Slashdot Mirror
Inside Apple's iPhone
DECS writes "Despite CNET's wild claims, Roughly Drafted is reporting that Apple's market position and recent performance show the company has the ability, capacity, and interest in shaking up the mobile phone industry. Something that service providers, manufacturers, and consumers desperately need."
You'll finally be able to transform your daughter into one of those silhouettes!
In an interesting turn of events, a product that Apple hasn't even announced is currently earning more attention in the press than Microsoft's ultra-hyped, astroturfed, press-blitzed iPod Killer. In fact, Apple's still unannounced iPhone has rocketed the company's market valuation to an all time high, meaning that Apple has made more from silence than Microsoft has earned in actual sales of its new player. After Apple's stock price surged to a new record high, it then retreated on further rumors that the iPhone might be delayed, only to again recover the next day. With that kind of wild publicity power, its no wonder that Apple has been biting its tongue. Unfortunately, Apple's silence leaves the iPhone-curious stuck with the writings of pundits, many of whom are bitter that Apple has repeatedly proven them wrong in their prognostications of imminent Apple woe. Kanellos Pulls a CNET CNET's Michael Kanellos decided to shamelessly open his Apple iPhone attack with a warning that his opinion was designed to "antagonize Apple fans." Maybe Kanellos should instead be trying to enlighten all his readers. Kanellos is certainly not the only writer taking shots at rumored Apple products, but his article, like CNET colleague Charles Cooper's earlier iPod Attack, is so consistently bad that it makes a great outline for describing what I like to call the CNET School of Bad Analysis. Kanellos starts out by inventing a series of ideas to critique: an imagined gushing review of the iPhone, then a hypothetical Apple colostomy bag, then invented memories of historical products, supposedly from Apple, including a "random video camera" and previous cell phones. Facts are optional at CNET, where writers can make up ideas and invent quotes to support their agenda. Strike One: Facts Are Not In Your Favor When Kanellos ventures into the world of facts, his arguments start to break down. He attempts to write off the iSight and Airport wireless networking as "would-be hits," apparently failing to grasp that Apple makes considerable money on both, and that that each is key to Apple's ongoing product strategies. While Apple hasn't ever sold the "random video camera" or "cell phones" that Kanellos seems to recall, Apple has sold generations of Airport wireless and lots of iSights, pioneering both product categories with higher quality offerings that are significantly easier to use than competitors'. Apple also leads in consumer brand awareness in both areas. Sales of the iSight, a high quality Firewire camera that is sold at a premium over the cheap, low quality webcams common on PCs, have only gone down recently after Apple built cameras into all its laptops and iMacs as standard equipment. Anyone who thinks Apple's Airport software isn't miles ahead of what's available in Windows or from third parties simply hasn't ever used it. Airport plays a major role in Apple's education sales, and is also tied into iTunes and contributes to the company's iTV product strategy. Airport and iSight are not would-be hits, but rather distinct home runs. There are plenty of failures and missteps Apple has made in the past that can be criticized, but confusing reality of existing products with supposition and conjecture isn't an honest or credible way to write news analysis. If Kanellos isn't aware of today's reality, how is he qualified to talk about the outlook of future products? Strike Two: The First Rule of CNET: Don't Talk About CNET If Kanellos is looking for credibility of his CNET article, he needs to stop beating up the ridiculous claims made in earlier articles published on CNET. His first was a January 2005 article that asked if the Mac mini would "spur a petite PC revolution." Of course it did in sorts, but Kanellos seems to prefer think Intel's AOpen rip off showcase didn't happen, and that the Mac mini isn't selling for Apple. Perhaps he needs a fact checker. In any event, the idea he's criticizing was originated by CNET. Apple never claimed that PCs in general would suddenly become small and highly integrated. PCs have been big empty
Sounds cool, but it sounds like another fad. Just like the RAZR was a fad and just like the iPod was a fad, this will pass with time, and technically speaking, it will be a terrible product, but Apple's viral marketing schemes will somehow sell people on this idea.
