[Vincent Ferrari]

When the iPhone launched on June 29, 2007, the lines to get one were tremendous.  I waited on line for about 8-10 hours to get mine.  A lot of people waited a lot longer, and in New York City if you didn't get yours before the weekend was over, you had at least a one-week wait to get your hands on your own.  No sooner did people get them in their hands than a disgruntled group of non-buyers began explaining to anyone who would listen that the only thing selling the iPhone was hype.  Accompanying that argument was the repetitive pointing out that there was "nothing new" about the iPhone and that everything we were seeing in it had been done before.

In essence, those arguments are at least partially true.  Apple isn't the first company to have used a touch screen.  For years, companies like HP, Dell, Toshiba, and HTC have been cranking out device after device with touch screens.  I'll even ignore the fact that Apple was one of the first to ever use a capacitive touchscreen on a mobile device, and is definitely the first to cover their touch surface with glass instead of plastic.

Many people who never bought one bemoaned the interface.  It was too simplistic.  It didn't offer "skins."  You couldn't customize anything.  it was just "there."  According to the so-called experts, this was Steve Jobs' way of ramming a user interface down people's throats that was his vision for how a phone should work and people had two options: take it or leave it.  Others bemoaned the lack of third party applications, a to-do list app, note synchronizing, Exchange support, a physical keyboard, video recording, cut and paste, the fact that it wasn't a 3G phone, and the fact that it couldn't make a cup of coffee merely by dialing it in the middle of the night.

Oh yeah, and it was "too expensive" for the average consumer.

By rights, the iPhone should have fell flat on its face from minute one, and if any of these objections that were raised were serious, we'd be reading about how Apple shareholders voted out Steve Jobs and cancelled the iPhone project altogether.  Of course, that didn't happen.

What did happen, however, was a minor revolution in the phone market.  Despite their lumbering nature, many phone companies were slapped in the face with the fact that their objections simply didn't matter to Joe Consumer (a distant relative of Joe the Plumber).  Companies responded, as they usually do, with poor knockoffs of the iPhone that completely missed the point.  Toward Christmas of last year, Verizon was touting its Voyager as the best touchscreen phone on the market.  "Touch does more when it's on 'The Network,'" the ads reminded us.  In the end?  The Voyager flopped.  You couldn't get one at all around Christmas, but you could easily get one now.  Verizon then launched the Samsung Glyde, the LG Dare, the Venus, and so on.  Again and again touting that "touch" does more on their network.  Again and again, these competitors fell flat on their face, enjoying minor success on day one and complete nothingness thereafter.

Sprint tried to go after Apple, also.  They launched a gigantic ad campaign for their Instinct, the phone that was going to knock Apple off its pedestal.  It had everything.  Turn by turn directions, mobile TV, picture messaging, and so on.  The hype machine was in full force.  If you got this phone on the "Now Network," you'd be the envy of the neighborhood, and yet today, a mere few months after its launch, I've barely seen one on the NYC Subway.  Despite the number of competitors, I still see way more iPhones; first generation ones as well as 3G ones.

How can this be?  How can all these competitors show up with more features on better networks and yet people are still buying the iPhone?

Today, on Boing Boing Gadgets, Joel Johnson makes an excellent introduction to a recent Consumer Reports article pointing out how satisfied iPhone owners actually are with their purchase:

"According to the 2008 "Business Wireless Smartphone Customer Satisfaction Study" by J.D. Power & Associates, Apple's iPhone - a smartphone with no turn-by-turn directions, copy-and-paste, physical QWERTY keyboard, user-installable programs, expandable flash memory, or removable battery - rates a perfect five-out-of-five in the "Features" category, winning out over HTC, Motorola, Palm, RIM, and Samsung. There's only way to interpret that data: for iPhone owners, Apple has provided every feature that matters, even if that means leaving some features out"

The reason Apple keeps succeeding where others are predicting failure is that most of the iPhone works the way it's supposed to consistently and reliably.  The UI in version 2.1 generally doesn't crash much.  It's not immune from crashing, but it's very stable.  The E-Mail app works.  Sorting messages, downloading them, responding, attaching pictures, and working with multiple accounts is all relatively painless.  Adding a new account is a click or two and a username and password.

The much-maligned "push" synchronization with MobileMe just works, despite some initial hiccups.  No complicated setup, no server adjustments, just a username and password and you're on your way.

