the same technological advance as putting a cam in a phone for the first time.
The memory stick duo isnt a new way of storing, its just a new casing, it incorporates the same existing technology, or most of the existing technology, and doesnt introduce many new things to the table, and is hence considered less or not innovative, since it doesnt introduce anything technologically ground breaking like the first removable memory modules.
This is the same with increase in quality, nothing new is being introduced, existing technology is just being tweaked and perfected, and hence nothing technologically more advanced than the rest is being introduced, an existing technology is improved.
And Yes I would call them Improvements not innovations.
An innovation can also be taking an existing GENERAL product that is innovative in its own field, implementing it in another field.
I dont mean memory sticks -> Duo, by general I refer to them as their purpose, expandable removable memory.
Camera, not as 3MP not as CMOS or CCD sensors, as cameras.
-Kamikaze-
Esato- The first Biased Sony Ericsson Forums
MP3 Ringtones? Oh yeah Laffen killed them. |
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
@bart
Ericsson never released their prototype. P800 is released as a SE phone. So that for you must see it as a SE phone.
SE is 50% Ericsson 50% Sony .. P800 is not 100% a Ericsson phone. Prototype had Buttons + joystick and no jogdial.
Stop this.. oh it's Ericsson .. oh it's Ericsson .. it's silly.
NVIDIA use lots of technologies on GF6XXX from 3dfx, do you say .. oh it's a 3dfx card? I hope u don't. 
So see it for what it is, a phone released by SE and forget the Ericsson prototypes, it's in the past.
If Sony had bought Ericssons mobile department, then ok... I would also say the same as you, that P800 is a Ericsson phone. But that didn't happen, they merged forces and release phones under the name SE.
(P800 is not a IBM Deskstar with a Hitachi label on it)
On some phones Sony influence more on others Ericsson.
|
vivek_h
Joined: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 152
From: Mumbai, India
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-28 13:45:03, Yazan24 wrote:
And Yes I would call them Improvements not innovations.
An innovation can also be taking an existing GENERAL product that is innovative in its own field, implementing it in another field.
I dont mean memory sticks -> Duo, by general I refer to them as their purpose, expandable removable memory.
Camera, not as 3MP not as CMOS or CCD sensors, as cameras.
|
|
according to ur considerations...bout referrin to things as their purpose....
phones with anythign on them...are still phones..
whatever u add to them, be it bluetooth, be it motion detection, be it anythign at all...is a mere improvement to the phone....
lets refer to things as their purpose......they are all phones, and everyones is improvin each other..
noones innovating anything....
i think in the end, we gonna forget to add the ability to make calls to a cell, and only add all kinds gizmos to it...cause thats what everyone gives a shit about these days anyway
|
vanquish
Joined: Mar 20, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Wor Newcastle Phone: V600i
PM, WWW
|
Whats wrong with similair phones?
So you want every phone to be produced without using any parts from other phones. Jaguar cars have many Ford Mondeo parts in them, yet are they crap cars? Of course not! Highly regarded!
Sony Ericsson are very innovative. Would you rather the K750 and W800 not be similair, i.e. the W800 have no camera or have a worse camera?
There are significant differences between the two phones and yet again i have to tell you to stop blabbing and go and research and read specs etc. before you post up such nonsense!
[addsig] |
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
yep |
vanquish
Joined: Mar 20, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Wor Newcastle Phone: V600i
PM, WWW
|
Yazan24, i didn't know you wrote the dictionary!
Have you actually READ the dictionary defenition? You would call improvements improvements but innovation can also mean improvement to something already created to make it more innovative.
This is pathetic. Sorry, but it really is.
[addsig] |
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-28 13:45:03, Yazan24 wrote:
Surely a smaller jump is considered less innovative than a leap in technology, so upgrading from 1.3->2 MP isnt the same technological advance as putting a cam in a phone for the first time.
|
|
*cough*Monochrome pixel display -> 16 Color pixel display *cough* |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-04-28 13:45:03, Yazan24 wrote:
Surely a smaller jump is considered less innovative than a leap in technology, so upgrading from 1.3->2 MP isnt the same technological advance as putting a cam in a phone for the first time.
|
|
Isn't it? Why do you assume that it was difficult to integrate a camera into a mobile phone in the first place? It is far more difficult to actually integrate a camera that is as good as a dedicated product into a mobile phone. However, you would label than an 'improvement' not innovation.
