Apple iPhone Rumors Resurface

donkeyDevil writes: "Following the rule of 'i before e except before P,' rumors of an iPhone resurface in the New York Times (registration required). The evidence: OS features, foiled acquisition attempts, PIXO relations, and the genius of Steven P. Jobs. Unmentioned, Apple's tried phones before. PIE produced a nifty desktop phone design, Apple Europe produced some nice telephone-computer integration software."

Comments

Everyone's Desk

[MikeOttawa]

The thing is, a phone and a Computer are the two things that everyone has on their desk. Judging by their past successes (keyboards, mice) maybe Microsoft should start making phones as well.

If these companies want to compete in the future of VoIP, then they need to start building up their knowledge base now. Even if they start by building regular POTS phones, they will gain the expertise and experience of phone ergonomics and production.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Registered Coward v2]

The thing is, a phone and a Computer are the two things that everyone has on their desk. Judging by their past successes (keyboards, mice) maybe Microsoft should start making phones as well.



They did - it failed in the marketplace because it was expensive and offered no must-have features.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[ejdmoo]

MS has made a phone. link

Granted it's old, and not sold anymore, but you hooked it up to your serial port, and when there was an incomming call, it could screen it for you and give different answering machine messages to different people. Pretty cool.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

Who wants a phone that is as unreliable as Microsoft Windows, more user unfriendly than a plain old phone and Microsoft expensive on top of all that!

It even got panned by reviews in the press, which was Microsoft friendly at that time.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut up... wait.. because it's microsoft it must suck Get a life.. I bet you refuse to use a wheel mouse because Microsoft popularized it..

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Alan Partridge]

I refuse to use a wheel mouse because a mouse needs a wheel like a fish needs a bicycle. I fucking hate mice anyway, I use a Wacom pad instead.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is still working on phones. They do a lot in the mobile space. They develop Mobile versions of the Explorer (which used to be on the Sony phones) and they still have a product in the backpocket which they are planing with Sendo.They call it smartphone. Its not too bad http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/smartphone/default .asp

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

Even your Wacom pad could benefit from a scroll wheel... either that, or you don't use applications that have scrollbars.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Alan Partridge]

maybe it's your hands that need a scroll wheel then?

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

You are in a vast minority then. Most wheel mouse users flip out the second you give them a mouse without a wheel. This is especially true if you work a lot in Excel, Word, or a browser.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[wompser]

I actually have and use this phone everyday, and for as much as you might hate MS, it is a great phone.

It screens your incoming calls and announces the caller's name and number over your computer's speakers and a loudspeaker on the handset, which is cool because you don't have to look at the caller ID, just listen to the phone, even if you are not by the computer.

It also uses your harddrive to record messages, and it can do the multiple messages for different callers, plus lots of voice box options.

It organizes all your callers with your contact lists on your computer (outlook etc.)

Speed dial using Microsoft Voice, plus you can use the handset as a microphone to control your computers functions. Cool, though a little hard to use...

good sound quality and range, good battery life.

Call history, showing all outgoing and incoming calls, their length, number, etc. Useful if you want to see who called and didn't leave a message, or want a reference when you called someone.

All in all, it is a great phone. The software takes up a few too many system resources, but is very reliable. You can say what you want about MS, but this phone works well and interfaces great with Outlook, which is a huge benefit as far as I am concerned. It is great to be able to push one button and automatically call anyone in your Outlook contacts list.

Don't bash me for liking a MS product, I have yet to see one from anybody else that works as well.

Re:Everyone's Desk

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh, another Slashdot fundamentalist.
I suppose you want to bring back punchcards too?

Re:Everyone's Desk

[JasonAsbahr]

The only problem is they dropped support for it, so it won't run on Win2k, will it?

Re:Everyone's Desk

[wompser]

As a matter of fact, it won't. Interestedly, I have a Gateway XTV (their old 27" monitor-TV combo) which also won't support anything more current than Win 98 (not even 2nd addition!!) so it is a non-issue for me.

I wish they still made the phone and supported it. It would be way better now than it was several years ago. Oh well

Why not?

[jukal]

Nowadays, you can just walk to another company, give them your brand, and say: "Produce xxxxxx" of these. The risk is much smaller nowadays. If you go to a fair related to mobiles, you will meet a dozen of these companies. Same stuff, with different logo and package. If it works, they might take the risk to themselves.

Re:Why not?

[superdan2k]

I'll tell you why not. Because Apple doesn't produce cookie-cutter products. Steve Jobs can't just go to the company that builds Nokias and say, "Produce XXXXXX of these, but oh yeah -- make the case white and silver."

For Apple, it doesn't work like that. Not anymore. Apple has come the conclusion -- rightly -- that the ergonomics and user-interface are just as important as functionality. No, they are integral to the functionality of the device.

For most people this is so obvious that it usually gets overlooked. A great book that demonstrates this is The Design of Everyday Things -- if you haven't read it and are in product engineering/design, I highly recommend it.

The point is, what truly sets Apple apart, is its attention to detail. The small details can make or break a product, and they know that. It's particularly well-evidenced in their laptop designs and the iPod. If you haven't had a chance to play with either of these, find someone who owns one and spend 30 minutes of your life with it, and you'll see what I'm saying...

Re:Why not?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an iBook. I think the only thing that makes it stand out is the battery last longer and the machine comes out of sleep in a second. Those are directed related to the chip design and architecture. Attention to what detail? The case gets scratches easily. The stupid sleep indicator drains battery. (How thoughtful! let's drain the battery when the battery is low!) If you mean gadgets, yeah Apple has gadgets. Lots of pretty bells and whistles. It's what makes and breaks Apple. When people have money, they can buy gadgets. When everybody's laid off, Apple gets in trouble.

Re:Why not?

[D_Fresh]

If Apple does this, expect a device that seems like other consolidated gadgets, e.g. Handspring's Treo, but upon closer examination is different in subtle but crucial ways. I don't think they'll veer from the basic iPod formula much - they'll start with a technology that's up-and-coming, like iPod's tiny HD, support it with a thoughtful combination of hardware and software, like firewire and iTunes, and they'll create a device that is so useful and good-looking we'll all wonder why nobody thought of it before. Only in this case the up-and-coming technology is Bluetooth, the supporting software is iSync, iCal, iChat, Address Book, Jaguar's Bluetooth support, and maybe even OS X Mail. Who knows what the cool hardware is - maybe there will be an integrated camera, or a clever way to use the screen, or a higher quality speaker, or an organic LED color screen. (The camera idea is intriguing, but that may end up being an entirely separate device - with their emphasis on iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto I'd be surprised if they haven't at least prototyped some combo still-DV models. It's not unprecedented, either.)

I don't think Apple management walks on water - any engineering company can create new gadgets - but their design philosophy and willingness to push beyond what's already been done make all the difference. Of course they won't manufacture it themselves - again, the iPod showed their willingness to admit their limitations. When it comes to consumer electronics, they're not a fabrication outfit, they're a design house, with an emphasis on integration with their existing line of software. I'm excited to see what they come up with next.

Re:Why not?

[el stevo]

the sleep indicator light? you have a problem with that? you think it drains the battery? sir, you are an imbecile.

first, there is not a pee-cee or mac laptop on the market without a sleep indicator. it's standard equipment, and has been since the days of the powerbook duo 210 (c. 1991).

second, do you really think that a tiny pulsing led, drawing a fraction of a watt of energy and well under a volt of electricity, would really have much of any effect on a 47 watt-hour (55 wh on the 14.1 inch model) lithium-ion battery? that is, unless that green led is actually a super-tiny halogen bulb fresh out of apple's skunkworks.

think about it. dummy.

--------
i hate stupid people

Re:Why not?

[evocate]

Yeah, Apple has this crazy notion these days that the best way to stay in business is to offer something of value. Like a "new idea" or a "better way" or something. What a wacko that Jobs is trying to build Apple back with concepts like that. When are those guys gonna wake up and realize that this is America! Consumers here don't care anything about style or status or comfort. If it ain't a noisy clunky beige box just like everyone else's, it ain't gonna sell. Next thing ya know, they'll be trying to do the whole PVR/MSNtv thing, only they'll want to it "the right way". Sheesh.

Re:Why not?

[User 956]

I'll tell you why not. Because Apple doesn't produce cookie-cutter products. Steve Jobs can't just go to the company that builds Nokias and say, "Produce XXXXXX of these, but oh yeah -- make the case white and silver."

Isn't that exactly what he does with computers? What makes you think he wouldn't do the same thing with phones?

Oh, that's right, you're stuck in Jobs' Reality Distortion Field.

Sub-par performance, sluggish UI, overpriced commodity hardware, DDR mated to an outdated SDR bus... It's crap, but it's not cookie-cutter crap, so that magically makes it a good product?

Interesting discussion on the register.

[Matthias Wiesmann]

There is an intersting discussion about this in the register. To summarise, it makes little sense for Apple to design and build its own phone - a partnership with Sony and Ericson would be more reasonable. Designing and builind a portable phone is much more expensive that building a MP3 player. All Apple wants is to integrate the phone into their digital hub.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[Mr_Silver]

To summarise, it makes little sense for Apple to design and build its own phone - a partnership with Sony and Ericson would be more reasonable.

Just so long as neither Sony nor Ericsson have any input what-so-ever when it comes to the user interface.

I've used plenty of their phones (including the joint venture T68i) and without sounding rude, their interface has been designed by the technical for the technical. Slashdot readers may have no problem with it - but it's not particulary nice, structured or clean compared to Nokia's.

Mind you, to be honest, I'd rather Apple work on a PDA over a phone since I find Palm woefully slow and behind the times (still no built in bluetooth, limited OS means a requirement to install 20 odd "hacks" and a tonne of replacement apps to get something a bit more flexible) and PPC overkill, buggy, complex and horribly unstable.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[ptomblin]

Just so long as neither Sony nor Ericsson have any input what-so-ever when it comes to the user interface.

Read the referenced article. It says that the most likely candidate for cross licensing is one of the phones based on the Symbian platform, such as the P800 which is a pleasant piece of eye-candy. It's also the phone that Jobs invited Sony to demo at MacWorld Expo and the WWDC.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[imperator_mundi]

But a cell phone with a little Mac look and feel could be a massive hit. Til now only Nokia developed its prouct line with a little coherence in what is design and interface, the others changed radically all the ui paradigms and the look many, many times.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[Anonymous Coward]

It is ALL about the user experience, otherwise we would all be using Windows CE. Rememeber the original CE-experience, a "mini-desktop"? Yikes!