Without going feature by feature, the iPhone simply does what it's supposed to do and does it really well.

Where other companies fall flat is that they over-promise and under-deliver.

They promise you feature after feature after feature, only to have a customer find out that the feature isn't that great.  They promise synchronization with your desktop computer only to tell you that you have to use MS Outlook on Windows XP or better.  They promise video capture and later you find out that their idea of video capture is 260 x 74 QIF video that's unwatchable on anything less than your phone.  They promise music downloads, but charge $2-$3 a track (or a monthly rental fee) and the "download" is locked to your phone for all eternity.  Lose your phone?  Tough.  They promise a "touch" screen, but it's usually either plastic (the Voyager / Glyde / etc.) or needs a stylus (Windows Mobile).  They promise "push e-mail" and then tell you that you need a special server and corporate e-mail.  They promise you a "replaceable battery," when in reality you won't need to replace it before your contract is up and you're buying a new phone anyway (and if you do grab a new battery it'll set you back $75).  They promise picture messaging, but then in some cases you can't send the pictures outside of your own carrier's network.  They brag about giving you access to your IM lists, and then tell you that every incoming and outgoing message will cost you one SMS message.  They offer 3G service, but don't mention that it isn't available everywhere and don't offer WiFi on their phones to compensate (Verizon, I'm looking directly at you!).

You're probably starting to see the point.

The iPhone's success isn't that it's another touch screen phone, only this time backed by Apple's mythical "hype machine."  Its success lies in the fact that it has a UI designed for your fingers, not a stylus, and the team that developed it actually had a goal of making the best and most usable device on the market, not the one with the most features.

in a few weeks, we'll see the launch of RIM's effort to climb out from sameness and produce something new; the BlackBerry Storm.  It'll only be available on Verizon at launch (wow, you mean a one-carrier phone?  I thought only evil Apple did that?) and will have all the features you've come to know and love about Blackberry handhelds with the addition of a web browser that's finally more than a glorified WAP browser and an on-screen keyboard that sort of kind of simulates a real one.  I guess RIM's assertion that no "serious business user" would go without a physical keyboard went out the window now that they're trying to cash in on the "I don't want an iPhone" market.

Will it sell?  Probably.  Like most "iPhone killers" it'll do really well in the opening weeks and then fizzle like a can of soda that's been left open for a week.  RIM still doesn't understand that features aren't what sell phones; well-implemented features that don't overpromise and underdeliver do.  As long as RIM is not singularly focused on the Storm, it'll be just another also-ran in the great dustbin of touch screen phones that never really attained mass-market appeal.

I'm not saying Apple got everything right with the iPhone.  I am, however, wholeheartedly agreeing with Joel from Boing Boing Gadgets.  Apple's success is grounded in the fact that for most users (ie: the mass market at large), the iPhone is everything they need and want in a device.  That, and not the hardware, is going to be the hardest thing for its competitors to overcome.  Churning out features is what they're good at, but churning out well-thought out features, even if there are fewer of them, is what makes the iPhone great.

Vincent Ferrari is an Apple fan, videoblogger, blogger, writer, and all-around geek from the Bronx. He works in the IT Department of a cellular phone company that shall not be named, and lives in a very comfortable apartment with his lovely wife, two lovely cats, three Macs, two iPhones, and God-knows-how-many iPods of varying age.

[Vincent Ferrari]

When the iPhone launched on June 29, 2007, the lines to get one were tremendous.  I waited on line for about 8-10 hours to get mine.  A lot of people waited a lot longer, and in New York City if you didn't get yours before the weekend was over, you had at least a one-week wait to get your hands on your own.  No sooner did people get them in their hands than a disgruntled group of non-buyers began explaining to anyone who would listen that the only thing selling the iPhone was hype.  Accompanying that argument was the repetitive pointing out that there was "nothing new" about the iPhone and that everything we were seeing in it had been done before.

In essence, those arguments are at least partially true.  Apple isn't the first company to have used a touch screen.  For years, companies like HP, Dell, Toshiba, and HTC have been cranking out device after device with touch screens.  I'll even ignore the fact that Apple was one of the first to ever use a capacitive touchscreen on a mobile device, and is definitely the first to cover their touch surface with glass instead of plastic.