I can't help but think of how Apple's iTunes cripples the MP3 industry by restricting use with proprietary formats. Maybe we'll see the same traits with the iPhone. I can see it now... only being able to make calls to other iPhones. Brilliant!
even Digg knows not to take this trash website seriously
The problem is cell providers who make most phones ones that force you to pay ridiculous fees for things that you should be able to get for free (like ringtones, backgrounds, etc). This is the reason why apply had problems with the iPhone the first time around, because the cell companies wanted to charge people for being able to transfer songs to their phones.
For me VOIP on a PDA is the way to go. Works great with with my wireless broadband, or wi-fi hot-spots if they are around. Not the most reliable setup for incoming calls, but having a $10/month pager solves that problem.
Apple sells form, not function. They sell image.
Why doesn't the iPod publish audio specs? Because it under performs compared to every other player in the market. How does a minor upgrade in processors constitute a 37% increase in speed?
Expect the iMobile (not iPhone, remember) to be expensive, poorly integrated with service providers (or an MVNO) and a mediocre phone / mediocre mp3 player.
But it'll have HYPE, and so it'll sell. That iPod you just bought your kids for Christmas will be old hat, and the new iMobile make phone calls, text message badly, shoot crappy pictures, and make the cheerleader want to go out with you.
Or at least that's what the ads will say. Maybe I'm just too jaded to bite into the Apple hype. Too many worms.
..but TFA sports a case of roughly-drafted-itis in my opinion. While making a good point that Apple could do better and be more flexible in its approach than any of the old mobile dinosaurs, it could have been said in a much more compact way - without nice stock charts and raves about 'Apple doing better than any other tech company'
It wont be called iPhone because Cisco/Linksys has already released one and owns the trademark for iPhone. The Canadian trademark is controlled by Comwave, I believe (someone linked to them defending the trademark against Apple in another article but I can't find it now).
MacPhone perhaps? That seems to be more in line with some of their recent naming conventions as well.
If the phone is affordable, and for me, that means > $200, and can store at least a gig of music, then I'm down with it. I haven't bought an iPod yet- why cut into my reading time on the subway? But if it works well AS A PHONE, it gets my vote. The phone market is flooded with cheap, useful phones and expensive phones with tons of features I don't really use. If Apple can give it a useful interface, integrate it well with the computer (I use an apple, but it would be stupid to ignore the PC market), then it's ten steps ahead of everyone else.
Unfortunately, I think the price probably won't break $300, and will possibly be more than that. For all that I like their stuff, new, it ain't cheap. As for integration with iTunes DRM, who cares? As long as it lets me move songs from my library to the phone, I could care less.
Are they going to building a new competing cell network? Are they going to lower the cost of airtime? Cheap flat rates for unlimited plans?
If not, all they're doing is releasing a new phone. Hella cool or not, it's still just going to be a new phone.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
The RAZR is the most popular cell phone in the US, and the newest version (available in the US through Cingular) interfaces directly with iTunes. This is a much nicer phone than the ROKR and comes with a 512MB microsd card (see review). Although it has the restriction of only holding 100 songs, this is about what will fit on the included memory card. I have one and I find it a compelling alternative to carrying around a separate nano. I'm not sure why people are so dismissive of this.
Is that all the service providers want to wall you off in their own little managed garden.
For obvious reasons, Apple isn't likely to solve this problem.
Really? It doesn't look like it though. Most people happily live with vendor lock-ins and keep paying ridicuolus fees for what should have been free or affordable (2$ for ringtone while keeping users form uploading their own files? Come on, how much does it cost to show caller ID?, and don't even get me started on data packet rate). Service providers are happy with the status quo because they are in the driver's seats. Perhaps phone manufacturers want some change, but definetely not the services providers and (most) consumers.
Oh well. At least he gets some ad revenue out of the Slashdotting. Maybe he's not such a dolt after all.
