Apple to Become Wireless Provider?

nonsuchworks writes "Forbes reports on the possibility of Apple becoming a 'mobile virtual network operator,' or MVNO, in order to extend the iTunes and iPod brands into the cellular phone market. This would allow Apple to circumvent the cellular carriers who have so far balked at carrying the iTunes-enabled mobile phone." From the article: "It might sound far-fetched, but the pieces are in place for it to happen later this summer. Apple is already developing a hybrid iPod/cell phone with handset maker Motorola. And companies ranging from the Virgin Group to The Walt Disney Co. are proving that a new network model can allow all kinds of businesses to easily enter the mobile market."

Comments

hybrid iPod/cell phone

[illtron]

The "hybrid iPod/cell phone" this guy is talking about is just a phone with a "iTunes" on it. I put that in quotes because it's obviously not iTunes. It's a tiny program, probably Java, that plays Apple's AAC files from the iTunes Music Store and looks sort of like the iPod color interface, if the pictures floating around the web are to be believed.

"hybrid iPod/cell phone" Ha!

Re:hybrid iPod/cell phone

[Iriel]

then again, how often does a product sketch turn out like the finished piece? I'm not saying that everything will be rainbows and lollipops on the road to a cellular iTunes service, but that picture could have been made to impress clients and partners at a presentation while the gritty work is still being done 'back at the lab'. A java based iTunes emulator is still possible due to the cross platform capability, but don't sell the idea short just because of a promotional pdf.

Well since it is built into iTunes 4.9

[DebianDog]

Well since it is built into iTunes 4.9 I would say good guess!

The phone has been "ready" for a while now.

Re:Yeah right

[The Lynxpro]

"I think a more accurate statement is that they are *used to* two button mice. I use a PC at work (say 8 hours/day) and a Mac at home (say 1 hour a day) on a daily basis."

I use PCs mostly, and Macs. The single button on the mice infuriates me to no end. I like to use scroll wheels when I'm reading web pages, and I like to use the right mouse button to right click to open up other browser windows as tabs in either FireFox or Safari. And during that time, I don't want my hand to be on the keyboard so that I can replicate what I can do with one hand on a two button + scroll wheel mouse.

It also bugs me that the right button option apparently doesn't work in Yahoo Messenger on OS X. I don't like having to do the whole "control + c" to copy text from a Messenger chat session window to paste elsewhere.

But yes, there are some that do prefer the single button.

Re:Mouse

[jbolden]

Their logic on the matter is this.

Beginning computer users (beginners includes those who never become competent regardless of number of real life years they have used the system) have a great deal of difficulty with applications that utilize multiple mouse buttons. Because the apple ships with a single mouse button any program which expects to have beginning users cannot make use of multiple mouse buttons. The result is a less steep learning curve when people switch to Apple. On the other hand the other half of the user base is perfectly willing to install a multi-button external mouse and use context menus and or use keyboard + mouse combinations.

The result is that the system is essentially the same for advanced users however the ease of use is much higher for beginners.