That is the reason why there's UI designers, not just GUI designers. Ever tried an iPod? It is outstanding, a mini-GUI AND a new input device, the thumbwheel. This is the reason why it is marketed as a special-purpose device for music browsing (wheel) and playing (click). You cannot simply "fold" these functions into a PDA, where you need a keyboard or pen.

I want to see Apple (or anyone) give a try to a new user experience for phones and PDAs. Everything else out there sucks.

I highly recommend reading The Humane Interface by Jeff Raskin, http://www.jefraskin.com

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[faichai]

Too true. This fits in well with Apple's digital hub theme.

Through Symbian and through the use of standards such as SyncML (that allow syncing of contacts and lots more besides over normal TCP/IP) Apple has a more or less a single partner to work with that enables compatibility with a whole raft of manufacturers including Sony Ericson, Nokia, Panasonic, Siemens and Samsung, who co-own or partner with Symbian.

Furthermore, if they really do not see current phones offering what they expect (and for apple these are mostly UI related shortfalls), then the Symbian OS is the perfect platform for building a Mobile UI on as all the telecoms and networking functionality is already present, and is in fact how Symbian OS is marketed. Partners license the core parts of the OS, then slap a UI on to allow for product differentiation and boom they have a product.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[scoove]

it makes little sense for Apple to design and build its own phone

And even less sense for them to dillute their focus. This annoying "I wanna be a Cowboy when I grow up... no, a Fireman... no, an Astronaut..." peter pan vision of Apple is greatly responsible for their marketshare decimation over years (and is directly responsible for why I ban their products in my company).

Purists might trace it back to how the Apple II line was killed (yes, I bought a IIgs and was foolish enough to buy Macs after that).

Then there was the Quicktake camera. "We're an imaging company" said Apple, playing line extension on its command of the graphic design world. Oh, except they killed that too. I've got one in my desk drawer downstairs.

Then there was the Newton, which I bought unit #2 in my state (second in line behind my friend who got #1). Personal computing to the nth degree. One man, one Newton. Nice ads. Nice vision. Then they killed it.

And yet I still wanted to believe. Yes, I bought NeXTStep Intel, honestly believing Jobs was brilliant and it was the Apple corporate bozos that were fools. And I also bought WebObjects, another overpriced and undersupported product (6 months and zero support... dropped it and shifted to a Microsoft platform and we shipped in 3 months).

After personally experiencing numerous cases of product infanticide, and getting tired of wasted funds on an structurally immature and disfunctional company, I booted my Macs and left Apple.

I'd expect an Apple IP Phone to last no longer than a Newton (before Jobs gets bored and decides to take another course). Another pile of Apple-branded junk for the computer salvege lot...

partnership with Sony and Ericson would be more reasonable

or Nokia. Actually, Sony's recent efforts (outside of their audio products like walkman) have been disappointing. Sony laptops, schlocked up in what is supposed to be 'applianceware' design, have none of the ruggedness and reliability one would expect from the makers of the Walkman. In fact, having assumed a few dozen of the laptops from a previous corporate buyer, not one of them lasted more than a year from normal year. Compaqs and HP laptops did just fine.

If Apple wants to play it right (they won't), try licensing the product from one of these folks and putting their pretty sticker on it for the 2% marketshare that buys Imacs, Icars (VW Beetle) and other items of its class.

*scoove*

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[clmensch]

Actually, Jobs used a Sony Ericsson T68i at the MWNY keynote to demonstrate iSync...not the P800. That is what you meant by "MacWorld Expo", right? There were a bunch of T68i's next to 17" iMacs at their booth to demo iSync as well.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[tswinzig]

There is an intersting discussion [theregister.co.uk] about this in the register.

Actually, you're wrong. There is an interesting article at the register.

The interesting discussions about those articles always take place over here on slashdot.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[Anonymous Coward]

At first I thought this read, "Sybian". Doh!

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[ptomblin]

I'm just quoting The Register there:
We refer to the SonyEricsson P800, which struck us with its Aquaesque eye candy (that's Thin Quartz). (See our hands-on here and screenshots here).

Jobs recently invited SonyEricsson's chairman to demonstrate the device at MacWorld Expo, and at the WorldWide Developer Conference disclosed that Apple had introduced a new common address book format specifically to make it easier to communicate with PDAs and smartphones.

I assume "the device" refers to the P800 in the previous paragraph. I also consider the distinct possibility that SonyEricsson uses different model numbers in the US and the UK (which I've seen them do before) or that the Register got the model number wrong (whcih I've seen them to before).

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[BitGeek]

At first I just thought you were a bitter guy. Then you mentioned WebObjects and claimed you couldn't do it in 6 months of WebObjects but you could using Microsoft tools in 3 months.

That's when I realized you were full of it. As someone who's used WebObjects, it takes days if not weeks to finish a project that previously took 5-6 months using the more traditional Microsoft tools. ITs shockingly fast.

Furthermore, I've gotten great support from Apple when I've needed it, there's a very active developer community and I've seen very few questions on the WO discussion lists that go unanswered. Even when I ask a stupid one, there's an answer, and often a tutorial length description from one of the WO engineers than hangs out there. Furthermore, the only reason ANY webobjects project is likely to fail is programmer incompetence. The tool is stable, extensive, and superior to everything else I've seen in the market. But it does mean you have to understand object oriented programming. Those who won't learn fail.

Anyway, its clear that you're just one of these PC users who has a long list of perceived mistakes on apples part that you like to trott out to bash apple whenever you get the chance.

I doubt you've ever used a Mac.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[Anonymous Coward]

Jah, thats not the sort of machine you want near your head.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[antijava]

The tool is stable, extensive, and superior to everything else I've seen in the market.

...and then they ported it to Java and it became buggy, undocumented, and indistiguishable from anything else on the market.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[SophtwareSlump]

Just so long as neither Sony nor Ericsson have any input what-so-ever when it comes to the user interface

Or marketing for that matter. Can't you just see a bunch of hot girls walking up to geeks in bars trying to hawk iPhones.

Re:Interesting discussion on the register.

[BitGeek]

The Java version is the one I used. It is not buggy-- I thought I found a bug once, but an Apple engineer showed me that it worked, and he was right, it was my bug. It is not undocumented-- I had no trouble learning it and everything I looked for I found documentation for (still do)..

as for indistinguishable in the market, clearly you have never used it, nor have you used the "competitive" offerings.

But then, what do I expect from someone who's nick is "antijava".

Apple Europe?

[pudge]

I don't know what Apple Europe produced, but Apple produced the GeoPort telephony stuff. It didn't work great, but some people used it. Some people probably still do.

Re:Apple Europe?

[cplater]

I used to use one of these, but not for long. They were analogous to the WinModems available for wintel PCs. Basically an A-D/D-A converter, and you CPU did the modem functions. They were slow as hell, but they did work. Basically, just a box that hung of the back of the CPU with two phone jacks.

I sort of doubt that they are working on something of this sort. The bluetooth integration with the current crop of SonyEricsson phones looks great. They would be better off with a partnership, than creating their own products.

Re:Apple Europe?

[pudge]

Yeah, I see no reason for Apple to make their own, rather than partnering.

Yeah, and the price would be....

[Brento]

Mobile phones are an extremely competitive market: if you bring out an overpriced phone (relative to the other phones on the market), it just plain doesn't matter how cool it is - you won't sell enough volume to make a profit. Makers like Nokia can afford to make uber-cool super-phones, because they enhance the company image and make you want to buy a cheaper Nokia phone. Apple doesn't have that kind of market model, so how are they going to succeed on their own?

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Corporate Troll]

First: Nokia are toy phones. I wouldn't want to be catched with one alive. I'm a Siemens fan, plain (not "uber-cool") phones with a clean interfaces and no fancy-schmancy stuff.

Personally I'd love to have a phone that integrates completely with my PDA (I have a Psion Revo+, and compared to any palmlike machine, the Psion really *is* superior...too bad they don't make PDA's anymore). So imagine a sleek (think TiBook metal looks, or iBook...I love the white), with running a NetBSD-trimmed-down-but-Mac-friendly OS and integrating iPod functionalities...all that within a phone! Hey, I'd pay 500 for such a thing. Good cellphones start at 400 anyway..so why bother?
And don't star the crap about: "I get a cellphone for 99 when I take a two year service with a certain provider". I don't care... Cellphones cost a lot of money, you are just subsidised by the phone company. Most people just do not realise that. I prefer to choose the phone I like, instead of taking a crappy Nokia that is "given away" for 99.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Arimus]

First: Nokia are toy phones. I wouldn't want to be catched with one alive. I'm a Siemens fan, plain (not "uber-cool") phones with a clean interfaces and no fancy-schmancy stuff.

My Nokia has just gone in for repair following an encounter with the floor. By way of replacement I've been loaned some crappy little Siemens thing... okay it looks nice but the menu system is not brilliant, too much nesting and hiding of options behind other options....

I think with mobiles, PDA's and a certain extent laptop/notebooks personal choice and tastes play a big part and what one person likes another with loath.

As for mobiles... I want a telephone that lets me make calls, receive calls and send the odd text message, the latest features, gprs etc aren't important and add more clutter. As for the trend to smaller and smaller phones I prefer a reasonable size phone that is easy to hold and not easy to bury under a mound of paperwork ;>

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Corporate Troll]

My Nokia has just gone in for repair following an encounter with the floor.

That is one of the things I mean with "toy". My Siemens S35i has encountered the floor numerous times and it even fell once in a toilet (don't ask). It still works as the first day. Now try that with a Nokia.
The menu system is actually very precise and organised. It has nice categories for each functionality. Things that are important are not deep nested and stuff that your really just need to setup once is way down there in the menu-tree. Sometimes it's better for newbies that they don't meddle with the Network setup of the phone (for example). And I like the fact that I nearly reprogram any button I like.
Besides, ask your Nokia friends to send you an picture to your Siemens phone and see what mess it makes (receiving 3 to 5 SMSes full of junk). See, that is toy stuff...Nobody needs to send images (besides that is why I think that MMS will fail).
Besides, I'm not the kind of guy that buys a new cell each 3 months because now cells have MMS or GPRS or whatever is funky nowadays. I buy a phone and it is supposed to last at least 3 years. My last cellphone lasted 5 years, and I only replaced it because it was impossible to get a replacement battery.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be caught using "catched" in a sentence.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Corporate Troll]

Not everyone is a native english speaker. So excuse me for not catching the subtilities in your language.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Graff]

Don't worry about it. The past tense of catch is caught. There are a lot of native English speakers who get stuck on that word. Some people just can't understand that this is the WORLD-wide web...