Many people who never bought one bemoaned the interface.  It was too simplistic.  It didn't offer "skins."  You couldn't customize anything.  it was just "there."  According to the so-called experts, this was Steve Jobs' way of ramming a user interface down people's throats that was his vision for how a phone should work and people had two options: take it or leave it.  Others bemoaned the lack of third party applications, a to-do list app, note synchronizing, Exchange support, a physical keyboard, video recording, cut and paste, the fact that it wasn't a 3G phone, and the fact that it couldn't make a cup of coffee merely by dialing it in the middle of the night.

Oh yeah, and it was "too expensive" for the average consumer.

By rights, the iPhone should have fell flat on its face from minute one, and if any of these objections that were raised were serious, we'd be reading about how Apple shareholders voted out Steve Jobs and cancelled the iPhone project altogether.  Of course, that didn't happen.

What did happen, however, was a minor revolution in the phone market.  Despite their lumbering nature, many phone companies were slapped in the face with the fact that their objections simply didn't matter to Joe Consumer (a distant relative of Joe the Plumber).  Companies responded, as they usually do, with poor knockoffs of the iPhone that completely missed the point.  Toward Christmas of last year, Verizon was touting its Voyager as the best touchscreen phone on the market.  "Touch does more when it's on 'The Network,'" the ads reminded us.  In the end?  The Voyager flopped.  You couldn't get one at all around Christmas, but you could easily get one now.  Verizon then launched the Samsung Glyde, the LG Dare, the Venus, and so on.  Again and again touting that "touch" does more on their network.  Again and again, these competitors fell flat on their face, enjoying minor success on day one and complete nothingness thereafter.

Sprint tried to go after Apple, also.  They launched a gigantic ad campaign for their Instinct, the phone that was going to knock Apple off its pedestal.  It had everything.  Turn by turn directions, mobile TV, picture messaging, and so on.  The hype machine was in full force.  If you got this phone on the "Now Network," you'd be the envy of the neighborhood, and yet today, a mere few months after its launch, I've barely seen one on the NYC Subway.  Despite the number of competitors, I still see way more iPhones; first generation ones as well as 3G ones.

How can this be?  How can all these competitors show up with more features on better networks and yet people are still buying the iPhone?

Today, on Boing Boing Gadgets, Joel Johnson makes an excellent introduction to a recent Consumer Reports article pointing out how satisfied iPhone owners actually are with their purchase:

"According to the 2008 "Business Wireless Smartphone Customer Satisfaction Study" by J.D. Power & Associates, Apple's iPhone - a smartphone with no turn-by-turn directions, copy-and-paste, physical QWERTY keyboard, user-installable programs, expandable flash memory, or removable battery - rates a perfect five-out-of-five in the "Features" category, winning out over HTC, Motorola, Palm, RIM, and Samsung. There's only way to interpret that data: for iPhone owners, Apple has provided every feature that matters, even if that means leaving some features out"

The reason Apple keeps succeeding where others are predicting failure is that most of the iPhone works the way it's supposed to consistently and reliably.  The UI in version 2.1 generally doesn't crash much.  It's not immune from crashing, but it's very stable.  The E-Mail app works.  Sorting messages, downloading them, responding, attaching pictures, and working with multiple accounts is all relatively painless.  Adding a new account is a click or two and a username and password.

The much-maligned "push" synchronization with MobileMe just works, despite some initial hiccups.  No complicated setup, no server adjustments, just a username and password and you're on your way.

Without going feature by feature, the iPhone simply does what it's supposed to do and does it really well.

Where other companies fall flat is that they over-promise and under-deliver.

They promise you feature after feature after feature, only to have a customer find out that the feature isn't that great.  They promise synchronization with your desktop computer only to tell you that you have to use MS Outlook on Windows XP or better.  They promise video capture and later you find out that their idea of video capture is 260 x 74 QIF video that's unwatchable on anything less than your phone.  They promise music downloads, but charge $2-$3 a track (or a monthly rental fee) and the "download" is locked to your phone for all eternity.  Lose your phone?  Tough.  They promise a "touch" screen, but it's usually either plastic (the Voyager / Glyde / etc.) or needs a stylus (Windows Mobile).  They promise "push e-mail" and then tell you that you need a special server and corporate e-mail.  They promise you a "replaceable battery," when in reality you won't need to replace it before your contract is up and you're buying a new phone anyway (and if you do grab a new battery it'll set you back $75).  They promise picture messaging, but then in some cases you can't send the pictures outside of your own carrier's network.  They brag about giving you access to your IM lists, and then tell you that every incoming and outgoing message will cost you one SMS message.  They offer 3G service, but don't mention that it isn't available everywhere and don't offer WiFi on their phones to compensate (Verizon, I'm looking directly at you!).

