UPDATE: TiPb asked a few non-geek friends and most of them didn't even realize Verizon was targeting the iPhone in these ads (some thought the commercial was saying whatever device they were talking about didn't do the things listed). Is that an ad-failure, or was it deliberately targeting geeks?
Secondly, Sacha Seagan over at Gearlog brings up the now apparently dual, and now opposite meaning behind "open application" buzzwords - a device totally controlled by Verizon.
Thirdly, does the push for the Droid explain why Verizon seemingly buried the BlackBerry Storm2 announcement?
Original post after the break!
Verizon has now aired their first new Android 2.0-centric, anti-iPhone (technically "iDon't iDevice") attack ad and placed a new website online to go with them. Surprise, surprise -- like that leaked BlackBerry Storm2 vs. iPhone 3G(!) chart Verizon put together, the ads contain blatant inaccuracies (even if typeset in Apple's typical Myriad Pro):
- iDon't have a real keyboard: Er, it does. Not to get all Spock, but nothing unreal exists, the iPhone's keyboard exists, therefore it's real. Sure, it's soft/virtual (like the Verizon BlackBerry Storm2's) rather than hard, but it's certainly not imaginary.
- iDon't run simultaneous apps: Again, it does. The iPhone can run iPod, Email, Phone, Messages, App Store/iTunes downloads, Quicktime streams, and other functions in the background with full multitasking. Apple restricts two or more 3rd party apps from running at the same time, but that's obviously too subtle a difference for Verizon. (iPhone on HSPA can also multitask voice and data. D
- iDon't take night shots: Well, we guess they mean the camera's ISO doesn't produce good results in low light. Fair point. Arguably nothing short of a really good DSLR sensor does, tiny LED flash included. Though 5 megapixels is still nice.
- iDon't allow open development. Really, Verizon, with your history, you want to play that card? Android is an about face for you, not a two-face. We'll wait and see on this one.
- iDon't customize. Okay, fair point. One out of how many so far? UPDATE: Shawn Roberts points out it remains to be seen how customizable the Droid is. If it's just re-arranging icons, the iPhone can do that too.
- iDon't run widgets. What's a widget? Arguably iPhone Stocks and Weather are widgets not far removed from Mac OS X's Dashboard counter-parts. We're guessing they mean little, persistent on-screen information snippets. We'll give them a second point for that.
- iDon't have a removable battery. Third point. Apple's driven away from that entire concept towards longer life, built-in batteries and external charging packs. If that's something you can't stand, fair enough.
Wrap all that up in an Adobe Flash-only site for Verizon's upcoming Android powered Droid phone, and we're thinking Verizon better hope that the handset ends up a lot better than the marketing thus far. And, that's the key point here, as Daring Fireball points out:
“Droid” is going to be a Verizon-owned brand. It’s purportedly a Motorola-manufactured phone, but Verizon is the licensee of the “Droid” trademark. (Which name, by the way, strikes me as the perfect name for an Android OS phone — sort of implicitly establishes it as the Android phone.) That’s the big thing. Verizon doesn’t see itself as a mere carrier for other companies’ phones. It sees itself as being bigger than the phones. It’s Verizon-vs.-Apple in this spot, not Verizon-vs.-AT&T.
It's exactly the opposite approach, with Apple leading the carriers with iPhone (hopefully hastening them into their "dumb-pipe" future), now Verizon wants to turn back the clock by owning an OS like Android. They want to put carriers at the front again. Is that something that tempts you to switch?