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Alan Partridge]

Nokia make excellent 'phones. My girlfriend has a Samsung which has an abysmal menu structure (although an excellent screen). I use an Ericsson T-39m which is brilliant - Motorola's phones are the worst I'VE ever used. They CREAK and just up and die for no particular reason. Awful.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

The past tense of catch is caught. There are a lot of native English speakers who get stuck on that word.

Are you sure about that? Maybe 5 year olds... and Cletus on the Simpsons. It's an understandable mistake for a non-native speaker because it's irregular, however I wouldn't say it's a common mistake for native speakers.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Corporate Troll]

Motorola is indeed the worst, considering the menu structure, but in no way the reliability. My first mobile phone was a Motorola and I used it 5 years long. I still have it (and it still works!). When it was 5 years old and I replaced it, the new Motorola's were still using the same chipset (well, the menu structure and display was identical). On the other hand, my Motorola was very sturdy...actually it was that heavy I could kill someone with it but at least it never broke.

You may be happy with Nokia...but they really feel like toys to me. Perhaps the high end ones are good, but the ones most people have are really substandard.
What I know about Ericons is that they are small...very small...That's about it. They are not really that sturdy: my brother bought two Ericons last month because they didn't survive his rough handling. And two months before that had one fail on him (not due to rough handling) in the first week after purchase (that's what warranty is for, luckily). Just because of knowing this stuff, I wouldn't ever buy a Ericson. Strangely enough my brother still swears by the brand.
You know, one of my friends worked for Siemens and he had -of course- a Siemens company phone. He switched jobs to General Electric (which is a direct competitor of Siemens) and now he has a Nokia...one of the expensive models. Everytime I see him, he curses on his Nokia and swears that nothing can beat a Siemens. A lot of people who I know that have Siemens phone are very happy with it. But perhaps we just value german engineering ;-) (I just checked, it really says "made in germany" on the back of my phone).

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[donweel]

The user interface for Motorola is probably the worst, but thier reliability is legendary. The old classic brick phone cold be used as a weapon and still function normaly. My Iden phone has been funtioning for two years. Recently it bailed out from my motorcycle at 50 mph, I recovered it minus the flippy lid so I use it hands free mode. Then there was the beer test. I bought a 6 pack, which I placed in my carry bag with the phone in, got home, handles where overloaded and broke, bag hit the ground. I started the barbeque got out the food, went for a beer from the bag, one had broken flooding the compartment the phone was in, the unit was energized at the time. The phone was dead on arrival, but I rinsed it with cold water, let it dry, then used it normaly the next day. I did have to replace the battery though. I think the Star Tac type phones are not in the same league however.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Alan Partridge]

> The user interface for Motorola is probably the worst, but thier reliability is legendary.

Tell that to a Startac user. They are SH1T!

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

"NetBSD-trimmed-down-but-Mac-friendly" would not be the best phones due memory footprint (cost, battery) and overall battery consumption.

Why not get your hands on new Symbian OS phones (ex EPOC, same as revo). Nokia just released 7650 in Europe. It includes all PDA stuff, a camera and a phone. A great phone. SonyEricsson will be releasing their answer to 7650, the P800 later this year (also running Symbian OS).

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Sentry21]

The Motorola V60 was $500 (CDN) when my friend got it with his contract, through Telus...

He's lost the phone. Stolen, he thinks. He's now planning on purchasing another one to replace it.

Don't say that people won't buy it. People WILL buy it. People bought the iPod, even though it was twice as much as a similarly-featured device. Why? Because it had Firewire, was small, and was easy to use. If Apple does what magic with the iPhone as they did with the iPod, I have no doubt that it will sell in mass quantities.

--Dan

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[bjb]

First: Nokia are toy phones. I wouldn't want to be catched with one alive. I'm a Siemens fan, plain (not "uber-cool") phones with a clean interfaces and no fancy-schmancy stuff.

Nokia might be toy phones, but they seem to have a much more intuitive menu interface than any other phone I have used. I'm using an LG TG-510 these days, and despite its solid construction and nice shape, my old Nokia was much easier to use and a little less "brain dead".

As far as Siemens goes, I like the company, but I didn't have much luck with their Gigaset 2.4GHz cordless phone at home. (specifically, why can't I pick up the phone line while the answering machine is running?)

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

> That is one of the things I mean with "toy". My Siemens S35i has encountered the floor numerous times and it even fell once in a toilet (don't ask). It still works as the first day. Now try that with a Nokia.

I have tried that, several times. The phone still works. I don't think it's fair to expect a phone to work after dropping it to the floor, whatever the brand is. They are not designed for that. If your phone works, well, you are lucky.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

A startac user is usually a one time user.

I have been using the same nokia for 5 years,
nothing wrong with it.
The sound is good, the interface is great.
Alright it looks like yesteryear but it does what I want it to do.
Give and receive phone calls.

Re:Yeah, and the price would be....

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple doesn't have a market model like that? Uh...how many geeks out there have drooled over the latest G4 tower, and then ended up buying an iMac because that's what they can afford?

Clueless

[ianscot]

The "evidence" in the article is insubstantial. Hey, Apple and Palm have had their moments of differing opinion: must mean Apple's developing its own PDA again. Anyone who looked at OS X and said not "This is a modern OS GUI over Unix" but "Hey, there are lots of features here that would make more sense in a cell phone," please raise your hand. We need to cull you from the herd.

The reductionism of the history of Apple to "Wasn't that Newton a bad proposition?" is especially obvious and seems like the sort of journalistic conceit that pushes faked-up drama in a story. I mean:

In a remarkable turnaround effort, Mr. Jobs has taken pains to distance Apple from the Sculley-Newton legacy. He canceled the Newton soon after returning and has pooh-poohed the industry's personal digital assistants as "junk" and worse.

The Newton might have lost Apple money, okay. But it lost Apple money for a variety of reasons -- among them the problem Apple's always had with supply chain on its products, and the way Apple collapsed in the laptop market for years before releasing the first shoddy Power PC powerbooks. To lump Apple's entire fortune as a company into that one product just to create a false sort of journalistic flow in the story is just lame.

Real story: There are some indirect signs that Apple may enter the PDA market again. They did once before, but they were a little ahead of the market and they eventually cut bait. Wait and see.

Re:Clueless

[Anonymous Coward]

He has a dildo on a bedstand in his ass? How did it fit all that in there?

Re:Clueless

[NoData]

Good points. And how has Apple distanced itself from the Newton legacy, anyway? IIRC, Jaguar will include their Inkwell handwriting-recognition software which Apple loudly touts as being directly inspired by Newton's technology.

Re:Clueless

[class_A]

Apple has recently removed all links between Inkwell and Newton in it's current marketing material for the technology.

Re:Clueless

[NoData]

Well I'll be...you're right! No mention of Newton on any of the Inkwell propoganda pages at Apple. I could've sworn it was there maybe 2 weeks ago. Apple's really good with the revisionism.

Re:Clueless

[xenocytekron]

Apple recently removed all references to the newton.

so:
1. they are ashamed of the newton
2. Steve Jobs REALLY hates it
3. they are afraid the bad hype from the simpsons will mess up their image

iPod and Palm

[jaoswald]

I'll tell you what *I* think needs to be done: integration of iPod with a full Palm OS capability.

One thing that keeps me from getting an iPod is that I already have too many damn gadgets that I need to function. Pager (work), cell phone (personal), Palm pilot, wallet, and keys. If I add a iPod to this mix, I run out of pocket space. And I don't want to clip three or four things to my belt.

I know that Apple is moving to include calendar and contact information on the iPod, but read-only access is not enough, and entering data through the five buttons + wheel on the iPod would be tedious.

iPod + Palm + phone *might* someday be even better, but a hard drive in a cell phone seems a bit much. I've never really liked the idea of being hooked to my cell phone through a headset.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never really liked the idea of being hooked to my cell phone through a headset.

Mmm...brain cancer.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I know that Apple is moving to include calendar and contact information on the iPod, but read-only access is not enough, and entering data through the five buttons + wheel on the iPod would be tedious

However, the resemblance of the iPod's wheel to a telephone dial indicates that integration of iPod and mobile phone could be a great success, especially for those a little backward in their ways...

Re:iPod and Palm

[jaoswald]

Well, I've always been skeptical of the link between RF at cell phone power levels and long-term biological damage.

The main problem with a headset is that you either have to keep the headset on whenever you expect a call and look like a goofball or fumble to put the headset on before losing the call to voicemail and look like a klutz.

Without a headset, I can just keep the phone within arm's reach, and grab it.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Mononoke]

I'll tell you what *I* think needs to be done: integration of iPod with a full Palm OS capability.

Look at what they've done by adding iCal and iDirectory (or whatever it's called) to the iPod. Looks like all they are really missing is a good input interface on the iPod.

I'll be getting an iPod to replace my elderly PalmPilot (says USRobotics on it, if that gives you an idea), because all I need is to reference my calendar and look up the occasional phone number.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

I wear a full sized headset at all times in case I receive a call (about 4 or 5 times a day!) and people stopped asking me why I wear it around. I think they just got used to me wearing it all the time. They say that I am special.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I can't afford an iPod, however much I might want one. I would have never gotten a Palm Pilot, until I picked up my cellphone PalmPilot for $110. I figured, what a deal! I mean, a PalmPilot for $110 is a good deal, but a phone included? Yeaah..

Well, the other thing was, I agree with you in that I wouldn't want to carry around a million gadgets. A PalmPilot/Phone/iPod device would definitely rule.. But only if I could get it for under $200. See, that's the thing...

Sincerely,
Durandal

Re:iPod and Palm

[Pyrometer]

Get yourself a ScotteVest

I have had one for about 2 months now and I love it (v 2.0). Typically I have my phone, access card, keys, wallet, PocketPC and my mini-disc man all happily in the jacket and without the devices showing to much on the outside.