The article(s) don't have any substantial new information. They're just wishful thinking on behalf of the author.
The cellphone industry is an offshoot of the telco industry, and you'll have to look long and hard to find something more difficult to change. That industry predates the personal computer industry. It benefits from network effects and local near-monopolies, from massive lock-in and from being the gatekeeper to something that people want to do: make phone calls.
Note that I'm not saying that the industry shouldn't change, or that it won't. I'm just skeptical that Apple will do the changing, in a way that's profitable to them.
Ask not what GNU can do for you, but what you can do for GNU.
Please stop linking to these silly Roughly drafted articles.
Sure, the layout may be easy to read but that doesn't mean the articles contain any insights.
The author gives macfanbois a really bad name......
Because they make cool, functionnal, well designed devices and don't care about things like software patents and DRMs.
Be careful, be very careful...
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Is it me or the chick who wrote the article looks real hot ? Refer http://www.forbes.com/fdc/bios/new/rachelrosmarin. html
When kids today say bad, they mean good.
This story's summary doesn't make it clear that the submitter, DECS, is the article's author, Daniel Eran. A quick look at his comment history and articles on his Mac-biased site show an annoying tendency to attack Apple criticisms by building strawmen.
After 5 generations, Apple still haven't figured out how to put a plain old FM radio into their iPod. Wouldn't a phone be a much more complex proposition?
iPhone is a (Tm) owned by Cisco. I sincerely doubt Apple will butt heads in court with Cisco (although any smaller and maybe).
Just because morons are hooked on calling everything Apple does i-this and i-that doesn't make it right or even possible.
At least, that's what recent speculation on a lot of rumor sites says.
Tell me if I am crazy,
.02 cents of what would be nice if it comes true. If I work for a carrier, google or apple and get a bonus based on performance. I would start pushing the idea if its not on the table yet. lol. too bad none of these co would higher me in the marketing strategy-like department. haha. i am soo good or crazy.
Rumor of Google and Apple "secret deal"
+ Rumor of iPhone with Camera features (video recording)
+ Google buys YouTube
+ Apple Relations with Disney
+ Rumor MacOS X for phone
=
Killer App Multi Media Phone.
So Downloading full length movie is not prime time on phones yet.
its just too darn slow. but if Apple makes a deal with Google,
they can build an embedded YouTube plateform to upload and download video.
So think about this:
MacOS X Powered.
Photo Booth with your camera
YouTube Integration (with google)
WiFi (or WiMax with google)
Amazing Design for about the same price of the Sony Ericson's or Motorola or Nokia's (maybe a little premium)
and lots of features.
Even, if there is no deal with Google, a mp3 phone with photo booth like enhencement and a cool look would sell plenty. I added the YouTube thing because it would be a USP (Unique Selling Proposition) that carriers could not afford to refuse. Because the demand would simply be too high if they don't cary the phone.
As an extra incentive, the bandwidth charge for data transfer would be a insubstantial source of revenue that they cannot overlook, if there is a youtube integration.
so this is my
I haven't read the CNET article, but I have little doubt it's a flame fanning puff piece. However the "Apple iPhone Rumors Off the Hook" rebuttal hits a foul ball as early as its "Strike 1" paragraph. As someone who has owned an Airport, as well as various 3rd party routers, it does not stand "miles ahead" of its competition. Not only is it doubly, or often triply expensive when compared to solid competitors, it lacks a dead-simple web interface to administrate the device, replaced instead by an application. This is great, if you're using an Apple client, but if you have a mixed network, it a huge pain in the neck to require an Apple app to make a change to the device, as opposed to pointing your web browser towards it. The fact that it has a USB print server built in is a plus. I'll grant, although these are a dime a dozen. As for iSight, it seems the author doesn't realize that the product has been discontinued in the US. Sure, Apple has been integrating the revamped "iSight" into many of its new portables, and iMacs, but the fact that it has been yanked as a standalone product makes it difficult to defend as such a "hit". It sure is a great webcam, no doubt, but if you can't buy it, it's not a "homerun", but rather Apple took the ball and ran home.