You're probably starting to see the point.

The iPhone's success isn't that it's another touch screen phone, only this time backed by Apple's mythical "hype machine."  Its success lies in the fact that it has a UI designed for your fingers, not a stylus, and the team that developed it actually had a goal of making the best and most usable device on the market, not the one with the most features.

in a few weeks, we'll see the launch of RIM's effort to climb out from sameness and produce something new; the BlackBerry Storm.  It'll only be available on Verizon at launch (wow, you mean a one-carrier phone?  I thought only evil Apple did that?) and will have all the features you've come to know and love about Blackberry handhelds with the addition of a web browser that's finally more than a glorified WAP browser and an on-screen keyboard that sort of kind of simulates a real one.  I guess RIM's assertion that no "serious business user" would go without a physical keyboard went out the window now that they're trying to cash in on the "I don't want an iPhone" market.

Will it sell?  Probably.  Like most "iPhone killers" it'll do really well in the opening weeks and then fizzle like a can of soda that's been left open for a week.  RIM still doesn't understand that features aren't what sell phones; well-implemented features that don't overpromise and underdeliver do.  As long as RIM is not singularly focused on the Storm, it'll be just another also-ran in the great dustbin of touch screen phones that never really attained mass-market appeal.

I'm not saying Apple got everything right with the iPhone.  I am, however, wholeheartedly agreeing with Joel from Boing Boing Gadgets.  Apple's success is grounded in the fact that for most users (ie: the mass market at large), the iPhone is everything they need and want in a device.  That, and not the hardware, is going to be the hardest thing for its competitors to overcome.  Churning out features is what they're good at, but churning out well-thought out features, even if there are fewer of them, is what makes the iPhone great.

Vincent Ferrari is an Apple fan, videoblogger, blogger, writer, and all-around geek from the Bronx. He works in the IT Department of a cellular phone company that shall not be named, and lives in a very comfortable apartment with his lovely wife, two lovely cats, three Macs, two iPhones, and God-knows-how-many iPods of varying age.

[dma1965]

I have been a diehard Windows Mobile user since the days of the first Compaq iPaq. I was surfing the web with my Pocket PC before anyone knew it could be done. I have had more Windows Mobile phones than anyone I know (there are 3 sitting in a drawer right now).

I could not understand the iPhone hype until I got one, and let me tell you it is not hype that makes this the best mobile device, bar none.

Sure, I was annoyed at all the new users who showed me their nifty new iPhone and told me that they could surf the web. Wowee! I exclaimed. I have been doing that for 8 years (9 years if you count my Palm Vx and Omnisky Modem). Get a real phone, I thought.

You bet I found it irritating that the new iPhone users had to show me that their phones could play video and music. Oh, and they could get email too! Eat dirt, loser, I silently sneered.

Just this past week my beloved AT&T Tilt decided to synch my Exchange calender over and over again until my battery died. I called Patrick Gilbert, CEO of 4Smartphone, and asked him if something was up with the Exchange server. He told me that there was no problem. "Great!" I exclained "Now I have to troubleshoot yet another Windows Mobile problem, because I either have to be tethered to a power line all day, or turn off Exchange Syncing, which means I will not get my email, which is my business lifeline."

Then Patrick told me something that blew me away. He told me he was using an iPhone, and would not go back to Windows Mobile any time soon.

Holy crap! Patrick Gilbert using an iPhone! I had to hear more about this.

He told me how pleasant the experience was, some of the missing parts, and some of the great parts as well. I hung up the phone in dismay, and went down to the local AT&T store to have another look at that lame iPhone I was so sure was for losers.

I asked if I was eligible for an upgrade, and it turns out I was. I was told I had 30 days to try it out, and could return it if I did not like it for a modest restocking fee. The salesman also told me that there was no way I was going to return it, because it is the best phone he has ever seen. Yeah right!