As for the iPod ... I am going to stick with my Mini-disc man for now. My iPaq should see me right for a while ... now I just have to kill a few people so I can buy myself a Powerbook :)

Re:iPod and Palm

[creep]

If I add a iPod to this mix, I run out of pocket space. And I don't want to clip three or four things to my belt.

Get a handbag.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Alan Partridge]

It's European!

Re:iPod and Palm

[Nameles]

Better yet, if you're a business-type, get those slacks and khakis with the two pockets below the normal ones.

If you're a casual guy/gal, get jeans with cargo pockets, or get raver/phat pants, with so many damn pockets I can have my wallet, keys, glasses, palm, and my cd player in different pockets and still have spares.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Anonymous Coward]

Get rid of your wallet and carry a money clip. You'd be surprised at the difference. YOu probably don't really need most of the crap in your wallet anyway. Split your key chains into sub-chains and have a master chain with quick-release so you only carry the keys you need that day. Get the pager number to forward pages to your cell and ditch the pager. Then get an iPod. I have an OG one. it rules.

Re:iPod and Palm

[jaoswald]

After reading some of the responses here, I'm glad I've never seen anyone try to use Ask Slashdot to get fashion advice.

Re:iPod and Palm

[Elwood P Dowd]

Bluetooth earphone, dude. Stereo sound + bone conduction audio pickup. Wouldn't that be nice?

Re:iPod and Palm

[Nameles]

Remember the Emperor's New Clothes? If you listen to everyone else, you're going to end up naked marching infront of people that had respect/fear for you.

I don't care if what I wear is not fashionable (which it actually is, considering there's a bunch of Hot Topics everywhere. Sure it's not as popular as the preppy style clothing, but there are people that wear it).

total speculation

[GutBomb]

Of the 12 new OS X features the company has been emphasizing on its Web site, most would be desirable for a hand-held phone, including chat capabilities, mail, an address book, calendar features, automatic networking and a synchronization feature that will become available in September.

Um, as far as I know, most computers come with address books, chat capabilities, calendar features, automatic networking and synchrinization features. Does that mean MS is coming out with a portable phone just because outlook has all these features? This guy is TOTALLY grasping at straws here. iPhone my ass.

Re:total speculation

[Nutcase]

Just thought you should know.. Microsoft IS coming out with a portable phone. Well.. sorta. They design it and put WinCE on it, and others sell it. But same basic idea.

Course, you may have already known this and the sarcasm was completely missed. But whatever.

Re:total speculation

[GutBomb]

actually i didn't know that, but really, ms outlook has had all of these features for many years. the phone is coming now. with apple, these features could mean alot of things. why does it mean that a phone is coming? it could just mean thier os is trying to be better at keeping people in touch via email besides, the article paints the picture that OS X is being ported to a phone. Riiiiiiiight

Re:total speculation

[the way, what're you]

iPhone my ass.

Yes, but does it answer?

Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[mTor]

Check this: www.iPhone.org

This, of course, doesn't prove anything but it is interesting nonetheless.

Registrant:
Apple Computer, Inc. (IPHONE11-DOM)
1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014
US

Domain Name: IPHONE.ORG

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
Eddings, Kenneth (KE557) eddingsk@APPLE.COM
Apple Computer, Inc.
1 Infinite Loop
M/SAti 60-DR
Cupertino, CA 95014
408 974-4286 (FAX) 408 974-1560

Record expires on 15-Dec-2003.
Record created on 15-Dec-1999.
Database last updated on 18-Aug-2002 05:26:24 EDT.

Domain servers in listed order:

NSERVER.APPLE.COM 17.254.0.50
NSERVER2.APPLE.COM 17.254.0.59

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[TeamSPAM]

Okay, but does this mean that Apple is going into phone hardware (something like the iPod line) or phone software (something like iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, etc)? I would tend to agree with what others have stated. The cell phone market is a tough nut to crack. While I can see Apple creating a cell phone with some nice design ideas, how are they going to make it cheap enough to cover their costs? I bought an iPod cause it blew away all the other mp3 players I looked at. What is Apple gonna do with a cell phone other than the blue tooth integration I saw at MacWorld: New York?

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[richie2000]

And if you squint a bit, that G4 looks kinda like a cellphone! :-)

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[mTor]

"What is Apple gonna do with a cell phone other than the blue tooth integration I saw at MacWorld: New York?"

Steve Jobs has repeatedly said that he doesn't believe that PDAs (as we know them) will remain viable (as a market) that long. He believes that PDAs will merge with cell phones.

That said, I'd speculate that iPhone will be three devices in one: cell phone, PDA and an MP3 player.

Apple needs to combine their Newton tech (some of which, handwriting recognition, was reborn in Jaguar as Ink), the cell phone tech (as the article mentions, you can buy a chipset for around $50 that will do all of the advanced cell phone functions) and their iPod MP3 playing tech.

Combine that with Apple's UI, Apple's design and MacOS integration (iSync is just a start) and Apple will have another hit on their hands.

Cheers.

Disclaimer: This is all just a speculation and extrapolation... I have absolutely no inside Apple info.

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[King]

That does bring you straight to apple.com...

Intresting, Very Intresting

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[c1pher]

all of their domains that they don't use or might later, do that. (ie mammals.org too)

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[miguel_at_menino.com]

Apple having registered iphone.org doesn't prove anything.

Take a look at mammals.org . What does that mean? Apple is bring a new kind of mammal to the computing market?

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[Anonymous Coward]

You all forgot apples newest-soon-to-be-released product: The iToilet I already pre-ordered mine, along w/some fiber, and a copy of war and peace!

Re:Another piece of evidence: iPhone.org

[Anonymous Coward]

Loosely speaking, mammals relates to the whole Darwin metaphor.

OS X = Darwin, MS = Dinosaur, Mammals = the furry & cuddly products that evolve under the dinosaurs very feet. (And who plays the asteroid??)

Take a crack at it, why not...

[Launch]

Apple recently has proved their masterism of the UI in portible devices with the iPod.

Now many people have tried making PDA/Cell combinations, but few have stood out among the crowd (who know's how Nokia's new phone will play out).

Apple is a company that if everything went right and they developed a good product then they might have a real shot at being that de facto Cell/PDA combo that people are looking for.

A few things they'll need to do to succeed. Don't make the iPod mistake, make this thing Win compatible... Open up to the open source comunity, this is the perfect product for the open source community to have a crack at. Think hard about "can this product make it if it doesn't use the Palm OS?".... If you use the Palm OS how much does that take away from your ablity to develope a UI.... Could it be a Apple front end on a PALM OS?...

Hey I know what every geek needs, multiplayer PDA games that we do via cell phone... that would be a hell of an improvement on IR pong.

Re:Take a crack at it, why not...

[mccalli]

Don't make the iPod mistake, make this thing Win compatible...

Err....mistake? From whose viewpoint? Apple got to service their customers first, got a cool product to entice the OS-agnostic to their machines for a while, and then once demand had died down a bit they added Win compatibility and now have access to that market too.

I don't see much in the way of a mistake being made there.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Take a crack at it, why not...

[Launch]

A mistake from Apples POV.

IMHO I think they could have sold more units by offering it to the windows market.

I'm all for costomer loyality... and I'm sure mac users appericated it being a 'mac product'... but in the cell phone market it's a war... I don't have a mac box, and I wouldn't buy one to use a PDA/Cell phone... In the fight for customers a company needs to accomidate.

Cheers,
Jon

Re:Take a crack at it, why not...

[mccalli]

IMHO I think they could have sold more units by offering it to the windows market.

I agree, but in the beginning they didn't have more units to sell. Production was soaked up entirely by demand from Mac users. Well, Mac users and me that is - I went the XPlay beta route in order to use it on Windows.

When demand slackened a little, they introduced the Windows compatibility to expand the number of people they could sell to.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Take a crack at it, why not...

[sjlutz]

Another important criteria for their success in this? Do not make it cost 3 to 4 times an equivalent device.

I.P.Freely

[clickety6]

News Flash: After the iPod, iMac, iTunes, etc. etc., Steve Jobs today announced that from today he will be officially refering to himself as iI.

Re:I.P.Freely

[gaudior]

THANKS A LOT!

I just spewed coffee all over myself. I did manage to miss my iBook, but that's the only thing that's still clean.

Re:I.P.Freely

[Anonymous Coward]

He already used to be called the iCEO, which was way back in 1997/8.

Re:I.P.Freely

[cbuskirk]

Why not? When he first came back he called himselft the iCEO.

iPod

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone know how much audio can fit on an iPod. I just got a 12 hour book from an audio book store in Raleigh, and I was wondering if it would fit on the iPod.

Re:iPod

[mccalli]

How much can be stored in total depends on the model, but you will definitely be able to fit your book on there.

I have a 5Gig model, and compressed the BBC's Lord of the Rings series (13 hours) using 96 bit rate MP3 - the whole thing fitted fine. Mind you, I eventually chose to just keep three episodes on at a time - after all I was unlikely to listen to the whole thing straight through without pause.

Cheers,
Ian

Palm and the future...

[MosesJones]

Palm is currently the OS of choice in a grand total of zero of the major phone producers. Symbian however is the OS of choice in pretty much the whole raft of them.

Partnering with Palm for phones would be akin to partnering with Suse for the Mainframe market. Apple are much more likely to partner with the companies of the future like SonyEricsion, or to develop standard extensions to Symbian to make all Symbian phones interoperate seemlessly with the Mac.

Palm needs to change, it not a reliable OS for phones to run on. Symbian is, and it has the backing.

Re:Palm and the future...

[DevNova]

Depends on your definition of "major" I guess. Kyocera's 6035 is Palm OS-based and its incredible. The Treo as well from Handspring.

OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[NajmAdDin]

I like how the article contradicts itself by saying that Apple would use a third party OS for the phone, but then saying that the features of OS X would be great for a phone. Which is it? Its not like they could actually USE any of their OS X software on the phone, and they certainly wouldn't be able to run OS X itself. I get the feeling the author doesn't have a clue.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[superdan2k]

I get the feeling you didn't read very carefully. The article specified new features to the OS that would interface well with a Bluetooth-enabled phone.

The thing is, right now, there aren't a lot of Bluetooth-enabled phones on the market. I don't know a single person that has one. I know I am in the market for one, personally, and if Apple releases one, I'll be in line for it.