"...interest in shaking up the mobile phone industry. Something that service providers, manufacturers, and consumers desperately need."
Yes, in the grand sceme of things, next to a cure for cancer, bird flu, global warming, world peace and all that good shit, a phone that syncs with iTunes is something we desperately need.
In reading published US patent application 20060268528 filed back in 2004 - Handheld Computing Device - Apple
In the description, section 0111
"In one embodiment, the device is or includes functionality for supporting cellular or mobile phone usage. In this embodiment, the device includes processors, transmitters, receivers, and antennas for supporting RF, and more particularly GSM, DCS and/or PCS wireless communications in the range of about 850 to about 1900 MHz."
In the claims, they detail the invention as a handheld computing device that is a cell phone made of a non-plastic material to have better wireless signal reception (claims 1, 6, 7).
That's my biggest problem with most of the cell phones out today. They can play music, games, look pretty.
But very few of them do the basics well... i.e. make phone calls. My old Nokia would lose signal. My new Samsung, the vibrate isn't powerful enough, and the ring isn't loud enough.
Oh yeah, but sure, it has a camera phone and will do all these other cool worthless things.
I doubt Apple is entering this market to make a cell phone. They probably just want to make an iPod that can occasionally make phone calls.
it lacks a dead-simple web interface to administrate the device, replaced instead by an application.
Yeh, that's a typical Apple situation.
Alternatively, as in the firmware on the Macbooks, they don't give you control at all...
On the other hand you have their total standards-based OS and open API. They're definitely a mixed lot.
Apple has been integrating the revamped "iSight" into many of its new portables, and iMacs, but the fact that it has been yanked as a standalone product makes it difficult to defend as such a "hit".
Not to mention that the built-in iSight is completely worthless for anything but videoconferencing. I have a third party firewire webcam I use with my Macbook pro, and a bit of electrical tape over the iSight because I can't be arsed making sure nothing turns it on when I don't want it on.
Apple's hardware is mediocre in functionality and power, it's only a hit for style. I could go on with the annoying clickwheel on the iPod, and the passive-aggressive 'it's not really a onw button mouse' crap with the mighty mouse and the double-tap trackpads... but I better stop here.
It's not worth buying for me. Already all Verizon customers are going to be out because Apple won't make the phone work with older technology. Sucks for you Verizon fans.
However since I have Cingular, the phone will probably be available to me... if it's 3G capable then I'll give it a look (and it's why I'm waiting now), since I want a PDA type of phone to organize myself... if the Apple phone can't be a PDA and work on the 3G network (which is in big swing around my area) then it's kind of moot... I'll get the Cingular 8525 which is a Windows Mobile device.
Time will tell... let's see if it's worth the hype.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Will the ZunePhone be the next iPhone killer!?!?!111
These companies, like especially Nokia are very good at what they do. Nokia has released perfect phones, one after another. Feature packed, beautiful working guis, innovative design. Nokia is also the one that has developed most of these new technologies. I very, very much doubt a small company like Apple can do much apart from attaching that Apple sticker to the back of the phone..
and not all the providers, and not all of the same.
For instance, Cingular took the hardware that performs the WiFi functions out of their HTC based 2125 phone while T-Mobile leaves it active in their version of the same HTC based phone. Verizon has a long history of disabling DUN in its phones, both bluetooth and datacable.
sometimes it is the phones though, for many phones you need special software to be able to transfer pictures and ringtones, so you still have to pay to get them there either way.
- Disclaimer: Information in this post deemed reliable but not guaranteed.
There's been a Java app
http://gicl.cs.drexel.edu/people/sevy/airport/ since 2000 for administering the Apple Airport since the Airports are administered by the ancient network device management standard of SNMP instead of some non-standard kludge over HTTP.