Quote:
|
The memory stick duo isnt a new way of storing, its just a new casing, it incorporates the same existing technology, or most of the existing technology, and doesnt introduce many new things to the table, and is hence considered less or not innovative, since it doesnt introduce anything technologically ground breaking like the first removable memory modules.
|
|
Which were? Floppy disks? Cassettes? They use magnetic storage principles. A memorystick does the same job as a floppy disk, but it looks different. According to your logic that isn't innovation, just an improvement with a change in aethetics.
Quote:
|
This is the same with increase in quality, nothing new is being introduced, existing technology is just being tweaked and perfected, and hence nothing technologically more advanced than the rest is being introduced, an existing technology is improved.
|
|
Yet you still don't seem to recognise the simple fact that this is all any technology is. It is all any technology ever can be. Any advance in technology is based upon exisitng technology, we simply improve and refine it.
Quote:
|
And Yes I would call them Improvements not innovations.
|
|
An improvement can be an innovation.
Quote:
|
An innovation can also be taking an existing GENERAL product that is innovative in its own field, implementing it in another field.
|
|
What exactly is a 'general' product'?
What you are trying to say I believe is that a product, which is innovative in a particular field can also be innovative in a field it isn't normally related to. In other words ... an exisitng technology, adapted and perhaps modified can be considered innovative even though it isn't necessarily a new product or technology anymore, in essence, what I have been saying all along.
Quote:
|
I dont mean memory sticks -> Duo, by general I refer to them as their purpose, expandable removable memory.
|
|
Why this pedantic dalliance with symantics? Is it perhaps to gloss over the fact that different formats can and are innovative in their own right? You can refer to them as banjos if you like, but it doesn't change the fact that they should still be considered as seperate products. One would hardly consider a VHS tape and a music cassette as one and the same.
Quote:
|
Camera, not as 3MP not as CMOS or CCD sensors, as cameras.
|
|
What utter rubbish! If you take that sort of nonsense to its logical conclusion you would have to consider a Victorian box camera as being the same as the latest Sony cybershot! A WWI Tigermoth could be taken alongside Concorde!
The idea behind such disparate products is the same, but they are different products and here lies the flaw in your logic. You are grouping technologies and deas together where they should not be. One would hardly compare a P900 with a Motorola StarTac for example, they are entirely diferent products.
Your logic stifles innovation because it cannot recognise innovation where it exists. By only viewing the first instance of a new technology your logic refuses to recognise where the real innovation comes from; not in ollowing on from existing technology to create a new technology, but in refining and improving that technology.
I'm surprised you are actually able to ind innovation in anything, your approach to it is so narrow that it is worth considering whether anything can actually ever be innovative to you.
_________________
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC
[ This Message was edited by: scotsboyuk on 2005-04-28 17:15 ] |
vanquish
Joined: Mar 20, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Wor Newcastle Phone: V600i
PM, WWW
|
I am impressed.
Well Done scotsboyuk
[addsig] |
Yazan24
Joined: May 29, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
On 2005-04-28 13:45:03, Yazan24 wrote:
Surely a smaller jump is considered less innovative than a leap in technology, so upgrading from 1.3->2 MP isnt the same technological advance as putting a cam in a phone for the first time.
Isn't it? Why do you assume that it was difficult to integrate a camera into a mobile phone in the first place? It is far more difficult to actually integrate a camera that is as good as a dedicated product into a mobile phone. However, you would label than an 'improvement' not innovation.
|
|
Why do you believe that its only the innovation in technology that fuels a technological advance, it is also the concept. Once the concept has been fulfilled, it would make any improvements less groundbreaking.
Quote:
|
Quote:
The memory stick duo isnt a new way of storing, its just a new casing, it incorporates the same existing technology, or most of the existing technology, and doesnt introduce many new things to the table, and is hence considered less or not innovative, since it doesnt introduce anything technologically ground breaking like the first removable memory modules.
Which were? Floppy disks? Cassettes? They use magnetic storage principles. A memorystick does the same job as a floppy disk, but it looks different. According to your logic that isn't innovation, just an improvement with a change in aethetics.
|
|
You know your being unreasonable by comparing floppy disks to smaller expanadable removable memory modules, theyre not in the same field, if you compared the first compact flash disk to the memory stick Id agree, but your pushing the comparison.