Right now, it behooves Apple to release one, too, because the market for the specific product is wide open...and if they have a bunch of Mac users out there, looking at Bluetooth-enabled phones, they're going to want to be a player in that market.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[Fished]

The features of OS X would be great for INTERFACING to a phone. We don't need to assume the author is a dweeb.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[NajmAdDin]

Read the article again:

------------
While the software is being marketed as an improvement for desktop computer users, it could have just as big a future in powering a yet-to-be announced Apple hand-held computer-phone
------------

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[rbrega]

Sorry to contradict you, but--in Europe--we have a plethora of Bluetooth comaptible phones. The latest devices from Nokia, SonyEricsson and Siemens are BT-enabled. E.g. SE T68i, Nokia 7650, 6310i and many many others (really I just stopped listing them...).

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[Mikeytsi]

The ericsson T68 is a nice bluetooth phone, with the exception of the odd software bugs that my friend has been experiencing. I'm thinking about grabbing that and a bluetooth Ipaq, so I can SSH in to equipment when I'm remote.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[superdan2k]

No worries. I was speaking about my country... please excuse my blatant Americentrism. You guys and the Far East always seem to be about one step ahead of us in technology adoption.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[superdan2k]

So you're going to voluntarily buy a product even knowing that it's buggy? I mean, yeah, I can see that with operating systems, software, etc., but a hardware product with bugs? Forget it.

Re:OS X on a Phone, Ha Ha Ha

[Mikeytsi]

I'd hate to break this to you, but the Ericsson phone has software on it, and it's updatable. Welcome to the 21st century.

Re:iPod...hours? Try days...weeks, maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Try ten days straight, approx. (for the 20gb model) at the higher bit rates...supposedly the audio books will take less space than a premium (sic) MP3.

I heard Nokia

[linuxislandsucks]

I heard that Apple and Nokia were in discussions about this combination phone/pda....

But please remeber the companies that help out Apple before anemly , the software handwriting recognition company are now owned and controlled by MS..

Where is the software coming from, not APPLe they are not known fro doing high quality CE software with the exception of iPhoto

Re:I heard Nokia

[foo12]

Apple has its own handwriting technology, Inkwell, perhaps the one thing that they've held onto from the Newton project. The first versions of the NewtonOS had crappy handwriting recognition, but by the later (last) versions, it was dead-on. Remember, this is with actual handwriting, not a simplified script like Grafiti.

As for consumer software: iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, iTunes, etc. ,etc. --- all very high quality consumer software and free (beer, not speech).

Re:I heard Nokia

[rjung2k]

APPLe they are not known fro doing high quality CE software with the exception of iPhoto

You must be kidding -- even the dyed-in-the-wool Macolytes admit that iPhoto is the weakest of Apple's iApps. As good as you think iPhoto is, the truth is that the others are even better. iMovie alone is almost worth the purchase of a new Mac, and spanks the living daylights out of anything comparable on the Windows side of the fence.

the iPhone brand is already taken...

[i_am_nitrogen]

I already own a $400 POS desk phone called by the name of iPhone. It has a 640x480 monochrome touch screen. It was bundled with a bigplanet multi-level marketing scheme my parents bought into a few years ago. I doubt Apple would want to be associated with such a butt-ugly piece of hardware.

They'd have to come up with a better name if they released a phone of any kind.

Interested in the design

[Winterblink]

I for one would be very interested in a design Apple would come up with for a phone. Say what you will about them as a company and their computers, but you have to admit their designs are pretty original. People are pretty polar about whether they're original in a good way or a bad way, but oh well.

I wonder if they'll have Ellen Feiss doing Switch commercials. "My old Nokia phone went BEEPBEEPBEEPBEPPBEEP! It ate my voicemail. Bummer."

They don't care

[thatguywhoiam]

Strangely, Apple seems to somehow just 'not deal' with pre-existing trademarks.

Witness http://www.ibook.com

Re:They don't care

[demaria]

According to the whois
Record created: 1997-03-19 00:00:00 UTC by NSI

ibooks came out after 1998. Considering how that site and the laptop are quite different things, there should be no trademark overlap issues, but also Apple would have no rightful ownership over the domain.

"the genius of Steven P. Jobs"???

[Wakko Warner]

Jesus christ, people. Get off this guy's dick.

Repeat after me:
"Steve Jobs is not the messiah."

- A.P.

Apple and VoIP

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's certainly got something up its sleeve when it comes to telephony, but everyone's hung up on the hardware aspects - why not think about software for a second?

With QuickTime 6 (especially) the potential for clear, bandwidth-adaptable communications is right in the OS. Anyone who's seen streaming QT6 broadcasts knows that it's a quantum leap in quality over previous incarnations. There is a strong likelihood that some form of realtime video conferencing will be built into future versions of iChat - using Rendezvous and the Address Book to locate people across LANs and WANs, for instance. Now, eliminate the video component, and imagine those algorithms being brought to bear on multiple audio streams. You could pack quite a lot of conversations on a Gigabit Ethernet connection...and with the appropriate gateways, iChat becomes a softphone. I presume Apple is already up to speed on H.323 and its rapidly rising successor, SIP.

Furthermore, with the emergence of T.38 Fax-over-IP, Apple could integrate a T.38 client into the OS (as part of Print Center or a Telephony Center) to work with FoIP servers like XMediusFAX.
I've even heard that Apple might integrate IP faxing into .mac or OS X Server as some sort of add-on.

Future versions of Xserve might be used as VoIP gateways and softswitches - combined with the usual hardware from Cisco, Alcatel, Avaya etc.

If there is a hardware "phone" it might not come from Apple. Most likely it will just be a 3rd-party phone or PDA loaded with a combo of Bluetooth and 802.11g to allow synchronization and wireless "roaming" in-office, respectively. I've seen solutions like this (minus Bluetooth) running on Compaq iPaq PDAs, so there's no reason Apple can't do it.

FYI to those posting NY Times articles.

[burnsy]

FYI to those posting NY Times articles. You can get NY Times articles via the AltaVista news search engine and no registration is required.

Link to this article, no registration required.

Apple's Chief in the Risky Land of the Handhelds

But what network would it work with?

[patiwat]

The problem with phones is that there are significant issues of network compatability.

The US, Apple's core market, has too many incompatible cellular phone networks. Having multiple versions of the iPhone that support PCS, GSM, and god-knows-how-many-analog versions would be a pain in the ass in the logistics and product development perspective. Making a phone available only on one network would limit the market significantly.

Even worse, an iPhone would have to compete with phones given away for free from the network operators. The Nokia 3390 phone that Voicestream gave me for free is extremely well designed and easy to use - I don't see how Apple could improve on it, besides maybe Bluetooth PC-phone integration. But I would certainly never pay hundreds of dollars for that.

Re:But what network would it work with?

[Winterblink]

The US, Apple's core market, has too many incompatible cellular phone networks. Having multiple versions of the iPhone that support PCS, GSM, and god-knows-how-many-analog versions would be a pain in the ass in the logistics and product development perspective. Making a phone available only on one network would limit the market significantly.

Maybe that's the hook right there. Maybe Apple's going to make the one phone for all network, complete with software upgradable protocols? Is that even possible? *shrug* At any rate, that would be sweet if they could pull it off.

Re:But what network would it work with?

[patiwat]

Maybe Apple's going to make the one phone for all network, complete with software upgradable protocols? Is that even possible?

Nokia and pals would have the most to gain from network interoperability. They deal with interoperability issues on a world-wide scale, in markets besides the US.

Besides, Apple's largest markets are the US, Europe and Japan. Europe is GSM land, Japan uses a whole slew of network technologies that interoperates with nobody else, and the US uses an equally diverse slew but a generation or two behind. Develop a phone for one market, and it wouldn't work in the other markets.

If Nokia, Ericsson, and Motorolla could develop network/operator-independant phones, they would, and would invest much more money than Apple could possibly invest alone. If I were Apple, I wouldn't even try to get into that market.

Re:But what network would it work with?

[Winterblink]

If Nokia, Ericsson, and Motorolla could develop network/operator-independant phones, they would, and would invest much more money than Apple could possibly invest alone. If I were Apple, I wouldn't even try to get into that market.

Are you talking the phone market or overseas markets? Just my opinion, but I think the designs and stylings of Apple would be incredibly popular in places like Japan, where nifty design is often the difference between stuff that sells and stuff that doesn't.

Tired Anti-Apple Exaggerations

[feldsteins]

There was no "equivalent device." And if you mean costing somewhat more than a "less-than-inspirational-but-pretty-similar device" then don't say "3 to 4 times more." It's those kind of tired exaggerations that keep folks stuck in the (well-earned) early 90's Anti-Apple mindset.

And if you're going to insist that it isn't an exaggeration show me a device which was on sale within 3 months of the introduction of the iPod, in the same size/weight class, same capacity, same transfer speeds, which also doubled as a hard drive....at less than the iPod price.

No? Thanks for playing our little game. Next!

Re:Tired Anti-Apple Exaggerations

[56]

Archos had a line of hard drive based mp3 players out before the iPod.

And yes, it didn't use firewire, it used usb 1.0, yes that is a difference, but it was still a parallell product... which cost less.

You do have a point about anti-apple exxagerations, but in doing so you perpetuate the apple-zealot stereotype to a tee.

if they do do it

[banky]

Did anyone read the article about the design of the iPod? Apple basically bought all the parts off the shelf, with the exception of the case. They didn't build it all from scratch, and used existing parts wherever possible. So given the relative success of the iPod, the logical choice for the design of the iPhone would be to partner with Sony or Ericsson, let them provide the guts, and let Ivo dream up the nifty case.

Then consider all the new stuff in Jaguar. Some posters have said, "Like including chat and address books in the OS is anything unusual". Well, it's not... except that Apple is all about the "Digital Hub". What do you wanna bet the iPhone will have the ability to sync with .mac, downloading all your contacts and stuff? That's assuming you don't spring for the Bluetooth adapter.

The biggest problem with phones is they aren't like MP3 players, in that phone services are localized. You can't use your bitching Sony with Nextel, or whatever. If they want the phone to work, they'll need to have the best penetration possible in terms of phone use.