The iPhone certainly did get released, but by Linksys as a Skype/Yahoo Voice Messenger/VoIP/landline phone -- not as the vaunted Apple gadget. Infogear/Linksys/Cisco has held rights to the name "iPhone" since 2000.
Apple have i-talk and here it is http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-316873375 9916419298
from this site originally
http://christopherdesantis.blogspot.com/
it's a coming buy and it's a combo i-pod/phone/pda with much gorgeousness!
Pax681
For Heavens sake, please build an Apple Stile Tablet + mac style on board scetch and notes software. That would rock. Who needs a iPhone? Built a 10" iNewton or whatever with a small solid state HDD and sell it for 650$ or so. People would chop their right arm of to get one.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
When you accuse somebody of erecting strawmen, but don't provide any specifics of your baseless generalizations... ... well it's ironic.
People had been saying that Apple is just about to release a new PDA to replace the Newton ever since the Newton got pulled, pointing to all kinds of never-capitalized-on patents. This looks like more of the same, except now Palm's gone to huffing on the Microsoft "PDA as laptop replacement" crack pipe full time and it's become obvious to even the most casual observer how that's such a bad idea. So for the past few years it's been "The l33t new Apple Cellphone" instead of "The l33t new Apple PDA".
.100) in mind, and take any such predictions with a grain of salt and a bottle of antacid.
Until Steve says they've got a product, I'm going to keep the Pundit Apple Prediction Scorecard (currently batting less than
Comment removed based on user account deletion
apple just sell expensive stuff for idiots who want to look good in front of their yuppie friends. it has been proven by this survey here.
I just got the 810i and I love it. Dowloaded a bunch of games for it on bittorrent, takes great photos for a phone, it takes a pro duo card (up to 8GB now!) and plays mp3s. I have read reviews on the net complaining about audio quality, but I honestly cant tell the difference between my phone and my ipod nano sound-wise. Oh yeah, my 810i came with the most confortable ear buds I've ever used. But the best part is it only cost $100 with a 2 year contract from cingular.
Screw apple and their proprietory format music players. I don't like itunes or ipods. I am stoked on this phone and recommend it to anyone who wants an all in one device. It is my ipod killa.
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. -Confucius
1. 3G (Rumors are that the Apple phone will be only 2G, but they're only rumors. A 2G iCell would be a disappointment.)
2. Bluetooth
3. Addressbook
4. Calendar
5. iSync
6. POP & IMAP email client
7. Web browser
I have been unable to find a satisfactory phone for the American market. A Treo might come close, but its lack of good multitasking is hard to take after having a multitasking phone. Excellent S60 phones exist... (overseas|as prototypes).
I probably am a member of a niche market. The market has no good products currently. Apple could get all of it with a decent offering.
VIVO, Brazil's largest provider still will disable most Bluetooth functions. Recently, *some* of its smartphones are coming with some fuctions enabled. Not all. Just some, but hey, it is a start right? A few of the GSM providers like Claro (3rd) sometimes also disable functions (i.e., Claro's Nokia E62 cannot work as a modem). We are probably in better shape than US because VIVO, as a CDMA provider, has been losing market here pretty quick, and already 70% of the market belong to GSM providers; and I understand the market in the US is concentrated in CDMA providers, which usually are less open than GSM.
Of course, I have a Nokia 6600 from Claro and I have not (and would not) ever paid for backgrounds or ringtones, but perhaps that's just me. Some people seem pretty comfortable with paying for these, as well as uploading their pics. Go figure.
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
Certain carriers in the US like Verizon are notorious for locking down their phones. Other providers, like Cingular, don't tend to do it. I just bought a new LG phone from Cingular and it's not locked down at all. I can transfer mp3's, pictures and videos to and from my phone using either the data cable or via Bluetooth. Granted, the phone didn't come with instructions that talked about how to do it but it was pretty easy to figure out how to transfer files between the phone and my Mac.