I meant by General, as in THESE WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS REMOVABLE MEMORY: -
COMPACTFLASH DISK, MEMORY STICKS, DUOS, SD, ETC.
Quote:
|
Quote:
This is the same with increase in quality, nothing new is being introduced, existing technology is just being tweaked and perfected, and hence nothing technologically more advanced than the rest is being introduced, an existing technology is improved.
Yet you still don't seem to recognise the simple fact that this is all any technology is. It is all any technology ever can be. Any advance in technology is based upon exisitng technology, we simply improve and refine it. |
|
You are correct, however the measure of innovation, is the size of the leap, the carriage to the automobile was an improvement, but it was a HUGE LEAP and cannot be compared to the jump between the current 3G phones and the size of the K600.
Quote:
| Quote:
An innovation can also be taking an existing GENERAL product that is innovative in its own field, implementing it in another field.
What exactly is a 'general' product'?
What you are trying to say I believe is that a product, which is innovative in a particular field can also be innovative in a field it isn't normally related to. In other words ... an exisitng technology, adapted and perhaps modified can be considered innovative even though it isn't necessarily a new product or technology anymore, in essence, what I have been saying all along. |
|
We agree on that, but what we disagree on is the magnitude of innovation, refining a camera in a phone isnt as innvoative as putting it there in the first place.
Quote:
| Quote:
Camera, not as 3MP not as CMOS or CCD sensors, as cameras.
What utter rubbish! If you take that sort of nonsense to its logical conclusion you would have to consider a Victorian box camera as being the same as the latest Sony cybershot! A WWI Tigermoth could be taken alongside Concorde!
The idea behind such disparate products is the same, but they are different products and here lies the flaw in your logic. You are grouping technologies and deas together where they should not be. One would hardly compare a P900 with a Motorola StarTac for example, they are entirely diferent products. |
|
Surely youll agree with me that the invention of the camera, is far more innovative than the increase between 6-7 Megapixels. That is the point I am trying to get across.
If you wanted to compare the first mobile phone and the P910, which would be more innovative, clearly the first mobile phone because there was nothing like it before it.
However there are smaller steps, as well but these are not as innovative as the larger leaps.
S4K1S, the difference between the monochrome screens and the 16 Color screen is the monoscreen was limited in functionality and the T68 allowed backgrounds themes and lots of new possibilities,
Why this is relevant? Because as we increase from 16-64-256 we havent increased the functionality, we can view pics like we could before, the only difference is the quality.
-Kamikaze-
Esato- The first Biased Sony Ericsson Forums
MP3 Ringtones? Oh yeah Laffen killed them. |
dave_uk
Joined: Mar 06, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
A very thin and knit-picking argument IMHO and one that, against the formidable Scotsboy, you are unlikely to win 
Of course  are innovative, you can't survive in this industry without being so - to suggest otherwise is a nonsense. Ironically (with respect to this argument) are arguably the most innovative mobile manufacturer since their inception. If pioneering Bluetooth is not innovative, I don't know what is!
|
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
Quote:
| You know your being unreasonable by comparing floppy disks to smaller expanadable removable memory modules, theyre not in the same field, if you compared the first compact flash disk to the memory stick Id agree, but your pushing the comparison.
I meant by General, as in THESE WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS REMOVABLE MEMORY: -
COMPACTFLASH DISK, MEMORY STICKS, DUOS, SD, ETC. |
|
You know floppy disks are removable media right...
like zipdisks ... like dat .. like usb memory .. like memory sticks .. like sds ...
Quote:
| S4K1S, the difference between the monochrome screens and the 16 Color screen is the monoscreen was limited in functionality and the T68 allowed backgrounds themes and lots of new possibilities, |
|
ANYTHING you can do with a color _pixel_ display, you can also do with a monochrome _pixel_ display.
It is not the display that allows you to show backgrounds, it is the software.
Quote:
| Why this is relevant? Because as we increase from 16-64-256 we havent increased the functionality, we can view pics like we could before, the only difference is the quality. |
|
What sort of pics can you watch on a 16 color display?
Can you really say with a straight face that you can watch pics on a 16 color display?
To say that bigger display and more colors don't increase the functionality is madness! Madness!
T68 Vs S700 ... have you compared those displays?
I say it again...
To say that bigger display and more colors don't increase the functionality is madness! Madness!
| |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2005-04-28 11:16