I think there's at least a decent chance.

misinformed

[evil superstar]

obviously you guys are misinformed. The product you are talking about is phone.mac ... it's one of those devices that used to come for free but for which soon you will have to pay hard cash. Other similar upcoming products are : bottleOfWater.mac, coffeeCup.mac and boxOfCookies.mac

Now that NY Times is a mac rumor site

[Tyrone Slothrop]

will they be unable to get press passes to Macworld SF?

Mandatory image.

[Mr_Icon]

It's that time of the year when someone has to post a link to this other idea from Apple. :)

Re:Mandatory image.

[cei]

Or their presidential candidate, the alGore.

Re:Mandatory image.

[Anonymous Coward]

You all forgot apples newest-soon-to-be-released product: The iToiletI already pre-ordered mine, along w/some fiber. This thing looks so swweeeeeeeeeeeet!

...not a lot.

[l-ascorbic]

In most countries, handset prices for contract mobiles are subsidised heavily by the networks. Even prepay phones are subsidised to some extent. This means that a phone will always be cheaper than an equivalent PDA. As an example, I just got a newly released T68i, off-net price ~300GBP. I got it for free on an Orange contract.

Re:...not a lot.

[Alan Partridge]

Are you another idiot who thinks that £17 a month for at LEAST 12 months is "FREE" then? And the 'phone is LOCKED so you can't use it on another network. Not too bright, is it?

Re:...not a lot.

[l-ascorbic]

If I'm going to be spending the money on calls anyway, I may as well get a contract and a subsidised phone. My point is that because most people will be buying mobiles anyway, the savings on a device by having it a phone rather than just an unsubsidised PDA are considerable. The economics of pricing with mobile phones is different.

Regarding your second point: yeah, the phone could be SIM-locked. Who cares? I've signed the contract for a year anyway, so why would I want to use the phone on another network before then. In fact, in many cases they're not really locked. Try swapping SIMs with another phone some day. You'll probably find it works fine. I always have.

Re:...not a lot.

[Alan Partridge]

nope, you're totally wrong on that. They ARE locked and Orange / T-Mobile / Voda / whoever will charge you a handsome fee for unlocking. Face it - the only subsidy going on with a contract 'phone is the one you're paying to the retailer and service provider - that's why contract users give them a higher average spend. Buy your own handset (I got my T-39m for £140) and then go pre-pay - it's WAY cheaper and the only services you miss out on are irrelevent crap like MMS and Wildfire.

Re:...not a lot.

[class_A]

Erm no, most phones aren't locked. Prepay phones tend to be locked as you can so easily switch networks otherwise by just picking up a SIM for £10. Most contract phones aren't locked and even if they are, it's only around £35 for the code from the network.

And besides, what's your problem? The guy made his choice and you made yours and you are both happy.

I personally prefer a seperate PDA and phone as I think they need their own distinct user interfaces and input devices. Seemless integration between all my devices, as Apple is providing with iSync, is what I really want.

Re:...not a lot.

[Alan Partridge]

I don't have a problem except with the notion that contract-bound 'phones are somehow "free". The "free" Mercedes keyfob that you get with your £50000 car is freeer than THAT, coz you don't have to pay Mercedes a fee to use it with other keys.

Just the facts, Ma'am

[freerangegeek]

1) Palm is tanking, badly.
2) Handspring has yet to support OS X native despite platitudes for over a year.
3) Windows CE devices are not Mac compatible.
4) Sony doesn't support Mac OS directly.

Apple's PDA section of the digital hub is about to get very sparse and remain unsupported if it doesn't do something fairly soon. Options are:

1) Kick Handspring in the nuts. (Please do!)
2) Buy Palm outright.
3) Convince Sony to play nice.
4) Live with outdated PDAs.

Or, in my not so humble opionion, dump the whole problem by making the right move and producing (either on their own or in cahoots with a mobile phone manufacturer) a combined PDA/phone.

Think about it, it doesn't make sense to spend time and effort syncing your PDA, your Phone, your iPod, and your desktop. It makes a lot more sense to start putting them into one device, and syncing that to your desktop.

Battery life is now reasonable to support it, Apple has repeatedly proved that the can put out UI that makes a device world class. (See the iPod). And nobody else out there wants to support Apple's hub strategy, they all want a share of the Bill Gates' market.

While I don't agree that Apple will likely produce a proprietary phone. They don't have to. All they have to do is work their interface magic on the front end of one.

Who care's who's 'talk to the network guts' live inside the phone, at that level, there is no differentiation from Nokia, to Erricson to Kyocera. What's going to make thing killer is a new 'front end' that makes your phone a better tool. And who's produced the most innovative tools in the last 15 years?

Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[jaliathus]

The funny thing about option #2 you list above (Buy Palm Outright) is that they'd be getting the BeOS this way too! Remember when they debated between BeOS and NeXT for the next (pun intended) version of MacOS?

Well, now they can have both!

Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[Ch_Omega]

"Think about it, it doesn't make sense to spend time and effort syncing your PDA, your Phone, your iPod, and your desktop. It makes a lot more sense to start putting them into one device, and syncing that to your desktop."

Well, Sony Ericsson's soon-to-be-released P800, will have both PDA-functionality(using SymbianOS 7.0), big(320x208x12bit) color screen, a built in digital camera, a dedicated mp3-decoderchip, a memorystick slot, and triband cellular functionality all in one device.

Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[kalidasa]

2) Handspring has yet to support OS X native despite platitudes for over a year.

Maybe not, but I have no trouble synching everything on my Visor Deluxe but my email with OS X using the Palm client.

Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[freerangegeek]

I do that too, but when it fails and blows away all my addresses, I'm gonna be screwed. And I won't have any support from the vendor to fix it.

Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[kalidasa]

Tha's why I use the back up flash, too.

Yes the genius

[feldsteins]

After all that Steve has done for the age of the Personal Computer...and all he continues to do... you go ballistic over a little "genius" hyperbole? Switch to decaf already, sheesh. The guy has some pretty serious accomplishments/credentials and merits a comment or two of that nature.

Who does Apple know...

[nadador]

that makes cell phones?

Everybody has mentioned Sony and (sp) Eriksson, but even if there was a chance in hell of this kind of product getting sold, I don't think they'd buy from either of those two. (Apple isn't selling its own PDA because the market is saturated and no one is making money. The cellular handset market is 10 thousand times worse, so don't look for this any time soon. Eriksson might make a likely partner, but longterm Sony is a major competitor in the digital-lifestyle space, so I don't see them going there. Eriksson or Nokia, maybe.)

Who does Apple know that makes phones? A company established in the cellular industry, maybe down on its luck in recent years, looking for a breakthrough product? Maybe one that sells things like phones and has been getting good press lately for Bluetooth gear seeing as how Apple loves Bluetooth. If oonly there was a company that Apple already had a relationship with, then we'd know who they might go to for this sort of thing.

If only I could think of a company like that...

Re:Who does Apple know...

[Anonymous Coward]

You know... Ericsson is called 'Sony Ericsson'.
Sony bought some Ericsson.

Re:Who does Apple know...

[dalamcd]

It's too bad that the general consensus seems to be that Motorola's processors and phones suck.

dalamcd

Hey, where's the standard mention here of...

[pjt48108]

The iWalk??? ;-)

How SOON we forget!

MS Phone

[wumarkus420]

I own a Microsoft MP-900 phone and I can tell you that it is one of the best pieces of hardware I have owned. I also purchased the CyberGenie (also discontinued) which offered USB/Outlook integration, multiple handsets, and a slew of other features, but the MP-900 was still a better product overall. It cost me $50 and I still use it today. However, I have to keep a machine running Win9x to make it work correctly (though it still works fine without a PC as a standard 900Mhz phone). The Caller ID voice announcement is CRUCIAL - while it's typical computer voice quality, it is very nice to hear who is calling instead of having to get up and look at the caller ID. Plus it makes my friends go, "HOLY SHIT, YOUR PHONE TALKS!" - they also like it when they hit the voice command button and say "What time is it?" and a magical computer voice gives them the answer. It was a revolutionary product ahead of its time and it's too bad that even with the cybergenie that nobody has come up with another POTS phone that interfaces quite as well.

Re:MS Phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a couple of those around somewhere. MS couldn't even give them away. They wanted me to take more, but how many do you need for a museum of failed MS products. The coolest T-shirt ever might be my "have a nice computer" Bob shirt. A combination of cotton shrinkage and pork chop expansion has rendered it useless for me, but DAMN my wife looks good in it.

Re:MS Phone

[presearch]

M$Phone nice? Please. It had all of the typical problems of
M$ products. Promising feature set, shitty implementation.
Sometimes it would ring and you couldn't pick up.
Sometimes it would ring and 95 would exception fault.
Sometimes it wouldn't ring at all.
Sometimes it would un-sync itself with the base station and you
had to do that strange mating dance with the phone and the base.
Sometimes it would keep recording a message and wouldn't
drop the line until it would fill up your disk and then crash.
They never updated the software from v1.0
When 98 came out, it stopped working and you couldn't
install new on 98. I wanted to write my own handler for it
to get around the bugs but despite of all of the hype about
a telephony API, it didn't use it and M$ never published
specs or an API or ActiveX control for it.
It set a new standard in M$ suck-ness. I was glad to retire it.
Piece of shit.

Re:MS Phone

[wumarkus420]

Well, you are already wrong about the software, which was updated to 2.0. I never experienced ANY of the problems you just mentioned. While the product's drivers ended with Win98, you should have tried upgrading your software before ditching your phone.

DoET

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the greatest books I ever read was that book; read it for a freshman HCI class, and it's probably the only book from that year which still sits on my bookshelf.

Who says it has to be hardware?

[ryanw]

iTunes,iSync,iCal,iMovie,iEtc ....

Not all 'i' products have to be hardware. I think it would be awesome if 'iPhone' was just a software piece to make voice communication on the internet easier and possibly integrate it in with one of those bluetooth sony/ericson phones. Now that would be awesome.

Ryan

A Possible Motorola Connection

[DLWormwood]

I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned that Motorola's past relationship with Apple could be a factor in this... Moto makes phone chips and could be more willing to put R&D into improving PowerPC chips again if Apple makes phones with their other chips. (Or Apple could go elsewhere to "punish" Moto for failing to abide by Moore's Law.)

In the Next-iApp-Department...

[Spencerian]

Apple announces their entrance into the bionics market with a new prosthetic for the rest of us: the iEye.