I really wanted to hate the iPhone, and it gave me plenty of chances to hate it. No copy and paste, no document creation, no ability to schedule sync times, no GPS routing application, and the list goes on.

Yet I dwell on the "minuses". The "pluses" quicky took over. Tons of free and useful applications in the app store helped. Applications to do just about anything I found useful. Like ones that found things to do nearby based on my location. Cool applets for every kind of lookup imaginable. Then there are the games, which I normally did not like, but look so good on the iPhone I just have to play them. Then there is the unbelievable HTML email and web browsing experience. You have to use it for a day or two to truly understand how marvelous this is.

Then, of course, is the whole multimedia experience. Applications which smoothly stream my iTunes to my phone as if the song was on my phone. Fluid video watching with no hiccups. Crisp photos and one tap uploading to my gallery on MobileMe.

Sure, Windows mobile can do most of this. But on Windows Mobile it always felt like a job. At least 50% of the time something that should work as expected fails miserably. On the iPhone, it just always works, and is actually FUN.

I need routing capabilites on my phone for GPS, and my Tilt is now no longer synching and is used solely as a Navigation device in my car (only until a suitable application comes out for the iPhone). It now sits in my car waiting for a trip.

Goodbye Windows Mobile. I am leaving you like a bad relationship. I must now look up a recipe for preparing crow, since I will be eating plenty of it. I am glad I downloaded that recipe search application from the Appstore.

[Phronetix]

I think the idea that Apple feels they know what people use and need, then they actually act confidently in delivering it is one that elicits two responses.

The first is outrage. A defiant, "you can't tell me what I want and need", somehow fed by the idea that Apple is unjust in deciding which features to exclude, or include. The thing is, if you don't like it, don't buy it. It really is that simple. I really don't have the time to listen to people bemoan the fact that Apple didn't do this or that for them.

The second is enthusiasm. I count myself in the category of people who feel Apple almost always gets it right. I am not offended that Apple has designed only limited ways for me to get things done, or certain software to use. It works. I value function and form over freedom when it comes to things like video editing, music playing and purchasing, streaming of content, photo organizing and editing, and PIM.

I have found that I would rather not spend the hours that I used to spend tweaking my WM registry just right, or taking Pocket Informant and decluttering it the best I could. Or trying to fix the settings to make the wireless work. Instead, I accept and use the tools as they are, and get good at them. The iPhone calender is adequate and tells me enough. It could do more, and I am sure will gain features over time. I am enjoying the light-on-features and easy on the eyes version. Same with contacts and mail. On the Mac side, I have now used the first piece of software ever to its full potential (iMovie08), and I have just bought Final Cut Express to start using.

I recognize that this path is not for everyone. I hate that people get so wound up on either the side that says Apple/Steve Jobs is perfect/godlike/worshippable, or that it is evil/arrogant/irresponsible. Clearly, it is neither, and it's a waste of neural activity to get so wrapped up in this, at least in my opinion.

Good article, Vince. I like your perspective there.

Dennis

[gmontielh]

I must say that I have not yet experienced anything like the iPhone. Like dma1965 I have been on WM until last year when I switched. I must admit the I liked very much the Blackjack. But the iPhone has been working fine from day one with my corporate email, and now with Exchange sync even much better. Now I have the 3G and gave my wife the 2G and she just loves it (but must admit she had a RZR which is unfair to compare...).

As to C&P through the year in WM I found little use for it and maybe because I found it cumbersome. Although useful when creating contacts.

I do miss Excel and Word document creation capability but I look forward for their versions to finally come to the iPhone (version 2.2??). I am not impressed with what is being offered for now for such programs in the Application Store. Also, as a former Pocket Informant user, I look forward to their iPhone version. Question is, will Apple allow it?

[Menneisyys]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

I'll even ignore the fact that Apple was one of the first to ever use a capacitive touchscreen on a mobile device, and is definitely the first to cover their touch surface with glass instead of plastic.

Are you sure about the latter? Most resistive touchscreens use glass on at least the WinMo, Palm OS and the Symbian platform. Very few use plastic instead.

EDIT: forget it, I see you referred to the surface of capacitive touchscreens, not the layer right under the resistive touchscreen. The latter causes a lot of misconceptions: while they're, for the most part, made out of glass, many people think they're plastic.