"We feel that a clear vision is needed in the synthetic vision market, and Apple is excited to bring a new light to users with vision problems." said CEO Steve Jobs at a recent press conference.

The iEye uses Bluetooth technology to mesh the camera of the iEye to a user's Macintosh product. From there, a second Bluetooth receptor disguised as a user's 2nd molar sends basic visual stimuli to the user's brain.

"We know that our vision-impaired users will give their eyeteeth for our new product." Jobs said.

International versions of the iEye include the PopEye (for maritime users with stronger water resistant features), and the EyeYiEye (for members of the Hispanic community).

When asked why the iEye uses a Mac as a "middleman" device rather than transmitting the signal directly to the molar-shaped receptor, Apple responded, "Uh...it's..um...a part of the digital hub...and...er...well, it goes well with...um...can we call you back on this?"

Steve Austin-style "boop-boop-boop-boop" sound effects for magnification will be available in a later package.

Genius Spelled "W-O-Z"

[Anonymous Coward]

When you refer to "all that Steve has done for the personal computer," you obviously are talking about Steve WOZNIAK, correct?

Because Steve Jobs is just another huckster who would be selling aluminum siding if it weren't for the ever-gullible 4% of the computer buying public who can be fooled all of the time...

Re:Genius Spelled "W-O-Z"

[feldsteins]

if it weren't for the ever-gullible 4% of the computer buying public who can be fooled all of the time...

Read the above and complete the following. "This guy is..."

A. "...clearly aproaching all things Macintosh in a level-headed and unbiased way and thus your opinion should be given due consideration."

B. "...obviously a knee-jerk Mac basher who knows just enough about the platform to knock it a good one whenever the opportunity arises."

Hm... let me think....

Re:Genius Spelled "W-O-Z"

[Anonymous Coward]

The best way to approach a new product like this is to build upon what is already there.
If you consider the iPod and how it could be modified to become a phone (make it a little larger and add the ability for it to flip open for the mics) or build on top of what is already there and just add a mic to the headphones. Changing the output jack to an i/o jack and adding the additional guts to the product would be a quick way to add cell phone capabilities to an existing product. make the screen larger, up the ante on the processor, flash ram, etc, and theoretically, you could make it a video phone or just a device for better games and perhaps watching video. go bigger yet and you could have a tablet. The deal is why not add the phone capabilities (softphone) instead of building a new phone. Just build a more versatile product, which also has phone capabilities.

Re:Genius Spelled "W-O-Z"

[kalidasa]

Yeah, last time I checked, Woz had nothing to do with OS X - and what's driving Apple's current climb in the standings?

Interface

[Anonymous Coward]

Boy, I hope they make the iPhone with more than one button.

"hone" is a word, too...

[Anonymous Coward]

It means "to refine" or "to improve in precision".

Think:

IP hone

an abandoned Rendezvous marketing idea, perhaps?

There *are* other interpretations...

Is this good enough to prove it?

[dotcomian]

www.iphone.org

Oooooooooohhh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Apple is making a new product?!?! It's going to be revolutionary!!!! Cant miss!!!!! I cant wait to have one of my very own.

I this , I that, I dont care

[bdigit]

IPod,IMac,IPhone,IToilet,INeedToComeUpWithANewWayT oNameMyProducts

Convergence - Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[jackDuhRipper]

Think about it, it doesn't make sense to spend
time and effort syncing your PDA, your Phone,
your iPod, and your desktop. It makes a lot more
sense to start putting them into one device, and
syncing that to your desktop.

For some people, this may make a great deal of sense, but my PDA is not just a contact manager.

I use my pda all day long. I take notes on it in meetings. I read news on it on the subway or the bathroom (<-- not always easy to tell the difference ...). I would not want my phone ringing while in a development meeting. I don't want to put up with the added bulk or cost of other devices vying for battery life. I don't even want color in my PDA (not until there's good reason for it).

I do want easy synching of info between desktop, phone, pda and music machine, but i want the best of each - for my use - doing each of these things. This should not be that difficult (there are enough data synching interfaces / ports on all of these devices), and my hope is Apple pulls it off with hardware or software or both.

Re:Convergence - Re:Just the facts, Ma'am

[NDPTAL85]

You know, with most of the Smartphones (including my Kyocera Smartphone) you can turn off the cell phone part while keeping the PDA part on. Or you could simply set the cell phone to vibrate. And not wanting color is silly. Stop being silly. Want color. K THX BYE!

Apple can't compete with Japan phones in coolness

[patiwat]

Japan's mobile phones are generations ahead of anything coming out of Europe, let alone the US. That's one of the reasons why Motorolla and Nokia haven't been able to penetrate the Japanese market at all. (The other reason is that they don't want to invest in network compability).

J-phone started selling phones with video cameras years before the Sony Ericsson T68. The latest lineup from Sony Ericsson seriously puts the T68 to shame. You can hardly find monochrome phones anymore - nearly every new phone in the market has a color screen. All those cool features that are being promised in 5 years from 3G (video conferencing, multi-player games, streaming music, Java, etc.) were available yesterday by au, j-phone , and DoCoMo.

Now I don't want to write Apple off just yet - Apple has a great brand in Japan for product innovation and design. But to think that Apple will come out with a phone that can beat the Japanese in cool factor (see the Keitai Gallery for the newest and coolest) is pushing it.

Apple OS 10.2/SonyEricsson and bluetooth

[sachemcst]

Apple is making progress towards this. Don;t know if anyone has seen, but the SonyEriccsson t-68i will be able to synch the calender, address book etc. in it with Mac OS 10.2 via bluetooth. Have yet to see it work in person, but as a Mac user it's enough to make me consider buying one as I'm looking for a new phone anyway.

Re:Apple can't compete with Japan phones in coolne

[patiwat]

Ooops, the "Showcase of Japanese Keitai Culture" is actually at http://nooper.co.jp/showcase/?l=en. It's a great site that shows the latest cool keitai (mobile phones) from Japan.

Not iPhone -- iPad

[ruzel]

Nah.

An iPhone is not just a big move for Apple -- it's a HUGE move. Something like the iPad would make a lot more sense.

Apple can create a web pad device that has mobility built in (thanks to Airport aka 802.11b) and because of the Unix OS features the device could just be a terminal extension to a large nearby desktop. You can take it into the living room and surf while you watch TV, or even talk on the phone using Apple's new iPhone program (with voice recognition no doubt!). They also have handwriting recognition built-in to 10.2 which is great for filling out forms while surfing.

The iPad makes more sense since it replaces the iBook as the low-end laptop and can be sold to Apple fans and new users alike. It's just less of a stretch than a phone and closer to Apple's roots of inventing new computing devices.
_________________

Did nobody here watch the Macworld Keynote?

[Anonymous Coward]

I watched the keynote. They very nicely brought out guys from Sony and Ericsson detailing about how bluetooth support for their phones are going to be integrated into OSX 10.2. The Bluetooth phones will be able to auto-download your address book, call screening, that sort of thing. This definately was a two-way street in that the phones were being made to operate with OSX, and OSX made to operate with those phones. It was Cingular network too if I recall.

Apple doesn't need a branded phone -- it's already partnered with people who have phones.

I agree with your assertion.

[elocutio]

In fact, it is in keeping with Apple's other partnerships in the digital hub strategy. Apple doesn't make digital cameras; instead, they forged a partnership with Canon. Interestingly, this is partly because of Canon's quick adoption of authentic FireWire, something which Sony refused to do.

Apple also doesn't make printers anymore. I kind of miss Apple-branded printers, even if they were being made by Canon and HP and stamped with an Apple logo. Apple dropped the Apple-branded printers in order to tighten the screws on Apple-authorized service and support, and it was a great cost-cutting move, in my opinion

Apple knows very well what overhead is involved in supporting a product that wears that cute little apple logo. I think they will choose their players very carefully.

Apple considered making cell phone with Newton

[aceop]

Just so you know, the last generation Newton was hardware ready to be a cell phone, in terms of chipsets and in the positioning of the speaker and microphone (diagonally opposed).

NYT Misses the point

[BitGeek]

Cellphones aren't about building hardware. Cellphone hardware is given away at cost (or you pay dearly for it, depending on your perspective.)

Cellphones are all about minutes. And that is where the competition is. The NYT says "building the hardware is easy, but building the infrastructure is hard". Which is why they miss the point--- apple isn't going to try and make money on cellphone hardware, apple is going to try and make money on cellphone minutes (if they even do this at all).

They would do this by providing an easy to use cellphone (certainly built by someone else and possibly co-branded) but would introduce some compelling feature that adds minutes, and adds value to the infrastructure carrier. And thus do a deal with them.

Much like they thought they'd make money with their earthlink partnership (which they may have, just hasn't been gangbusters, I bet.)

The iPod took and MP3 player and added three killer features: the useability of the wheel, the next generation battery, and the next generation storage device (a small hard drive.) Expect an iphone, if there is one, to have three killer features as well.

But I suspect that all thats going on is Apple is spending R&D money watching the market, and keeping efforts going to integrate the mac into the "Digital hub" of our lives.

When and idea comes up that improves this integration, apple turns it into a product (iSync) ... but I believe apple has realized that the Mac is the platform, and eveything should support that.

It will make more money, and is far easier to grow mac market share, than to enter a totally new market and try to dominate it. The Newton was not a bad idea because it CREATED a totally new market. But a PDA or Phone would be pointless until there were three significant advantages (like the iPod had) and even then the MP3 player market was tiny when Apple entered it, and the PDA and phone markets are already big.

Apple's watching the convergence and I'm sure product ideas are developed periodically-- I'm sure they've internally built apple brand/style iPhones-- but that doesn't mean they are planning to release one. All products from good companies go thru these revisions, and speculative development to see if there really is an opportunity there.

But the economics of the situation is that unless there are some compelling reasons to believe this would be very profitable to apple, they are highly unlikely to do it. Better to spend the time and money and FOCUS on improving the Mac profitability.

phone.mac.com

[vudmaska]

The hottest phones i've witnessed lately are leveraging services from the internet in sensible ways. Sprint services (All kinds of manufacturers) now have access to contacts in a web ui where you can input them or import them. The coolness of this(besides having an 'input' interface instead of a dial orsomething) is that once they are there calling them is as easy as - 'Call Heather'. I found especially interesting because the smarts that make the voice commands possible are actually on 'bigger iron'on the other end of the phone.