[ucfgrad93]

While the iPhone is far from perfect, it does what I need it to do and with almost no problems. I think the main draw for the iPhone is its ease of use, and the fact that it just works.

[Janak Parekh]

I would go even farther than you, Vinny, and say the iPhone doesn't do everything I want it to. Voice dialing would be a really nice feature. However, Apple tends to work by omission, not by inclusion. They'd rather do fewer features and get it right ("right" from their perspective, at least) as opposed to more. So, despite the missing features, the iPhone has worked better for me than many other devices.

--janak

[petvas]

The iPhone is a big success because it delivers exactly that, what the users expect: A device that works intuitive and combines a revolutionary interface uniting a phone, an iPod and an internet device. Safari is really great (ok, it crashes often but still it is much better than anything else!), the iPod is the best media player in the world and the phone feature is done very intuitive.
The user isn't confronted with features that aren't needed or don't work really well.
Apple has become a master in doing that for many many years. They have done the same thing with the Mac. They deliver features that are easy accesible and they just work. The user doesn't have to become a scientist in order to use an Apple product. Apple is really the only company in the world that has really understood the meaning of computers.
Computers were created to make our lives better and easier, not bother us with unnecessary, bad implemented functions that most people will find on Windows PCs/Mobile Devices...
Most hardware manufacters are really boring and they just don't get it. Microsoft is also sleeping...
Apple is gaining a lot of ground and if they continue like that they will become even more bigger.

To sum it up: Apple creates "experiences" (software/hardware) that work for people and not the other way around! Microsoft makes software that needs to be learned. It doesn't work for us. We have to adjust to it! They don't even think about the experience of using a computer/device. They focus on features but they don't focus on usability...

[dh]

I got my wife the original iPhone a while ago and it was not a huge success. She likes the coolness, but the device hugely underperformed as a phone.

Fast forward nine months or so and I took the plunge and got a 3G to replace my old HP6940. While the phone does have some well known shortcomings, I just love using it.

What clinched the deal was the ability to use third party apps to custom the phone to what I really need. Here are a few things I really like:

Reading eBooks on the SSSS of the 6940 was horrible. I've always been a big fan of the eBook concept and loved to read on my old Zaurus C860 with its VGA screen. Now the joy is back using Stanza which is a great reader app.

The screen is great for videos for our wedding photography business as well. Our customers tend to be techie peopel so we include an iPhone/Touch version of their slideshow all the time.

I'm waiting impatiently for the iPhone version of Pocket Informant, but Toodledo is a great task management system in the meantime. Even better, Alex has said that PI is going to sync with Toodledo which will be brilliant.

Janak, I'm sure that decent voice dialing is on the way at some point. Say Who? works pretty well in its limited way. The developer says that it is Apple's restrictions that prevents them from making it BlueTooth enabled and easier to use.

So far I'm really enjoying the iPhone experience and I can understand why it is so popular. Now if only Apple would make a version with a slide out keyboard like the Touch Pro. For now, there is much more to the iPhone than just hype!

[Joe Johaneman]

I originally resisted the urge to get an iPhone. I just didn't need that much power from a phone, or so I thought. Why would I need a phone that could surf the web and check my email, etc? I thought I just needed a phone.

I did need a music player, though, so I bought an iPod touch (after struggling between that and a Zune.) My partner already had the iPhone. After a few weeks with the touch, I understood why I needed an iPhone. I didn't get one right away. I got a MacBook first. Then, when the 3G came out, I inherited my partner's iPhone.

I'd have to say what makes the iPhone a success has little to do with hype. If it was hype, then nothing would have been able to convince me. Instead, I had been led to the iPhone through actual use of the interface (on the iPod Touch), and through the use of other Apple products like the MacBook.

I often hear Apple compared to Microsoft, and I think it's the wrong comparison to make. Apple is primarily a hardware manufacturer and they make awesome hardware, in my opinion. I tend to wait a bit, though, while all the kinks are worked out. (I take that attitude towards any hardware manufacturer, not just Apple.)

Now that I use the iPhone regularly, I wonder how I ever lived without it. I still don't really need to check my email while I'm out (unless I know something important is coming), but I've found being able to surf the internet while away from home useful. And it wouldn't have been useful without the simple power of the Mobile Safari browser. I had a browser on my Razr, and I never used it, because the experience was awful.