In short, this type of product will get's it's legs...(revenue) from the services it provides - right in concert with this .mac stuff ....

If I can access my mp3s, voice messages, email,docs(virtual harddrive) etc from WHEREEVER , you've got something special - just the type of thing that keeps Steve in a job.

Re:phone.mac.com

[Anonymous Coward]

Nextel has had this funtionality available for more than a year and a half. Why is this being referred to a a cool new feature?

Hmmm....

[NoData]

Is this what you're up to? :)

Text from lower right-hand column of this page:


BECOME A PR AGENT AND WIN A FREE SCOTTeVEST
We are encouraging all our loyal customers and readers to help us get some press coverage. So, we have a brand new contest. Here's how it works: if you send an email to a member of the press, AND they do an article on the product, then you get a free SCOTTeVEST. Some limitations apply, like (a) no spamming, (b) only major publications and Web sites apply (not school newspapers or smaller websites), (c) does not apply to any press that we have already received or work in progress, and (d) you must be the catalyst of the coverage as verified by the reporter. The first person who gets a favorable post on Slashdot gets a prototype of the next version for free (limited sizes available).

Re:Hmmm....

[Pyrometer]

Those on this rather synical world of ours might believe that I did, however I didn't even know that this page exsisted. After having to fork over $90 AUD to customs to collect the jacket I would have second thoughts of collecting one if I did win one :)

That is rather annoying, I could find anywhere in Australia that re-sells the jacket, so I order it ... and then I get slugged a nice customs fee. Quite interesting that the multitude of books I have bought on Amazon (go on start looking for PR agent competition there if you like :)) including an order that was more than the vest didn't go through customs. Maybe it was just the postal method ~sigh~

So how's Vertu doing?

[laz-e-boy]

Speaking of expensive phones, how's Vertu (www.vertu.com) doing with its gold-plated cellphones?

You missed the point...

[Anonymous Coward]

"[...] show me a device which was on sale within 3 months of the introduction of the iPod, in the same size/weight class, same capacity, same transfer speeds, which also doubled as a hard drive....at less than the iPod price."

The Archos is significantly larger and heavier and does not double as a hard drive. I'll give you the transfer speed only because not many PCs come with IEEE 1394.

One of the complaints I have when people compare Macs and PCs is that they forget most of the "cheap PCs" that they compare with don't have IEEE 1394, don't have a network card, has a WinModem versus a hardware modem, etc. In comparing with an iMac, for example, they'll quote the $699 (after rebate) PC special, neglecting to mention that it doesn't come with a monitor.

I'll grant you, when I get done configuring the "cheap" PC with everything that I have in a Mac, the PC is still less. But that margin shrinks dramatically once I've added the IEEE 1394 card, 10/100 ethernet, and a monitor with the same specs as the applicable Apple monitor.

In ignoring the capabilities, you perpetuate the PC-zealot stereotype to a tee. :^)

Re:You missed the point...

[56]

That's my point, actually. The Archos came out well before iPod - I believe it was over a year earlier. Yes, it was heavier (and it DID in fact double as a hard drive) and it didn't use firewire - but PC's don't come with firewire cards, they come with USB. And, again, it cost less. Do not misinterpret what I am saying. The iPod is a far better device, without question. Yes, Mac's are more refined and are, in my opinion, better - I use one at home in conjunction with Linux and Windows machines. If "ignoring the capabilities" is a trait of a PC-zealot, then you are the PC-zealot, not me, as you have twice now misread (hopefully intentionally) the specifications of the Archos devices.

iPhone name already taken

[kishkumen]

I work for a company that has been selling iPhones for over 3 years now. The company is BigPlanet (www.bigplanet.com) and though the iPhone is no longer one of our big sellers, we've had the name and product for quite a while. The phones themselves were made by Infogear, which was purchased by Cisco a while ago. For a little more info on the first iPhone out there, check out <a href="http://www.myplanet.net/computing/viphone.h<nobr>t<wbr></wbr></nobr> m">this link</a> which has a virtual phone. If you want to buy one, or see the specs on it <a href="http://www.bpstore.com">this</a> is where you'd look for it. Anyone think Cisco and Apple might duke it out over the name?

It's the PLATFORM, people.

[Jasin Natael]

I've seen a few short posts on the "Cookie-Cutter" implementation slant, alleging that Apple could just go out and have products made to fit its needs. Apple doesn't do that. At least, they probably wouldn't slap an Apple logo on it. :)

However, Apple may see a significant opportunity by providing manufacturers with a mobile platform, and a hardware reference spec. Microsoft already does this, in a way that not only does not compete with its core platform, but enhances it. Think about the following points:

1. Apple's Mac OS X is Unix-based, and is therefore (unlike previous versions of the MacOS), theoretically, largely processor- and chipset-agnostic. It should be able to take advantage of available hardware. After all, can't you already run Linux on an iPaq? Who's stopping Apple?

2. Apple may not license or co-brand the desktop MacOS, but there is nothing to prevent them from licensing an accessory platform. They cut the Mac clones for two reasons: Quality and Competition. Since Apple won't be competing with their licensees, they only have to worry about device quality. And not only can they enforce this to some degree through restrictive platform specifications, I'd figure the carriers themselves would help enforce product quality.

3. If Apple does introduce an iPhone, it makes an absolute certainty that all the features of the device will be available to Mac users. Imagine something with functionality like the Panasonic eWear -- MP3, HDD-based DV Cam, 3G wireless, internet-enabled PDA, with bluetooth to sync and Firewire to transfer A/V data with your Mac. iWear. There's an opportunity to do some very cool things and grab a lot of attention doing them.

4. Even if they don't produce a phone, Apple has still just ensured that their platform has compatibility with such devices. Sony-Ericsson is obviously more friendly to Apple now that their products are being supported by Apple. That can't be a bad thing. Expect to see more 'relationship-building' exercises to build potential partners.

What am I saying? Only this: The idea of Apple producing an iPhone is not ludicrous, but neither is it an absolute. Don't complain when Steve Jobs doesn't announce it at the next MacWorld, but don't dismiss it either. Apple, behind all their tree-hugging hippie artsy crap, IS a publicly traded company. Their goal is PROFIT. They are smart people, and if there is money to be made, maybe they can find a way to direct some of it into their coffers. I'll bet they've done more market research in this segment than any poster here, and certainly more than the NY Times author.

Re:It's the PLATFORM, people.

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a product out there called CyberGenie. It was made to work as a VOIP device before the company split and the Intellectual property is for sale now. A newsgroup exists that knows more about it at www.cygnion.org

we want photos!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Please show us a photo of this butt-ugly hardware....

iMammals

[commodoresloat]

Yes, Apple insiders have known for some time now that Apple is working on the iMammal in order to take the market in computerized mammals by storm. While they foresee many virtual pet applications, the first application of this new technology will be to replace the blowup doll. Here's a prototype.

P800

[commodoresloat]

I got to admit that thing looks sweet. I want one with PalmOS in it. And I want it for $200. Is that so wrong?

Overcome localization with GSM

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're creating a GSM phone, you don't have to make it work with every provider - you just adhere to the standard of a Triband phone and everybody will be able to use it! :-)

No...

[SPYvSPY]

...the P800 is not the T68i. And yes, Steve and Avi and the ganage were brandishing T68i's at MWNY.

Apple iPhones

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of THESE!!!

Finally! A picture of the iphone!

[teamhasnoi]

Here it is. I guess it was 'borrowed' from Steve Jobs while he was testing it.

Mistakes and moves

[fm6]

I think you read too much into Apple's decision making. Maybe there are people out there who bought Macs because, or partly because, they were infatuated with the iPod -- but I haven't seen any of them. Face it, the iPod isn't that much better than its competition. Not enough to justify the high initial cost for the unit itself, plus the additional cost of a firewire interface for the majority of PC people who don't already have them.

(It's nice that Macs have always come standard with fancy options like networking and special interfaces. But it's also why Mac prices are higher and profit margins are lower.)

If the internal politics at Apple are anything like other development orgs, it went like this. The FAT versus HFS decision was made by engineers, not marketeers. The marketeers either didn't understand the impact of this decision or were not consulted. Somewhere along the line, somebody realized that this was excluding most of the potential market, so there had to be a FAT version. But obviously they didn't even start on this until the HFS version was finished. (If the iPod had been less succesful, they never would have started at all. I'm still waiting for my Windows port of the Newton Development Kit.) This might seem dumb in terms of grabbing market share, but working on both versions in tandem would have meant hiring more people -- and development orgs are under a lot of pressure to keep their head counts down.

Re:Mistakes and moves

[mccalli]

Maybe there are people out there who bought Macs because, or partly because, they were infatuated with the iPod -- but I haven't seen any of them.

True, neither have I. However, I know people who are now extremely interested in the Mac platform whereas before they wouldn't realy have thought about it. So the iPod produced positive press if nothing else, and I suspect it did lead to a few sales although I have no proof of that.

Face it, the iPod isn't that much better than its competition.

Ah well, here we must disagree. For my usage pattern, which isn't that unusual, the iPod has no competitors. The form factor is key, not the storage. These Nomad thingies that everyone brings up are far too large to be used on the move. I use the iPod on the Tube (London underground railway), so the ability to fit into a pocket is a primary concern.

The FAT versus HFS decision was made by engineers, not marketeers.

Yes, I'd agree with that. I'd also agree they didn't start on FAT before finishing HFS+. Where I disagree is that the implications of this weren't understood. Bear in mind that these are physical units depending on a component (the HD) in fairly limited supply - Apple didn't have enough units to satisfy everyone, so they chose to produce for their own customers first.

working on both versions in tandem would have meant hiring more people

Here I again we must disagree. The FAT filesystem is a well understood thing, and their core OS is BSD anyway now which means they must have an implementation of FAT lying around. I run my iPod under Windows, and followed the XPlay beta program to get things working. On there, there were plenty of people who accidently formatted their iPod as FAT and yet still reported that it worked fine. I don't see the filesystem change as a major departure. In fact, I think it would probably make more sense for them to go 100% FAT.

Anyway, to sum up I take your point about the increased sales, though I would counter by pointing to increased interest. The othe two points, that the iPod is not much better than competitors and that moving to FAT was major development work I'm afraid we must respectively disagree on.

Cheers,
Ian